Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-07-27 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL M INUT€S' Regular Meeting Monday, July 27, 1981 ITEM Oral Communications Agenda Changes, Deletions, Additions Resolution of Appreciation to League of Women Voters Resolution of Welcome to Representatives From Oaxaca Resolution of Welcome to Representatives From Enschede Consent Calendar Fire Fighters' Memorandum of Understanding and Compensation Plan (CMR:371:.1) Compensation Plan for Council Appointed Officers Recycling Agreement With Palo Alto Sanitation Company for 1981-82 (CMR:363:1) Book Publishing Company - Amendment to Contract Final Subdivision Map - Hewlett Subdivision on .Los Trancos Woods Road (CMR: 3 7 5 :1 ) PUBLIC HEARING: Planning Commission, by a vote of 4 in favor, 0 opposed, 1 abstention, Recommends'. Denial of a Preliminary Parcel Map for property at 1451 California Avenue Policy and Procedures Committee Recommendations to Council re Stop Signs Policy and Procedures Committee Recommendations to Council re Overnight Parking Ordinance Recess to Executive Session 10:00 - 10:15 P.M. City/School, Liaison Committee Recommendations re Use and Maintenance of Community Recreation and Arts Facilities Condominium Coversion Ordinance (Second Reading) (Continued from 8/10) European Health Spa (C.MR:368:1)- County Termination of Land Development Referral fCMR:372:1j --Request of Vice. Mayor Fletcher re DOwntown_Non- ltetai i:--Morafor i.um CITY PALO ALTO PAGE 1 0 9 9 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 2 1 1 0 3 1 1 0 5 1 1 1 1 1. 1 5 ITEM PAGE Request of Mayor Henderson Re Establishing A Committee to Work With Staff in Negotiating With PAUSD for Purchase of Terman 1 1 2.2 Request of; Mayor Henderson Re Human Relations Commission Interviews 1 1 2 4 Requestof Mayor Henderson Re Schedule of August and September Council Meetings 1 1 2 4 Vice Mayor Fletcher Re AB 256 Re Age Discrimination in Housing 1 1 2 4 Adjournment 1 1 2 5 Regular Meeting Monday, July 27, 1981 1 The City Council of the City of Pala Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:40 p.m. PRESENT: Bechtel, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson. Klein, Levy, Renzel, Witherspoon (arrived at 8:30 p.m.) ABSENT: Eyerly ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. 1. Lou Fein, 1540 Oak Creek, said that the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) board rejected the City's offer to buy the Terman School site for $6.8 million. One trustee said it was worth $10 million and could bring $12 million on the open mar- ket. He quoted a trustee as saying, "We can't back away from our responsibility of providing funds to insure education to district's students." Another board member urged that the Council be told that because of Proposition 13, the District was strapped for money, and that the situation of poverty was part of the reason for the District turning down the City offer. The board member said that only land sale revenues could lift the PAUSD out of poverty. Another trustee urged the Terman group to press the City to raise its offer. The legislation passed one month ago by the State affecting future school rev- enues had resulted in the PAUSD getting millions more money in revenue than it would have gotten had Proposition 13 failed. He said for something over 9,000 students next year, the total revenue and beginning balance of the District would be $39 plus million dolle.s, which was in excess of $4,000 per child. He said it would be rare any unified school district in the country to match that' ,unt. He said so much for District poverty, Proposition 13, 'and reason for the City to up their offer. He felt that one of the trustees was misleading in saying that some of the moneys would go toward insuring stu- dents' education. A few months ago the board had discussed whether they should set policy on the purpose to which land sale revenuesshould be put. Should part be mandated for maintaining and expanding structural courses and services and parts to the negotiating table. Traditionally, all of the money had been put on the negotiating table with the other revenues. Mr. Fein said no policy resulted from the discussions, all money would go to the negotiating table,, and as traditional, compensation would be raised, and staff courses and services reduced. He recollected that the Superintendent had granted 25% increases to some of his managers. He felt there was no educational or financial reason for the. City to pay the District mors than its present offer and the Terman group should press the District to accept the offer, rather than press the City to. raise its offer. He suggested that the City should instruct. staff to cease negotiations until after the November Council and Board elections. He thought_ .. the City should put_. the question of the Terman price to the people. He .suggested the possibility of putting an advisory issue on the November ballot and have the people -sly whetherthe price should be $6.0 million or $10 million. Mr. Fein felt that in that way the issue could be debated between now and then. Another alter- native wouldbe to make it an election issue for people running for both the school boar.; and the City,Council. Councilmember Fazzino asked if the City was beyond the deadline for adding measures to the November ballot. Acting City Attorney Don Maynor advised that he thought they were. AGENDA CHANGES, DELETIONS, ADDITIONS Mayor Henderson announced that there would be additional items on the agenda. One would be that one or more members of the Council would be supporting the consideration that the Council establish a committee to work with staff on the Terman school site negotiations. Further, the HRC applicant interviews needed to be d3,scussed, and the Councilmembers needed to discuss scheduling of Council meetings over the next two months. Vice Mayor Fletcher wanted to discuss the State legislation dealing with the child discrimination in rental housing because it would be heard in a Senate Committee on August 12, and Council would not be meeting next week. She asked for a determination tonight. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino introduced the following resolution and moved, seconded by Klein, its passage. RESOLUTION 5942 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS FOR ANCHORING OF THE KZSU BROADCAST OF THE MONDAY NIGHT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS" MOTION PASSED unanimously, Witherspoon and Eyerly absent. Mayor Henderson presented the resolution to Irene Sampson. Ms. Sampson thanked the Mayor and members of the Council on behalf of the League of Women Voters. RESOLUTION OF WELCOME TO REPRESENTATIVES FROM OAXACA MOTION: Councilmember Levy introduced the following resolution and moved, seconded by Bechtel, its passage. RESOLUTION 5943 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 6F PALO ALTO RECOGNIZING THE PRESENCE OF, AND WELCOMING TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO OAXACA, OAXACA. REPRESENTATIVES" MOTION PASSED unanimously, Witherspoon and Eyerly absent. Mayor Henderson read the resolution and with Dr. Mario Perez Ramirez, presented a resolution to the following students: Olga Leticia Corres Tenorio, Rafael Ortega Meixueiro, Rosalba Gonzalez Gallo, Alejandro Abad Garcia, Jesus Larumbe Mendoza, Enrique Gomez Migoya, Arturo Bolanos Cacho, Emilio Bolanos. Cacho, Maria de los Angeles Fernandez Perez, Jorge Suarez Perez, Dora Luz Vargas Guzman, Claudia Lopez Paladfos, Guillermo Gomez Abascal, Samuel Vargas Fabila, Miguel Angel Bustamante Underwood. Dr. Marto. Perez Ramirez presented a gift to the City of Palo Alto. RESOLUTION , OF WELCOME TO REPRESENTATIVES . FROM ENSCHEDE MOTION: Vice Mayor Fletcher introduced the following resolution and moved, seconded by Klein, its passage. 1 1 1 1 0 0 7/27/81 RESOLUTION 5944 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO RECOGNIZING THE PRESENCE OF, AND WEL- COMING TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM ENSCHEDE, NETHERLANDS" MOTION PASSED unanimously, Witherspoon and Eyerly absent. The resolution was presented to Cor Bouwhuis. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Fazzino, to remove Item 4, Referral of Consultant Selections for 1981-82 to F&PW, from the Consent Calendar and continue until August 10, 1981. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Witherspoon and Eyerly absent. MOTION: Councilmernber Klein moved, seconded by Fletcher, to approve the Consent Calendar as amended. FIRE FIGHTERS' MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AND COMPENSATION PLAN (CMR:371 Staff recommends that Council adopt the resolutions approving the Memorandum of Understanding and the Compensation Plan for Fire Employees in Order that the agreement may be implemented. RESOLUTION 5945 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 1501 OF THE MERIT SYSTEM RULES AND REGULATIONS RE MEMORANDUM OF UNDER- STANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND LOCAL 1319, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS" RESOLUTION 5946 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ADOPTING A COMPENSATION PLAN FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 5865 AS AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NO. 5922" COMPENSATION PLAN FOR COUNCIL APPOINTED OFFICERS RESOLUTION 5947 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE ITY OF PALO ALTO ADOPTING SALARIES FOR COUNCIL APPOINTED OFFICERS" RECYCLING AGREEMENT WITH PALO ALTO SANITATION COMPANY FOR 1981-82 Staff recommends that Council approve the proposed contract with the Palo, Alto Sanitation Company for the operation of the City's Curbside Collection Program and Recycling Center for two years, or expiring June 30, 1983. AGREEMENT - OPERATION OF CITY OF PALO ALTO RECYCLING SOLID WASTE PROGRAM - Palo Alto Sanitation Company BOOK PUBLISHING COMPANY— Amendment to Contract • AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO CONTRACT NO. 2861 - Book Publishing Company FINAL SUBDIVISION MAP - HEWLETT SUBDIVISION ON LOS TRANCOS WOODS Staff recor ends .that the -.City Council approve the final map. 1 1 0 1 7/27/81 1 1 MOTION PASSED to approve the Consent Calendar as amended, by a vote of 7-0, Witherspoon and Eyerly absent, Fazzino "abstaining" on item #9, Final Subdivision Map for Hewlett Subdivision. PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION BY A VOTE OF 4 IN FAVOR, 0 arrom. 't ABsTENTfOP; t 'Z MMEMOS , It IAL OP A PRELIMINARY PARCEL MAP FOR PROPERTY LV T Chairman of the Planning Commission Fred Nichols said that a funda- mental question which had been dealt with was the question of shifting the '.property line in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. He said the issue was moving the property line to permit the construct='_on of a building larger than what would otherwise be per- mitted. He said that under the suggested configuration, the building would be theoreticallythe same as what would be allowed now, but realistically the Planning Commission felt that by moving the parcel, more could be created than if it were left alone. Mayor Henderson declared the public hearing open. Warren Higgins, 1294 Hamilton Avenue, spoke on behalf of Tab Products Company, 1451 California_ Avenue. He said that the purpose of the request was to consolidate Tab's corporate headquarters with the other facilities at the Industrial Park thereby vacating the leased facilities on Hanover Street. In order to do this, the lot line adjustment would be required. He said that all of the proposed plans which were submitted fell within the required building ordi- nances -and codes. Regarding the employment density factor, Tab had and would continue to minimize the employment density in both the ,manufacturing facilities and the administrative operations by adopting and utilizing the most modern office procedures such as computers, direct entry terminals and other systems andprocedures efficiencies. In manufacturing, they had automated their production line. The Palo Alto operation, five . years ago, employed 344 people and now they employed 243. He said the labor intensive operations in Palo Alto would be minimized. Tab's density in relationship to the, square footage ratio was three per thousand. Regarding traffic, at the present time, their ingress and egress was by way of California Avenue which on one, ,side of the street are single family homes and on the other, the Industrial Park. He said that by making the lot line adjustment, part of the conditions of the agree- ment with the residual parcel A would give TAB ingress and egress at Page Mill Road which would transfer most of the California Avenue traffic on Page Mill. Councilmember Levy asked what assurances the Council would have that the average employee per square footage would continue to be below the average. Mr. Higgins said that Tab's normal projected growth rate was about 3% per annum. He said that Tab was determined to continue their efforts to modernize and use more computer systems in the adminis- tration side of the business and also to automate the production lines. Bill Hebard, 845 Page Mille Road, said that if the lot line were left as is, it would be possible to build 35,000 on parcel A, and. 28,000 additional on parcel B, which , if added together would be about 63,000. If it were done as staff pointed out, 35,000 could be put on parcel A, and 18,000 on parcel B with no problem. If the property line were adjusted, the total buildable would' 'be the same, the 40,000 _.would . be on parcel B. The larger amount- would be on parcel. B. 4s far as the ordinance was concerned, 23,000 could be put on parcel A, which would give the 63,000. He said that one of 1 1 0 2 7/27/81 the' problems with parcel A, when the size was reduced as proposed -in the revision, was that it would be difficult to develop the full potential of the 23,000. There was a 22 foot wide easement which runs down one side, a drainage canal, and a 50 foot setback on Page Mill Road, which all put constraints on the property as far as where to build and the amount of parking. He estimated about 16,000 square feet, and 40,000 square feet. 1 Mayor Henderson said he assumed Tab could obtain parcel A and put their building there so they had a choice between what they were asking for and the possibility of developing under the existing con- ditions. He asked if Tab would try to obtain parcel A in the event their request was turned down. Mr. Hebard said it was an option. Mayor Henderson declared .the public hearing closed. MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded Any Klein, to,uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission. and deny,_ the request. Councilmember Fazzino pointed out that he opposed the motion and did not feel that it was a major issue. He thought that key issue which the Council should focus on was that construction could occur on the site with or without lot adjustments. He felt that Tab Products had been exemplary in reducing employment in Palo Alto and their new addition with employees per square foot far below . the norm in that area, was something to be considered. He said a company could build on that site to capacity with a much higher employee per square foot :formula and not be as responsive to the City in terms of total employment in Palo Alto, but still work within the parameters of the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. He did not think that approving the application of Tab Products would increase the density in the area, and he thought it was a recognition of the outstanding job the company had done in the past in reducing Overall employment in Palo Alto, and should be considered'a.minor issue. Vice Mayor Fletcher was torn on the issues but was aware that the number of employees in a particular building was not a constant factor because of ownership changes or the use by the present owner did nothing from stopping the number of employees from rising. She said that because they had had a reduction in the past, the City did not zone for a particular company, it was a lot which was zoned. She did think there was an advantage to having the traffic along Page Mill Road rather than California Avenue. Councilmember Klein agreed with Councilmember Fazzino that it was a, small issue, but felt you could get hurt by a sercies of small issues which added up to a big one. He was sympathetic• to Tab Products, but thought the City had to take stronger action with regard to. limiting the job growth. He felt that the job growth already approved during the year far exceeded the amount of housing which had been approved. He felt Council had made the jobs/housing imbalance worse in the past year and the trend must be reversed. He would uphold the Planning Commission recommendation. MOTION TO DENY PRELIMINARY PARCEL MAP PASSED by a vote of 6-1, Fazzino voting "no," Eyerly and Witherspoon absent. POLICY AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS TO COUNCIL RE STOP SIGNS Vice Mayor Fletcher, Chairperson of the Policy and Procedures Committee, said the Committee reviewed the staff recommendations regarding requests for additional stop signs or removal of two 1 1 0 3 .. 7/27/81 existing stop signs. She said they went along with the staff recom- mendations with the exception of the removal of a stop sign on Los Robles because that particular stop sign needed more input from the local school people and the PTA because the request originally came from them. She said that one was being held off until the Fall when they could hear from school persons. MOTION: Vice Mayor Fletcher moved for the Policy and Procedures Committee that the Council not make any revisions to the existing "Stop Intersection System" map identified as Exhibit "A," and that the Council support the staff recommendation in Exhibit "B" with the proviso that No. 11, Intersection at Los Robles/La Donna be reviewed after school starts in September. Councilmember Levy said regarding the recommendation that instead of installing stop signs, .increase existing no parking zone on Waverley to 50 feet on both, sides of the street, he felt that parking was at a premium in the area of Waverley and Forest, and he was concerned that the trade off was wrong and that as much parking as possible should be maintained and the stop sign installed. He asked how much parking would be eliminated. Transportation Engineer, Ashok Aggarwal, said that the existing red zone was thirty feet and staff intended to increase it to fifty feet, 20 feet on either side. He said it would be a loss of four parking spaces. Director of Transportation, Ted Noguchi, said he did not think any of the four parking spaces were time limited and did not think customer parking was involved in that area. Councilmember Levy did not think he had enough information to sug- gest installing stop signs, but suggested that so long as the Policy and Procedures Committee was continuing the evaluation of the Los Robles/ La Donna recommendation, he asked that they also review the Forest/ Waverley recommendation in teems of the loss of the four parking spaces. Although not many parking spaces would go, he felt they were in a critical area and was concerned that there had been eight accidents at the intersection. The intersection was in need of something, and he felt in -his heart that the stop signs would be a better way of proceeding than eliminating the four parking spaces. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Levy moved, seconded by Bechtel, to refer the recommendation to install stop signs on Waverley and Forest back to the Policy and Procedures Committee to reconsider at the same time as the Los Robles/La Donna intersection. Vice Mayor Fletcher pointed out that the particular intersection was very close to the Civic Center parking garage, which would assist in the event of a parking shortage. She said there was a problem of site distance at that intersection. With regard to the accidents, she pointed out that two of them were due to the drivers running the stop signs. She said it was pointed out at the Committee that it would mean that there were stop signs one block after another with- out a break, and with that many stop signs, people were likely to violate them, Councilmember Renzel said . that there was a perception problem at the intersection because the street on one side of; Forest was wider than the street on the other side which created an `optical allusion that maybe part of the problem and was one of the reasons staff requested to draw -back the parking spaces from the corner. She said that Waverley Street was a bicycle route and a major ` bus route, and she felt it would be ill-advised to put a Stop. sign' there if the problem could not be solved with the parking space removal. She would vote against, the amendment. She felt there was a difference between this proposal and the Los Robles/La Donna proposal, i.e. with Los Robles/La Donna the status quo was being left in tact. She said that the proposal from the Policy and Procedures Committee was to make a change at Forest and Waverley with respect to parking and she thought that Perhaps Councilmember Levy suggested that they, go ahead and make the change and then review the change six months from now. If not, she thought there was quite a distinction between reviewing the decision to make no change and to not make a change at all at this time. Mayor Henderson felt that the Committee had discussed the matter thoroughly and that if the change of parking was not successful, the possibility of stop signs could be looked at another time. He did not see much to be gained by sending the matter back to the Committee now. AMENDMENT FAILED by a vote of 5-2, Bechtel and Levy voting "aye," Witherspoon and Eyerly absent. Councilmember Fazzino said he would vote "no" because he was opposed to the recommendation to put in a stop sign at Homer and Cowper. He felt the matter was thoroughly. discussed by the Committee .and he did not see the votes tonight doing anything but implement the recom- mendation of the Committee. He said he would like to see it moni- tored and explored again in the future. However, he was pleased with the idea of a crosswalk. Councilmember Renzel said that the . Women's Club, who requested, the stop sign, agreed to the solution and she thought the need would be taken care of by the crosswalk. MOTION PASSED by vote of 6-1, Fazzino voting "no," Eyerly and Witherspoon absent. POLICY AND PROCEDURr S COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS TO INKRR ZNG CROTHANCE COUNCIL RE OVERNIGHT Vice. Mayor Fletcher, Chairperson of the Policy and Procedures Committee said that the Committee had discussed the overnight parking ordinance at length and heard from many members of the pub- lic, and they came up with what: they felt might take care of some of the problems which were voiced by people who were opposed to the ban. She said she was a little hesitant about the recommendation in the beginning and would feel schizophrenic when she pu'. the recom- mendation to the Council and argued later :against it. MOTION: Vice Mayor Fletcher for the. Policy and Procedures Committee moved that the Overnight Parking Ban be enforced; that the ordinance be revised by staff to apply only to R--1 neighborhoods, with the exception of neighborhoods such as Downtown North, Downtown South, Ventura and others that have a severe lack of on -site parking; that there be a permit system for the other R -I neighborhoods, the ones that are not exempted (in line with the schedule set forth by staff in its report of May 14, 1"81), that the permit system be such that the persons have to demonstrate that they do not have adequate off- street parking for their vehicles before they can get a permit for_. on -street parking; that there . be an easily administered ; system by telephone to allow quests' overnight parking; and, that commercial vehicles be banned from parking_ in the residential area streets. COUNCILMEMBER WITHERSPOON ARRIVED AT 8:30 .m. Vice Mayor Fletcher, said that the Policy and Procedures Committee Minutes of July 7, 1981, page 10, . paragraph 4, should read "Chief Zurcher,. thought that were legal problems with enforcing the 1 -1 0 5 7/27/81 ordinance on a complaint basis." Jean Libby, 1222 Fulton Street, supported the proposed enforcement of ..the -ban on overnight parking. She particularly supported the limitation of the number -of permits which could be issued per house- hold`. She said that on a small R-1 street it was not fair for one household to control it, when there were six vehicles parked regu- larly on the street. She felt they were eneroachinq on the front of their neighbors homes. She realized recently the visual impacts of looking out your window and always seeing a vehicle parked in front of your house that did not belong to you. She supported the ban on overnight parking. Mike Gal l i , 525 Homer Avenue, opposed the ordinance. He felt that because the ordinance would only be enforced between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. , people could still park their cars on the streets during the day, therefore children would still be running out into the street between parked cars, so the ordinance would not solve that safety problem. Further, there was no indication that burglary or vandalism would be reduced. He said that very few people would be awake during that period. Further, he said that a March staff report said there was no indication that crime would be reduced by this ordinance. Regarding aesthetics, if people could park during the day, there was no impact because between 2:00 a.m., and 6:00 a.ni. very few cared what the street looked like. Finally, he did not feel the ordinance would have any impact. He said the Chief of Police had stated that it was inequitable to enforce the ordinance on a complaint basis only. He said there were only five complaints in a 12 month period. Harry Sanders, 1456 Hdgewood Drive, recommended enforcement of the ordinance. He was concerned about safety and security. He said that several years ago a member of the Police Department had called a neighborhood meeting and asked the neighbors to report strange cars because of the series of robberies in the area. He said that cars parked between 2:00 a.rn. and 6:00 a.rn. would often remain the next day and through the weekend which made it impossible for the street cleaner to get through. From the standpoint of safety for the children and security, he urged the enforcement of the ordi- nance. Jonathan Reider, 3407 South Court, said regarding, crime 'it was unlikely that the strange cars parked on the street belonged to a burglar. He did not see that an overnight parking ban would affect his child's safety since she would be inside during the night. He thought the ordinance would impact- different neighborhoods differ- ently and . for the majority of the neighborhoods affected there were very few problems. He felt what was proposed was a "nonso.ution to a very small problem." Helen McStravick, 562 Military Way, said in her opinion overnight parking was not the problem. She said the problem was continued building of high density housing and residential neighborhoods being overrun with cars, commercial vehicles, trucks, vans, RV's and boats. - Raymond Lux, 4126 Sutherland Drive, said he and his wife supported the ban to prohibit overnight street parking except by paid permit and by temporary guest permission. He said they hoped for greater night safety .and an improvement in the residential nature of the City. He favored the proposed ban. Joyce Anderson, 3881 Magnolia Drive, read a letter from Rex Ling, which is on file in, the City Clerk's office. She supported the overnight parking- ordinance and felt it must be enforced.. 1 i 1 1 0.-6 7/27/81 he felt when cars overflow onto a neighboring property it was an abuse. She said that in the past few years it appeared that the City Council and staff had lowered the City's standards and turned its back on blatent abuses and violations. She pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan stated as a policy to protect and enhance those qualities which make Palo Alto's neighborhoods especially desirable. She supported enforcement of the overnight parking ordinance, and if the Police Department did not want to enforce it, give the enforce- ment powers to another department. She urged that the Council eliminate the exception of a lack of on -site parking. Jane Grubgeld, 3746 LaCdlle Court, urged enforcement of the over- night parking ordinance. She said her situation had not changed since she spoke before the Policy and Procedures Committee. She did not think the hours of parking prohibition would solve the problem, but there was nothing else before the Council. She felt that the people asking for the privilege of parking on streets should pay for the privilege. Bern Beecham, 321 Cowper, did not support the permit restriction in dense areas. He lived in Downtown North. He felt that in the densely populated areas, there would still not be parking spaces in front of their homes even if they had paid for a permit. They would still wind up parking wherever they could find a place. Ralph Crawford, 1111 College Avenue, opposed the proposed ban on overnight parking. Regarding aesthetics, he felt a lot of street signs would be added and felt that was another blight upon the aesthetics of a neighborhood. He felt it was awkward to go into a town when there was a ban on overnight parking, and you did not know about it. There was an assumption that a lot of cars would go away, but he did not think the cars would go away --they would have per- mits. Bob Moss, 4010 Orrice, pointed out that the ordinance was not a new one, but was a modification of an existing ordinance which would help the enforceability. He felt the control for overnight parking would make it easier to identify incorrect uses in residential zones. He supported enforcement of the ordinance. G. L. Bradshaw, 255 Campesino, opposed the ordinance because not everyone lived in a big house with a two -car garage and a double driveway. He had a single -car. garage and single -car driveway which was inadequate to park one car. He did not think the ordinance would help getting cars off the street. He felt the main complaint of citizens was strange cars being parked in front of their prop- erty. He suggested that the thrust of the ordinance should be that owners would be allowed to park cars in front of their homes, and if someone else parked in front of thei a place, then those cars should be \removed He thought that the police efforts would be better spent in controlling crime rather than where cars are parked. Gail Woolley, 1685 Mariposa, said that when the .overnight parking ordinance was enforced, there were no cars parked where they should not be. Further, she felt the ordnance was an incentive for people to get rid of unneeded cars and _- to place cars in driveways. Glynn Falcon, 1221 Webater, had an old house with no garage or driveway. He felt the problem was no communication between neigh- bors. He wasopposed to the ordinance to the extent that it would pose a fee which would constantly be increased. David Moberiy, 3899 Magnolia Drive, supported the overnight parking ban. 1 1 0 7- 7/27/81 Mayor Henderson said he had supported the overnight parking ban. years ago, based upon police recommendations concerning criminal activity, street sweeping, and aesthetic improvement.. He said at that time the permit fee was modest. He was concerned about applying the ban to everyone. He said the Finance and Public Works Committee approved the ban and permit requirements, and then exempted areas, .including others that had a lack of on -site parking. He was not sure it was right to charge $19 for a permit to park in front of one's own home especially when there was no other alterna- tive. Further, he felt it penalized lower income people because they had less on -site parking available. He thought it was a nuis- ance to obtain permits for guests sad that it might be the ultimate bureaucratic interference with private lives. He did not think it greatly improved aesthetics if permits were obtained. Further, he thought the worse problems were in the day time and the parking ban would not do that much good during the early morning hours. Mayor Henderson said the police now recommended against the ban because they did not see it as any substantial help in reducing crime. He felt it was silly to put substantial resources into such a program when there were so many other important police needs that existed in the community. There were alternatives such as enforcing and tightening the existing laws concerning abandoned cars and cars with expired license plates. There isn't any excuse for those types of cars to remain on the streets for any significant length of time. He would also ban commercial vehicles and recreational vehicles from parking on the streets. He felt that if there were safety problems, then a ban on parking on one side of the street should be con- sidered. He would oppose the Committee recommendation. Vice Mayor Fletcher felt there were problems with people parking on the street when off-street space was available. Regarding signs being posted on the street, the legal staff felt that anyone receiving a citation as a result of overnight parking, without a sign being posted on the street, would probably prevail in court. Due process was discussed regarding one neighborhood vs. another, with one neighborhood having the enforcement and the other neighbor- hood not. Vice Mayor Fletcher said that `under the proposal each permit application would result in individual police on -site inspection to investigate how much parking space was available, and how many vehicles a family owned. She thought there would be a lot of regulations which on balance would not justify the ordinance. She said there Were times when government intervention was jus ti f led, but in this case she weighed the% ;o-:os and cons and was appalled to institute a program which created such a bureaucratic heavy-handedness, where the police core out and say that you have to get a permit, and someone else would. riot have; 'co get a permit . She felt that people who had overnight guests. and gust inform the police boa dered on denial of their civil liberties to come and go as they please. Further, she remembered when the ordinance was first in effect and the complaints from people who were new in the area and did not know about the ordinance She thought, it was inequitable that those persons would be given a = ticket. especially if > they arrived on a Saturday night and City Hall was not open until Monday to get a permit. She felt there were too many situations -_where its would cause unjustified problems. She thought it might be 'a geed idea to bars parking on one side_ of the street whe i the streets were, unusually narrow. She thought the neighbors could start the process of trying to get some sort of control on those particular streets. Further, she suggested commercial vehicles and recreational vehicles be banned from parking ,on the Streets in residential areas. She thought -it would be a good -idea to speed up the_ process of enforcing, the law re_ cars which had been; parked .'an the ;street in .exvess_ of 72 hours. Caunci lmember Levy felt that the ?2 .heir - parking limit which was required to enforce" the removal_ of older.:' cars was extremely difficult to implement hence the cars remained for a long time. Further, people who had several older cars left the cars outside. He thought it was more than an aesthetic problem there was also a problem of safety. In the past, he believed that burglaries were easier to _ stop at night . if the police had some knowledge of which cars were normally in the neighborhood and which were not. He felt the ordinance would help that situation. As he recalled, the College Terrace Rapist was caught because of a strange. car in the neighborhood. Another safety .element was that of children playing in the street, and he felt that would be helped if there were fewer cars on the street. The ordinance would effect substantially less cars being on the streets during the day as well as on the street between 2:00 a.m. and 6.00 a.m. He was sensitive to the problems, and felt that the fact that the ordinance had been weakened so as to not affect neighborhoods where clearly it was inappropriate was a good idea. Most R-1 residences had a oneor two car garage and a driveway or a two -car driveway and most people tend not to use their garages for cars. He felt the ordinance would cause people to rearrange their lives and start using their caraQes . and driveways for the purpose for which they were intended. He supported the recommendation of the Policy and Procedures Committee. Councilmember Fazzinosupported the enforcement -of the ban and the recommendation of the Committee that such a program be enacted on a complaint and self-supporting basis. He had noticed a significant increase over the past few years of on -street parking in residential areas since revocation of enforcement. He did not want to set, up a bureaucratic program which emphasized cost and paperwork. When the program was successful in the late 1960's and early 1970's, it did have a positive impact on crime prevention programs, street sweeping efforts and was aesthetically. pleasing. The program which was pro- posed was heavily oriented towards ongoing complaints about inappro- priately parked automobiles. He said that practical implementation of the ordinance would be an .effective anti -abandonment ordinance. In reality, no guests of a residence would be cited if only there for a viait. He said that only those automobiles which . had created tremendous problems over a .period of time would be cited because those would be the automobiles noticed by residents and phoned in as a complaint. - He asked Mr. Maynor whether a ban of nonresident parking in front of residents' homes was a legal approach. Mr. Maynor deferred response for the moment. Councilmember Fazzino said pending Mr. Maynor's opinion, he would support the original recommendation. Councilmember Bechtel was concerned about the bureaucratic maze. which might happen, but felt something had to be done about the amount of vehicles parked in residential . areas which did not need to be there. Councilmember Klein felt there was a ,deterioration in the situation since the City stopped enforcing the ordinance.. He agreed with, Councilmember Levy, and said that although the means for enforcing the ordinance was a ban on parking from . 2:00 ; a.m. to 6:00 a.m./ he thought the real $ttempt Was to get people to get their, cars off the street and put them in driveways. or : garages. He thought that would, occur, and said that the = reverse had occurred over the last five years. He did not think it was a drastic infringement on civil rights, and:, did not think that when the ordinance was being enforced, people felt them civil ' rights ,were ' being violated. Further, he .:chid not think it was an infringement on the occasional.: 1 1 0 9 7/27/81. visitor. who needed to park on the street overnight. He thought that a balance was attempted, and the problems of various neighborhoods tried to be exempted. He thought there might be otherimprovements which could be made in order to tailor the ordinance to the prob- lems. He recognized that there were different neighborhoods, and that there were not ordinances which applied equally to all areas. He did not think there was anything unique about exempting some neighborhoods and applying the ordinance to others. He felt that was owed to the citizens. He was concerned about the fee. The ,notion passed by the Policy and Procedures Committee, set no fee because the concept was changed from that which was described in the staff report, which set forth the $19 annual figure. He discussed with Chief Zurcher the idea that with the various neighborhoods exempted from the enforcement of the ordinance that the cost should be substantially less to the City than originally proposed by the staff report, and he hoped the fee would be substantially less than what was originally proposed. However, he did intend to support the motion. Councilmember Renzel felt that several years ago, the Council Made a commitment in the course of preparing the Comprehensive Plan to beautify the neighborhoods, protect the R-1 zones, and to try and seek new uses for street space besides parking automobiles, When she was on the Planning Commission, she was very concerned about getting adequate parking off-street in developments as they came before the Commission. She felt most people were capable of parking their vehicles off-street in R-1 zones, and even those of their guests. The actual impact in terms of i. npossibility of ,parking off the street in R-1 zones was .not as great as one might surmise. Regarding notices and signs on the street, at the Committee level, the City Attorney had indicated that it would probably be adequate to have notice in the utility mailers. Regarding the hours of enforcement, she felt that basically what it said was when you go home, put your car off the street. She felt it would encourage the habit of parking in the driveways and garages. She would support the recommendation. Mayor Henderson asked the City Attorneysf the fact that it might be announced periodically in the utility bills was sufficient for pro- tection in court or would it be a tough argument. Mr, Maynor said ultimately it would be for the judge to determine, but what was interesting about the State law, which basically pre- empted the whole field was :that the . sect ion which dealt with over- night parking did hot require the posting of signs. He said that reading the statute -strictly it would appear that the City would be in compliance . with State law. He was concerned about a due -process argument being made, and he thought that one.measure which could be. taken would be sending ,notices via utility flyers -and whether or not it would work would ultimately .be found when the tissue went to court. Regarding Counciimember Fazzino's question re whether or not a ban of nonresident parking in front of a residence was legal, Mr. Maynor, responded that it was clearly allowed by State law. State law allowed:preferential parking systems for the handicapped -and and for residents, Vice Mayor Fletcher said regarding the statement that the previous ordinance had a significant effect on the removal of cars . when it was enforced, according to reports from the Police Department, that ;gas not the case, a significant number of cars were not removed. Regarding the fact that the ordinance wouldbe enforced on a com- plaint basis, she said the Police Department made it very clear that that would also not be the case, they would not enforce it on a com- plaint basis, it would be across-the-board. She said' guests would also be cited if they did = not have the special exemption because there would be police personnel who would be doing the enforcing, and they would not recognize which cars belonged and which cars did not belong, which car was . new, qr which car "parked one night . after 1 1 1 the other, and that it would be too much bookkeeping to keep track of which car was new or old. Vice Mayor ,Fletcher, said that. regarding the utility flyer, the utility bill would not arrive the day that the hook up was made, so for the first few weeks, the new person would not be notified at least through the utility flyer. She wondered what the Utility Department would think of the idea, or whoever had to do it, because each address would have to be checked, against whether that was a zone that was exempt, or what side of the street it was on, or whether it was a single-family or multiple - family. It -was -not an easy thing to accomplish. The deterioration over the years and more cars .on the street, was a true fact and was a reflection of the housing costs and nature of the change in the household composition. 'Mare were fewer families with lots of small children and much --more shared housing because that was the only way many people could afford to live in Palo Alto at all. She did not think most of those cars would be taken off the street because they would be eligible for permits . The ordinance benefitted those who had large estates and large lots with lots of room to park cars, but penalized those large families and Shared housing and types of stu- dent groups who could least afford to pay the high fee. It was a complicated program, and she thought the fee would have to be pretty ateep to make it self-supporting. Councilmember Renzel said that' in the past when the ordinance _was enforced, the only limitation on the number of permits was the space in front of aproperty. As a result, she said than: people who had off-street parking space could still buy permits on -street and one of the conditions of the proposal from the Committee was that you -could only get permits )?or cars for which you did not have an off-street space. Further-, she said it included the limitation according to street frontage as well, but she thought that with that extra proviso, there would be a significant number of cars parking cff-street. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fazzino moved to have staff come back to Council with a plan for a preferential parking permit program which would allow resident parking in front of a home, but not nonresident parking. -AMENDMENT FAILED for lack of a second. Councilmember. Fazzino commented that the Council was the one dic- tating the program, and he believed it should be enforced on a com- plaint basis and, that was how he would support it when it cane back later. MOTION PASSED by a vote of 6-2, Fletcher and Henderson voting "no,'' Eyerly absent. RECESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION .10:00 - 10:15. CITY/SCHOOL LIAISON COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS RE USE AND MAINTENANCE OF Councilmember Fazzino said that the: Liaison Committee felt that the possibility of having a single person designated with full authority for scheduling all athletic facilities and for issuing .binding and enforceable permits should be ''explored. Councilmember Fazzino said that many members of the City were also constituents of the School District and the City, and did _ not knw where 0o,turn for use of school sites' athleticfacilities around town The feeling was that one area where the City and ; School District could work together would be in consolidating athletic and other facility coordination. Further, he said there was a feeling that the possibility of identi- fying and separating `costs , for athletic and other community 1-_1. 1 1 7/21/81 1 e facilities which were not run by the School District, but which received heavy City citizen use should also be looked at. Identi- fying and separating those numbers would give a better idea of the cost, resources, and burden on the City in looking at the possi- bility of eventually purchasing or leasing or in, some other way pro- viding control over the facilities for community use. There was a general feeling that the City and the School District should go for- ward with the study and that three basic points would be considered: 1) Central authority in one location: 2) a joint powers agreement on funding with the recognition that the City coffers just like the School District were limited and that the City would not be in.a position of expending a tremendous amount of money purchasing sites around town; and 3) consideration of educational vs. noneducational uses of school facilities. Councilmember Fazzino felt that this was the critical point in terms of delineation between School District and City responsibilities. He said the City could not assist the School District with their educational concerns. He said the City could look at the School District's Programs which were noneduca- tional in nature and which concerned all citizens in Palo Alto, and look at the poss=ibility of operating those kinds of facilities. MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Levy, the City/ School Liaison Committee recommendation that the City and District develop a proposal that will (1) explore the c Acept of a central authority for community use of recreation and performing arts facilities as recommended by both the Palo Alto Athletic Council and the Standing Committee on the Arts and Sciences; (2) delineate the costs for all programs; (3) explore a mechanism to bring about a joint legal authority for funding; (4) propose trade-offs to cover costs (user fees, taxes, volunteers, etc.); and (5) define the use of school district facilities for educational purposes. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme, asked that the City not take any action that would in any way reduce the School District's cost of operations or funding levels because hewas upset at the School District's refusal of the City's generous offer (about $6.8 million)' to purchase the Terman site and the indiction that they wanted the citizens of Palo Alto to` pay an exhorbitant price for their own property. Since the City was not getting much cooperation in the financial end from the School District, he thought it would be a good idea for the City to make it clear to the School District that if they were r&ot going to play, the City was not going to play either. He felt the financial handle was the only one the City had on the School Di_strict , and if no cooperation was received from the School District, the City should start eminent domain, condemnation proceedings on the school sites. Councilmember Levy felt that what the City was doing here should ` be looked at in the spirit of cooperation so that mutually the citizens of Palo Alto would be better:° served. He was also concerned about thestate of the Terman negotiations but 'wanted to look uponthat as a separate issue and not let it get in the way : of working coopera- tively. , MOTION PASSED unanimously., .Fyerly.. absent. CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION, ORDINANCE (Second Reading) (Continued MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Renze of the ordinance. second =reading ORDINANCE FOR SECOND READING entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE TO AMENDING CHAPTER 21.40 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING CONVERSIONS TO CONDOMINIUM AND OTHER COMMUNITY HOUSING" (1st reading 7/13/81 - Passed 5-4, Eyerly, Klein, Levy, Witherspoon "no") Sylvia Seman, 3380 Middlefield Road, Executive Director of Palo Alto Housing Corporation said that the Corporation had addressed the Council earlier on the matter and she would address the Council as an individual and not on behalf of the Corporation. She was con- cerned about lifetime leases applying to units that the Housing Corporation might acquire if they were in the same complex. She said that the Housing Corporation's goal, when properties are acquired was that as years go by, and it could be afforded by the Corporation, to rent them to low-income people under whatever fed- eral program was available. She said in the acquisition_. of 129. Emerson, the Housing Corporation was planning to lease their units under the Housing Authority's moderate rehab program. That program had a lease that those tenants would have to be under, and she did not have any notion of how those tenants, if they had a lifetime lease, would be able to have a lease under the federal program she was also concerned about how it would work with having two leases guaranteed to tenants and being able for them to have a subsidy involved. Ms. Semen understood the Council's concerns that where a condominium conversion was to occur in one building, it would be difficult to delineate those units that would be converted from those units that would be sold under the Rental_ Housing Program. As she perused the ordinance, the definition of "complex" was not limited to one building, it could be several buildings. The defini- tion of "complex". meant.. a structure or structures containing at least three rental units .on the sage parcel or adjoining parcels of property. In that case, if the converter wished to convert the 32 units, as Ferne, then instead of 16 units going to the Housing Corporation, there would be approximate.iy 11 units that went to the Housing Corporation and 22 units would be converted because the com- plex could be defined as the two parcels rather than just one building. Her understanding of the Council's concern of the complex would be if it was in one building, a building such as Forest Towers where it would be difficult to separate those units=, but in the definition, ''complex" was defined as more than just one building. She was not sure if that was Council's intent, because she thought they were trying to delineate conversions when they were off -site rather than those within. She was unsure that Council had done what they intended to do, and wanted to bring that to the Council's attention. Regarding 21.40.050(2) (a) which stated: "Units (i); equal in number to fifty percent of those units proposed for conver- sion (excluding any units which are subject to the tentative or pre- liminary parcel map and are to be provided to the City as below - market -rate units) ," ahe did not understand the language in the par- entheses as being clarifying to the point that she thought the Council wanted. She thought it would be simpler to remove it _unlehs there was something in it that required to, to remain. Mayor Henderson clarified that it meant units .equal to fifty percent of those proposed for conversion, so I in one building there were 100 units, and 67 would be converted then 33 units would have to be provided -at low/moderate rates: City- Attorney : Don Maynor agreed with .Mayor Henderson. He thought, however that it might bebetter to continue the matter since the. attorney who wrote the ordinance was not there top.respond to Ms. Seman's questions 1 1 1 3 7/27/81 MOTION: Vice Mayor Fletcher moved, seconded by Fazzino, to continue second reading to August 10 to allow the attorney • to study the pro- posed language changes. Mayor Henderson said he shared Ms. Seman's concerns and would sup- port the continuance. Councilmember Fazzino said he did not want the Council to rehash all the issues previously discussed, and if the Council's discussion on August 10 could be limited to the three issues raised by Ms. Semen, he would have no problem supporting the continuance. Vice Mayor Fletcher said she saw no reason to hash and rehash tonight and on August 10, and thought that if points other than those mentioned by Ms. Semen needed to be discussed, it ought.: to be done tonight. Councilmember Renzel commented that it was a second reading before the Council, and that it had already been hashed through by the Council. The proposed changes for second reading were considered nonsubstantial and were presumably wording changes to accomplish the Council"s.purpose. So, she thought that if it were continued, it should be continued as a second reading with the discussion basically limited to the wording changes requested by the Housing Corporation. If there were further geestions, she felt they should have been asked when Council reviewed the ordinance during the first reading. MOTION TO CONTINUE PASSED by a vote of 6-2, Levy and Witherspoon voting "no," Eyerly absent. EUROPEAN HEALTH SPA (CMR:368:1) Mayor Henderson said he had received a call from Mr. Turley, the Vice President of Grecian Health Spa, and he was concerned because he had had no opportunity to get any background on the subject and it would be difficult for him to deal with the issues tonight and, therefore, he asked that the item be continued. Mayor Henderson said that Mr. Turley indicated that the Council should take into account the fact that it was a new owner, and that there was evi- dence from the :staff report of apparent cooperation. Mayor Henderson said he hoped the Council would accept the staff recom- mendation that. Council instruct staff to work with the Grecian Health Spa management in order to obtain as much improvement as pos- sible through %.aluntary means. He felt that there was every evi- dence that the new owners wanted to cooperate and do everything pos- sibie,to alleviate the situation. Councilmember Fazzino said hisconcerns had not abated and he was very concerned about the parking situation, at the same time he was getting` increased feelings that resolution of this problem would be related to resolution: -of. the Evergreen Park area Problem. He thought that since there was new management and according to staff, they had shown a willingness to discuss the problem, and develop some conclusions, he was willing to hold off: a few week's , and have staff work with the new management. He did not think it would_. be fair to impose a solution on the new management without givingthen a chance to review some of the problems. He said he would be care- fully monitoring the isene and if no change = had occurred in a month's - time, he would bring it back to Council and consider some of the other options which has. been lookedat previously. MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Renzel, to instruct staff to work with the new management as they seek to obtain voluntary changes in the parking habits of their customers. Staff Staff would take no action except to encourage the new management to follow through -with the committemerits described in CMR:368:1 POTION PASSED unanimously, Eyerly =absent: COUNTY TERMINATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REFERRAL (CMR:372:1) -rte. r.-.... ► Chief Planning Official, Bruce Freeland, said he had spoken with the Director of Planning at Stanford, Phil Williams and asked that he reassure the Council that even though the County was backing out of the referral process, the University intended to continue its part of the referral process and would abide by the previous agree- ment between the City and the University. Mayor € end.erson said he had a conversation with Mr. Doty from Stanford who conveyed the same message and also said that Stanford would be willing to ;join with the City in asking the County to retain the referral system. Mayor Henderson said he felt everyone saw it as a serious situation. He thought, that it was a unique situation because Stanford was not like all pockets of land in the County, and the least the City should get, would be an exception to where the system would continue for the Palo Alto/Stanford CS zoning relationship. MOTION: Councilmember Bechtel moved, seconded by- Renzei, to. authoe rize .the Mayor to send a letter to the County Board of Supervisors protesting the unilateral discontinuation of land development refer- rals and urging the reinstatement of these referrals; and: further, that the Mayor personally contact Supervisor Becky Morgan and other supervisors; that letters be sent to Mayors in other cities, and ask that the item be placed on IGC agenda. Councilmember Renzel felt it was important that the County continue the land development referrals, the CS agreement which was shared with Stanford and the County was an alternative to a land develop ment process which applied to unincorporated pockets and various spheres of influence throughout the County. She said the City was not p.ugged into that process because of the CS zone agreement and would he prepared should the County. not go forward, to raise the question of whether the City should not go _.to the basic land devel- opment proposal process for unincorporated areas. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Eyerly absent. REQUEST OF VICE Vice Mayor Fletcher said she had addressed the problem of retaining the retail vitality of the downtown which was a positive feature in Palo Alto and a necessary service to the residents of the City. She said the threat was the loss of retail space to office uses and, the loss of food markets and hardware stores was a symptom of the larger problem. She said Palo Alto had become a prime location for office space now that San Francisco was running out of space. Vice Mayor Fletcher indicated that some months ago, there was a workshop with the Association of Bay Area Governments who had told them that Palo Alto was the second most desired location foroffice space after San Francisco. It had been argued that a moratorium was not justified because a study of the problem was being commenced. She said that in the time it would take to complete the study and for the Council to take action, if the studyindicated that action was needed, more retail space could be lost, which could not be retrieved for several decades. She thought the situation was serious enough to warrant an immediate freeze. Then, if the study revealed there was no problem, the freeze could be lifted. MAYOR FLETCHER RE DOWNTOWN NON-RETAII. MORATORIUM MOTION: Vice Mayor. Fletcher moved, seconded by ,Henkel, that Council direct :,the City Attorneyto institute a 6 -month moratorium' on non- personal service uses at street level on University Avenues and cross streets from Webster to High ( north boundaries of Lytton and Hamilton) to be for new uses only, and ' that the moratorium ordinance be returned to Council at the next me?ting. 1 1 1 .5 7/27/81 Mayor Henderson asked for a definition of "personal services." He said normally "personal services" would include banks, and savings and loans. Vice Mayor Fletcher said she did not intend to include financial services. She said she was at a presentation of a merchants' com- mittee where there was a speaker from Los Altos who said they had a similar ban on non -retail uses. She thought they might have a model which could be followed as to what type of services might be excluded. She asked if there was a definition in the zoning ordi- nance. Principal Planner George Zimmerman said there was a definition which essentially included beauty shops, barber shops, shoe repair, self- service laundry and similar type uses. Councilmember Bechtel said that assuming the Finance Committee approved the consulting firm recommended, %-,hen would staff estimate the downtown retail study would begin and be completed. Mr. Zimmerman responded that if the Finance and Public Works Committee recommended negotiating with the consultant selection committee's recommended consultant, staff wculd take the budget amendment and contract to Council for approval in late August and the consultants would be ready to begin the study in September. The results would be back by January 1 as a report to the Planning Commission. Councilmember Bechtel asked foe figures on the amounts of retail use by square footage or whatever over a ten . year period and if pos- sible, what changes have occurred in the last cotpi:..,of years. Mr. Zimmerman said that as part of the downtown retail study., staff indicated, to both Council and the Finance and Public Works Committee that analysis of land use in terms of ground floor square footage between 1970 and 1981 had been commenced. Staff figures were pre- liminary. Overall there was more ground floor area in 1981 than in 1970 because there was more development downtown. He raid that in staff's category of "Retail, which was . not :quite the sane as the zoning definition, but close, downtown had increased by 110,000 square feet. Under "services," which included both personal ser- vices and business services, there had been an increase of. 10,000 square feet. He emphasized that they we ra all approximate figures. In terms of "office space," there had been an increase of 35,000. square feet. For "public and quasi -public uses" there had been an increase of 10,000 square feet Although staff's figures were pre- liminary figures, there had been an increase, but the major increase had been in retail. He pointed out that olf the approximate 110,000 square feet increase in "retail," approximately 50,000 square feet had been in eating and drinking establishments. Eatinu and drinking establishments had accounted for much of the increase in tax'ble retail sales in-; the downtown ° area _during the last decade and had aloe accounted for a substantial share of the , increase in retail floor area. Mr. Freeland presented a list of applications - which had coe:, before the City in the period from January, = 1980 through June 11,_ 1981. He said there was one significant application since that date which was tlett Food Mart site on Waverley. Within the 1-1/2 year time period, there were 12 applications which would involve , a change in: the ` land use status of properties in the general area of the downtown. He gave an individual breakdown. He mentioned that as a caveat for all of the listings the Council should keep in mind that several were being built as speculative space and the tenancy of " the building would not be setuntil the building was complete It was possible' that several of the '<-applications could very_ < wen l involve retail uses, some were. identified' as either retail`"orr offices in the infor- mation which accompanied the application,` : but basically -. staff .recorded the information that came into the City. The first appli- cation was at 181 Lytton,'which was from a gas station, restaurant, and a house to -offices of a -little less than 10,000 square feet; 124 University Avenue, the Paris Theater to two offices of a little over .. 5,000 square feet each; 745 Emerson was. to offices. of almost 5,600 square feet; 335 Bryant from -a residence and a parking lot to offices of less than 1,000 square feet; 146 Forest from automotive to retail end_ antiques, this was one where there was 11,000 square feet gained in reteile 247 High from'a manufacturing concern to offices -interior decorator of 2,500 square " feet; 339 University Avenue which had been retail to an an expansion of Imperial Savings of 2,300 square feet; 420 Univer sity from retail to Union- Bank, another expansion of 2,-800 square feet; 623 Alma from automotive to offices nof a little less than 6,000 square -feet; :119 University from retell tce offices of 3,000 square feet; 165.175` Forest from a gas station to offices and retail of 16,000 square -feet. He said it was being built as a spec building and it was intended that one floor would be primarily :retail. The fact :was that: .one would not know until the bui ldings were.. occupied just what would be there. The final one was 365-369 Forest which had been •residences and a beauty shop and would now be offices and/or retail for 12,000 square feet. lie said that 11 out of the 12 involved a change in use from a non - office use to "a potential office use. Most of, them did not cone out of retail, but from auto related or other non -retail activities. Overall there was about as much gain ein retail as there was loss and there was a big unknown as to what- the tenancy would ultimately .be. In terms of the heartland of _the downtown, -Mr. Freeland said there were very few of the applications and they tended to be small in size. He said to keep in mind the Food Mart side on Waverley, about 10,000 square feet was formerly retail and proposed to office. He did not see a clear pattern "of loss of retail, but clear activity toward office. It was not a clear case ir. -terms of building a case one way or the other. Counc i 1 member Witherspoon asked i f the so called "office space" .was. a total loss for sales tax revenues or were there some taxes from ' certain offices uses. Mr. Zimmerman responded that it depended on the use, but most office uses would not generate a taxable sales space. Business machines and>. rentals such as the IBM sales office, that were not even ground floor establishments were major contributors to the taxable sales revenue in the downtown area. Douglas W. Rucker. 227 University Avenue, of Rucker Uniforms, said he and his wife were in. their 35th year of business. He was opposed to the moratorium because the more legislation, the less regulation. As a property owner, he did not feel it was in the best interests of the City to say what type of business must exist. Ann Werry, 460 Waverley, Werry Electric, spoke first as President of Downtown Palo Alto, Inc. She said the new merchant's promotion com- mittee did.: not represent Downtown Palo Alto, Inc. She _.read a letter dated July 27, 198.1, from Darryl Wallace, Manager and Co-owner of the Habit at 384 University Avenue,` which stated that a copy of a petition dated July 1.f, 1981 was,,attached and that it ..bore Mr. Wallace's 'endorsement. He asked that his name be ` removed from the petition. He was under the misassumption that the petition was authorized by Downtown Palo Alto. Inc. He felt that . the petition was: a nistepresentati on of the group and, therefore,- he did not endorse the proposed moratorium. Mrs. Werry said that she was a member of a long-time retail family whose firm had been in business for over 66 years in downtown Palo Alto, 55 years on University Avenue. Thev did not" support a ban on any kind of business because of its negative aspect on the business community at large. She felt it would pre-empt the action - already taken in referring the downtown retail study to the Finance and Public Works Committee and that when the results of the study were evaluated, they could work together toward maintaining the unique downtown community Palo Alto as it had always been. She hoped that Council's only conclusion would be that no restrictions of any kind were necessary especially after having heard from other positive speakers who had been part of the downtown business community for many years. Roxy Rapp, Rapps Shoes, 375 University, said he was opposed to the. proposed moratorium on office space He spoke of - the various prob- lems which had existed over the years, and of the help which had been received from the banks and other financial institutions He felt that downtown had developed a base of the financial institu- tions and good offices and during the time of deterioration these institutions had helped keep the town from becoming totally dete •- rated. He hoped that no action would be taken on the matter, .he saw no benefit to it, and urged .the Council and fellow merchants to address themselves to more realistic dangers which faced downtown such as parking for customers and employees, and toward making down- town a safer and cleaner place to shop. Don Klages, owner of Wideman's, 281 University Avenue, said he agreed with Mr. Rapp that through the years there had been many dif- ficulties, and that many banks and savings institutions stood by the merchants and helped stabilize downtown Palo Alto to make it what it is. He said that although they were not .a shopping center, they were a financial center, and a place to find excellent food. He felt that one thing which brought people to shop were the fine restaurants. He said that what had made his business so vital had been the people employed by many of the firms, the emplo,,ees worked in downtown and shopped in downtown. He felt that sort of thing must be addressed. He said Northern cal ifornia Savings and Loan had their head office in Palo Alto, Bank of America had its major branch in Palo Alto, Crocker Bank was planning the same thing. He felt it would bring a clientele of customers who were very strong for the business. He felt .the moratorium was self-destructive and would do a great deal more harm than good, Warren Thoits, 525 University, spoke on behalf of Thoits Brothers, Inc., had two points concerning opposition to the proposal. He felt declaring the moratorium was an extreme in the exercise of political power. It mooted peoples` rights, which he felt should be restric- ted to emergency matters only. . He felt the reference to the old Paris Theater was inaccurate, that there would be retail there, and felt there would be retail in several of the other locations where "office" was indicated. The situation was hardly an emergency and in any event no emergency which would warrant the exercise of the extreme measure. In terms ,of downtown Palo Alto ownership, he assured " the Council that the . tenancy was. toward, not away, from retail. In terms of personal experience, any.request for space over the last 18 months in which he had an interest, had all been for :. retail use, not office = use, He re-emphasized that there was noe. emergency warranting the moratorium. Joel Budgor, = 305 Lytton, representing the downtown property owners group, said no one had presented any evidence to show that the .mer- chants were concerned about being driven, out of the downtown. He said that: Hare, _Brewer and Kelley had= prepared a report documenting thanges in business uses in the ;downtown Palo Alto commercial area from 1970-1980. The source of information for that study was the Palo_ Alto City Directory for 1970 published >: by R. 1. Polk and Company. The ,information .far 1980' uses was gathered through on -site inspection,' He said that In that study All changes;; in use from 1970 to 1980 was -categor ized prior and subsequent ;'to, the change in use. Four main categories were =used: Retail, Norp.Retail, Vacant and Other. , The findings showed .:that -for 1910-1980 _ on University Avenue and its cross streets, excluding' businesses that had not changed their use and therefore -were Irrelevant to the issue, the number . of retail, establishments increased from 39 to 58, while the number of 1 non -retail eetabl ishments decreased from 25 to 15. He said that if changes along Lytton and Hamilton Avenue were included, the number of new retail establishments in the downtown area would increase to 85 from the 59 retail establishments existing in the same area in 1970. Further, he said that figure declined with „the. decline of 13 non -retail businesses from 35 to 22 for the same area in the same period. His information did not support the claim that non -retail businesses had been overrunning the downtown area. In studying the impact of business changes on the character of the downtown business community, it was found that of the 70 -odd charges in business uses which had occurred on University Avenue and its cross streets from the 1970-1980 comparison, only 14 resulted in a loss of retail establishments as compared to 23 which resulted in losses of non- retail establishments. If the impact of business changes along Lytton and Hamilton Avenues were included, the trend was reinforced. Conversely, Mr. Budgor said that if you looked - at business which operated in 1980 on University Avenue and its cross streets, you would find 31 instances of business changes which resulted in growth of the retail community vs. only 11 such instances in the non -retail community. The trend on Lytton and Hamilton Avenue was similar if not- quite as strong. Regarding the claim that non -retail businesses were driving retail businesses out of downtown, the actual numbers did not correspond with the image offered. For every retail use that was changed to a non -retail use --10 to ,be exact --twice as many non -retail uses became retail uses. If you add the business changes on .Lytton and Hamilton, the findings would become stronger. During the 1970's with no ban on the use of ground floor space except standard zoning ordinances, downtown Palo Alto retail establishments expanded largely at the expense of non -retail establishments and not the other way around. Carol Mullin, Bentwood .Rockers 201 Hamilton, said she opposed the moratorium because she felt .the merchants who were arguing for it were mistaken in their analysis. The people who filled the offices, who went to the banks, and filled the restaurants, or bought from the merchants were customers. She felt most landlords would prefer to have strong retail tenants. She believed that the banks and the offices were what made them prosperous and if their needs and parking could- be fitted in, that would be even better. Councilmenbe.r Levy asked Ms. Mullin what percentage of her gross was represented by her rent. Ms. Mullin responded approximately 6%. Ira Kaplan, 4283 Ponce Drive, . Owner of Kitty O'Hara, had gathered a group of Concerned merchants relative to sales promotion in the downtown Palo Alto area. His group met every Friday morning and discussed the growth of non -retail in the downtown area. It was highlighted by the action taken by the City of Los .Al tos e and by the strengthening in the Stanford Shopping Center with the announcement that . they would build the new Nieman Marcus store, thereby reinforcing the position that they were concerned about what would happen in the downtown Palo Alto retail community. The group believed that a contiguous area of retail . activity was necessary for the survival of the retail community in downtown Palo :A1to& He said that .custoiei s liked to _ window shop and to go from . store 'to -Store and that, activity was broken when they moved from ` a retail store past a non -retail office, bank,eetc. He said_>the very. fact that the Council had/ authorized a study -to review - the : retail climate showed than:°there was a concern .about the future. - He felt that if Council placed a moratorium in effect -which would last until the results of the study, that would at least' halt the erosion of -the downtown community should the study suggest that the downtown retail zone was in jeopardy. He said the merchants who met on Friday mornings were willing to abide by the results of the study, but felt that until the study was complete and had a chance to be evaluated, a mora- torium should be put into effect. He 'clarified the statement made by Mrs. Werry about the signatures and the drafting of the resolu- tion which was presented to the Council. He said there were four members of Downtown Palo Alto Board of Directors that met every Friday morning. He understood that Mrs. Werry had submitted a let- ter on the stationery of Downtown Palo Alto, Inc stating their position. -As a member oi the Board of Directors of Downtown Palo Alto, Inc., he knew of no such meeting which was called that gave Mrs. Werry the approval to go ahead with- that letter. He urged adoption of the moratorium. Howard Churcher, 377 Fletcher Drive, supported the moratorium until the proposed study was completed. David Gaskill, 4060 Manzana Lane, read a letter from Victoria Basch, which is on file in the City Cherk's Office, and supported the mora- torium. Don Douglas, 355 University, felt that the moratorium was a neces- sity. Ann Miller, Studio. D, Inc., 657 Alma, read a letter from Peter. Giamalis, which is on file in the City Clerk's Office. She sup ported the moratorium because she saw the retailers around her going out of business and offices going in. She realized that banking establishments were needed, and she was concerned that Studio 0 would be the only retail outlet left in downtown Palo Alto. Steven Singer, 552 waver 1 ey, Owner of Deal i n' Down, supported the mop atorium. Don Surath, 1930 Ivy Lane, said he loved banks, but was concerned about where they: were being located[. He felt that the banks, offices and merchants should be separated and each kept together. He supported the moratorium until the study was completed. Councilmember Witherspoon said she opposed the motion. She pointed out to those who wondered why a moratorium was being proposed before the study, that Council had voted to have the st!tdy at the insis- tence of the same group that now wanted the moratorium. She thought it behooved the supporters of the moratorium to make an overwhelming case for an emergency necessary to enact an ordinance. She did not see an emergency. She thought. that Menlo, Park and Los Altos were different communities and what might be appropriate for their area was not necessarily appropriate for Palo Alto. She said it was attractive to her to be able to do all her errands in one place, and she did not: limit herself : to shopping just in retail stores, but tried to do all her family errands in one area. She said doing that meant she avoided having to drive here, there, and everywhere, which was what she thought was trying to be achieved in the downtown area. The mix was needed and she could sense the concern among the retailers. It was no secret that the economy was failing down and at this time of the year retail trade was at a slow ebb, but she, did not think . it was because offices were Coming, and she did not think in _ the ' next four months there would be enough offi ce space being used at the cost of retail space to justify a moratorium. Counc1 Ime,aber Levy said he el so opposed the coati or, He saw nothing against the concept of moratorium,: and generally favored them if' things- were changing too rapidly . or":.If there was a reasonable pros- pect .of his possibly favoring ,the changes being considered. In this case, he did not think either of those situations: prevailed. He said he road down . University on his way to the Council meeting, _ and observed between Cowper and Kipi ing.= no banks or . savings and roans, between Ki pl ing and Waver ley two, between Waver ley. and: Florence two, between Florence and' Bryant One, between Bryant and Ramona one. He. 1 1 did not observe at this time that the downtown was being overwhelmed by savings and loans or banks. The data from staff wherein there were a total of 160,000 square feet added between 1970 and 1981.of which 110,000 was retail indicated to him that retain had been on the upsurge over a longer term trend, In the short- term, if he counted the data correctly, in the last 1-1/2 years, the City had lost 19,000 square feet in retail, gained 11,000 of retail definitely, and 30,000 square feet some of. which - would be retail. - If a third of that was retail, .there was about an equal loss and gain. He felt it would be unwise to install a freeze in this situation. Councilmember Klein- said he was concerned about the commercial viability of the University Avenue area. 'He did not feel that a. moratorium would add to the health of the area. He felt moratoriums warranted an overwhelming amount of evidence that an emergency existed. He thought it was a drastic solution and was a long way from'finding an emergency at this time. He did not see any trend at all at present, and thought perhaps the in depth study would show more, but absent that evidence, he would oppose the motion. Councilmember Fazzino said he shared some concern about the viability of retail. He said during the seventies, the shift had been toward retail, and also during the past 1-1/2 years. He thought it was incredible that any member could support.a moratorium when there was such little evidence that a major problem existed. He did not see the major danger signs of office/bank shifts which would necessitate emergency action. Further, he did not feel moratoria solved anything, they showed no imagination and no creativity. He thought it was a negative public policy. He would agree that there were some slight concerns for retail uses in the downtown area that should be looked at, i.e. higher rents, little parking, loss of food markets, and some reputable firms moving out. That concerned him, but he would prefer that substantive proposals be brought forth to nurture and sustain development of retail growth in the downtown area rather than do-nothing moratoria approach. He wanted to explore the concept of the pedestrian ground floors which were looked at a few years ago along certain blocks of University, additional parking, and other approaches during the course of the downtown retail study. He also wanted and invited smaller merchants in the downtown area to participate fully and actively in the downtown study to 'deal with the approaches. He encouraged his fellow Councilmembers to vote against the motion. Mayor Henderson said he had previously supported a moratorium under what he considered to be an emergency situation, but the data in the downtown area did not substantiate the conclusion of an emergency situation. He said retail and personal services growth had considerably exceeded office space growth over the past ten years.. He did not see , an emergency gency now, and did not see one for the next six months, and, therefore, would oppose the moratorium, Councilmember Renzel supported the moratorium not because it was an emergency, but because it was an area under study. Moratoria had been used in the past during the Comprehensive Plan process and application of the zoning ordinance when an area was under study. She had watched University Avenue go down and then pull itself back up, and she felt it was a vital and lively place, but 'the balance was delicate, particularly because of the inter -ref ati onshi ps of the parking with the land uses. She said retail merchants used a lot of short term parking where one space could .be turned over many times during the day for:: a customer, where offices eaand otheu employment type uses utilized the parking spaces all day long, and one parking space was used for one car and one person, She thought it was a very delicate balance and they knew there were parking problems downtown and the balance and the lively atmosphere that drew custo- mers _to the retail uses in downtown Palo Alto should be preserved. She said she would support the motion. Councilmember.Bechtel said she was concerned about- the vitality of downtown Palo Alto and University Avenue. She thought it had been exciting to see the growth of a number of -restaurants and new retail stores which had come in.' She felt that offices could -not do it alone, and if there were all offices, the restaurants would not. survive. She used the example of downtown San Jose Where a series of restaurants had tried to survive on solely the lunch crowd. She thought the mix- of -active and vital stores was needed. She did not think there was an emergency in this case, and would not support the motion. If :the results of the study showed that there really was a danger of losing the viable mix, then she would support retail only on University Avenue. Vice Mayor Fletcher said she could not understand why they had to go all the way to an emergency before instituting a moratorium. She said, it had. been done several times before. All she was asking for was a temporary holding action. She could not see .that a short-term moratorium until the long-term solutions were seen, was such an action that would affect anyone very drastically. She said there was a problem downtown, it was recognized in the Comprehensive Plan. She said they were not talking about eliminating the banks and offices that were there. There were ample banks and sayings and loan, and no one was.suggesting that they be eliminated. They would still be there -even if a moratorium were put .into effect, it was a matter of making sure that they would not lose any of the prime retail uses now in effect. MOTION FAILED for a moratorium by a vote of 6-2, Renzel and Fletcher voting "aye," Eyerly absent. RE UEST OF MAYOI HENDERSON RE ESTABLISHING A COMMITTEE TO WORK WITH Councilmember Levy said he was dismayed and very concerned at what he felt was tha School district's arrogant rejection of the City's offer for . Terman. He said that without intruding on the preroga- tives and efforts_. of the City's negotiating team, he wanted to see the Council more intensively involved. He said that June Fleming and dean Diaz were in agreement with the concept. MOTION: Councilmember Levy moved, seconded by Fazzifo, that the Mayor., be authorized to appoint an advisory committee to work with staff in negotiating with the PAUSO for purchase of Terman. Councilrnember Levy said that since the School District had set a deadline of July 31, he felt it was an emergency situation regarding the item._ Counciimember Witherspoon asked what were the Council's options under the deadline. She asked if condemnation proceedings would be started if a price could not be reached by the 31st. Assistant City Manager June Fleming said staff's understanding was that the School District Board was not .recommending an extension of that deadline, but that they were willing ,to continue to negotiate Counci lmember Wither spoon said thzte was not ,a deadline then except on paper. Ms. Fleming answered that was correct. 1 1 2 2 7/27/81 1 1 Councilmember Witherspoon said she would support the motion, but did not know who would volunteer to spend the next two weeks with the School Board. Councilmember Renzel said she was concerned about how complex the negotiating process would get if two or three Councilmembers were added to the staff members' negotiating team. Ms. Fleming said that as she understood the concept, Councilmember Levy had said that this would not be a negotiating committee as such, and the Councilmembers would not be actively involved in nego- tiations, the way it was currently being carried out was how it would continue. This would be an advisory group that would be sup- portive of and would serve as a sounding board for the negotiating team. That would be very helpful. She agreed with Councilmember Renzel that it would to very confusing if the Councilmembers became a part of the actual negotiations. That was not her understanding of Councilmember Levy's proposal. Mayor Henderson said he thought that if staff found it useful for Councilmembers in some way to participate such as making phone calls, that would be the extent of the subcommittee. Councilmember Renzel asked if the Council subcommittee would speak for the Council or was the subcommittee to guess at what Council felt, She asked what the perceived role of the subcommittee was. Councilmember Levy thought that the situation was such that perhaps the negotiating team could benefit from two-way communication with formally named members of the Council so that an elaborate procedure would not be needed whereby the Council in a public meeting had to be polled and discuss items, etc. If there was a major departure from the parameters that the Council had laid out, then they would go back to a whole Council He said that at this point the School Board and the City were now substantially apart, and perhaps some more intensive Council advice. and help was necessary. Councilmember Renzel said she found it difficult to understand the concept. If those Councilmembers were not authorized to make decisions on behalf of the Council and if they were not participating in the negotiating process, what would they be doing. She thought the Council was always available, individually and cumulatively, for staffto have a sounding board. Councilmember Fazzino saw than group as being advisory on this issue as any other. . subcommittee or board was advisory to the .entire Council on any other issue. He thought it would be nice to march all the Councilmembers down to the School Board chambers and perhaps that should be done as a final action if they continue to "arro- gantly" rr:fuse the Council's very reasonable proposal. He felt that one ofthe big problems and one of the great concerns arising out of .: the Ventura hassle a few months ago was that it was a Board/staff process. The Board or the School District elected officials were dealing directly with City staff and there was a real need for elected officials to speak with elected officialson an equal basis. He felt that utilizing the talents of some of the City's representa- tives would be helpful. He said a committee person would merely be an advisory position supporting staff and who were able to talk to the School Board members to raise some of the political and other issues' which were -a basic part of the proposal in an informal way. He thought it was an irnportant._:approach, and hoped the motion would be adopted so Mayor Henderson could quickly appoint the group. 1 1 2 3 7/27/81 MOTION PASSED by a vote of 7-1, Renzel voting "no," Eyerly absent. MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Fazzino, to appoint Councilmember Klein as chairman, and Councilmembers Levy and Witherspoon as members of the advisory committee to work with staff in negotiating with PAUSD re Terman. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Eyerly absent. MAYOR HENDERSON RE HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION INTERVIEWS. Mayor Henderson said there were 15 applications and his feeling was that the Council submit five or six choices and that the top six or so be interviewed. He noted that a number of the candidates had been interviewed before. MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Fazzino, that Councilmembers submit up to four names by Thursday, July 30, to the City Clerk. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Eyerly absent. MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Fletcher, that interviews of top six applicants be on August 3. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Eyerly absent. MAYOR HENDERSON RE SCHEDULE OF AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER COUNCIL Councilmember Witherspoon said she probably would not be available September 8. Councilmember Levy suggested that September 8 be cancelled because it fell between two holidays rather than September 14. Mayor Henderson asked if there was a special reason for the September 14 meeting being cancelled as opposed to September 8. Ms. Fleming said that staff was concerned about time being available to prepare information, agendas and CMR's for the 14th meeting when there were two holidays in the preceding week. She said there were deadlines for getting information to the public and getting things through reproduction. Councilmember Renzel pointed out that there would not have been meetings for two weeks prior to that time. Ms. Fleming said that would mean the agenda would have to be in place two weeks in advance. MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Fletcher, to cancel August 3 Regular City Council Meeting. MOTION PASSED. unanimously, Eyerly absent VICE MAYOR FLETCHER RE AB 256 RE AGE DISCRIMINATION IN HOUSING. Vice Mayor Fletcher said that recently the Council had directed the Mayor to send a letter in support of the McCarthy Hill, AB 256, which would prohibit discrimination against fail1il ies with children in rental housing. She saiJ that in the Council- packets, they had a letter from Leo McCarthy'' pot nt ing out that the bill sti l) needed to go through the Senate. She said it would be before the Senate local. government committee on August 12. 1 1 1 1 -1 2 4 1/27/81 MOTION: Vice Mayor Fletcher moved, seconded by Fazzino, that Mayor send a letter in support of AB 256 to Chairman of Senate Local Government Committee (Senator Marks) . 1 MOTION PASSED by a vote of 6-1-1, Henderson "no," Witherspoon "abstaining," Eyerly absent. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 12:20 a.m. APPROVED: Mayor MOTION: Vice Mayor Fletcher moved, sec by Fazzino, that Mayor send a letter in support. of AB 256 t .irman of Senate Local Government Committee (Senator Marks) . MOTION PASSED by a vote of. 6-1-1, Henderson "no," Witherspoon "abstaining;" Eyerly absent. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 12:20 a.m. APPROVED: Mayor 1 1 2 5 7/27/$1