Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04081963175 City Hall, Palo Alto, California April. S, 1963 The Council of the City of Palo Alto met in regular session on this date at 7:30 p.rri,, Mayor CreSap presiding. rasa", Debs, Marshall, Porter, Present: Bishop, Byxbee, C r Rodgers, Rohrs, Rus, Stephens, Woodward. Absent: Arnold, Dias, iweng, ^' aPP=oval of the answer to the Mayor' 6' staters. ert reg_•rdi In. a... Mao c363, Councilman Debs moved to minutes of the meeting of March Z=', 1 Cou ,;rs�.•c�rs to them." amend the minutes by adding after the words ' a.^d his first aragraph, the following specific questions by Debs and' in the p by Santee: "Qtiestion: If the School District were to d would xtra rooms this not to existing elementary schools, make the elementary school exceed e 450 d' population maximum set by the Ar;.;wex: In some ca$e. , yes. Qucsticn: 1-ias your office ar..d Mr. Foc,rcroy's office completed your ,;oir.t study? �<,rz.' v Y.= was (.3.•rri d by a rx'ca The motiontmotionw-z.,> seconded az';,1i3.ft�:r discussio e minutes were then a.pprov`:d as distribute . r voice tote. 7'.. h A Motion, made by Dyxbee, seconded by C,«,s:,p to agrzi^ refer • the method of taking.r':t.ir_utes-.to the Council er omCommittee on Procedures for review. was loat r..y. a majority voice vote. d Zweng arrived at 7:47 Z. r,(1 N..•e:;'e (Court. ,--me:•x Dias n�_ present -.for the balance of.the meeting.) iewcoxnb Es*'�t_: � rc,ceive.d from the Citizens' Advisory Committee Council on Parks and -Recreation with -reference to the advisability of the author izin.g an. appeal: to the Prob Newcomb Estate. property at 20Z7 Emerson sonStreet. rls not The -Co fors park general opinion waS that the subject property ar..d therefore it was recreation,purposes.-because of size and location, efforts to acquirei was, - recommended -that the City abstain. from any - this property. seconded by Vi:ir. ah�ii�, that Woodward, tic A :notion- Was made by _1 t .i, f"Zi7Y1 t�'!r• tiLttl.�t'3 :r st."li<:.t€ d not to f. l . ap Attorney '�t" " the City decisiondecisionin regard to this property. c.� ....;rd by aAfter discussion. of the matt«%.r, ther,ot.:c: v. : voice Co;.nc z'.zt1;� Rndger ��: � majority- - vote, Amendment > to P -C Development Plan Portion of Lc>t 3� oos er u ivi,sion A report was received from the Planning'Comrnissior that it has. recanaidered the application. of Walter J. Harrington, Conrad G. Welling and Paul A. Reyff to amend ,the P -C Development Plan applying to a por tion.of Lot 51, C.M. Wooster Subdivision, otnerv.,ise known as 3176 Middlefield Road, wherein an alternative plan was submitted, and 'recom- mends approvalby a vote of 4 to 2, in accordance with the following conditions; a)" Permitted Uses: 15 apartment units. Structures': 5, as indicates: on the plan. Height: 3 two-story structures of a maximum height of 26 feet, and 1 one-story structure of a maximum height of 12 feet, as indicated on the plan. c) Site: Setbacks: • Front; 28 feet. Side: 20 feet and 14 feet, as indicated on the plan. Rear: 41 and 46 feet for the two-story structures, as indicated on the plan., and 22 feet 6 inches for the one-story structure. Architecture:As indicated on th.c plan. Maximum lot coverage - 12,419 sq. ft., or 44. plus or minus per cent. Open Green area/Dwelling unit -965 sq. ft. Landscaping - In accordance with general standards, and as required by the Use Permit: Off-street Parking: , 23 spaces under the apartments, as indicated on the plan. Signs: In accordance with Sign Ordinance for R -3-G District. f) Development Schedule: Start within 45 days of Council approval. Completion within 9 months thereafter. A motion was made by Porter, seconded by Stephens, to amend the P -C Development Plan in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Planning Officer Fonrcroy and Planning Commissioner Stromgt ist explained the proposal of the applicants and answered questions in re- gard to it. After ,further consideration and discussion., the motion to accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission was lost by the following roll call. vote:. 177 Ayes Bishop, Marshall, Porter, Rodgers, Stephens. Noes: Variance 1Utader. Byxbee, Cresap, Debs, Dias, Rohm, Rua, Woodward, Zweng. A report was receive -I from the Planning Commission unanimously recommending, approval c..: the application of D. G. Ulanc'._r for a variance to permit construction of two off-street parking spaces 16 feet from the front property tine and one off. -street parking space 8 feet from the street side property line at'2233 Alma Street, Zone District R -3-P, where Ordinance No. 1324 otherwise provides that such spaces may not be pro- vided in the required front yard or in the first 10 feet of any required side yard which abuts a street. It was moved by Rodgers, seconded and carried by majority voice vote to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the variance. A report was received from the Planning Commission unanimously recornmend.ing approval of the application for a lot division of Macario Y. and Lupe M. Salas for property at 775 Color?do Avenue, being a portion of Lot 68, C. M. Wooster Subdivision, .subject to: a} Reducing the width of the rear lot to 60 feet. b) Payment or segregation of Assessment. No. 227, Bond Series 'JJJ and to furnishing evidence of payment of all payable city and county taxes. On motion :by Bishop, seconded by Stephens, and carried, the recommendation of the. Planning Commission was accepted and the lot division approved in accordance therewith. A report was receivedfrom the Planning Commission unanimously recommending approvalnof a lot division for the property of George A. Forrester at 4147 Old Trace. Road, being a portion of the Briones Partition`, subject to ftirnishiag: evidence of pa.yznent of all payable city and county taxes. After explanation by the Planning Officer and discussion in regard to they; property, a motion was znade by Poster, seconded by Stephens, and carried by a majority voice vote to approve the lot division in accordance with the Planning Conimissior.'s recommendation. Ordinance No. 1324 A report was received from the Planning Commission unaniznously reaffirming its recommendation for an amendment of Ordinance No.. >1.324,' the Zoning- Ordinance, to permit two-story c.orstruction in the R-DUP District, and requesting an opport r - ta cation. 178 su Stephen. Moore, 750 . PACrt of the ordinance Bryant Street, ^ ance amendment. addressed the 1',b�, Council in Planning Officer explain ed th R matter z as cli to .ssed.. A Illation. by the recommendation dulyn e c seconded, and the of duPler.,�,,w only bathro fius duly recorded was lost .by"the following and bedrooms to to amend the Ilowin� roll tali vote in second stories AY< s, . -.. tie, I zshap, Cresap, Debs, Rus, Woodward, Noes: BY'Xbeey .bias Zia-eng- ..;Steph�er_s,r Ivfarsl;ali.Porter, Rodgers, f{ohrs, ordinance Palo An rdina i entitled "Ordinance No: I 2�,, t Sections 6A. a of the Council of t, the he . Amending Ordinance, 9• oA. I 1, 6A. e City of. DUp hesZon.i , nance, Permitting 12 and , 20 was aec was introduced a �n r oti 'nvo_Sta d and se Ordinance et�ted for first reading and on �zotio:t uctzon.'n "'by tlxe following made and Seconded; `Ayes' Bishop, rol; call vote; $yxbee, Cress Rodgers, �'Zohrsr xis, Stephens, Dias, Marshall, TvYar; �nai2 , Porter t Noes; Debs . , Woodward, Zwe ng. us System Ittr had beeayrC tswp nnouriecd that the Special t"heir, directed to report rep port to the Committee Transportation hlein matter en`da.tioyls on local of t Committee be ;ronszde l bus transportation, Whale v d muted the of the Whole,. y , xed':'directly by poxt3tion regard.to 'Ile ht�Ie ", and moved that' mi of stated The as seconded rather b Chat motion ui• he had and was than Committee from, this received ed by letter s carried un old as i�; -'�ee.txr�� in which ter from Council hic,h man Arnold his oPzniprt , he he :requested that I.is rhat accumulated . capital, equipment colleagues (absent ar�inc; capital funds, pment (buses) �3ues be advised increase' ir, the' but the operating ) cauld be d be r•ed: by submitted eea to. property tax rate; ''vst should be use the Voters for a that the whale xnet"through ppxovai- propositionshould be The Mayor "`===rind • transportation reminded the Councilthe that if a proposition the M�.y 14th proposal on local requested Would have to be municipal ee bun: Councilman decided .at ballot, the wording to make a report.' wflod.va rd, chaff • this n�r'etirzg. He then .. rnan of the special. committer, The z-Cporr, of the distributc,ci Co the he special committee Council rrie , cF> was read c e Phi S. znbe» s prior to thc.:n a ti op. had been Committee Flint, `� �"��:). mm h j 2256 Sr;� recom- mending l or pu lintTransportation, nta A is Street,, s e,f ,. a the. bie Council add. Council, i r; p ki„ ,, ; xheie i ,it ;;p not rush "essc�n on ...t.izeve' ioild take sc�i7ie �3,cC'ior, into a decisior ecam_ prefer. it not to h on the n�,atter, studied,,,perhaps �s w�ithir, a .short time. � � never- theless no t t a this a ballot p .i stated the dombis a study pr posat but want( committee in any Pmk�e�-> of his tudy session and d to see any plan she on the committee would he glad a assist hearing. .un if it should m«ttNx „d requested �,.ad to be .referred to a 'committee that they he notified r r �ist the Council m a z.z d as to me for consideration. meetings Th -r aey,z w: as discussed and a motion was made seconded, that 'the r�por z :t Gf Che s by Ror.�°s, duly.. lexred to the Committee of the Whole £o committee be accep ted and re'-. further action. ,Fo'1?owir consideratio subsequentd subsequent ?r�othe .va s zn g fur. ther-�discussiorr ar. amendment to the by Zweng', seconded by Woodward, t directed '1.1:o coz*_fir n by consultation with Per.'rsul- that the staff e £i:ia.ncialasvects an bus transportation as � a Transit Lire the report, .and that after this is done the staff efer the contained xquestion to the Committee oz the Whole,. e A second amendrnerit to the motion was made by Debs and s that the Corrzrnittee of the Whole consider in its seconded, particular sub-coxzimittea report, h discussion not only the lost by the ort• but other r possibilities as well, was following -roll call vote; Ayes: Bishop, Debs, Dias, Marshall, Porter. Noes: Cresap, Rodgers Rahrs, Rus, Stephens, Woodward, AbMtairing; pyx!hc:e• It was po,nt...d.. out that tr any or, all aspects of t . tte url has .:� nr•::.r committee's a;;:men of amending waS the carried by a ur.:�i,,,r,o, report and the amended motion is voice vote. Zone Chan e, !Ll-iyerst V Wit Z7 cizra.r of Palo Alto c e. \c) 21 34 entitled "O diro.rc:c: of r,:c 4r`1� riding Section :3, 02 c Caur.< it of the City Ordinance, Cs -1 �-��,,,�r� t!-,, Zoning of O•r, dir�;.r-,:r> ?�'.� 1324, oning o,. Certain the i onrrt.g of Blocks 39,and �p �..• Property Known as a Porticin L...vtrsity Park Tract, ract, frv•t, is,2:S to �� intxcciu p -d for second ''e°�'d'r� and o, R-4 was:. by Bishop, wrs adopted h g i motion voter by Porter, seconded, y u .,nir;toc;s voice C nded. c:e vote. crest Avenue' 02-dittanc,eoNo. 2135 Alto Amending' the +O entitled "Ordinance of the C :ty of Palo Al zt �t'ic al A e do �,��; t .;s' Zone Map of the City of Palo A''a C- `' r• .fiCJ 1. C+� 701,. 7U3, 7tJ5 711 and '7�'7 Co, Street,) by G.,a..pir.� thc� Property�rar i oduced +ox v. a reading 1 to F i e Por, e sc t d Y oxm Building Code) ,,. . al.sfo car 543, 5 -?5, 5.55 a�rei 5Ga :p'o,: Np a�.<1 524, S2c, 53? 'S3,� Forest. Avenue fr , Zone \C, 3" W3S. introduced CTT1 Fire %O.�r. No. second Porter., co.n k ; y Bisho+ was .c c rtntior,• made 5 p, as adopted try a t.l inlous von Ame ndrr e, -t • k; ice vote., to Setback O Ordinance No. 2136 entitled "Ord5r.,; :i:e of the, r of Palo Alto Arno d:='fi Ordina.nce No. 1596 Council a� the City ..zYzend:r:� Setbacks c,n',q arastra o � th"c ' `, �::k Ordinance ' by ero R d" wa.S i1:' . Cduccd ffor reading, . ard:o'r "t':otior .x; ade by Porter, second a.dop+e.d by _ un t'- r ot.s voce vote. seccr,d..0 l)' fji :hop, was Unziorm Ptumbia Code Ame;ndsnent OrdinanceNo. 2137 entitled "Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Item 3.0 of Division 2 (Uniform Plumbing Code) of Chapter' 34 (Building Regulations) of :,he Palo Alto Municipal Code by Adding Subsections (e). and (f) to ,Section 1004 (Materials)" was introduced for, second reading, and on motion made by Porter, seconded by. Bishop,. was, adopted by a unanimous voice vote. Ordinaac:e :No. 2,138 entitled "Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Axto Providing for the Submission to the Voters of the City of Palo Atto at the General Municipal Election of May 14, 1963. of Certain Referendum Propositions" was on motion made and seconded, adopted by a unanimous voice vote. ` It was noted that since the ordinance is forthe purpose of complying with the provisions of the City Chart ;r, it would be in effect immediately. (T:he. Council recessed at 9:00 p.m., reconvening at 9:15) Project No. 63:.2', L'niver5ity A;!enue District �5� ir-street Parkin Assistant City Manager Morgan explained a map in the Council chambers, identifying the lots tentatively included in the proposed off- street parking district, and presenting preliminary figures on land costs and improvements, including costs .on groundlevel parking and on a pro- posed three -level structure. The City Engineer's preliminary estimate; ., . of the project is $3.000,000, of which $2,155,000 is for land acquisition, $196, 000_,for cost of surface parking construction, and $649, 000 for cost of a.multi-story parking garage; that total parking spaces, not including: the multi''' Ieveistructure, would -be 740 at an approximate ate cost of $3,,180 per space The questions of public hearings, approximate costs, and possible ad -valorem tax rates were discussed at length by the Council. Mr. Roy Maloney, manager of Pacific Telephone Company,spoke to the Council, stating that a letter of protest on behalf of the telephone company, particularly in regard to the assessment procedure, had been. submitted to the City staff. He then read the letter of protest to the Council; adding that the .teleprxore` cornpa-»s representatives would be happy to world with whomever. the Coui, cil designated; and participate in discussion of the proposed assessment procedure and/or alternative procedures. Mr. Irving Layton,;: 2386 Brarner, also addressed the Council on ,behalf of First C'iurch.,of Christ Scientist. He read a letter from its Board of Directors(copies had been provided to the Council prior to the meeting) expressing, among other things, the Church's belief that the Downtown pro- ject, with its plan for needed additional revenues, would place it in an - inequitable position in relation to the rest of the downtown district. Phillip D. Assaf, Esq., of the law firm of. Wilson, f arzfeld, Jones and Morton, bond counsel for the City, stated that na special consideration can be given to a churchsimply beca,tree it is a. church; that the benefit to the land is the basis of any asses s. Fred Cochran, 557 East. Crescent Drive, Harvey Nixon, 430'' Kipling, and; J.' P. Swartz, 730 Bryant Street, also spoke to the Council on aspects of the proposed project. Following a detaileddiscussion and. further explanation, a motion was made by Rohrs, secondedby Stephens, that the Council adopt aL resolution directing preparation of an investigation report under Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code, and after added discussion Resolution No. 361`$ entitled"'A Resolution Directing Preparation of Investigation Report Under Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code University Avenue -District Off -Street Parking Project No. 63-2, was adopted'by the: following roll call vote; Ayes:, Bishop, Cresap, Dias, Porter, Rohrs, Rus, Stephens, Woodward, Zwencg. Noes: Byxbee, Debs, Marshall, Rodgers. Absent: Arnold. Pro'ect No. 63-3 tJniversi Avenue Beautification The Assistant City Manager explained the proposedbeautification of University Avenue as delineated on a map and advised that the City. Engineer'e preliminary estimate of cost under Plan. A (usingterrazite walks) was $565, 875, and under Plan B (using colored concrete walks) was $461,175; that the City'scontribution on either of the plans was estimated at $57, 200. He requested that the Council rescind Resolution No. 3614 of Preliminary Determination and of Intention to Acquire and Construct Improvements and to' Form the University Avenue Maintenance District, zidoPted or. February 11, 1963, and to follow 'he same procedure as outlined for Project 63-2 on off-street parking. The following resotutio> s were thee: introduced: Resolution No. 3619 entitled "A Resolution Rescinding Resolution No. 3614, University Avenue; Beautification, Proje(t No. 63-3"; Resolution No. 3620 entitled "A Resolution of Preliminary Deter- mination and of Intention to Acquire and Construct Improvements and to Forrn the 'r:;iver.sity Avenue Maintenance District, University Avenue Beautific:a.'::ior: Project No. 63-3"; Re slol.utio n No. 3621. entitled "A Resolution Directing Preparation of Investigation Report tinder Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code, University. Avenue 'Beaut,ifieatior. Project No. 63-.3"; and on mo•;ion of Porter, se -;corded by Stephens, were carried by the following 'roll call vote: • Ayes: Noes: ' Bishop. Cresap, Dias, Porter, Rohrs, Rus, ,' Stephenns, Woodward, Z.weng. Byxbee r Debs, Marshall, Rodgers. -Absent: A.rr_,old... ro'ec': No. 52-13 Universit Avenue District Of.f-Street Parkin roLetct 5Te ^ivers:t vHr.ne istrict trees Parxc The Assistant City Manager explained that by adoption of certain resolutions in conxection, with these two projects, the projects would be made co-terminous in boundary with Projects 63-2 and 63-3 previously acted upon by the Council and would assume the same prorated bonded. debt. He advised that May: 27, 1963 was the date: set for the public •hearing on the resolutions to annex territories. A motion was made by Porter, seconded by Rohrs, and carried by a majority voice vote, to adopt the following resolutions: Project No. 52-13 Resolution, Not 362Z entitled "A Resolution or Intention to Annex Territory to Tlarking District, University Avenue , District Off -Street Parking Project No. 52-13". Resolution No. 3623 entitled "A Resolution Directing Preparation of Investigation Report Under Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code, University Avenue District Off -Street Parking Project,No 52-13". Project No. 52 14, Resolution No. 3624 entitled "A Resolution of Intention to Annex Territory to Parking District, University Avenue District Off -Street Parking Project No, 52-14,". Resolution No. 36.2.5 entitled "A Resolution Directing; Preparation of Irvestigation, Report Under Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code, University Avenue District Off - Street Parking Project No. 52-14". project No. '62-3 Sherman Avenue et al__- exeept Ash Street Resolution No.. 3626 entitled "A Resolution Culling for Bids on Sale of Improvement Bonds, Sherman Avenue, et al, Project No- 62-3 (Except Ash Street) was introduced and on .;notion by Rodgers, seconded by Bishop, was 'adopted by a unanimous vote. The City Attorney reported that on March 20, 1963 the City Clerk received notice of an- original application for a retail on -sale,' beer license by Dorothy C. Styne for the 49'er Club at 2095 Bayshore Boulevard. He advised that he had requested the Police Department; to investigd' e the premises and the applicant, and that the Police Chief reported it was his opi.nion the method of operation of the premises.: is - not only a current police problem but would be aggravated by the issuance of a beer license; also he recommended that the City Council protest' the issuance' of a lecense on the ground that such issuance would be contrary to the :public welfare and morals. The City Attorney stated he concurred in the Police Chief's recommendation and requested that he be d.,r1;teted to file a protest against the issuance. of the license. • On`motion'made, seconded and unanimously carried, the City Attorney ;wasdirected, to file; with the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, a`protest against the issuance of, an on -sale beer license for these premises. Petition for E*elusiori ofd Territory �y The City Manager. advised that a report nad been received from. the Santa Clara County Boundary Commission, in the natter u:,, proposed exelusion'.of territory from the City of pro:7c^rty deser be.d as "Arastradero.Trtills Unit No. -1", stating, that the boundaries o7 the property are definite,:and cortain, conform to line~ of assessment and ow•n•iershili,;:anddo riot create islands or corridors of unincorporated territor.y the rext'ac:,tion in. r �eg a=. d to the proposal would be die stated ;that 1 �.c4 for the Council to adopt a .resolution giving notice of the time and p` for hearirg`utiy protests on the exclusiori, Resotatiof 14o. 3627 entitled "Resolution of the Council of the City of G:cvirg"Notice of the Time and Race for Heat i Q£ ,Palo Y Protests to the, Proposed Exclusion c?w•ati Territory and on rnatzori; Alto (Arastradero Hulls Unit NO, )'' made and seconded was unanimously adopted, It was - noted that the hearing of protests was set, for 7:30 p, on April Z3., 1963 in the Council Chambers, Adr o irnedMeeting It was moved, seconded and unanimously carried to adjourn, the meeting; at this time (10:45 p.m,) to Monday, April 35, 1963 at 7:30 p.m., at which time the remainder of the items on the agenda will be considered.