Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04171972MINUTES city of palo alto April 17, 1972 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto rnet on this date at 7:42 p. rn. in a regular meeting with Mayor Comstock presiding. Present: Beahrs, Berwald, Clark, Comstock, Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Ros enbaum, Sernan Absent: None Minutes of March 27, 1972 At the request of the City Clerk, Vice Mayor Norton referred to the Minutes of March 27, 1972, approved on April 10, and drew Council's attention to P ge 536 of the Minutes which indicated that,• in connection with the discussion on the Arts Convention report, an amendment to refer this report to the Finance and Public Works Committee, passed on a majority voice vote. Vice Mayor Norton .quested that a change be made to state in the second paragraph on Page 536 "The referral motion failed on a majority %,oice tote, and noted that this report was not referred to the Finance and Public Works Committee and that the main motion, without any amendments, passed on a majority voice vote as indicated. MOTION: Vice Mayor Norton moved, duly seconded, that the changes to Page 536 of the March 27 Minutes be written into the record. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. Mi ut�� f Apra 1 3�a1972 MOTION: Councilman Henderson moved, seconded by Pearson, that approval of the Minutes of April 3, 1972, be continued for one week to April 24, 1972, so that the City Clerk may check an item he believed had seen omitted. The motion passed an a unanimous voice vote. Coffee Hour -- Leads Hof Women Voters Mayor Comstock announced that on Saturday morning, April 22, from 10:00 a. m. to 12:00 noon, the League of Women Voters will sponsor a coffee at the Cultural Center, affording members of the community the opportunity to meet members of the Palo Alto City Council. 17 4/17/72 Public Hearing - Addition of an Open Space Element to the General Plan Mayor Comstock stated this is the time and place set for a Public Hearing to consider amending the General Plan by the addition of an Open Space Element, as certified to the City Council by Resolution No. 140 of the Planning Commission, adopted on April 5, 1972. He asked the City Clerk whether notice of this hearing had been given, as required by law. City Clerk Tanner confirmed that notice of this public hearing was published once, on April 7, i972, and the affidavit of publication is on file in the Clerk's office. Mayor Comstock invited the Director of Planning and Community Develop- ment, Louis J. Fourcroy, to speak to this subject. Louis Yourcroy, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated that the Open Space Element represents a key element of the 7 or $ State mandated elements of the General Plan, :t is generally, recognized by planners throughout the State that it will overlap with the Conservation Element and some of these others, The Planning Corn- mibsion dealt with this Element at some length, revising it and holding a public hearing. The Planting Conr.mission ar.d the Council, in terms of the actions that they have been pursuing over the years, have been ahead of most jurisdictions in the United States in terms of dealing with this type of subject. The Open Space Element is a document which provides the guidelines where Palo Alto has yet to go. Mayor Comstock asked whether any member of the public wished to speak. No :member of the public wishing to speak on this subject, Mayor Comstock declared the Public Hearing closed_ MOTION; Vice Mayor Norton introduced the following resolution and moved, seconded by Beahrs, its adoption: Resolution No. 4585 entitled "Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo .Alto Amending the General Plan by the Addition of an Open Space Element as Certified to the City Council by Resolution No. 140 of the Planning Commission Adopted on April 5, 1972" AMENDMENT: Councilman Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, that Page 19 of the Open Space Element of the Palo Alto General Plan, Item V, OPEN SPACE ACTION PROGRAMS: Foothills: 1. be amended to read "The City has allocated monies for the purchase of open space..." instead of stating the specific dollar amount of $4,000,000 as shown, The amendment passed on a unanimous voice vote. 1S 4/17/72 AMENDMENT: Councilman1 Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, that all the slaps be amended to show, in the area of Coyote Hills, uses consistent with existing zoning and the wording on Page B - 3 to be left as shown. The amendment passed on a unanimous voice vote. Vice Mayor Norton requested that for clarification, the record restate that the language on Page B - 3 will remain as is and the map will be amended accordingly. AMENDMENT: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Beahrs, that on Page 18, IV, OPEN SPACE POLICIES: 11. the word "residential" be removed and "all community lands" be inserted, making the sentence read "11. Provide maximum open space in all community land develop- ments consistent with residents ° needs and economic feasibility." The amendment passed on a unanimous voice vote. The resolution adding the Open Space Element, as amended, to the General Plan, was adopted on a unanimous voice vote. .elo lication of M. H, Podell Cornpany Change of District of Proper 2900 West Ba shore Road MOTION: Mayor Comstock moved, seconded by Norton, that Agenda Item 4, the application of M. H. Podetl Company for a change of d1a - trict of property at 2900 West Bayshore Road from R-1 to P -C, be considered out of order at this time for purposes of continuance, The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. MOTION: Mayor Comstock moved, seconded by Norton, that the appli- cation of M. H. Podell Company for a change of district of property at 2900 West Bayshore Road from R-1 to P -C and for a change of the P -C district development plan applying to a portion of the property known as 2800 West Bayshore Road to permit a 188 unit apartment house, be continued to May 8, 1972, Mayor Comstock read aloud a letter received from Mr. Thomas Dame of the M. H. Podell Company, requesting said continuance. He said he would call on Mr. Drama to state reasons for the continuance request, if Council so desired. Councilman Seman stated that she would be interested in hearing from Mr. Donna, since the reasons given for requesting the continuance would affect whether or not she would vote for such continuance. Councilman Pearson expressed concern that many members of the audience had requested to speak to the subject of continuance, 1S 4/17/72 Councilman Clark stated that in his experience on the Council he had never known a request for continuance on the part of the developer to be questioned or denied, He said he hoped such a requi;st would not be subjected to public debate. Mayor Comstock called on the applicant to address Council. Johnn, P. Hanna, Attorney, 6 Phillips Road, Palo Alto: speaking for M. H. Podell Company in place of Mr. r)uma, said M, H. Podell would like to be granted a three week continuance, Since reasons for this request have been asked for, he would make a slightly longer than usual statement under the circumstances. The application concerns the 9 acres on the corner of West Bayshore and Colorado which is now zoned P.-1. The proposal is to build 188 garden apartments - one and two story apartments, consisting of one, two and three bedroom units with 32 units under the proposal to be financed through Section 236 Horsing - subsidized housing. The other 156 would be 221 D-4 Market Housing - in the :>165 a month to $c50 a month rental range. The per unit population projected, would he 2-1/4 per unit. The density would be 113.7 which is within the 20 allowable under the proposed zoning and this is medium density, not high density, Several months ago, the applicant discovered that this area was designated under the General Plan for multiple. He went to the Planning Department and met with therm and he was told this is a suitable site for a medium density garden apartment type project. He then approached the Palo Alto Housing Corporation and they said this would be a good project for this area, but advised inclusion of some low income housing in the project. Mr. Podell agreed to do this and included 175/7c low income housing. The Zoning Administrator has studied the proposal and his recom- mendation to the Planning Commission was in favor of the project. HUD has studied the proposal and the area and the funding is available. The City Manager's office, in a letter to HUD, said they would welcome an opportunity to work w;th the developers on this particular project for this -area. Mr. Hanna said we have a plan which meets with what the Planning Commission said should be done in the area one year ago and yet the Planning Commission rejected it on a 4-1 vote. At this point the developer feels a little dismayed; and wanted to be sure that Council has had adequate opportunity to study this proposal. He suggested this might mean going to the site. Mr. Hanna said the applicants had been trying to get the residents of the area to meet with them, talk about the project and visit the site; and hoped tr do this in the next three weeks. The Planning Commission was not able to tell M. H. Podell how much time they warted to complete the study. M. H. Podell is willing to wait another three weeks, during which time they hope Council will consider, among other things, what the alternatives are for this site; R- 1, commercial, industrial or multiple garden apartments? They hoped that in the period of three weeks there can be some agreement reached between the residents and the Council that a garden apartment project here is the only one that makes any sense. Councilman Seman reminded Mr. Hanna that the Planning Commission had authorised a neighborhood study to be cottciucted of the area in 20 4/17/72 1• question. She said she could not vote for any development until the results of this study were before her and she therefore wished to inquire whether the applicant expected the Council would be in a different posi- tion to consider this project three weeks from now. Mr. Hanna replied that at the Planning Commission level the only period of time he had heard discussed was a period of 15 months, which would be too long a period for M. H. Podell Company to wait in order to exer- cise their option on the property and receive funding from HUD. Mr. 1.,ouis Fourcroy, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated that because the Planning Departrncnt's charge was to work with the citizens of the area in making the study he was unable at this time to giee firm commitment but would estimate that it would probably take six months before the Planning staff could return to the P➢ar.ning Com- mission and Council with results of such a study. He said it was his underatanriing that the applicants hoped that in three weeks' time. the Planning staff would be able to give a definite date for completion of the st;.idy, Mayor Comstock stated that he would now recogrize Jerry Tinldenbueg, who had requested to speak to the subject of continuance on behalf of the residents of the area. Jerry i inklenburg, 2841 Greer Road, representing residents of the area, stated that the residents are opposed to the continuance for two main reasons. First, the M. H. Podell Company has known of the neighborhood opposition for two months, but only very recently has attempted to cooperate with members of the neighborhood in any joint endeavors. Secondly, it was suggested to the applicant at a Planning Commission meeting that he might wish to request continuance for four to six months and at that time he refused this option and insisted . that the Planning Commission go ahead and vote on the project, Mr, Tinklenburg said that three, weeks will not provide enough time for the Planning Department to do any proper planeing or adequately assess the important issues raised by the Planning Commission, the U. S. Geographical survey regarding the high subsidence of the area, and the expressed opposition of groups such as 1v1CFH, the League of Women Voters, and the School Board to this project. Responding to further questions from Councilman Berwatd, Mr. link lenburg said that the residents would like to see this matter presented tonight and they would like to see Council oppose it. They did not oppose the proponents right to be heard, but were against the idea of continuance for three weeks because that would not be enough tirne to enact the careful analysis this area deserves, Councilman Rosenbaum expressed some sympathy for the developer and said he recalled an earlier application concerning this area when not a single resident of the neighborhood appeared at the Planning Com- mission meeting. He said he would like to see Council vote tonight, as he personally feh that the site in question is not suitable for resi- dential :yap. 21 4/17/72 Councilman Clark stated that although he is against the project at this point in time, he was not against the eight of the proponent to have the extra time he feels necessary before presenting his proposal to Council. Perhaps within the next three weeks the Planning Department will be able to give a better estimate of a date for completion of the study of the area. Councilman Clark s..id he wished to see the continuance granted, as requested. Responding to further questions, Mr. Hanna stated that while the appli- cants were willing to go ahead tonight and make a presentation if Council asked them to do so, they had not come with the idea of making such a presentation this evening. Councilman Pearson commented that it is usual to grant developers a continuance unless they ha d made a number of requests for continuance. She said she, too, could not support any development in this area until she has the results of the Planning Department's study before her, She raised the question concerning the options open to the developer, Responding to Councilman Pearson, Mr, Fourcroy stated that there are two options open to the developer. One, that the Council make a motion to deny the application without prejudice; or, secondly, that the applicant withdraw the application, also without prejudice, He noted that in the case of the developer withdrawing the application it would not be necessa -y for hirn to wait one year before reapplying, Councilman Henderson noted that the problem this evening is not one of inadequate study, but rather one of whether there should be further development in that particular area at this time and the need for a study of the area. He did not think three weeks would change this situation and added that he could rot support the project tonight and did not ex- pect to be able to do so in three weeks' time, The :motion to continue to May 8th passed on the following roll call vote: .Ayes: Beahrs, Berwald, Clark, Comstock, He: derson, Norton, Pea rson, Seman Noes: Rosenbaum Application for a Champ ;c: District .� 1155 Color t Avenue Mayor Comstock asked Director of Planning and Community Develop- ment Fourcroy to speak to the Planning Comtni€rsion's recommendation for denial of the application of Cortelyou and Cole Inc. Mr. Fourcroy said the Planning Commission has considered this appli- cation for a change of dietrict'from R-1 to P -C, the approximate location of the property being 1155 Colorado Avenue. What is being proposed is a development that would provide three two-story buildings, 22 4/17/72 There would be 10 one -bedroom, 10 two -bedroom and 7 three -bedroom apartment units in the development and at the wish of the Council and the City, if it is desirable, the applicants would reserve approximately 20"'c of the units for low -moderate housing. This proposal calls for something similar to a townhouse development, where the individual units will be sold. It was the considered opinion of the Planning Commission that this development should lot be recommended to the City Council. Mayor Comstock said Council would now hear from members of the public. Pellegrino J. Pellegrini, 535 Newell Road, Palo Alto, owner of the property, read aloud his letter to Council dated April 12. 1972, which enclosed a copy of his letter to Council dated October 7, 1970 and also a copy of his letter to Mr. Goldsmith of the Housing Corporation dated October 14, 1970. Mr. Pellegrini stated that he had presente=d a set of building plans pointed toward construction of units available to and priced for low income families and his application has been turned down by the Planning Commission. He reviewed the history of the property in question, stating thz.t he has owned it for 15 years and in reviewing the financial investment he has in the property stated that he has earned about S6, 000 on a $60,000 investment over a 15 year period, which, he added, could hardly be called a speculative profit. The contractors Cortelyou and Cole, are the contractors who built the units adjoining his property, Mr. Pellegrini said it appears that he is now caught in a 'zone squeeze" or a "zone strip", with a?artrnents to the west of his property, a creek bank to the east of his property and the rear and a huge electrical plant across the street. R- 1 zoning is not the proper zoning for this parcel, he added. Mr. Pellegrini noted that while he could agree with the residents of the area who are ob- jecting to too many apartments being built there, he did not believe that placing apartments directly on Frontage Road was a good idea. His parcel would take only 27 to 28 units and is not located on Frontage Road, which should be preserved for professional office space.only. Mr. Pellegrini concluded that Mr. Cole of Cortelyou and Cole would be pleased to present the Council a copy of the option agreement for the property which will verify the selling price of $60, 000. S. L. c orchado, 9z6 Colonial Lane, st:.ted that he would withold his cot tenents at this time. 1 Mae Tinklenburg, 2841 Greer Road, referred to a petition signed by 1, 237 residents which was submitted to the Planning Commission on April 5 and resubmitted this evening to the City Council. She read aloud the main body of the petition which stated the concerns of the residents about the unbalanced and poorly planned development of their neighborhood and requested the Planning Commission and the City Council to declare a 15 month moratorium on further development of the Amarillo -West Frontage -East Meadow area, listing reasons why they felt this moratorium should be imposed. 23 4/17/72 Luther Gibson, 1070 Moffett Circle, stated that it had been understood that high density housing was to be blended in areas of low density. He asked if it is to be assumed that where lcea•-moderate income housing is built without neighborhood opposition, as in the case of the Colorado Park project, all vacant land in the area will then be assumed to be available for high density development? if f:o, this is not a very good example to the rest of Palo Alto. Steve Sevilla, 1003 Colorado Avenue, stated that he had appreciated growing up in Palo Alto because of the good schooling, nice climate, etc. The City is growing in two ways. One, from the standpoint of beauty and, secondly, from the viewpoint of population. Developments such as those being proposed to Counct_ this evening would simply result in crowding the City and wo-eld be detrimental to the beauty of the City, He felt that children could benefit ;from a park being installed on this site, rather than it being developed ''for the benefit of the few." F. Carl Grurnet, 1074 Moffett Circle, referred to the staff report which outllnnes factors affecting development or non -development in the area. He stressed the importance of cor i ideration of the geologic factors of the area and said the residents are not concerned with the architectural quality of t'le projects, but ar :: concerned that the land in question be put to the hest use in terms of it:e geologic properties. The sites being discussed tonight are clearly not 3uitasle for high density development and he requested that the Council support tine Planning Commission's recommendation of a study to Investigate alternatives. John C. Huenink, 1080 Moffett Circle, said es a homeowner and resident he was delighted when Colorado Park was constructed. However, when the additional proposed developments came to his attention he wrote to the Planning Commission suggesting that seeious consequences could result for the community if these projects were built. He referred to Senior Planner Woollett's report on Census Tract 5110 and said this report presents many factcra affecting development of the area and he would urge Council to uphold the Planning Commission's recommendation to deny this application. Barbara Hopkins, 1040 Moffett Circle, spoke in opposition to the pro- posed development in the area. She said she is not opposed to low to moderate income housing in the neighborhood, but is opposed to any rezoning of an undeveloped strip of land before the City has had time to update its guidelines. Mrs. Hopkins said she is not opposed to low tcc moderate income housing providing there is criteria for its location and it is dispersed throughout the City and not concentrated in just a few areas. She was particularly opposed to ?la c:ing more low -moderate income housing between Amarillo and Lome Verde on West Bayshore as this neighborhood already has ample hol.ving, she stated. S. L. Corchado stated that he would not sh v slides of the area this evening. He addressed Council regarding tics existing high density in the area and said that the City should be thinking in terms of open space for this neighborhood as additional dor,sity wig' ,eliminate the possihility of open space in the future. 24 4/17/72 Councilman Pearson stated it was obvious to her that the Council can't go on just voting for one proposal after another without waiting for the specifications and criteria to come from the Housing Com- mittee and for some: overall planning to be done by the Planning Com- mission and our Planning Department. The residents are protesting because they haven't seen any plans for the City of Palo Alto or any specifications. The City doesn't know what kind of low to moderate income housing it wants throughout Palo Alto. The developer is put in a very peculiar position because he goes to the Planning Depart- ment and the Building Department arid they say, and rightly so, to include a little low to moderate income housing. Then when they come before the Council they' re turned down because we don't have any specifications. Councilman Pearson said it's time to at least get some interim criteria from the staff before a development can come before the Planning Commission. She was thinking of a list for developers to study and complete. That is, the developers will have to say what the density is to be and compare it with that existing in the area, and say what it will do to the area, if their develo;men'_ generates traffic then the developer has to say what the impact of that traffic will be on the area and how they intend to cope with it; how they expect, perhaps, the City to cope with it. I think in this particular area that the School District should comment on the impact, tog because the number of children that will come into the district could be quite significant. Also the developer ought to say what the development is going to do to the open space, which we need in Palo Alto. This is just a small list and the Planning Department probably can think of many more questions but until those questions are answered by the developer, applications should not come before the Planning Commission nor should the proposal come before the Council. Council- man Pearson said it is necessary that the Council sit back and look at what it wants in low to moderate income housing in Palo Alto, Up to this point Council has addressed itself for a number of years to a significant amount of low to moderate income housing in Palo Alto. MOTION: Councilman Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission to deny the application of Cortelyou and Cole, Inc , for a change of district of roperty at 1155 Colorado Avenue from R-1 to P -C (Multi -Family Housing). Councilman Berwald raised questions regarding the Planning Com- mission's recommendation and, in particular, Planning Commissioner Klein's proposal for a neighborhood study. Planning Commissioner Klein responded to Councilman Berwald that his proposal had not been based on specifics of this particular project, but on details of the area as outlined in the staff report. Councilman Berwald said, in terms of a moratorium such as Council- man Pearson had discussed, he did not think this was being fair to the developers. He asked what does the Planning Commission think this property is going to be used for? 25 4/17/72 Commissioner Klein responded that the Planning Commission had been concerned about being fair to the neighborhood. Councilman Berwald stated that he would abstain from voting on this applicaton as he felt badly about the issues involved. He reviewed the history of Mr. Pellegrini's applications and said he felt it wrong that the study had been initiated after the applicant applied for a zone change, rather than in, say, October 1970. He did not think this was a demonstration of justice or fair play. Councilman 'Henderson said obviously any study must include the pro- blems of the landowner, but there was no question in his mind that things are rn.oving too rapidly in the West Bayshore area, He felt Council needed t,.) pause before approving further deueloprnents to assess the impact from the projects that are now reaching completion in that area and to evaluate the housing situation in this one section of town in the context of the overall housing picture for Palo Alto. While he would reject any new high density proposals for the W Tc:st Bayshore area at this time, Councilman Henderson said that's not to say that he would never approve an apartment proposal in this area. Such a decision would be made in line with the results of an overall planning study. The motion to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission passed on a unanimous voi:_e vete, with Councilman Berwald abstaining. Application of Cortelyou and Cole, Inc. for a Change of District of Yro ere at 1011 Colorado Avenue from R-1 to P -C (Multi-Farril Toistn T Mayor Comstock asked Mr. Louis J. Fourcroy, Director of Planning and Community Development, to report. Mr, Fourcroy said this application of Cortelyou and Cole is located on Colorado Avenue, whereas the previous item before Council, was on the Bayshore side of Colorado Park development. In this particu- lar instance what is being proposed is a development with 10 one -bed- room and 10 two -bedroom and 8 three -bedroom apartment units. And again, it this case, the proposed 10% for low to moderate income housing. This issomewhatslightly less dense, The comments con- cerning the previous application, as they relate to the problem of whether or not we should have apartments in the whole area, repre- sent probably the pertinent factor that is involved here. Mayor Comstock acknowledged receipt of the Planning Commission's report and correspondence concerning this application. He said Counci! would now hear from those members of the public who had not spoken previously. Marjorie Soliman, 1005 Colorado Avenue, stated that she lives next door to the property in question and has a similar long, narrow lot 1 26 4/17/72 on which she built a home and a swimming pool four years ago. Mrs. Soliman said she would like to see the area remain R-1 and asked why does low to moderate income housing have to be high density, why can't it be mixed in with R-1? Mayor Comstock responded to Mrs. Soliman, explaining that Federally subsidized housing programs have a limit on the do?la.r allowance for land per unit and the effect of this has been, in Palo Alto where land costs are high, to increase the density of the projects rather than increase the cost of rentals or add a local subsidy to Federal funds. Eric Seedman, 1003 Colorado, stated that he is renting from the previous speaker. Mrs. Soliman, and said that, having heard all the arguments against the proposed development such as pollution, density. etc., he wondered whether members of the Council would like such a development placed next door to their residential properties. Steve Sevilla, 1003 Colorado Avenue, reiterated his previous com- ments and said he did not see why any more housing was n€ eded in the City, especially concentrated in one area. He said there is more of a need for a park in that area. F. Carl Grumet, 1074 Moffett Circle, referred to the petition with more than :200 signatures which, he said, was generated by an ad hoc committee. The residents of the area have been made aware of the problems encountered by developers. In order to form a more unified approach to generating communication between residents and official City bodies, the residents plan to organize an assoc;ation of area residents concerned with developmental trends. Mr. Grumet said that any resident of the area interested in belonging to such an association should contact either him or other speakers this evening. S. L. Corchado, 926 Colonial Lane, added sorne further comments about the size of the site and said that it is far too small for a high density development. MOTION: Councilman, Berwald moved, seconded by Rosenbaum, that Council uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and deny the application of Cortelyou and Cole, Inc., for a change of district of property at 1011 Colorado Avenue from R-1 t.o P -C (Multi - Family Housing). Councilman Berwald made some additional comments and encouraged the residents of the areas to form an association. He said he wished to discourage them from viewing the City's official bodies as enemies. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. Mayor Comstock said Council would now take a short recess. (The Council recessed from 9:45 to 10:08 p.m.) 27 4117/72 Preliminary Parcel May 5b man Antonio Road Council heard briefly from Director of Planning and Community Develop- ment Fourcroy, MOTION: Councilman Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, that Council uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the application of Goldrich, Kest, Hirsch and Stern for approval of a Preliminary Parcel Map (two lots, P -C residential and industrial) at 650 San Antonio Road, located generally southerly of the southerly corner of San Antonio and Middlefield Roads, subject to conditions recorded in the Planning Commission minutes of 4/5/72. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. Final Condominium Subdivision Map -- •-- and Everett Avenue rMENr- MOTION: Councilman Lerwald moved, seconded by Norton, that Council uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the application of Richard S. Condon (represented by Kirker, Chapman & Associates) for approvai of a Final Condominium Subdivi- sion Map (existing six -unit apartment house) located on the southerly corner of averley Street and Everett Avenue (Tract No. x'.146, Park Place), The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. Lower Foothills Open Oreser4ation: Purchase of Troperan(0. Riga :2 Mayor Comstock asked City Manager George Sipel to report. City Manager Sipel noted that his report to Council dated April 13, 1972 outlined all details of the City's option to purchase at fair market value, real property known as Santa Clara County Assessor's Parcel 182-35-37. MOT:JN: Councilman Henderson moved, seconded by Pearson, that Council authorize the Mayor to exercise the option to purchase at fair market value, real property known as Santa Clara County Assessor's Parcel 182- 35- 37. Councilman Clark commented that while Council was taking this action tonight without a prolonged discussion period, the subject has been before them on several occasions in Executive Session and tonight's action is the result of much preliminary discussion and forethought. Mayor Comstock noted that tonight's action concerning this acquisition in the foothills is a further step in the Council's stated objective of pre- servation of open space. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. 28 4/17/72 Webster Street Property (CMR:ZZ8:2) Mayor Comstock asked City Manage!- Sipel to report. City Manager Sipel stated that Mr. Louis J. Fourcroy, Director of Planning and Community Development, and Mr. Louis Goldsmith of the Housing Corporation would present this item. See Page 59 Louis J. Fourcroy, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated the Webster Street property was referred to the staff to develop See Page 59 a report in conjunction with the City Attorney and the Housing Corpo- ration. This report is now before Council and the essence of it has been covered by the communication from the Palo Alto Housing Corpo- ration indicating their thoughts in matters in terms of the Webster House property. Staff agrees with the Housing Corporation's report, but did differ with them essentially in what might be termed a reasonable estimate of the value of the property on the open market. The question is, basically, whether or 'iot this is an appropriate site for low -moderate income housing. The conclusion that staff and the [lousing Corporation arrived at is that it is very well suited to that type of purpose, parti- cularly in relationship to schools, to community facilities, to employ- ment areas, and to shopping facilities. The question that seems to come into focus is the price that is to be paid and the density that might be allowed on the property, The other dimension is the potential use of the City's land banking funds as a means of making this property avail- able, Mayor Comstock noted that, in addition to the staff report summarized by Mr, Fourcroy, Council received this evening a supplementary report from Mr. Fourcroy concerning potential development under existing zoning, Councilman Berwatd stated it appeared to him that the Webster Street See Page 59 property is well situated for development of low to moderate income housing. Secondly, there is ample evidence that the property is avail- able to the City should the City wish to purchase it for these purposes and some indication t' at the property would be available to the City at a price that would bring the property within the range of development by various means for this purpose. MOTION: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Seman, that the Council at this time express its interest in utilizing the City's land bank funds for acquisition of the Webster House site foe the ultimate purpose of developing low -moderate income housing thereon. Councilman Rosenbaum raised the question of the possibility of sug- gesting to the landowner that, since it is agreed that this land is suit- able for low -moderate income housing, the landowner might develop it in this fashion rather than the City having to purchase and hold the property for a number of years at considerable expense. Councilman Berwald responded that the property owner has gone through a good bit of trauma onthis property, as you klow. He would now like 29 4/17/72 to cash out on the property and is not particularly interested because of other commitments of the firm to get involved in such things as a joint development proposal. City Attorney Stone commented that the City has had conversations with representatives of the property owners for the past several months and it is true that the earner does have in mind the ultimate objective of the devotion of th;a land for the purposes of low -moderate incense housing. The owner, however, is not in a position to pursue that himself, other than to :Hake his property available to the City at what might be a price very advantageous to the City in order that the City be able to pursue that ultimate objective. City Manager Sipel added that it is his understanding that there is an offer that has been tendered no the owner of the property and the City has approximately two or two and .s half more weeks to make some kind of a decision before the owner makes other use of the property and, perhaps, exercises whatever options he had with other parties. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. MOTION: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Henderson, that the City express its willingness to use whatever legal powers it has to make economically feasible the development of this property for low -moderate income housing purposes. The motion -passed on a unanimous voice vote. MOTION::: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Norton, that Council instruct the staff to open negotiations with the property owner and to concurrently investigate alternative means by which the City can achieve the above objectives and report findings and recommen- dations back t< the Council, Councilman Rosenbaum raised a question for staff as to what might be achieved within the two and one half weeks' time period. City Manager Sipel responded that, first of all, he anticipated request- ing a thirty day extension of this time period and he thought it quite possible that this extension would be granted. Councilman Rosenbaum expressed a number of concerns regarding the land value. He said it is obvious that the current landowner doesn't feel able to develop this property, and it is quite clear that the land values in the downtown area are simply not consistent with the exist- ing' zoning and over a period of time ore of the two is going to have to change. Councilrrtan Pearson stated that she was concerned that the Council might be locking themselves into something here. She said she would :rote for it because she thought :t has always been considered to be, at least by the PTA of Addison. School, a site which they wanted to have developed ar, low -moderate income housing. She felt uneasy about the recommended densities, however, - 30 4!17/72 Councilman Serrtan also expressed concern regarding the proposed density for this site and said that she was worried about the present tenants of the existing rental property on that site. Mayor Cornstock stated that in supporting these motions he considered that Council was keeping its options open and was merely clearing the way to receive information to assist them in making further decisions. He noted that his support this evening did not necessarily mean that he would support., the recommendations: that come back to Council. Motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. Parking for North_count.Courthouse and California: Avenue District (CMR:23:3:2) Mayor Comstock asked City Manager Sipel to report. City Manager Sipel stated that the Council has before it a staff report on parking for the North County Cou 't'house and the California Avenue business district. This is a very complicated issue in that it involves a number of sub -issues including parkin=.,, open space, housing, the general subject of land uc.:. and, of course, financing, It involves at least two governmental jurisdictions; an assessment district or possible assessment district and also a group of homeowners who are very interested in the subject, The Council's current position on this parti- cular matter is that in November, 1971, Palo Alto requested that the County not proceed with the development of the parking lot because it was incompatible with the HDA usage that was designated. The County complied with this request and directed the County staff to work with the City staff to determine whether or not some kind of a cooperative venture could be forthcoming, stipulating that there be no net expense to the County . In other words, the land valde that was invested in the property, plus the proposed development cost of about $30,000 should not be exceeded. Working within that constraint has been rather diffi- cult because it effectively limits the number of alternatives that might.. be available to the County. Tie staff retort iodicates a number of alternatives. Several things have happened since thin matter was last before Council. The City has met with the County, with the California Avenue Business Association, and the Grant Avenue Condominium Owners' group on a number of occasions. The Hewlett-Packard parking lot, now owned by the County, has been striped for parking for about 91. cars and this +11 be used by ernployeea of the County. Staff has re- viewed the parking needs for the area in some detail and those figured are included in the staff report. Some preliminary work has also been done on developing costs for the proposed paring str ic`ure which would he a joint venture, possibly between the assessment district and the County, Staff feels the most important element is the longer term commitment to a parking structure as -a joint venture. Development of the Hewlett-Packard tsarking lot will alleviate the situation if the parking program ie adrninistered.the way it ought to be: 'The parking problem, however, has not been entirely eliminated, As a second .priority, staff thinks that. some immediate term remedy. is to order and suggests in -its report that there be an interim development on a•portion of the pro - 3i 4/17/72 posed County lot for parking and to relieve the pressure caused by jurors and prospective jurors that descend upon the County building at various times during the week, particuiariy on Mondays. Staff feels some immediate term solution must be arrived at with respect to parking. Staff also suggests the development of what's called an interim park for the area to serve a multiple use for people who live in the area and people who work' in the area. A small area could be made available at the one end of the County parking lot, roughly up to 12, 000 sq. ft. at the corner of Ash and Grant. Fourthly, staff feels the issue of housing should also be addressed. The property is zoned HDA. It is obvious that that particular zoning has not produced the HDA developments but staff feels that there may be some opportuni- ties for a study zrs the next year or so, in conjunction with the Housing Corporation, to get tc get .er a project that could produce some type of low -moderate income housing on that site. See Page 59 , - - Mayor Comstock stated Council would now hear from the public. Hal Hudson, 535 Everett Avenue, Palo Alto, Chairman of the Parking Committee, California Avenue Assessment District and Development Association, stated that this Association bolieves that the County had acted in good faith in obtaining the Hewlett-Packard lot. The staff's recommendations provide an interim solution, but this can only be effective if it leads to a permanent solution. It is a fact that more parking is neeeded in the area, he added. Thomas Simon, 425 Grant Avenue, representing the Grant Avenue Con- dominium Owners' Association, stated that the Association agrees with Mr, Sipel that this is a complicated issue. They ag e that a parkette should be established as part of the parking lot. - They are against pro- viding more parking for the County because they do not consider that there is a parking crisis in the area. Mr, Simon said that he did not think the situation justified applying a solution which would be against the HDA zoning and which would degrade the environment for the home- owners, He spoke in opposition to planning for peak use at the North County Courthouse parking lot. Norman Guinasso, 425 Grant Avenue, also speaking for the Grant Avenue Condorrainium Owners' Association, showed siiciks and discussed the size of the proposed parkette. He said the homeowners would like to see a parkette created and world discourage paving over the land even as a temporary alternative. Responding to a question from Councilman Seman concerning peak hour use in this area and whether staff considered there was actually a park- ing crisis in the area, City Manager Sipel stated that in staff's opinion it was more a problem of misuse of the existing facilities. The existing facilitiea are not being properly utilized. Some of the traffic originating from people using the County facilitiers is parking in assessment district 4/17/72 lots. He said in staff's opinion the most significant factor was that the County now acknowledges that they are contributing to the parking pro- blem in that area and are prepared to help in trying to solve the problem. Mayor Comstock complimented the Grant Avenue Condominium Owners' Associaticn for supplying drawings for the Council and said he hoped that they would continue their liaison with the staff. MOTION: Mayor Comstock moved, seconded by Clark, that Council recommend the following actions to the County and attempt to reach an agreement on them with the County: A) *.e County should proceed in concert with the California Avenue Assessment District to develop a joint structure to meet long-term parking needs; B) in the interim (2 to 3 years) the County should be permitted to build a parking lot along Birch and a portion of Grant while the City will build a parkette at the Grant/Ash corner. This can be accomplished by a property exchange via a short-term lease, A condition of the lease would be that the County and the assessment district agree to proceed with a joint parking structure; C) the County half -block should be evaluated by the Palo Alto Housing Corporation as a possible site for low to moderate income housing; DI after the Central Palo Alto Panning Study has been completed and the site has been evaluated for housing and other purposes, the County should place the property on the market for sale. The proceeds should be used to help solve the parking problem. AMENDMENT: Councilman Perwald moved, seconded by Beahrs, that the motion be amended to add: E) in all of the above, open space con- siderations are irnporta it to the Palo Alto community in this area and should be incorporated wherever possible in permanent improvements. The amendment passed on a unanimous voice vote. The motion as amended passed on a unanimous voice vote. Recotrnmendaton of YAC to Increase Mcmbershi, of YAC MOTION: Mayor Comstock introduced the following resolution and moved, seconded by Clark, its adoption: Resolution No. 4.586 entitled "Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Resolution No. 4406 to Increase the Mcmbership of the Youth Advisory Council" The resolution was adopted on a unanimous voice vote. Radio Broadcasting of City ouneii Azle tipgja_ MOTION: Mayor Comstock moved, seconded by Pearson, that Council approve the agreement between the City of Palo Alto and the 1?oard of 3'3• 4/17/72 Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University granting a license to make live broadcasts of the City's regular public Council meetings from their inception to their conclusion, subject to conditions of the contract. The motion passed on a uranimous voice vote. Letter from Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors Regarding Consolidation of t'he County of Santa Clara and all Cities as Charter Cit- and Count Mayor Comstock referred to his memorandum to Council dated April 5, 1972. MO'FION: Mayor Comstock moved, duly seconded, that the Board of Supervisors' letter dated March 23, 1972 be referred to the Policy and Procedures Committee and that. the Mayor he authorized to com- municate this action to the Supervisors and ask for details. The motion failed on a majority voice vote, MOTION: Councilman Clark moved, seconded by Berwald, that the Mayor be authorized to communicate Council's action 'not to refer to Committee for further consideration to the Board of Supervisors. Mayor Comstock acknowledged ti:at this would be done. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. Request of East Palo Alto Municipal uncil Regarding "Scenic Stream" MOTION: Mayor Comstock moved, seconded by Berwald, that the request of the East Palo Alto Municipal Council that Palo Alto desig- nate San Pranciequito Creek as a "Scenic Stream" be referred to staff for review and preparation of a reso cation. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. Consideration of Method to Provide Means to Halt Consideration of revs opment Proposals Mayor Comstock asked Councilman Pearson to speak to this item. Councilman Pearson stated this is a request for consideration of some method to provide means to halt the flow of development proposals coming before the Planning Commission and City Council until the Planning Commission and Housing Advisory Committee conclude 34 4/17/72 alternative studies for the General Plan. It was placed on the Agenda as a response to the West Baysitore neighborhood group who felt that they wanted to talk about a moratorium in the particular area and she felt that if Cou:,Lii was going to talk about a moratorium she wanted to talk about it throughout the whole City. She had informed the neighborhood group that she felt that she possibly didn't have very much support fora moratorium, but perhaps there were other means by which the City could affect the same thing and that was to inform developers and people who were asking for zone changes, etc., that the Council was going to take a "go slow" attitude. Councilman Pearson said she also wanted to hear from her colleagues as to how they felt about calling a halt or a moratorium to development, or whether they would like to have given some direet+on to staff and.establtsh some interim criteria or specifications which should be given to proponents of developments for the City of Palo Alto. She also wanted the Council to consider whet lids been happening in the past months. specifically to the Planning Commission and to the Planning Department. The Council has given a terrific amount of work to their Planning Depart- ment and Planning Commission asking them to give special notice and special study to particular areas such as the downtown area, the Montrose area, the California Avenue district, El Camino Real, open space, low -moderate income housint,, and, in addition, formed a new housing committee. At the same time the City wants a new General Plan giving Council alternatives or alternative developments for various parts of the City. Councilman Pearson said she thought the Planning Commission, and staff were being given an impossible job. She could not s ee Council receiving a new General Plan in less than three or four years. Meanwhile the Council, at every meeting, goes through exactly what you saw tonight. She thought that some- thing could be done short of a moratorium in the City of Palo Alto to slow things clown for the benefit of Palo Alto and for the benefit of those people who are asking to proposals and projects for the City of-Palo-Altoi with the € s_tr±id„ ..r ..a___ = -=__ - --- _-.: �:� r.......r z::a� a prcu)ect is good for the City of Palo Alto being placed upon the person who is proposing the project. In other words, there would be a set of criteria, questions, which anyone proposing a project for the City of Palo Alto would have to answer.. When Council has the questions before them, then they can look at those sets of questions and can ask themselves whether they think that the proposal before them has honestly, legitimately, and accurately answered those questions. Mayor Comstock stated that he would like Councilman Pearson to respond to questions, hear staff and public comments and insure everyone is clear on what the proposal is, before she made a motion. Responding to questions, Councilman Pearson stated that this would include proposals for physical developments or developments that require building permits. Councilman Pearson stated that she expected that in the futut a Council would receive input from the Housing Committee, the Housing Corpo- ration and the staff and the Planning Commission, together with the General Plan, which would enable Council to judge the projects which 35 4/17/72 are presently corning before them. The course of action she is recom- mending right how would be interim pending this more permanent criteria. `:he said what she has in mind is that a proposal for apart- ments or ar,y other kind of development Indicates the impact on the area of Palo Alto that it is to be located in and whether it is going to be good or bad for -hat area. This would be achieved by having the developer answer a set of questions concerning the impact on the neighborhood, the number of -.children involved, the traffic problem, and environmental problems in general. City Attorney Stone stated his understanding of what is being reonested of staff. He said he thought Councilman Pearson was asking for a set of questions, the answers to which the Planning Commission and the Council would be interested in knowing each time a project for rezoning -of any kind comes before the Commission or Council. The answers to the questions would not be forthcoming within the next two to three week period. The staff would simply devise a list of the questions to be asked. He also stated that it was his understanding that there probably would not be legislation forthcoming as a result of the staff report, but that this would be a policy guide to the Council and, perhaps more importantly, to the community. so that when projects do come before Council everyone is aware of the kinds of things that are going to be required of developers in terrns of answers to the questions. Councilman Pearson confirmed City Attorney Stone's statement, She said she was not asking for a new ordinance at this time, she was simply requesting a new policy That states, for the benefit of developers and the -community, what will be required of them if they are making a proposal f o r the City of Palo Alto. Councilman Clark stated that having talked to the City Attorney end the City Manager about the hospital referendum and the fact that the Palo Alto Medical Clinic t:as been extensively studying sites for a hospital in the community and may very well, within the year, come before the City with some alternatives, the City Attorney had advised hirn that at this stage in the preliminary discussions there was nothing that would make it inappropriate for him to enter into these discussions, Councilmen Berwald expressed pleasure that Councilman Pearson had withdrawn the idea of a moratorium.. He said that it, frankly, aggra- vated hire more than anything he had seen for a long time in the City and he appreciated that Councilman Pearson was open to other alter- natives. Councilman Pearson said that she had only suggested that Council talk about thissubject and she felt it was socnething that should be discussed and that there is a possibility that it is required, but she did believe that there was another way and that was what she was proposing this evening. 36 4/17/72 Councilman Berwald etated that he felt Council had the obligation as elected officials to consider proposals under the existing law whether they like it or not, He would see a moratorium removing from indi- vidual Councilmen the judgment that the voters thought they had when the elected them to office, and making the job of Councilman a kind of closed, rigid sort of challenge. Councilman Berwald added that he felt the City has made excellent progress toward an environmental plan and he said the he, too, had proposed this kind of environmental element several years ago. Councilman Beahrs said that what he could see being proposed was a kind of interim General Plan, or at least a guideline, and he had always seen the General Plan as the vehicle by which Council governs the problems that are under discussion, MOTION: Councilman Clark moved, seconded by Beahes, that this matter be tabled. The motion to table failed on the following roll call vote: Ayes: Beahr , Berwald, Clark, Norton Noes: Comstock, Henderson, Pearson. Rosenbaum, Sernan Councilman Pearson made some further comments regarding her proposal, reiterating her earlier remarks, and adding that she felt Council was looking at every single project too arbitrarily with no set of st= ndards before them. This was particularly true with regard to housing. Mayor Comstock stated he would call on the public at this time. He reminded speakers that the matter before Council now is the referral to staff for a study and report to the Council on what has been outlined in this evening's discussion. He asked the speakers to direct their remarks to that, since Council would not be adopting any final recom- mendations this evening. Robert Jones, 1031 Moffett Circle, referred to his comments en earlier Agenda Items and said that he was really petitioning Council to work out sorrae kind of arrangement that will be a little bit :more helpful to not only residents but to architects, construction people, and the Council themselves. Ile said a partictlar play: reference ire needed to give everyone guidance. Mr. Jones said he agreed with Councilman Pearson that something has to be changed, and if it takes a moratorium to get a General Plan prepared he would think that might be a good idea. 1 Georgina Anderson, 4150 Abe Avenue, seconded Mr. Jones' remarks and tiaid that the developers, the residents, and everyons-i in the City, would like to see some criteria established regarding housing projects. She thought Councilman Pearson's suggestion was a good one, and as a resident site would support it. 37 4/17/72 Ervin B. Schultz, 301 Oak Court, Menlo Park, stated that he was President of the Carpenters' Local Union 668, lccated at 3565 Middle- field Road, Palo Alto, an old Palo Alto organization that has been in business in the City since 1900. Mr. Schultz discussed the work of the Carpenters' Local Union 668, particularly their support of social causes and programs such as the Affirmative Action Program, He expressed concern about the "stagnation" of Palo Alto and the way that it affects the work of the Union's members alit; urged Council to take some action to revive business in the City. Vau; An Hopkins, 1040 Moffett Circle, said he strongly agreed that there is some means required to slow down the proliferation of de- velopment proposals in the City, particularly in the West Bayshore area. However, in considering the City-wide need, he said he hoped Council would not lose track of the fact that .there are less restric- tive alternatives than a moratoriourn. He spoke in favor of a mora- torium for the West Bayshore area and said the residents would like to consider additional neighborhood facilities which are needed such as expansion of Greer Park, Jack Wheatley, 2240 Cowper Street, stated in his opinion there hasn't been a proliferation of building in Palo Alto. What has happened is that as a result of approving low to moderate income housing projects on Colorado Avenue and at Oregon Green, everybody went out and bought tie land and made contracts in the neighborhood for further developments which they brought before Council. He said the burden is on the City to provide zoning laws and the City has these and they do work. The only thing that is worse than a direct moratorium would be a "creeping moratorium" end he urged Council to :Hake a decision to either apply a rnoratoriur'n or not to do it, but not to let this happen gradually. Mr: Wheatley. lso discussed the Planning Commission's workload and the possibility of the Palo Alto Mvledical Clinic making a deciaion to relocate out of Palo Alto and the resulting effects on the downtown core area. Gerald B. Ferrari, Attorney, Su=ite 325, 550 Hamilton Avenue, repre- serating the Beall Company, owner of 5 acres of land fronting on San Antonio Road between Middlefield and Bayshore, presently zoned M- I;S-D and used for greenhouses, stated that he thought the idea of a "slow down" has an even more sinister effect than a complete mora- torium .and his client would be opposed to both of them, particularly from the standpoint of lost opportunity for the Beall Company but also from the standpoint of lost opportunities for the community and the City itself. He epoke of what is proposed for the Beall property and the sales tax dollars it woud bring to the City and said that a mora- torium or a slow down will hurt many people without a rational basis for it. Richard Oliver, 220 California Avenue, Suite 210, stated that he is a developer and an attorney and hopes to come before Council and Plan- ning Commission soon with a specific project. Mr, Oliver discussed the results of supply and demand and -said in his opinion the burden of 38 4/17/72 proof has always been on the developer and if the City makes such. stringent and time consuming restrictions proposals for Palo Alto will cease to be economically feasible. He said all the basic facts are contained in any proposal that a developer may make and it is normal procedure to be available to answer any questions staff might have. Questions such as the number of children that will be living in a project are entirely subjective, he said. Cassius Kirk, Staff Attorney, Stanfcrd University, residing at 220 Palo Alto Avenue, said that he had cone this evening to strongly oppose a moratorium on developrnent, He was perplexed by the criteria re- quested and how it would work in relationship to the General Plan end zoning but would not be opposed to the motion as presented by Council- man Pearson this evening. Frank Manfredi, 21,9 Addison Avenue, spoke in support of establishing a moratorium on development. He referred back to earlier times when Palo Alto was a small town and there were fewer developers making pro- posals to the City Council, Jim McDerrnoLt, 251 University Avenue, representing the Pank of Arne. ica, stated that the Barr,k of America hoped to apply soon for a building permit for a $2,000,000 building which they very badly need and any moratorium would affect their application. i-le also said that the requirement that applicants respond to an ecological statement would also affect their application since it could-. in no way, be con- sidered applicable to the Bank of America building and if the state- ment represented a qualification there was a possibility that they would not qualify. He felt that there was an over --reaction to one seg rnent of the community in this proposal and stated that.the Pank of America woul t be opposed to it. Nonette Fla also, 3172 Emerson Street, pointed out that Councilman Pearson's letter to the Council under .Agenda Items made no specific reference to a moratorium, per se. She said this subject has upset a lot of -people. She could see Councilman Pearson's proposal this evening as being very worthwhile - an interim group of questions similar to an environmental protection act for the City until the new Comprehensive General Plan is ready, These questicns should be answered by developers before Council makes decisions cn the pro- posals. Mrs. Hanko said she would question whether the statements, when presented, would be believed or accepted, but noted that there were many organizations in the community who would scrutinize this kind of information for the Council, Mrs. Hanko referred to recent developments in the City and said in many cases the full impact of these projects has yet to be realized. Bud Time, 260 Sheridan Avenue, President of the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce, noted that planning has been the nutnber one problem in the City for some time and it seems that the job is not getting done. He said that the Chamber believes this may be due to lack of direction and tack of pri'ritiea. The Chamber would oppose Councilman Pearson's motion made this evening and wish to express concern at the uncertainties it ouggests. If this is put inta effect, Mr, Time said, the Chamber would like the opportunity to work with the staff. Gerald R. Grow, 420 Jaynes Road, Apartment 6, Conservation Chair- man, Loma Prieta Chapter of the Sierra Club, said this organization is new to the field of urban conservation and has no set answers to this very complicated problem. They are looking very carefully at past and present patterns of development in Santa Clara Valley. The Sierra Club would favor Councilman Pearson's proposal, but there is an important question concerning what rights the land owner has insofar as development of this land is concerned. That has to be answered, This also raises the question to what extent do the public have to subsidize the private developer. Mr. Grow said that he would; also like to see a cost benefit ratio study prepared for the benefit of the taxpayers. S. L. i:orchado, 9Z6 Colonial Lane, responded to some of the earlier speakers pointing out that the City is dealing with a 1963 General Plan that is hopelessly out of date. There is more interest now in urban planning in this area and the residents expect the Planning Commission and the Council to provide this kind of planning without the public having to ask for it. He spoke in favor of Councilman Pearson's pro- posal and said it is not only needed for the West Bayshore area but in other .areas of the City. F. Car! Grumet, 1074 Moffett Circle, stated that Councilman Pear son's proposal is a reaaonab:e-arse and speaking for the citizens, he Wished to point out that he considered the indication made this evening that developers will not wish to offer proposals for develop- rnent in Palo Alto to be a scare tactic. He did not think developers would ever leave the City, Mr. Grumet noted that a moratorium has already been set up for the Pay►lands and the Foothills and he said that the residents of the West Bayshore area and other areas deserve similar Consideration, [t is reasonable to require a developer to study the effect on the area and .present an area impact study when _making application to the City of Palo Alto. William Crowell, Gerson- Pakar, Inc., 437 Lytton, said he was here to pass on one developer's reflections and reactions to the newspaper article which was written about this subject. In his opinion, such a news item creates another level of uncertainty and what the City needs is more certainty. He agreed that developers will not be scared away from Palo Alto as it is a delightful and attractive town to propose a development for. However, talk of a moratorium could narrow down the type of developer the City wi?1 attract. Appropriate guidelines and procedures fat development are needed and can be accomplished through study sessions prior to applications being filed. He urged Council not to discourage creativity and to take a positive, rather than a negative, action,. 40 4/17/72 Boyd Smith, 903 Cottrell Way, stated that tonight's discussicn really evolved from the large number of applications the City received for low to moderate income housing in a particular section of the City. The City Council encouraged these proposals during past months and indicated that the City of Palo Alto was open, to such proposals. Speaking as a resident, he would be very concerned to see a mora- torium enacted for the entire City and he would describe it as an "over -kill". Further clarification is needed as to exactly what sections the moratorium would apply to. Louis Goldsmith, 1462 Edgewood Drive, President of the Palo Alto Housing Corporation, stated that Councilman Pearson's proposal was a good idea in essence since developers, staff and the community do not have any criteria by which to judge whether a project is good or bad. He said it's easy to ask the questions and not difficult to get the answers. The main question is what do the answers mean He would be in favor of such a check list for developers being es- tablished provided that it draws the distinction between those who are asking for a special dispensation with respect to land develop- ment, and those who are making application within ex°.sting zoning, and that Council ony applied this criteria to special cases, Mr. Goldsmith made further comments about the housing that has been developed in Palo Alto over the last few years and said that in most cases developers have been advised that they should include some low to moderate income units and this has taken place. MOTION: Councilman Pearson moved, seconded by Beahrs, that -Staff be directed to prepare a report regarding the feasibility of establishing criteria possible for an environmental impact report to be required on a project requiring a variance or change of zone that is proposed for the City of Palo Alto. Councilman Henderson said he was happy that what is being presented tonight is something other than a complete moratorium and he could see merit in Councilman Pearson's proposal and would support it, He said Council's actions this evening made it clear that the council is not going to be rushed into approval of new developments without proof that such developments will benefit the City. He felt that a compete moratorium would indeed be an "over --kill", but he could support the motion as stated. Councilman Seman staters that while she could not have supported a moratorium, she would support the proposal as stated. She said that she was anxious to encourage development to come to Palo Alto, but this development should meet Palo Alto's standards of excellence. Councilman Seman said that planning is not an action, but a process that occurs in the public arena with different needs competing. She felt the staff report requested this evening was a positive action and she would Support it, said he would vote for this proposal and Councilman BerwaldAreminded Council of a proposal he made to Council some time ago for total environmental plan and he said out See Page 59 41 4/17/72 of that proposal carne the Livingston and Llayney study of the Foothills. The consultant was charged then with identifying the elerrtenis and factors of urban design to make Palo Alto a viable. living City. The consultant could not, or did not, do this, He said what is being pro- posed is not a small job and will involve looking at the entire City. Councilman Rosenbaum stated that he was happier with the original thrust contained io Councilman Pearson's letter to Council, beca'ase he felt that a moratorium on zone changes might have relieved so''e of the work of the Planning staff and Planning Commission. He did not see the assignment as proposed the vening helping to al eviate that problem. In fact, he could see it as a- request for a new General Plan, which Council hopes to receive in due course. Councilman Clark stated that hie felt a moratorium on zone changes would bring real mediocrity into building in Palo Alto with no inno- vations or creativity occurring. He could not vote for tl'e motion as stated this evening for staff to give a report, because he felt the things being requested are being considered already and have been considered at least for the fast year or two, Councilman Clark noted that a proliferation of proposed developments was stopped tonight by a unanimous vote of the Council and he said Council can always dens, a -request if they feel it is not suitable, To request the kinds of information indicated tonight means that staff still has to make comparisons with whate':er is given as information by the developer. He said the proposal tonight is a leftover from an impractical idea of a complete moratorium, and he could not support it since it would seemingly serve no purpose: Mayor Con stock thanked the Council, the staff and the public for their perseverance and patience this evening. He said it had been interesting to him to note a common thread of concern throughout the comments on the part of both developers and residents. 'The motion failed on the following roll call vote: Ayes: Comstock, Henderson, Pearson, Sernan Noes: Eeahrs, Berwald, Clark, Norton, Rosenbaurn San Jose/Palo Aito Transit Authorit, - San Jose Model 0121M111004 JAIMIMIVAll emria.r...saaw.a.cmiatiaer" Cities Trans ortation Pro rare MOTION: Mayor Comstock moved, seconded by Seman, that Council approve the proposal as provided in the report from the San Jose/ Palo Alto Transit Authority regarding sponsorship of a San Jose Model Cities Transportation Program, subject to the proviso that separate funding is available and the stipulation that support by Palo Alto does not imply future financial commitments, The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote, 42 4117/72 Adjo:�rnment iarrr.rwiri�rrs�rr- There being no further requests to speak under Oral Communications, the meeting was adjourned at 1:35 a, m. APPROVED: �J{ ' Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk 43 4/17/72