Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10301972MINUTES city of Palo alto October 30, 1972 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in a special meting at 7:30 p.m. with Mayor Comstock presiding, to continue consid- eration of the prezoning of property in the vicinity of Peter Coutts Road and Page Mill Road known as Frenchman's Terrace to establish P -C glow/moderate income rental housing development of 225 units) . Present: seaters, berwald, Clark, Comstock, Henderson:, Norton (arrived 7:37 -►.m.), Pearson, Rosenbaum, Senan Absent: None Mayor Comstock stated that Council was meeting in a special_ meeting with one .agenda item only _.. the P1_nning Cn fission ::ecormendation "6 concerning the Peter Coutts project (rezoning) and the ratter of the Stanford annexation report as well as possible ordinance action. He said the matter of the annexation will not be heard this evening, that Council is only dealing with prezoning, and that tonight's meeting will continue from they point of public testimony heard on October 10 and 0ctcber 24, with staff reports and giving Council an opporturity to deal with this subject in terms of action en recommendations. He acknowledged receipt of letters that Council members received at their places this evening from Mrs. Donald Porkel , 812 Mayfield Avenue, Stanford, protesting the action of the Stanford Homeowners' Association executive board; letter from George B. Dantzig, 821 Tolman Drive, Stan- ford, supporting Councilman Rosenbaum's recommendation; letter from Thomas and Sarah Kailath, 1024 Cathcart Way, Stanford, supporting the project but expressing some concerns; letter from Ray and Shir'sy Clay- ton, 729 Tolman Drive, Stanford, supporting Councilman Rosenbaum's pro- posal.; telegram from Mr. and Mrs. Donald D. Kline, 2345 Amherst, Palo Alto, supporting Councilman Rosenbaum's proposal; letter from Peter K. and Margaret Hepler, 940 Cottrell Way, supporting the project; letter from Lucy M. Evans, 1440 California Avenue, Palo Alto, giving information about AB 1744; letter from Ruth S. Schneider, 701 Tolman Drive, Stanford, expressing some concerns about the project; and a letter from the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce reviewing the project and its financial planning -asp€ is and urging Council to support the project. Mayor Comstock stated ;he appropriate way for Council to proceed would be to ask questions about staff report, have staff review anything they wish to review, and respond to Q'1e. '.~,ions and issues raised by Council over the past several meetings; then set what questions Council has. He said it may be hard to totally separate information rom the Urban Coalition from staff presentations. He asked the Urban Coalition and others to hold thealselvea.in readiness and be prepared to respond to questions. Following the presentations and discussion by Council, it will be proper for Council to consider how it wishes to handle this. Mayor Comstock called on City Manager SSipel and Planning Director Knox to make their presentations. Planning Director Naphtali Knox introduced two of the planning staff meibers. Mrs. Elizabeth Crawdek, who %.as repponsible for the envixt:n- mental- .impact reports, and Lynnie Mena, assistant to the Director of Planning, who has done research on all of the Frenchman's Terrace reports. 427 10/30/72 Planning Director Knox stated that a number of questions were raised about the Frenchman's Terrace proposal which.staff did not answer to its own satisfaction in the reports deliver ,. :,R Council's packets. i said he would like to briefly cover five items; 1. Minor corrections to the Planning Department's report .2. Curb, gutter, and other road improvements 3. Density comparisons 4. Traffic in general 5. Park service to Palo Alto population He said it was his -understanding that the developer would like to follow with additional information on: 1. Potential park sites 2.- The economics of inserting a park or reducing the total number of units 3. Answers to questions from Councilwoman Pearson regarding grading Fr_t he proceeded to correct three errors, typer:aphical and other- wise, in the "Responses" report of October 27th. 1. On page 6, item 8, the first paragraph, lett sentence, begins with the word "otherwise," 2. On page 7, fourth paragraph, under PAUSD, no easement would be required from Stanford. The pathway system between Peter Coutts Hill and the Nixon School is in existence and is part of Stanford's gaeenbest system. A gate to the playground still would be needed. 3. On page 11, last paragraph, first sentence, should end with the words "Frenchman's Hill," not "Frenchman's Terrace." The local streets in Frenchman's Hill have curb and gutter. He said that leads to item 2, the question of curb, gutter, and other improvements for Peter Courts Road. The Coalition in one of their letters of October 27th said "that sidewalks, curb, and gutter on Peter Coutts from the site _,a Stanford Avenue can be bandied within the existing framework." The additional $30,000 cost would add $.36 per month to the subsidized rents and $.90 per month to the market rents. He then showed glides depicting the need for curb and gutter: Regarding item 3, density, he said Frenchman's Terrace as now proposed will have density of 11.15 dwelling units per net acre of land, and a population of 36.5 persons per net acre. He then showed slides of developments in Santa Clare County ranging in order of highest to lowest density. Regarding item 4, traffic, he said some of the statements made in the Environmental Impact Report need clarification. Reference to a doubling of traffic volume applies only to Peter Coutts Road. The capacity of the most critical and criticized intersection in the area at Stanford Avenue and &vdoin Street is 1600 vehicles per hour. At peak hours, the maximum projected traffic at this intersection will be no more than 1027 vehicles per hour, which is only 65% of capacity. The peak hour projection at Stanford Avenue -Peter Coutts Road is 53% of capacity; Stanford Avenue, 61%; Bovdoin Street, 69%. He said they have not estimated how vehicles going to El Camino from Frenchman's Terrace will travel past or through College Terrace, because the total increase in traffic in this direction will be only 8% (200 cars), epread over a 24 -hour period, which is an insignificant increase. 2-8 10/30/72 Regarding item 5, parks, he referred to a large map counted on the wall which showed the relative density of Palo Alto's residential areas and where people live in relation to Frenchman's Terrace. He said that later staff would have some comments on specific conditions offered in the Planning Commission resolution. Councilman Rosenbaum said that he did not believe that concern expressed about traffic had to do with capacities of the various roads but more to do with traffic passing through College Terrace. Mr. Knox responded that staff is cognizant of that and will discuss with Mr. Noguchi the possibility of intersection improvements similar to those in the Olive -West Meadow neighborhood. He said this is the kind of thing that can only be studied by taking traffic counts at this time and following up with traffic counts after development has taken place. Councilman Rosenbaum commented in reference to the slides shown of other projects that even though Capitol Townhouses had very high density, it should be noted it had only 82 total units. Councilwoman Pearson asked about the trerr ndous increase of 88`/: at Raitau.ndo and Peter Coutts. Mr. Knox had said that traffic would then flora down Stanford Avenue to F1 Camino Aaith only 8% increase. She asked what would be the increase on Page Mill Road. Mr. Knox responded that those numbers amount to an 8% increase scat- tered over a 24 -hour period and are not a major traffic problem. Mayor Comstock said the next report to be considered would be the letter of October 27tn from Mr. Knox and Mr. Sipel which responds to a number of que Lions individual Cdancil members have esked. Councilwoman Pearaon referred to page 6, item 8, stability of percent- -. ages of rental units by income levels. She said she understood that= if a person does find himself with his income increased beyond limits, he can pay additional rent and remain in the house, and asked if that were correct. Mr. Knox responded that that is staff's understanding. A person whose income -rises is not -penalized_ by having to move out of the project. ----Howe„er =the ::resolutionfor4arded--by tl7e ,Planning Coffimission states rather clearly that_2n% of the units shall be low income, 40Z moderate and 20% middle income. After further study, staff thinks this might lead to forcinz' out a person whose income -rises and recommends this should read "...provided that no occupant be evicted from a low or moderate income ;.nit in the event his income rises above maximum federal limitations." Councilwoman Pearson asked what if the unit which would now be low or moderate income should become unoccupied. Would that unit then be rented again to a person with low or moderate income or would it graduate to market -priced housing? Mr. Knox responded that under the present wording of the resolution as proposed by the Planning Commission, any unit that becomes vacant would have to be filled by=someone in the same category. If the devel- oper were given more flexibility,,it would become a two-way street. 'If a person moved out of a higher -income unit the unit would not be 4 2 4 10/30/72 left vacant if a low income person were knocking on the door looking for space. On the other hand, if a low income unit were vacated and the only person •iohing to rent it was from a moderate income family, the moderate inrot _nPY'4nrt-�!,};aid rent 1G. Staff's View at: this point is that the developer who has pleaded for some flexibility has some merit in his request, and -it would be appropriate to limit those per- centages to goals tor the initial rent -out. Coune.t.iwoman Pearson commented that she was looking for the guarantee that -any low and moderate income housing that becomes available will be offered to low and moderate income people. City Attorney Stone responded that under the wording proposed by the Planning Commission there would indeed be 20-40-40 in the ratios pro- vided. What it does noe provide is the flexibility. Councilwoman Pearson said she was not worried about the flexibility. She wanted to assure that it will always be 20-40 for low and moderate incomes. In response to a question from Councilman Henderson asking open cannot qualify enough people under present low income what happens to the present low income units, City Manager that they would lie fallow. if the devel- qualifications, Sipel responded Mayor Comstock asked Mr. Maremont to come to the r'icrophone and be prepared to respond to questions from Council with regard to the Urban Coalition's reports of October 23, October 26 and O tober 30. Councilwoman Semen referred to the letter of October 26 on the subject of Frenchman's Terrace economic mix, third paragraph, second sentence, "The initial and ongoing rental of units will be subject to the pro- visions of the ground lease between Stanford and the Coalition, which will include criteria for tenant selection, including economic mix." She asked for that to be explained more clearly. Mr. Maremont responded that at the present time the Coalition has a development agreement -with Stanford, and the ground lease will be the cont.-oiling document for fifty-one years. That lease will contain provisions dealing with the economic mix, criteria for tenant selection, etc. In other words, Stanford is asking for the right of approval of a number of things. Councilwoman Semen asked if the ground lease were already executed, and Mr. Maremont responded negatively. Councilwoman Sem.an said it is her understanding that in Colorado Park there was a spin-off organization formed that was in charge of making the policy for Colorado Park. She had understood the policy -making body for this project would be similarly organized. She asked if Mr. Maremont meant that Stanford will have control for setting policy, rather than a spin-off organization of the Urban Coalition. Mr. Maremont responded that Stanford has a right of approval, which is different from having control. The initiating and controlling body would be the Coalition's Corporation. Councilman Beahrs said that some of the reports indicate disastrous experience with overaizeci developments. Along this lin.F:, he wanted. toask a question concerning the prospect of e' good happy mix here.. 430 10/30/72 He said one critic of the project suggests that the rent levels pro- posed are generally well above the Peninsula rent levels. This should be an attractive development, but he wondered whether or not people -would willing - -would be to pay c: (�i'e 2i.,:. L�? live in tie project, particularly when he heard such expert opinion as Professor Lind at Stanford, who wnen cne puts groups of people with very different incomes, lifestyles and attitudes in close proximity, a high level of conflict is generated. In some cases the conflict is so intense that the situ- ation becomes unstable and stability is not returned until one of the groups moves out." Councilman Beahrs said he hoped Mr. Maremont could draw some distinctions between his project and onethatProfessor Lind might have in mind. Councilman Beahrs also referred to the letter from Professor Luenberger, and asked what assurance there is that the development is going to be a credit to Stanford and a credit to the community. Mr. Maremont responded that he thought this would be an appropriate time to introduce the president of the newly -selected managethent agent, Lustrar, Mr. Richard Gautereaux. Mr. Gautereaux said that the question Councilman Beahrs asked is not easy to respond to, especially when experts are cited. He said his experience in dealing with federally insured projects has shown that where the market rent is truly representative of the market rent level of the area, which 1;y comparison would be the conventicmal rental level, they do have resi- dents in 236 projects who are receiving no interest supplement who are paying the full market rent as well as those who are receiving the full subsidy based on 25% of their earnings. He said he has not experienced any erratic type of noncoa:patib.ility of those having the choice to live in the housing of their choice in this type of facility and those not, or any experience of mass exodus because of incompatibility of those who have selected a particular house and unit. Councilman Beahrs asked if these projects are comparable to that before Council tonight or are they smaller, larger, similarly situated on or near a campus, etc. Mr. Gautereaux responded that the examples are similar sizewise. The average size insured project in the United States is between 125 and 150 units. The economic showing the most stability in project economics has been between 200 and 250 units. Some of the projects have been in college settings. Comparable in the immediate area__is_-x- unit _-near___- ------ Secxamento Stare -College. Councilman Beahrs asked if this is housing for the general. community- or related ;.o the school. Mr. Gautereaux responded that it is for the general community, but the school has an interest in it because of the families, graduate students, etc. that would qualify. Councilman Beahrs said the project before Council is somewhat larger than those Lustrar has had actual experience with, Semi +op1e say that a unit of fifty dwellings is the ideal. He asked -Mr. Gautereaux's opinion on this, because there is a lot of small space available in the area, but nothing else comparable to th.h size of this piece of land. Mr. Gautereaux said that a small project becomes very -marginal. Their experience has shown that 150-200 unite give Mite- necessary- iinanvial security to be able to provide the social a nitles .within the project, 4 3l 143%30/72 Councilman Beahrs asked about criteria for screening or accepting appli- cants. He said he understood that there has been no work done on this yet at Stanfort or by the Urban Coalition. He asked if Lustrar would largely guide this kind of interest and activity. ,*- __ _ _ � :. ....�� criteria would be employed to guarantee a happy mix of divs+rse seteei e Mr. Gautereaux said the sponsors and the community would have their own objectives in meeting the housing needs of the community, and when those objectives are set forth, Lustrar will counsel with them. He said in Colorado Park they attempted to follow through on what the Coalition set forth. In his opinion the 20-40-40 suggested for the Frenchman's Terrace project provides a good economic mix. Councilman Beahrs asked if Lustrar encourages a community organization, and how they police relationships and antagonisms if they :-ievelop. Mr. Gautereaux said Lustrar definitely He said it is not management's role to ment's role to encourage participation zaticn and to have a good relationship initially a line of communication beiween management, sponsors, and residents. It is vital that this type of participation become part of the life of the housing facility. encourages community organizations. dictate policies. It is manage - in bringing about tenant organi- and understanding of establishing Cit; Manager Sipe1 said there is sere question regarding AL 1744 as to when 17 -xg,ht go into effect if it is passed by the state legislature. The original bill included a provision that a constitutional amendment would be required if the bill were to be passed by the legislature. This would require a vote of the people and would put off the adoption of this provision for about two years. Staff has found in discussion with the author of the bill that there has been a change in the wording of the bill that will not require a constitutional amendment. The bill is presently before the senate and will be dealt with by the Senate Review and Taxation. Committee on November 15 and would go into effect in the normal manner. He said he could not say whether it would apply_ to existing conditions or those that arise after passage. Councilwoman Pearson referred to the paragraph entitled "Impact on Adjoining Areas," the sentence reading "The architects will study the relationship of the site to indua'trial Park parking lots and the lights therei,n, with a view to limiting pedestrian traffic betwen the site and these parking Tots::." She said she was curious as to why they would.limit pedestrian traffic between the site and parking lots, 2artict:.iarly when the total emphasis seems to be on howfew cars are going to be running from this project. Mr. Maremont responded that access to the site is Page Mill where there will be pedestrian walkways about here is the possibility of children who are Terrace becoming a nuisance in those parking lots architectural treatment can be provided that will not a problem along . What is being thought residents in Frenchman's . Something by way of reduce this. Counciiwoan Pearson said she is concerned that some emphasis is going to be placed on the philosophy of walking from the project to the place of work, and this is contrary to the philosophy. Air. Maremont said if it is a matter of people going to work along Page Mill Road, if they were required to go out to Page Mill, this would not be an undue burden on them. If static can be avoided by requiring that 432 10/30/72 1 1 walk, perhaps it is a wise thing to do. It is in the category of things to be studied. He said what they wanted to respond to was their aware- ness of the existence of neighbors and the concern that they have for architectural solutions which maximize thechances of harmonious rela- tionship, Councilwoman Pearson said she thinks that if she were living in the project and wanted to walk to work, she would hesitate to go out to Page Mill and compete with the cars. Councilwoman Pearson referred to the Urban Coalition's letter of Octo- ber 30th responding to questions she had submitted and said, that in Teem 6 what she is asking is whether or not the developer plans to have test borings done on the Frenchman's Terrace site. Mr. Ivelich responded that they definitely plan to take borings on that site. The reason reports were included on the adjacent site is that most of the time they are indicative of what will be found on this site. Councilwoman Pearson commented that two geologists who ere well known in the area have pointed to Frenchman's Terrace as having soil creep. Mr. Ivelich responded that in the back of the report that he passed out tonight there is a supplemental report which addressed itself to the problem of soil creep. Councilwoman Pearson said she is concerned t h_tt in moving 80,000 cubic yards of earth, there could be problems with compaction. Mr. Ivelich responded that as architects they don't want to get in- volved in an unsafe situation. Depending on what the reports point out as to the soil condition, thea.r engineers would design foundations and retaining walls that would stabilize any conditions that might be unsafe. Councilwoman Pearson asked if these are the kinds of questions that would come In the environmental impact report. Mr. Ivelich responded that these are the questions they would get involved in shortly, once the project gets underway. At this time they are not that far along to be able to pinpoint the runoff, etc: Councilwoman Pearson asked for a ball park figure as to haw much it would cost to move 80,000 cubic yards of earth. Mr. Ivelich said the fign res would vary, depending on where the soil is being moved to. Mr. Roy Lugo, representing the contractor, W.B. Dickman, estimated the moving of the actual yardage itself would cost somewhere in the range of $100,0€ 0 Councilman Beaters asked if it is possible to predict what kind of com- paction will be used. He said he hoped it would be a high standard, Mr. Lugo said that generally speaking, it would be a 90% compaction. This would be a result of the analysis. Councilman beahrs asked if he could co pare that to something like a highway overpass. r Mr. Lugo said it would be similar to a highway overpass. 4.3 3 10/30/72 Councilman Beahrs asked how close that would approximate natural.set- tl+ng. Mr. Lugo responded that it is generally better than the original ground. Mayor Comstock asked if 1C'0; means that you would compact it 3,n."1- a. wnat it was,,end Mr. Lugo said it is higher density than the original ground and 9% is about as high as you could go and still stay within economic feasibility. Mr. Knox indicated that Mrs. Crowder would respond. Mrs. Crowder said she would understand Ccuncilworaan Pearson's concern because of the reports from Stanford geologists and other residents and some of the requirements Stanford has had to place on developments there. The subsoil in both of the areas is Santa Clara formation, which is known to be subject to creep. In the soil report of May, 1967, Dr. Richard Johns, Chairman of the Mineral Sciences Department at Stanford, said "Further, we believe that recurrence of creep movements is not likely to be of significance during the life of the structures within the proposed development." They recommended careful engineering to guard against soil creep, and the architect has indicated he will use every method to prevent problems. Councilwoman Pearson said in relation to co,:lpa.tion of soil relating to freeways, she wondered if anyone re 1eTnb red c_he uigh^"y 80, which was compacted, slid down the mountain. Mr. Lugo said that was due to subsurface water conditions. He said he was certain draining will be a part of the soil engineering require- ments. Mayor Comstock asked City A=torney Stone what the City could do to mitigate any liability. City Attorney Stone responded that with respect to City liability, the staff reviewed these soil reports and the engineering calculations of the project itself, foundation, and other factors, ant'• whether or not the City does give a permit for construction, it acts on all of the available information and if a "creepy condition" occurs, the City would not be liable under the present state of the law. Mayor Comstock commented that Councilman Rosenbaum had raised some points about alternative unit/park combinations. The letter of October 3Cth responds with an analysis of this. He asked if Council had any questions. Councilman Rosenbaum said tact due to the late arrival of the report, he was not in a position to make any specific request tonight. He did have a question about the ground rent assumed to be $30,000 per acre. He wondered if :his was thought of as being the cost of purchase. is the price greater than the lease price to the Urban Coalition? Planning Director Knox explained 5a and 5b columns, which staff had added to the display copy of the Summary of Alternatives submitted by the Urban Coalition. Why Clay gager Sipel responded that it is common knowledge that the value placed by Stanford for leasing to the Urban Coalition has been $20,000 for the 51 -year period. In discussions that he has had in the Zaat weak _or ten days oa the- ®ub#ect of purchase, he tcnded to use the assessed. valuation for the property times four, which would yield a 4 3 4 10/36/72 value of about -$30,000 per acre. Why the Urban Coalition has used this particular figure, he was not sure, but he guessed that is the case. Purchase of the full title would be worth more than the limited- ....,.... term lease. Cuucciltu n c`cosenoaum said ne would really like to have the opportunity to go into this summary in more detail. He said he thought it answered a ' fair number of questions as to why the development is as costly as it is. Councilman Clark said this is the crux of Councilman Rosenbaum's sug- gestion, and he thought the audience has been in the dark about this. He suggested Council should take a while and go over it step by step. Councilman Rosenbauth said he would like to make a sample calculation to show how the Urban Coalition cam up with their numbers. Mr. Maremont explained the Summary of Alternatives, which was sent to Council members, and how the figures were derived. Councilwoman Seman asked if she were correct that if Council approved Councilman Rosenbaum's suggestion, it would reduce the density to 180 units and provide a four -acre park., end in order to keep the rents at their proposed .level, it would cost the City saf Palo Alto, providing it gol: a .-1UB grant, $586,204 or $.50 on the tax rate. Mr. Maremont responded that if you divide the initial cash figure into the debt -service component, which you would pay in cash, and the debt service which you would pay on an annual basis, then you would pay $487,790 plus the $5,580 a year. Mayor Comsto';k said that what is before Council is the Planning Coin -- mission recommendation and ;asked if there were questions that Council wished to address to Mrs. Gordon about the recommendation. Mayor Comstock reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendations. Councilman Henderson said he had ,not seen any economics on the elimi- o ;tation of the multi -purpose room from the community building and asked what that means in terms of monthly rentals at the various levels. Mr. Maremontsaid the community building in its entirety is estimated at $176,000. The effect would not be major. The mulC-purpose room is a relatively inexpensive portion of a larger building. Mr. Knox said the figure that was given by the developer for improve- ments to Peter Coutts Read amounted to $30,030, and this amounted to $.36 per month on the subsidized rents and $.90 per month on the market rents. He said he thought that $30,000 is very close to what might be saved by eliminating the multi --purpose room. (The Co nei1 recessed from 9:25 to 9:50 p.m,) Councilman Berwald requested that Council hear from Lou roldsl:ith of the Housing Corporatton, noting that the Housing Corporation has offered valuable assistance :.n various similar proposals such as Colorado Park. Lou Goldsmith, Executive Director, Palo Alto Housing Corporation, said he wished to make two points. First, there is a -need for flexibility in trying to determine who is going to be allowed to live in the _Freuchaoan'e Terrace project. -It is diffl.cLit to find people in Palo 4 3 5 10/30/72 Alto to fit all the parameters for initial occupancy based on the_pro- posed 20% low income, 40% moderate income, and 40% middle income under Section 236 of the National Housing Act. He said this proposal gives no latitude and he did not see hat,° the project could be operated this _. way. He spoke of the difficulty experienced in finding enough iuenn7a_ rm__ qualify under the rent supplement for the 12 low income units included at Colorado Park. He noted that in his report to the Planning Com- mission on September llth he had stated that it was dubious that Council could find 20% who would qualify for rent supplements, particularly if all other parameters are to apply, i.e. people who work in the shopping center or industrial park would not qualify for ;ow income housing, but might be eligible for moderate income housing. hr. Goldsmith said the second point he wished to make refers to the multi -purpose room which the Planning Commission had recommended be eliminated. He would recom- mend inclusion of this room and felt it is a good idea and it would be used. Citing Colorado Park as an example, Mr. Goldsmith said more and more residents are now using the community room. It takes a while and you have to let it happen gradually. Maybe the day care facilities could be used in the evening for adult events but he cautioned that to consider adding the multi --purpose room later could cost five times as much. Ceunci_lman 8erwal.d thanked Mr. Goldsmith for his presentation and spoke to SECTION 2. 1. Use: of the ordinance before Council which stated 20% of the units shall be .zw income, 40% moderate income and 40% middle income. He asked Mr. '.Jldsmith if he had any particular language he would like to see su',sti.tuted for that or included in this section of the ordinance. Mr. Goldsmith replied that his suggestion would be that Council avoid thinking in terms of rigid limits. Rent supplements apply to low income people and with most of these projects 10% can pay market rent in the beginning. He said he did not see anything gained by reference to moderate income. There should not be any problem if the intent is indicated clearly as the sponsors hase every intention of taking care of low and moderate income people. Councilman Unsaid asked Mrn Goldsmith if he had any other thoughts as to the design of this proposal with particular attention to the total number ofpeople, He cited.themany 1erters received which com- mented on the gross number of people to be housed in the project. Mr. Goldsmith replied that 11 units to the aces will not have all that me;:ch of an impact on anything. He considered this to be very sparse and in fact considered the density to be too low and ,a waste of a very valuable piece of land to put so few units on it. He said that he w►7uld prefer the project to be on 15 acres instead of 20. This is extremely valuable land and in his opinion 800 or so people will be relatively lost on that acreage. He cited the example of Colorado Park and said that this is a much bights density, yet when visiting. the project he has:iever seen it crowded. Responding to a question from Councilman Rosenbaum about the poseibi.lity of including in the City's ordinance reference to Section 23, Mr. Goid- stit,h stated that there is no guarantee that Section 23 funds will be available in the. amounts needed. Mayor Comstock stated he wished the following to be entered into the record. He said fie is a manber of the Policy Board of the Urban Coali- tion and acts on an a dvisory . basis only, receivtn ; no coOpensation and 436 10/30/72 is not a director of the Urban Coalition. The meetings are approxi- mately once a year and he wished to state that he has given no direct advice on iaansgement or anything connected with the project being con- sidered this evening. t4'P'- the Pl.,...,t„f. n.,=__:33 __ • - Mavnr ('.ni_r.crn�l �! atnn _ __-- _.... _ _...__.,..t, .,,,.....�iaa�.vu � i�s.Vuu tl'aICiC?ll 1S now before Council, including a series of conditions written into the ordinance before Council. He stated Council could approve or modify the conditions of the ordinance as they see fit. Councilman Rosenbaum said as far as he could see the first policy decision Council has to make is whether they want to explore his pro- posal of October 4th or some version of it. Raving only received the Urban Coalition's information at a late date, he has not had an oppor- tunity to analyze it and he would like to sit on this item for a week before making a definitx motion. Re asked his colleagues if this would be acceptable to them. Mayor Comstock said that he understood that Councilman Rosenbaum wished to have an opportuniey to react to the Urban Coalition's material and to develop a .,ore detailed proposal. Councilman Henderson said he was planning to introduce the ordinance at this time. Council has got to begin to face some policy decisions. Councilman Rosenbaum's proposal involves a tremendous outlay for parks, park lands, etc., and while he would like rn see it discussed he did feel that Council should go ahead tonight. He said he would hate to s .ot now, having cote this far. Councf 1•.:o an Sean stated that she appreciated Councilman Rosenbaum's feeling of wanting to analyze and respond in more detail to the proposals given by the Urban Coalition this evening. She wondered whether Council could proceed this evening and still give Councilman Rosenbaum a chance to respond at the second meeting. City Attorney Stone stated there was a distinct possibility that at the time of the second reading if the changes suggested tonight are made, then they would be so substantial as to require that that second reading become a first reading and Council would have to proceed with the second reading two weeks from that date. Councilwoman Pearson stated that she would support a motion to con- tinua mainly because she aid not like to receive information and react to it, especially the response to Councilman Rosenbaum's proposals which were submitted by the Urbane Coalition this evening. She said she would like to see Councilman Rosenbaum develop his own figures and if possible find a way to reduce the density. She said she could not support this ordinance at 225 units. Also, some of the proposals could well be substantial enough that she would expect to see some modification of design. She said she was not willing to subject low and moderate income people to carbon monoxide and she would like to see the whole project moved back to at least 100 feet along Page Mill Road. Councilwoman Pearson also noted that Council has not addressed itself to the priority on discrimination in the City of Palo Alto. She said the project could also be designed to be built around the hill rather than changing the whole contour of the site and involving the expense of moving the dirt. She expressed concern about problems experienced in the pest with compacted earth. She -also added that she felt that approval of the prezoning this evening would force the.posi- tion .,n annexing the load on November 27th and she said she would not be willing to pass the annexation application unless evidence is received 4 3 7 10/30/72 from Stanford that they will, in the near future, apply for annexation to the City of Palo Alt- of the trio gular piece of land at Stanford and Bowdoin. Councilwoman Pearson added thet Cc -1 = fi- - -- .,,,__.6�. avttttcC has ::had their fill of traffic in the area and Council has a responsibility not to add to it and has to have some control over the situation in the near future., She would be willing to vote for continuance of the consideration of the prezoning this evening. Councilman Berwald stated that Councilman Rosenbaum had asked whether there was much interest in his proposal. With due respect to Councilman Rosenhaum's intent he said he really was not sufficiently interested in changing the present design of the project in terms of numbers and com- plicating, what he considered to be, a well designed proposal with a park that would make the protect much more dense with respect to adja- cency of the buildings. In summary, he felt Council should move forward and move the ordinance and make such modifications as he would like to see. He said he had a question to ask later about grading but he would like to move ahead. He said he did not know of any proposal that has • come before this Council t at has been discussed in such detail as this one. The Council has had the benefit of input from the public and most of the Council ..embers have had time to explore their favorite amendments. He said he was ready to vote on this this evening. C nunci.44u Be:-shrs said he had been comforted by the earlier discussion tonight. His greatest concern with this project has been the human impacts. He has seen so many contradictions before this Council. He said he has a high degree of sympathy with people oho have dl fficulty. in finding housing. Regarding the question of including a park, this gets to the question of how much the re; idential taxpayer can afford to put into all of this. With a park, the subsidy cost of this project to Palo Alto taxpayers will be up about $80,000 towards the school deficit in this protect. Where does Palo Alto draw the line on its abilities to support this kind of thing? We mue t draw the line somewhere, he said. Councilman Clark said his concern was that Council settle the question of whether they are interested in Councilman Rosenbaum's suggestion for major modificaticias before they begin amending the ordinance. A - policy decision should be made. If Council does want to make major modi- fications to the ordinance then the matter should be,contlnued„-_--if not, Council should begin to work out amendments to the ordinance. It would be a waste of time to work on amendments tonight if Council is going to wind up proposing major modifications in the plan eventually. Vice Mayor Norton stated that he understood that HUD would be processing this matter and the City would have until the middle or late December before any substantial changes by the City would affect their timing, so he did not think a week or two's delay would be too crucial and the project should be properly designed. From `'a planning point of view, Vice Mayor Norton said that while the density is not excessive and there is open space spread throughoutthe site, there is a rather uniform coverage of the site and he was not sure that this was right in itself. Because of the grading, and he said he had been informed that this is the worst environment in wh..ch to plant tre8 and other ground covers, he would prefer to try to leave the topography as it is and leave the soil in its natural stag. He did not see the improvement that .:tomes from grading. He would prefer to keep grading to the minimum. Regarding the manner in which the buildings are placed on the of te, he £Cit= brat - they do come close to Page mill Road and would create a virtual well h 3 8 10/30/72 in terms of aesthetics to people passing by. The industrial setback is over 100 feet and Frenchman's Hill has a setback of at least 100 feet. This one is only about 60 feet -fro the curb and would certainly create a kind of a wall. - 'tice Mayor Norton -said he did favor pursuing the L Yvesivi111 iiiy Vi a park butn? questioned -whether the staff ii:dicatie2;,5 i the best - ;,_... ...�. �r�.. �vedtiv5i. 'r'e would .gee opening everything from the top of the hill down to Peter Coutts' Road and then locating a low key kit. of a park but open to the public and residents of the development. This would help to create a sense of openness for people who have to,look;at the project as they pass along. He said he could see the open space • best located down toward the corner of the two streets. He added that he did not think 225 units too many for the site to stand, but he thought, the aesthetics could be improved beesezc as it is now, the buildings are so uniformly spread over the site. He would like to see approxi- mately 200 units with deletion of the 25 being converted into the strip of open space he. has discussed. He said he would be willing to con- sider Councilman Rosenbaum's reduction to the extent of permitting a total of 200 or perhaps 205 units. Vice Mayor Norton added that , i.f Council insists on ;moving ahead without having the Planning Commission review this again, he felt the grading .end landscaping plan should be reviewed by the Planning Commission because he thought these were things they have not yet seriously considered. MOTION: Councilman Rosenbaum moved. seconded hy Pearson, that the tatter of prezcning of Frenchman's "ierrace be continued for the pur- pose of reducing the pi.up:, aI LU 200 units and to include roughly five acres of open space. Councilman Rosenbaum stated that there had been concern expressed with regard to the potential cost to tenants and he would refer Council to the Urban Coalition's letter of October 30, Alternative C, which gives the statistics involved in reducing the numbers of units to 200 and adding a four acre park. He noted that under this alternative the moderate rental would go up $1.12 and the market rate $2.81, so in terms of resit increase Council would not be talking about a great deal of money if a five acre park was included, plus you get the reduced maintenance cost of actual acreage. The numbers would come down further than quoted because the cost would be associated with a five acre park. The basic idea is one that would not compromise the number of moderate income units or the concept of making the prefect available to different income levels and yet' offer something to the surrounding neighborhood. Councilwoman Seman stated that she would vote for continuance if she thought that Councilman Rosenbaum wished to ce'roborate the figures presented tonight, but what she was hearing him say to Council was that Council suggest that it will only buy 200 units and if that is what she is being asked to vote for she would not vote on that. Councilman Rosenbaum said Council should come to a policy decision as to whether they wish to pursue this, as stated by Councilman Clark. et Councilmae Berwald quoted from Page 3 of the Urban Coalition's state- ment of October 30th "A four acre park at 200 units like the three acre park at 225 ; uni is would require elimination of meet of the use- ful open space elsewhere in the site." He said Councilman Rosenbaum's motion concerns 200 units and a five acre park but he would take the above quote at face value. Mr. Maremont asked if Mr. lvUlich could respond to this. Mr. lvilich stated that they would want to allow four or five acres to be taken up by a park and to provide a park for 225 units they would have to absorb some of the spaces it was hoped could be used for recreational aspects of the family units. There are major site lines into the project and these adzht have to he filled in order to fit -the units onto the site so it is possible that that could wind up with "sidewalk barriers," as mentioned earlier. Councilman Berwald said he realized that the motion was a sincere effort to get Council to make a decision on redesign but in his opinion con- tinuing this discussion would be tantamount to denying the project. The motion has no definition to it and it is a major step for Council to take after all these weeks of discussion. Chairman Gordon referred to slides that Mr. Knox had presented earlier of ocher projects which showed a great amount of open space with more density. What is being proposed would mean soree change in the project but it might be reflected in the way of eliminating those open sp:ecea . She reminded the Council of the open space available at the Lucille Nixon School. Mayor Comstock stated that he world support the motion to continue. It is a good project basically and what is proposed calls for a dif- ferent project but enhances it. He said it would be of a different nature and composition bec; use of the changes but all of the basic components which are in the project could be done well and it could still be attractive. He said he would like to see the idea developed in a little more detail. What is being proposed is close to item C and it should be clear to Council what the basic impact will be. Councilman Henderson stated that he could not argue with what was being said and he was certainly willing to look at alternate possibilities, but he could not make a definite policy decision tonight to reduce the project to 200 units and what is being proposed seems to say that Counei1 would go for 200 units with a five acre parr_ and he could not support it on'ehat basis. Councilman Beahrs stated that he agreed with Councilman Henderson. He could not make a policy decision tonight which completely reverses the proposal. While he would not be opposed to a straight continuance to give Councilman Rosenbaum time to develop his ideas as he desires, he would not vote for the reduction in units. Councilman Rosenbaum stated that Council is not in the business of designing developments and he felt this va;; the developer's job in cooperation with the City's Planning Commission and that it could be done pretty quickly. The Council members all seem basically sympathetic to the project and he did not visualize his request taking a great deal of time. City Manager Sipel said the concern that he has is the intent of the motion - is it to refer back to the developer for reduction of the project for submittal to the Council or the Planning Commission? if it is coming back to the Council them this could be done in too weeks. If it is planned to refer it to the Planning Commission we are talking about substantlilly more than two weeks, maybe four to six weeks. Mayor Comstock suggested that staff wait and see what Council wishes to do and then they will receive trstr. tians. 4 4 0 10/30/72 The motion to__continue_for the purpose of reducing to 200 units and to include roughly 5 acres of open spacs failed on the following roll call vote: Ayes: Comstock, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum Noes: Beahrs, Berwald, Clark, Henderson, Semen MOTION: Councilman Henderson introduced the following ordinance and moved, seconded by Berwald, its approval for first reading: "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.08.040 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH A ZONING CLASSIFICATION FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF PAGE MILL ROAD AND PETER COUTTS ROAD SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS AND TO ESTABLISH A FIRE LONE FOR SAID PROPERTY, BOTH TO BE EFFECTIVE UPON ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO" Mayor Comstock noted that this ordinance was recommended by the Planning Commission and includes additional conditions imposed by the Planning Commission as well as the original conditions suggested by staff. AMENDMENT: Councilman Henderson moved, duly seconded, that SECTION 2. of the ordinance, number 11 . which states "There shall be no priorities on the selection of occupants except as required by federal law and regulations." be deleted. Councilman Henderson said he would like to zee this reference to priorities eliminated. He disagreed with the Planning Commission's action declaring that no priorities be allowed. The matter of priorities should be settled between Stanford University, the develope s and }WD. Councilman Rosenbaum stated that in his Opinion the proposal to have the entire project reserved for employees on Stanford lands is unfair. We are dealing with a sebsidy which is in quite short supply. Money is hard to come by. He could net see why residents of the City should be excluded. He opposed this deletion and said as an alternative Council could go along with -the staff suggestions or go along with 50% to be reserved for Stanford employees, 50% for the people of the City of Pao lito area - residents or employees of companies located in Palo Alto. Councilmen Berwald asked whether any priorities had been noted in any previous ordinances regarding low to moderate income housing Has the Council made any reference to such a condition before. City Attorney Stone responded and said there had been no references made to priorities. References have been made to the percentage of low to moderate income units to be included in a` project. Councilrun Berwald said he felt that the practice of not making reference to priorities should be continued. 'Councilman feahra asked these members of the Council who had met with Mr. Deasy of HUD earlier in the day whether they had had the -oppor- tunity to raise this question with him. He said personally he felt the City should be -sf lent on t10a and let those who put up the coney resolve this question. He enu.i,d not believe Palo Alto could control other agencies'w•ho are supplying the money. 441 10/30/72 City Manager Sipel responded that this point was discussed with Mr. Deasy and the feeling was that this is not the kind of thing that is usually included in this type of arrangement. Mr. Deasy indicated ehat the sub- ject is er sently ;eider study-"ih HUD's legal department but they have not, in the past, been confronted with fact situation quite like this. Planning Director Knox added to the City Manager's comments and noted that Mr. Deasy had cited extremes, one of which was that a labor union structuring a project of this kind might wish to set priorities and could not do so, clearly. Also mentioned was a college town project for Sacramento State College which is 90% occupied by students. No statements were made in advance regarding setting these priorities and no special arrangements were made with HUD. Planning Commission Chairman Gcrdon stated the reason the Planning Commission felt it advisable to include these statements was becau-se the applicant included such a statement in the application and the Planning Commission felt that it should be dealt with and responded to. Councilwoman Senan commented that Mr. Deasy also mentioned cases where model cities' tr,Cney was used. The amendment to delete condition i l from SECTION 2 of the ordinance passed on the following roll call vote: Ayes: Beahrs, Berwald, Clark, Henderson, Norton Noes: Comstock, Pearson, Rosenbaum, SetrLan AMENDMENT: Councilman Henderson moved, seconded by Beahrs, that SECTION 2. of the ordinance be amended to reword condition 1 to read as follows: "1. Use: A multi! -family residential complex of not to exceed 225 dwelling units and related facilities to be funded under Section 236 of the National Housing Act as amended. No less than 6D of the units shalt be low or moderate income with every attempt made to include at least 202 of the units as law income, provided, however, that no occupant be evicted from a low or moderate income unit in the- event his income rises above federal limits." .SUBSTITUTE AMENDMENT: Councilwoman Pearson moved, -seconded by Seman, that the amendment to SECTION 2. 1. Use: as proposed above be substituted by the following: "A multi -family residential complex of not to exceed 225 dwelling units and related facilities, at least 20% of the units shall be rented te_..famiiies of law income and at least 40% to families of moderate income to be funded under Section 236 of the National Housing Act as anted. Provided, however, that no occupant be evicted from a low or moderate income unit in the event his income rises above maximum federal limits." Mayor Comstock noted that the final sentence of the Planning Commission's recommendation on SECTION 2. 1. [ate; stated "The proposed retail stow shall h&eliminated as A permitted use." He asked Councilwoman Pearson whether it was her intention to include this final ;entente in her subat ttute -motion. Councilwoman Pearson replied "absolutely.:" Councilman Clark expressed concern about the words "at least" being a mandate. He said that there is always a possibility that there would not be 202 loss income people to fill these units andthey might lie empty for , long period of time. 4 4 2 10/30/72 Planning Director Knox stated that in his opinion Councilman Henderson's motion is better, grouping low and moderate income together gives more flexibility and, as Mr. Maremont and Mr. Goldsmith pointed out, it will be difficult to fill 20% of the units with low-income families. Councilman Berwaid requested that the substitute motion separate the section referring to elimination of the retail store. VC u.cviucu w MOTION DIVIDED: Mayor Comstock ruled that the substitute amendment would be divided and that Council would now vote on the substitute amend- ment as proposed by Councilwoman Pearson with a separate vote to be taken on the final sentence referring to elimination of the retail store. Councilman Rosenbaum expressed preference for Councilman-Henderson's original [notion. Councilwoman Semen stated that she was in favor of the substitute motion which allows 20% for low-income people and at least 40% for moderate -income people. Shenoted that in the original motion there is no way you could go above 60% and it precludes getting into the market rents. She said she would like to add a plea that she felt comfortable that there are enough low --income families in Palo Alto that could fill. these units and she would like to see every effort made that the ordinance state at least 20% or a+ore for low-income families, in this project. the substitute motion speaks to her concern to a greater degree. The first section of the substitute motion, as stated by Councilwoman Pearson, failed on a majority voice vote. Mayor Comstock said the second part of the substitute motion "The -pro- posed retail store shall be eliminated as a permitted use" was now before Council. POTION TO TABLE: Councilman Clark moved, seconded by 8erwaid, to table the question of inclusion of the sentence referring to eliminating the retail store as a permitted use. :he notion to table passed on a majority Deice vote. 1'4ayor Comstock stated that Councilman Henderson's original amendment to SECTION 2. 1. Use: was now before Council. Councilman: Clark said that the words "no less than 60X" bothered him. There to a possibility of turning the project into a 100% subsidized housing development and it was his understanding that. that was net the goal. Councilman Rosenbaum suggested an additional sentence which he would like added. There was no second to his suggestion at this time. Councilman Clark asked Mr, Maremont for a cement. Mr. }iarecont said that the Urban Coalition had some concern about the. phrase In Coundilnaan Henderson's motion "...provided, hoarever, that'rio occupant be evicted froc a low or moderate income unit in the event his income rises above maximum federal limits." He said there might be ether reasons is viet a tenant such ss nonpayment of rent, He suggested that this be reworded to state "...should not be evicted solely 4 4 3 10/30/72 See Page 473 by reason his income rises alcove maximum federal limits." He noted fur- ther that HUD insists that they be free of any restriction on income of people who may occupy the units. Mayor Comstock asked City At r or„ey a recormendAtion to C?!!'rtri 1 - r thn regarding wording. ,t -A= . uul ant maze AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT: Councilman Clark moved, seconded by Beahrs, that the amendment be amended. to state "approximately 60%..." instead of "no less than 60X..." Mayor Comstock stated he disagreed with this. If Council wanted to deal with that concern they would have to put in another kind of re- striction to insure that there will be no less than 60%. AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT W ITHDRAWN : Councilman Clark, with the agreement of his second, Councilman Beahrs, withdrew his suggested amendment to the amendment. AMENDMENT DMENT TO AMENDMENT: Councilman Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Berwa td, that, the following section be added to Councilman Henderson's amendment to the ordinance: "That the developer will make a good faith effort to maintain 40X of the units in market priced housing." Coi'ncilwer an Pearson said s'ie world argue against adding this to the amendment. There is a dearth of upper --income housing in the area. There is a good possibility that HUD will not like to have 40X Biddle -income housing specified. Councilman Clark tormented that it was hoped the t HUD would approve of a real economic mix for this project. The amendment to the amendment passed on the following roll call vote: Ayes; Beaters, Bervald, Clark, Norton, Rosenbaum Noes : Comstock, Henderson, Pearson, Serian . The amendment to SECTION 2. 1. as amended passed on a unanimous voice vote. MOTION: Councilman Clark moved, duly seconded, to remove the question of adding language regarding elimination of the retail store from the table, The motion passed on a manimous voice vote. MOT/ON: Mayor Comstock moved, seconded by Rosenbaum, that SECTION 2. I. Use: include the condition "the proposed retail store shall be elimi- nated as a permitted use." Councilman Clark stated that,he felt that good rep., '3 for having a con- venient store have been presented by :he proponents of the development and therefore he would be in favor of not including this condition to eliminate the store. Mayor Comstock stated that he would support inclusion of this condition eliminating the store. He said experience has shown that small neigt- borhood shop outlets have a very bad experience and he is not convinced that including the store is a desirable approach. He commended the pro- ponents of the project for;bringing plans to include such a stor : .to the attention of the Council but he did not feel that it was a desirable addition to the project. 4 4 4 10/30/72 Councilwoman Semen said that she would favor not including a condition which would eliminate the store as a permitted use. She said she would prefer _to try, it and the _ idea of cutting dawn on t..utomobile traffic for trans to stores is „eri torious. _ _ _ . o_..... P a..;d... uua,s aaa.: .•VuiU UF7pile liFiVliYg a store in the pro- ject and would support inclusion of the condition because it means put- ting commercial ercial spot zoning in the middle of a residential area. She would prefer to see people patronize the stores that we already have on California Avenue. We have enough commercial development in Palo Alto, she added. Councilman Berwald said he supported Councilwoman Semen's point of view as expressed and would oppose including this condition. Councilman Beehrs questioned what the size of the store would be and said he understood that Council was talking about a mini -store -market. The motion to include the condition "the proposed retail store shall be eliminated as a permitted us=e" failed on the following roll call vote: Ayes: Comstock, Pearson, Rosenbaum Noes: Beahrs, Berwald, Clark, Henderson, Norton, Sez.an AMENDMENT: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Norton, that SECTION 2. 7. "The developer shall submit a soils engineering investigation report and grading plan to the City for approval" be amended to state "...to the City Planning Commission for recommendation to the Council." The amendment passed on the following roll call vote: Ayes: Comstock, Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum Noes: Beahrs, Berwald, Clark, Senaan AMENDMENT: Councilwoman Pearson sawed, seconded by Norton, that a new condition 11 be added to SECTION 2. 'That _ the-4eeclopee shall submit a plan that minimizes the cut and fill of the grading, retains the integrity of the hill and maintains the swell of Page Mill Road by moving the entire project back to a total of 100 feet, or an additional 35 feet over what is proposed." City Attorney Stone pointed out that if this amendment passes Council will have an ordinance that requires the entire development plan to come back to Cvuncii for approval before anything can be done. It would not be possible to go ahead with first reading tonight if this condition is added, as the development plan would not be acceptable to }LTD for rezoning because in effect there is no development plan under the ordinance. With the amendments as proposed Council will have the text of an ordinance but not a development plan which has to be attached to the text. The effect is that there is no development plan until it comes up through Planning Comiission recommendation for approval again. Councilman Berwald spoke in opposition to the proposed amendment and said that Council can have the developer come back at the second reading with pans or suggestions on how they could minimize the cut and fill and utilize the swell. To put it in as a condition to dif.f 4 cur +and could cause the complete redesign of the project. See Page 47? See Page 473 445; 10/30/72 See Page 473 Councilman, Rosenbaum noted that Councilwoman Pearson's proposed amend- ment is similar to the one that he offered by way of a continuance, a major modification, except that as things are now we te)u1d retain the number of units. He felt the only way to go now ie -.o continue and get a p eeao ai back. Councilman Beahrs coum:ente4. that he did not believe this a"*ndment met with the City Attorney'.; approval and in any case many of the natural features of the site are not yet known. At the request of City Attorney Stone, Councilwoman Pearson repeated ner proposed amendment which would add a new condition 11 to SECTION 2. City .attorney Stone suggested that this might be dealt with by the staff at the use permit phase of the proceedings. He expressed some concern as to the generality of the motion and whether the plan would conform. City Manager Sipei said be i.ec terms of what the is, as compared to what He said he had not been how far they would wish that as far as he could see the problem will Council's impression_ of minimum cut and fill staff night feel would meet that condition. able to grasp Council's intent here and exactly the City staff to g) is difficult to tree. Councilwoman Pearson offered a further explanation of her pronooed amendment. City Attorney Stone commented urther on the language as proposed, and said Council may wish to discuss the alternative. of considering the ordinance as they see it before them. He suggested that tonight Council look at other conditions and perhaps continue the ordinance for the purpose of looking at a new development plan. Mr. Maretnont commented that what is being pr!:poeed is net ad ordinary condition, it goes to another plead. The idea or a total 100 feet set- back has an extreme impact cr, the plan. It takes an extreme amount of open_apace add puts it all in one place while taking it_ aw=_y - `zi.i other areas in the development that need it. He-pouted out that such :: a condition would raise constructlo costs and leveling the building space is 4,411yer cost. The swell is where the dirt comes from the loop road and if the dirt has to be hauled away that is another addi- tional cost. He cautioned that what is being discussed is a detriment . to this development and it 4tas his feeling that this should be placed on its merit. It would cause a substantial detriment to the project as proposed. The amendment failed on the following roll call. vote: Ayes: Comstock, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum Noes: Beahra, Berwald, Clark, Henderson, Semen 101)B p:: Te Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Berwald, thAr, the or41nkn a b0eamended to state that the development be. moved back on Page Mill Read for a total of 100 feet, The amendment failed on the following roll call vote: Ayes: Comstock, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum Noes: Beahrs, Berwald, Clark, Henderson, Henan 4 4 6 10/30/72 AMENDMENT: Councilman Clark moved, seconded by Berwald, that SECTION 2. of the ordinance, paragraph 2. be amended to delete the final phrase "...provided, however, that the community building shall be redesigned to eliminate the mmulti-purpose room." Councilwoman Pearson spoke in ci»r,ric{ ti nn to the emcnd=cat O:cie saiu tiiC would hope that if a multi -purpose room has to be added it could be reduced in size. She felt multi -purpose rooms should not be more than 900 to .1,000 sq. ft. and pointed out that the day care center facilities will be available at night as a multi -purpose room and therefore in her opinion a specific multi -purpose room should be left out of the project. Councilman Berwald spoke in support of a yes vote to retain the multi- purpose room. He cited his experience living in a neighborhood that has a community building, a nursery school, and a multi -purpose room which has proved to be way too small for the group in Creenmeadows. He said he is also familiar with the Colorado Park project and the multi- purpose room has been used constructively there from the opening day to the present. He said there is .a tendency to have a double standard, one for one type of neighbo,')ood and one for low-income projects. If Council wants to add one thing which would create a sense of true neigh- borhood then the community building is a real asset and it is the last thing that he would wish to have taken out of the development. It is a place for people to get together and get to know one another., Councilwoman Seman said she concurred with Councilman Berwald and would urge a yes vote on this amendment. She indicated that Mr. Deasy from HUD had said that they would like to see all kinds of humanities included in 236 housing. A general concept now is to provide more than shelter. She said it was also pointed out that H1JD may have to reduce the size of the multi --purpose room and so it may be smaller anyway and she would not iike:.to see this Council take any action to reduce it. The amendment passed on a majority voice vote. Mayor Comstock referred to condition 10 Noted under SECTION 2. of the ordinance and said that while he endorses this, he was concerned about a lack of .provision for fire trucks, etc. He said he would ask staff to comment on including a provision for access to the project by emergency equipment. City Attorney Stones confirmed that the suggested wording would be in order. AMENDMENT; Mayor Comstock moved, seconded by Pearson, that SECTION 2. of the ordinance, number 10, be amended to add after the word "noise" "..,with provisicns for access to the project by urgency equipment," The rmendment passed on a unanimous voice vote. Councilwoman Seman referred to SECTION 2. , number 2., which relates to buildlr g, parking, landscaping, driveway, sidewalk and street aaodifi- cations'and all other improvements and stated that, since it is recog- nized that HUD may -make some requirements and changes, she would like to see Council have soap control as the City normally does, over all PC's when they -do not go through tA,"D, She therefore requested that staff keep on top of this and keep Council informed and also keep informed of suggestions for an 1i proved design. 4 4 7. 10/30/72 Mayor Comstock asked City Attorney Stone whether Council could consider tonight the first hearing of the ordinance. City, Actorney Sto 'e said looking at the changes Council has made tonight the ordinance is in. Shape for adoption of first reading if Council so -de_ irPQ_ Hs said he wanl - _ _ .,__,. .... ....,��u y�uar: re:garoxng the amendment made to SECTION 2. number 7., as it was difficult for him to understand what Council is going to do regarding soils engineering investigation report and grading plan when this comes back to them from the Planning Commission. The ordinance as amended was approved for first reading on a majority voice vote with Councilwoman Pearson voting "no." MOTION: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Comstock, that staff be directed to start traffic counts in the College Terrace area. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. Oral Communications No one wished to speak ._t this time. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 12:15 a.m. APPROVED: ALL ttitin Mayor ATTEST: 1) L4- City Clerk: / 4 4 8 10/30/72