HomeMy WebLinkAbout08261974CITY
COUNCIL
MINUTES
August 26, 1974
CITY
Of=
PiiLO
iLTO
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date at 7:30 p.m.
in an adjourned meeting of August 19, 1974 with Mayor Sher presiding.
Present: Benre.i_d, Clay, Comstock,
Henderson, Pearson, R.oaeaba e,,
Sher, Norton (Arrived 8:48 p.m.)
Absent: Beahrs
Reaueatto Consider�gends.
rtrem with s. Item 2
Mayor Sher noted that. Item 3 on the agenda was the Planning Commission's
recommendations in regard to the Housing Land Bank Report, and that
it would be well to consider it with Agenda item 2.
POTION: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Pearson, that Item 3 on the
agenda be considered with Item 2.
The motion passed on a unanimous vote.
Finance and Public Works Committeg
Recos ndations and. Planning
Commission's Recommendations
Hou>sinsg Laad Flank (cMR:290:4)
•
Vice Mayor Henderson recalled that on May 6, 1974, Council referred
the Housing Land Bank Report prepared by staff to both the Planning
Commission and the Finance and Public Works Committee. The committee
waited until the Planning Commission met and made its recommendations,
and those recommendations were then incorporated into the committee's
deliberations. The basic staff report dated May 2 gave background
on Palo Alto's Housing Land Bank Program, guidelines for proceeding
with the program, a listing of all vacant parcels in the city of
one acre or more, a listing of criteria for rating vacant land for
housing purposes, a point scoring of all the available land other
than Stanford land, and a series of recommendations. In response
to comments from the Planning Commission members, another staff
report was prepared on .August 1 refining the criteria for site selection;
and in this report all school related criteria vas eliminated, and
higher density was allowed on ei':es near the North County Court
House. As a result, the land in the Court House area rose rather
Sel pg. 283 dramatically in rate and to a higher position. Also included as
a source material for the committee's deliberations were letters
from the Palo Alto Housing Corporation and from Anne R. Witherspoon.
Vice Mayor Henderson expressed appreciation for this meteria1 and
for the input frog both the Planning Commission and the staff. Since
then, a letter has been received from Dan Williams, President of
Hidpeninaula Citizens for Fair Housing, supporting the Committee's
housing recommendations. Vice Mayor Henderson reported the following
committee recommendations. First, the committee recommends that
the Housing Land Beak Fund be replenished each year to perish expenditures
192
8/26/74
up to $500,000.00 annually; and any expenditures beyond that amount
would require budget amendment. The committee recommended that
within those dollar limits, outright purchases of land be made whenever
possible to minimize cost to the city. Further, the committee recommended
that small parcels of land with less than one acre be included in the
program to assist in the goal of scattering low/moderate income
housing throughout the city. A fourth recommendation was that the
city take immediate steps to investigate purchase of land in the
North County Court Huse area, and that staff investigate the current
status of all the properties listed in the staff report. Also,
the committee deleted the West Bayehore Drive -In Theater property
and all other property in that West Bayehore area from consideration
because of its inclusion in the expanded Greer Park.' The committee
specifically included the Palo Alto Housing Corporation in any future
decision awaking. Vice Mayor Henderson stated that one recommendation
made by the Planning Commission was not included in the committee's
recommendation; namely, that the city involvement should be limited
to the extent that it is necessary to enable a non-profit sponsor
or appropriate developer to proceed with a project. Nothing on
this matter appears in the committee's minutes; however, Vice Mayor
Henderson recalled stating that he opposed the recommendation because
it appeared to prohibit or limit purchase of land that nay be threatened
by imminent developsaent and which right be held in a land banking
status for some time, or it might limit the city In its choices
of how low/moderate income housing might be developed on a certain
property. Since there was no further discussion in the ccmam1ttee,
Vice Mayor Hendeesaen felt it could be concluded that the committee
did not support that reco reeadation. As Committee. Chairman, he
presented the opportunity for any member to make a notion related
to that item; but no one made a motion Vice Mayor Henderson reported
that four of the five recommendations passed unanimously with Councilman
Berwaid absent. Section C passed on a two to one vote with Councilman
Peahrs opposed.
Anne Steinberg, Vice Chairwoman of the Plannieg Commission, said
that the commission basically supported the recommendations of the
staff. Their recommendations were passed on to the committee, and at
that time were given a chance to speak.
Hal Hudson, 535 Everett, stated that the Palo Alto Housing Corporation
was in support of the land banking proposals. He expressed appreciation
for the study that staff made of the availshie pieces of property.
In 1972, the Palo Alto Helloing Corporation saw a benefit to the
parcel at Grant and Ash; and now that parcel was being recommended
for some kind of development by the Finance and Public Works Committee.
Mtr. Hudson said a direct relationship could be seen between continuance
of the land banking program and the proposal of the Housing Corporation
for an agency to acquire and develop properties for low and moderate
incomes.
Councilman Clay asked how the proposed sub -corporation of the Housing
Corporation and the Land Bank Fund inter -relate.
Mir. Hudson responded that at this time it would be only to the extent
of the interest in the parcel at Grant attd Ash and related sites,
Councilman Clay asked if the Corporation :could need the land bank
funds if the snub -corporation were to be established as had been
discussed in the Poli'ay and Procedures Committee.
Mr, Hudson expressed interest its the finds being available to develop
as many properties as possible, and to acquire for low and 'moderate
incomes as many as possible.
1 9 3
8/26/74
Councilman Clay asked if Mr. Hudson were suggesting that the Corporation
would like to have land bank funds plus what might be made available
to it through other means;
Mr. Hudson replied that the Corporation would like to see the city
use land bank funds, and would hope to cooperate in the use of the
funds through the development of the property that would be acquired.
Councilman Clay asked if Mt. Hudson did not think this should be
done through the sub -corporation.
Mr. Hudson felt the Corporation's position would be that it would
be happy with anything that would further the overall project.
If land wanking funds' were available, then the Corporation could
confer with Council and its committees as to how the Corporation
could help in developing land so acquired.
Councilman Clay said the purpose of the land bank funds would be
to acquire parcels of land in the city, but that would also be the
sub --corporation's purpose. It appeared to him that one such entity
would be sufficient.
Mr. Hudson responded that the Corporation had not visualized that
it might be acquiring parcels of such size. They had been trying
to look ahead to using funds available for as many different developments
in as many different parcels of the city as possible. Once a property
vas acquired, the sub -corporation could be useful to actually develop _ng
it.
Franklin Me Church, 456 Feriae Avenue, -spoke to Coenci1 as President
of Palo Alto Little League. Mr. Church said that representatives
of Little League had stated at the different hearings that there
was no way the Little League property would be for sale. He had
hoped that this stated fact at the committee meetings would remove
the property from the listing, but it succeeded only in dropping
the property from a rating of three to four. Mr. Church asked that
consideration of the Little League property as an available parcel of
land be dropped.
Councilman Rosenbaum recognized the importance of the field to Little
League, but he wondered how tlk. Church might feel about it if the
city provided a field at soam other site to replace the one at Middlefield.
Mr. Church replied that except by vote of the membership, there
was no way that the property could be released. Since the membership
was made up of parents of the players, he was certain they would
not vote to sell the ground.
Councilwoman Pearson commented that the mars purpose of the sub--
corporatios and the Palo Alto Housing Corporation was to rehabilitate
units already in existence and to purchase units already constructed.
Purchase of pieces of land was far down on the horizon. If there
would be a Land aanking Program, it would certainly have to come
from the City Council.
Vice Mayor Henderson assured Mk. Church that the listing of the
Little League field vas not s threat of imminent development for
hsusing. It is simply land that might some day be available. One
of the actions that he hoped Council would approve would determine
the current status of each of these properties.
1 9 4
8/26/74
MOTION: Vice Mayor Henderson moved on behalf of the Finance and
Public Works Committee that the program be continued through the
Capital Improvements Program, with the Housing Land Bank fund to
be replenished at the beginning of each fiscal year to $SOO,OOO;
and special purchase opportunities beyond that amount be considered
individually in terms of budget additions.
Councilman Norton asked if replenishing the funds applied to one
fiscal year in terms of the coMmitment Council would be making.
Hewanted to be sure that what was said at this meeting did not
bind the Council one year from now.
George Sipel, City Manager, responded that in order to put this
recommendation into effect Council would :have to actually appropriate
the money; and this would occur every fiscal year.
Councilmen Norton said he was not suggesting that Council should
or would change its policy; but if it did, he wanted to be certain
there would be no binding effect ou their saying that at the beginning
--of each fiscal year the funds should be at a level of half a million
dollars.
Ni. Sipel replied that he saw no binding nature to it, since it
would have to be implemented each year.
Councilman Norton asked if Council would have the opportunity to
vote for each individual parcel. He wanted it to be dear that
voting to put the doney in the fund would not remove the opportunity
for Council to review, approve, or disapprove each individual proposal
on its merits.
Mr. Sipel said this wa.s correct, and the City "anager could not
purchase land without approval of the Council.
Councilman Clay responded to Councilwoman Pearson's comments regarding
the limitations of the proposed sub -corporation. He did not think
that any limitations had been imposed on them. Councilman Clay thought
it would be prudent not to have separate entities, one purchasing
land and another developing or buying housing.
Councilman Comstock commented that action at this meeting would
be in the background at such time as Council discussed how to handle
details of the sub -corporation and other matters.
Councilwoman Pearson explained that she did not say the sub -corporation
was limited, but the main purpose sae for the to rehabilitate and/or
purchase existing unite.
Mayor Sher asked Ht. Sipel to give some projection of the federal
and state programs, and the possibility of available funds for low/moderate
income projects that'are necessary to implement the land bank objective.
Mt. Sipel replica! that he could not be very definitive, but there
was at least one bill that had been approved. Staff was presently
trying to determine what Palo Alto's share might be and how it might
be used. He was speaking of the amity Development Block Grant
Program. Mx, Sigel said that staff would have more information
in the near future; but as of now, the picture was a bleak one.
Mayor Sher asked Mr. Sipel if this led him _to a recommendation in
regard to /and banking parcels of land for low/moderate income housing
which assumes some project in the relatively new future that can
utilise time laud.
1 9 5
8/26/74
Mr. Sigel responded that you have to weigh against that the possibility
that the land will be lost forever to some other kind of development
not consistent with the objectives of low/moderate income housing.
A wise course of action, in Mr. Sipel`s opinion, waa to fairly aggressively
seek out parcels of land and buy those within the city's means,
and try very hard to develop parcels that it had. He did hope that
the city would not over -commit itself by purchasing seven or eight
parcels without having some indication that some type of development,
private or public, might be possible.
Mayor Sher asked how much the city had invested in land bank property,
Which he assumed was the Webster Site. He also wanted to know if
there were $500,000.00 avai.laabie given what had been done during
budget discussions.
Mr. Sipel stated there was about a million dollars invested, and
part of that had been gotten back because of the Lytton Project.
He recalled that there is now $500,000.00 in the budget for land
banking purposes. The Webster site was about $475,000.00.
Mayor Sher understood that there was about $475,000.00 actually
invested in land; and of the million dollars, the city got some
of it back and this money was returned to the general_ fund.
Mr. Sipel said this was correct. Both the money returned to general
funds and the remainder would also go into general funds.
Mayor Sher stated that he supported the general land banking principles
as long ae there is the prospect of being able to put together projects
to utilize the land acquired. In his opinion, there was a danger
that the philosophy would be adopted that the city ought to buy
as much open land as possible under the land bank program. He noted
that throughout the Planning Commission minutes there were statements
that land should be purchased when it was available, that it could
always be sold later, etc. Mayor Sher was concerned about putting
the city in that position. If it had to sell some of the land,
there would be pressures to permit intense uses so the greatest
mount on a resale could be realized. His opinion was that as long
as the city was engaging in the land banking program, Council should
be careful that there is the prospect of using land acquired for
the purpose for which it was acquired. Mayor Sher indicated support
for the program, but any proposed additional acquisitions would
have to be carefully considered when Council was actually authorizing
purchase of land,
Councilman Berwald agreed with Mayor Sher, but he came to a different
conclusion regarding support. He had concerns about the conceit
of publicly owned housing, whether it be city, state, or federal.
Hover, he did think that then types of housing that had been conteme
plated, and/or built, were sound. He thought the Lytton site would be a
good addition tt= housing'in the comity, and he wished the necessary
support would have been there at the time the Stanford program was
contemplated. Frenchman's Hill represented a very fine effort on
the part of the University, and the same thing was true of the property
on Arestradero. With the Webster House finally on the verge of
being developed, Councilman Berwald wee not willing to go along
with a motion that goes as far se this one does. He would support
the action if it were stated '..n the context that for the fiscal
year 1974-75, the $500,000.00 figure be maintained by adding $53,004.0Q
to the Capital Iz provementa Fund, or whatever would be necessary.
The policy Council was being asked to approve was that at the beginning
of each fiscal year, the feet be replaeished. Councilman Berwald
196
8/26/74
was not willing to go that far. Further, he felt that considering
special purchase opportunities beyond that amount as budget additions
was a wide open door; and he did not want to go that far. Council
had been recently talking about the horrors of spending so much money,
and last week had even talked about lowering the tax rate. He asked
for correction if he mistnderatood the intent of the motion.
Vice Mayor Henderson explained that the committee was not recommending
$500,000,00 each year, but the policy decision was to maintain a
fund of $500,000.00 each year. So the city would be replenishing
the amount of ,looney that eeould have been spent in the prior year.
The Council was not automatically committed to that expenditure
since every purchase would hive to '.e approved. Vice Mayor Henderson
further explained that the special purchase opportunities was really
a limitation statement. This ;could mean holding the expenditures
at $500,000.00. Any other opportunities :luring the year to spend
beyond that amount would require a budget amendment and six votes.
The notion passed on a unanimous vote.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Henderson moved on behalf of the Finance and
Public Works Committee that within the limits of the annual budget
appropriations outright purchase of desired properties be emphasized
whenever possible.
The r_otion passed or: a unanmoussv.te.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Henderson moved on beh4f of the Fyinance and
Public Woks Committee that purchases of small land parcels he included
as past of the program, and stab be,directed to b; ing to both the
Coua:cil`e and the Palo Alto Hquaing Corporation's attention any
opportunities that arise for such purchases,
Councilman Clay questioned as to whether this matter might be included
under recommendation a), It appeared to him that in light of the
diecueeiona regarding criteria, based on which Council would decide
to purchase or not, small land parcela would fall into the same
category. Contrary to that, if you specify a all land parcels in
this fashion, you were emphasizing something which did not need
to be emphasized; and this may cause the city to go off in a different
direction from that which would be most productive.
Vice Mayor Henderson responded that recommendation (c) was added
because it was net included in the iigtings in the report. The
report included parcels that were larger, and it was the committee's
feeling that small land parcels should not be excluded. If an opportu-
nity presented itself, the city should be able to use land bank
funds to purchase small piecea of property. Recommendation c) was
a positive statement to include that as part of the land banking
program; end thus, small 1aand parcels would be eligible for commitment
out of the $500,000.00 amount.
Councilman Clay did not feel the list of parcels was the driving
force, since it is the policy that decides whether or noc a parcel
would be considered for purchase. Lt was his opinions that recommendation
(c) ought to be deleted.
Councilman Norton asked what cot►stitutea a small parcel of land.
Lynnie ifslena, assistant to the Planning director, replied that one acre
was used as the cut-off.
197
8/26/74
Councilman Norton asked if that were what Council would be voting
on at this meeting.
Vice Mayor Henderson said this recommendation would include properties
under one acre.
The motion passed on the following vote:
AYES: Perwald, Comstock, Henderson,
Pearson., Rosenbaum, Sher
NOES: Clay, Norton
MOTICN: Vice Mayor Henderson moved on behalf of the Finance and
Public Works Committee that staff be directed to investigate possible
purchase of county and privately --owned land on Grant Avenue between
Birch and Ash Streets to be held for a possible low/moderate income
housing development, similar to the suggestion made by the Palo
Alto Housing Corporation.
Councilman Norton said it had been his impression that the parcel
of land at the corner of Grant and Rah was one which the people
in the (area had persuaded Council to make a park out of, and he
was speakirsb specifically of the people living in the Eichler condo-
minium: He asked if this dovetailed or conflicted with that idea,
1
Vice Mayor Henderson responded that the Palo Alto Housing Corporation's
proposal showed purchases on both sides of Grant Avenue with the closing
of Grant Avenue. The housing portion of .it would be three iota on
the south side of Grant Avenue, and three lots or more on the north
side. All of the discussion of possible building oe the north side
has anticipated an area for a park. Whether it would be on that
particular corner or on some o*her part of the property was still
an open, question.
Councilman Norton expressed strong disfavor of the idea of closing
Grant Avenue; acne other things.
& . Sipel noted that Council had approved in the budget an appropriation
for a mini park in that area, and no specific site had as yet been
designated. Staff would want to dovetail any study or recommendation
with this motion.
Councilwoman Pearson pointed out that the people in the area strongly
favored housing and the park idea. She hoped that Councilman Norton
would not lock himself into not considering the closing of Grant
just because it was the closing of a street.
Mayor Sher wanted some clarification as to the difference between
the approaches in items d) and e). He asked if he understood correctly
that item d) was a policy decision that if Council wanted to add
that property through the: land beak program, assuming the terms
are favorable, it could; vhsreas, Council simply wanted are investigation
of the status of the otter properties.
Vice Mayor Henderson said recommendation d) showed a definite interest
in that property. It did not commit Council in any way, but expressed
an interest on the part of Council to purchase. The recommendation
indicated that Council would like to have information as to whether
the property is available end what the price might be; and recommendation
e) directed staff to find out what the status of properties would
be at this tine.
1 9 8
8/26/74
Mayor Sher asked if Vice Mayor Henderson contemplated, debating
whether or not the city wanted to obtain that piece of property
and getting into the whole question of the feasibility of getting
funds for developing a low/moderate income housing site there when
the report came back from staff.
Vice Mayor Henderson responded that if staff reported the land was
available and had the ter , then Council would be put in a position
of needing to make a decision as to whether it wanted to cove in
that direction. He understood that some of the land on the south
side of Grant Avenue has been for sale for quite some time. If
Council wanted to consider that prapert7, especially on the basis
of the Housing Corporation's suggestions, it would have to make
some overtures.
Mayor Sher commented that he would want an appraisal in the staff report
of the low/moderate intone housing situation and indications of
when the land might be able to be put to use. Such information
would help him decide if the land should be added to the land bank
property. He wanted it to be clear that in voting for this motion,
he was not stating that this property should be added to the land
bank.
Mr4 Sipel stated that staff's interpretation of the motion would
be that Council had put a high priority on this property, Staff
would probably go out - and work en this one first, do a thorough job
which included an appraisal of the property and the other things
sugg:asted by Mayor Sher.
The motion passed on the following vote:
AYES: Comstock, Clay, Henderson,
Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher
NOES: Berwald, Norton
2{ T1QN: Vice Mayor Henderson moved on behalf of the Finance and
Public Works Committee that staff be directed to investigate the
current status of all properties listed in the staff report dated
May 2, 1974 (excluding the West Bayshore Drive -In Theater), including
possibilities for obtaining first refusal options by the City, and
report to the Council and to the Palo Alta Housing Corporation.
Vice Mayor Henderson explained that in obtaining first refusal options,
the committee did not mean that staff should go out and get those
at this point. But that would be merely a part of the information
on the current status and whether owners would be willing to give
the city first refusal options.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Pearson,
that the Little league property be deleted from the study.
The amendment passed on the following vote:
AXES: Berwald, Clay, Henderson,
Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher
NOES: Comstock
(Bolton out.)
199
8/26/74
Councilman Berwald asked that if a specific site were found, could staff
take an option on the property after an executive session with the Council
without any investigation of neighborhood feelings.
Vice Mayor Henderson responded that staff could probably do that,
but this was not the intent. Staff was simply to report which property
owners would be willing to give first option to the city. Information
was involved, not commitment.
Mayor Sher added that there was no direction to staff to actually
obtain any option,
Councilman Berwald felt the priorities ought to be clearly stated,
and the number of sites that might be eventually voted on should
be kept in mind. He did not think that a wholesale in-depth study
should be made of all the properties on the list to the point where
Council would be contacting individuals about particular neighborhoods,
when there was no particular long range prospect of ever acquiring
the property.
Vice Mayor Henderson pointed out there were only six properties
that staff would be making inquiries ahcut, and they were all known
to anyone interested because of being included in the report.
The motion as ascended passed on a unanimous vote.
Mr. Knox stated that he and the City Attorney felt that the record
should show that the actions taken by Council are in the nature
of policy statements and directives to staff, but no specific develop-
ment action or approval has been requested or enacted. Therefore,
no environmental assessment would be needed at this point, At the
time specific acquisitions are recommended by staff pursuant to
policy statements and directives by Council at this meeting, environmental
assessments will be prepared.
Mayor Sher felt Council should address itself to the recommendation
of the Planning Cox 1ssion that was not included in the recommendations
from the Finance and Public Works Committee,
MOTION: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Berwald, that the city involve-
ment should be limited to the extent that is necessary to enable
a non-profit sponsor or appropriate developer to proceed with a
project.
Mayor Sher noted that this recommendation came to Council on a vote
of five to one from the Planning Commission. Several of the Commission-
ers made it clear that the objective of the land bank plan is to
enable others, to develop low/moderate income housing, using either gov-
ernment or private funds. The city needed to make it clear that
by continuing this program it was not contemplating becoming involved
in the business of building low/moderate projects. Therefore, he
felt it would be well to hive this recommendation included as part
of the entire package,
Councilwoman Pearson pointed out there was one dissenting vote cast
by Mrs. Steinberg. Since she considered ors. Steinberg the housing
expert: on the Planning Commission, Councilwoman Pearson asked to
hear her reasoning for voting no.
Mrs. Steinberg stated that she felt the city should not be tied
into anything at this time. It was not known what kind of new programs
would be introduced in the whole area of homsing. The new Community
Development Bill as explained by Mir. Sipel will come in the form
2 0 0
8/26/74
of block grants to the city. Mrs. Steinberg said it was not known
either what kind of guidelines would be given, and she thought the
city should be as flexible as possible.
Vice Mayor Henderson indicated that he had a problem with the wording.
Literally, the motion is saying that the city should not be involved
except when it is necessary to enable one of these apohuors or developers
to proceed with a project. That meant to him that the city was
not to buy a parcel of land unless there already was some project
in mind. He said there could be occasions when the city would want
to buy the land even though they did not 'snow at that time who the
developer might be.
Councilman Berwald stated he had earlier changed his intent on the
first motion partly because Of Vice Mayor Henderson's' explanation
of a point that he had .dared because he had been on vacation; and
secondly, because he had noted the Planning Commission recommendation
that was now before Council. He supported this motion because it
removed one of the strong objections he had in the beginning, and
he hoped this item would pass. Councilman Berwald responded to Council-
woman Pearson's comments with regard to the Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission approved this item on a five to one vote,
with one absent and Commissioner Steinberg opposed. Be felt that
the elements involved in the notion had to do with much more than
being an expert en housing, encomps.seing good planning, economic
concepts, and the feeling of the city. Councilmen Berwald conaidered
the recolmendaticn of the Planning Commission to be a very sensible
one,
Co,uaiCi1r an Comstock said that a land banking program had been talked
about here, and he hoped there was no feeling chat the motion required
a one and two arrangement, that is, a limitation in acquiring the
land until somebody states he has an idea of what he would do with
the land and comes forward with plans. That clearly would not be
workable. If there is any question in anyone's mind that that would
be a possible interpretation, words should be developed to clear
it up. He did not consider it to mean that. Councilman Comstock
thought it was a narrower statement of the issue than if none was
there; nonetheless, it still contains some inherent flexibility.
For example, he presumed the city might in one case sell the land
to a developer immediately; and iu another case, perhaps it would
be a longer time before a piece of land would be turned over to
a project. Councilman Comstock assumed those hind of options were
still considered possible under the motion as it now stands.
NOTION RESTATED: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Berwald, that the
land bank program be utilized to enable land to be acquired for
purposes of later sale or other transfer to, and development by,
a nonprofit sponsor or other appropriate private developer.
Councilwoman Pearson believed it was necessary to pick up on what
Mrs. Steinberg said also, and that $s that perhaps same language
could be added such as the use of any other means that' aa.ight be
available on the federal or /state level. She felt this Was a very
valid point because there were several bills before the !state and
federal governments which would perhaps allow the city to utilize
those funds for development of lowlmvder:ate income housing. Rather
than tie it into a sponsor specifically, perhaps words could be
added to make it possible to use state and federal funds as they
are made available.
Mayor Sher felt Mrs. Steinberg's argument was that she wanted maxim=
flexibility since it was not known just when new programs might 7
come along, end it sight be important for the city to be involved
2 0 1
8/26/74
1
in the development. He thought the earlier motions voted on explained
the present policy statement, and they were subject to change at
a later time. Given the present situation, Mayor Sher felt it would
be appropriate to make it clear that the intent was that the city
not be involved directly in the development of housing units.
AMENDMENT: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, that
the motion be Amended to include language that would encompass any other
county, federal, or state funding that may be available for the develop -
rent of low/moderate income housing projects.
Mayor Sher asked if this meant that the land bank program would
be used to include any other county, state, or federal programs.
Councilwoman Pearson said the word would be "funding".
Mayor Sher thought the amending words went more to source of funds
than how the funds would be used to acquire land and how the land
would be utilized.
Councilwoman Pearson stated that if Council wanted to make a policy
that would be carried on, then her wording should be added. She
was simply adding a broader base for receiving funds and programs
which the city could use.
Vice Mayor Henderson felt that the County Housing Authority would
be outside the motion as stated by Mayor Sher. If they were able
to actually do the building of a project, and the city had to land
bank in order to make a differential, then he did not think the
county was included. When Mayor Sher spoke of non-profit sponsors,
Vice Mayor Henderson understood him to mean the type of project
on Lytton.
Mayor Sher felt this was covered in
but the :Main part of the motion was
in the business of buildiug housing
the words "appropriate developer",
to exclude the city froti engaging
developments.
ides. Steinberg asked if the words "appropriate developer" would
mean a developer of market price housing, too.
Mayor Sher responded negatively.
Councilmen Rosenbaum felt Council was going about this somewhat
backyards, probably from the desire to protect the city from the
spe tre of public housing. If Council really wanted to do that,
then it should be stated that it was not the intent of the city
to own and operate housing,
The amendment failed on the following vote:
AYES: Henderson, Pearson, Rosenbaum
NOES: Clay, Comstock, Norton, gerVwaid, Sher
SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Councilman Rosenbaum coved, seconded by berwald,
that it is not the intent of the city to own and operate housing
as part of the Land Bank Program.
Councilman Comstock asked what this woad imply in the case of the
Webster Site where there were two or three houses that were leased.
Presumably the same situation might come up in the future where
theirs is a parcel of land with one or two houses on it, and the
city might find itself in an interim landlord arrangement.
202
8/26/74
Councilman Rosenbaum said it was not his intention to exclude that
kind of thing; and obviously, the city was doing it.
The substitute motion passed on the following vote:
AYES: Clay, Henderson, Pearson, Sher,
Berweld, Rosenbaum
NOES: Comstock, Norton
Q� ins Amendin Sections
of the } unicipal Co e
Reflecting Admin?strative Changes
MOTION: Councilman Comstock introduced the following ordinance and
moved, seconded by Pearson, its adoption:
ORDINANCE NO. 2808 entitled 'ORDINANCE
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
AP4ENDIN ; VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE PALO
ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE REFLECTM ADMINISTRA_
-IVE CHJ GES" (1st sealing 8/5/74)
The ordinance was adopted on a unanimous vote.
Ordinance Amendin Sectiol.. of
Cbluter 16.0.4 BuiloRK Regulations
MOTION: Councilman Comstock introduced the following ordinance and
Doved, seconded by Pearson, its adoption:
ORDINANCE NO. 2809 entiti�d "ORDINANCE
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
AMENDING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 16.04,
BUILDING REGULATIONS AS REQUIRED BY
ADOPTION OF THE 1973 EDITION OF THE
UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, UNIFORM MECHANICAL
CODE AND UNIFOLM HOUSING CODE" (1st reading 8/5/74)
The ordinance was adopted on a unanimous vote.
ordinance Ameadfm
Chapter 16.08,E ,Pluabing Code
MOTION: Councilman Comstock introduced the following ordinance and
coved, seconded by Pearson, its adoption:
ORDINANCE NO. 2810 entitled "ORDINANCE
OF THE COUNCfl. OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
AMENDING CRAFTER 16.08, PLUMBING CODE,
OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE SETTING
FORTH R CHANGES REQUIRED BY ADOPTION OF
THE 1973 EDITION OF THE UN1.FO81i PLUMBING
CODE" (lit reading 8/5/74)
The ordinance was adopted on a unanimous vote.
203
8/26/74
Ordinance Amending Chapter
1S:rb, Elecrical Code
MOTION: Councilman Comstock introduced the following ordinance and
moved, seconded by Pearson, its adoption:
ORDINANCE NO. 2811 entitled "ORDINANCE
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
AMENDING CHAPTER 16.16 (ELECTRICAL CODE)
02 THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE PROVIDING
FOR CHANGES REQUIRED DUE TO ADOPTION OF
1971 EDITION OF TVS NATIONAL ELECTRICAL
CODE" (1st reading 8/5/74)
The ordinance was adopted on a unanimous vote.
Ordinance Amending Title 15
of the Code - Fire
MOTION: Councilman Comstock introduced the following ordinance for second
reading and moved, seconded by Pearson, its adoption:
ORDINANCE NO,o2812 entitled "ORDINANCE
OF TOE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PAIO ALTO
A` .NDING TITLE 15 OF THE PALO ALTO
MUNICIPAL CODE AS REQUIRED BY ADOFTION
OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE, 1973 EDITION"
(1st reading 8/5/74)
The ordinance as adopted on a unanimous vote.
Resolution End;;rsinjq
Employment of Local Persons
POTION: Councilwoman Pearson introduced the following resolution
and moved, seconded by Comstock, its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 4990 entitled "RESOLUTION
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
ENDORSING rha EMPLOYMENT OF LOCAL PERSONS"
The resolution was adopted on a unanimous vote.
Oral Comsaimica.t,1214
None
Act r.►u zeu t
The adjourned meeting of August 19, 1974 adjourned at 8:48 p.m.,
August 26, 1974.
lta uiar satin o. A2P,at 26* 1974
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto mot at 8:48 p.m. on
August 26, 1974 in a regular meeting with Mayor Sher presiding.
2 0 4
6/26/74
Present: Berwald, Clay, Comstock,
Henderson, Pearson, Sher,
Rosenbaum
Absent: Beahrs
T12utes of Au net 5 1974
Vice Mayor Henderson referred to page 102, next to the last paragraph,
bottom line, and requested that the words "and such" be deleted and
the words "much less acknowledged by a Council resolution" be inserted.
Secondly, he asked that the words "Palo Alto" be deleted from the
bottom line of the next to the last paragraph on page 104, and "Santa
Clara County" be inserted.
NOTION: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Berwald, that the
minutes of the August 5 ;eating be approved as corrected.
The motion passed on a unanimous vote.
kchitectural Review Board Recommends
e Bu enirs of dts JtirTatct cry 7 —2
Philip W. Vogt, Vice Chair tan of the Architectural Review Board,
stated that as a result of a request of the ARE, followed by a subsequent
meeting attended by Councilwoman Pearson, Vice Mayor Henderson, members
of the Planning Commission, the City Manager, the Planning Director,
and himself, several possibilities for the clarification of the respec-
tive roles of the ARB and the Planning Commission were considered.
A unanimous agreement was not reached at the meeting; however, the
Planning Director proceeded to draft an ordinance which : o old embody
the consensus of the situation. The ordinance was now before Council,
and Mr. Vogt suggested that since all ARE and all Planning Commission
members had not had an opportunity to review the ordinance in detail,
the matter be postponed. He felt that the full ARB and the full
Planning Commission should have a chance to see what is entailed
in the ordinance, and to have the opportunity of deciding whether
it meets with their approval or disapproval.
Councilwoman Pearson explained why the ordinance was before Council.
She stated that she had been receiving calls from members of the
ARB and the Planning Commission regarding things that were occurring
with certain projects. Councilwoman Pearson felt that the reason
behind the difficulties was that it was not clear exactly what the
ARP and the Planning CQM-I Asion were supposed to be doing. Therefore,
a meeting was held. When everyone lei: the meeting, she felt that
they were fairly unanimous in what was understood to have come out
of that meeting. She referred to page two of the report before Council
where Mrs. Brenner and Mrs. Gordon had made comments about their
understanding of what had happened at the meeting, Councilwomen
Pearson felt that ?ors. Brenner was correct, and Mss. Gordon was partly
correct, Mrs. Brenner recalled during the discussion of open space
projects, that they were to be reviewed by the ARB with the exception
of singly -developed single family hantu.s. Vice Mayor Henderson agrees
that that is what he also remembered. Mrs. Gordon felt that not
all items would automatically go from the Planning Commission to
the ARB when the matter under discussion might be open space, P -C -T,
or D zones, but only at the discretion of the Planning t'MI.ission.
Councilwoman Pearson said her own understanding was that they would
automatically go from the Planning Commission to the Arb, back to the
20S
8/26/74.
the Planning Commission, and 'o the Council with the exception of
the singly --developed single family homes. As Councilwoman !'earson
read through the ordinance, she realized that some things needed
correcting. It was her feeling that Mr. Vogt's idea was a good one,
and that the ordinance ought to go to the Alms and the Planning Commission
for review. However, Councilwoman Pearson felt that what ought to
go to them was what actually came out of the committee, and an they
needed a corrected ordinance. In the first paragraph under Section
I, where it says "singly -developed single family dwellings, duplexes,
and addition; thereto, are exempt from this chapter", everything
from "except" to the next period should be deleted. In the following
paragraph where it says "and for approval of any development, construc-
tion, or improvements in any open space district", it should also
say "except singly --developed single family homee". Toward the end
of the paragraph where it says, "which actionshall be a final",
she felt it should say "ARB recommendation" to make that clear.
From that poine to the end of the sentence should be deleted, and
it should say "and has given preliminary approval by the Planning
Commission and sent to the ARB". As it now reads, an application could
still go to the ARB, even if it has been denied by the Planning Com-
mission. It had been agreed at this meeting that this would be a waste
of time. Those attending the meeting wanted a Planning Commission denial
to come back to the Council and let that body decide whether it should
go to the APB or the Planning Commission. Mrs. Pearson continued that
in the next paragraph, the last sentence says, "if the difference
is not resolved at this joint meeting, then a separate recommendation
shall be transmitted to Council". Councilwoman Pearson felt this
language should not be thert, rather it should read, "the Planning
:oc, issien recommendation and minutes from the ARB shall be forwarded
to the Council". Councilwoman Pearson expressed her willingness
to have the ordinance referred to the ARB and the Planning Commiesion,
provided her corrections were incorporated into It.
Mr. Napthali Knox, Director of Planning, felt he understood the gist
of Councilwoman Pearson's comments; and felt they could be conveyed
to the ARB and the Planning Commission. He and Mi. DeCuir of the
City Attorney's office had already discussed the nature of the changes
that would have to be made in the draft ordinance to accommodate
excluding the open space single family homes from review of the ARB.
Councilwoman Pearson's cements were generally correct, but tee nature
of what would have to be excluded was quite codex.
Councilwoman Pearson stated that it was her feeling when she left
the me eting that Mr. Vogt, Vice Mayor Henderson, the two Planning
Commissioners, and she unanimously agreed on exactly what she was
trying to convey now. What they had agreed upon was not reflected
in this draft ordinance. If there had been any disagreement, it
was on the part of the staff. She wanted to be sure that the ARB
and the Planning Commission had in front of them an ordinance that
read the way she felt it ought to read.
Mt, Knox said he would be happy to bring these points to the ARB and
the Planning Commission, but the language would first have to be
drawn up by the City Attorney and couched in the proper terminology.
MOTION: Counc i lwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, that
the ordinance as proposed with corrections recommended by her, and
corrected by the City Attorney, be referred to the ARB and the Planning
Commission. 4
2 0 6
8/26/74
Councilman Berwald found this matter rather unsettling. First of
all, Council heard that Councilwoman Pearson had received calls from
the ARB and the Planning Commission. He felt these two groups should
comunicate with the whole Council when they wanted to communicate
with them, and not with particular members. Secondly, he did not
know about the meeting; and he was disturbed about a tweeting which
two Council persons attend and others are not at least invited to
attend. He also felt, that it was the general policy of Council
to have the ARB and the Planning Commission act independently and
to be free of any influence from individuals on the Council. Councilman
Berwald explained that he was not saying it was improper, but that
it was unwise for Council to direct the ARB and the Planning Commission
on how the ordinance should read. He would like to see the ordinance
referred back to the groups, yet he could not vote for a motion that
refers it back with any particular Council person's interpretation,
Vice Mayor Henderson -said he was not aware that the outcome of the in-
formal meeting would be a specific ordinance. Apparently, that had
already been in the works through ARB action. Once that action had
taken place and there was unanimous agreement among these various
bodies, it had appeared to be a chance to save a lot of time and has-
sling. It seemed then that if the ordinance were to be drafted based
upon what had been talked about at that meeting, then it ought to
have wording in it that reflected what happened. As the ordinance
stands, there ate things in it that are not correct. The request
le that the ordinance be worded in accordance with what came out of
that meeting, and agreed to by the Chairman of the ARB and the Chairwoman
of the Plannin3 Commission, Council No4 'a than be'looking at exactly
what was discussed and agreed upon by tb.ose people at that meeting,
and not some other wording.
Councilman Norton said he was not replying criticism about the meeting
that was held. He felt these kinds of meetings do happen from time
to time. He did feel somewhat in a bind though, because staff was
suggesting their interpretation of what happened by the ordinance
version presently before Council, while.two Council persons were sug-
gesting that they differ. He felt it was quite unimportant as to
what is referred to the Commission and the Board, but if this ordi-
nance went with Councilwoman Pearson's comments, the entire set of
issues should go before the two groups. They could then get together
and try to work them out. Councilman Norton preferred to just vote to
send the ordinance back as prepared by staff without any suggestion
that either staff was right or the Council persons were right.
Councilman Comstock stated he had a strong urge to make a substitute
notion that the ARB and the Planning Commission get together and
discuss any differences and corm back and make recommendations to
Council. He did not feel that how the two groups were gotten together
was terribly important. Councilman Comstock felt Council members
were putting themselves its a strait jacket by trying to decide who
was right or who remembered correctly. The important thing is for
the ARB and the Planning Commission to have an opportunity to review
what they see as differences and what their jurisdictions cover.
Hopefully, they will -come back; to Council with a unified recommendation
that will represent an understanding between their two bodies.
Councilman Rosenbaum thought there would be a fair amount of discussion
after review by the two bodies, and use wondered if the recommendations
of the ARB and the Planning Co isaion should be referred to the
Policy and Procedures Committee,
247
8/26/74
1
Mayor Sher suggested this migtt be made as a separate motion.
the whole subject of jurisdiction of the two bodies should be
to their with the report and Councilwoman Pearson's comments.
he would vote against this motion.
Councilman Comstock felt that the intent of the motion was to
Planning Commission and the ARB the possibility of discussing
subject.
In his opinion,
referred
Therefore,
allow the
the whole
Neyor Sher said he understood that Councilwoman Pearson did not want
the w}o1e subject with all of its alternatives referred, but only
the draft ordinance with the changes stated by her.
Councilwoman Pearson stated she was referring the ordinance because
that was what came out of ARB, but she aleo wanted theme to get the
coments that came out of the meeting. To her, that meant the whole
subject. She did not feel that in the discussion they would feel
limited to discuss the jurisdiction that either body has.
Councilman Comstock asked for clarification of the motion.
Councilwoman Pearson said the motion included f.he aordinance, the
report, and her comments.
Mayor Sher asked :`!r. Knox if he found the motion in its present form
an acceptable way of getting the matter before the two bodies, or
did he feel they wuuic' be limited in their review in any way.
sir. Keox did not feel the A E and the Planning Commissicn would be
limited in their discussions.
The motion passed on the following vote:
AYES: !;lay, Comstock, Henderson,
Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher
NOES: Norton
(Berwald out)
MOTION: Councilman Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Pearson, that the
comments of the ARB and the Planning Commission be referred to the
Policy and Procedures Committee.
The motion passed on the following vote:
AYES: Clay, Henderson, Pearescn,
Norton, Rosenbaum, Sher
NOES: Comstock
PRESENT BUT NOT VOTING: Rerraid
OTdhance Aendiiig and kids Sect
eRai ardin& Human Relations Commission
Councilman Co a took introduced the following ordinance and moved,
seconded by Pearson, its adoptions:
2 0 8
8/26/74
ORDINANCE NO. 2813 entitled "ORDINANCE
OF THE COUNCIL OF .HE CITY OF PALO ALTO
AMENDING SECTION 2.22.050 OF, AND ADDING
SECTIONS 2.22,060 AND 2.22,070 TO, THE
PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO THE
HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION" (1st reading 8/12/74)
The ordinance
was adopted on a unanimous vote.
Ordinance Amendin Section of Title 12
b' eta i sing Underjround Uti ity strict No. 17
MOTION: Councilman Comstock introduced the following ordinance and
moved, seconded by Pearson, its adoption:
ORDINANCE NO. 2814 entitled "AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING SECTION I2. 16.020 OF CHAPTER 12.16
OF TITLE 12 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE
BY ESTABLISHING LISHING UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT
NG, 17" (1st reading 6/12/74)
The ordinance was adopted on a unanimous ous vote,
Seloskire_of Miller Avenue
Between the Two Monroe Drives (CHR:438:4)
Carleen Bedwell, Project Manager, noted that this item arose when the city
purchased a mini park cite at the corner of :filler and Monroe. The
Planning Co issio:: had suggested that the short block linking both
sides of Monroe be closed and added as area to the park, and this
was given to staff as an assignment to come back with additional
information. The report before Council dated August 22 contains
?nformition analyzing traffic data, title, recreational use of the
land, street improvement, and assessment. This report was mailed
out to all residents in the area. While staff did not make a recommen-
dation, it did indicate that it was possible to close the street
without unduly impacting the amezgency access or the traffic situation.
On the other hand this would be costly; and as evidenced by submitted
petitions, it was also unpopular with some of the residents, However,
there aie some residents who favor the closing. Mks. Bedwell said
that in addition to the petition that staff received requesting Miller
Avenue not be closed, seven other residents have expressed disapproval.
This area is in Mountain View's sphere of influence, so staff had
their report reviewed by the Mountain View staff; and they found
it acceptable, }trs. Bedwell stated that the information in Chart
i2 dealing with properties and assessments associated with this section
of the street could not be considered final. Some of the figures
may be too high, and staff needs to discuss them with the bond attorney.
If Council decides co clone the street, then staff will come back
with information regarding what this means to the assessment district.
George P. Casten, 114 Monroe Drive,
Avenue would be more of a hindrance
that the people who lived there had
grandchildren, and to did not think
park.
209
8/26/74
stated that closure of Miller
than a benefit. He pointed out
large yards for children and
there was a need for an expaneed
Larkin Hall, 131 Monroe Drive, was of the opinion that additional traffic
studies ought to be taken by the city with regard to traffic concentrations
from Miller Avenue through the two Monroe Drives, Mr. Hall stated
figures in regard to the concentration of traffic at the various
intersections now, and indicated there would be a great increase
in the traffic if Miller Avenue were closed. He pointed out, too,
that the neighborhood was having a problem with automobiles speeding
up and down Monroe Drive; and he felt that closing Miller Avenue
would considerably increase traffic problems.
Joan Carter, 112 Monroe Drive, said that the closure of Miller Avenue
is proposed to give more room to the park. It would not wean eny
more elaborate facilities, and it would be a minimum amount of space
added. Mrs. Carter felt that a larger park would tend to increase
congestion in the area, and a few people would have to drive farther
than they otherwise would. She was concerned that an expanded park
would attract people from farther away, and this would mean an increase
in the number of cars needing to park in the area.
Jay Carter, 112 Monroe :rive, stated that he two was against the
closure of Miller Avenue. In his opinion, it would do nothing except
increase the flow of. traffic. Nr. Carter thought that an increased
park would naturally attract more automobile traffic, and the closure
of the street would be to the detriment of the whole neighborhood.
Mary Vail Allen, 331 Monroe ;rive, suggested that the city put up
a sign stating that the street was not a through street.
Councilwoman Pearson noted that staff reported the park would not
have a great deal added if the street were: closed off, and she was
impressed by the number of people who signed the petition against
closing the street. However, Councilwoman Pearson Would like to
see the park developed. She did not agree with the residents who
felt that improving the park would make it an attraction to people
from outside the neighborhood.
MOTION: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, that
staff proceed with development of the Monroe Park and that Council
determine that Miller Avenue not be closed.
Councilman Berwald said that when staff met with the residents regarding
the park design, they should have Mr. Noguchi along to talk with
them about the possible means of either slowing down the traffic,
or diverting it.
Councilman Comstock stated that it was quite clear there is a traffic
problem in the area, and felt that it was important enough to allow for
a separate meeting with the residents. He thought that the traffic
discussion might overwhelm the discussion of the park if it were
all done at the same meeting. He stated that he would support the notion,
but he would like the residents to keep a plan that might be amenable to
street closure at a later date in the back of their minds when discussing
the park. it may come out of the traffic discussion that closing
the street is a good idea, and he supported the ides of the residents
having a meeting with the Traffic Department.
The motion passed on a unanimous vote.
MDTIO is Councilman bervaid roved, seconded by Rosenbaum, that in
conjunction with discussions between staff and the residents of the
neighborhood that the staff discuss the traffic situation and report
to Council on the steps they plan to take to ameliorate the traffic
speed and to 1ir1t the transient traffic.
2 117
8/26/74
Councilwoman Pearson agreed there was a problem in the area, but
the residents needed to realize there were many other neighborhoods
with traffic problems which were ahead of them. It was necessary
for staff to realize that this area would be far down on the priority
list; and if Mr. Noguchi met with these people, it had better be
after he had met with the Newell Road and the Louis Road residents.
She recalled to Council that a few months ago, she had suggested
:that Council establish a Citizens Traffic Committee to determine
how best to handle traffic in Palo Alto, but the Council had voted
it down. Since then, every neighborhood in town wes coming to Council
with their traffic problems. Eventually, there would have to be
a traffic committee that would decide which streets would be closed,
which ones would have bumps, etc. Councilwoman Pearson supported
what needed to be done in this area, but she wanted to be sure
priorities were adhered to.
Vice Mayor Henderson requested that the words "in conjunction with"
be left out of the motion, since that would tend to place this traffic
situation ahead of all the others or delay the park.
Councilman Berwald thought that when the residents talked about the
park they would be talking about traffic, no matter What Council
would say; and he felt his motion reflected reality. He did not
know how much staff work was involved in talking to the people on
Louis Road, tyre vnmeadow, and other.; but he thought the sooner a
response could he made to individual neighborhoods, the better off
everyone would be. Staff would probably be the best judge of how
fast they could move.
Councilwoman Pearson said two staffs were involved, one which concerns
itself with parks and one which concerns itself with traffic. The
two subjects should be separate:.
MOTION RESTATED: Councilman Berwald roved, seconded by Rosenbaum,
that at the earliest appropriate time staff discuss the traffic situation
and report to Council on the steps that they plan to take to ameliorate
the traffic speed and to limit the transient traffic in the area.
The notion as restated passed on the folleQwing vote:
AYES: Berwald, Clay, Cematock, Sher
Henderson, Pearson, Rosenbaum
NOES: Norton
} ja9 aim• Count; Coneract (CMR:484:4)
?LION: Councilman Comstock moved, seconded by Pearson, that the
Mayor be authorized to execute the agreement.
Vice Mayor Henderson said that in reading the contract, it seems
that the city is sacrificing $21,000; but he was sure that was not
true. The fifteen month funding promised had been $107,000; and
now, this had been reduced to a twelve month period at an amount
of $85,500. He wanted to know if that meant the rest of the money
would be coming, later, or was that lost.
Mrs. Bedwell responded that the county felt that $85,000 for twelve
months was their commitment.
Vice .Mayor Henderson asked if it wr.re true, then, that there would
be a budget problem because of the reduced revenue.
2 1
8/26/74
:firs. Bedwell replied that staff would be back with a budget amendment
that would reduce the city's level of funding and expectations, and
the program has adjusted its budgets accordingly.
Mayor Sher asked if there were any chance that the county would make
a supplementary grant on tW s program, or was it their intention
to pay for just the first year.
Mrs. Bedwell said the county's intent was for just these twelve months.
However, this is not a one year circumstance, and the city would
be free to apply again.
The motion passed on a unanimous vote.
(Councilman Norton left during recess and did not return.)
Barron ark Fire Detachment (CMR:480:4)
MOTION: Councilwoman Pearson introduced the following resolution
and moved, seconded by Berwald, its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 4991 entitled "RESOLUTION
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
MAKING APPLICATION TO THE SANTA CLARA
COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION
FOR T E DETACHMENT OF TERRITORY FROM BARRON
PARK FIRE DISTRICT„
The resolution was adopted on a unanimous vote.
elmbarcadero Road Underpass Pump Station -
Ae II: Report sn Rids (CMR:485:47
Z ION: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, that
Council find this project has no significant environmental impact,
and that the Mayor be authorized to execute a contract wth Power-
Andersoe in an amount of $24,300 for construction of an Fmharcadero
Read Underpass Pump Station - Stage 1I.
Vice Mayor Henderson wanted to know if the city were dollars ahead
on this project, Stage I cost $19,000.00, and Stage 11 would coat
$24,300.00, making a grand total of $43,000.00 instead of the original
budgeted $58,000.00.
Arthur Reschke, Manager of Public Works Engineering, responded affi-m-
etively; and he stated that this particular bid came in very low.
Councilman Rosenbaum questioned why one contractor would bid roughly
one-half of what the other zontractors bid.
Mr. Reschke reported that the successful bidder had been contacted, and
he *soured the city that he would honor the bid.
The notion passed on a unanimous vote.
Calla a Terrace Nevi hborhaod Traaffic
X .' x,.ev lua.at (G R:483:4)
Ted Noguchi, Traffic Engineer, stated that Plan X has been in effect
for approximately three months. Fundamentally, it was staff's view
that Plan I'vas somewhat rigid. .Looking at all of the traffic data,
staff cams to the conclusion that the Plau 2 would probably have
reduced the severity of impact on the neighborhood.
2 1 2
8/26/74
Dr. Richard Clark, 865 Stanford Avenue, Director of the Latter Day
Saints Institute of Religion, said the Institute was located on Stanford
between Cornell and Wellesley. A barrier was erected on the corner
of Cornell and Stanford, and this has created the problem of automobiles
cutting through the parking lot and going on to Wellesley and out
to Stanford. This posed a dangerous pedestrian condition, it has
eliminated safe traffic entry and exit to the premises, it has imposed
severe wear and tear on the parking lot, and it infringed on the
privacy and security of the building, Dr. Clark strongly recommended
that the barrier be removed.
Udo Kaiser, 1630 California Avenue, stated that Plan X has been very
successful; and the traffic had been greatly reduced. He requested
that whatever final plan may be adopted, the barriers not be removed.
Frank Rhame, 2344 Hanover., surveyed the Hanover Street residents;
and he gave Council members a copy of the results of the survey.
One of the results of the survey was that a great percentage of the
residents favored retaining the barriers. He pointed out that College
Terrace did not grow up with a traffic problem, but it had been imposed
upon the residents relatively recently by outside events. These
were the opening up of Hanover Street to Page Mill Road, and the
development of Stanford Industrial Park. This particular neighborhood
was unique in that it was caught between two giants, Stanford University
and the Industrial Park. Mr. Rhame urged support of the barrier
system.
Lino Moffitt, 637 Stanford Avenue, wanted to point out that there
was not just a problem at the upper end of Stanford, but that it
existed at the lower end also. Ms. Moffitt stated she did not favor
the barrier system, since a number of people felt inconvenienced
by it, She felt a stop sign at Stanford and Yale would be well worth
while, especially if the street could be painted indicating there
was a atop ahead. In her opinion, one or two barriers would be sufficient.
Nick Simon, 2035 Oberlin Street, stated that the traffic survey indicating
three hundred vehicles passing through Oberlin on a certain date
was done jest after] Plan X was implemented, Mr. Simon conducted
his own traffic survey a few weeks ago, and that indicated 215 vehicles
in less than one a.nd one-half hours. He felt the earlier traffic
survey was not really relevant because it takes motorists quite some
time td find their way through a maze, thu.t: finding the most direct
route to their destination. He felt the area's particular problem
would be alleviated by the introduction of Plan 2, except that he
did not agree with having stop signs at the corner of Oberlin Street
and Stanford Avenue. Mr. Simon stated that because of squealing
brakes, etc., the noise level was unbearable. He recommended that
police ticket drivers for speeding, rather than for going through
stop signs,
Vice Mayor Henderson asked Mr. Simon just where he took his traffic
count.
Mx. Simon, upon checking the staff report, apologized because it
was apparent that staff's traffic survey coincided with his.
Stephen Ac°htenhagan, 720 South California Avenue, stated that the
point had been made in the staff report that stop signs reduced the
velocity of the vehicles moving through the College Terrace area.
However, the noise peobles caused by vehicles coming to sudden stops
and starting quickly had become a serious one, Mr. Achtenhagen urged
that the stop signs be removed.
2 1 3
8/26/74
Rebecca M. Anderson, 2081 Amherst Street, spoke against the barriers.
She felt hewed in, and she used extra gasoline to get from her house
to Route 280 because she had to go so far to get around the barriers.
Further, Ms. Anderson was concerned about the fire hazard created
by having Hanover closed off. She reported that she'noticed a decrease
in the number of police patrol cars since the barriers had been put
down. If the final, plan did not include stop signs, then M. Anderson
was in favor of bumps.
Arlene Kaplan, 900 Cottrell Way: representing Stanford Hobe Owner's
Association, referred to the signal at Hanover in Plan Z. VS, Kaplan
wanted to know if the time delay could be activated during those
hours when it would produce a positive effect, and then have it de-
activated et other times of the day. She sympathized with the noise
and pollution problems as stated, but she felt that stop signs were
needed on Stanford. Ms. Kaplan agreed with staff that bettering
the situation along Page Mill Road was the answer to the problem.
Sill Henderson, 1142 College Avenue, stated that traffic and noise
had increased along his street since Plan X had been put into effect.
Mr. Henderson did not agree with that part of the staff report which
said that 86% of the traffic along the various Terrace avenues came
from Terrace residents. He offered two possible solutions. One
of these was that Stanford Industrial Park needed a s'eparaate ents:uice
and exit, and the other was to again block Burgoyne Street with a
barrier on the industrial side at California and Hanover. Mr. Henderson
thought that six months s as a trial period for Plan 2 was too long.
It was hie hope that Council would look for a total solution for
all of College Terrace and not just for segments of it,
John Murphy, 1467 College Avenue, suggested barriers at Stanford
and Junipero Serra and at the Hanover industrial side. If this could
be done and still give College Terrace residents direct access to
Stanford, the residents would again have a cul-de-sac.
Reverend Manfred Hellmann, University Lutheran Church, expressed concern
about the barrier on Bowdoin. With regard to Plan Z, he wished to
make it cle.;r that the church would be unable to pay for any redesigning
of the parking lot. It appeared to him that the barrier would have
to stay at ite present site or be moved down to the end of Bowdoin
and College. Otherwise, the parking lot would become a loop again
for drivers to circumvent the barrier at that particular point.
Reverend 1aheann thought it might be well to block off Bowdoin at
Stanford and also block off the church parkin lot. If this were
done, those persons attending church could park along the'atreets.
Vice Mayor Henderson asked how many parking spaces there were in
the church lot.
Reverend B.ahmann replied there were thirty-two.
Dick Stoddard, 2137 Bowdoin Street, was in total oppo8ition to any
possibility of leaving the barrier where it was presently located
on Rowdoin. He suggested that a one way cattle guard to egress from
the church parking lot to Stanford be installed, and that the barrier
be moved to Stanford Avenue.
Jars Culpepper, 2121 Amherst Street, Cheirman of the College Terrace
Residents Association, read the letter which he had sent to Council,
dated August 23. He made the following recommendations: 1. In order
to reduce the traffic on College Avenue, he proposed the elimination
of the four way stops at Oberlin and Wellesley on Stanford Avenue
and at Princeton and Williams on California Avenue. He felt the
2 1 4
8/26/74
stop sign should be retained at Stanford and Yale to accommodate
very heavy pedestrian traffic at that particular intersection, and
he believed there should be a stop sign at California and Wellesley
to slow down Industrial Park traffic. 2. He recommended removing
the barrier at Yale in order to relieve the traffic on Oberlin and
to provide better access to the J. J. & F. Food Store. 3. To reduce
the traffic on Princeton, he suggested moving the four ;:ay atop at
California and Princeton to California and Wellesley. 4. To discourage
an even higher build up of traffic on Stanford Avenue, Mr. Culpepper
recommended eliminating the right turn corner cut from El Camino
on to Stanford. 5. For the sake of simplicity and appearance, he
thought the Bowdoin barrier should be moved to the corner of Bowdoin
and Stanford on a trial basis to determine if this, in fact, caused
the Stanford Lutheran Center unreasonable inconvenience. Mr. Culpepper
noted that the Planning Commission had recommended construction of
an alternative road system for California Avenue industries as one
element of the new Comprehensive Plan. He urged favorable Council
consideration when that element was before it. Mr. Culpepper referred
to Elie suggestions as Plan Y, and the main difference lies in retaining
the barriers on Williams, Cornell, and Princeton Streets until the
consequences can be evaluated of removing three important stops and
one barrier. Mr. Culpepper stated that he appreciated the fact that
. Noguchi moved forward on traffic problems as fast as he possibly
could, and that he was so thorough and impartial.
Colin Mick, 2133 Hanover Street, also had reservations about the
staff report that a great deal of the College Terrace Traffic was
local traffic. It appeared that Mr. Noguchi had been using figures
from a 1973 originideatination study which was made before ahy of
the barrier systems were instituted, and he thought the figures were
probably no longer correct. Ni. Mick did not feel that Plan X had
done a great job of discouraging through traffic, but it had merely
diverted it. Hanover Street had 1200 cars per day, and he considered
that to be excessive. Mr, Mick said he would feel sorry for the
people on Princeton, Cornell, and Williams if their barriers were
removed. He urged consideration of his suggestion of moving the
barrier on Hanover to the other side of California and blocking off
all of the commute traffic which user Hanover and College Terrace
to avoid the Page Mill/El Camino intersection,
David Raskin, 1575 Stanford Avenue, suggested the solution of putting
the Bowdoin Street barrier at the Stanford end of that street. That
would prove convenient fer those persons who use the facilities of
the Lutheran Center. For his end of the Terrace, the barrier system
had proved to be an enormous improvement.
Mt. Noguchi said that with regard to th.t signal at Stanford and Hanover,
it would be poaeible to make an arrangement where the delay would
be in effect only during certain hours of the day: hoVever, previous
surveys indicated that there was a problem all day,' not just during
peak traffic hours. W. Noguchi felt it might be possible to de-
activate the time delay during the evening hours when there is s
sign{ f ica nt decrease in the traffic volume. He referred to the comments
about 83% of the traffic being local traffic and said those figures
were not based on the old origin and destination study. Rather,
they were based on current information that staff had developed from
traffic ccunts.
Vice Heyor Henderson referred to Figure 6, Summary of Public Comments
on Plan X, and asked who the fifty-five people were, or where they
lived in College Terrace.
Ht. Noguchi explained that the consents were those received in his
office by telephone or letters.
215
8/26/74
Vice Mayor Henderson noted that people who are dissatisfied will
always make themselves heard, so he did not feel it could be stated
that 56% of the people were against Plan X. Of the five streets that
were listed as being seriously impacted by Plan X, Vice Mayor Henderson
disagreed on at least two of them. The two sections of Williams
averaged 900 and 500 vehicles after Plan 6, and 300 and 600 after
Plan X. On Columbia the two sections were 600 and 200 after Plan
6, and they were 300 acid 500 after Plan X. He asked if Mr. Noguchi
considered five or sip, hundred tari a serious traffic problem, and
if the totals were not virtually the same as prior to Plan L.
Mr: Noguchi did not think he had compared the results of Plan X with
Plan 6. He was indicating the general unbalance of the volume of
traffic on those streets,- and College Avenue was contributing to
that problem.
Vice Mayor Henderson said that au unbalance would not bother him
too much as long as the total number of cars was not too great.
As the original author of Plan X, Vice Mayor Henderson was willing
to accept any criticisms. However, he felt that it had worked quite
well, but some changes were needed. He did not agree that Plan Z
would be a good solution, and he felt Mr. Culpepper's ideas, termed
Plan Y, should be tried. Vice Mayor Het ?demon said that page 3 of
the staff report noted that before"Plan, 6 wi,nt into effect, 50X of
College Terrace traffic was from oucalde the College Terrace area.
After Plan 6, 38% was from outside: now, after Plan X, only 142 was
from outside the area. This mesat the primary gr al bad been accomplished
of significantly reducing commute traffic. He referred to page 4,
and pointed out that travel time measurements after installation
of Plan X show that the Page Mill/f1 Camino route is now as fast
as either of the two alternative rotates its the morning, but is 20%
slower in the afternoon peak. This was a tremendous improvement
over the earlier figures. Vice Mayor Henderson noted that the final
paragraph in the report said that Plan 2 ray re -attract and re -introduce
some non -neighborhood traffic in the College Terrace streets. He
said that if those streets were opened up, a lot of the traffic would
return. It was his opinion that the present level of outside traffic
should be maintained, and the three problem sections should be aided.
These areas were the south half of Princeton Street, the north half
of Oberlin Street, and much of California Avenue. Vice Mayor Henderson
felt it would be foolish to eliminate barriers at this point, because
he felt sure they would just have to be put back in. ' He said that
segment solutions were ell that could be done at this time. The
Industrial Park could not be taken away; and on a long range basis,
the city was working to try to alleviate the traffic to get better
entry to that area. On both church situations, Vice Mayor Henderson
would like to see soma research on the idea of using cattle barriers.
The Latter Day Saints Church could sake their two driveways into
one being an entrance and one being an exits and the cattle barriers
would prevent through traffic.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Pearson, that the
following changes be made to Plan X sad tested for three months:
1) Eliminate the four --way stops on Stanford Avenue at Wellesley Street
and Oberlin Street, 2) Eliminate the four-way stops on California
Avenue at Williams Street and Princeton Street, 3) Remove the barrier
at Yale and Stanford Avenue but retain the four-way stop, and 4)
Move the barrier can &owdoin Street to the corner of Stanford Avenue.
Councilman Comstock asked if Vice Mayor Henderson's recommendations
were those listed in Mr. Culpepper's letter.
216
8/26/74
Vice Mayor Henderson responded they were except for Mr. Culpepper's
recommendation with regard to eliminating the right turn off of El
Camino on to Stanford Avenue.
Mayor Sher recalled a discussion about the El Camino/Stanford intersec-
tion and asked Mr. Noguchi if the city had control over that right
turn corner cut.
Mr. Noguchi replied that the city did not have jurisdiction over
that intersection., and any change would require state approval.
Councilman Berwald asked Mr. Noguchi if he had seen Plan Y for the
first time that afternoon..
Mr. Noguchi said he had received it in the mail that day, and that
was why he did not have a transparency of that plan. He looked at
the plan, and Plan Y seemed to be half way between Plan X and Plan
Z in its severity.
Councilman Berwald asked. Mr. Noguchi if he wound feel comfortable
in analyzing Plan Y this evening, or would he rather have some time
to cake an assessment of it, or was he going to stick to his recommenda-
tion of Plan B. The situation was that someone from the neighborhood
who knew the area quite well had made some suggestions, and now the
motion was before Council to accept those suggestions. On the other
hand, the city has a Traffic Engineer, and Councilman Berwald felt
he should have an opportunity to study the suggestions. He did not feel
comfortable about approving Plan Y without a recommendation from
Mfr. Noguchi.
Mr. N:sguchi said that since the neighborhood appeared to be fn support
of the plan, and since fundamentally the only change being requested
was the relocation of an existing stop, and a change of a barrier
location, he saw no particular problem in testing the plan and evaluating
it.
Councilman Berwald asked if Air. Culpepper's recommendation represented
the recommendation of the College Terrace Residents Association.
Mr. Culpepper responded affirmatively.
Councilman Berwald was concerned that perhaps some of the residents
were not polled.
Mayor Sher said he thought it was clear that the College Terrace
Residents Association did not include all of the residents of College
Terrace, and obviously there were some speakers who objected to some
of the features of Plan T.
Councilman Clay asked if the state's rejection of the turns on El
Camino and Junipero Serra was a final decision.
Mx. Noguchi responded that the state was quite emphatic about its
opposition to the restriction on turning at that intersection.
Counci/man Clay said this subject had been discussed by the Palo
Alto/Stanford Liaison Committee; and as mentioned earlier, the problem
is one caused by external sources, those being Stanford University
and Industrial Park. The non -work hour traffic was not something
that Council was trying to resolve. Councilman Clay asked if there
bad been any form of communication with the Industrial Park about
the problem.
2 1 7
8/26/74
Mr. Noguchi replied that staff alerted all of the industries along
California Avenue about the meetings, and they had very little response
from any of the businesses about the traffic plans.
Councilman Clay thought perhaps a pointed request for response should
be made to the industrial comffiunity since that is the biggest source
of the problem. He was not in favor of going about solving this
kind of problem in the fashion suggested at this meeting. Councilman
Clay was not convinced that the neighborhood has been fully heard
or that they were fully satisfied with any of the proposed solutions,
including the one that might be approved tonight. The responses
received on an unsolicited basis were more heavily weighted with
dissatisfaction with the way the community was barricaded. He said
that the amount of attention Greenmeadow had received was miniscule
compared to the number of hours Council spent trying to redesign
a traffic system on the spur of the moment for College Terrace.
It seemed to hire that Council was seeing itself as a better designer
of traffic movement than the Traffic Engineer. If the citizens were
led to believe that were the case, then Council could expect to have
to design traffic patterns for the whole community. Councilman Clay
said this was not a fitting and proper use of Council time. He was
not pleased with Plan Z because he did not feel it solved the problem.
Also, he would not want his community barricaded in the fashion that
College Terrace was. He did not think any community had the right
to cordon itself off from the rest of the co unity in protection
of itself. Councilman Clay stated that he had as much right to travel
through College Terrace with as much comfort and convenience as anyone
who lived in College Terrace, and he felt that many of the residents
of that neighborhood were saying the same thing. He could not support
Plan Y because it intensifies the problem that Council was creating
for itself by doing on the spot traffic engineering. He was disappointed
and dissatisfied with having spent so many hours discussing this
College Terrace problem.
Vice Mayor Henderson commented on the length of Councilman Clay's remarks.
Councilman. Clay stated that he had a right to speak for as long as
he wished on any subject, and he had never commented in that fashion
on any statements that Vice Mayor Henderson had made. A look at
the minutes would show that Vice Mayor Henderson's comments usually
outweighed his own by a factor of about ten to one. Councilman Clay
took exception to the comment And said he hoped that he would be
respected just as he respected V#.ce Mayor Henderson.
Councilman Comstock wanted to clarify with Vice Mayor Henderson the
point in his motion about removing atop signs at four locations,
that he was talking about stop signs on Stanford and California,
but not on the side streets.
Mayor Sher stated that Vice Mayor Henderson confirmed Councilman
Comstock's understanding about the stop signs.
Councilman Comstock spoke to those person, in the audience concerned
about the College Terrace traffic problem and assured them that they
were not alone in their misery. People on other streets in the city
had the sauce problems. He pointed out that, without being derogatory
to anyone, it was still a fact that when Council and staff tried
to solve other traffic problems in the city, the beet solution was
never found the first time. Every neighborhood bas its unique traffic
problems. Councilman Comstock felt that finally Council had gotten
to the best place that it could with the College Terrace problems,
but that did not mean that every single resident of the neighborhood
would be happy. The coition as now offered would satisfy sole of
218
8/26/74
the points of criticism made at this meeting. For instance, it addressed
itself to the noise problem created by stop signs. Removing the
barriers would result in increased traffic levels on the streets,
and he supported the retention of the barriers. Councilman Comstock
disagreed, with Councilman Clay to the extent that he did not go
down Park Boulevard any more because it was too big of a hassle;
and he did not go through College Terrace any more because that was
too bier a hassle. He was willing to accept this in exchange for
the neighborhood becoming a lot nicer for many people who lived in
College Terrace. Council's job was to do the best it could to mediate
conflicting interests between people in the neighborhood. This would
be a continuing effort and should not be looked upon as a last chance.
He urged his colleagues to support the motion.
Councilman Rosenbaum asked Mr. Noguchi about the justification for
his recommendation of going from Plan X to Plan Z. Mr. Nog,achi's
report stated that the streets that used to have heavy traffic before
anything was done had 210 dwelling units and that now with Plan X,
the traffic was increased in front of 320 dwelling units. He wanted
to know if part of the justification for the change was that Plan
X had made things worse for more people.
Mr. Noguchi responded affirmatively. In its analysis, staff had
tried to determine the number of units that were impacted by increased
traffic as compared to the condition prior to any action at all in
the College Terrace area.
Councilman Rosenbaum said that traffic had increased along College
Avenue, and that was due to sole of the barriers. He noted that
Councilman Henderson had made the point that if the barriers were
removed at Williams, Cornell, and Princeton, there would be more
through traffic coming down EI. Camino, turning en to Stanford, and
then using one of those three streets. But there seemed to be a
willingness to open up Yale. Councilman Rosenbaum thought that traffic
would probably take Yale over to California rather than go down to
Williams, Cornell, and Princeton; and he wondered if L'uch would be
lost if the barriers at those streets would be removed. That would
obviously reduce some of the internal traffic problem that had been
experienced, and he did not think that it had the potential to cause
additional commuter traffic. Councilman Rosenbaum was inclined to
go along with Plan Z which would solve the problems created by Plan
X without introducing new commuter traffic except to the extent
that it would go on Yale.
Councilwoman Pearson stated thee she would not be willing to open
up any further barriers. She felt that significant improvement had
occurred in the area over the past twenty months. Considering the
amount of traffic on many residential streets in Palo Alto, where
the volume could be up around ten or twelve thousand, councilwoman
Pearson did not think that the internal streets in College Terrace
had s great deal of traffic at all. She asked whether there were
two left turn lanes off of Page Hill Road on to El Camino Real.
Hr. Noguchi responded that there was just one left turn lane.
Councilwoman Pearson felt this was one of the chief bottlenecks,
and she urged Mr. Noguchi to study whether or not Page Hill Road
could be striped for two left turn lames, In response to eosraaeuts
suede by Councilman Clad as to whether" or not the city had received
any input from Stanford Industrial Park, and what'thsy thought about
the city's blocking off of traffic through College Terrace, she said
she was not interested in what their comments might be. They had
their say when Stanford Avenue was connected to California Avenue,
2 1 9
8/26/74
and that has proved to be a disaster. They also had their say when
they rammed Oregon Avenue through Palo Alto, when they could have
gone around and used circular traffic ways. Councilwoman Pearson
thought the suggestion of an interchange both at Foothill and Page
Mill at El Camino was very frightening, and she pointed out that
the county plans show Page Mill as a divided four -lane road right
up to Skyline Boulevard. The interchange idea would be one of the
worst things that the city could do because that would become the
cross traffic carrier for the entire peninsula, and the next step
would be a freeway. Councilwoman Pearson said the noise problem had
to be addressed at a different level, and the City did have a noise
ordinance. She is in support of the Council and Planning Commission
recommendation for the new streets which would remove the traffic
from California Avenue.
Mayor Sher said the motion would be divided into four parts.
The first part of the motion passed on a unanimous vote.
The second part of the potion passed on the following vote:
AYES: Clay, Comstock, Henderson, Sher,
Pearson, Rosenbaum
NOES: Berwald
The third part of the notion passed on a unanimous vote.
Mayor Sher asked, in regard to the fourth part of the motion, what
the advantage was of moving the barrier to College.
Xt. Noguchi said the comment was made earlier that it was unusual
to have :a mid -block barrier, and the residents did not feel the location
was a good one. If the barrier is to be installed at Bowdoin and
Stanford Avenue, the access to the church from Stanford Avenue would
have to be modified.
Mayor Sher said he did not think it would be wise to put a barrier
at that corner until the problems is solved of having the church parking
lot used as a shortcut. Re would vote against putting the barrier
at the corner, and he thought that cattle guards -- or wrong way deterrent
devices - should be studied as possibilities for the two church properties.
The other possibility that could be explored would be excusing the
church fro having a parking lot.
Thr fourth part of the motion failed on the following vote:
AYES: Henderson, Pearson
NOES: Clay, Comstock, Berwald,
Rosenbaum, Sher
MOTION: Councilman Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Clay, that the barriers
on Stanford at Williams, Cornell, and Princeton, be removed.
The motion failed on the following vote:
AYES: Bervald, Clay, Rosenbaum
NOES: Comstock, Henderson, Pearson,
Sher
2 2 0
8/26/74
_) ;
MOTION: Councilman Comstock introduced the following resolution
and moved, seconded by Pearson, its adoption to change the citywide
stop intersection system and crap as acted on this evening and making
a finding of no adverse environmental impact:
RESOLUTION NO. 4992 entitled "RESOLUTION
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
AMENDING RESOLUTION 429? CHANGING THE
CITYWIDE STOP INTERSECTION SYSTEM AND
MAP"
The resolution was adopted on the following vote:
AYES: Berwaid, Comstock, Henderson,
Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher
NOES: Clay
Tit EQa.w j2 ci £ sytr- iee
arkinR District "Ad Valorem"
Assessment Rtes 1974-7
Pro, ect Numbers 55-5,60-8,52-i3 and 52-14
MOTION: Councilman Comstock introduced the following ordinance and
roved, seconded by Serweld, its adoption:
ORDINANCE NO. 2815 entitled "AN ORDINANCE
FIXING AD VALOREM AS_:ESSNENT FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1974-7S, CALIFORNIA A`VLNUE DISTRICT
OFFSTREET PARKING PROJECT NO. 55-5"
The ordinance was adopted on a unanimous vote.
MOTION: Councilman Comstock introduced the following ordinance and
moved, seconded by Berwald, its adoption:
ORDINANCE NO. 2816 entitled "AN ORDINANCE
FIXING AD VALOREM ASSESSMZ1T FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1974-75, CALIFORNIA AVENUE DISTRICT
OFYSTREET PARKING PROJECT NO. 60-8"
The ordinance was adopted on a unanimous vote.
MOTION: Councilman Comstock introduced the following ordinance and
awed, seconded by ferwald, its adoption:
ORDINANCE NO. 2817 entitled "AN ORDINANCE
FIXING AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR 19'4-75, UNIVERSITY AVENUE DISTRICT,
OFF-STREET PARKING PROJECT 140. 52-13, OFF-
STREET PARKING PROJECT NO. 52-14"
The ordinance vas adopted on a unanimous vote.
sapst of Councilman Berwald For
Resolution of Appreciationto
irz -Fazzino
Councilman aerwald said he knew that Council hers were all aware
of the fine work that Gary Fuzin° had done in broadcasting the meetings
over K2SLl,
2 2 1
8/26/74
MOTION: Councilrian Berwald moved, seconded by Henderson, that staff
be directed to prepare a resolution of appreciation to Gary Fazzi::o.
The motion passed on a unanimous vote.
Dates Set for Se tember Council aieetin s
MOTION: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Pearson, that the September
3 meeting be cancelled.
The motion passed on the following vote:
AYES: Berwald, Clay, Henderson,
Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher
NOES: Comstock
Mayor Sher said that September 16 was a Jewish holiday, and a cancellation
of that meeting would work in very well with some thoughts about
a special meeting for review of the Comprehensive Plan. The suggested
date for that meeting was Wednesday, September 18.
MOTION: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Comstock, that the regular
meeting of September 16 be cancelled and. a special meeting be scheduled
for September 18 to deal with the Planning Commission recommendations
in regard to the Comprehensive Plan.
Councilwoman Pearson said the holiday was an unscheduled one, and
there was a terrific work load. She felt it would ba appropriate
to have a regular meeting on the /6th and also to have a meeting
on the 18th concerning the Comprehensive Plan, In her opinion, it
was important to do both of them. She asked that the motion be separated.
Mayor Sher recognized that September 10 had a very heavy agenda.
He had thought that .tnstea.d of having the regular meeting on the
16th, that Council could continue with its work on the llth. Mayor
Sher did feel that one regular Council meeting per week was sufficient.
MOTION RESTATED: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Comstock, that the
regular meeting of September 16 be cancelled.
Councilman Berwald asked for reconsideration of the cancellation of
September 3, because it would affect his vote on the current motion
re 16th.
MOTION: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Clay, reconsideration
of the motion that the September 3 meeting be cancelled.
The motion to reconsider failed on the following vote:
AYES: Berwald, Clay, Comstock
NOES: Henderson, Pearson, Sher,
Rosenbaum
The motion to cancel the regular meeting of September 16 failed on
the following vote:
AYES: Rosenbaum, Sher
NOES: Clay, Comstock, Henderson,
Pearson, Berwald
2 2 2
8/26/74
Mayor Sher asked Mr. Sipel if it would be appropriate to set a
special meeting to deal with the Comprehensive Plan options.
Mr. Sipel said he did not see any reason why that could not be done.
MOTION: Mayer Sher moved, seconded by Comstock, that a special meeting
be scheduled for September 18 to deal with the Comprehensive Plan.
Mayor Sher stated that he had changed his mind since he originally
made the motion, and he would vote against it.
Councilman Comstock felt that without a regular meeting on the 16th,
Council would get in a hole again. He assumed that those who could
be present on the 16th would carry on a business meeting, and that
he was still committing himself to a special meeting on the 18th.
Councilman Berwald concurred with Councilman Comstock's comments.
Councilwoman Pearson and Vice Mayor Henderson agreed with the two previous
speakers.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION:- Councilman Rosenbaum taoveri, seconded by Berwald,
that a special meeting to consider regular busfness be held on Wednesday,
September 18, and a special meeting regarding the Comprehensive Plan
be held on Mionday, September 23.
The motion passed on the following vote:
AYES: Berwald, Comstock, Henderson,
Pearson, Rosenbaum
NOES: Clay, Sher
MOTION: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Cainstock, reconsideration
of the vote for the meeting of the 16th.
The motion to reconsider passed on the following vote:
AYES: Berwald, Comstock, Henderson,
Rosenbaum, Sher
NOES: Clay, Pearson
MOTION: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Comstock, thst the regular
Meeting of September 16 be cancelled.
The motion passed on the following vote:
AYES: Berwald, Comstock, Henderson,
Rosenbaum, Sher
NOES: Clay, Pearson
Re wrest of Councilwoman lrearson
� rr' —07 re ant 4
ifC &dte In►craase
Ilrl�I R.II}I(��.I I S.�1r c
MOTION: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, that
stiff prepare a report on th'i pros and cons of the Southern Pacific
Rate Increase of 111%.
Councilman Berwald, stated that as a commuter, he was opposed to the 1n -
crease; but he had not heard S.P.'* arguments. He would like the
staff report to include the facts of the situation.
123
8100/74
•
The motion passed on a unanimous vote.
(Councilman Comstock left the meeting before the above vote and did
not return.)
e uest of Councilwomania as
for Information on AB 3369 and AB 4369
MOTION: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Berwald, that staff
get information on AB 3369 and AB 4369 re the aged.
The motion passed on a unanimous vote.
Regast of Councilwoman Pearson
re Support of Equal. Ri$hta dmantt
MOTION: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, that
the Mayor send a letter to the Governors of those states that have
not ratified the equal rights amendment urging that they do so.
The motion passed on the following vote:
AYES: Clay, Henderson, Pearson,
Rosenbaum, Sher
ABSTAIN: Eerwald
mbarton llr
Vice Mayor Henderson reported there would be a study undertaken in
regard to an access road between East Palo Alto and Palo Alto.
Oral Communications
None.
Adlaurnment
MOTION: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Pearson, to adjourn.
The motion passed on a unanimous vote.
The meeting of August 26, 1974, adjourned at 12:10 a.m.
ATTEST:
APPROVE:
2 2 4
8/26/74