Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout031819631,47 City 1-'::il, Palo ,yy h A °. California 18, 1963 r`•"gtiYar •ad.r, The Councilpr siding he d. <'.;:�io 1. on ,.} of th`' City r:, P: this elite ,,t , ,14....,.).,-orAlto3`' 3�, rrt., . m.et in a Cxes cP Piryy(rt• Arr_clki iii s h c,, } Arrzohul E f yxbeet W I. Rodg,, h Crc to b oodw.L, r s. Dias, t�tsser,.. _d � - «, „'• Rus, Stephens, ( tilx.:'tth r<rpytnu PIa„ had r. I t}t rtZc•,. "d thy Cc,, r.o i t been :-. .Y tir't: a" r.tl."it- r and the th c <��i�d; that d that the ut h:�, �' G:O a,.r.izt~, discussion P sI;�• he r.i t1ti71:�„ of,the Planning Ccs'rr:nis5iord xc, s1b." would r` -ow b hc,n� on the General mime, thrr; ing Commission. si n.to present st ...cd he WO,_2. c thc. Council vi,4wy .•.d whenct. cor;n.ciL^z:tr would e' -t any st:2t�Amcr,L.,t ask the. Chaixrr�a for 2c. c'o.y d hc. given 5 opportunity desired hutrz: °,. was clone, an tunny d to dditior:rr? di, " Larthc..� appO�tur,i- to present .his �Y would b his c provided. �' Cu i, moo:^ ;.�pl3rov.�.I the `'"•�•in T.ie;,s and, of L `'' r.ciirrr.i irqu:_-,td wh Apo- E�, s of the adjourned t'th..r t.� dd '•cs the raxr .�i,.sc;d ?.�y tt., 'vlay- Joa,:�<�d rn::e�t:ir�,t(,xcv ` the, proper time Dc ho u c. the answers or that it w Vhe would prcpr. in+, hid z .�s, t bi n of Dr• H crold ,} rtee-7 t cd o s ns 3 CoC :t,- 7.., c, to Y of dd1^'�,' an individual's ciYz72a. 7vi {: h Ii h r.-�• two ciuestio to xzy.n.� r 1 tti its which h on with ,insw..• r'r1 � a i �.,s(, , r the individual r , to the min; question as t0 the •t5, (�� the , and tizt•,; Ce� �zs.cilr zr_sr.iors het Councilman cages fir st S1ntee. D ��M :,, rnF=d thr31 k sent to Dr. Santee CJf r5 suggested that e,would turn; for hisn arses ers furnish st.tc}, a transcript to Dr'th,�:•r•1. GeIt ...,- p`a" o` the ta City ofMr A.Lv e'wtcwi�d the z �5. ka.Y Zow; Chairman �h�; nr r c ��,, �ti. of *:u: c, t rn�;zr of h •h°d al arriving go; rd the Planning .O ,t objectives Commission, 'e tc net �'�.jn�'� , td etitat�Iishir i thr ?"' the outlined bPriefly t irz4c a. Y nitrf. c rrtee, :'., -,,rd, objectiv...ti w 9 s She o1ow th or n tt � of � x:LY,, v• y ,; I d tarle.fly ,t public •;t �i is, rd,iscussed w'.th ma it toes this COrn 1 h..i citizens mittEe.: t>t,r�r 1-,(-:; iD..; t Y C;,t � t7s to o tnp .,�J d 1h t �ittr 1h P 1.Ci< , of Ole and rCpre'SC'n- wr`I�h } �.t a t iCi �t' .,<i � er "'S n1in.ry goals Ord �� {xV It . t i1 . h nsi c tion t r . '`fin C l.s d we i of neti,e . go41..s `ri ie w•r� held w 1 fC'`rtn(-.:r: errs p e pre- sented .a p <,C r' 1 1 ( b at .Lsu . ,., t,r.r,s .t..r ,,•,a ,-it,�, d ° 1e.ctiv G, Cot:.c:ii w.rr, `. that' rir�.a, h. ''� ,i r,i�rr d that {.:;s speaking. 6., i 'r 4r two uC, L. r_1. 1t' rz-ne.,s Sh' .,�so ree7.iied th,,,t�tr� written n e'; s_o:-, ::nd o e hr, po affir of t 'ns s, ari: _ pal1y for tt 'v had t�cc, s the p 'f t,N;��-:'i• of , reaffirmed on c np�c. With rr ,, nr, consultant.: �� x t� 5,� rr:rce to t! t•: t S' �Z'e�ttitG . li thrn fee of rr,,, Ce ..ippr,.rctr,r misunderstanding ':12t i,t 2 1 `C .,G.4. «n1 •: rh �S'1 nr I oiloci: in. t �Y" to th ? by 5(jXy3E. ''-`!(3 �. 1'r, A u7?1"7i7 -. schools; ;(�li � ,•r, ,, t r. ::•,--0,'.2-,,,,i7,,.. , o r `1i LYYl, fib"4��,.,.,, �ltt�.,�,czq,; added that. there ddistrict d tTnm �, s!'.n'a .rt t fit. - s.:hor,i t)'` (i..�i{?,' of are s p 1 i. ,., . fit; t `Camino - ='c1. time, z•c.cv�,..;zi.,g r:t3tUr�:tht'. 148 She stated the Planning Commission had studied the General Plan, had gone through three revisions, and unanimously recommend it as a guide for the future of Palo Alto, still wishing to impress on the Council that the General Plan is only a guideline, subject to annual review - that it is exactly what it says - a "general".ern. CouncilmanZweng - Advised that he was one of the two members now sitting on the Council whohad something to do with framing the goals and objectives; that he believed it was the feeling of the committee that in any programoffuture planning the past character of the City of Palo Alto should be kept in mind. He pointed out that in a number of aspects Palo Alto, since ,:its inception', has been different from its neighboring communities: that from the beginning it has been an integral city, called into being prxrna.rily because,- of the existence of Stanford Univerasity and the University's consequent needs for services for its students and faculties; that the fact, of the City's ownership of its own utilities today is <)..resuit of the University's and community's needs dating from that beginning. He expressed his opinion that Palo Alto never has been, is not now, send,never=w'il be in the future a straight residential city and, he felt the Council should keep that point in mind. He then. discussed,one by one, the fourteen goals and objectives contair..ed in the General Plan, mentioning inparticular, among other things, his feeling that there should be quality diversity of residential, commercial, industrial and other types of development; that. to condemn apartments is to deny people who wish to live in or conEinue to live in, Pato Alto suitable accommodations; that openareas in the foothills should be retained so far as is reasonable; that he, as a Palo Altan, liked.the-fact it was not necessary to range far and wide in order to find good shopping and trading opportunities; that the City, in connection with the'play=n.ing of neighborhood communities, recognizes its ;responsibilities and responds to overtures. Fate felt that the opposition to. the General Pla:i>:arose,:;ironically enough, from the problem of civic prosperity and spoke briefly of the "municipal poverty" in the early 1950's.: He mentioned it crust be remembered that the "more .things" a city wants cost money - a fact which must be faced. He stated, from his exarnination of the General Plan in the light of the fourteen goals and ;objectives, that the plan as presented is really a statement of the status quo cf Palo Alto at this time; that he believes the goals are not obscure but clear; not invalid but valid; not lack:irag in priority but reflecting the multiplicity of priorities which exist in the City. He then stated an ;summary that he found the General Plan good a -'d moved for its adoption, mentioning, however, that when the Planning Commission begins its annual review he would wish to present some.,specific points for its consideration and detailed dis- cussion. In answer to the Mayor's inquiry on the specific suggestions, he advised he would like to hear from the Planning Commission in due time a great deal of evidence as to foothill develop- ment, whether or not the one dwelling unit per acre ratio is preferable to cluster .development, and why; evidence in respect to any need for an interchange at :Charleston and Alma; the need for the designation of Arastradero Road and: Charleston Avenue as major arterials. 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 Councilman Arnold - ;ead a prepared staternent of his ideas in reference tii the General Plan, containing ir, part the following: That more than two years of time, effort, Study, evaluation and evis o ' ha.ve 'gone into the plan, during which time its development has bee; presented in public meetings, discussed, reduced to writing by the Planning Officer and Planning Commission.; again studied and discussed by the public on two occasions: and that by this time reasonable, objective and intelligent: people should be able to make,'a decision on it; That the Palo Alto Branch of American Association of University Women' has expressed its appreciation for the time devoted to -the' plan; that. Stanford University, although it makes three specific: - protests, calls the plan "basicaily sound": the Committee for Green Foothills commends the Planning ng Commission for three specific; changes made and for its "reasonableness and good intentions''; ' the League of Women Voters expresses approval of reserve status for,t.he baylands, pleasure at lowered densities for the foothills and appreci.ation of the fact that this represents planning cooperation with contiguous communities; the Audubon Society approves reserve status for the baylands and asks to participate in evaluating Pro- posals as they arise: the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce, endorses. Ow plan, 'describing it as "an excellent framework"; the California Ave'ruc Area Development Association indicates approval and cites its expo'. ier..ce with its owe: plan, which has proven both "general" and "amendable.": the Palo Alto Times editorializes that the Council should act to -adopt this General Plan now; finally. and most irn- - portant, the Plan has been certified to the Council without objection by our own Plan.-ur_g Commission: That; arrayed in. cpposit.iont appear to be one organization and a number of individuals preoccupied largely with densities; that in connection with the concern involving densities and school enrollment; t; the Superintendent of Schools bas expressed his feeling that the system ca.n.accommodate to additional school erroll:rne.-:.t, and that this protesting organization had refused to endorse th• r`c.ent school bond issue. He sated the General Plan should have four characteristics - it :ahould be long-r:a.nge, it should be comprehensive, it should be general, and it should be amendable and he believes this plan possesses these characteristics, providing the Council with ,a. ba..sic policy control in- strument, leading towardconsist.e-t decisions or lir:d-use, densities, circulation routes and public facilities. He advised he felt the General Plan should be adopted and.: secor.ded themotion for its adoption, mentioning, however that if it is adopted, he intended immediately subsequent to such adoption to reque-st the Planning Cnmm.issior, to re -ex -mine the following six specific points, on wnich he favors rnv^.Sion or modification:, Oregon Aventic•.at West Yayshorc - an apartment area of <3.porox.imatety Z5 cl' ._il -' units h -Jet acre". Why not: R-1, or, at wc'rs', a less ieterese density? 150 2. "Middlefield -Loma Verde -Change industrial areas to residential with an average of 20 dwelling units/net acre." Why not R-1? 3. "Monroe Park Area - A residential area with an average of 25 dwelling units/net acre." Why not R-1? 4 Reconsideration of designation of Charleston as a major arterial to a designation of collector street. 5. Deletion of: a proposed interchange at Charleston and Alrna. 6. Referring to page 5 of the minutes of March 11, 1963 (the adjourned meeting), consideration of a moratorium on development above Foothills Park until a regional concept is developed, as requested by the Committee for Greer. Foothills. Councilman Arnold concluded his statement with a quotation. from Lewis: Mumford in an article written for the Sierra Club Bulletin. oiiDecember, 1962, entitled "California and the Human Prospect", "I have, of course, intentionally, and doubtlessly grossly , caricatured the life of the representative American today; and I am as well a.warie ,as you are of the many happy qualifications and modifications that make much of it bearable, and some of it positively rewarding. There are still real cities in America, like the core of San Francisco, and some of your smaller towns, which like Palo Alto, with the benefit of Otrnsted's great origxr al plan fdr the campus itself, have so far held their own against? the bulldozing highway engineers and have even by the orderly addition, of. industrial parks and shopping centers, taken on the more complex and varied and vivid life of a city, without eroding the landscape. Councilman Debs - stated he would prefer to speak on the General, Plan after all the other members had spoken, since he felt he was probably. the only person speaking to his point of view, but he had decided to go ahead :with his opinions. He believed that after Councilman Zweng's presentation, it was not necessary to discuss again in detail the fourteen goals and objectives; that when quoted individually, each of the goals and objectives was fine, but it was 'his opinion that they are sops to every faction in the City; that his quarrel in reference to the General Plan is that the Planning Commission `;should not have accepted the fourteen goals and objectives. He claimed the Planning. Commission had agreed with everyone, which resulted in a plane with goalsreaching in all directions. He questioned the wisdom of -adopting the plan now if it will need revision. in 90 days, and reminded the. Council that Ordinance No. 2090 does not require only one public hearing but only states that one hearing is the minimum that is acceptable He stated that in his view the General Plan is a statement of policy and 4ntent,from the ruling body, of what the City is to become; that the goals an_ are contradictory. He pointed out that 1205 acres in the City of Palo Alto are presently zoned as industrial, and in the General Plan, inexorable logic points to the fact that jobs car. be supplied for a population of about 434,000 people; that although the plan does not add industrial zoning," it does not preclude the possibility of more areas being zoned to;•industry. He stated he felt the plan is incomplete, based on goals>cornpletely contradictory, and will open the door for all types of zoning. He reiterated a previous statement that the plan does not have init the''recreation study • or the school surveys, and suggested that `. additional study be,given:to the plan prior to its adoption, during which study revisions could be made of major points. At the conclusion of his presentation Councilman Debs made a substitute motion to Zweng's motion, that the General Plan be held:. in Council for study, during which period the Council should: 1) first,. set as the primary goal, to be given priority above all other goals, the preservation and enhancement of the predominant, single -family -home residential quality of Palo Alto, with •emphasis: upon, keeping present population density in the flatlands as much as possible; 2) second, assign, by full debate and by several public hearings, a set of priorities or weights to the remainder of the fourteen goals and objectives; and that after this weighing has been done, the Council should send the plan back to -the Planning Commission with instructions that the plan be rewritten to conform with these assigned priorities. The motion died for lack of a second. Councilman Dias - agreed with Councilman Zweng on the goals and objectives,, feeling they are all-inclusive, that there is something for everyone in them., andthat changing councils would change emphasis rather thangoals and objectives. She stated she is perfectly satisfied with the overall philosophy of the three divisions, i.e., reserve for the baylands, the came density as the 1955 plan for the flatlands, and the low density for the. foothills. She mentioned that although a plan would never be adopted with which everyone agreed, she was concerned with the high density designation of Monroe Park and the Oregon-Bayshore area, and with the' arterial designations of Alma Street, El Camino Real, Skyline, San .Antonio and Charleston. She stated that her concern for schools seems to have been proved invalid by the fact that residents of the Van Auken area disagreed with her written statement suggesting that rather than establishing Amarillo Park, the land be set aside for a primary school to handle increased density at the Van Auken School; that it also appeared the school district was not interested; and finally, that one of the school sites had been removed from the General Plan. In answer to her inquiry with respect to the Larry Smith & Company analysis of residential housing units, recreational areas, industrial areas, non-complex` retail and services, etc., Planning Officer Fourcroy advised that the information referred to is under the general heading of background of development of the plan, that it is intended as background information only. 1.52 Councilman Stephens - agreed completely and wholeheartedly with the statements, made ,by Zweng. He stated it was his opinion that the most difficult part of any major program is getting it started; that he thought a tremendous. amount of time, effort and research,on the part of the Planning Cornznission, professional planners, the city staff and the Council,had been devoted to the General Plan; that there will be continual study.and revision of it and it is necessary for the City to have a flexible prograarrefor'u.se as a guide for the future. He believed it would be im- possible to have any general plan for the long-range future of the City which would':'.cover every thought, interest and possibility of every situation in Palo Alto. He recommended adoption. of the General. Plan as a guideline for the City's, Tong -range future. Councilman Bishop - stated he was in agreement with the views expressed_ by Stephens and added that he thought the Planning Commission had done a fine job and come up with a very good plan; that he felt it must be kept in mind the General Plan is a land -use plan and not a zoning plan. He mentioned there are areas which are controversial as far as development i., concerned, that traffic would` be one and the foothills another; that he personally felt development inthe foothills would be slow and he, too, stated the plan would'ha,ve to be reviewed and changes made as time went on: He started he was certainly in favor of the plan and intended to vote for its adoption, ;with the proviso that the Planning Commission consider in its first review of the plan the items already set forth by Zweng and Arnold. He suggested also that the bayland area be reviewed, keeping in mind the request of the Audubon Society to set aside seve.ral acres of land for a wild life refuge. Councilman Marshall. - agreed with the views expressed by Zweng and Dias, adding, 'however, that problems could develop for the City in the event the fe-cleral government should cut down on spending, that this would directly affect the electronics industries. He stated he had always it mind only the best interests of Palo Alto and its people. He agreed with lDebs that Palo Alto: should be kept as a residential city, adding that he believed this was just what was being done. He complimented the Planning; Commission for the fire job it had done, and in particular, expressed,apprecation to Mrs. Towle. He stated he was concerned about the attitude of_many 'citizens toward Stanford University, Hewlett- Packard and many Council members, ar..d declared he believed every oneof them had the best interests of the City at heart. He noted that United Palo Altans had not to date ever asked a Council member, with one possible' exception, to attend any of their meetings. He advised he intended to vote for adoption of the plan, adding one suggestion that he felt the community north of University Avenue is not ready for ,high-rise apartments. Councilman Woodward - spoke in agreement with the views already ex- pressed, stating appreciation.on behalf of hirnseU and the Council for - the hours, days and years spent by the Planning Commission on the General Plan; that it should be remembered, basically, that the Majority of citizens realized the problems involved and what the Council and Planning Commission was trying to accomplishfor the City, and 153 it is unfortunate - that the Councilmen must be continually defending themselves against small minorities of citizens. He, too, agreed that the goals and objectives are bascally sound and were arrived at after much deliberation and .caszsi,deratior., that this is true also of the General Plan, which has been in the making for a long period of time; He stated he believed: She plan should be adopted and that the Council, after making its decision, should now move on about the business of the City. Councilman`Rus - observed that a start should be made somewhere acnd'he was in favor of the General Plan. He spoke of the work done while he was a member of the Planning Commission and the time and effort spent on the fourteen goals and objectives; and mentioned that lie was on the Council when these goals and objectives were ratified in principleafter full hearing had been given to them, on two occasions. He added his appreciation for the excellent job done by the Planning Commission, the staff, and all who were connected with the General Plan. He stated he, too, felt some points needed clarification, addition to or, subtraction from; that the minutes of Council meetings reflect his position on zoning and density, and he believed he had consistently voted in the best interests and on behalf of the people of. Palo' Alto. Councilman Rohrs - presented the following remarks: That he had followed the program of updating the General Plan since its start, .had attended practically all of the meetings with the Luckxnar_ group and most of the Planning Commission sessions, attended one of the two public hearings held by the Planning Commission and, of course, was in attenda.nce at the Council's public hearing on March I•lth; That he had heard both praise and criticism, had seen changes in the original concept of the preliminary plan and other changes as' a result of suggestions and criticism; that he is well aware of the im- possibility of turning out a plan which will suit everyone in every detail, even the Unitied States Constitution has been amended many times and the California Constitution has been so many times amended it is ready for a general rewriting; That the annual review of the General Plan is an excellent safe- guard against stagnation, against failure to keep abreast of the times or of the changes in the will of the people - likewise against maintaining any portion which may prove to be best deleted or changed. Touching on some of the criticism of the Plan and indicating his evaluation of such criticism, Councilman Rohrs read the following prepared statement: Not enough public hearings - We have heard much and often through the whole process - many study sessions, plus two legally required Planning Commission hearings and one Council hearing, At the Council hearing everyone who wanted to be heard was heard. The hearings were well publicized. What purpose could more hearings bring if no further persons appeared, and the same people belabored us with the same suggestions. Critics have said to wait until other things are completed* the report of the Committee on Recreation, the report of Ebasco on "public facilities, and the joint School and Planning Commission survey - There will, I think,. always be' programs in the planning stage in a vital communitylike Palo Alto. Our legal procedure makes it reasonable to add these, if appropriate and approved, from time to time. Another criticism is that we are in haste to adopt the plan because it unfreezes industrial zoning. - How can this be when the plan adds no industrial zoning, - it suggests at a later date some R & D additions. I'll state now, I am opposed to any such additions as I see it today and for several years to come. "4. Critics have attacked professionals and their work - DeLeuw Cather, Luckman, our own professional planning, employee, and semi-professionals (so classed by me because of years of experience) on our Planning Commission - Any group of professionals can be attacked, usually by other professionals. Witness the conflict of testimony in any court case where professional witnesses appear. against each other. This is healthy to a degree but it doesn't necessarily completely disprove results. In:this' case, most criticism was by non-professionals who didn't have any alternative suggestions, they just don't agree. I'd like to touch on Luckman Associates, as an example - Luckman himself, a nationally famous architect with years of experience and many great monuments of success_ to show for it, and the associates, likewise capable men and certainly some with planning experience. Our contract termination wasn't based on lack of competence,:. it was a time and money matter. I, for one, was stimulated by the Luckrnan. approach. By not limiting them, we got some ideas not acceptable, but their suggestions were thought, -provoking. Ir. most cases there were alternatives, e.g. baylands - three approaches. Most of what Luckman' did > was valuable to completion of the plan. It showed: us definite ,approaches some we couldn't adopt and others we could': He didn't stay to the compromise and com- pletion stage. I say the professionals and our own staff were most competent and turned out a good job -. not perfect necessarily. Goals and objectives - There has been much hue and to-do on this point. Here again, goals were set up long ago by an eminent committee. They have been criticized several times by a few, but I haven't seen any suggested revision of goals or any suggested priorities. Here again I feel a good (if not perfect) job has been done and these goals can well serve our General Plan, which' is subject to continual review and which is by definition a set of policies to be used as a guide for iw_�.--r develop- ment. " 1`5 Councilman.Rohrs stated he agreed a hundred per cent with Zweng's appraisal of goals and objectives; that he believes the plan merits adoption, that it has been well done; that he is aware of and glad the City has the ordinance requirement of review and revision and he intends to stay close to the plant, to keep alert to changes suggested and. that .he might initiate some changes of his own, in addition to those already suggested, particularly in respect to Monroe Park, R and D area enlargement in the foothills, anda policy statement in regard to watershed, flood control, coat and fill, etc., as suggested by the Committee for Green Foothills Councilman. Rodgers - agreed with the statements already presented by his colleagues and declared he was in favor of aooption of the General Plan: Councilman Byxbee - expressed his belief that basically, over the years,Palo Alto has beer a planned city, that as a result of the types of industry under which the City was born, an extremely cohesive group of people with similar interests was attracted here, resulting in a population which has been vitally interested in the City and in City improvements, He stated that in designing'Pado Alto, probably thee equivalent of fifteen or twenty so-called- "master plans" have been utilized over the years. : He reviewed early history in regard to the street design of the City, mention- ing that with the present .magnitude of automobiles, many problems are the result of that basic street design and the ordinary street widths. lie cornmented upon finances, stating that definitely; the industries the City has: had have served' to its advantage, that the property tax rate is the lowest tax rate, of any major city in California; that on the other hand, Palo,Alto's school tax rate is the highest tax rate of any major city in California; that if the City did not have the industry. to pro- tect the fax position he doubted whether the last school bond issue would have passed by a vote of 5-1"!2 to 1, and doubted that the citizens would be so keenly interested in the schools from an economic point of view. He ?relieved the . plan should be adopted - that although it does have, its faults, it is the basic skeletonof the City, it is a plan on. which the City can grow, build upon or subtract from if necessary, In respect to goals and objectives, he believed they are an integrated, philosophical statement, He commented upon the high-rise apartments recommended` for the older part of town, stating he doubted the existing street structure in that area would support any increased population, and that he personally would like to have the Planning Commission re-examine this item; that in addition, he felt it might be a good idea to suggest a moratorium,on any further zoning of apartments until the Planning Commission has an opportunity to review that entire matter. He noted that the Planning Commission has suggested the baylands be kept. more or less, in reserve and questioned whether transferring the yacht harbor to the County, adding to the airport acreage,. and possibly constructing a corporation yard in the baylands, would be consistent with the philosophy of the Planning Cornrnission. a 156 With reference to Monroe Park, he suggested that. servicing the area with utilities and sewers be made a part; of next year's budget, and ,also suggested that as a part of the Capital Improvement Program, a bridge be constricted across Adobe Creek to bring the residents in that area into the City. He talked in regard to the land above Foothills Park, setting out the fact that any development in the hills would also include bringing into the area' utilities, including sewer, water, gas and electricity, and that this would prove to be a costly proposition. (Councilman Stephens left the meeting at this time, 9:25 p.m. ) In connection with the foothills area he pointed out that the watersheds of Adobe ;Greek: and Dry Creek are in Los Altos Hills, not in Palo Alto; that as'J ar as the City's foothills are concerned, per- haps 10% of the watex'shed originates in Palo Alto property, the rest originates in Los Altos Dills. Speaking of drainage on parts cf the land. above Foothills .Park,, he; believesi approximately fifty per cent; o:: the foothill area could be bl vktopped withou.', affecting the flat lands in the entire low areas. He ;ended his statement with a declaration in favor of adoption of the General Plan, feeling the goals and objectives were ex- pressed in the broadest of terms, although he did agree with previous statements that further, study should be made on some parts of the plan. (The Council recessed at 9:35 p.m. reconvening at 9:45 p.m.) Mayor Cresap announced that a request had been made to carry over item 26 on the agenda until, the next meeting, a matter requesting an extension ofItime for use of building at 445-447 Alrna- Street, . 101 -105 -107 -109 -:ill and 111-1/2 University Avenue, and that the matter would be carried over unless there was an objection. No objections being made, the item was continued to the meeting of the Council on March 25, I963. Mayor Cresap then stated that the Council would return to consideration of the General Plan and asked for short rebuttals. Councilman Debs - restated his strong objections to the General Plan and his feeling that the Planning Commission would rezone according to this directive, again declaring that the plan is not an answer to what kind of a City the, people want. He moved to amend the motion to adopt the plan so that the people would be allowed to vote on the fourteen goals and objectives. The motion to amend died for lack of a second. Mayor Cresap - made a brief statement that he thought perhaps his view of the General Plan might be unusual; that it is not what is in. the plan, it is the.. processes by which it ixas been developed and will continue to be developed; that a great arousal of civic :interest had been witnessed. 15i "We have heard a great variety of opinions, many of them very helpful - and this process of planning is the important thing rather than the particular words contained in this plan at the moment. I would 'Like to reassure people who are opposed to adoption, that adoption does not mean an end to. pl anning. : •On the contrary, it means we can go ahead with, e P . I am urging my colleagues to vote for the resolution." The Mayor requested the City Attorney to read to the Council the resolution of adoption of thc; read a short di plan. Plan, After the resolutionwas that each member should present to the City Clerk withinMayor henouncenextweek a list of the Items in the plan which he wished to have submitted to the Planning Commissionforfurther review; that after these lints were received, the staff would put them in order for presentation to the Council so that the Council could then act in an orderly manner on the items at a subse meeting. u q ent Resolution No. 3616 entitled "Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adopting the General Plan as Certified to the City. Council by the Planning Commission on February 20, 1963, as the General Plan of the City of Palo Alto" was then voted on and was adopted by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Arnold, Bishop, Byxbee, Cresap, Dias, Marshall;, Rodgers, Rohrs, Rus, Woodward, Zwerzg. Noes: Debs. Absents Porter, Stephens. Councilman:.Byxbee moved that a proposal to dis- tribute .a copy of the General Plan to all families in Palo Alto be referred to the Committee of the Whole for consideration. seconder and. was carried by a roll call vote as fol w smotion was p Aye s : Bishop, Byxbee, 3 bee, Dias, Marshall, Rodgers Rohrs, Rus, Woodward. Noes: Arnold; Cresap, Debs, Zweng, Absent: Porter, Stephens, Ordinance No. 1324 and Fire Zone Ma -_. . Chan A report was received from the Planning Commission, recommending on its own initiative a change of district from C -2:S to R-4 of a portion of Blocks 39 and 40, ise known. as 701, 703,.'705,. 711 and 727 Cowper1ty Street Park and 524,Tract,ot526her,532, 534, 543, 545, 555 and 569 Forest Avenue, and also recommending a No. 3. change of Fire Zone for this property from Fire Zone No. 1 to Fire Zone. A motion was made by Byxbee, seconded by Marshall, that the recommendations of the Planning Commission be upheld. A discussion followed, and at its conclusion a motion was made by Debs that the ri atter be referred back to the Planning Commission for restudy of the zone changes in relation to the other zoning in the area. The motion died -for .lack of a second. An ordinance entitled "Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 3.02 of Ordinance No. 1324, the Zoning Ordinance, Changing the Zoning of Certain Property Knownas a Portion of Block's 39 and 40, University Park Tract, from C-2:5 to R-4" was introduced.' A second ordinance, entitled "Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto, Amending the 'Official Fire Zone Map of the City of Palo. Alto, California' (Section 1601 of the Uniform Building Code) by Changing the Property at 701, 70:x, 705, 711 and 727 Cowper Street, and 524, 526, 532, 534, 543, 545. 555 and 569 Forest Avenue From Fire Zone No. 1 to Fire Zone No. 3", was also introduced. The ordinances were then accepted for first reading by the following roll call vote', xeouestec', by Councilman Debs: Ayes: Noes: Absent: Zoning Chan Ye Arnold, Bishop, Byxbee, Cresap, Dias, Marshall, Rodgers, Rohrs, Rus, Woodward, weng , Debs. Porter, Stephens. On motion by Zweng, seconded by Rodgers, and unanimously carried,the Council upheld the recommendation of the Planning Commission to deny the application of A. L. Hawley, Jr. and F. O. Hawley for a change of district from R -E to R - is B-20:1; of a portion of Lot 7, Mesa Tract, otherwise known as 4232 Manuela Avenue. ,, Q,�in O dinance No, 1324 A report was received from the Planning Commission unanimously recommending amendment of Ordinance No. 1324, the Zoning Ordinance, to permit two-story construction in the R-DUP District by amending Sec. 6A.09 (to require an additional sideyard of three feet for the second story); Sec. 6A. 11 (to increase the parking requirement from one to one and one-half spaces for each dwelling unit); Sec. 6A.12 (to increase the building height from one to two stories); and Sec. 4.20 (to define a duplex as "a two-family dwelling separated vertically, such that no portion of one dwelling shall be above or below any portion. of the other dwelling". The Planning Officer and Planning Commission Chairman,, in answer to inquiries, explained the recommended amendments to the zoning ordinance in detail. Following a discussion, a motion was made by Zweng, seconded. by Rus,to refer the matter hack to the Planning Commission for further consideration. At the request. of Councilman Debs, a roll call vote was taken and the motion was carried by the following: 159 Ayes: Noes: Absent: Arnold, Bishop, Byxbee, Debs, Dias, Rohrs, Rus, Zweng. Cresap, Marshall, Rodgers. Porter, Stephens, Woodward. Zonin Antonio Over as A report was received from the Planning Commission that it has studied the zoning pattern for the pr_vate property outside the right-of-way for the San Antonio overpass, as requested by the Council, and unanimously. recommends that the present oning be retained. The Mayor stated he hadbeen advised by the City Manager that this report would need further study and consideration because an agreement between Palo Altoand Mountain View had not been completed in regard to the overpass itself. The City Manager agreed that further study was needed andat his request it was moved, seconded and unanimously carried to refer the matter'. to the staff for further study, the staff to report back to the Council. yc�t Division A��ica'ti,on (George Kaku A`report was..received from the Planning Commission recommending that the decision of the Planning Officer be upheld in denying the lot division application of George Kaku for the property at 3580 Ross Road, being: a portion of Lot 93, Wooster Subdivision. Councilman Zweng inquired whether the recommendation of the Planning Commission had been unanimous and was advised that the vote had been 5 to 2. An explanation of the recommendation was made by Planning Commissioners Towle, Spencer and Stromquist. After discussion, it ,was moved, seconded and carried by a majority voice; vote to upholdthe recommendation and deny the lot' division application. t Divxsiori Shurtleffl 3ai7E ss oaT A; report was received from the Planning Commission unanimously recommending mending approval of the lot division application of Robert D. SF urtleff for the property at 3508 Ross Road,, being a portion of Lot 90,. Wooster Subdivision, , subject to: inclusion of the 18 -foot right-of-way (driveway) as a portion of Lot 2 and granting of easement overthis driveway to Lot 3. Paving of driveway shall, be to the satisfaction of the' Fire Chief, and i;n, no case less than 10 feet in width: Adequate p_.ovision for fire protection, including :mairs and hydrants, as may be require? by the Fire Chief. urnishirig evidence of payment of all payable city and county taxes Dedication of a 5 -foot public utilities easement as shown in red=on the map. The Planning' Officer explained that this is a substantial parcel of property, approximately 78 feet wide and about 530 feet deep; that the property has two rear lots,and division of these two would still: resultin a square.footage in excess of the 8, 000 square foot requirement; that the front lot contains more than 9,300 square feet and each of the'. rear lots t.ontain approxirnately, 11,.700 square feet. The Planning Officer. answered:.'var>ious questions relating to the division. The City Attorney explaine,d.that the, lighting on what would be a private street could not be required by ;the City; > that the provision for lighting would, be strictly up tb the property''owncr. The City Manager advised the staff had studied the application, carefully and, although the staff does: not recommend three -deep lots, this property presents a uniquesituation; that the street created would not be a public street and in granting any lot division it should be; made c"sear that the City has no responsibility, to provide or''maintai'i lights, this responsibility is clearly on the buyer or boyer s of the property. On motion made by Rodgers, seconded by Marshall, and unanimously carried, approval of the tot division was granted. Ordinance No, 1896, .(The $etl§ack Ordinance) A report was received from the Planning Commission unanimously recommending amendment of Ordinance No. 1896, the Setback Ordinance; to establish setbacks on Arastradero Road of 24 feet in single family and R-3 areas, 16 feet in R-5 area and 8 feet in commercial area,'. in accordance with the map presented by the Planning Officer.. An :ordinance` entitled "Ordinance of the Council of the City:_ of Palo Alto Amending Ordinance No. 1896, the Setback Ordinance, by Amending Setbacks on Arastradero Road" was introduced, and on notion made by Bishop, duly seconded, was accepted for first reading by a unanimous voice vote. Ordinance 'No. `.1896; (The Setback Ordinance} �s�r A report was received from the Planning Commission:' unanimously recommending: amendment of Ordinance No. 1896, the Setback Ordinance_ , to establish a 10 -foot setback on the northerly side of Homer Avenue for a distance of approximately 205 feet off El Camino Real in accordance with the map presented by the Planning Officer. The City Attorney stated he felt this amendment would not be necessary, it could be taken care of by the staff, and at his request, it was moved, seconded and carried to refer the matter back to the staff. Election Services sksessassassas Resolution No. 3617, authorizing the City Clerk to obtain the services of ,the Registrar of Voters in connection with the municipal election to be held. on May 14, 1963, was introduced and on motion made and duly seconded, was adopted by unanimous voice vote. Ordinanc? Win, 1$9 The ck Ordinance~ An ordinance entitled "Ordinance No. 2133 Council of the City of Palo Alto Arn.encling.Ordinance No. 1896, the Setback Ordinance, by AmexndingSetba.cks or; Moreno, ` Bryson and Colorado .Avenues" was introduced for second reading, and on motion by Zweng, seconded by Arnold, `wasradopted by a unanimous voice vote. FltAmbjr CodeAmendm:ent. (Radiant Heatin The City Manager advised that, at the request of the Council made some time ago;_ the staff has bee working on the matter of radiant heating requirements in the Plumbing Code. He stated that the City Engineer recommended use of Type L copper tubing for radiant heating; that he checked this recommendation with Birge Clark, who was. Chairman of the Building Code Review Committee, and Mr. Clark concurs with the recommendation and the amendment of the Plumbing Code in accord- ance with it. ATI ordinance' entitled "Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Item 30 of Division 2 (Uniform Plumbing Code). of Chapter 34,(Building Regulations) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code by Adding Subsections (e) and (f) To Section 1004 (Materials)" was introduced, and on motion by Bishop, seconded by Zweng was unanimous- ly accepted for first reading. Off-,atreet Parking Contribution naweasetamaaarmaraerce s.a ..,.� .... ... The City Manager announced that a check for $500.00 had beenreceived:from the First Methodist Church, a payment of the church's voluntary parking contribution on off-street parking in the downtown ;area, He also noted this is an annual contribution from the church on its. voluntary $5, 000.00 commitment for such parking. �lrtersection' Separation Stud Report The City Manager advised that he had received a letter (in answer to the City's inquiry). from the State Highway Engineer, advising that the °Division of Highways does not make studies of inter- section separations other; than those which are a part, of a freeway and expressway system. Consequently, the studies the Council had requested_ on Embarcadero-.E1:Camino and Charleston -El Camino could not be made.` (The Vice Mayor took over the chair, in the absence of the Mayor,: at :10:40 p, m, ) basco Services, Inc. Contract Extension. The City. Manager explained that in extension of time was required to permit completion of the study now under way by Ebasco Ser ices;' that no additional cost is involved, but the Council, in accordance with the terms of the contract, must approve an extension. He recommended that Ebasco be allowed an extension of time to April 20, 1963 for completion` of its study and submissio» of its report. On rznotiol made by Rohrs, seconded by Rus, an extension. of time as recornmended by the City Manager was approved by a unanimous voice vote. 162 (Mayor Cresap returned to the meeting at this time and again presided.) X???rt *o ,OTd Palo -- __� �llto Kos itap" s_ A. proposed amendment to the "Old Palo was reviAwed: by the City AZaaa ex. Alto Hospital" lease provides th?t i, r g He explained that the existing lease 'x'1971 Stanford University has an option to repurchase the building at a depreciated cost, itith the provision.that in exercising the option to purchase, the Urivers period of five, must provide hospital services for a years and must give preference to Palo Alto residents it providing such .services.. He then explained that the for an additional period ofai ed that proposed amendment wog inept of any, o a'or rehabilitation iy yea. s from t� would provide of the old building, the date of �omzxzence _ eliminate the University's five-year and would also services, Y responsibility for providing hospital Ile reminded the Council that in Late Hospital Board proposed renovation of the stxzxrnser of 1962 the Council adopted a master financial fo old thishprotal building c:a1 plan for project. the g• QaeCt, 4 rrotiox` was made by Debs to refer the ;proposed lease amendment to the committee of the . Whole for stud , complexity of the, rebuilding pro ram . in view the second. S „ motion 1 The rcloti ; ,died for lack of a After general discussion tp k Council approveto he , it was moved by Zweng that the seconded oposed lease a ra� mend ent, and the motion was. by Rohr s, ,who commented that the complexity t; T action had been gong over rxxpiexi�y of the, financialyea .previous) �. i., great detail by the Council about a y. The motion was carried by .a, majority voice vote. . Debs `voting against it, The :City Ma:ea a for the Council to g -r then. stated that he. felt it would be in order direct the Hospital Board to proceed with r plans for the� old building,' i..� - with erac�ae ling program. ad it:: the approved financing.' A TnotionWas made by Zweng, seconded. by Rohrs, and, carried that the staff notify the Hospital Board of the Council's action and request them to proceed with h,� of the building acco„darce with the 3 reh^ '.litation.. g i pproved.:fii:aneing program. r,,;' (Councilman Woodward left the meeting at this time) ,_Yacht Harbor Tc e The City Manage,' noted that a copy of the agreement between Palo Alto and Santa Clara Proposed County on the lease of portions of the Palo Alto `yacht harbor had been sent t of the Council prior to this meeting , t ea; h member opportunity to study it; also a copy of s�. that each would. have an by the staff was o distributed to the members. Recreation-Park. Stud a;s y made. 163 Communications from Philip S. Flint and Warren M. Turner were.acknowledged by the Mayor. A motion was made by Debs that the agreement be referred to the, C-mmittee of the Whole for consideration. The motion was declared lost fox- lack ofa second. The City Manager explained in detail the area proposed to be leased to the County as shown by a map in the Council room, adding that the rriap to whicl:"he referred had been on file in the Library and the City Clerk's office since March; 1962 He stated the 'gird refuge and the duck pond were not included in the lease. Concern for preservation of wild life in the area was expressed and questions with reference to dredging operations were asked and answered. Mr. John Brokenshire, .Director of the Audubon Society, San Jose, addressed the Council, stating that the Society had felt apprehension that the lease would include the area on the north side of Fmbarcadero Road where the duck pond and lagoon is located. Philip'S. Flint, speaking for the Prieta Chapter of the Sierra Club, read a resolution adopted unanimously by the local chapter. He stated his. group was, concerned; among other things, about the preservation of some of the prime natural features' of the area arid the preservation of fish and marshland areas. Miss Harriet. Mundy also spoke to the Council in protest against leasing of the area to the County. Following a general discussion, a motion was made by Zweng and seconded by Rus that the Mayor be authorized and directed to execute the agreement with Santa Clara County, in accordance with the provisions presented by the staff. (councilman Stephens returned at 11:40 p m. and was present for the balance of the meeting. ) A second Motion was made by Debs that the lease be amended to include •a provision that approval of the City Co..ncil be required for. opening. of any new dumping areas of dredging spools, Rodgers seconding the motion. A roll call vote on this motion. requested by Debs, was then taken and the motion was lost by the following vote's: Ayes: Bishop, Debs, Dias, Rodgers. Noes: Arnold. F3yxbee. Cresap.• Marshall, Rohrs, Rus, Zweng. Absent: Porter, Woodward. Abstaining: Stephens. The Mayor assured all persons present that the. Council is also greatly interested in the preservation of wild life. He expressed the hope that the Audubon. Society would continue to work with the recreation committee on the development of sanctuary areas. The motion to approve the lease and authorizing arid directing the Mayor to execute the agreement was carried by .he following roll. call vote: Ayes: Arnold, Bishop, Byxbee, Cresap, Dias, Marshall, Rodgers, Rohrs, Rus, Stephens, Zweng. Noes: Debs. Absent: Porter, Woodward. Gas Rate Reduction A proposed gas rate reduction was explained by the Assistant City Manager. He advised the proposed reduction would result in an estimated decrease in, revenue of approximately $33, 400. 00, or an amount of about 14fi per month to customers; that this decrease could be allowed by passing on a rate reduction of El Paso Gas & Electric, and would keep the city's rates on a competitive level with Pacific Gas & Electric Company, in keeping with Council policy. A mc,,tion was made and seconded to make the gas rate reduction in accordance with the explanation by the staff, the reduction to become effective on March 22, 1963. A further motion by Debs to refer the matter to the Committee of the Whole for consideration.was lost by a majority voice vote. The original motion was then carried by a majority vote. Tentative Ma -"Ara.stradero._Hills Unit No. 1 A petition was acknowledged from Pacific Resources, Inc. for exclusion of territory from the City of Palo Alto of property situated in the proposed subdivision of Arastradero Hills Unit No. I, as shown on a certain map entitled "Tentative Map - Arastradero Hills #1" prepared by George Nolte, Civil Engineer. The City Manager explained that normal procedure on a petition for exclusion is to first rr.fer the property description and map to the, .l3oundary Commission of Santa Clara County for approval, and on motion .rnade, seconded and unanimously carried. the staff was directed to forward •the map and description for such approval. Tentative Ma - Arastradero Hills Unit No. 1 On motion made, seconded and carrieel, the request of George S. Nolte Consulting Civil Engineers, Inc. for permission to connect to existing city sewer lines for property described in a proposed tentative map entitled "Arastradero Hills Unit No, 1", was referred to the staff for further study. ,Recre tion-Parls_Study • The City lvlana.ger requested that the record show a copy of a. report on Palo Alto's recreation -park system, made by the staff, was . distributed to each Council member at this meeting. A :notion was made, seconded and carried to continue the balance of the matters on the agenda to the next meeting of the Council on March 25, 1963. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:55 p.m. ATTEST;-. APPROVED: �y - Mayor U