Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11181974CITY COUNCIL MINUTES CITY Of - PALO ALTO Regular Meting November 13, 1974 ITEM Adjourned Meeting of November 11, 1974 6 2 1 Request of Councilman Rosenbaum re Revising Utility Rules and Regulations 6 2 1 Request of Vice Mayor Henderson re Property Maintenance Standards 6 'l 1 Oral Communications 6 2 4 Regular Meeting of November 18, 1974 6 2 4 Minutes of October 21, 1974 6 2 5 Request of Councilman Rosenbaum re Council's Opinion on a Petition to Transportation Commission re Shifting of a Bus Route on Melville 6 2 5 4090 El Camino Real (McElroy Property) Application for Prezonirg to P -C 6 2 9 30U Homer Avenue (Palo Alto Medical Clinic) Change of District from R-4 to P -C American Field Serv e Students 6 4 0 6 4 5 November 20, 1974 Special Executive Session - Personnel Matters 6 4 6 620 11/18/74 (".70 November 18, 1974 The City Council of tha City of Palo Alto met on this date at 7:30 p.m. in an adjourned meeting of -November 11, 1974, with Mayor Sher presiding. Present: Beahrs, Henderson, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher, Berwald (arrived 7:40), Clay (arrived 7:45). Absent: Comstock, Norton Re west of Coun 1 Ro e re v s ne t ft5r u .es and Regulations mommur Councilman Rosenbaum stated that he had noticed that in his utility bills for two consecutive months, the number of kilowatts used was about the same; but the charges for electricity were considerably different. Upon checking this with staff, he found that the reason has to do with delays in ;meter reading. If a meter is not read for more than thirty --three days, the amount charged goes up. Councilman Rosenbaum explained the reason for this was to make certein the city collects the equivalent of its service charge and the higher rate for the first 200 kilowatt hours twelve titres a year. In practice, however, the city made up for the 1on periods with a number of short periods that did not go under the twenty-seven day break point. The result wss that Councilman Rosenbaum was charged more for electricity in two months out of the twelve, and he was sure this had happened to a number of other people. MOTION: Councilman Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Henderson, that staff prepare a revision of the rate schedule to prevent extra charges on utility bills due to delayed Meter reading. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. Request of Vice Mayor Henderson 4 (CMR:535:4) Vice Mayor Henderson said he introduced this item in September of 1972 in response to a number of complaints he had received from citizens concerning litter, over -growth, and general neglect of private property. It was Vice Mayor Henderson's opinion that people who work hard to maintain their oene property should be protected from extreme cages of neglect on nearby properties. The October 17 staff report lists the portions of the Municipal Code that apply to property maintenance and concludes that the laws are adequate; on the other hand, enforcement is on a coeplaint basis only. Staff feels that more rigid enforceme..it would require additional personnel. Vice Mayor Henderson stated that holes existed in the Code, and automobiles on front lawns was one example. Some instances of neglect were Aso obvious that Vice Mayor Henderson thought that inspectors should note them in the course of their travels. He read the following article from the San Francisco Chronicle dated August 20, 1972, 6 2 1 11/18/74 s - � regarding a new program in the City of San Mateo: "Starting on Monday every house and apartment in the City of San Mateo will get a once-over from Building Inspectors launching a city-wide housing survey. The survey is aimed net only at spotting structural defects on the outside of the building, but will call owners' attention to the need to comply with the city's relatively new aesthetically and environmentally property maintenance law. Violations include such titters as unkempt landscaping, lawns gone to weed, houses in need of paint, and broken windows. In some areas, broken down autos are parked on the lawns or in front of homes; and inspectors would check this as a violation of the Code. Furthermore, unsightly accumulations of debris, rank overgrowth, etc., are included as violations. Buildings, fences, or other structures which have been abandoned or boarded up, or partially destroyed, constitute violations. Other violations include trailers, campers, boats, and other mobile equipment stored for unreasonable periods of time in front and side yard areas and causing depreciation to nearby property values. Abandonment, parking, or leaving a licensed or unlicensed vehicle - or part thereof - which is in an abandoned, wrecked, dismantled, or inoperative condition on any private or public property for a period in excess of seven days would be considered a violation.01 Vice Mayor Henderson said that Palo Alto did not necessarily want all of these details in the Code, but some of them should be considered along with enforcement of existing laws. MOTION: Vice iiayoe }-ienderson moved., seconded the subject of property maintenance standards Policy and Procedures Committee for review of ordinances and for consideration of increased by Rosenbaum, that be referred to the the adequacy of existing enforcement activities. Councilman Berwald asked if the laws regarding public nuisance, health codes, and the present building inspection laws are adequate. Stan Nowicki, Chief Building Inspector, responded that the Codes are adequate to the degree that they are enforced; but the Building Inspectors do not have citation power. He pointed out that there was a time delay due to the paper work involved with a first and second notice to the owner, and then a request for legal action through the City Attorney's office. Mr. Novicki explained that staff did not try to get penalties against persons who violated the ordinances, but that they simply to:ight compliance. He said there were some chronic violators, but staff found that the majority of the citizens wanted to cooperate and comply with the ordinance. Mr. Nowicki added that the amount of time given to an owner to meet the Code varied depending upon the individual situation He noted that working on vehicles was covered in the zoning ordinance, where a time limit of seventy --tiro hours was indicated. Mr. Nowicki stated that in addition to responding to complaints, his inspectors did take note of violations as they went about the city. Councilman Berwald asked if it were generally true in mual.cipaliti+es throughout the state that Building Inspectors had no citation power. lfr. Nowicki responded affirmatively. Councilman Berwald asked if there were of the paper work that was required to Mr. Nowicki replied that the only way to have citation powers; but that had and he did not believe the city would any way to eliminate some enforce the ordinance. would be for the inspectors not been Palo Alto's policy, want to change that. 622 11/18/74 Councilman Berwald recognized the motivation for this item being on the agenda, and the request that it be referred to the Policy and Procedures Committee. He mentioned a situation which the San Francisco School District experienced, which was that the more laws that were put on the books, the more vandalism there was. When a different tactic was implemented of opening up the school yards so that the youngsters could play there and of taking a leas punitive stand, vandalism dropped. Councilman Berwald thought there was an analogy in this matter. The end result of referral and study would probably be to favor the punitive method rather than the present stance of asking for compliance, and Councilman Berwald expressed his preference for the latter. He stated empathy for young men who worked on cars in their driveways, because this was one way that they developed knowledge, potential, and growth, Also, Councilman Berwald thought there were some persons who were act able to keep up their properties for financial reasons. It was his understanding that broken windows, litter, etc., were items that were already fully enforceable. Councilman Serwald would like to see the staff continue to work with citizens to encourage them to take pride in their community and maintain their homes. It seemed to him that asking staff to pay a little more attention to this matter and bringing - to Council's attention any additional measures that were needed would be better than a referral to the Policy and Procedures Committee. Councilwoman Pearson said that some of the rules and regulations had been on the books for years without having a good review as to their effectiveness. Perhaps some of the recommendations would include deletion_ or consolidation of the rules; and after so many years, she agreed it was time to review the ordinances that dealt with property maintenance. Vice Mayor Henderson responded to Councilman Berwald that he was not sure any new laws were needed. The one having to do with autos had not been listed in the staff report, so he had not had the opportunity to read that one; but it was indicated that someone could have a car parked in a front yard for six months or more before it was considered a violation. Vice Mayor Henderson explained that he was not asking for any additional punitive measures. Warnings were fine, but perhaps there needed to be more of them; also, he was not expecting a manicured sawn kind of a standard. Vice Mayor Henderson was speaking about extreme neglect cases; and in response to the concern of property owners, he thought the laws should be reviewed to determine if additional steps needed to be taken. Councilman Clay asked who received the complaints from concerned citizens, Vice Mayor Henderson responded that people are very reluctant to complain officially to the city because they fear their names would be given to the person about whom they are making the complaint. Therefore, complaints are received by various members of Council. Names of persons who make complaints to the city are kept confidential, but Vice Mayor Henderson did not think this was known in the community. Mr. Novicki offered the information that the name of the person who complains is not released, and that policy has been followed on the advice of the City Attorney's office. Councilman Clay thought it would be well if this fact were publicized throughout the community. 6 2 3 11/18/74 Mayor Sher thought Councilman Clay's comments got to the heart of the matter. Staff states that there are adequate laws on the books, and the basis for a review is that a few extreme cases of neglect exist. What was being really talked about was the level of enforcement, and this was a question of how much money the city wanted to put into the program. Mayor Sher pointed out that the first part of the motion concerned a review, and the second part dealt with enforcement; and he thought the second part should be referred to the Finance and Public Works Committee to be studied perhaps at the time of the budget review. Vice Mayor Henderson recalled that there is considerable criticism at the budget hearings because so much time was spent on establishing policy. Wherever possible, it is efficient to have the policy established and then proceed with the budget accordingly. In this case, Vice Mayor Henderson did not know that there would be any additional budget requirements. His point was that the whole subject needed a review; after the review, there could be a budget determination. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Clay, that the natter of the level of enforcement of the property maintenance ordinances be referred to the Finance and Public Works Committee without specifica- tion as to when the review should take place, The substitute motion failed on the following vote: AYES: Clay, Sher NOES: Beahrs, Berwald, Henderson, Pearson, Rosenbau The motion to refer this subject to the Policy and Procedures Committee passed on the following vote: AYES: Beahrs, Henderson, Pearson, Rosenbaum NOES: Berwald, Clay, Sher 1�� icat ions ids 1, Randy Brodersen, 656 University Drive, Menlo Park, expressed concern that the decisioa Council had made regarding the extension of Willow Road could destroy the grove just off of El Casino and have negative ecological effects on San f'rancisquito Creek. He asked Council to give the decision careful reconsideration. The adjourned meeting of November 11, 1974, adjourned at 8:05 p.m., November 18, 1974. 7 The City Council of the City of Pale Alto met on this date at 8:05 p.m. in a regular meeting with Mayor Sher presiding. Present: Beaters, Berwald, Clay, Sher, Henderson, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Norton (arrived 9:35 p.m.) 624 11/18/74 alialsgalagiu.bumiLmaLi Councilman Clay referred to page 473 and requested that the word "distance" be added after "hauling" in the fifth paragraph from the bottom of the page. MOTION: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Henderson, that the minues of the meeting of October 21, 1974, be approved as corrected. R.e•uest of Councilman Rnaenbeum re Councilman Rosenbaum, Council liaison to Santa Clara County Transit District Transportation Commission, said that before getting to the specific issue on the agenda, he wanted to announce that the Dial -A -Ride part of the new bus service would start on Sunday, November 24th; and the marketing informational campaign would start that same day. Secondly, Councilman Rosenbaum announced that the new arterial routes were scheduled to start on December 21. Proceeding to the agenda item, Councilman Rosenbaum stated that two petitions had been received; and one of then had to do with the understanding of some people on Lincoln that the present bus route running on Melville and Lincoln was being shifted completely to Lincoln. He explained that the confusion was 2ue to the way the county drew its map. lc appeared that route 50, which was the one that goes out to Fast Palo Alto, comes down on Lincoln, and then shifts: over to Melville, vas going to run on Lincoln all the way. However, Councilman Rosenbaum said this was not true; and the route would continue as it has been. He went en to the major question which had to do with the new route 23, The County proposed that this new mute would run down Middlefield, turn left on Melville, and go on to Waverley. The residents along Melville, from Waverley to Middlefield, have petitioned that the route be shifted over to Embarcadero. Councilman Rosenbaum said there were two reasons why the route went down Melville; one of these was to provide service to the Community Center, and the other is to provide connection to route 50. Otte suggestion that had been made was that the route, instead of turning left on Melville, continue down Middlefield and make use of Charming and Homer - which are one --gray streets. Another suggestion was that the route continue all the way down Middlefield to University Avenue. Councilman Roaenbaum pointed out that the objection to that is that there currently is a route on Waverley, and there may well be people in ti:at area dependent upon that route. He expressed one possibility as being an evaluation as to whether or not having a bus run down Waverley from Fbaarcadero Road to Channing was serving some purpose. If it developed that people were not really making use of that route, then Councilman Rosenbaum thought there would be no objection to shifting the route to Channing and Hoaxer since those streets are designated au "collector streets". On the other hand, if it were found that significant use was being wade of the route by people who lived on Waverley and down towards Alma, there would be justi'f`ication for leaving the route there. Councilman Rosenbaum offered the opinion that the Transit District would be basically indifferent to any of these solutions, especially since no change in mileage was involved. Councilman Clay was concerned about the people who lived at Stevenson House, and he asked about the relative effectiveness of the Dial - A -Ride system as compared to the fixed route. b 2 5 11/18/74 Councilman Rosenbaum responded that there are a number of route changes in Palo Alto and San Jose. People who previously had routes running close to them would not all still have them because there were not enough buses to provide for them. The hope is that the Dial -A -Ride system will make up for the fact that there would be fewer fixed routes. If a person wanted to go someplace which was not on a fixed route, the Dial -A -Ride would be much more useful because that would take you exactly where you wanted to go. Conversely, if you are on a fixed route, it may be that it is more convenient to just count on a bus coming by. Councilman Beahrs asked if the Dial -A -Ride system would be supplementary to the fixed route system. Councilman Rosenbaum replied that the County had been divided up into nineteen zones; and roughly speaking, Palo Alto is a zone. Someone could call Dial -A -Ride and be taken anywhere within his own zone; and if a person did not live near a fixed route, the logical thing to do would be to call Dial--A-Ride. The Dial -A -Ride system works just as a taxi would, except that it would pick up a number of people along the way. Councilman Beahrs asked if the Dia1-A-Ride bus would follow a general routing. Councilman Rosenbaum Explained that as calls case in, a dispatcher radios to the driver and relays the sequence of addresses which the driver is to visit for picking up and delivering passengers. Councilman Beahrs understood there would be about a one hour time delay from when a phone call was made to Dial -A -Ride to actual pick- up time, and he was wondering how well the people at Stevenson House would be accommodated. 'Councilman Rosenbaum responded that would depend upon the level of demand for the service. Mayor Sher invited members of the audience to address Council on this subject. Michael J. Cullen, 409 Melville Avenue, expressed surprise that route 23 was going to go along Melville since the street is quite narrow. Also, there were one or two _areas impacted with activity; and there are lots of children who live on the street. Mr. Cullen thought that the use of Melville for a bus route should be re-examined. Kathleen Davis, 677 Melville Avenue, stated her objection to having a bus running up a quiet residential street; and this seemed to be contrary to the policy of the Santa Clara Transit Authority. T'ne Authority states that the arterial, or fixed route bus lines, would be the traditional system of regularly scheduled buses along major streets; and Ms. Davis pointed out that Melville just was not a major street. Speaking for the petitioners, Ms. Davis expressed the opinion that the Homer and Chancing alternative would be the most successful one. Don Alves, 475 Melville Avenue, said he had young children in his family; and he was opposed to any additional traffic on Melville. Mr. Alves pointed out also that there were many young bicyclists who used Melville on their way to Palo Alto High School because it was a low traffic street. 626 11/18/74 Richard Wilson; 500 Melville Avenue, spoke for the residents on Melville from Middlefield to Waverley. Mr. Wilson said the residents agreed on the need for local transportation, but proper location was important to its success. He stated that Melville Avenue did not meet optimum characteristics for a bus route, and that streets such a2 Homer and Chadning would be more suitable for such use, MOTION: Vice Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by #eahrs, that Council instruct its representati'e on the County Transportation Commission to request that Route 23 be rerouted to continue on Middlefield Road to Homer Avenue, and then to Waverley, and return by way of Channing Avenue: Councilman Rosenbaum reiterated his concern about people making use of the existing route, and he would prefer to wait for a determination as to whether or not a significant use was being made along that section of Waverley. Councilwoman Pearson said she knew there were people who used the fixed route along Waverley, because she saw them waiting for the bus throughout the day. She expressed concern because when Palo Alto gave up its bus system and entered into the ccunty system, the city was promised an equivalent service. It seemed to Councilwoman Pearson that more and more of the fixed routes were disappearing. She expressed willingness to experiment, but her personal feeling was that the Dial--fi-fius system would not be as good a solution as a fixed ioute system. Councilwoman Pearson could foresee the Dial -- A -Bus drivers getting into a routine of using the same streets over and over, and this would result in another group of people coring to Council to complain about their streets being used as bus routes. Furthermore, this is a partial system involving two hundred buses; and eventually, there would be two hundred more. Councilwoman Pearson noted that this was just the beginning, and people would have to get used to the fact that there would be buses going up and down their streets. She stated she would support this motion, but it was her feeling that Palo Alto was in for some real struggles with the County about the bus system. The motion passed on tee following vote: AYES: Seahrs, berwald, Clay, Sher, Henderson, Pearson NOES: Rosenbaum Councilman Rosenbaum stated that the hope was that the Dial -A. -Ride service would be found to be a very adequate replacement for the routes that will no longer be in existence. With regard to Stevenaon House, a request was made that the route be changed so that it would serve the corner of Charleston and Middlefield. He remixed this was not as good as the present situation where the bus comes out of Nelson Drive at Charleston, which is much closer to Stevenson House; but he thought this was the best arrangement that could be made, Councilman Rosenbaum commented that the County had a route running all the way from San Jose to the Stanford Shopping Center; and they were not sure what the time involve nt would be, end whether or not they could afford to extend the route. He recommended that Council ask the County that, as soon as possible after the fixed routes start, they make an evaluation as to whether route 23 could be rerouted in the area of Charleston and Middlefield. 627 11/18/74 Councilmen Berwald asked just how the County proposed to serve Stevenson House. i 1 Councilman Rosenbaum responded that Dial -A --Bus would service Stevenson House. Councilmen Berwald thought that it would be hazardous for senior citizena to walk up Charleston and get across Middlefield Road. He felt the County should be asked to continue the service to the corner of Nelson and Charleston. Councilman Rosenbaum said that from the standpoint of the Transit. District, that was not a realistic request. They want the route to serve the major centers, such as Philco and the East Meadow industrial area, in order to provide commuter service;- Such a route can very easily come up to Charleston and Middlefield, but_Councilman Rosenbaum thought that a request that the new route be just like the old one in this respect would not be granted. MOTION: Councilman Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Beahrs, that Council indicate to the Transit District Palo Alto's strong interest in having Route 23 serve the intersection of Charleston and Middlefield and ask the District to evaluate the possibility of revising the route to provide such service as soon as possible after starting the new arterial service. Councilman Clay thought a more logical use of the fixed route system mould have been to go along Charleston to serve Stevenson House and places like it rather than Melville, for instance. The link along Melville would have fewer bus riders and more automobile users, a:ad Stevenson House was probably almost totally a bus user group.. Councilman Clay pointed out that not only do you have to think of the centers where people were going, but you also had to think of who the people were who would be going to the centers, and he felt real concern that route 23 was not going by Stevenson !louse. He understood that Councilman Rosenbaum was recommending that this problem be looked at after the system was put into effect, and that disturbed him. Having Stevenson House accommodated should be looked at now, not later. Councilman Rosenbaum commented that a request had been made through staff, and the response was that when it came to adding route mileage, the county did not feel there were enough buses to provide the service. Councilman Clay thought that from the standpoint of the Stevenson House resident, it would be much more convenient to go out and wait at a bus stop for a bus to come than to telephone DialwA-Bus. He said he would like to know just how route 23 would get to Charleston and Middlefield. Councilman Rosenbaum explained that the bus enters Palo Alto and runs down San Antonio, providing service to Seery and that area and also to Palo Alto Gardens, which is another apartment house with a lot of senior citizens. The bus continees do►:rn San Antonio to Fabian. Palo Alto is suggesting that the bus turn left at Middlefield and run on Middlefield zee Charleston. It would then make a right on Charleston to serve the Philco area. Councilman Clay was certain that such a change would be requested for Stevenson House, and he did not see why it should not be done at the outset. He asked Councilman Rosenbaum: if he would be willing to charge his motion. : b 2 8 11118/74 Councilman Berwald asked that the motion also include a request for an evaluation of the service to Stevenson House within a reasonable period of time. MOTION CHANGED: Councilman Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Beahrs, that Council indicate to the Transit District Palo Alto's strong interest in having Route 23 serve the intersection of Charleston and :Middlefield and ask them if the route can be changed to reflect this before service begins. Also, that the Transit District evaluate the possibility of providing service to Stevenson House within a reasonable period of time, The motion passed on a unanimous vote. 40 0 E C .,. . o Real _ McElro Pro eggi Frances Brenner, Chairwoman of the Planning Commission, noted that the Commission was unanimous in denying prezoning for this particular subdivision. At a previous meeting, the Commission had agreed on guidelines for the developer to follow, leaving Singer Housing Company with the prablem of proving that a given number of units of a given size could be fir into the pLoject and still provide stated desirable qualities. The Commission felt that the developer had not responded adequately. Chairwoman Brenner explained that the Commission's standard was to be guided by the desirable uses on the one side, rather than to be overwhelmed by the less acceptable uses near the strip. She pointed out that the present zoning is R -I, and this gives a conventional set of guidelines with which to make comparisons. Chairwama,n Brenner stated that when you start with a piece of land 4.2 acres in size, you would expect to use - in a conventional subdivision approximately one-third of that land for streets. She commented that it should be recognized that streets provide open space between revs of horses; further, if the streets were made narrow, the hope would he to use the saved space as an open area rather than a paved one. Chairwoman Brenner said that when the development is analyzed using the gross acreage, you get a result that appears to be eleven, twelve, or thirteen units per acre; but according to conventional standards, it is twenty u:uita. Another aspect is that if you use conventional guidelines and subtract one-third for streets, you have a building coverage remaining of approximately 502; and that is a higher building percentage than the city allows in regular apartment zones. The Commission had a desire for this development to be very family oriented, and they wanted the space gained as a result of more narrow streets to be used as play area. However, instead of that, the buildings became larger. Chairwoman Brenner pointed out that calling a driveway a public street did not, in fact, make it a public street; and the City Engineer considered the offered street as being grossly inadeque to compared to public street standards. She said that Co issioner Gordon had indicated that something visually interesting could be done in this area as it relates to Barron Park and El Camino. Commissioner Gordon thought the project gave a feeling of great denseness, and the building arrange- ment offered an extremely bleak feeling to at least fifty percent of the units. Chairwoman Brenner related Commissioner Carpenter's reaction that the design concept seemed to have been made up for a much larger piece of property. Naphtali Knox, Director of Planning, stated that on July 31, 1974, the Planning Commission moved that this matter "proceed to the Architectural 6 2 9 11/18/74 Review Board with the request to consider alternatives for guest parking that would not destroy the project; that the staff and the developer explore methods to assure provision of seven moderate income units of three bedrooms cr more; that the streets be public, and traffic circulation improved; and that the ARB-approved plans then be returned to the Commission'°.. The ARB met and reviewed the project on August 13th and on September 27th, and an ARB approved site plan was returned to the Planning Commission and reviewed by them on October 30, 1974. Mr. Knox said that the Planning Commission, after hearing from the Barron Park residents, unanimously rejected the project. On November 1, George Sigel, City Manager, requested that Mr. Knox call a meeting to see if the specific objections of the Barron Park resideuts could be identified. On the same date, Mr. Knox received a telephone call from the developer's representative, Mr. Jags Beide, of Singer Construction Company, who also asked if a meting could be arranged. He wanted to talk to members of the Barron Park Association determine whether there was anything he could do to salvage the work that he had put into this project and to come up with a plan that would be satisfactory to the residents of Barron Park, while still meeting the requirements of the Planning Commission. It had been Mr. Belda's impression that he was doing everything that the community, staff, and Commission had asked him to do; and he was surprised at the unanimous negative vote of the Commission. While reviewing the matter .in preparation for the meeting, Mr. Knox ran across, a key statement made by Richard Placone, President of the Barron Park Association, at the Planning Commission meeting of July 31. :fir. Placone said: "°1 will comment on the changes that have been made so that the Cori ssion can be guided by what the community would like to see happen. The developer's response to elimination of the former proposal of commercial development along El Camino Real is a significant step in the right direction, The question of the ingress/egress on Los Robles has created some confusion. We asked for a reduction in traffic - not a total elimination of traffic on Los Robles. The reduction in denaity from i5 units to 12 is perhaps more significant. We consider the 121 units per acre the absolute maximum for that project. If the proposal by Mrs. Steinberg for moderate income housing ins increasing the density, we would be very opposed to that. This project by no means will win awards for architecture. We do not endorse the overall project since we do not endorse any plan per se, but this plan follows what we had been speaking about for a year now, and we want to thank the developer for working with us". Mr. Knox reported that the following people met last Thursday: Harold Battinus of Cornish & Carey; Jame- Beide, of Singer Construction Company; Richard Placone, President of the Barron Park Association; Robert Englund, Sam Elater, Ken Artunian, Joyce Anderson, Jane Grubgeld, all of the Barron Park Association; and Jiro Glanville, Lois Atchison, and himself for the city staff. A goal was set to determine precisely vhat these particular individuals felt would be appropriate and ought to be kept in this residential sroposal if iF were to go forward, and w3',et things were inappropriate. As a result of the meeting, Mr. Knox was prepared to bring before Council specific thoughts that the residents had. The residents want to have the uumber of units on the property lowered from 50 to 46. That would reduce the density from 12 units per acre to 11 units per acre on the 4.2 acre property. It would also add modestly to open space. Secondly, they wanted to go back to the unit type mix that was proposed in July which included two, 630 11/18/74 threw, and four -bedroom units. Instead of all three and four -bedroom units as was proposed and turned down, the group indicated it would settle for something like 12 two -bedroom units, 26 three -bedroom units and eight four -bedroom units, totaling 46. Besides reducing the number of bedrooms per acre, that would also reduce the population and the number of cars on the site. Mr. Knox made it clear at the sheeting that city policy has been to encourage three and four -bedroom units, and that the Council had just reaffirmed that in adopting Comprehensive Plan option 1(g). Thirdly, the residents stated th_.t they did not want any low/moderate income units. They felt there was a significant number of such units in their neighborhood, and they were not willing to see higher density as a result of providing them. Mr. Knox pointed out that the key trade-off is a reduction in units from 50 to 46. The land cost is about $325,000, and the developer said he would be able to reduce the total number of units only by providing no units for low/ moderate income families. Mr. Knox told those at the meeting that provision of 20% low/moderate housing is city policy. The fourth statement from the residents of Barron Park was that they would like to see units of higher quality and price. Alit-. Knox stated that the following aspects of the project were considered to be satisfactory: 1) the building heiglecs, 2) the driveway widths and the distance between buildings, and 3) two driveways that exit two-thirds of the units onto Los Robles Road ar.d one driveway that exits one-third of the units onto Vista Avenue. The key objectives of the Barron Park Association were to nova forward with a plan that would produce housing on El Camino instead of commercial development; and secondly, to lower the number of bedrooms in the development. Mr. Y.a1ox said that Council had alternatives. It could uphold the Planning Commission recommendation and deny the development. He thought the feeling of great denseness was due to the monotony of all two-story buildings set in a rectilinear pattern, all nearly equidistant from each other; and Ferhaps a denial at this point would get that message across. 0n the other hand, Mr. Knox considered that it was still possible to salvage what is good in the project in order to meet the key objective of providing housing instead of commercial development along this stretch of El Camino. At the moment, there still was a willing applicant; and a lot of effort had been put into the proposal by the applicant, residents of Barron Park, staff, ARB, and the Planning Commission. Mr. Knox stated that the second alternative would be for Council to return the matter to the Planning Commission with specific directiona in one last effort to see if a satisfactory residential development could be produced on El Camino. He added that he would not presume to indicate that Council's policies with regard to provision of low/moderate units or encouragement of three and four -bedroom unites should be overlooked; but he ventured that a combination of two, three, and four -bedroom units would meet both the policies of the Council and Commission and the wishes of the neighborhood. Mr. Knox recognized that the provision of low/moderate units was a sore difficult question. Some would want no such units, and others would want more than the four to seven offered by the applicant. Mr. Knox concluded his comments by suggesting that if Council chose to send the matter back to the Planning Commission, it should give the Commission and the applicant specific directions from which to work. Councilwoman Pearson took issue with the fact that a meeting had been held outside of the Planning Commission and Council Chambers. She took particular, issue with the fact that staff and the City Manager had called a meting between the developer and the residents 6 3 1 11/18/74 after the Planning Commission had made a recommendation to Council. In her opinion, if the residents and the developer had something to say to Council, they should come to Council and say it. Further, Councilwoman Pearson thought that if anything happened, it should happen, at the Council level; and Council would direct staff to have meetings about the matter, or it would be sent back to the Planning Commission. She felt that the Planning Commission should never be asking for any meetings outside. Councilwoman Pearson did not want to see a developer and staff negotiating on what would be brought before Council every time there was a project, after the subject had been to the Planning Commission and the ARE. Councilman Beahrs asked whether the problem in this matter was based on economics or design deficiency. He stated sympathy to the staff's predicament. Council wanted more housing, but it was not willing to accommodate or negotiate with anyone. In his opinion, it would be well if Council performed as staff had; and that would be to find out what could be done to provide housing without demanding that it be done precisely the way Council wanted it. Mr. Knox responded that the problem was one of both economics and design. He mentioned that the Webster Property was a much more satisfactory design c)ncept because it mixed up different kinds of units, including three-story buildinga. This meant there was a higher density on the site while still allowing for more open space at the ground level. However, that plan was done without any consideration for the economics involved. Mr. Knox explained there was an economic consideration on the McElroy property because the land was in the county. The developer has a strip of commercial land on El Camino, and he was being assessed for a very high value. When the property owner first proposed to put a small commercial center on the land, the sales price was going to he about $700,000. Subsequently, when the owner talked about housing with the Singer Construction Company, a commercial strip was going to be retained along El Camino with housing on the back part of the property; and at that point, the sales price was set at about $425,000. Mr. Knox said that after it was clear that the objective of the Planning Commission was to break the commercial strap on El Camino, the applicant and the property owner agreed on a sales price of $325,000. Mr. Knox concluded that there was an indication that economics did enter into the picture, and there was an obvious trade-off between density and low/moderate income housing. If there would be low/moderate income housing, the density would go up. Councilman Beaters agreed that the development sounded like a rather dreary affair, but he wondered if Council should adjust its attitudes to the point that it would accept a use of moderate high-rise to conjunction with a development of this type. Councilman Beahra felt it was time that Council, the community, and Barron Park residents adopt the idea that moderate use of high-rise in combination with town houses would accommodate a lot of the problems being discussed, notably the provision of low/moderate income housing and a greater ameunt of open space. Councilman Rosenbaum expressed some surprise at the Planning Commission action because of what he had observed by reading minutes of meetings concerning this matter in the past. It had appeared that progress was being made and satisfying everyone, There had bean a number of complimentary comments made about the development by Commissioners end by residents of Barron Park. Councilmen Rosenbaum aaked whet had happened that changed everyone's opinion so dramatically. 632 11/18/74 Mrs. Brenner responded that the Commissioners had all been pleased when the developer recognized that the El Camino strip would not be continued, and he was willing to respond to a residential zone. The problem of architectural interest existed, and there was no real response to the concerns of the Commission regarding family living in the development. Further, there had been no real response at all to the Commission's desires as far as the streets were concerned. The Commission had expected that the developer would take a look at Barron Park streets, and then design something that would not be as wide es Palo Alto streets but would satisfy .the City Engineer as to safety features, etc, Mrs. Brenner said there was too much concrete, and the rows of buildings had only thirty-two to thirty- four feet between them. The primary aim of the Planning Commission was to help the developer present a plan that would satisfy all of the concerns of Palo Alto. Councilman Rosenbaum asked if the Planning Commission did not have the plans, or something comparable to them, on July 31st when the Commission appeared to be favorably inclined to the parameters suggested. Mrs. Brenner responded that the plans became progressively more dense, the green strip along El Camino became more narrow, and the parking situation did not improve. A public street would provide a certain amount of casual parking; but when the street is simply a driveway into garages, there is no incidental parking. Councilman Rosenbaum asked Mrs. Brenner if the Commission had plans before it in .July similar to the ones being discussed. Mrs. Brenner replied that there were plans, but they had drastic things wrong with there. The developer's feeling was that the plans were schematic, and he would try again. Councilman Rosenbaum asked why the green strip along El Camino become more narrow. Mee, Brenner assumed that the reason was because the units were made larger, and the number of bedrooms was increased a great deal. Councilman Rosenbaum presumed the (developer did this because of the city's expressed interest in three and four --bedroom units. Mrs. Brenner commented that the development as it now is covered the ground area by fifty percent, which is dense, Co ncilasan Rosenbaum thought this problem might be handled by asking the developer to eliminate some of the units or to reduce in number the four -bedroom units. Mrs. Brenner agreed, but she added that a design that would be more interesting would be helpful. Councilman Rosenbaum stated that if a project is not acceptable from an aesthetic viewpoint, then the ARB end the Planning Commission can give specific directions to the developer. Mrs. Brenner felt it was necessary to see a good plan so that the Planning Commession could determine for itaelf that the developer could do what he says he, can with a site. Councilman Rosenbaum stated that it appeared that the prices of the units had gotten to the place sphere it did not sake much mense to take off twenty percent, or even forty percent, and hope to get a b 3 3 11)18/74 low/moderate income unit. He asked if staff were ready to take money as a means of pursuing the city's goals. Mr. Knox replied that staff was not ready for the City to take money, and it would take some time to work out the intricacies of payments in lieu of the housing units. Councilman Rosenbaum asked if staff would be able to set up a plan to take money within the time frame that this particular project would require, if Council proposed to go in that direction. Mr. Knox responded that the city was about able to use funds that might be set up for housing in lieu of asking for low/moderate Councilman Clay asked for some elucidation was concerned that involved the developer, staff members, etc. two years away from being the purpose of providing income units. as far as the meeting Barron Park residents, Mr. Knox said that Councilman Rosenbaum's comments pointed up the fact that it was not clear from the Planning Commission minutes why the project was turned down, and that was basically why the meeting was held. Councilman Clay commended staff for going ahead with the meeting. It was his feeling that the more the interested parties were gotten together, the more there would be solutions brought to Council, rather than problems. With regard to the low/moderate income units, Councilman Clay asked if the discussion had a HUD idea behind it, or the below -market priced units that had been discussed by Council at the last few meetings. Mr. Knox explained that the Commission in July had asked that seven units of low/moderate, or below market -price units be provided. In the last report that the staff had sent to the Planning Commission, it had been pointed out that twenty percent below market price did not mean much when you were talking about houses in the sixty thousand dollar range. An alternative was put forth which offered four units, and they would be reduced in price using the same amount of money that was going to be used to reduce the price of seven units. Councilman Clay said he had expressed on previous occasions his feelings about the likelihood of low/moierate income housing being developed in Palo Alto, and he thought this matter was a good indicator. In this case, rather than give the developer a bonus for including low/ oderete income housing, it seemed he would be given a bonus for not doing it by increasing the price of the units and decreasing the number of low/moderate units. Councilman Clay thought it was obvious that everybody wanted low moderate housing in Palo Alto but not in their own areas. Therefore, even if money were put forward for them, it would not be possible to find a place to put such units in Palo Alto. Dice Mayor Henderson raked how long the developer would have to wait before he came back to Council with changes, -if Council decided to reject the proposal as recommended by the Pienning Commission. Mr. Knox responded that there would be a one year waiting period. George Sipel, City Manager, referred to the meeting that had been held, and he said he considered it his responsibility and staff's responsibility to bring all the information they could to Council to aid its purpose in making decisions. In this particular matter, 634 11/18/74 it was not staff's intention to work at cross purposes with the Planning Commission. Mr. Sipel explained that staff wanted to get into some of the issues that were considered important. This matter concerned a piece of property on a key arterial; there was the case of low/moderate income housing and the implementation of Council policy; and there was a side issue of potential annexation, which was of concern to Council, staff, and the come^unity. Mr. Sipel felt the meetinZ was appropriate to explore what the problems were in getting the parties together, and it was not staff's intent to produce any kind of a negotiated settlement. Staff's intention was to find out just what the issues were and to pees the information along to Council. Mr. Sipel expressed staff's interest ih trying to implement in every case possible the Council's policy with respect to low/moderate income housing. Another aspect was that staff wanted to try to preserve the many efforts that had been made in the past with respect to this development; and these efforts had been put forth by staff, Planning Commission, Council, and the residents in the community. Mr. Sipel added that staff always tried to be responsive to the public; and when a developer calls and wants to find out whet he can do to lake his project acceptable, staff is happy to meet with him and try to help him understand requirements. Staff does this part of its job in an open and professional manner. James C. Belda, representative for Singer Housing Company, said he was not present to appeal the Planning Commission decision but to try to preserve a development which he thought would be an asset to the city in the future. Mr. Belch recalled the history of the procedures that had been gone through with the city over the past year, and he spoke of Singer Housing Company's efforts to meet the requirements of the Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board. He mentioned that with respect to the green strip along El Camino, it had been determined with the city staff and the Barran Park Association members that the strip had not changed between July and October. Hr. Beide thought he left the ARB meeting with what was an acceptable plan, but he admitted That perhaps he mi.einter- preted what city staff and the Planning Commission were recommending regarding the three and four -bedroom requirements. He indicated to his consultants that the city desired three and four -bedroom units because he understood that to be the major objection to Singer's plans on October 31. Hr. Beide said this was a case of population density increasing, not necessarily an increase in unit density. Accordingly, the number of bedrooms had been increased from 144 to 170. Further, ?fir, Belda understood that Mr. Glanville had stated that the Public Works Department was not in favor of public streets. He complimented the professional city staff for holding the meeting that was of such value in developing communication among the interested parties. It was Mr. 8e1da's hope that Council would take some action that would allow this long discussed development to proceed. Richard Placoue, 601 Chimalus Drives commented that with regard to the meeting that was held, he considered that the city staff was acting more as a facilitator than anything else in getting the developer together with the Barron Park residents when the project seemed to be coming to its climax. Mr. Placone stated that it had always been the desire of the residents of Barron Park to have this piece of property developed with the lowest possible density; however, they felt that the abandonment of plans of commercial development along El amino was a trade-off to the higher density. The Barron Park Association wanted to see a key project come into being that would reverse the coeesercialtrend on El Camino even if that project is not ar ideal one. The Association was happier with 46 units than with 50, but they did not consider that number ideal either. Mr. Flacons commented that the struggle had been to keep the density 635 11/18/74 down, and suddenly a requirement for three and four -bedroom units was put in. Barron Park residents would prefer more of a mix of two, three, and four -bedroom units since they did not think that small ere could accommodate that many people. Mr. Placone stated that the issue of most importance to Barron Park was the low/moderate income housing requirement. He explained that no one cared if the entire project was a low/moderate .income one; but if constructed under the present situation, people of low/moderate incomes would be forced to live in an overpopulated project. In his opinion, if low/moderate income housing is so incredibly important, then the city should consider subsidizing it. Mr. Placone said that houses in the price range of $15,000 to $24,999 constituted 252 of the housing in Barron Park, and 162 in Palo Alto. The range of $25,000 to $34,999 constituted 412 of the housing in Barron Park as oppoared to 372 in Palo Alto. Barron Park had 28% of its housing in the $35,000 to $49,999 range as compared to 302 in Palo Alto. The final figure of $50,000 or over is 15% in Palo Alto as opposed to 4% i. Palo Alto. Mr. Placone concluded that Barron Park had a very good sampling of low/moderate income housing, and he did not feel it needed to be required in this particular project. The project would start a trend on El Camino; and as long as the developer was willing to continue, Mr. Placone thought the opportunity should be given to him. Vice Mayor Henderson asked if the figures Mr. Placone (voted were current ones based on assessed value. Mr. Placone responded that the information came from a city staff report dated December 20, 1973. Vice Mayor Henderson asked if the Barron Park Association would be opposed to the development including low/moderate income units if there were no more than a total of 46 units. Mr. Placone replied that the Association was not opposed to low/moderate income housing unless it imposed a totally undesirable project in terms of density. Samuel Elster, 3744 Laguna Oaks Place, said his understanding was that there would be 46 units without low/moderate income housing, or 50 units that would include it. Also, Mr. F.iater stated that the residents really would prefer an increase in the quality and price of the units. He reiterated that :tn the opinion of those who live in Barron Park, it would be mueh better to have residential units on the property in question than to have anything there that would be commercial. Robert Moss, 4010 Orme, pointed out that the recreational area provided. in the development was inadequate. Mr. Moss thought Council should uphold the Planning Commission recommendation and have the builder come back with plans that would meet the standards that the city expected, including improvements in the circulation plan. Jowe Anderson, 3881 Masnolia Drive, stated that the residents wanted the density to be reduced; and the developer said he would not go any lower. In her op,`nion, all meetings held on matters should be public to avoid exactly the kind of problems that were obvious at this meeting. In Ms. Anderson's opinion, any project that falls short of being a superior project today will poas many problems in the future. W. E. Rhoades, 861-B University Avenue, stated that his wife was the mole owner of the property in question. He recalled for Council some of the things that had transpired with regard to the property 6 3 6 11/18/74 in the last year and one-half., especially the fact that the property had decreased in value to such a large extent. Mr. Rhoades expressed his frustration at how long it had taken to get to this point only to discover that the present project might be completely rejected. Councilwoman Pearson reiterated that she did not approve of meetings between staff and the developer without Council sanction, but the developers and the neighbors could meet endlessly if they so desired. Without the benefit of public input, she felt staff did become an advocate for the developer. Councilwoman Pearson said these were the kinds of shenanigans that the citizens of Palo Alto had put up. with in years past, and Council had managed to turn that practice around. She expressed the hope that such meetings would not become a habit. As far as the project was concerned, Councilwoman Pearson thought it left a lot to be desired. She thought the McElroy developers had tried to cooperate, but they just had not received the message from the Planning Commission and the residents in the area that they wanted a lower density. Councilwoman Pearson pointed out to the Barron Park residents that if they ere annexed to Palo Alto, the low/moderate income housing policy would apply to them as well as to the rest of Palo Alto; and the whole object was that everyone shares. MOTION: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by 3e rvald, that the matter be referred back to the Planning Commission, that the number of unit, be reduced to 46 with a density of 11 units per acre, bedrooms be reduced to total of 134, that there be four ?ow/Moderate income units, that there be just one driveway on Los Robles, and that the green strip be maintained on El Camino; Councilman Rosenbaum asked Councilwoman Pearson if she had anything specific in mind with regard to the low/moderate income units. These units are now S6O,0O0 ones, and he wondered what her thoughts were as to how these could be considered low/moderate or even below market price units. Councilwoman Pearson thought it was possible to have the same kind of low/moderate income houoi.ng_here as_there has been on other projects where the units cost sixty to sixty-five thousand dollars. Councilman Rosenbaum noted elat even if you went to 40% off, you would be talking about $36,000 units; and he vondered if it would really pay to pursue that line. Perhaps it would be better to offer the developer some feaxibil.ity in some other area to improve the project. With regard to the driveways, Councilman Rosenbaum thought the city experts should have the opportunity of debating the subject. AMENDMENT: Councilman Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Seahrs, that the motion be amended to eliminate the low/moderate units and that the number of driveways on to Los Robles not be specified. Councilman Clay asked if Councilwamaao. Pearson meant the details of her motion to be directions to the Planning Commission or guidelines. Couaaci.iwovan Pearson said her motion wale a specific direction;. Vice Mayor liendereoa did not think that if thia matter were referred back to the Planning Commission, they should receive absolute conditions. SUBSTITUTE AMENDMENT: Vice Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Sher, that the subject of the McElroy property be referred back to the Planning Commission without direction. 637 11/18/74 Councilman Berwald felt that referring the subject back to the Planning Commission without direction was a "copout". He agreed with what the owner, Mr. Rhoades had said; and Councilman Berwald undetratood his frustration. The Council, staff, and the Planning Commission were differing in what they wanted; and the property owner was confused and frustrated. In Councilman Berwald's opinion, Council could remedy the situation by*.giving very specific inateuctions to the Plenning Commission and staff as to what the sense is of the Council. There needed to be some flexibility, but some things needed to be stated definitely. Councilman Berwald said a decision should be made about low/moderate income units, for instance; and he stated his support of the sense of Councilwoman Pearson's motion. Councilwoman Pearson asked Chairwoman Brenner if the Planning Commission would like to have some specific directions. Mrs. Brenner replied that if too much direction were given, there would not be very much left for the Commission to work on. She added that if there were going to be specifics, she would like a direct statement regarafng public streets. The substitute amendment failed on the following vote: AYES: Beahrs, Henderson, Sher NOES: Berwald, Clay, Pearson, Norton, Rosenbaum Mayor Sher said the amendment would be divided. The Rosenbaum amendment to delete the requirement for low/moderate income units p acsed on the following vote: AYES: Beahrs, Berwald, Clay, Norton, Rosenbaum NOES: Henderson, Pearson Sher The Rosenbaum amendment to leave open for discussion the number of driveways passed on the following vote: AYES: Beahrs, Berwaid, Clay, Norton, Henderson, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Pearson AMENDMENT: Councilman Unpaid moved that there be no requirement for public dedication of interior roadways. The amendment failed for lack of a second. Councilman Berwald thought there would be some market in the area of this development for single persons and senior citizens. AMENDMENT: ENT: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Norton, that the unit mix with regard to number of bedrooms be deleted from the requirement. The amendment passed on the following vote: AYES: Berwald, Clay, Henderson, Norton, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Beahrs, Pearson 6>i 3 8 11/18/74 • Councilman Berwald stated that the development as shown is a very atypical rectilinear alignment of the buildings. It seemed to him that some of the buildings could be raised, and the parking could be placed underneath; this would provide more open green areas. Further, the way the buildings were placed on the lot, there was no gathering together of parking facilities; and that reduced design possibilities for open space. Councilman Berwald suggested it might be a good idea if some of the buildings in the center of the development and away from the R -I area, be three stories high. This would present still another way of opet:ing up sate space. Councilman Berwald asked Mr. Knox to respond to his comments. M.Y. Knox said that he felt the rectilinear plan was a problem, and he hoped that some of the ideas mentioned by Councilman Berwald could be accomplished. A plan providing for parking under the buildings would provide more open space, design flexibility, and would cost more since fill would have to be brought in. It seemed to Mr. Knox that the developer would probably be able to pay for the fill by raising the price of the units. Since he was no longer constrained to provide low/moderate income units, the developer had $70,000 to work with. AMENDMENT: Councilman Berwald moved that Council direct the Planning Commission to consider variations in building heights to produce additional open green areas. The amendment failed for lack of a second. Councilman Berwald stated that the lack of a feeling of open space, the exterior of the h.aildings, and the tr.ivaginativeness of the entire design all concerned 'Zips. AMENDMENT: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, that the lighting in the public areas of the project be incandescent. The amendment passed on the following vote: AYES: Berwald, Henderson, Pearson, Norton, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Beahrs, Clay Councilman Norton said he would vote against the motion as amended. He thought the project was so bad that he would like to vote against it at this meeting in the Council Chambers, and he felt robbed of that opportunity. Mayor Sher explained that a vote against the motion to refer the matter back to the Planning Commission was that kind of a vote. Vice Mayor Henderson stated he would vote against the motion with the specific directions because he disagreed with some of the specifics. In his opinion, the whole subject should have been referred to the Planning Commission without direction. The Pearson action as amended failed on the following vote: AYES: Beahrs, Berwald, Clay, Rosenbaum I UES : Henderson, Pearson, Norton, Sher MOTION TO RECONSIDER: Councilman Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Sher, that the motion to refer the setter to the Planning Commission without direction be reconsidered. 639 11/18/74 The motion to recoueider passed on the following vote: AYES: Beahra, Clay, Henderson, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher i NOES: Berwald, Norton Mayor Sher stated that the motion to refer the subject of the McElroy property back to the Planning Commission without direction wes now before Council. The motion passed on the following vote: AYES Beahrs, Clay, Henderson, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES; Berwald, Norton ?4rr. Beide, Singer Housing Company, felt that most of the discussion that had taken place had been very useful. He said Singer Co., would try to meet the challenge of having the matter referred back to the Planning Commission, but he was sorry there was no specificity involved. Mr. Beida stated willingness to spend more time and effort to see what could be done; and he felt he would be doing this with the appr,ov,:l of all the people who had contributed to the discussion tonight - not necessarily agreeing with the project in its totality - who, ingood town meeting spirit,- had made their comments known Mayor Sher expressed appreciation on behalf of the entire Council for Mr. Belda's statement. 00 Hoe ,she (P • H t-� to Councilwoman Pearson said that some residents had expressed their concern about houses still owned by the clinic on Bryant, Waverley, and Ramona. They wanted to know if these houses were going to be sold and :speed as residences, or whether the clinic would raze them and use the land for parking lots or satellite facilities. Mrs. Brenner responded that staff had indicated these houses could not all be brought together under the zoning of P -C, and they would have to remain as houses. Councilwoman Pearson stated another major concerti was about the park- ing problem that would exist during the two and one-half years of construction. She understood that theme would be 21}0 spaces between Urban Lane and the Southern Pacific tracks on what to now a dirt: lot, but she wondered how it would be possible to insist that -_employees and patients park there. Councilwoman Pearson added that the shuttle bass Oates should be routed through the business district and mot through the residential area. Mrs.. Brenner said the aim was to have patients use that parking facility and then have them bused to the clinic. She pointed out that the Planning Commission had requested that there be some employee parking within the new structure in order to get 411 day parking off the streets in the neighborhood. Councilwoman Pearson asked if there had been any height limit placed on the building, and whether or not the clinic could come in again and again for permission to add smother floor. 640 11/18/74 Robert Booth, City Attorney, responded that there was no limit at all; and the clinic could continue to apply for extra levels as often as they wanted to. Mrs. Brenner commented that a future request for another level could be curtailed at the Planning Commission level. Dr, Sydney Hecker, Chairman of the Facilities Planning Committee of the Palo Alto Clinic, 100 Homer Avetue, stated that the plan that had been submitted was carefully prepared over the past year and one-half; and it incorporated the recommendations of the ARB and the Planning Commission. The main reason for the application to add facilities was to improve the quality of the environment in which health care services are provided and to improve the capacity of the clinic to respond to the community's health care needs. Dr. Hecker pointed out that many new services had beenadded making service to patients better than ever; but the physical facilities had become terribly overcrowded, and the surroundings for the patients receiving the care were presently less than optimum. Dr. Hecker gave a number of examples of the inconveniences experienced by the staff because of the lack of space, including the fact that six of the phyr+tcians had no offices. He said that the proposed building, plan would provide the space that the clinic so desperately needed, a small attractive park at Homer and 'averley, and a significant excess of parking spaces. According to the architect, sixty-eight more parking spaces were being provided than were required under the Cody?; and t ;ii would help reduce on -street parking. Dr. Hecker felt that the plan would permit flexible aid rapid response to the medical needs of the community and to continue the clinic's position of leadership and qualft;r. Dr. Hecker referred to the Planning Co=ission's recommendation that 186 parking spaces be designated tor employees. Currently, the clinic owned one lot with 46 spaces which way reserved for employees; and the cl.iLic tented an additional 65 upaces for employees. The clinic was being asked to permanently designate 75 spaces for employees in the new construction area. Dr. Hecker pointed out that such designation would not create any more spaces, but it could create some inflexibility in the parking system. The recommendation of the Planning Commission suggests that off-street parking be designated for 100% of the employees, which is an extremely stringent, and possibly unique, requirement. He thought that such a requirement might actually be an encouvagrment for employees to come in their cars. Further, Dr. Hecker thought the requirement might put the clinic in a difficult position in the future if for some reason they were not able to continue to reot 65 spaces since replacement parking might be impossible to provide under existing zoning regulations. For these various reasons, Dr. Hecker requested that the requirement designating 1.86 parking spaces for employees be deleted. In responding to Councilwoman Pearson'e concerns, Dr. Hecker said that the hou es on Waverley, Bryant, and Ramona are not included in the P -C zone request; and he believed that the city ordinances would preclude their being razed to be converted to any use other than residenti&l. Regarding parking, the Clinic employed parking cousultants who made a careful analysis of traffic flow sad parking needs at the facility. The consultants designed a program that would fit the needs of the transitional period, and there were three sites available that the clinic could choose from for interim parking. The clinic would be happy to accommodate the city's wishes with regard to routing the buses that would travel between the lots and the clinic. Referring to the height limit, Dr. Hecker said be could not Lonceive that there would ever be an silt -story building. According to the city's own projections, Ch=urn would not be a great deal of growth over the nest ten years; and if Palo Alto did not grow, then the clinic would not grow. 641 11/18/74 Councilwoman Pearson asked if the clinic would be willing to sell the houses that she had referred to earlier. Dr. Hecker responded that there were no plans at all for the houses at the present time. Councilwoman Pearson considered the houses to be in a dilapidated condition, and one of them was being vandalized. The ones on Bryant Street are not maintained very well, and she thought it would be in the interest of the neighborhood if the clinic would sell the houses to persone who would like to make fine residences out of them. Dr. Hecker replied that one of the houses was in a poor structural condition, and the City Inspector declared it uninhabitable. He said there were no plans for the other two houses, so he could not discuss therm. Councilwoman Pearson thought it would be well if the city would develop a bus route system that would be in effect during the transition period. She was not sure that Dr, Hecker was correct in thinking that if Palo Alto did not grow, the clinic would not grow. Councilwoman Pearson stated that a number of patients did come from surrounding communities, and that number was increasing. Also, Palo Alto knew there were health plans for the future, and the clinic was vitally tied into that. This meant that the clinic would be drawing patients into its health plan. Councilwoman Pearson asked if the employees at the clinic could be asked to not park on the residential streets and use the parking spaces that are designated for them. Dr. Hecker responded that 111 spaces were designated at this time for employees. He thought that car pooling could be encouraged; and when better mass transit was developed, fewer employees would be bringing their cars to the clinic. Councilman Clay asked if the clinic grew to full utilization of the proposed addition, would it then consider that the saturation paint had been reached at the site. Dr. Hecker said that the :linic was considering some sateliiting of its operations. He reiterated that Palo Alto would not be growing very much, and the Chambers of Coerce tat the surrounding communities are predicting about a 1X growth per year. Furthermore, Dr. Hecker noted that the limitation on prepaid medical plans was geography; and people who lived more than eight or ten miles away would not join the clinic's health plan. Vice Mayor Henderson asked Dr. Hecker to elucidate on the matter of employee parking. From the minutes of the Planning Commission, he had leaved that 60% of the employees care to the clinic in cars; and there were about 186 parking apices for them. Dr. Hecker explained that about 260 employees come in cars, but not all of the leave their cars there. Some are dropped off at the clinic, some comme in car pools, etc. A survey indicated that about 50 to 70 employees do leave cars on the street. The clinic accommodated about 111 cane on its existing employee lot, and probably some of the employees parked on the patient lot as well. The clinic was going to provide plenty of parking in the new plan that would reduce ors --street parking. 642 11/18/74 Vice Mayor Henderson asked Dr. Hecker if he would consider parking limitations on the surrounding streets so that employees would have to park in the lot or the garage; for instance, the implementing of two-hour parking zones. Dr. Hecker contented that the question was whether the city was going to insist that every employee be off the street. He said the clinic would like to provide as many spaces as would be necessary, but they did not want spaces marked so that only employees could use them. Mayor Sher commented that under the Comprehensive Plan, Council was taking the direction of trying to reduce the number of cars being used, either by car pooling, mass transit, or other alternatives. Mayor Sher expressed interest in the idea of the clinic's leasing parking lots at some distance from the facility and using a shuttle bus to get patients and employees to the clinic. He hoped that the city would be able to observe this shuttle bus idea from outlying parking places and perhaps apply it in other areas. Mayor Sher thought choosing a location at the Stanford Shopping Center was a particularly good idea since there was a lot of interchange of doctors between the clinic and that area, and he wondered if perhaps the doctors =could he amenable to using the shuttle buses. Perhaps instead of being an interim solution, this could become a permanent one. Mayor Sher pointed out that the Planning Commission in recommending that 186 parking spaces be that such spaces had to be asked Dr. Hecker if, since not parking in the patient in the streets as well. designated for employees did not say immediately adjacent to the clinic. Re there seemed to be a rule about employees lot, they could be asked to not park Dr. Hecker thought valuable experience with regard to permanent parking solutions would be gained from the experiment with the shuttle buses. He did not know how the shuttle busing would work out on a long term basis, but Dr. Hecker was certain that the clinic would be willing to cooperate with the city if it wished to gain some data that might predict the possible success of such a system used in various parts of Palo Alto. Mayor Sher asked if the clinic could actually issue a mandate that the employees shall not park all day on the street. Dr. Hecker thought this night be a possibility, but he Brae not sure the clinic had a legal right to pursue that kind of action. Councilwoman Pearson asked for avow elaboration on Dr. Hecker's comments regarding satellite operations. Dr. Hecker responded that the clinic was considering some sateIliting. He explained that recently there had been some consideration for a satellite for environmental s>edicii,e. The obvious spot for that would be the Industrial Park, and the clinic had }seen looking at space in that area. Susan Varian, 327 Addison Avenue, stated, that she had no objection to the expansion at the clinic as long as the residential use of the area Woe maintained, and that the expansion now and in the future is confined to the three hundred block of Homer. Me. Varian hoped that the additional underground parking lot would be coastructed first before expansion began en the clinic building itself. Me. Varian asked Couuctl to require that 75 parking spaces be designated for employees only. 6 4 :3 11/18/74 Emily Renzel, 1056 Forest Avenue, Planning Commissioner, stated that the Planning Commission did not specify where the designated parking spaces would be located; in fact, they could be located on any of the available properties. In Ms. Renzel's opinion, the 60% figure for the number of employees who came to the clinic in cars was a terribly conservative one. She felt the request for ae additional 75 parking spaces designated for employees was a minor request. Ms. Renzel did not feel this would be much of an inconvenience, and she was very strongly in favor of it. Mayor Sher read a letter from Tyler C. Peterson, .i19 Addison, stating that Council had done a number of things recently in the neighborhood to enhance it as a residential aiea. He felt that any expansion of the clinic would only add to the already severe parking and traffic problems. Dr. Hecker responded to Commissioner Renzel that the 60% figure was the result of a survey conducted among the employees. MOTION: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Beahrs, that the Planning Commission recommendation be approved; and he introduced the following ordinance and moved, seconded by Beahrs, its approval for first reading: ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.05.040 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE. (THE ZONING MAP) TO CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY KNOWN AS 300 HOMER FROM R-4 TO P -C, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS Councilman Berwald recognized that the presence of the clinic did create traffic and varking problems, but it needed to be noted that the clinic was providing a number of additional parking spaces. He thought it would be well that if the parking problem became exescer-- beted, the clinic gave some thought to using shuttle bases on a permanent basis. Councilman Berwald really thought that designating certain parking spaces for employees only would .aggravate the problem. AMENDMENT: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Beahrs, that the ordinance be amended to remove the condition for the designation of parking spaces for clinic employees. Mayor Sher stated that he would vote against the amendment since this was the one opportunity Council had to deal with the problem of employees parking on residential streets. Councilman Norton stated his agreement with Mayor Sher, and he added that there was no doubt that the clinic had a terrific traffic problem and has had it for many years. The amendment failed on the following vote: AYES: Beahrs, Berwald, Clay NOES: Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher 6 4 4 11/18/74 Councilman Berwald said that Palo Alto in very fortunate to have a medical clinic of the caliber of the Palo Alto Medical Clinic. it is renowned throughout the country; and it was in the business of preventing disease, maintaining health, preserving and extending life, and taking care of the physical and mental traumas that plague human beings. Councilman Berwald indicated 110% willingness to help the clinic provide the kind of facilities that will make possible a higher (reality of health care and to attract new young physicians and medical service people who will continue the fine service that it offers. The ordinance was approved for first reading on a unanimous vote. .American Field Sa.rvice Stude.nta Mayor Sher recognized the presence in the audience earlier in the evening of the following American Field Service Students: Leendert Colign from The Netherlands; Dina Maria Pabon from Colombia; Joan Sole from South Africa; Surachet Vetchapitak from Thailand; and Hilde Kringier from Norway. alualuak At 12:25 a.m., the meeting of November 18, 1974, was adjourned to 7:30 p.m., November 25, with Item 4 on the agenda to be heard first. ATTEST: APPROVE: CiEy Clerk f }' Mayor 545 11/18/74