Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10151973CITY COUNCIL MINUTES e Monday, October 15, 1973 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date at 7.40 p.m. in a regular meeting with Vice Mayor Pearson presiding. Present: Beahrs, Berwald, Clay, Henderson, Norton (arrived 7:45 p.m.), Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher Absent: Comstock Minutes of September 24 19'3 Councilman Sher referred to page 222, seventh paragraph, third line and said that the word "opportunist" should be "entrepreneur." MOTION: Vice Mayor Pearson moved, duly seconded, that the minutes of September 24, 1973: be approved as corrected. The ration passed on a unanimous vote. Fero nitic,r� of Cub Sc:o,st PacF: 19 Tern 4 Councilman Clay commented that a group of Boy Scouts from pack 19, den 4 were in the audience. They are members of Webelos, a name mean- ing "We will be loyal scouts." He welcomed these young teen to the meet- ing and -Indicated that they are working toward their citizenship badge and tonight were observing the Council meeting. Vice Mayor Pearson also welcomed the Cub Scouts to the meeting. Resolution of A reciation on Retirement of Louise Trautman Q: • -- W.rO - - 4 MOTION: Councilman Henderson introduced the following resolution and moved, seconded by Beahrs, its adoption: RESOLUTTON NO. 4829 ENTITLED "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO LO;JISE TRAUTMAN UPON HER RETIR. Y T" The resolution was adopted on a unanimous vote:, Mre. Trautman was present in the audience, and Vice Mayor Pearson thanked her and wished her many years of happy retirement. Resolution of A reciation U on Retirement o Steve Duarte ` :assaammomaamamwmemme : MOTION: Councilman Clay introduced the following resolution and moved, seconded by Beahra, its adoption: 242 10/15/73 RESOLUTION NO. 4830 ENTITLED "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO STEVE DtUARTE UPON HIS RETIREMENT" The resolution was adopted on a unanimous vote. Mr. Duarte was present in the audience and Vice Mayor Pearson thanked him and wished him many years of happy retirement. Ordinance Motion to Reconsider Out of Order Item 7 e a ; '.,Mira or um on re one or ree ont a tem Irdinance us ea onvere'on o an Condominiums During Pe •ency o tug es Councilman Henderson noted that there were two items on the agenda that he felt would require the attendance of the full Council. He thought they should be continued if possible. MOTION: Councilman Henderson moved, seconded by Rosenbaum, that items 7 and 10 (Ordinance Extending Moratorium on Fire Zone I for Three Menthe) (Ordinance Suspending Conversion of Condominiums During Pendency of Studies) be brought forward for consideration at this time. The motion passed on ..he following vote: AYES: Clay, Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Beahrs, Bemeld MOTION: Councilman Henderson; roved, seconded by Pearson, that items 7 and 10 (Ordinance Extending Moratorium on Fire Zone I for Three Vontha) (Ordinance Suspending Convereion of Condominiums During, Pen- dency of Studie3) be continued to the meeting of October 29. The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Clay, Henderson, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Beahrs, Bervald, Norton Public Hearin : Downtown Beautification and Vice Mayor Pearson stated that two separate hearings are scheduled for this project, but that they would be held concurcentiy because they both relate to the same proceeding. The first bearing is on the engineer's report prepared pursuant to Livision 4 of the Street and Highways Code. The sole purpose of this first hearing is to receive and hear protests against the proposed improvements. Protests at this first hearing may be either written or oral. Written protests filed during the course of the hearing will be received and considered by the Council but cannot be legally included in the percentage of protest. The second hearing is on the engineer's report, which includes all the details of the project, including plans, specifications, estimates 243 10/15/73 of cost, and proposed assessments. Formal protests as to this phase of the project ray only be in writing and will be received and consi- dered by the Council if filed at any time before the conclusion of the hearing. However, as in the case of the first hearing, only those protests filed before the time set for the hearing can be considered in determining the percentage of legal protests. Vice Mayor Pearson continued that anyone interested may address Council on any detailed phase of the project. Vice Mayor Pearson declared the public hearing open. City Clerk Ann Tanner stated that she had the affadavit that the =notice of improvements was published trice on September 24 and Octo- ber 1 and the certificate of mailing executed by Mr. Kenneth Jones on September 22, and that the boundary map was filed with the County Recorder on September 28. Mr. H. A. Eckiand stated that on behalf of the City Engineer, the office of Jones, Tilson and Associates prepared under his supervision the report pursuant to the requirements of Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code. T' s report consisted of outlined plans and spec- ifications of the proposed improvement, evidence of cause, assessment diagram and boundary maps, a tabulation of the assessments proposed to be levied, and a table showing for each parcel of land within the district its county parcel number, assessed value of land, assessed value of icYrovementa, tree value of land, and the estimated principal aEuount of all currently unpaid special assessments. This report was completed on September 6, 1973, and filed with the City Clerk. Mr. Eckiend then gave a recapitulation of the financial_ feasibility of the project according to figures taken from the report. Louis J. Frurcroy, Special Projects Manager, noted for the record that a staff report on downtown beautification dated October 12, 1973, was sent to Council. He summarized the proposal as dealing with .mpiovements to the University Avenue area with new treed, tree islands, intersections with trees, benches, ramps, trellises, new lights, a brick strip next to the curb, pedestrian -scale lights between inter- sections, and various other improvements. He said that Lytton and Hamilton Avenuea and cross streets would also be improved with trees and rrplacexsent of luminaires. He projected on the screen the budget for tha project, showing a construction budget of $636,02'1 and a con- tingency of $65,000. He noted that there is no contingency for normal construction -type problems that usually arise through projects of this nature. In addition, he mentioned the consultant's fees would be an additional $56,000 and itemized various other costs, making a total of $823,865. Utility and capital improvements projects for this area total an additional $240,000. The total amount involved is $1,063,865. The beautification and lighting project is proposed to be funded by $206,933 from the capital improvement fund and $616,932 from the assessment district. Of the $206,933 that is the city's responsibility in that portion of the project, $175,00!2 has been bud- geted, but at the time the bids were received. Council deferred making any actual change for the additional $31,932.50 that will be the city's responsibility. In total the city's responsibility will be $446,933. The assessment district will have a responsibility for $6.16,932 equaling the total budget of $1,063,865. )tr. Fourcroy continued that in the staff report that was sent to Council and made available to the public, staff expanded on the method 244 10/15/73 of allocation and assessment costs. In addition, staff pointed out the problem of overlap of the Fire Zone I study and those recommendations with the proposed assessment district boundaries. After studying it in some detail, staff recommended that the overlapped area be deleted from the assessment district and that no improvements be made on that side of the street of the area involves and those proper- ties not be assessed. For those properties which are referred to as Class Five Residential and residential and coimercial combination situations included in the Fire Zone I setting, but which are also in the assessment district, and in order not to put an undue burden on those properties, staff recommends that a procedure be initiated so that those properties could have a deferred assessment if they chose, so that as long as they continue in residential use they would not be assessed. Staff proposed modifications of the assessment of three properties as the result of a meeting with the property owners in the assessment district. There were some inequities of a substantial nature to the three properties, and staff recommended that because of the innrove- menta these properties had already provided that some relief be granted to them. Finally, staff indicated that there was a need to make sore minor plan modifications as a result of more detailed studies that are going on resulting in the development of the construction documents and final construction drawings. These have to do with modifications on University Avenue between High Street and The Circle. The original plan called for six tree islands, and traffic difficulties would arise with this set-up. This was undesirable from a safety point of view. Staff reconmended a change in the design which puts four of the trees in the uidewalke, admittedly close to the buildi:ga. The other trees would be in the middle of the street where there is some excess right of way that can be used. Also staff reccemends that the light proposed to be located essentially in front of 323 University Avenue be deleted because of the basement problem which comes cut under the sidewalk and excess costs inlc,lved. They proposed the deletion of two similar lights in the blocs of Jniversity between Cowper and Tasso on the north side of University Avenue. In this last respect this would delete the four r.es lights proposed between the intersections and on the left side of University Avenue as you look at the plan. This would leave one light at the intersection of Cowper and University which would be a regular light for that corner. In lieu of those four lights, it is proposed co put a light on the base where the light presently exists on the opposite corner at Tessa and University so that at both intersections there would be one tall lu ina.ire. In addition there a:re some ten to twelve flush lights located on the Eldorado Building that shine down and illuminate the sidewalk area. The reason for the recommendation to eliminate the light is that the particular type of construction of the roof of the basement which is ,just under the sidewalk is such that there is a good probability that .if the sidewalk were gone into, it would create a situation which would result in leaks in various areas. A letter of protest has been received from Eldorado Insurance Company with respect to the problem of violating the waterproof aspect of their structure and the fact that they feel they deserve some relief with respect to the trees snd brick walk they have provided in that area which will not be replaced. Relief from the assessment would amount to approximately* $6,400 which is a conservative figure in terms of allowing a credit to this particular property. Eldorado has said that if Council adopts the staff recommendations, they will withdraw their protest and support the downtown beautification and lighting protect. 2 4 5 10/15/73 Vice Mayor Pearson asked for the information regarding the written protests and endorsements. City Clerk Ann Tanner read a list of sixteen property owners who had filed official letters of protest to the district and noted that there was one owner of nine parcels who had written to express support. In addition, eight letters were received from citizens supporting the official_ protest of All Saints Episcopal Church, and there was one general letter of protest from Mrs. E. Smith, not a property owner. All letters in opposition to and in support of the assessment district are on file in the City Clerk's office, Vice Mayor Pearson indicated this was the time for oral orotes_r and testimony. Crystal Gasziage, representing Downtown Palo Alto, Inc., stated that their organization opposes the exclusion of certain properties or. Lytton from the district. Downtown Palo Alto, Inc., thinks that this exclusion would be tantamount to a preconceived decision on what is going to happen regarding the Fire Zone I study. They also oppose the exclusion of some parcels on Hamilton which are right in the heart of the commercial district and which are used as residences now, but that is not the long-range plan for the„ unless the new zoning is enacted. The owners have not asked for exclusion and have. not protested the project. Councilman Henderson responded that in a gray Council right be preju- dicing the outcome by keeping these particular properties in the dis- trict. He asked what would happen if there were a rezoning later on and the assessment district had to be redone. Crystal Carnage said that she wcuid hate to think of it. The parking assessment district was forkd twenty years ago, and people have been trying to get into it for twenty years. Downtown Palo Alto, Inc., feels it would prejudice the discussion on Fire Zone *, and they also feel that their territory is being invaded. Scott Carey, 150 University Avenue, representing Downtown Palo Alto, Inc., stated that tonight the city is on the brink .,,f having the dre-e of beautification for downtown fulfilled. Their organization has two serious problems with the project, particularly as construed to- night. The greatest amount of internal protest from members of Downtown Palo Alto, Inc., concerns the loss of the onstreet parking of some sixty -plus stalls that this project will take. The overriding desire to have this project has made this protest semi somewhat silent in the minds of many of the downtowners. However, there is concern because there is insufficient parking and to love another sixty -plus stalls will perhaps create a problem that will have to be resolved by future action. The second problem involves serious reservations about the proposed exclusion and reduced assessments. With respect to All Saints Church, after hearing members of their church, Downtown Palo Alto, Incorporated, was persuaded not to oppose their request for exclusion from the district. However, there was concern that if the Church was excluded that it would not set a precedent and become the basis for future exclusions. Proposed assessments in the future should be taken on their merits-. Downtown Palo Alto's real concern had to do with exclusion of other areas. They now find that staff is recommending that those properties within Fire Zone I and within the proposed assess- ment district be excluded. Downtown Palo Alto, Inc., opposes this. 246 10/15/73 Also, it is proposed that those properties not within Fire Zone I but within the assessment district and presently being used for resi- dential purposes are to have their assessments deferred and paid for by the city until they are commercial. Downtown Palo Alto, Inc., sees some problems with this because it defers the oblisation until some future date and then creates a problem at that tine. The proposed reduction of Palo Alto Office Center's assessment nakes sense, because they are not receiving some of the benefits of the prolect; however, the Union Bank's assessment has been proposed for reduction solely because they have installed a brick sidewalk. This is inconsistent with the purpose of the beautification project itself which is designed to motivate the private sector of the downtown community to upgrade their sidewalks and facilities. In fact, the sidewalks have been excluded from treatment by the project in hopes that the project will entice the property owners to install new sidewalks. Just because they have done it prior to the project is no reason for a reduced assessment. Mr. Carey continued that the exclusion from the district of the fire/police building gives him trouble. In this case the city has embarked on its own frontier into private enterprise and has become a landlord and intends to lease the building for commercial purposes which generate revenue to the city; yet the city proposes to exclude themselves from paying their share on property being used for ccmtrercial purposes by private individuals. To him this seemed illogical. host importantly, the city is on the brink of finally approving a downtown beautification plan; yet in the sale breath they have sotehow gotten wrapped up with the issue of Fire Zone L and the proposed rezoning from C-2 to R -3 -Rehab. If the city intends to exclude frori assessment those properties on Hamilton and Lytton that are under stc.dy, then it seems it has already been decided they are going to be rezoned, If they are not rezoned in the future, how they will be gotten back into the assessment district? The rezoning, of those properties will be strongly opposed by the downtown association. He felt they should be left in the assessment district, and if they are to be down zoned for the profit of the entiree community to preserve the housing stock, it ie a fair assumption that the city should then pick up the tab. Regarding the three lots on Hamilton Avenue proposed for rezoning, he said that there are three houses on that property. There a= some twenty-three thousand housing units in Palo Alto, and the city is getting stuck on trying to preserve three. He wondered if the game was worth the candle. Wells Fargo has not protested the inclusion of these lots in the assessment district. Re asked if anyone had inquired what Wells Fargo intends to do if these lots are rezoned. He urged Council to keep within the assessment district those proper- ties on Lytton and Hamilton that fall within Fire Zone t and resolve that problem at a future date. The downtown association is also con- cerned about the inclusion of tc ► trees in the median strip between University Avenue and The Circle. They felt placing the trees here would impede the traffic flow. He concluded by saying he hoped the project would pass tonight. Councilman Clay asked if the downtown association's position of r.ot opposing the inclusion of All Saints Church were the game as supporting the exclusion. Mr. Carey responded that he supposed there was a subtle distinction. The issue was hotly debated among the board members of the downtown association, and this was the resolution they passed. Councilmen Clay asked regarding the Hsmiltan-Lytton property if the objection to their being excluded were only an the basis of their being prejudicial to the Fire Zone 1 study. 247 10/15/73 See Page 330 Mr. Carey responded that if All Saints Church is excluded, the asses3- ment of Palo Alto Office Center is reduced, the old police/fire ftation is excluded, and the properties in Fire Zone I are excluded and the cost of these exclusions added to assessments of the remaining members of the assessment district, he wondered what it would do to the cost, and it might raise questions of the legitimacy of the notice of this hearing tonight. .Once the Fire Zone I properties have been excluded, the assumption is that they are going to be rezoned. If they are not rezoned but remain commercial, they will receive the benefit of the beautification without having to pay for it. He felt it made more sense to include them now and absorb the assessment if necessary. Councilman Sher asked regarding the loss of the fn -street parking if the downtown association expected someone to make up those units somewhere else. Mr. Carey said they did not. He meant that despite what appears to be overwhelming support for this project, it did not come easily. One of the reasons is the loss of parking. The downtown association may have to come before Council in the near future asking for an analy- sis of the parking requirement downtown to determine there there is a shortage and what might be done to remedy it. Downtown has two problems beautification and parking. Councilman Sher referred to deferment on the seventeen Type V properties which remain within :he assessment district and asked why it would cause a problem later on for owners to assume those assessments. :sir. Carey replied that he was not saying it would; he was saying it might. He said he did not have a great quarrel with that part of the proposal. The property owners involved might have, One thing he could see is that in ten years there would no longer be the advan- tage of paying on an annual basis but would require a lump sum. That night create some problems. Their great concern is for the exclusion of those properties now zoned commercial and in Fire Zone I. Councilman Sher referred to Mr. Carey's opposition to decreasing the assessment for the Union Bank on the basis of their existing sidewalk improvement. He ,said as he understood the proposal for decreasing the assessment on the Eldorado Building, it was on the same basis. Mr. Carey responded that as he understood it, the Eldorado opposition was partially becauee they were worried about leakage in the basement if new trees and lights were put in, and if their assessment is reduced, they will get no trees. The Union Bank does not have this problem, and he was assuming; they would get the trees. Councilman Sher said that was not true. The letter from staff to Union Bank states that the proposal to reduce the assessment is on the basis of the previous work an the sideway: plus trees that are there, but it is also pointed out that other trees will go into the parking spaces in front which are far enough away from the underground parking garage not to cause problems. He thought that the proposed reduction in assessment was on the sale basis as the Union Bank. Councilman Morton asked staff how many other nonprofit organizations like the All Saints Church would qualify for exclusion if Council were to accept downtown's position on the matter. 248 10/15/73 Mr. Fourcroy responded that to the best of staff's knowledge, there would be one other property that is located on Lytton and Ramona across the street from the Palo Alto Times and occupied by Gospel Outreach. The assessment that would be outstanding against this property would be $2,300. Councilman Norton asked if Gospel Outreach had protected or requested exclusion, and Mr. Fourcroy responded negatively. Councilman Berwald said that since Mr. Carey brought up the subject of changes in the assessment district at this late date and indicated it did not give his organization enough time to take a position, he hoped staff would at some point cover that point, and he woad like to know whether the ?art -minute changes prejudiced the hearing. Mr. Carey commented that they received almost all the information inn a timely fashion on the critical issues. They knew for some time that those properties in Fire Zone I would probably be excluded. TLe only thing they did not have advance notice of was the two minor changes in the project itself. Councilman Beahrs asked the City Attorney if this large number of exclusions imperil the legal liability of this project. He could see the possibility of ending up in court if this line were continued Mr. Kenneth Jones, bond counsel, Wilson, Jones, Morton & Lynch, res- ponded that the adjustments in the Eldorado assessment he thought were almost dictated by the facts of the protest and the design of the project, and the granting would not in any way endaeger any of the legal proceedings. The proposed exclusions of the Fire Zone I property raised one additional issue which is not raised by the Eldorado adjustment, If the Connell excludes the Eldorado Building and concurrently deletes the changes in the project, that would be ,uipportable if attacked. If the Council u ere to accede to the re- quest of the Church that necessarily raises addit{onai_issues of some legal complexity, but if they were called upon to defend that action, they could put up a pretty stiff fight to support it. Councilman Beahrs asked if the city could, as suggested by Mr. Carey, fund the Type Five structures, and City Attorney Booth said he believed it could. James McLeod, 1770 Fulton Street, Rector of All Saints Church, said that the church contends that it will receive no financial benefits from inclusion in the district and will be putting out $7,300 which will greatly hinder the in serving the downtown community. They do not believe people will be attracted to All Saints parish because there are fourteen trees on the periphery of the property. The merchants will derive much benefit from the beautification and will be able to pars on the cost to the increased numbers of clients and customers. The church has no one to whom to pass on the increased costs. Mr. O. Turner, 21 T vie Place, said that the written protest of the church is in the record and also the letter from Mr. McLeod dated October 10, 1973. He said basically they were just asking that a logi- cal classification be made and that All Saints Church be excluders as a tax-exemtt religious property. All the property is utilized for this purpose; there are no commercial purposes. There can be no possible compensatory benefit to the church". The church has trees 2 4 9 10/15/73 See Page 330 on its property presently for beautification. When they designed the building, they tried to save as many trees as they could. He said he would like to have the records show that the church raised the point of benefit upon the legal theory that in order to be of legal benefit, it must increeee value of the property. In his opinion, there could be no increase in value as a result of the changes proposed on the perimeter of the property. Harvey Fzixon, 430 Kipling Street, Palo Alto, reviewed the contents of the letter which he had sent to members of the Council. He asked if they deferred his assessment, what happens to this debt to the city. It is his understanding it will be a lien against his property. He said he was concerned if he takes this deferment, what happens in fifteen years. Does the lien stay on the property until the property is sold? Would it become a debt to his heirs? He said it will not increase business for him. If the city excludes All Saints, people with homes should be excluded also. Harlan Htlther, 325 Weverley, addressed Council about the problems of overnight parking which he said is totally inequitable to all of the citizens of Palo Alto. He said if Council will not act to remove the overnight parking ordinance, he will seek a referendum. Ethel Mitchel?, 1170 Forest Avenue, said she owns property at 426 Waverley, a seven --unit apartment building. She reviewed the assess-- ne'1ts that had been made against her property over the years. She said that Council has been greatly concerned recently about providing low rents in the downtown area for low --income people. Downtown rental property owners cannot afford to keep low rents and keep being assessed over and over at this rate. She has tried not to pass on those ex- penses to her tenants and has tried to keep the rents low, but she cannot keep them low if she is going to be assessed over $1001 so often. She could not .gee the reason for the city to keen on assessing people who own downtown property and then tell people they should keep the rentals low and provide schemes in order to help people keeo the rents low. She felt that she should be excluded or else she would have to raise her rents. Councilman Henderson asked if this unit would be included or deferred under one of the requested actions. Mr. Deverel responded that Mrs. Mitchell has not filed a written protest, but 426 Waverley is one of the properties that staff is pro- posing for deferment. Eloise Smith, 756 University, said she was speaking as an individual. She said that the city had come a long trey. In fact, she felt it had come too far. The idea was to make Palo Alto more beautiful and one wonders who was this being done for. Was it to make the mer- chants make more business and bring more cars into Palo Alto or was it for everyone? Was it not to make the city more beautiful for everyone who lives here? Who determined that from the city funds about one fourth of the cost of this would be paid? She said maybe Council should look at the pocketbook and sea how much it can afford and then decide how far to go. She said that the trees that are on Uni- versity Avenue now are nice, and it would be incredible to tear them down and have the messy sycamore trees. All of this is costing more than it should. The trees and lights should be left there and just decorate the corners. She felt the program should be modified and - only part of it done. 2 5 0 10/15/73 E. Sutra, 430 Emerson, said he wanted to protest for 196 and 187 Emer- son. Before beginning to beautify Palo Alto, maybe Council should get rid of the pornographic theaters you see when you drive in town, then the drug center and the writings on the wall. Instead of beauti-' fication, extra policemen should be put on and make the city safe for everyone. Vice Mayor Pearson returned the discussion to staff for response. Mr. Jones dented that the purpose of this hearing is to afford the staff an opportunity to perfect a record that the legal proceeding and stature of the whole matter was controlled by what was said and presented tonight. It is important that all of the matters raised be explored and questions answered. He said he would cover the points which he felt needed comment in order to make the matter complete for Council's consideration. Mr. Carey had a number of points which require some comment. First, he expressed doubts and objections re- garding adjustment of the Union Bank assessment. The rationale for that recommendation is that these particular property owners have already expended funds to put in Improvements which are consistent with the proposed Improvements that the project would provide, and the basis for the recommendation of the assessment adjustment is to acknowledge that contribution. For that reason the assessment adjust- ment is in order. Secondly, regarding the ratter of the aid police/fire building, that falls in line generally with the topic of the extent to which any city property should be involved in this type of pro- ceeding. The city owns this Civic Certcer structure as well as the police/fire building. The rationale for not putting an assessment on city -owned properties is that the t'ity is proposing a contribution of about twenty-five percent, and assessments against the city pro- perties, if they were included, would terse to something like $18,000, so that the city's general fund is participating in a greater extent than the assessment. Also regarding the police/fire building, at the moment it is municipally owned. It is proposed to be leased at some stage. When it is so leased, it would certainly be in order, and it is part of the basic proposal, that the irtnrovemeents will be recognized in the amount of rent that the city will receive for the property, and they might recover some of the city contribution which has been advanced. ?4r. Jones continued that the question was raised as to how the Fire Zone I properties could be brought back into the district if excluders at this time and if tht Fire Zone I proceedings were not consummated. He said that gets to the heart of the point that was being made that the Fire Zone 1 matter had not been resolved yet, and for that reason it might be premature to carry through on the recommendation. It is just a question of which way you approach it. If the properties are retained in the project tonight, and if Council determines later that than Fire Zone I project should be implemented, then there is the necessity for a reaaaeeement to take the Fire Zone I properties out. If they are excluded tonight and the matter is resolved, it could be misted again only if the project does hot go through. That would raise the question of how the properties could be brought back in. The answer is that there would have to be a completely new proceeding which would involve the design, construction, and installation of the improvements in the Fire Zone I area and the levy of en assess- ment. It is a matter of judgment as to which way to go. Either way ie going to create some problems, depending on Council's final action. Staff felt the least number of problems would be raised by making the recommendation which it made. 251 10/15/73 Mr. Jones said Mr. Nixon raised an excellent Question regarding the matter of deferment. Re-pardinv the nroperties in the district which are nos/ occupied ae residences and which Council wishes to ercourape, how can they be provided with improvements at this time without dis- rupting the overall plan and provide sore assurance that they will pay for their share if their properties revert to commercial use. His question is what is the cutoff point. The staff propcsal is that the assessment in the presently estimated amount remain as a lien on the property but not enforced until such time as the property is restored to commercial use or until the residential use terminates. That could go on for a long period of time, and a cutoff point should 5e worked out as part of that deferment propcsal. The period of the bond is one possibility. It is obvious that the type of lien we are talking about could not continue indefinitely, because it would put a permanent, burdensome cloud on the title of the property. The answer must be worked out. Mr. Nixon also raised a question as to how the project could be consummated if all these changes are ordered. At this point it is enough to say that the changes can be accommodated and the project could proceed if Council is so inclined. Another question was how was the Council contribution determined. He said that Council and staff had been involved in the structure of that figure and he would not answer, but the legal point is that Council may contribute whatever proportion of the project they feel is of general municipal significance. It E• as also suggested that there should be a look at the financial feasibility of this project before any final action is taken. The reference there was probably to the individual financial capability or the owners to carry the burden of the assessment, and 4r. Jones had no comment on that part, but law and proceedings tonight have provided a degree of exploration of the financial feasibility that vas the subject of' r. Fckland's initial report. The investigation report ender division four has as one of its objectives the determination of financial feasibility. The total assessed value of the lands only in the district is $3,900,000, and the combined impact of outatandinp assessments plug proposed assess- ments in this project come to $2,535,07x) which is substantially less than the statutory limit of financial feasibility. Finally, if the Council determines to accept sone or all of the staff recom ndationa in terms of assessment adjustments, deletions from the project, etc., it will mean that the budget will suffer to that elitent. If the deletions stay at the level indicated, mart of the recommendation is that there not be any readjustment of assessment estimates at this time, but adjustments wait until bids are received so we will be dealing with actual coats. It is not legally possible for the assessment, as they have been advertised, to he increased by ;more than ten percent of the figures released. That is one of the limitations involved in the financial feasibility, and property owners are protected to that extent. Councilman Henderson referred to suggested Council action one —the potential for rezoning --and asked if the assessed a►meunt that would be lost for those properties is $15,0000. Mr. Fourcroy responded that $15,0)0 is the net figure that staff est.imatea would be involved. The total amount of the assessments of those parcels involved propose; to be deleted from the project is $20,580. Because of the components of the assessment, the legal front footage and the other components which hued to ,in with the assessed 252 10/15/73 valuation of the land, there is nct a straight one -for --one type of reduction involved. There will be some trees and lights not nut in, but those properties were carrying some of the general benefit of the total project not immediately on their street. Staff estimates that the $15,000 would be a net figure that would have to he carried by the other properties. Councilman Henderson asked if Council went or, with the beautification of Lytton Avenue and were to defer these properties as it would he doing with the other seventeen properties within Fire Zone 's, would there be an additional expense to the city of $20,700. Mr. Fourcroy responded affirmatively. Councilman Henderson said if these properties were shifted to the deferred basis along with the other seventeen that are listed under Council action two, the additional costs would be in the neighborhood of $20,000. In relation to that would there be any problems legally and technically in adding them to make a total of thirty-three proper- ties that would be put under the deferred basis. Mr. Jones responded that before any of the assessments advertised tonight could be increased, there would have to be an additional notice and hearing. Staff would not recommend any additional notice and hearing procedures until_ bids for the c;orl: are received. At that point the Council could decide where the additional money, if any, should cone from. Councilman Henderson stated that there is an important policy decision that will have to be made tonight. If Council decides to add the sixteen properties to the deferred basis and the city pays for it, that is a decision that would have to be made tonight. He said he was not talking about increasing assessments or properties. Mr. Jones said it is a mattes of mathematics. The protect estimate includes $64,000 of contingency funds; so it is possible that the adjustment will be absorbed by a more favorable bid or the contingency. He said he would simply suggest that Council not gat locked into fixed figures. Councilman Henderson said that he would not lock in fixed figures; he would lock in fixed properties. He asked if Council can lock in sixteen more, or a total of thirty-three. Also, there is always a basis for justifying any assessments within a district, and he thought that Council should hear what the justification was for including All Saints Church. Mr. Jones responded that the rationale is that special assessments are, by their nature, a charge against property and not aga!nat the property owner. Admittedly, the property exacter is compelled to spay them as he is compelled to pay taxes, the results of nonpayment being the loss of the property. The charge is directed at the land and not at the owner. Traditionally and legally, the charge does not vary with the current use to which the property is being put. It is obvious the use varise tremendously. If you attempt to account for the variety of uses taking place, you would have an insolvable bag of variables. When a formula is developed, it is developed on an objective basis such as frontage, distance from the improvement, etc. ! o ccnsideration is given to the ownership. It iR for that reason 2 5 3 1.0/15/73 the churches were included alone with everybody else. That more -or - less rigid approach is necessarily sublect to flexibility and the rules of reason and the elements of a public hearing, and certainly there are elements of use which have demanded a degree of recognition in an assessment formula, and one of those is zoning, Zoning was not considered as a formula because it is commercial throughout. That relates to the problem of Fire Zone I. If Council makes a change in zoning, that could be the basis of a change in formulas. It wEs on that basis that the construction of this bind of imnrovement was felt to incur a benefit on the property. Councilman Berwald understood that Mr. Jones was not supgestinp any change in the assessments, but he asked if there would be a change in the engineers' estimates that would reflect the change in the Im- provement and in the change ir. the boundaries, therefore causing the bids to come in at a somewhat lower figure than they would have other- wise. M.r. Jones responded that any change that Council ordered would he in the estimate of cost. Any reduction in assessment would mean a reduction in contingency but not in the other figures. Councilman Berwald referred to the police/fire building: and said he was trying to be persuaded by staff's arguments, but then he thought perhaps, if we take as a hypothesis that the city night want to buy other parcels and convert the to conmercial use, then if the city is going to benefit in income from those properties, and not withstalding the fact that the city has made a contribution, when the city hecones owner of profit -making establishments, is it not as entitled to con- tribute to the assessment district as the private property? Otherwise, it would give the city an unjust commercial advantage in dealini with private enterprise. City Manager Sipel replied that there would be no doubt that assess-- nent would be levied if the property in question ware now utilized for commercial purposes. In the future, if there are to h& aeessment districts, there is no question in his mind that this property would be assessed as a commercial property. It is a policy question of whether or not to include any city -owned property at the time of the project. Iti further response to Councilman Berwald, City Manager Sipel said if the old police/fire lease had been signed last week or this week, and the property were commercial at this time, it would be assessed, but he would have no intention of passing on the assessment at a later date. The benefit would accrue to the city in total income, because it will be an'irprovement on an asset the city has. Councilman Berwald asked if it were a vacant lot zoned commercial, would the private property owner be included in the assessment district. Mr. Sipel responded affirmatively. Councilman Berwald said that the zoning on that property is now com- mercial, and he thinks it is illogical that this city owning a piece of commercial property can exempt itself. City Manager Sigel said that it is a question of how you wish to arrange the accounting. If Council wants tc add an assessment for the city -owned properties, it ie welcome to do so and corresnondinply reduce the total contribution of the city. 254 10/15/73 e 1 Councilman Sher said he would like to pursue the deferral question on the Type V property. He said he understood the remarks about how the action taken tonight could perhaps prejudice one way or the other the Fire Zone I matter and the difficulty it would cause either way. He wondered if it would be possible in the sixteen properties that staff has recots ended be excluded, to include those but defer the assessment until such time as the proper dies are removed from the commercial zone, if and when they are removed, or, if they are not, to treat them like the other seventeen properties and defer the assessment until such time as the residential usage is discontinued. Mr. Jones responded that the basis for the deferred assessment recom- mendation on the residential properties not being excluded is that they are encompassed within a proceeding --the Fire Zone I proceeding -- which has as its objective the perpetuation of housing. They are improved as existing homes, and Council feels they should be perpetuated. That is to be distinguished from the properties that are involved in the exclusion. There is no such city policy involved there except out-and-out rezoning which is a legal proceeding which involves notice and hearing and cannot involve prejudgment. If the 7.auncil actuary rezones those properties, that would create a basis for deferential treatment, but to give them deferential treatment now, he did not think would be a legitimate distinction. Councilman Sher said he thought it was ,dust the other way around. The proposal of staff is to take those properties that are not recom- mended for rezoning but which are Type V properties and to assess but defer the assessment, the city carrying it until such time as they are no longer used for residential purposes. The other proposal for rezoning also relates to these Type V properties. The sane policy underlies the recommendation that those properties he removed from the commercial zone and from the assessment in order to preserve then as housing. It is recognized that rezoning may or ray not occur. 'hat Council is attempting to do tonight is not to peeiudice the out- come one way or another. If they are not rezoned, then Type V resi- dential structures would be left in the commercial district which would otherwiee be within the assessment district. Would not one way to be sure they will be treated like the other seventeen be to make the assessment and defer it until the property is either rezoned, or it is not rezoned and demolished, or no longer in residential use? Mr. Jones asked if it were not true that at least some of these proper- ties in the proposed exclusion area are actually devoted to commercial use now. Staff responded that they are all housing at this time. There are some noncommercial uses involved, but they would become nonconforming. Mr. Jones commented that another part of the problem is purely physical. It is physically ,isslble to exclude the improvements frov the area that staff is recommending. It is a severable part on the periphery. The residences are scattered throughout and would cause stiot removals of the improvements. Councilman Sher said that he was reaching fora formula that would not occlude them. Excluding them is some momentum toward rezoning. .Originally they were thought to profit by beautification. If they are converted to commercial use, then deferral is terminated. They pay their share of the assessment. 255 10/15/73 Mr. Jones said if Councilman Sher were talkinp about leaving the assess- ment on with a deferral until there is a decision on Fire Zone I, the only complication that arises is the fate of the project. The fornaticn of Fire Zone I could mean the project could get carved up at that point. Councilman Sher said the assessment would stay on forever if it is changed to rehab. The $21,00) which the city has picked up in the meantime the city would continue to carry. The assessment would not disappear. It would just be the city's share. It is a question of who is going to pay it. Mir. Jones said that his problem is that he has difficulty in the Council contributions. Would the consummation of the Fire Zone I proceeding put these proposed exclusions in exactly the same category as the seventeen houses? He asked if Councilman Sher thought there would be any distinction in their status. Councilman Sher said that if Fire Zone I wens approved, and these sixteen properties were removed from commercial zoning, then they would not be the same:. If they are not rezoned in connection with Fire Zone I, they are exactly like the other seventeen properties --- Type V residential structures with the policy of the city to preserve that housing. It seemed to him that ultimately on the seventeen properties, the city may end up paying those assessments. When the cutoff point is reached, it means the city has paid those assessments. He asked why is not the same thing possible in the sixteen properties. Mr. Fourcroy said it is important to recognize that the whole concept of deferral cannot be made mandatory. You cannot force deferral on the property owner. If he chooses not to have deferral, he will not. The odds are in each case that there will be some who will want to have the assessment deferred and others who will not. (Council recessed. from 9:45 to 10:00 p.m.) Councilman Sher said he hoped that Council would proceed along the lines he had suggested and treat those sixteen properties in the Fire Zone study in the same way it is treating the seventeen properties spotted around 6he assessment district --leave then in initially and defer the aesessment act that if the zoning is changed, the city will carry the assessment and if not, they will be treated like the other seventeen properties. Councilman Sher then referred to the Eldorado Th i/ding and the proposal to delete the four lights that were to be put in on that property. He asked if there were any commitment on the part of the property owner to keep the building lights an and is the commitment necessary. Mr. Fourcroy replied that he did not know how the city could legally commit the property owner to keep the lights on all the time, but it is the city's assumption that they will. Councilman Sher commented that if they do not keep the lights on, there will be an unsafe condition there, and Mr. Fourcroy responded that it would not be completely dark, but it would be darker. A light stand would be put on that corner. In response to another question from Councilman Sher, Mr. Fourcroy said that the previous work done by the Eldorado Building and the 256 10/15/73 Union Bank would not cause the bjde to come in lower, because the design consultant recognized the existing work and did not put replace- ment work in. The budget therefore will not gain anything. There will be some minor benefits from deleting the four light standards in the middle of the block, both on the part of the underground elec- trical project and also on the part of the beautification. In response to a question from Councilman Clay, Bond Counsel Jones said that if the Council, goes through an additional hearing procedure, the assessment could be increaser) but no more than an additional ten percent. Councilman Clay asked if the present assessment based oct cost with $65,000 contingency of ten percent does not cover what would be the ten percent. Bond Counsel Jones said he thought so; he did not anticipate increases. The $65,000 in contingency money is one of the buffers against that possibility. Councilman Clay said that the city's contribution had been mentioned and he heard two responses. One, that it depends on how you keep the books. He asked if other contributions were eentioned. Bond Counsel Jones said that he mentioned that the city owns property in the assessment district and an assessment could have been levied on those properties. That process was not gone through because of the fact that the Council was making such a substantial contribution. Councilmen Rosenbaun asked if certain properties were excluded, if it were then proposed that the improvements would not he made aloe the frontage of those properties, ur. Fourcroy replied that there are actually two ncopcsals. One is to eliminate those properties up for rezoning in Fire Zone T. Under that proposal there would be something in the vein of about $15,000 chat would have to be borne by the assessment district. On the other hand, it is proposed that those boundaries not be changed and treat chose properties as those that have not been proposed for rezoning, and that would include a deferment and potentially an additional city contribution if it were rezoned. In that case there would he no distribution or charge against the assessment district. Councilman Rosenbaum said he was thinking of physical improvements. If the latter course were adopted, the trees would be planted, but if the former course were adopted, the trees would not be planted. Hr. Fourcroy confirmed Councilman Rosenbaum's understanding. Councilman Rosenbaum asked is there some concern es to how things might look if certain areas were eliminated. What effect might this have on the overall desirability of the project. 1 Hr. Fourcroy said he was talking strictly to the areas the staff proposed for de/etton from the assessment district. If the areas subject to rezoning are 'excluded from the assessment district, there will be no improvements on that side of Hamilton and Lytton. If they are included, the improvements will be put in. To exclude All Saints; Church is something else that he could not answer. He would assume that if the improvements were not put in front cf All Saints Church, there would be an aesthetic gap, and there would be improvements surrounding that property. 2 5 7 10/15/73 City Manager Sipel said that staff felt that in the two r_aeea where staff was suggesting the deletion of area because they were on the periphery of the district, the impact would not be as great as if it were in the middle of the district. Obviously, when you drive down Hamilton and Lytton, if you had improvements on both sides of the street, it weld look esthetically better. With respect to the other properties, staff did not recommend any deletion of improvements in front of either of the two churches because they were forgiven an assessment. Councilman Rosenbaum stated that from his point of view this gave added. weight to Councilman Sherds argument that all of the properties in the district should be included and offered deferment. He asked for the rationale for offering this deferment to certain properties. Why can and should this be done? Mr. Fourcroy replied that the policy of the city to enlarge, enhance, maintain, and pereerve the low-cost housing situation in town, parti- cularly in the commercial area of downtown, leads to that possibility. The reason is that if you apply those assessments against: those proper- ties, you will prejudice their situation, in terms of adding maybe ten to twenty dollars a month to the rental. In order to maintain that policy and achieve the low -to --moderate housing goals of the city is why staff has proposed the deferral. Councilman Rosenbaum asked what would be wrong with applying that argument to the All S.irtts Church. Council thinks churches downtown are nice too. Mr. Fourcroy said that the city has not adopted that kind of policy. Councilman Rosenbaum asked for Mr. Jones to comm.ent. Fe said he was looking for a rationale if Caun:ii is going to exclude and attempt to defer. He ate'ked what would be a reasonable rationale to attempt to exclude All Saints. Mr. Jones replied that it has been assumed throughout that the city may and up with a fully worked out municipal project in Fire Zone 1 which justify it in spending city money to achieve. That is the foundation of the whole concept of deferment —that the city will achieve a ieg?timate and proper municipal objective. If you apply that sane formula to the church property, what is the rationale? MUnicipal funds would be used to defer an admitted benefit on the only basis that the perpetuation of a religious use is a desirable municipal objective. If Council determines that there is no legal benefit to those properties because of the fact that they are used for church purposee, [het is a totally different situation. There is no benefit; so ehere is no assessment. Councilman Rosenbaum asked if there is no trouble in putting a tree in front of the church. It is not necessary to exclude them. Hr. Jones responded Council will not have any problem if they determine there is too legal benefit to the church property. Councilman Norton said he still had some uncertainty and disparity between something Mt. Carey said and questions that Councilman char was asking. Who is going to be responsible for the improvement of the sidewalk? Is it a private project or is it part of the assess ent 2 5 8 10/15/73 district? Mr. Carey suggested the bank not get credit for the brick work done because they did it voluntarily end others were expected to snake these improvements in the future at their own expense, and therefore there should be no credit given. Mr. Sipel said the distinction here is the location of the Union Banff: property on a corner where it is proposed to make substantial improve- ments to sidevalks. If the bank were in the middle of the block and had done similar work, they would not receive that credit. Councilman Norton said so in effect work in the corner is part of the project and work in the diddle of the block is private. City Manager Sipel confirmed his understanding. Councilman Norton commented that the city is proposing to give the Eldorado property a credit not for the fact that there will be no lighting installed in front of the building, but rather on the basis that in the middle of the block they are going to provide a private scurce of light. The assessment district w 11 have no control over it. He said that if the city is going to rely on a private lighting, source, it should have assurance lights will be on. Mr. Fourcroy commented that there is .io credit being proposed for not installing the lights. The credits have to do with trees and bricks at the corner. The problem with the lights is that staff feels Eldorado's request had rerit, because there would be problems if the lights were put in. Also staff thought it would be worthwhile to eliminate them, but no credit is being given for not including lights. Councilman Norton questioned whether the midb1ock street lights should be eliminated. Staff justification was that the city could rely on private lighting on the building. He asked if there is any basis for assuming that they are going to leave the lights on. Mr. Fourcroy said that to the extent they have done so is the only assurance. There is no assurance on their part that they will in fact keep the lights on. Conditions change; policies change. The city will have lights on both corners across the street. If Council feel* that staff should proceed to put the lights in, they can indicate as ouch. Staff feels that potential problems are going to coat an extra $1500 to $2000 for each light. Councilman Norton asked if there sidewalk. He questioned issuing going to inhibit public projects is an encroachment permit under the permits of that nature when it is in the future. Vice Mayor Pearson asked when in the project would the present trees be torn out. Zia. Fourcroy said that staff expects to have bids in January which means that construction documents will presumably be available in December. He did not know at what point the trees would be taken out. Vice Mayor Pearson asked if there were any possibility that the other parts of the project could be installed and the trees put in last or is there a particular ttaging. 259" 10/15/73 Assistant City Manager Deverel said that he would speculate that removal of the privets would occur early in the project along with the demolition of the curbs. The sycamores would probably be installed rather late in the project after the sidewalks and plaza intersection Work has been done. Counellman Norton referred back to the Eldorado discussion. He said that an encroachment perm=it usually contains an agreement to hold the city harmless for anything that it does. If Eldorado ie using the public space in the sidewalk for their basement and making it more difficult for the city to install lights, should they not pay the additional difference? Mr. Fourcroy replied that he did not issue the permit and is not completely familiar with the legal language in it. It is his under- standing that the docu=ment is such that it does have a clause wherein the city is held harmless by any of their actions. In texas of being able to impose an additional cost he doubted that there was anythinp in the contract that would allow billing Eldorado for the extra costs. Councilman Norton said that he thinks that those permits can tell the encroacher that he can no longer encroach, and he did not know what better leverage the city could have than that to negotiate a $1500 item. Mr. Deverel said that it is entirely appropriate for Council. to take whatever action it desires. It is entirely appropriate and within Council's right to direct that staff proceed as the original design lne'.icated. Mr. Fourcroy said there were some other matters he felt should be covered. Mrs. Canape indicated that the proposal of staff of the elimination of Fire Zone I properties would prejudice the outcome of the study. The truth is exactly one hundred percent the other way around. By not including them, the decision could be made to include or not include and improvements could be made at a later date. Regarding the deferred assessment question raised by Mr. Nixon, this is a matter of Council's discretion as to what kind of plan would be involved. There was a contention that property owners did not have notice of the change at High Street and the exclusion of the old police/fire building. The change in the trees was mentioned at the meeting staff had with property owners, and the exclusion of the old police/fire building has been consistent from the time the map showing the assessment district came out. In terms of who decides how such the city contributes, the Council makes that deter- mination. Vice Mayor Pearson declared the public hearing closed and asked for a report on the percentage of protest. Mr. Fourcroy responded that the percent of protest was 11.374. If the Council acts in such a manner as the communication from Eldorado indicates and removes their protest, then the percentage would be 7.906. Vice Mayor Pearson stated that it was now time for Council action, Councilman Henderson indicated that he would prefer to eliminate suggested Council action one sod make number two include thirt;-three properties. In other words, ha would leave the boundaries of the 260 10/15/73 district as originally established and defer the sixteen homes on Lytton and Hamilton on the same basis the city is deferring the other seventeen properties. 1 1 MOTION: Councilman Henderson moved, seconded by Berwald, to: 1. direct staff to develop the necessary legal vehicles and procedures to provide for deferral of assessments for the residential properties with Type V structures in Fire Zone I as shown in the original aescsement district map. 2. Approve the proposed design modification for the block on University Avenue between High Street and The Circle. 3. Retain the full assessment on parcels l5, 16, and 74. 4. Direct staff to eliminate assessments on All Saints Episcopal Church and Gospel Outreach. 5. Direct staff to add the old police/fire station to the assessment district. Councilman Norton said he would like to divide the question or else make some substitute proposals. I'.e felt that parcels 15 and 16 should pay the assessment, because he reason they are not getting the trees is due to their own design. They have designed their project in such a way that it is too expensive or precludes the planting of trees. On the other hand, the bank has made a good case for exclusion. Staff says their work benefits the district. Vice Mayor Pearson agreed to divide the question. AMENDMENT: Councilman Norton moved, seconded by Rosenbaum, to amend part (3) of the motion to reed that lots 15 and 16 be assessed but that lot 74 not be assessed. Mr. Deverel said that he understood the intent of the,-•''tion was to give credit for sidewalk work already created by the property owner but not give credit for where the city does not have to plant trees. A portion of the Eldorado assessment is for trees and a portion is for the walk. The portion attributable to sidewalks is $5,275 To be consistent the proposed reduction of the assessment of Union Bank would be as proposed in the staff report and for Eldorado also $5,275 AMENDMENT CLARIFIED: Councilman Norton moved, seconded by Rosenbaum, that Part (3) of the motion be amended to read that the proposed assessment on Lot 16 be reduced by $5,275 and that Lot 74 (Union Bank) have its proposed assessment reduced by $4,20n. In response to Councilman Clay, Councilman Norton said that he was not proposing credit for the leck of trees but Taring consistent with giving Eldorado and Union Bank credit for sidewalk work. Councilman Clay recalled that the construction estimate excluded the coat of work not done for that area, and Mr. Deverel confirmed that the construction estimate did not contemplate any work in that area. Councilman Clay said than it is not being paid for, so he had problems coping with charging for work not done. 261 10/15/73 Mr. Deverel said that they had already completed work and constructed consistent with the planned beautification and this was being recog- nized in the assessment. Councilman Clay wondered if they were to say they wanted trees but to plant the trees would cause a potential leakage problem which gives the city added liability. Mr. Deverel replied that since this is an encroachment situation, he did not believe the city would have any liability. Councilman iienders}on said that he found all kinds of problems with this situation. A lot of property owners could make claims that one tree is worth so much and the problem of putting in the light standards in Eldorado Building. He felt it was wise to go ahead and do it if it could be done. He did not feel that Council could make some Of these judgments, He could see other property owners who had done things downtown saying that they should get. credit. These pro- perty owners are gaining from the overall beautification, and he would prefer to keep them in the assessment. Councilman Clay asked what the reduced assessment would be. Mr. Deverel replied that the assessment on Eldorado, Parcel No. 16 could be reduced .by $5215 'instead 'of the original reduction of $6 400. . For the Union Bank property, the recommended reduction was $4,200. The proposed assessment was $10,355. The amendment passed on the following vote: AYES: Beahre, Berwald, Clay, Norton, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Henderson, Pearson Councilman Berwald eaid he would like to know how long the deferral would -run. Is it a lien against the property? He felt there should be a limit, and he thought Mr. Jones suggested the limit be the bond term. That seems like a long time. He said his suggestion would be that it be halfway plus one day. Mr. Fourcroy replied that this term has not been set. Re felt that staff had in mind the term of the bond as being reasonable. Council has leeway in whatever terms is wants to set. How long does Council went to try to continue thl8 inducement? AMENDMENT: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Beahrs, to amend that portion of the motion that would say that the assessments would be deferred on Type V structures within the assessment district con- ditional upon the property owner's opting for such deferral until such time in the future as the residential Type V structures ase demolished or the residential usage discontinued, but in no case should the deferred assessment represent a lien on the property beyond the term of the assessment period. Councilman Sher said he wanted to be careful that Council was not prejudicing the property in area I and area II either for or against rezoning. Council is proposing to treat them the same as the seventeen properties spotted throughout the assessment district.. In the event the change in zoning should occur, in the opinion of the city's experts, 2 6 2 10/15/73 given the fact that this deferral will continue as long as the proper- ties remain in Type V residential use, is there any problem that affects the city's ability to change the zoning? If Council takes this action, would it limit its freedom of action to leave it alone? Councilman Berwald said that the legal language covering the points that Councilman Sher rained should be in there. Councilman Norton felt that adding all thirty-three of the properties and the other improvements on both sides of Lytton and Hamilton were a plus for the proposal, but he said he could not favor the motion. He thinks it is important to follow on the concern of whether there is a commitment. There is no way Council can keep from making a com- mitment. The middle ground proposed by staff quite clearly is committing the city to a subsidy to the extent of the assessment proposed on thirty-three properties, 1f rezoned as proposed. There could be sore other solutions but realistically it is not likely to happen, If the city goes ahead or. this part of the motion, and whenever the city makes a determination if these Fire Zone properties are kept residential, certainly then the city could be expected for the life of the bonds to subsidize these thirty-three parcels for the life of the assessment. It is a policy commitment, and he was not willing to make it. Councilman Sher did not agree. He said certainly it is not true with sixteen properties spotted around the district, the deferral does not depend on rezoning. It depends on the nonde ,olition and continued residential use whether they are spotted around the district or on the edge of the district. Councilman Norton responded that the city will be paying the assess- ment on them, and Councilman Sher agreed that it will be as long as it is retained in that use. That was in order to carry out the policy of maintaining them as housing stock. Councilman Norton said that he woul i predict that realistically the city was going to end up subsidizing these parcels if the residential use is maintained and he was not willing to do it. Councilman Rosenbaum felt that fifteen years was too short. It ie indeed a subsidy if the property stays residential. He gathered Hr. Jones felt there should be a cutoff date. It is not obvious as to why it should ke tied to the length of the bond. AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT: Councilman Rosenbaum shoved, seconded by Henderson, to amend the amendment to make the term twenty-five years. The amendment to the amendment failed on the following vote: AYES: Henderson, Pearson, Rosenbaum NOES: Beahra, Berwald, Clay, Norton, Sher Councilman Berwald said he understood that if the Type V structure is improved to the point it is no longer a Type V structure, then assessment becomes due. He asked to be refreshed on what a Type V structure is. City Manager Sipel said it is a wooden structure. He could not con- ceive of a question where a Type V structure would be modified to the extent it would no longer be a Type V structure. 263 10/15/73 The amendment failed on the following vote: A/ES: Henderson, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Beahrs, Berwald, Clay, Norton AMENDMENT: Councilman Sher moved that these properties be excluded from the assessment district.. The amendmene died for lack of a second. Councilman Beahrs recalled Mr. Jones' discussion concerning All Saints Church. He said that the -Church was not entitled to this consideration on the basis of religious interests and pursuits. Councilman Beahrs said that has not been the basis of their argument, and he felt that the record should show that they are asking for exemption on the basis of their charitable social services beyond the religious involvements and consideratio s. Mr. Jones said that the church's testimony is in the record in writing; and in the oral presentation and provides the Council with justification for the action. He did not feel a specific finding was necessary. €NDMSENT: Councilman Sher moved to delete the portion of the motion which referred to the inclusion of the old police/fire building. The amendment fail d for lack of a sitcond. Councilman Norton asked to have the question divided. Councilman Berwald referred to the part of the motion referring to deferrals of assessments for residential properties and said he wanted to make it clear why he was inclined to vote against this particular part of the motion. He said he made the motion to tighten it up and put the time limit on conaietent with the assessment district. As he originally understood it, if the properties were improved to some extent, they would pay the assessment. What the city does by deferring the assessment is encourage people to keep these old homes and not really improve them very much in an area that is very close to the commercial area. He said he was not sure a different type of building would not provide more decent housing for more people in that area. What the city is doing by deferring the aasessment is deferring the date when decent housing for more people would be established. Councilman Clay said he was inclined to oppose it also, for the reason that most of the discussion tonight had included rezoning. It is al- most as though this were a rezoning hearing. It is like Council is anticipating the outcome of the Fire Zone I study. No matter how you suggest it is not, the whole concept of deferral implies thtt the city is anticipating that the Type V erructures will be kept as they are. He did not think it was appropriate. This hearing is to discuss beautification of downtown and not Fire Zone I or rezoning. Councilman Henderson stated that he thought it was the one way to go that is not prejudicial. If Council takes staff's recommendation to remove these properties fro the assessment district, then it does indicate the city is heading for a rezoning, but if they are included, than it sounds as though Council is intending to keep the commercial zoning. By putting in a deferred arena, Council is not raking any 264 10/15/73 commitment about future zoning. It is saying that as long as they are retained as residence©, they will be excluded from the assessment. It is sircply housing versus commercial use. Either way Council goes as an alternative to this is a prejudicial move on the zoning question. Councilman Clay said he disagreed, because if you are not anticipating the outcome of Pire Zone I, the assessment should be handled on the basis of current zoning and not even give deferral in anticipation of their being changed, Councilman Sher said that he did not think that could be right in vegard to the seventeen properties scattered around. There is no recommendation to rezone at all. Deferral is strictly related to the policy to preserve residential housing. If they are demolished or put to some other use, they would no longer be deferred. The other point is that if the residential properties are not deferred and are assessed, the policy is carried the other way. There is an incentive to tear them down and realize on them as commercial pro- perty and further deplete the stock of residential property. Councilman Clay stated again that in his opinion Council is antici- pating the outcome of the Fire Zone I recommendation, which is now before the Policy and Procedures Committee and the Planning Commission. Councilman Eechrs said he would like amplification on Councilman Eerweld!s point. He did not believe that the city should try to perpetuate antiquated housing for two families where it could be demolished and make attractive housing for six families. As he seas the motion if it is passed, this could still be realized. The defer- ent would carry on if someone did demolish and build something else, Vice ?Mayor Pearson said that if they build something else, the deferment does not continue. Councilman Beehrs said that in that case he was opposed to the motion. Councilman Eerwald comtsented that this is one of the benefits of debate. He was persuaded by the arguments that Council should defer and with the condition that he made previously, he said he would again move his amendment. AiEMMENT: Councilman Bervald moved, seconded by Beahrs, that the Council defer the assessments on Type V structures within the asses- sment district, conditional upon the property owner's opting for such a deferral, until such time in the future that Type V structures are demolished or residential use discontinued® but in no case should the deferral assessment represent a lien on the property beyond the term of the assessment bond. The amendment passed on the following vote: AYES: Beahrs, &:rwald, Henderson, Pearson, R.oaenbaum, Sher NOES: Clay, Norton The motion to direct staff to develop the necessary legal vehicles, etc., passed on the following vote: AXES: Beahrs, Benaald, Henderson, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Clay, Norton 265 10/15/73 The motion to approve the proposed design modification for the block on University Avenue between High Street and The Circle passed on a unanimous vote. The motion to eliminate assessments on All Saints Church and Goanel Outreach passed on a unanimous vote. Speaking to the motion to add the police/fire station, Councilman Sher said that he thought such action would be a mistake. Fe thought Mr. Sipel's point was well taken that the city is making a contribution in terms of a direct contribution plus the electrical work. There are other city properties. Twelve hundred square feet of the police' /fire building will be retained in public. use. In setting up the assessment district, properties owned by the city were taken into account. Councilman Henderson noted that Mr. Sipel also said that if this had already been occupied by commercial enterprises, it would have been included. It is a matter of timing. The city mad that commitment and zoned it commercial which is why he supports it. The motion to add the old police/fire building to the assessment dis- trict passed on the following vote: AYES: Be<ahrs, Berwald, Clay, Henderson., Pearson, Rosenbaum NOES: Norton, Sher MOTION: Councilman Berwald introduced the follo=wing resolution and moved, seconded by Henderson, its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 4831 ENTITLED "EA RESOLUTION OF DETERMINATION, UNDER DIVISION A OF THE STREETS A','~• HIGHWAYS CODE, TO PROCEED WITH ?ROCaDIN GS FOR IMPROVEMINTS -- DOWNTOWN BEAUTIFICATION AND 1 IOHTING - PROJECT NO. 71-80" The resolution was adopted on a unanimous vote. MOTION: Councilman Berwald introduced the following resolution and moved, seconded by Henderson, its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 4832 ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OVERRULING PROTESTS ON RESOLUTION OF INi ITION NO. 4812 - DOWNTOWN BEAUTIFICATION AND LIGHTING - PROJECT NO 71-80" The reaolution was adopted on a unanimous vote. MOTION: Councilman Benald introduced the following resolution and moved, seconded by Henderson, its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 4833 ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION AND ORDER ADOPTING EN(:IR'EE ' S REPOIT, CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT AND ORDERING THE WORK - D0WNTQV?1 BEAUTIFICATION AND LIGHTING - PRNECT NO. 71-80" (as modified by Council action.) The resolution was adopted on a unanimous vote. MOTION: *mice Mayor Pearson moved, seconded by Berwald, that the changes is the project which have bean approved, and the steps taken to improve and enhance the project, have no environmental impact. 266 10/15/73 The motion passed on a unanimous vote. Councilman Norton asked for clarification regarding whether or not it was Councilman Henderson's intention to leave out the second half of the staff's recommendation to the effect that the improvements in the Eldorado block would be put in. Councilman Henderson confirmed that it was his intention. MOTION: Councilman Norton moved, seconded by Pearson, that the im- provements in the block of lot 16 be included in the project as ori- ginally planned and that any additional costs occasioned by construc- tion difficulties attributable to Eldorado's use of the sidewalk sub - service be negotiated with Eldorado rather than picked up by the assess- ment district or the city to the extent legally possible under the encroachment permit. The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: 8eahrs, Berwald, Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Clay Request of Youth Advisor Council to r%a1 rd" 1 Ifo " ciri� �iEy MOTION: Vice Mayor Pearson moved, seconded by Norton, that item 6 be brought up on the agenda for consideration at this time. The notion passed on a unanimous vote. MOTION: Councilman Henderson moved that the Council of the YAC that the City Council declare Palo Alto a cated to international cooperation and world law and following resolution and moved, seconded by Pearson, accent the request 'arid City dedi- introduced the its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 4834 ENTITLED "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF TIE CITY OF PALO ALTO SUPPORTING AND RE)UESTING IMPLEMENTATION OF WORLD CITIZENSHIP." Tory Seedman, representing the Youth Advisory Council, mentioned that the resolution passed by the Youth Advisory Council was passed unani- mously and represents a basic viewpoint towards the function of the United Nations. He said that one c, two members of the United IT.ations Association might want to address Council and that he would answer any questions Council might have. Elizabeth Frye, 536 Lincoln, past president of the Palo Alto chapter of the United Nations Association, said that she felt strongly that one reason the United Nations is failing again to prevent or stop a war is that there has not been a mass movement in support of the United Nations. It has been left to government officials. There has not bean a worldwide: system in its support, and that is what is reedsd. The world citizenship movement is growing. Everyone is so concerned with local problems that there is not time left over for global ones, but the tier. is cooing when there must be. The world citizenship movement is a tt.,l to helr, educate the public to think in larger terms than their own backyara. 2 6 7 10/15/73 Councilman Berwald said that he guessed the resolution was symbolic and it did not especially bother him. He referred to the statement in the resolution that Palo Alto be ordered to fly the UN flap at all times with the US flag. He said he did not like someone to order the city to do something and he also referred to raising funds annually by voluntary public subscription. He said that Council could not make gifts of public funds. Regarding the phrase "World City subject to world law," he was not so sure that he was ready at this time to take this too seriously, because he did not think there is a world l aw . Councilman Beahrs said he was glad Mr. Berwald spoke as he did and also that Council heard from the audience to the effect that there should be personal involvement to which he agreed. It is important that people think along these lines. He said he remembered sadly the faith that was put in the Kellogg-Briand pact over forty yeas ago that was to end war forever. AMENDMENT: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Beahrs, to chan?e section one of the proposed resolution to remove "ordering the" and insert "flying" and to take out the words "to be flown." The amendment passed on a unanimous vote. The resolution as amended was adopted on a unanimous vote. Mercury -Vapor Street Li ht Conversion Program MOTION: Councilman Sher moved, seconded by Beahrs, to continue this item to the meeting of October 29. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. Consideration of Re uest from All Saints ..p ecopa ur° or ie ; am tat Assesesaen4. Councilman Henderson, chairman of the Finance and Public 'orks Com- mittee said that the main argument made by the church in seeking relief was that churches are exempt from regular property taxation and thus should be exempt fry assessment based on property owner- ship and that any benefits to the church fro parking facilities were minimal. The church -provides social services of considerable value to individuals in the downtown area and to the community as a whale. In response, thie committee was told there had been a public hearing when the parking assessment districts were formed, that deci- sions were made then that those properties assessed would receive that proportion of the amount of benefit, and that state law has n3 provisions for allowing property once assessed to be removed from an aseeee en_L district. Also it was pointed out that if the district were to be changed to exclude the church, there would be problems refunding to the church the amount already paid and other members of the district, some of whom paid their full assessments at the be- ginning, would have to make up the difference. Conversations with other downtown property owners left little doubt that a new public hearing would produce a majority protest by the property owners. The meMbe a of the.committee expressed regret at not being able to review the church's assessment further in terms of at least some re- lief; however, there appeared to be little, ff any, toaaibility for 255 20/3.3/73 change even if change were desired. The recommendation by the com- mittee is that the request of the church be disapproved. MOTION: Councilman Henderson moved, on behalf of the Finance and Public Works Committee, that there be no change in the method by which the parking easeesmente are made each year and that the request of All Saints Epiacopal church for relief from assessment be dis- allowed. Councilman Norton co nted that the words "that there be no change in the methods by which the parking assessments are made each year and" were unnecessary. Councilman Henderson agreed and said he would strike them from the motion. Councilman Beahrs commented that this follows action that Council had previously taken on petitions from the Methodist church. Council has never made exceptions. The motion with the deletion mentioned above passed on a unanimous vote. Ordinance Adder Section 2.04.390 to the PA!,C 1177 n in Section.2.16.030 of -the PAM __ to Aut or ze Ex ense owances to ,.e s he City Council, etc. Councilman Clay introduced the following ordinance and moved, seconded by Pearson, its adoption: L '(-2-//‘ORDINANCE O. 207 ENTITLED "ORDINANCE OF TI'E Ct`U?'C'IL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ADDING SECTION 2.04.390 TO THY Y PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE AND AMENDING SECTION 2.16.030 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL COIE TO AUTHORIZE EXPENSE ALLOWANCES FOR ?HERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, BOARDS, AND COMMISSIONS" (first reading 9/24/73) The ordinance was adopted on the following vote: AYES: Berwald, Clay, Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Beahr. Resolution of the Council 0poain MOTION: Councilmen Berwald moved, seconded by Beahrs, that this item be continued to October 29. The motion passed an the following vote: AYES: Beahrs, Berweld, Clay, Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum NOES: Sher 269 10/15/73- Ordinance Amending Various Portions o c 'hapter of the MOTION: Councilman Henderson introduced the following ordinance and moved, seconded by Pearson, its approval for first reading: "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO A'N'1?NP YNG VARIOUS PORTIONS OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE TO REDUCE T1E SIZE OF CERTAIN SIGNS BY ONE-THIRD, GRANTING THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AUTHORITY TO DISAPPROVE CERTAIN SIGNS, AND PROHIBITING ROOF SIGNS" - Councilman Henderson stated that he felt there was an inconsistency between sections 1 and 5 in that section 1 prohibits roof signs and section 5 reduces the minimum size of the signs. City Attorney Booth agreed that there is an inconaiatency; however, he felt he should respond to Council's assignment with both directions, which is what he understood from the last meeting, and assure that somewhere it would be decided whether roof signs were going to be prohibited at which time the Attorney's Office would make appropriate changes in the ordinance prior to the second reading. AMENDMENT: Councilman Henderson moved, seconded by Pearson, that the ordinance be amended to eliminate section 5 and renumber the sa±t- sequent sections appropriately. Councilman Beahrs said that he missed out on the presentation in connection with this matter, but he was alarmed that with such limited discussion, Council could change the ordinance that everyone talked about for weeks. He asked to be filled in on the substance of the arguments. Vice Mayor Pearson stated that the Architectural Review Board was finding it extremely difficult to work with the present ordinance if they were expected to pass judgment on signs which they considered architecturally poor. Therefore, they came to Council with the recom- mendation that Council give they: this latitude by passing this amended ordinance. First reading included a lengthy discussion, and Council hard from the Architectural Review Board chairman. Councilman Beahrs asked if he understood correctly that in substance the old ordinance stands, but it is subject to variations at the dis- cretion of the Architectural Review Board with these modifications. Vice Moor Pearson replied that the old ordinance does stand except that tonight's action reduces the permitted size and eliminates roof signs entirely. Councilman Beahrs asked about the inoffensive signs in Town and Country Village. After discussion it was decided that they were not roof signs. Councilman Clay asked if Beneficial Finance net with the. Architectural Review Board. City Attorney Booth responded that they mat with the ARA and resolved their difficulty. They will hive a wall sign and no roof sign. 1 1 270 10/35/73 Councilman Norton commented that each time Council deals with the sign ordinance, they create a hardship on those who in the interim period have installed signs which become nonconforming. If this is really what Council wants, fine, but if it is going to be treated as interim fora couple of months and then changed, it might be best not to d3 anything until Council is sure what it wants. People relying on the present ordinance spend money and then their signs made non- conforming. He said he was satisfied, but if there is any thought that the ordinance is likely to be changed again, it should not be acted on tonight. Councilman Berwald recalled that he mentioned at first reading that he had, during the early formation days of the Architectural Review Board, recommended the overhaul of Palo Alto's sign ordinance, He said he had a copy of the Lafayette sign ordinance which he considered to be a model ordinance, and it was worked out with a great deal of cooperation with groups in town. When it was finished Lafayette had an excellent and very restrictive sign ordinance that was accep- table in the community. He said he would not mind passing an ordinance this evening prohibiting roof signs, but getting into the other Areas and adding an economic burden without a fair hearing, bothered him. He said he would like to pass this ordinance with the provision of prohibiting roof signs and have the balance of it referred to the 'Policy and Procedures Committee. He said he would be willing to work very hard to synchronize this with the Lafayette ordinance and work to came up with .a really strict, aeetheti^ally pleasing sign ordinance. Vice Mayor Pearson asked if Council could pass an ordinance that simply prohibits roof signs. City Attorney Booth responded affirmatively and said he would bring beckon ordinance reflecting that. The balance could be considered by the Policy and Procedures Committee. SUBSTITUTE AMENDMENT: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Beshrs, that Council pass first reading of sections 1, 6, 8 and 9 of the proposed ordinance and that the balance be referred to time Policy and Procedures Committee. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. atina of Stop Sign System (CMR:922:3) Assistant City Manager Charles Walker said that this is the sixth time the present stop intersection system has been undated. It is revised approximately every six months, and there are seven or eight changes included in this recommendation. Councilman Sher commented about the report, He said he favors updating the stop sign system, but there is discussion in the report about staff's intention to review the whole guard -and -go system in reference to some bad motoring habits, indicating that people are not abiding by the guard -and -go system. The suggestion seems to be very much the same as that in the state law in regard to geed limits that traffic laws have to conform motorists= behavior. He felt that the !replication was wrong. Be did not think staff should revise the system to accoma iodate motorists that are not abiding by it. Mr. Walker aaid that staff completely agreed. The intent is to show that it probably would be timely to have a review. The fact that these things are occurring is an indication it is tine to review. Councilman Henderson agreed with Councilman Sher. He felt that it may be creating a problem by increasing the number of four-way stops. That ie discouraging more than any other factor. He thinks the guard -- and -go system is excellent. MOTION: Councilman Beahrs introduced the following resolution and moved, seconded by Pearson its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 4835 ENTITLED "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING RESOLUTION 4291 CHANGING THE CITYWIDE STOP INTERSECTION SYSTEM AND MAP" The resolution was adopted on a unanimous vote. MOTION: Vice Mayor Pearson moved, seconded by Beahrs, that Council find that no significant environmental impact will result from this action. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. Child Care Pro ram: royal of Sill'le rental runctfr�g ar are o:^�, n2'itt ' R �.i5 31 MOTION: Councilman Beahre introduced the following ordinance and moved, seconded by Sher, its adoption: ORDINANCE NO. 2748 ENTITLED "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO) A!NflING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1175„74 TO APPROPRIATE $5,525 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SICK CAPJ COMPONEJT OF THE CHILD CARE PROGRAM" The ordinance was adopted on a unanimous vote. MOTION: Vice Mayor Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, that Council find that no significant environmental impact would result from this action. The nation passed on a unanimous vote. MOTION: Councilman Beahrs moved, duly seconded, that Council direct the Mayor to execute the contract with Health Services Education Council. The notion passed on a unanimous vote. Reslonss to LAFCO's Letter Cotcernin sorvfces Councilman Rosenbaum commented that about a month ago, Council re- ceived a coomunication from LAYCO asking for a count on the issue of whether, if an annexation is proposed, the transit district be asked to comment on the availability of transportation in the pro- posed annexation area. Councilman Rosenbaum thought this was a Uetin- nine to consider transit aside from highways as one of the services that should be provided when new development takes place. He felt that Council should indicate that it would favor such a proposal. 272 10/15/73 MOTION: Councilman Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Norton, that staff be directed to prepare a response supporting the proposal that the transit district comment on the impact of annexation on the provision of transportation services. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. Re cLuest for Resolution eosin Santa Clara +ountv�crt rep a ,eaaure A Councilman Rosenbaum stated that the arena issue is going to be on the ballot November 6. There are many reasons why one might be opposed to it. One is that the county has only a limited amount of money. To the extent it is spent an this proposal., it is unavailable for other purposes. There is little public purpose in the sports arena and great uncertainty in construction and operating costs. Fe did not see it as a risk that should be taken. He felt that Palo Alto should take a strong position that this is not the way the money should be spent. MOTION: Councilman Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Henderson, that staff be directed to prepare a resolution opposing the Santa Clara County Sports Arena (Measure A) . Crystal Cava e, 1568 Chan,ninp. Avenue, sreakine as a private individual, read a prepared state;,ent supporting the construction of the sports arena. Councilman Rosenbaum res; orded that he thought it was a subjective matter as to whether spending this mcney is a useful public expense. He felt that teams should build their own stadia. Whether we are talking about nonprofit activities or whether, particularly in the case of the frarchiae, we are talking about profit -making activity which is being given a facility in which to play its ga=rs at public expense. Councilman Berwald Said he was not totally convinced that the argu- ments against the arena are particularly sound. If the arena were considered as a place for small Little League sorts of things and concerts and religious conclaves, basketball, etc., he thought it night be a very fine addition to the county in terms of providing a public place for people to have recreation and entertainment. He hoped that if it were constructed it would reduce some of the traffic that is now directed farther away. One of the things that bothered him in the previous discussion vsa that it was presented as though it was a 1O0 000eperson coliseu*. It is a very small arena. He said he has checked with some of the existing local arenas, and found they do not we/come a lot of outeide activity. There is not a place in the county for this kind of facility. He felt that it was all right. One of the arguments that it is a white elephant is not backed up by the SRI study. He said he would rather let the ta:eoaayers decide this. He could not see why an arena is not as important as other public facilities that are built. Councilman Hendersc n said that if you look at the story of sports arenas around the country, you come to the conclusion that they are one of the great ripoffa being perpetrated on citizens. Typically eases are new being priced far above what families with average in- comes can pay. The person who suffers most from the tax increase to pay for these arenas is least able to attend the events that are '.' 7 3 10/15/73 held there. They may cover the operating costs, but they never cover the initial construction coats. Promoters and team owners are making fortunes out of the gullibility of citizens who ars willing to pay for construction of facilities to be used by these private interests. Councilman Beahrs said that his family hes derived a lot of satisfaction and inspiration cut of sports, but he find himself rather ambivalent on this scatter. He said that he is a great supporter of amateur sports. He decried the fact that the country is being taker: over by professional sports. He feels this is one reason to vote against this. He thinks that the country should evert to an earlier interest in amateur sports. The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Beahre, Henderson, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Berwald, Clay ABSTAIN: Norton Regular fleeting of October 23 Cancelled MOTION: Councilman Beahra moved, seconded by Henderson, that the regular meeting of October 23 tie cancelled. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. October 29 Set as S2ecial * tin sg MOTION: Councilman Beahrs roved, seconded by Sher, that the fifth Monday, October 29, be set as a special meeting of Counci'. The motion pssaed on a unanimous vote. Committee of the Whole October 30 1973 MOTION:: Vice Mayor Pearson :coved, duly seconded, tat Council set Tuesday, October 30, for a Committee of the Whole tweeting to be held in the City Council Chambers to hear Stanford's presentation of future plane/academic direction. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. Ural Communications 1. Clarence Hager, 2575 Hazelwood, East Palo Alto, addresaEad Council regarding the sign at the Squire House. 2. Crystal Gemage, Downtown Palo alto, Inc., addressed Council expressing thanks for Council's action tonight regarding the beautification project. .0 t The tweeting adjourned at 12:23 a.m. 274 10/15/73 ATTEST APPROVE: 2 7 5 10/15/73