HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-08-30 City Council Summary MinutesCITY
COUNCIL
MINUTES
ITEM
CITY
OF
PALO
ALTO
Regular Meeting
Monday, August. 30, 1982
PAGE
Oral Communications 2 4 3 7
Minutes of June 28, 1982 2 4 3 7
Consent Calendar 2 4 3.7
Item #1, Ordinance to Prohibit Interference with 2 4 3 7
Police Dogs
Item #3, Ordinance re Changing Classification of 2 4 3 8
Property Located at 350 College Avenue
(2nd Reading)
Item #4, Lytton Plaza. Dedication (2nd Reading) 2 4 3 8
Item #5, Ordinance re Chap nin9 Classification of
Property Located at 359 Oxford Avenue (2nd
Reading)
Item #6, Classified Employees Compensation Plan
Changes Resulting from 1982-83 Budget
Adoption
Item #7, Civic Center Telephone Cabinet Door
Replacements (CIP 82-15)
Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions
Item #9, Public Hearing: Public Hearing on the
Establishment of a Parking and Business
Improvement Area in the Downtown Area of
the City of Palo Alto in Accordance with
the Parking and Business Improvement Area
Law of 1979 and Resolution Mo, 6058
Item #10, Finance and Public Works (F&PW) Committee
Recommendation re the. Regional Water
Quality Control Capacity Study
Item #11, Finance and Public Works (F&PW) Committee
Recommendation re Consultant Selection
for California Avenue parking Assessment
Land Use/Parking Study
Item #12, Election Sign Ordinance (2nd4Reading)
2 4 3 8
2 4 3 8
2 4 3 8
2 4 3 8
2 4 3 9
2 4 4 5 1
2 4 4 5
2 4 4 6.
ITEM
Item #I2 -A (Old Item #2) Subdivision Ordinance re
Tentative Maps (2nd .Reading)
Item #12-8 (Old Item #8) Option Agreement Air
Rights Development Over Parking Lot Q)
Item #13, Request of City Manager for Adjourned
Council Meeting re Cal avera s
Item #I4,
Item #15,
Request of Councilmember Fletcher re
Travel Reimbursement for Bicycle
Travel
Request of Councilmember Fletcher for
Council Support for a Resolution of the
League of California Cities re Traffic
Barriers
PAGE
2 4 4 7
2 4 4 7
2 4 4 8
2 4 4 8
2 4 5 0
Item #16, Request of Councilmember Cobb re League 2 4 5 0
of California Cities Resolution re
Financing of City Governments
Item #17, Request of Councilmember Cobb re Staff 2 4 5 1
Report on Guardian Angels
Item #18, Cancellation of Council Meeting of 2 4 5 2
September 7, 1982
Adjournment 2 4 5 2
Regular Meeting
Monday, August 30, 1'582
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto :net on this date in the
Council Chambers at City Hall, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:30 p.m.
1
PRESENT: Bechtel, Cobb, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Klein
ABSENT: Levy, Renzel, Witherspoon
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
1. R. F. Bennett, 524 Middlefield Road, said he was building a
12 -foot high wooden structure on the side of his house, which
consisted of two figures going up on the side and meeting at
the top with their hands, and which was entitled "The Gates of
Heaven." He wanted to be allowed to complete the sculpture.
2. Dr. Nancy Jewell Cross, 301 Vine Street, Menlo Park, spoke on
behalf of Clean Air Transport. The records from the Bay Area
Air Quality Management District showed that in relation to its
population, Palo Alto had 55 percent more carbon monoxide
hotspots at signalized intersections than any other city in
the area. The City of Menlo Park voted approximately two
weeks ago to ask the Metropolitan Transportation Commission
(MTC) to consider puttirg electric trains or trolleys on the
new Dumbarton Bridge. She suggested that Palo Alto might wish
to have its representative to MTC present a request to
consider an electric train or trolley across the Dumbarton
Bridge.
Mayor Eyerly announced that the State legislature passed a bill to
allow cities to continue the use of street barriers.
MINUTES OF JUNE 28, 1982
MOTION: Cooncilaeaber Fazziao mowed, seconded by Cobb, approval
of the Nei nuts of June 28, 1982 as submitted.
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, °Renzel , Witherspoon absent,
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Klein removed Item #8, Option Agreement - Air Rights
Development Over Parking Lot Q from the Consent Calendar; and Vice
Mayor Bechtel removed Item #2, Subdivision Ordinance re Tentative
Maps from the Consent Calendar,
MOTION: Counc#lmeaber Cobb moved, seconded by Klein, approval
of the Consent Calendar as amended..
ITEM t1 ORDINANCE TO . PROHIBIT : INTERFERENCE,' WITH - . POLICE DOGS
:
Staff recommends that Council adopt the ordinance to prohibit
interference with any police" dOg while such police dog is in the
custody of, or being used by, a law enforcement officer in the
performance of official duties.
ITEM #1, CONT'D
ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE
COUNCIL OF THt CITY OF PALO ALTO ESTABILSHING A POLICE
DOG ORDINANCE'°
ITEM #3, ORDINANCE RE CHANGING CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED
n a n
ORDINANCE 3382 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.08.040 OF
THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL .CODE .(THE ZONING MAP) TO.
CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY KNOWN AS 350
COLLEGE AVENUE FROM R-2 TO RM-4" (1st Reading 8/16/82,
Passed 7-0, Bechtel, Fazzino absent)
ITEM #4, LYTTON PLAZA DEDICATION (2nd Reading)
ORDINANCE 3383 entitled `ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING CHAPTER 22.08 (PARK
DEDICATIONS) OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING
SECTION 22.08.360 (LYTTON PLAZA)" (1st Reading
8/16/82, Passed 7-0, Bechtel, Fazzino absent)
ITEM #5, ORDINANCE RE CHANGING CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED
n ea �n
ORDINANCE 3384 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF
TN( CITY —OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.08.040 OF
THE PALO. ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE (THE ZONING MAP) TO
CHANGE . THE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY KNOWN AS 359
OXFORD AVENUE FROM RM-4 TO R-1" (1st heading 8/16/82,
Passed 7-0, Bechtel, Fazzino absent)
ITEM #6, CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION PLAN CHANGES RESULTING
PROF. 1982-133 BUT ET AISO PT'f +l ( CSR :
By adopting the resolution, the Council will authorize revision of
the compensation plan for classified employees to provide for new
positions.
'RESOLUTION 6068 entttl ed _"RESOLUTION , OF' -.THE .COUNCIL OF
TUE CITY OF PALO ALTO.AMENDING :THE COMPENSATION PLAN
FOR CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION NO.
032 TO ADD NEW CLASSIFICATIONS THERETO"
ITEM #7, CIVIC CENTER TELEPHONE CABINET DOOR REPLACEMENTS - CIP
Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor to execute a
construction contract with Hodgson Construction, Inc. in the
amount of $29,113.
AWARD OF CONTRACrt,
Hodgson Construction Company
MOTION PASSED aaanimoosly, Levy, Menzel, Witherspoon absent.
AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS
City Manager Bill loner announced .,that. Item #2, Subdivision.
Ordinance re Tentative Maps, would become Item 12-A; and Item #8,
Option Agreement - Air Rights Development 'over Parking Lot Q would
become Item 13-A.
Co.unci-lmeeber Cobb added Item #I6, League of; California Cities
Resolution re Financing of City Government.
Councilmember Cobb added item #17, re Staff Report on, Guardian
Angels..`
1
ITEM #9, PUBLIC HEARING: PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A
AIVIOPOR
Councilmember Cobb said page 2 of the staff report spoke of
enforcement through small claims court, and he asked if that
should be added as a specific item in the list of recommenda-
tions.
City Manager Sill Zaner said no.
Mayor Eyerly declared the public hearing open.
Charles Kinney, President Downtown Palo Alto, Inc. (DTPA), 124
University, supported the staff's recommendation and .urged
Council's adoption of the ordinance. Senate Bill 1693, adopted in
1979, provided an opportunity for grass .roots. He said the
ordinance would allow for the development of a coalition of an
assortment of like interested people who wanted to see enhancement
and betterment to the downtown. The people were acting
collectively because they could achieve more than as individuals.
The fees were modest in the A Category - those businesses that
would have the most benefit for $110 per year; and, B Category •=
those businesses having less direct benefits, but still enjoying
the enhancements for $36 per year. He said they understood that
the Council was responsible for the administration of the
District; however, as President of DTPA, with DTPA's 24 -year
knowledge and working experience in the downtown, and their
community interest, they stood ready to take on the assignment as
Administrator on the Council's behalf. He introduced Lee Strong,
a founding member of Downtown California Association, and Mayor of
Whittier, California.
Lee Strong, Mayor of Whittier, California, represented the Down-
town California Association, said that downtown association
management and downtown organizations were a comparatively new
field which started to come to life after World War II, when the
shopping center movement was on in California. It was felt that
the best way to handle the problems was to organize and collec-
tively work on problems to compete with existing shopping centers.
It was discovered early in the game, that downtown associations
could be effective, but would never reach its potential as a
voluntary organization. Shopping centers overcame the problems by
using their shopping center leases and requiring all merchants in
the shopping center to belong to the Shopping Center Association.
They were required during the course of the year to pay for the
maintenance of parking lots and public areas. In 1966-1967, a
group known as "California Downtown Association" was organized,
in order for people to talk about what would and would not work in
downtown. As a result, the State Legislature of California passed
AB 103, which permitted cities to form. Business Improvement
Districts in the downtown ov anywhere within the city limits.
That legislation was in effect until 1979, when as =a result of
Prop. 13, there was disagreement as to whether the original
legislation would apply under the new Prop. 13 guidelines.` Rather
than trying to settle that issue in court, the California Downtown
Association proceeded to get new legislation enacted which met the
objections of those who thought it did not fall under Prop. 13.
The basic difference between the two was the terminology --there
was no reference to "taxes," but rather "charges and assessments."
A City Council must make a finding that the assessments related
somewhat to benefits of the people being asessed. He, said there
were about fifty cities in California who httd used the provisions
of AB 103 or AB 1693, and established one or more business
improvement districts in their downtown. Today, in - any kind of
proposal made by cities for downtown revitalization projects or
downtown redevelopment projects, they always listed the business
improvement 'district mechanism as a possible .;source of funding.
The. Downtown Association of Whittier established its business
improvement district in 1970, which had done well over the past 12
o
years. It permitted the people in the downtown to concentrate
their energies on a planned program_ by knowing in advance what
their programwould be for the next year and by knowing they would
have to budget to implement_ that program. He said it was more
than a promotional tool although that was a primary effort. It
was a tool to bring the people i n the downtown together. When the
organization spoke before the City Council, representing all of
the downtown business people, they spoke with authority and
responsibility. If the City Couij'ci1 approved an assessment dis-
trict, that was only the beginning. From then on, the people must
work together to make it effective.
Councilmember Fletcher asked what cities generally did to get the
program administered and did all cities have a comparable group to
Downtown Palo Alto, Inc.
Mr. Strong responded that the successful downtown improvement
districts started with an organization downtown who decided it was
needed. The City usually contracted with that organization
because they were there, they designed the program, and they had
credibility.
Everett Steichen, 261 Hamilton Avenue, said the principal business
activity of his firm was real estate and retail consulting. Based
upon the review of all available data, he could not determine
whether his business was a Class - A or Class B business. That
indicated to him a problem with the proposed business improvement
district of defining business activities and the need to continue
to monitor as uses change. He had been in his current line of
work for 27 years, and during that time, provided consulting ser-
vices on downtown business district revitalization projects in all
types of cities. He prepared benefit impact analysis including
establishment of the benefit and assessment criteria for a
downtown improvement district in Boulder Colorado, and was
currently working on a similar problem in Vale, Colorado. He
spoke not only as a representative of a business which would be
impacted by the proposed assessment, but also as an experienced
professional in the field. He was not opposed to the improvement
district provided certain criteria were observed: ' 1) that the
purpose be clearly defined; 2) that the objectives be outside the
normal activities or jurisdiction of already constituted bodies;
and 3) that the distribution of costs be directly proportional to
the benefits received. He believed that the current proposal
failed to meet all the criterion. Resolution 6058 was general as
to purpose and the materials he had seen from DTPA were equally
ambiguous. However, there was a thread of evidence that the
primary purpose was to stimulate retail sales in downtown Palo
Alto. For example, the Policy and Procedures (P&P) Committee
Minutes of May 5, 1982, reported Ned Gallagher as stating the
following, "In the 1950`s there was a general exodus from the
downtown area of all businesses in the cities in the State of
California to suburban shopping centers which resulted in
deterioration of the downtown shopping area." He believed that
insofar as DTPA was concerned, wherever the word "business"
appeared, the word "retailer" should be substituted. The Lynn
Sedway. Palo Alto Downtown Retail Study, dated, May 1, 1982, on
page 39, stated "the purpose of a business :improvement district
was to actively promote and advertise a `downtown as a retail
center." Nothing could be stated more clearly, and unless the
purpose of the proposed district was stated as clearly, there was
no way to determine the distribution benefits, establish criteria
to monitor activities, assess results, or identify the cost
effectiveness of the program. One objective stated by DTPA 'as
quoted from a January, 1982, letter signed by Anne Werry was to
"provide scrubbed•' sidewalks, digital street cleaning, , flower
plantings, and decorations to expand downtown beautification on .a
continuing basis." with regard to dup2i'cation, the City_ of Palo
Alto was currently responsible for . certain housekeeping functions,
such as, street cleaning. As a representative_ , of a business which
was expected to help pay =: the tab! he did not get a thrill out of
1
1
the idea that part of the money collected would be used to pay for
services now provided by the City. Regarding the distribution of
benefits, he quoted from Page 68 of the Sedway report, "If . -a
business improvement district were set up, businesses could pay at
a level commensurate with the benefits they would receive. Thus,
retailers pay a higher assessment than upper floor office users.
All types of users would benefit, however, as an improvement dis-
trict would enhance the overall vitality of the downtown." He
noted that in an improvement district, insofar as it was success-
ful, all persons benefited. They were being asked to tax them-
selves and to pay an assessment which would flow to persons who
were not going to be taxed. For example, if the program was suc-
cessful, the value of properties would increase, his rent would
increase, other peoples' rent would increase, and the landlords in.
the area who would be the direct beneficiaries would not be
taxed.
Len Snyder, 261 Hamilton Avenue, said Everett Steichen stated his
concerns adequately. Hewas a.small businessman and did not think
the business assessment would benefit him since he was in the
upper floors of the downtown area, and the assessments should be
regulated accordingly.
Lad Wilson, 2261 Southcourt, spoke as the proprietor of Dahl
Plumbing, Stanford Electric, and as a landowner of property
between Lytton and Everett Street, High and Alma Street, who were
a part of the new downtown improvement district. He basically
supported the improvement ordinance and assessment. Last year he
tried to improve the land and was forcibly shot down by the City
of Palo Alto due to zoning problems. Further, he was fearful
about the assessment being taken as a precedent for future parking
assessments for the downtown businesses especially in light of
the proposal of the four-story parking going in on Cowper Street,
and what the consequences would be. for the future. He asked if
the improvement assessment would be a precedent for expanding the
parking assessment. He pointed out that most benefits would be on
University Avenue, and he did not see many benefits going to High
Street or Everett Street. Businesses that performed services in
downtown Palo Alto sometimes found it difficult due to the parking
tickets that were incurred. Currently, they had spent about $300.
per year trying to serve downtown clients, and they were not: sure
if the group could help in that regard. If the area between
Everett and Forest were to be expanded, they should be realistic
and pull together the planning in the downtown area.
Mayor Eyerly commented regarding the two districts, and said the
improvement district followed the same outline as the parking
assessment •district, but there was no interaction between the
two,
Howard Churcher, 415 University Avenue, said the plan sounded
great on the surface. For $100 as .a merchant, he received clean
streets, fresh flowers in the planters, free advertising, free
Christmas decorations, and much More. He could not help, but , be
cynical concerning who would really benefit from S.B. 1693... The
more he thought about it, the more he got the feeling that the
plan appeared to be as much a bail -out for DTPA as it was for the
benefit of the business community. He had the impression that
DTPA would be the administrators of the proposal , but he did not
have the same confidence in them as they had in themselves. Judg-
ing from DTPA's lack of achievement over the past 15 years, he
felt that if they were th ..success and spoke for the business
community as they contended, the introduction. of S.B. 1693 would
not be necessary at this time. Last week's fair was indicative of
.what the merchants could do when they worked together.;
Carl Schmitt University. National Bank, 361 Lytton ;_Avenue, was in
favor of : the district. His bank was technically _;outside of the
ordinance because it was a bank, but he planned as most other
banks and institutions did to -voluntarily comply with the ordi.
nance. Having been involved with merchant's associations in
2 4 4.,,1
8/30/82
prior assignments, Palo Alto's downtown needed the improvement
area, and he urged Council's support.
Vice Mayor Bechtel asked for clarification. that banks. were
excluded.
Senior Assistant City Attorney Anthony Bennetti responded that
banks were specifically excluded from the State law based on the
provision in the California Constitution which made banks subject
to no other charge or levy. He was not sure whether Palo Alto's
ordinance, as a charter city, could be made to apply to banks on
the benefit theory as opposed to a taxing theory. He left the
ordinance purposely ambiguous because if banks were exempted as a
matter of State law, Palo Alto would be pre-empted and would not
be able to charge them. If there was room for interpretation,
that as a charter city Palo Alto could impose a fee for a benefit
which was the theory of the law since 1979, then . they would be
included because Palo Alto's definition under the zoning code
stated that financial institutions included banks.
Vice Mayor Bechtel asked when -a determination would be made as to
which was legally possible.
Mr. Bennetti responded that until the City had some kind of a
challenge, previous State law on the subject would be followed and
banks would be exempted. If a decision was made by some other
,adjudicatory body that banks were not in fact exempted from a
charter city, charters could be instituted at that time.
City Clerk Ann J. Tanner entered a letter from John Paul Hanna,
525 University Avenue, Suite 1400, dated August 17, 1982, opposing
the district; and a letter from SEOCAL, 459 Hamilton Avenue, dated
August 23, 1982, requesting that "general business offices" be
changed from Class A businesses to Class B businesses, into the
record.
Mr. Schmitt urged the City, to proceed .as if banks were not exempt
and to wait for the challenge. He felt that most banking
i nsti tuts ons would accede to the City .
Counci1member Klein agreed with Mr. Schmitt. If the City waited
for someone else to decide that banks were subject to the ordi-
nance, it would be a long time. He felt that under the benefit
theory, banks should share the cost. He asked for response to a
letter from Cheryl A. Lathrop of SEOCAL, Inc: suggesting that-. a
general business office should be a Class B business rather than .a
Class A business.
Ned Gallagher, member, Downtown Palo Alto , Inc . , said the
background for the ordinance and all the "categories of businesses
that were listed came from the Palo Alto zoning ordinance in which
all the categories were defined. A general business office was
defined as folIows: "A general business office. - A use
principally providing services to individuals, firms, or other
entities, including but not limited to reap estate, insurance,
property management, title , companies, investment, credit unions,
personnel, travel, and similar services and including business:
offices of f public util i.ties,, or other activities when the service
rendered was that customarily associated with administrative,:
office services." He believed that Ms Lathrop's organization/was
a general bust ness office, however, dependent upon the nature of
her product, she may come under the possible definition of
wholesaler. In treating all businesses in the downtown area, of
which there were over 800, it : was impOssibla to define _"general
bustness offices" i n ° categories related to o those on the , first
floor, those .on the second floor, those on the third floor, or in
any. Other : area of the City. It was also impossible to represent
them 'in ,: ordinance dependent upon what they were selling The
general 'deft nition .contained in the zoning ordinance had to , be
relied upon, believed that ,'SEOCAL was a general business
office, and Ms. Lathrop's suggestion that her company be taken out
of the general business office category was not supported by the
definition in the zoning ordinance.
Councilmember Klein said he did not believe that was the question.
He thought her point was that general business offices should not
be a Class A business, but rather a Class B business. For an
example, he asked if an insurance firm would receive more benefits
than a law firm or doctor's office which were considered Class 8.
1
Mr. Gallagher said DTPA thought yes because the general purpose
and results of the ordinance was going to enhance the downtown
area to pedestrian traffic and shopping people. Those people who
would be attracted to the downtown area would be exposed to insur-
ance companies who were in the area --especially those on the
ground floor. The insurance companies were more benefited by
pedestrian traffic than would be a professional office such as an
attorney's office where there were seldom walk in clients.
Normally the clients developed from the professional offices came
from previously arranged interviews, telephone calls or referrals.
Everyone in the downtown area would benefit to some degree by the
ordinance.
Mayor. Eyerly said regarding the budget format, the area was a
business improvement area, and the budget listed "income,"
"benefits to members," and "operating expenses." He thought that
the entire budget --whether for operating expense or direct
benefits --were all benefits, and all moneys collected or expended
were for the benefit of the district. He suggested that when that
budget was approved, the wording might be changed so as not to be
misleading.
Mr. Gallagher agreed. He said the entire purpose and ft/fiction of
Downtown Palo Alto, Inc., since its inception, was to benefit the
downtown area. All the functions and expenses which took place
under the corporation itself were for the benefit of the downtown
area and all of it might well be listed as benefits.
Mayor Eyerly declared the public hearing closed.
MOTION: Coencilweaber Cobb moved, seconded by Pazzino, to
approve the staff recommendation as follows:
1. To adopt the ordinance_ establishing a Downtown Business
Improvement. Area;
2. Designate Downtown Pilo Alto, Inc. as the administrator and
direct staff to negotiate a contract between the City and
Downtown Palo Alto, Inc. for Council consideration;
3. Direct staff to contract with _ the County of Santa Clara for
the,,biiling and collection of assessment fees; and
4. Include amend•ent to Section S(b), page 2 of the ordinance, to
add the word 'banks."
5 Staff be directed to work :with the definition of 'general
business office' as set forth in the erdins!ce to precisely
define those businesses more retail oriented and thus
belonging, in Class A and those less retail oriented which
would belong in Class B.
ORDINANCE FOR `FIRST READING entitled.. ORDINANCE OF THE
Wall. Cr TNE C1T! OF PALO ALTO ESTABLISHING . TAE_
DOWNTOWN O4lS1MES$ IMPROVEMENT AREA'
2 4 4 3
8/30/82
Counc.i1member Cobb said that based on some of the comments the
proposal needed clarificati on of the phrase "general business
offices." A manufacturer's representative for example was not a
professional office, but on the other hand, he doubted that it
would benefit any di fferently than any other Cl ass B busi ness, and
yet would be called "a general business nff i ce." He thought that
the operative words --local as opposed to nonlocal--might be the
way to resolve it. SEOCAL was an import/export operation, and he
doubted that it would directly benefit from increased traffic in
the downtown area. While it would be classified as a general
business office, he would call it Class B rather than a Class A.
He wanted to see the definition improved so that some of the prob-
lem areas were resolved. He supported the proposal whole-
heartedly.
City Manager Bill Zaner urged the Council not to define the nature
of. a business and what category they should fit into that specifi--
cal .ly in the ordinance. The ordinance provided for the City
Manager to make that decision on a case -by -case basis in those
cases where it was a judgrnent call It was important at this
point for the Council to decide whether general business should be
in Category A or Category B. The question of deciding what kind
of business ore was should he left to staff because it would
depend upon the particular circumstances surrounding each busi-
ness.
Councilmember Cobb asked how that would work in an operational
sense.
Mr. Zaner said there would be an application form of some kind,
which would attempt to determine the predominate business. One
gentleman said he did a number of things, and the predominate
business would attempt to be found in order to make a j',idgment.
Sometimes the area would be gray and occasionally some would be on
the line.
Councilmember Fletcher asked for a representative from the mer-
chant's committee to report on how they felt about Downtown Pal o
Alto, Inc. administering the whole district.
Ann Miller, Co -Chairperson of the Downtown Palo Al to Merchant's
Association, responded that the majority of the merchants who were
actively involved for the last one and one-half years, felt that
the ordinance was going to be the only facility by which the mere
chants could successfully do promotions for downtown Palo Alto.
It was a vehicle which afforded the merchants funds to do the
k l nds . of things they wanted to' do ' in terms of - adverti si ng and
decoratiohs . The majority of merchants supported `the proposal.
Councilmember Klein was uncomfortable with the definition of
"general business offices." After reviewing the list contained In
the ordinance, he felt that about half belonged i n : Cl` ass A and
half in Class B.-. In his opinion, title companies would. not be
significant beneficiaries of the downtown district, and he' would
put them more in the Class B \situation. Oh` the other hand, credit
unions, insurance. offices, :and travel_ agencies would benefit from
increased walk-'i n trade. He was concerned that the definition
would create problems which' were `insuperable .for the' -city to
decide. Since the ordinance could only be passed .fo'r first
reading tonight, he asked if . the City Attorney's„ Office' 001d -come
back with langu€age'to sharpen up the defini'ti'on" and somehow divide
general ,business offices between Class A and Class B.
Mr, Benhi tti' 'Said eyes the 'purpose -'of tie public hearing was to
bring ` out: the concerns. The tomb$_ claSsi ficat'ions were chosen
strictly for convenience, and nothing prohibitted the Council from
splitting them apart. The Council expressed the general standard
they would like to see reflected in the ordinance; and on second
reading the ordinance could reflect "general business office" as -
being divided with some ,in Class A and soave in Class 8 on the;
particular type of business leaving all others to be ,determined;by
the City/Manager on a case -by -case basis.
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Klein moved, that staff be directed to'
work with the definition of 'general business office' as set forth
in the ordinance to precisely define those businesses which were..
more retail oriented and thus belonged in Class A and those less
oriented which would belong in Class B; and Section 8(b) on page 2
of the ordinance be amended to add.the word "banks."
Councilmembers Cobb and Fazzino agreed to incorporate amendment in
main motion.
1
1
1
Mayor Eyerly favored the ordinance. It was a big step for down-
town Palo Alto in that it provided a mechanism for accomplishing
things which were above and beyond. ,the level of service provided
by the City. It also provided an opportunity for the members of
the district to have promotions or other activities to benefit the
retail or to attract people . to the downtown area. Approximately
five people in the assessment :district_ came forward to oppose the
formation of the improvement :district. The Council was free to
move ahead on the ordinance.
Vice Mayor Bechtel said that with the proposed amendments, she
believed some of the concerns expressed by members of the public
would be taken care of by the second reading of the ordinance.
Mr. Bennetti responded to Vice Mayor Bechtel's earlier questions
by saying that since the law was changed over to a benefit basis,
there was no longer any mention that banks were excluded in the
State law. On a benefit basis, banks could and should be included
in the district.
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, Renzel , Witherspoon absent.
ITEM #10, FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS (F&PW) COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
RE THE
•
•
Councilmember Klein said the Regional Water Quality Control Board
required the. City to have a Regional Water Quality Control Capac-
ity Study. The City had exceeded 80 percent of its listed capac-
ity, and, under the Board's regulations, the City must go forward
with a study as. to future capacity and whether there should be
steps taken to improve the City's capacity and efficiency. The
F&PW Committee listed the consultant study as one which it would
like to review and approve.
MOTION: Councilmember Klein for the Finance and Public Works
Committee moved as follows:
1. That staff be directed to proceed with negotiations with the
first ranked firm, Matte 4 Water International, fora Regional
Water Quality Control Capacity Study; and
2. To negotiate with the second ranked firm, James M. Montgomery
Engineers, in the event an agreement is not reached.
AGREEMENT - CONSULTANT SERVICES
Waste :4 Water International
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, !teazel, Witherspoon, absent.
ITEM #11 FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS (FAPW) COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
bluuT TOM With I
Councilmember Fazzl no said that a blue ribbon committee composed
of staff, Architectural Review Board :;(ARB),` and Planning Commis-.
s i on members, unanimously agreedthat the ; firm of Angus McDonald &
Associates should be employed by the City to conduct the study.
244 5'
8/30/82
MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino for the Finance and Public Works
Committee moved as follows
1. That the Mayor be, authorized to execute a contract with Angus
McDonald 4 Associates in the amount of $19,800;
2. To approve the budget amendment ordinance in the amount of
$24,000;
3. To authorize staff to negotiate with the second ranked firm in
the event an impasse is reached in the negotiations with Angus
McDonald and Associates.
AGREEMENT - CONSULTANT SERVICES
Angus McDonald i Associates
ORDINANCE 33€45 entitled "ORDINANCE `OF THE COUNCIL OF
T1it. CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE
FISCAL TEAR 1982-83 TO ESTABLISH AND PROVIDE FUNDS FOR
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 82-25 'CALIFORNIA
AVENUE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT STUDY' "
Counci?member Cobb said that in previous discussions of the
California Avenue issues he asked that maximum ;development poten-
tials be addressed in the scope of the City's study. He was dis-
appointed that it was not included in the scope of work.
Chief Planning Official Bruce Freeland responded that maximum
build out under the zoning was going to be analyzed by staff ---not
a consultant.
Counc i.lmember Cobb: asked if the ultimate : report to Council would
include all oi the information.
Mr. Freeland said yes.
Alan Weller, 2601 El mdal a Court, said he was a member of the
California Avenue Area Development Association (CAADA), and cur-
rently President of its Board of Directors. CAADA was pleased
that the City Council and staff had taken an interest in the area,
and was impressed by the direction of Ken Schreiber and the
management of the study in its preliminary stages by Yicci Rudih.
CAADA was concerned that the scope of services to be provided by
the consultant go beyond the study of parking and into general
economic forecasting, traffic management, and land use strategies.
The financing, as . proposed by City staff, was to .come from the
parking district, and parking district capital outlay funds gen-
erated by parking revenues and the sale of some of the land. It
should bedevoted specifically:to:-parking issues. CAADA felt that.
in this particular case, the use:. of those funds exceeded the gen-
eral intent and purpose of those funds:, :and that the City Should
fund the study from its general revenues rather than using the
limited funds of :the; parking assessment district.
City Manager Bill Zaner said it was recommended that funding come
out of the California Avenue District itself. The study was
specific andpointed directly to California Avenue and its parking
and development problems, Staff was persuaded that the charges
were appropriate for the area and ought not be :charged against the
general fund which was supported bythe entire City.
MOTION` PASSED roaaiaosily, Levy, `Reuel , Witherspoon absent.
ITEM #l22_t ELECTION SIGN ORDINANCE (2nd Readin )
Senior Assistant City Attorney Anthony Bennetti said that the
Taxpayers for Vincent case clearly resquired that the City could
not -include a brad definition of public property for purposes of
prohibiting pot i'tical signs He spoketoday with the City
2 4 4 6:
8/`30/82 _:
1
Attorney's office in Los Angeles who had not yet heard about their
petition for rehearing in that matter. If the petition was
denied, Los Angeles would probably undertake an appeal, but in the
meantime, the City of Palo ,Alto was probably constrained by the
extent of the case to at least sharpen .its provisions related to
public property in order to confidently enforce the ordinance.
The City Attorney's office planned to work with the Planning
Department and Planning Commission to return to the Council in
September, with a definition of public property and where signs
were specifically prohibited on public property that would be con-
sistent with the decision. Staff would recommend that it be
adopted as an urgency measure because by that time the election
campaign would be upon the City.
MOTION: Mayor Eyerly moved, ° seconded by Fazzino, approval of
the ordinance with the removal of Section 16.20195(b) in the
ordinance.
ORDINANCE 3386 as amended entitled *ORDINANCE OF THE
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE
PROVISIONS OF THE BUILDING REGULATIONS REGARDING
ELECTION SIGNS" (lst Reading 7/26/82, Passed 7-0,
Fazzino, Renzel absent.)
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, Renzel, Witherspoon absent.
ITEM #12-A (OLD ITEM #2) SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE RE TENTATIVE MAPS
nti ea tng
Vice Mayor Bechtel said a letter was submitted to the Council by
Herb Borock, which is on file in the City Clerk's office, sug-
gesting that a reference to Chapter 21.12 also be included in
Section 18.93.080. She checked with the City Attorney, and it was
determined that the measure was appropriate and should be
included.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Bechtel moved, seconded by Fletcher,.
approval of the ordinance for second reading, with an amendment to
include a reference to Chapter 21.12 in Section 18,93.080 of the
ordinance.
ORDINANCE 338.1 as emended entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE
COUMCII OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A PROCEDURE FOR
AMENDING TENTATIVE MAPS* (lst Reading 8/16/82, Passed
7-0, Bechtel, Fazzino absent)
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, Renzel, Witherspoon absent.
ITEM #12-8 (OLD ITEM #8) OPTION AGREEMENT - AIR RIGHTS DEVELOPMENT
1)ARKTIITI.vi; Q) IC H:-451:
Council:ember: Klein said he was unclear about hoes the option
payments would be Handled, and asked for clarification
Real Property Administrator Jean Diaz said that on Page 2 of
CMR:454:2,, left column, "Purchase Price of Option," were the
option payments as set forth in the original Option Agreement.
The right hand column was the schedule of payments for the option
as amended to reflect a longer, stretched out time period. He
Pointed out the three "-0-" which were the gird, fourth and fifth quarters reflected a nine -month suspension of the option which was
existence until the latest Co'unci 1 ! eti an
Counci.;l member Klein . asked why the sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth
quarters were not similarly marked zero.
Mr. Diaz said that in working out the quarterly payment format
he and . Mr. Kinney had two objectives: 1) to begin the process
immediately so that in the event the economy turned and interest,
rates stayed down, thedeveloper would be ready to take advantage.
2 4 4 7
8/30182
of it, would have the the plans approved and be ready to go into
the institution_. and obtain the. necessary commitment. It' was
important to reinstitute the option payments to act as an incen-
tive to speed the process along. The option payments, therefore,
immediately began to accrue again; however, a provision was
included whereby Mr. Kinney could .defer any or all of the payments
upon the payment of an interest component on top of them.
Councflmember Klein clarified that an interest factor had been
added to the payments over the next year.
Mr. Diaz said yes if Mr. Kinney chose to defer the payments. He
expected that Mr. Kinney would choose to defer the initial first
quarter's payments at least.
MOTION. Councilmember Klein moved, seconded by Fletcher, that
the Mayor be authorized to execute the proposed Option Amendment.
AGREEMENT
AK Properties'
Mayor Eyerly was opposed to the action., In his opinion, the City
was wrong to tie up property over a period of time in order to
work with one developer. The downtown area, or any other area in
the City, benefited from the opportunity for competitive pro-
posals. Although ample time had been given to AK Properties, and
although they had worked hard, market conditions had not allowed
them to move ahead. There were undoubtedly other developers in
the area interested in putting together some kind of proposal, and
the City was holding them back waiting for this one to come
through. Tying up property in that manner was very close to a
gift of p b1 is funds, in his opinion. He pointed out that over
the period of time the property was held for AK Properties, prior-
ities in the air rights on the parking areas in the downtown may
no longer be housing. He would not support the motion.
MOTION PASSED by a vote of 5-1, Eyerly voting "no,' Levy,
Renzel , Witherspoon absent.
ITEM e13, REQUEST OF CITY MANAGER FOR ADJOURNED COUNCIL= MEETING RE
City Manager Bill Zaner said two major items would be agendized
for the Council on September 13. 1) CATY; and. 24 Cal avera s . He
believed that both those items could be ,done on September •13; but,
in the event the items carried over, he requested that Council
reserve September 14 for the balance, of the discussion. Council
action was not needed. Staff asked that,the Council Teserve the
night of September 14 in case it became necessary to adjourn the
meeting of September 13 to ,S ptember 14 :
'Councilmember Klein said he thought a Finance and .Public. Works
(FOPW) Committee meeting was scheduled for September 14.
Mr. Zaner said .he understood that the meeting would be delayed as
the items on that agenda were not critical.
Mayor Eyerly authorized Mr. Zaner to 'give the "appropriate public:.
notice.:;__.
ITEM 114 REQUEST OF COUNCILME4BER FLETCHER. RE TRAVEL` REIMBURSE-
Councilmember Fletcher said that`Cduncil was recently advised that
the automobile allowance had gone up for travel on official busi-
ness. In January, 1980, the policy of. $.04 per mile for bicycle
travel reimbursement was adopted, The four cents pet mile was
outdated when it was adopted, and in addition. _ the date, used to
arrive at the figure was based upon inforsation received from;
bicyclists who kept a log of their expenses. Those bicyclists did
1
1
1
1
1
most maintenance and repair work themselves, which was not typical
of the average bicyclist. The State report, which accompanied the
report to the a Board of Control in Sacramento, stated that mainte-
nance costs came to $.07 per mile, as per. the Department of Gener-
al Services who maintained the Capitol's bicycles which were
available to State employees.
MOTION: Counci l member Fletcher moved, seconded by , Klein, that
the bicycle travel reimbursement be increased from four cents per
mile to ten cents per mile. -
Vice Mayor, Bechtel asked for clarification about whether the
motion applied only to City Councilmembers or if it included all
City employees.
Counci lmember Fletcher hoped to have the motion adopted as .a Coun-
cil policy with a possibility for it to be applied to staff. How-
ever, the Council did not have the authority to set the rate for
employees.
Mayor Eyerly said that if the bicycle allowance were raised to ten
cents --compared to 23 cents --it would be within 45 percent of that
allowed for a car. An increase from four cents to ten cents per
mile would be an increase of 150 percent. The last raise on the
car allowance went from 20 percent to' 23 percent --or a 15 percent
increase. He would not support the motion.
Jeff Caplan, 225 Emerson Street, commended the City Council for
having adopted the four cents per mile reimbursement policy. As
an intern for Friends of the Earth, he had done research on trans-
portation policies. Specifically he had worked on a federal bill
which would reimburse federal employees for using their bicycles.
There were . a number of other cities in the country with bicycle
reimbursement policies with rates ranging from four cents to ten
cents per mile. If the policy were adopted for Councilmembers, he
felt it would have a trickle effect on the residents of Palo Alto
and their children.
Courtcilmember Fazzino said that Mayor Eyerly had articulated his
concerns. He agreed with the idea of a reimbursement policy, but
noted that the average increase in various description of parts
was about 21.41 percent, or about a penny more. Given -the
increase in parts, he could support a moderate increase in the
reimbursement policy --from five tO seven cents --but could not sup-
port a ten cent increase. He would not support the iuotion. -
Councilmember Cobb' said he'would not support the motions Me
cal i ed ai bicycle shop and ascertained that a new 10- speed women's
bicycle could be purchased for between- $1.90 -and 3260 not on sale.
Me was concerned that the motion would pay for 150epertent=eaf a
new bicycle every year,. , It .did not make economic sense for the
Council to pass it. He was concerned :that the Council not fatten
its benefits during the period of belt tightening that all cities
were experiencing. Except under the most:. extraordinary circum-
stances, he ;would not submit any mileage allowanceallOtanceeJOre cars
because he- felt, his Coonci l , . sal ar.-y more . than..._pa i d for his
expenses. Hie cons f derea. it prl:vil ege " to sere 'as - a Council_-
member and did 'nat'`thir k he 'shoul,d .'be- -paid - handsomely ,l for :that
privilege.
AMENOMENT: Ylce $ay,r 8ecbtel moped, seconded by 'K1eiN, that
b i c,ycl ae re1.b r�sen�, ut fee be changed to = seven tents per mile
rather than• tea 'cents er t�i1;.
Vice`Mayer Bechtel encouraged those':Councileeebers to':,retons#der:
their opposition because Couflcllmember Fletcher had a.. point.. The
more people cou'id`-be :encouraged to :;use- t►l cycl es ,---th;e better
AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT: Mayor Eyerly moved, seconded by Cobb,
that the bicycle reimbursement be increased to five cents per
mile.
Mayor Eyerly said that the car allowance reimbursement went from
20 cents to 23 cents per mile --or a 15 percent increase. A penney
increase on four cents per mile would be a 25: percent increase on
the bicycle allowance, and a seven cent increase would be about 75
percent.
Councilmember Klein did not think the numbers being compared were
comparable. The assumption was that the four cent rate was right,
and he did not think the Council had sufficient data when it set
the four cent, rate, and did not have the experience with bicycle.
expenses as with automobile expenses. He did not accept the four
cent rate as one which was correct from which to figure inflation
rates. He rejected that analogy and would support Vice Mayor
Bechtel' s amendment.
AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT FAILED by a vote of 3-3, Bechtel,
Fletcher, Klein voting„ "no," Levy, Renzel, Witherspoon absent.
AMENDMENT PASSED by a vote of 4-2, to increase bicycle reimburse-
ment to seVen cents per wile, Eyerly, Cobb voting "no," Levy,
Renzel, Witherspoon absent.
MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED by a vote of 4-2, Cobb, Eyerly voting
'no,' Levy, Renzel, Witherspoon absent.
ITEM #15, REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBER FLETCHER FOR COUNCIL SUPPORT
FR A RESOIUTIox-"OF lam -7
BARRIERS
Councilmember Fletcher said legislation had passed in Sacramento
which permitted cities to keep barriers. The legislation had a
sunset clause and new legislation would have to be introduced and
passed. She would attend the League of .California Cities confer-
ence in September, and requested Council authorization to intro-
duce a resolution.
MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Cobb, that
Councilmember Fletcher be authorized to present a resolution re
Traffic Barriers to the League of California Cities for, adoption
at its Annual Conference.
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, Renzel, Witherspoon absent.
ITEM #16, REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBER COBB RE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA
C1tIES RESOLUTTUH RE t INANC11IG OF CITY GOYERRArNTS
'Councilmember Cobb said that a couple of months ago, the Council
passed a resolution which dealt with the issue of developing a
mechanism for insuring the adequate,: stable and -long-term sources
of revenue for financing a City government.
MOTION: Councilmember Cobb - mved, seconded by Fletcher, that
Council present to the League of Califereia Cities for adoption at
its ARaaeal Conference, a resolution passed previously re ` State
Financing with whatover refinements - are necessaPy (Deadline.
September 3..)
MOTION PASSED unanimoesliy, Levy, Renzel, WIthe spoon Absent.°
Councilmember Fletcher said that the, Council had, taken two actions`
to present resolutions to the League of California Cities She
asked the Council : to seriously consider taking O. more active role
in ` the League. It was : an effective -organization and had a high
rating among the legislators, and was considered to be a powerful
group among the - lobbyists also.
2 4 5 0
8/30/82
Mayor Eyerly thanked Councilmember Fletcher for her comments. He
said- there was much business being transacted by the State in
Sacramento of which the City needed to be constantly aware. The
City needed to be in a position to ask the League to work on its
behalf with their lobbying efforts,, but the City also needed to do
some of its own lobbying --by phone or by letter.
ITEM #17, REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBER COBB RE STAFF REPORT ON
1
Councilmember Cobb said he read about the Guardian Angels in the
newspapers, and the issue struck him as one which the Council
should be prepared for. His motion would be without any prejudice
pro or con with respect to any, potential role of the Guardian
Angels.
MOTION: Councilmember Cobb moved, seconded by Eyerly, that
staff prepare a report on the Guardian Angels, to include, but not
be limited to the following:
1. Status of the activity in Palo Alto;
2. Assessment of potential benefits and/or problems by staff and
Police Department;
3. History in other communities where Guardian Angels were or had
been active;
4. How might the Guardian Angels relate to the Police Department,
and what City recourses would be required as a result.
5. What legal issues might be involved,
6. Did the City have any l i abi l ty as a result of such activity;
7. What controls should the City have over such activity; and
H. Who were the Guardian Angels.
Councilmember Fletcher said she was not clear about the purpose of
the report --the Chief of Police consulted with the Guardian
Angels. She was not sure what else could be added. It was not an
organization that would be sponsored by the City unless the Coune
.ci1 was so inclined. She was not sure that the report was a
war thwhi 1 e way for staff to spend their Mine.
Mayor Eyerly said a report would be worthwhile in view of what the
press had run on the Guardian Angels. He had received a number of
inquiries from interested citizens as to how they might interact
with the_ organs zati on and whether there might be trouble with the
Police Department. The residents _of Palo Alto were always inter-
ested in their Police Department and any policing action. He felt
it was wise for the Council to be fully informed on any group
which was attempting` to do certain things which would generally
fall under the City's Police Department.
Councilmember Cobb commented that the public would hold the City
Council responsible for any problems which might result from such
an activity. He felt that as part of the Councilmembers'
responsibility, they needed to know precisely about the pros and
cons of such an activity.
Vice Mayor ,Bechtel said she shared some of Councilmember
Fletcher4 s concerns. If the purpose of, the report was to Poten-
tially take action to discourage the services of the Guardian
Angels that was one thing, but if it, was simply for staff - to spend
a lot of time doing something and concluding as Chief ° Zurcher did
to waitand see, that waS another.
Mr. Zaner said he understood that the motion was for an update and
status report on the issue. He understood that not a lot was
occurring at this point, and there might not be much to tell.
Councilmember< Fletcher said that if the report included who the
people were, that wouldtake some research.
MOTION PASSED by .a vote of 5-1, Fletcher voting 'no," Levy,
Renzel, Witherspoon absent.
ITEM #18, CANCELLATION OF COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 7, 1982
MOTION: Vice Bayer Bechtel moved, seconded by Fazzino, to can-
cel the Council meeting of September 7, 1982.
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Levy, Renzel, Witherspoon absent.
ADJOURNMLNT
Council adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
ATTEST:
APPROVED:.:
2 4 5 2
8/30/82