HomeMy WebLinkAbout0216.092r I .
-
Apt<J 16, 1992
mE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
Palo Alto~ Caljfom;a
Attention: FLTlance Committee
1222:1293 Commtmity Develppment Block Grant Funding RecommendflJions
Members of the Council:
Rel!\?£t in Bn ef
The piU.yos:: of this report is to present the funding recommendations of City staff and the
Citizens' A<t.nsory Committee (CAe) for the 1992-1993 Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) pmgram year. Staff and CAe funding recommendations are summarized on
Attachment A. Attachment B lists all funding requests and prior year's funding levels.
Attachment C details all the projects recommended for funding, and Atta~hment D details
projects for which funding was not recommendtd.
Source of Funds
The City of Palo Alto participates in tlle Department of Housing and Uman Developmenfs
Community Development Block G,.""t (CDBO) Program as an entitlement city. Each year
the City is notified by the Department of Housing and Urban Development of the actual
a.mount of their a.1nua! entitlement. The prima..ry objective of the Program, as stated by
HUD, is the development of v12ble urban communities by providillg decent hDi.lsing and a
sui:able llving environment and e,;panding economic opportu!lities, principaJJy for persons of
low and moderate income.
A-.Yaila.ble Flmds
Total COBG funds available for allocation for the 199211993 program year are $845,484.
The entitlement grant from HUD will 1>: S640,OClO,.an increase of 7 percent o ..... er the 1991-
1992 gr.mt of $598,000. Additionally, the following recycled funds are available for
programming:
1) $121,454 --actual net program income from the Hous.ir.g Improvement Pro
gram through June 30, 1991
CMR:216:92
L
.,.;:.
r:.c ...... r r····. -"",~' •• ,(,,'/ >
'-'"-.: .-.
2)
3)
$81,997 -actual net program income recei'r'ed fmin the Palo Alto Housing
Cor;oratio" for CDBG funded proper';e, for the peTied July 1, 1986 tnrough
June 30, 1991
S2,033 -reallocation of lJn~pent funds from the Senior Home R.epair Program
for the 1991 program year.
A primary as;«t and required element of l!'c Federal regulations relating. to the CDBG
program js the prvvision of adequnte opportunity for citizens to participate in an advisory
capacity in program phJ1nlng and assessment To address. this requirement, the Palo Alto
City Council adopted a Citizen Participation Plan on August 23. ]979 estabIishrng a fifteen
member Citizens~ Advls.ory Committee (CAe). fn accorda.rlce with this plan, new committee
members were selected in February. 1992 and app.:>inted by the Mayor. This y~'s
Citizens' Advisor,,: Committee members included; Dr, Bernard Aarons, Chair; Margot
Goldberg, VlCe-chair; Jr...e Podolsky, Human Relations Commission Liaison; Rhonda Berry.
Beverly Clayton, Gari de Jauregui, Leonard Ely Ill, Margaret Feuer, Barbara H:ifley,
VlTginia Lee, Janet Owens, Helen p.UegTin, Christine Shambora, Joe! SpoHn, and M~aret
Toor. Suzanne Richards. served as Ci!y staff liaison from the Human Services Division.
The CAC held public meetings on February 27, March 3, 5, 10, 12, 17, 19,24 and 26,
1992 in order to review funding applications, inter..'iew representatives of applic.ant B.gencies,
and to come to consensus on funding recommendations for City Council consideration.
CAe member; also made site vis~ts to several of the larger projects, including the proJX>sed
LyttDn lV, Lytton Gardens, the Barker Hotel, and parking Tt~ R.
Funding Applications
A notice soliciting requests for proposals and announcing the avai1ability or funds was
published iii frl.e Penir.sula Times Tribune or. December 11, 1991. Additionally, req'Jests for
PlOposals were sent directly to (In ex.tended mailing list or area non-profit agencies and
human service provid~,s. Thirty·three applications (with re.quesu for funding totaling
$1,177,715) were received by the February 10, 1992 deadlioe.
HUP Recplations
There are numerous Federal regulations and program constraints whicn must be baianced in
making allocation recommendations:
1. Se .... enty percent of the grantee's overaJJ beneficiaries must be Im~.'Jmoderate income as
defined by HUD. Income Limitations for the current year define a family of four ~ilh
CMR.216:92
L
4/16i92
Page 2
-.1 .....
.at1 annual income of SJ8/X)() as low income: and witt, ar'l annu.al income of $28,850 as
very low ioc.orr:e.
2. A maximum of 15 perc.ent of the annual grant arr:ount and the projected progra.-n
income expected from the current year (1.99111992) may be spent on services in the
Public S~rvice Category. The maximum. funding in t.l,is categ.1ry for me 1992/93
program year is estimated to be $120,750.
3. HUD regulations also restrict the funds available for o .... erall administration of ttle
program to 10 pen:cnt of the annuaJ grant amount and the projected program income
for the following)lear (1992/93). The arr:Ollnt of funds available in this category is
estimated to be $153,600. Regulations also a1low funding fer programs or proJects
which affirmatively further fair hOI'!sing to be funded u.nder this. category.
CPoo Plan
The City of Palo AI,o', CPBG Pla." approved by Council on October 4, 1984, sets goo, of
80 percent of available funding for housing and housing activitie~) 15 percent for commun[ty
wide facilities and improvements, and 5 pel cent for overall CDBG admini~tration. The
S percent for admmistration was intentionally set low \1!!lh the expectatiol1 that the General
Fund would cover t.'te actual cost of program i:!dministratlon. These goals were not intended
to be ngid. but rather 10 serve as guidelines consistent with the need. The allocation
recommendations for the 1992/1993 program year reflect substantial dewriations frcm these
Eoals due to administrative program changes necessitated by the need to respond 10 HU'D
monitoring finding' and concern, (see related CMR, 170;92 and 105;92).
The attached staff funding recommendations reflect 22 percent of the available funding for
general admir'Jstration (including fair housing), 13 percent for community-wide facilities and
improvements, 63 percent for housif1.g and hO'J.sl0g activities, an1 2 percent for supportive
public services not directly re!a!ed to hous:ng activities (teen substance abuse. homeless chad
care). The difference bet'oVeen the 22 perce'flt for gener.u administration and t.i.e 20 percent
administrative cap is allowable as a project. dehvery cost. It is; anticipated that during the
nc.xt program year staff and the CAe will review t.'1e CDW plan ~d return to Council · ... ,ith
a revised plan to include updated program goals and objectives.
Pal{) Alto Housing Cowration Fundine
In previous years a substantial portion of the CDW funding was allocated to the Palo Alto
Housing Corporation (pAHC) for various housing-related activities, including infonnation
and referral, prede'.'elopment expenses related to new projects, services to the City as a
consultant on housing issues, and management and other expenses for affordahle housing
projects. Allocations for the last two program years were $107,100 and S102,06O respective
ly. The eligibility of these activities and Lie categories in which they were funded, however,
CMR;216;92
L
4/16/92
Page 3
L
'k-ere questioned by Ht.iD officials in on·:;ite mon~torings in Ja.'1.uary 1991. As a response to
lhese concerns, the PARe has been advised by City staff to submit applie&.tions for CDBG
funding which are projcct·5peCific. Thelr application for housing information and referral
servlces is being ronsidered llnder the -Pl1blic Ser .... ice:" category this year~ resulting in
increased competition for these fun.ds aIr 19 all the human servk.e applicant agencies due to
O:le 15 perunt aIlocatio:llimitatjon.
The PAHC has also applied for CDBG funding for staff costs relating to three project
specific proposals: acquisition and rcl~abi1itation of the Barker Hotel, rehabilitation costs for
the Plum Tree apartments, and predevelopment CDsts associated' ~ith a new downtown SRO.
(Since the CAe meetings, staff has received sevc:rai letters pertaining to the proposed SRO.
These letters are attached.) Additionally, PAIIC ... ill be funded witll approximately 532,000
from the housi:lg reserve f"Uno to administer the City's Below Market Ralf housing program.
Proposal Review Criteria
In re'wieVloing the proposals for rJ.nding rec:>mmendations, staff and the CAe considered
federal regulations relating to applicant arld project e1'lgibmry, the goals of the CDBG p1an,
a.rld programs or projects which served people in crisis, the special needs group identified as
a City Council priority for 1992, Also considered were factors such as the urgency of the
need, the value of the service or projec'( to the community, whet-her or D\.lt the se;vlce W3!=
offered by other agencie.s, the number and diversity of project beneficiaries, the availability
of other funding sources to ';e applicant, the stability of the applicant agency and their
ability to carry out the proposal.
FundiQ~ RecqmmeodatiQns
Atlacr.mCflt A summarizes the funding ra;ommendations of staff and the Citizens~ Advisory
Comrrtittee. Staff and the CAe concur on all recommendations except fllnding for Mid
Peninsula Citizens for Fair Hou,ing (MCFH). MCFH has requested $19,684 for operational
costs for the 1992·93 year. The CAe recommends funding of $7,500 while staff recom
mends $15,000. Additional info':rnation is contained in L'1e recommendation rla.rra.tive in
attachment C on pages 5 ar.d 6. The $7,500 difference is also reflected i1'l a reduced funding
recommendation by staff for the Palo Alto HOiJsing Corpo;-ation's downtown SRO develop
ment proposal.
Staff recommends that the Finance Committee rer,.ommenG to the City Council a.ppro-vai of
the following:
1. The funding allocations as recommended by staff in attachment A be included in the
1992-1993 Community Development Block Grant program;
CMR:216:92
L
4iI6/92
Page 4
-
2. Staff be authorized to sLiomit Lie "Final Statement" applicalioo document to HUD by
the May 3i. 1992 deadline to include tr.e proposed PaIo Alto i992-1993 program and
th;: re..qu tre4 certi fications; and
3. l11e City Manager, on behalf of me CH),. 'De authorized to execute tl'le HtJD applica
tion a.T\C any other necessa..ry documenu to effect the application, and to othe.l-wise
bind the City with les~--t to the applicatio,1.
RitfuliY SUbmitted,;/; ,
/-J~-fV1U--ui1udve-SUZANNE RICHARO '-
CDOO Coordina
j
/L /nl#;:;:fLi'<EM;.:;;'ING Ti
ss.iSlant Cit"j Ma.n:i{::~)
c<:: CjUzens' Advisory Committee
Applicant Agencies
Ik./.v:lt/?k
PAUL THILTGEN c/ ./
Director of Communitj Sen-lces
Attachments: "A· Char:: ~ Projects recommended for funding
cB· Chart -AU funding requesL<>
·C· Narrative ... Proj!Xts recommended for funding
rD"' Namuive ... Projects not recommended for funding
"E" Letters relating to Let R SRO
CMR:216:92 4116192
Page 5
. ~
I ,
1
. (
r
l
'\ L
'~;ht -;~~~:h" ,:" ' __ "~"',,, '~,;:_-,>\! '." -';)-;X{fi~l'~'!"'/"'':<9'~ '.
No,
1
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
~
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
, ,
,
I
leVhiOd 15 April 1992
&'TA~"F AND CITIZEN ADVliiORY COMMITrnE
1m . 93 CDOG I'1JNIlING RECOMMENDATIONS
Agl!DCY ProJort Starr R"rod"tI,
Catholic Charities senior ombudsman 9,689
Innovative HOllsing
1
!:hared housing coummling 10,000
Penin!.ula Area Info & Ref(!fral Service tenant/landlord info 10 ,000 ---
Senior Coordinatin.g Council seniot housing counseling 10,000
Urban Ministry of Palo Aho hometess setvice.'j, 33,000
Palo Alto Housing Corp. affordahle hou"ing info & t~fe!'ral 28,000
Palo Alto Adolescent Service..~ Corp. teen ~ubstan,e abuse 10,000
Homeless Child Care Pro~ram child care foIuhsidifl$ 10,000
City of PaJo Alto CDDa program ;:tdministration 178)00
Mid-Penin.~ula Citizens for Fair liousing fair housing connsel ing 15,000
Senior Coordinating Council senior home repair subsidit'S 10,000
Stevenson Housij carpcting 20,000
Social Advocate..'! f(lr Youth group home rehah 10,000
S'!COOO Harve. .. t F0\.1<.I Bank new food llistribution center 2.',000
. Children's Sheller Fund new shelter construction 72,500
New Housing Devolorment Fund: 3tJ3.'J?5
Specified amounts re'lcrved for rrujecL, Lytton IV (new Seni(lt Housing) 100,000
tilrollgh Dee, 31, 1992, If unspent 61 Palo Alto Housing Corp, 200,000
I that lime, funds becollll.'! available for Barket Hotel aCGlli~jtioll
use on other eligible housing projects. Palo Alto Housing Corp, 93,995
Lot R .. SRO d~Yelopment
TOTAL FUNDING 845,484
-----~--.-. ------------
CAC
RCitomm.
9,689
10,000
10,000
10,000
33,000
28.000
10,000
.~
178,300
7,500
10,000
20,000
10,000
25,000 --
72,500
401,495
100,000
200,000
j 101,495
845,484 1
.,( ,
·~"'"'"~~rit ...................... " ' . --.
": : -,,:J,~~'~,'
\! ",,', " ',', "'~"
, -":~ 'i:-<'~
> ,
a
>
)
)
, ,
\ '~
/f.
.....,
I
~
~.-..
",' >,: :" J,
1 , ri
L
/
ATTACIIlIiENT B
1992 -93 CDBG FUNDING IlI!QUESTS
No, Agen("y Projed 9Z/93 911l1Z
Req..,..$ Funding S
1 Catllolic Charities scnior omhud'lman 9,689 9,6R9
2 Innovative Housing iihai'ed housing coon"cting 24,000 24,000
3 PAAIRS tenant/landlord 12,000 12,000
4 Senior C{\()tdinating Council !Ocnior housing counseling 10,000 10,000 -
5 Urha.n Ministry homeless !Oervices 33,000 30,000
6 Palo Alto Housing Ctlrp, hou!Oing counseling 31,360 0
7 PA Adolescent Servicos adol, suhstance abu/'ic 15.000 0
8 H(lmel.e8s CuiM Care Project sullsid), money 20,000 0
9 Community Services Agency senitlr nutrition 4.000 2,500 -
10 Emergency Housing Con!<.ortium shelter hl,,(! nights 18,000 15.000
II Family Service -Santa Clara Co. women'!'i substance abu!Oe. 15.000 15,000
12 Peninsula Center for Blind program for disahletl 5,000 0
13 Family Service MLd~Penin!lula therapy/caNe management 20,147 0
14 Second Harvc.~1 Food Batik senior orown hag 5,500 0
15 Pen'msuta Gardening Project community gardens 5,000 0
16 City (If Palo Alto CDBG administration 178.300 81,000
17 Mid-Pen, Citiz('J1!! Fair Housing fair housing counseling 19,684 24,333
18 Stevenson House callJclirtg 20,000 5,000
19 Second Harvest Food Dank dj~trib\ltion center 35.000 25,000
20 Senior Coordinadng Council Senior Home Repair 15,000 15,000
90/91
funding $
9,22&
7,500
12,000
9.500 -
30.000
0
0
0
0
10,822
0
0
0 -
0
0
81,000
22.205
17.500
0
15.000
89m
Funding $
t,S79
5,000 .
. 11,700 I
10.000
30,000 ~
0
0
0 -
0
17 .000
0
0
0
0
0
51.100
20,500
20,000
0
15,000
:.-
~
Sa m
"to
)
)
.' , y.; "1 ...
revised 15 April 1992 ca~rec92.doc .1 ---.... --._---~.-.-...... __ ..... .-.----.----., -----.. ----,-.. _----.-.. ___ ._. __ ~ i
, \ '
,. -,
, ,',
I
No, Agff1(,y ProJ .... 1lZ/93
Req ... t $
r ZI Penin.lOula Children's Center roof repair 21,000
22 Social Advocates for Youth rehatl adole¢ shelter 10,000
I
23 ChildreIl':;; Shelter Fund shelter construction 72,500
24 Senior Cc)()rdinating Council senior center elec. repairs 3,979 I
25 Lytton Ganlen. .. elevator %,000
26 Comm. As. ... oc, (or RetardlXl, lnc. hal'ril'f removal 68,306
27 Palo Alto Housing LOrp. Barker Hotel 400,000
28 Pa]o Alto Homdng Corp. pre-dev. SRO 118,050
29 Palo Alto Housing Corp. rehab Plum Tree 123,2.~0
30 Lynon IV senior hOllsing 157,530
31 Miramonte Mt"ntal Health 835 Middlefield· rehab 11,000
~32 Miramonte M!;!ntill Health 739 Ro~eWtJOd ~ rehab 6.500
33 Jnllovative Huusing rehab home 18,000
TOTAL 1,177,115
----.. -~------
revised 16 April 1992
, ~,
91/92
l'llnding $
15,770
~.400
61,592
64,735
"-----
'!-
n~":'VTfi'\' .. n-''1':'It· ••••••• IIIl!I.III.jIII r
90191 89190
FundlnR $ Fundi"" $
43,519 W,4()S
I u
I
I
,
,
-----------
)
rllcrec91.doc
.-
-.~ \, -
/--,
-; ,
(
.1
1
,
--"j ~
~",JW:_
,,~, u
-.
I ,
~-.... ' ,
L
A ttaclunent C
ATfACHMENT C
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
AGENCIES A.""D PROGRAMS RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING
1992-1993 PROGRA.M YEAR
Palo Aito's CDBG progra..T. has undergone substantial <:hanges over the past year as the
.result of HUD monitor",,'g reports. Sigrufica.r:tt program modifications wer"! requested in the
areas of increased monitoring and regulatory corr:.pliance, as well as the determination of
eiigible activities and the Cjty~s role in the proactive expenditure of funds. This year'!
funding recommendations have begun to refle<:t these program changes. The committee
consensus is that the avera!! prograrn should move in a direction more in line wlth the
origlna1 HUD i.,tent of the creation of viable urban communities and the creation of
affordable hOl:sing opp<>rtunities. During the course of this year ~ the Committee plans to
revise the CDBG prcgram gnaIs and objectives and return to City Council for approval.
In reaching fundir.g consensus, the Committee also considered 1) the 1992 Ci~y Council
priority relating to "People in Cnsis·, and 2) the overall number aTI_d size oft.l-}e projects
recommended for funding in order to minimize the administrative-and monitoring burden and
maximize the allocation impact. Staff and the Citizens' Advisory Committee agreed on aU
recommendations except in the case of Mid-Peninsu~a C!tiz.ens for Fair Housing and the
amount .reserved for the Palo Alto Housing Corpordtion's SRO project in the-new housing
development fund.
The following agencie.;; arid projects are recommended for funding;
CATEGORY: PUHLIC SERVICE
1. CATHOUC CHARITIES
1991/92 Funding
1992/93 it"luest
CAe and staff recommendation:
9,689
9,689
9,689
Purpose: This agency provides confidential) free advocacy and complaint investigation
services to approximately 1,025 elderly residents living in 13 nursing and residential care
facilities located in Palo Alto. Trained staff and community volunteers (ombudsmen] visit
loc.al facilities on a regular bash and as special clrcumsta.'1ces dictate. Patient~ are counseled
and represented in the areas of patient/resident rights, elder abuse, quality of care, financial
concerns, diet, theft, incorrect pla~ement, eviction, and other concerns.
Proposal: The proposal funds staff salaries and benefits in support of the program_
JustificatiO:l: Continued full funding is recommended as these services are not duplicated by
any other Agency, add value to the community. and are cost effe{:tive.
L
, '
>}~~k ___ ~ . .....-__ -___ ... _-... , .. ~~._ ...
2. INNOV A'In 'E HODSrNG
1991192 Funding
1992/93 Request
CAe and staff recomml!ndation
24,O<Xl
24,O<Xl
lO,O<Xl
Purpose: This agency provides a program of shared hOlJsing ·~rit.~ supJX>rtive services for
very low to low income Palo Alto residents and employees. The program' S primary focus is
on single parent families headed by women, CWly of whom have been homeless or are at
risk of becoming homeless. With the critical shortage of affordable housing for lower
income people, sh~-ed housing is often the only option available. Special case management
services are provided to help reside<lts achieve successful sharing and master critical life
skills s!.lch as effective parenting, penonal goal setting. time and monty management, and
dispute resolution.
Proposal: The proposal is to fund staff salaries and benefits in support of the progr.un.
Justification: CDBG funding for toe year ending 1990 was $S,O<Xl and for the y= ending
1991 was $7,500, Staff an'; the CAC supponed a substantiallncrease in die 1992 funding
level to re...~nd to the agency·s unexpected 105s of anticipated private foundation financial
assistance. The current funding recommendation reflects a return to the previous funding
level as well as the Committee's s.upport for this valuable service, which reaches a $egment
of the population nO( served by other housing agencies.
3, PENINSULA AREA rl'.'FORMATION AND REFERRAL SERVICE (PAAIRS)
1991/92 Funding
1992/93 Re<juest
CAe and staff recommendation
12,000
12,O<Xl
10,O<Xl
Purpose: Funds would pro"ide ~nforrnation and referral seIYices relating to rental housing
and the rights and respcmsibilities of both tenants .and landlords, and referral to the ten
anUlandlord mediation program where appropriate,
Proposal: This proposal is for general admini strati ve support in the form of salaries.
Justification: Committee recommends funding at a slightly reduced level due to the numer
ous housing information and reierral programs available in the communiry. Agency bas
begun to respond to Committee concerns by conducting Clore community" outreach targeted to
low income clientele.
41!~/92
Page 2
j"-"" .... 1_. ~c .c-' ----, W_"
I -
I
'--
4. SD.10R COORDINATING COUNCIL (sec) -SENIOR SHARED HOUSING
1991192 F<nding
1992193 Request
CAe and StaIf Rec.:>mmendation
lC,OOO
10,000
10,000
Purpose; FunGlt would provide shared housing counseling and general housing L ... fo:maticn
and referral for senior citizens in Palo Alto.
Proposal: TI.e prop.JsaJ i:i for salary and benefits for a half time. housing coordinator.
Justification: ReoJmmendaticn is for full funding oasee on the descn"bed need for housing
assistance to this vtllnen.ble population, and the ability of the program to lower the demand
for housing in a more costly institutional setting.
5. URBAN MINlSTRY
1991192 funding
1992193 Request
CAe and staff Recommemlation
30,000
33,000
33,000
Purpose: The Urban Mi.nistry of Palo Alto provides emergency services for !he local
homeless and very low income population. These services include: emergency assistan('.e in
the form of food, clothing, personal hygiene supplies, showers, etc.; job referrals, day-labor
0PIXJrtunities, employment related counscllng. phone use, a:.d transportation assistance for
those seeking employmentj counseling related to drug and alcohol recovei)'; social security
or unemployment benefit options; advocacy and support in the courts and jail; administration
of the rotating church shelter program, the Hotel de Zinkj and coordination of a volunteer
corps who assist in counseling and casework with the homeless mentally ill.
ProposaJ: This request is to fund ongoing administrat1ye ex:perlscs in the form of sta.ff
salaries, benefits :and completion of the single audit,
Justification: The Committee recommends full f~mding for this local organization serving ho
meless and very low income individuals.
6. PAW ALTO HOUSING CORPORA110N
1991/92 Fu nding
1992193 Request
CAe and staff recommendation
'L
NlA
31,360
28,000
41!6!92
J>2ge 3
"" -:-.:'
-
Purpose: The PARe provides information, referral a.-.d counseling xrvices to low income
individlliils seeldpg affordable housing.
Proposal: This. request is to flJnd administrative expenses. En the form of staff saI;uies and
benefits.
JiJstiflca.tion.; The PAHe h;u ~n funded in the past for "'administrative-expenses relating
to bcusing, but under the "adrainistrntive-rather Lhan ·public service" category. The PAHC
will keep records of the actual staff time spent on this activity in order to more accurately
predict the cost. The Committee wOl!.ld also like to encourage the agency to iJJcrease the
community visibility of its many exce!1ent sen:lces and affordable housing oppor!tlni!..ies.
7. PAW ALTO ADOLESCENT SERVICES CORP. (PAASC)
1991!92 Funding
1992/93 Request
CAe and staff recommendation
4
15,1JC(J
lO,DOO
Purpose: PAASC provides counseling addressing the emotional and developmental needs of
local adolescents and their fammes. Funding under this proposal is for a new out-patient
program for adolescent subsr:a.l'lce abuse.
Proposal: The request is to fund subsidies for the program fer low income families in need
of services.
Justification: The Committee recommends partio:ll funding to adaress tllis serious need at a
loca11evel and respond to the -peopJe in crisis· priority of the City Council. The Comminee
anticipates thai start-up funding for this project will enable the agency to 1everage other
potf'Ittial funding sources.
8. HOMELESS CHILD CARE
1991/92 Funding
1992193 >.eques!
CAe and staff recom~endation
Purpose: The Div!s.ion of Human Services ";;\'itIlin the C;ty in conjunction with the Urban
Ministry t-.as brought to light the critical need for a program of subsidized d:ild care for
children 1n hQrneiess families.
Proposal: Efforts to have a local child care provide.r admini~ter the distribution of funds did
not materialize as expected. Tnc Child Care Coordinator's office, however, will continue to
work with local providers and non-profit agencies to develop a specific program and subsidy
distribution.
L
4fl6/92
P,,!;e4
··21··
I -
Justification: Recommendation is fer partial fundmg in order to assure tn:al this Ctrea of
critical need has an opportunity to be addressed. The Committee expects. this money to t.e
used as seed !TIcney to initiate a centra!:1 and begin a progra.m in order to document the need
and develop a plan for future funding through other sources.
CA"fEGORY: ADMINTSTRATION
9. CITY OF PALO ALTO -CDW PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION
1991/92 Funding
1992193 Req ueS!
CAe and staff recommendation
81,000
178,300
178,300
Project: The Dlvi.'l;:ion of Huma.'1 Services administers the Community Development Block
Gr.mt program for the City. Beginning in July. 1992, the administroition responsibility ~i!1
shift to the Department of Planning and Community Environment. Administrative costs
include staff salaries, Pe!lefits, materials, supplies and advertising.
Proposal: The City is requesting increased funding in order to address the HUD monitoring
concerns and to maR effectively administer the program. Request would fund an additional
staff penon.
Justification: The committee recomlnends full funding in order to support the additional
staffing needs of the program.
CAe comments: Despite the fact that the CAe had concerns relating to the high percentage
of program administration costs, it lS felt that the costs are necessary and justified -;,n order
tiat Palo Alto not jeopardize its access to the CDBa funds. It is toe hope of the Committe<;
that inoreased staffing will allow the program to go be)'ond the da)' to day admin;strntion,
and be used to more proactively pursue additional affordable housing opportunities in the
community.
10. MJD.PENINSULA CITIZENS FOR FAIR HOUSING
1991192 Funding
j 992193 Request
StRff recommendation
CAC recommendation
24,333
19,684
15,000
7,500
Project: Agency pro\'ides investigation, counseling, and legal referral for victims of housing
discrimination, community education and outreach regarding fair housing. and data and
analysis of Palo Alto~s fair housing practices. and problems.
~t~~'L,?~. ; , .. '.j;
,i.".'_
4!l6l92
Page 5
"
":"
Proposal: This proposal is for general ad:'!1ini~trative program support including wa.de.'! and
general office expenses.
Staff comments: Staff recorrmcnds funding at a level more rr. line with neighboring
communities a.T'Jd the level of activity generated by the Cit) of Pale Alto. o,..-er the past two
years. the number of discrimination cases opened for L'1e Ciry has been roughly between six
and ;)even percent of all cases. Funding at the $15,000 level appro,-,:imately equate·s to that
equivalent of tl,e annual budget.
rAe oomlTlents; The CAe sUpJX>rt5 fair housing and recognizes that the services pro...nded
by L'le agency are vital to the community. Funding at a reduced level is strongly recom
mended due to the Committee~s concerns Vfith rea! issues surrounding staffrng, effective
productivity and program !11.a!\a.g:ement.
CATEGORY, HOUSING AllID COMMUNITY FACILITITS
II. SENIOR COORD!NA11NG COUNCIL, SENIOR HOME REPAIR PROGRAM
1991192 Funding
1992193 Request
CA C and S taIf Recom mendatior.:
15,000
15,000
10,OClO
Project: This program is designed to subsidize minor home repairs for senior Palo Alto
homeowne.."'S. The program increases the opportunity for seniors to remain in their own
homes as long as posSIble, a'ld help! to maintain the quality of current housing in the City.
Proposal: This applir.ation is to provide subsidy money far low income seniors unab:e to pay
Lite full I non-subsidiud repair rates.
Justification: The Committee suppons this program which appropriately addresses the
health. safety and housing needs of low income senior homeowners, but recommends only
partial funding since the progra.""1 has been unable to use the entire subsidy aJl10unt OVe".f the
pa>i few yean.
12, STEVENSON HOUSE, COMMON AREA CARPETING
1992193 Request
CAC and Staff Recommendation
20,000
20,000
Project: Stevenson House is a senior housing project, affordable to low and moderate
income persons, which is owned and operated by Palo Alto Senior Housing, Incorporated, a
nonprofit organization. Currently there are 135 senior adults living In the residential
community.
L
4116192
Page 6
-
Proposal: Ste'lenso!l House is requesting money to replace worn caTpe,ing in the commO!l
areas of tile project. The worn carpeting is a safety h2.l.ard fN the eiderly re'!lidents,
espec.la11Y those with w21}~rs.
lusdfi~rion: Full funding is recommer.ded in order to provide I safe and comfortable
environmenl in the buildir .. g+s common areas for the elderly residents. Low, affordable rents
preclude the auumulation of suffIcient maintenance afF! replacement reserves til fund all the
necessary improvements.
13. SOCL~L ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH -REHABILITATION OF CASA SAY, A
RUNAWAY AND HOMELESS YOUTH SHELTER
1992193 Reque't
CAe and Staff Re;::ommendation
10,000
10,000
Parpase: Social Advocates for Youth (SAy) is a non-proftt agency established in 1973 in
response to the crisis need s of Santa Clara County youth and their families.. The ager!cy
provides Cri~5 residential treatment services through the Casa Say program, delinquency
prevention services, drug abuse prevention and day treatment services, independent livL'ig
skills training, and residential servIceS for abused iUld neglected youth.
Proj~ This -proposal is. for parual funding to comp1ete a $45,000 rehabHltau('In project to
inciude a new roof, exterior painting iU'ld the installation of a forced air heating system. The
project is located at 509 V:ew Street in Mountain View and houses six at-risk adolescents for
a. maximum stay of 30 days. The program offers a comprehensive residential and counseling
progt4Il1. specificalty targeted to families ir • ..::rises. Emphasis is ptaced on providing needed
support to the child and family in order to stabilize the home situation, and prevent court and
probation department involvement. The program also provides. vital services. to area. runav.'3.j'
and homeless youth.
Justification: The Comr.linee ret.:ommends full funding arthis one-time expendlrure. The
project provides a critical number of t.l'le ·crisis" shelter beds available to children in the
County. This program also addresses the "people 1:1 crisis" Council priority.
14. SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK -B'LTLT-IN EQUIPMENT FOR THE NEW
FOOD DISTRIBUTION CENTER
1992/93 Request
CAC and Staff Recommendation
35,000
25,000
Proj~t: SecDnd Harvest Food aa.,k of Santa Clard and San Mateo Counties distnoutes food
to area soup kitchens, shelters, emergency food providers, other non-profits, and brown bag
groceries directly to low-income ~nlon. Agencies served in the Palo A1to community
4/16192
Page 7
r . ,-'
f
I
f
t
I
~e .he1iir'
i
-
indude: La Comida, CAR, Ecumentcal Hunger Program, Moving On Group Home,
Peninsula Children's Ce:-Her, and t..i.e Ventura School Brown Bag :iite.
Proposal: This proposal is for fo • .mdii'g to equip the new 6O,()()Q square foot distribution
center's storage area with pallet racks to allow for maximum facility utilization. 50,000
pounds of food a..-e distriblJt~ each day to needy recipient'), The ne''''' facility will have
loading docks, specialized rooms and equipment for processi."'lg food, adeq,lJate refrigeraticn
and freezer space, improved traffic par:erns, and adequate office spa~ for volunteers and
staff. In 1991, 100,0<)0 people per month r=ived food assistance, half of whom were
-children.
Justification: The Committee recommends funding based on the necessary a.'1d excellent
services provided to the low-income residents of Palo Alto. Committee feels the recom
mended allocation is adequate to complete the project. and consistent with the level of
servi:es to Palo Alto residents.
15. NEW CHILDREN'S SHELTER FUND
! 992193 Request
CAC and Staff Recommendation
72,500
72,500
Project.: The New Children's Shelter Fund, a non-profIt organization, was fonned in 1987 to
:aise funes, design and construct a new S12 million children~s shelter in Santa Clara County.
Th~ goal is to create a p\!blic-private partnership to provide a new. non-institutional,
homelike facility an<! the best of """ices to the County" div<rse population of abu:;ed and
negIe.cred childrer,.
Proposal: The proposiJ is for design and construction c.osts associ.ated with the project wt-Jch
",,':ill !>e located r.ear the intersoction of Camden and Union in San Jose.
Justification: The committee recommends full funding as the City's contribution to this
esse!ltiaI facility which will provide unduplicaloo services for all children in Santa Clara
County. This is a one-time funding: allocation.
16. NEW-HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND
Staff recomrnendatior:.
CAe recommendation
393,995
401,495
Three propos.!'lls were received which wc-u!d eit1:ler increase the available number of units of
affordable housing or preserve existing affordable housing stock. Staff and the CAe d~d not
feel that any of the proposals were at a sufficient stage of development to recommend
funding, and agreed instead to recommend the creation of a one-year new housing develop
ment fund. Due to the fact that funding a11ocations can only be made on.ce a year during the
4/16192
Page 8
I
i
l
. j
i
. \
-
CDOO cycle, it was decided that a11ocation to a flind for hOl!sing dt.'velopmel:t wculd provide
needed money throlJghout t.~e year (or projects as they became O;ivaHable or reached 4t stage
of deve.1opmen: where CDBG funding could be utilized through approv~ of projects by the
City Council. It is. the Committee',S Iecommendation thaI these funds be a\·ailable in tJ-le
amounts indicated beiow IJntil December 31, 19'.n. Then.'-after, any unspent funds will be
available for any projects meeting t'le Cii:t's eDEG hDusing priorities, Oil a fijst come, firs!
served basis .
The three projects proposed' for the 1992/93 yfZ" are descnOed below, The Comminee
weighed the meriu and feasibility of the projects in the determination of fllnd~ng recommen
dation levels. Since more detziled informatioIl will be required on ail projects, it is anticipat
ed that staff will work with the agencies to develop final proposals with tl'le appropriate
documentation and return to Council for final funding approva1.
A. COMMUNTIY HOUSING INC. (CHI) - L YTION IV -DEVELOPMEl'o"T OF A
NEW 51-UNIT COMPLEX FOR LOW INCOME SEN10R HOUSING
1992193 Request
CAC and Staff recommendodor.
Project: Agency proposes to build 51 ne·oN units of affordable senior housing on a .site with
existing housing, located on the 300 block of Everett Avenue in Palo A1to. em is the
developer and manager of two other senior housing projects (Lytton I a:1d II), aIld the
nursing facUity mown as Lytton m.
Proposal: Request is for 535,000 in reiocation expenses, $SO,316In demolition costs, and
S72,2J4 for off-site impW"o/ements, i.e. sewer Hne, curb, etc.
Justification: An increase in the number of affordable housmg units for seniors is conslstent
with Palo AIw's Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy and Housing Element.
Although the initial receipt of HUD Section 202 funds gives this project viability, L'Jere are a
number of unresolved issues. The Ccmmine: appmvaI is contingent on City sraff's f3'1ot
able a..'1alysis of the fiC1ancial condition of '.he applicant agency as weB as the proposed pro
jecl.
B. PALO ALTO HOUSING CORPORATION -ACQUISmON OF nIE BARKER
HOTEL -A SlNGLE ROOM OCCUPANCY HOTEL CURRENTLY HOUSING
VERY LOW lNCOME RESIDENTS
1992193 Request
CA C and staff rOCOni men dation
400,000
200,000
Project: Agency proposes to acquire and rehabilItate uie Barker Hotel, a single room
occupancy hotel, in order to preserve and maintain th.:: current inventory of housing afford-
4116192
Page 9
-
able to the very low lr.come. Purchase of this asset by a private de"eloper would lea .... e Utese
units at risk. if the use was convertecl to retail O!" commercial.
Proposal: Request is for $273,000 in acquisition costs, $100,000 for reha~j1itatioo. and
$15,041 for PARC staff cos:s rolating to the proj""t.
Justifi.;atLon: Preservation of existing SRO housing is a top priority in PaliJ Alto's low
income housing strategy. Loss of 3Jly part of the supp!y of housing opticns for the very low
income should be avoidoo. The Committee's approval is contingent upon the pmchase p~ce
of the project not exceeding the appraised market value, and City staff's favorable 8.Ilalysis or
the financial viability of the project.
C. PALO ALTO HOUSING CORPORATION -PREDEVELQPME.", FUh1)S FOR A
NEW SINGLE ROOM OCCUPANCY HOTEL ON AIR RIGHTS OVER CITY
PARKING wr R-
1992/93 Request
Staff recommenclation
CAC reoommer.datior.
118,050
93,965
101,495
Project; PAHC proposed the development of 168 units of new SRO housing in the down
town area to serve the area's low income wagE-earr-eT'S, seniors, and others with special
housing needs.
Proposal; Request is for $24,000 in staff costs, and tile balance for pre-development costs
s'Uch as archit:ectura1 and engineering designs, financial oonsuHants, application fees, and
soils tests.
Justification: An increase in the supply of housing affordable to the very low L"lCOme is a
priority and consistent with the housing goais of the City's Comprehenslve Housing Afforda
bility Strategy. The difference in funding """'mmendation levels for this l'roJect is tile result
of the disparate recommendations of staff and the CAe relating to the Mid-Peninsula Citizens
for Fair Housing proposal.
L"
..
4/16192
Page 10
Attachm<Dl D
A IT ACHMENT D
COMMUNITY DEVELOPME1,7 BLOCK GRANT
AGENCIES AND PROGRAM NOT RECOM!\lliNDED FOR FUl'<'DING
1992·1993 PROGRAM YEAR
St1.ff and the CAe commend the non-profit hUman service and housing agendes for the nJ..aJlY
uccllent services they provide to those most hl need. It is heartening to know that there are
so man)' worthwhile projects and sen·ices avai1ab!e in our community. and frustn.ting to hear
of so much need and so few resour{;e5. The CDBG program, ho",\'ever, also has its limita
tions, and cannot iu.'1d all of the projects reqLit"'..sted. Some of the agencies listed below did
receive CDBG fu.nding in the current ytar or in previous years as shown in attachment B,
Based on t.lte proposal review criteria as outlined in this staff report, staff and the CAe are
unable to recommend funding for the following projects at this time:
L COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW
1992193 request: $4,000
Project: Administrative support for the senior noontime hot meal and socia!il.ation program
at the Mountain View Senior Center located near the Mountain View/Palo Alto border.
2. EY.ERGENCY HOUS!NG CONSORTIUM
1992/93 request: S18,IJ!.XJ
Project: Administrative support for agercy providing temporary emergency shelter and
supportive services for homeless individuals and families.
3. FAMILY SERV1CE ASSOCIATION OF SANTA CLARA VALLEY
1992/93 request: $15,OOJ
Project: Adminbtrative support tor women's polydrug abuse program based in Mountain
View.
4. INNOVATIVE HOUSING
1992/93 request: $18,000
Project: Rehabilitation of transitional housing progra.'T1 property. serving previousiy
homeless mgle parent families, located in Mountain VieW.
f ... ~-... ;. -:~ ... L:·:.: ..... . ' .. i -,;-
'. .
-
I
I. ,
~<." " ·.~f~~r-~
~i
-.
o
S. PENINSULA CEi·,rr-.-c.R FOR THE BLIN'U AND VISUALLY lMPAIRED
1992/93 request: $5,000
Project: Adminjstrative support for an outrl2ch program pro;iding information, ccunselLl1g
and trainhlg for low income visuaIly impaired seniors in ~o Alto
6. FAMlL Y SERVlCE MID-PENINSULA
1992/93 request: 520,147
Project AdrrJrUSti"ative suppcn for psychotherapy and case management services for the
more serviously impaired, low in.o:,ome P3!o Alto residents.
7. SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK
1992/93 request: 55,500
Project: Administrative support for "Brown Bag" progrdffi of supplemental groceries:
benefiting low income senior residents of Palo ArlO
8. SENIOR COORDlNAl1NG COUNCIL
1992/93 request: $3,979
Project Electrical repairs at the Senicr Center at 450 Bryant in Palo Alto consisting of the
replacement of emergency lighting system pnwer supplies and the repair of fluorescent
lighting fixtures.
9. PENINSULA CHILDREN'S CENTER
1992193 request: $22,000
Project: Roof replacement for facility located 2t 3860 Middlefield Road rn Palo Alto which
serves children and adolescents with behaviorial or emotional disorders.
10. LY"ITON GARDENS, DBA LY"ITON GARDENS HEALTH CARE CENTER
1992193 request: $%,600
Project: Installation c-f an elevator in a vacant elevator shaft in the health care facility
located at 437 Webster Street in Palo Alto.
,
4il5/92
Page 2
-
,.: .. '
II. COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION FOR RETARDED, INC.
1992193 request: $68,306
Project: Renovations to facility at 525 Charteston Read in Palo Alto to pro"idoe a barrier
m:e. more ~ssible environment.
12. PALO ALTO HOUSING CORPORATION
1992193 request: $123,250
Project: Rehabilitation, including roofmg, painting. structura:! and dry rot repairs, and new
furnaces. to low i.f1.come housing project located at 3020-3038 Emerson Street in Palo Alto.
13. MIRAMmITE ME.."lTAL HEALTH SERVICES, INC.
1992193 request: $6,500
Project Restore and rehabilitate property at 739 Ros.!wood Drive i" Palo Alto which serves
as affordable housing for adults with disabilities.
14. MlllAMOr..'TE MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES, INC.
1992193 I<quest: $11,000
Project: Resum and ",habilitate property at 835 MiddlefIeld Road in Palo Alto which serves
as affordable housing for adults with disabilitie.'i..
4/15192
Page 3
':-.';"',
-:~;~k-~: __ -
.~_c
"8
Jan"ary 31, 1992
Hal ~!ichelson
Pak-, Alto Chamber of Commer~
Government Action Committee
325 Forest Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Dear Ha1:
Attachmtnl E
This is to fonnally express my concern ",i,h the lack of City policy regarding the sale, leasing, or
jOiJ1t venturing of Downtown Assessment Dlsrrict parking iots. The lack of policy has created a
V",;lcuum which encourages ad hoc free lancing by real estate interests on what is "perceived" as
City property. The !a:L'"ge size and location of these Parking DisL.ict assets make them irnpo!:si'Jie
to replace. The asset includes not just the surface but, Uke any private property. the entire
bundle of rights inctuding subsurface and air right5.
The Government Action Committee in conjunction with the Dav.ll:Own \1'arketing Committee
should flesh out a comprehensive anaIysi!. of the Parking Assessment District propenies and
develop a pol.lcy recommendation to the City Council.
I am making this request in light of rumors that th.: Palo Alto Housing Corporation is
contemplating a project Or! parking lot P. I own two buildings abutting that lot and am very
much opposed to a housing project on that (Dr for that matter, any) assessment dLslrict Faridng
~at. Abundant, user friendly parking is the life blood of retailing. Additionally, the ongoing
redevelopment inherent to any vital downtown will requlre furure parking needs to avoid the
same neighborhood intrusive deficits of the pas~.
Please adviY.: and r can come prepared ""ith appropriate exhibits and Jistrict history.
/wf/
cc: Bill Zaner
. ~" .::~,~ "., ~
"',-r,;" <", ••• "_,1
Ken Schnller
Gc:orge Zimm~rman
Siivia Seaman
,,:·I~p
Miki Schneider
Tony Badger
Jim Bacr
Vi\;wr &110 ma
Herb McLaughlin
Roben Tennyson
Steve Fasani
Jill Vandervoon
Warren ThOi15
-
I
I
!
-
-
-.~ ... ,,----,--~-.--... ,.-..
. ,
Mr" Ken Schreiber
Director of Planning
City of Palo Alto
p" O. Box 10250
." ...
O}'l:RTIES
Palo Alta, California 94303
Mr. Bill Zaner
City of Palo Alto
p" O. Box 10250
Palo Ailo, California 94303
Members of th.e Palo Alto City Council
March 17, 1992
Re: Protection of Porking Lot R
Dear Ken, Bill and Couw ... i1members:
The purpose of this letter is to support the concern expressed by Chop Keenan in his
Jetter dated January 31, 1992, a copy of which is att::\cned.
I attended a meeting of Jeaders within tbe Downtown Parking As.s.essm~nl District called
by several members of the Government Action Committee of the Chamber af Commerce on
Marcb 16.
This comminee, diS{;ussed a • .... ariety of planning ISSlit'5 related to protection and
improvement of public parki..T]g in the Downtown.
Everjone in attendance shared as a fin.t priority expressing to coundlmembers , members
of City staff, and the Palo Aim Housing Corporation that the deveiopment of Parking Lot R for
housIng would be strongly opposed"
The Palo Alto Housing Corporation and its many projects in Palo AJtO arc admirable,
including the efforts of the PAHC to develop SRO housing. which we recognize as a type of
housing needed in our community.
, -": ".'-"
I
I I"
!
(
--
Mr. Ken Scilreiber
Mr. Bill Zaner
Ma:-ch 17, 1992
Page 2
Nevertheles.\ owners of properties and businesses in the Do~TIto\1o'Tl must be protective
of public parking lots. The future development of these lots to prQ1..;dc either im:rt'ased parking
or to enhance retail and pedestrian vitality is precluded b)' the: development of these: iots for
housing. Even a howing pmject which n:places and increases parking on an existing parld.rig
lot, depm .. es the assessment district of full de .... elopment of any such paTktl1g lot to the extent
that tl:1a~ parking lot has used some F'Ortion of its tolerable volume of development for hOUSing.
At a time when cOillmercial real estate is in a regional depression, and retail activlties are
ir'.3 !:ta!e of reo:e!'.:~iQf!, coru;dt'r3t!,.:,~ r:f the ~:s.e ~f oar. i::17":-t:!n! ?;;r1;j~;; 2:-::se[ suc!~ ~ Lot R for
housing is unfortunate.
Unnl such time as a comprehensive park..ing plan for the entire Downtown has be~n
adopted, prmiding assurances to owners of properties and businesses that parking demand can
be satisfied, the use cf any DQ\';,nto'W'Tl park.ing lot for housing 'Will be resisted by members of the
Downtown community.
During the March 16tr-meeting. those of us in 8tiendance were specifically asked to
request that the City not allo..:.ate CDBG funds for predevelopment costs related to an SRO
project at Parking Lot R.
Many of us who are members of I.he Do'.N'ntown community will be meeting over the ne),:t
several months to develop rome plans for increasing parking within the:: Do'\lr,l·ntQ\l\-TI.
JEB:c::.l:
Enclosure
cc: March 16th Meeting A tie ndees
Syl\ia s"rn an
Since~ly,
I A ~ ,!/.'--i{:..l\
J amti E. Bae r
V
, .
-~
,~
'~-'f.,;-_ _ c~k~ <T~;:~
-"
ROIfII!!.RT H. TENNYSON
388 A1.I';' .... '5t e,;-c:.;"
Menlo p.,,.. ... , CJ!iO~,fo!,'T"a 8400::5
Marth 2~, 1992
1oI,r. Ken S(brel~er
Director of Plzr.ntng
City cf Palo A1to
P.O. Bo)(' 10250
Pale Alto, CA 943D3
Mr. Bill Zaner
City of P~10 Alto
P.O. S" 10250
Pale Alto. CA 94303
Members of the Palo Alto City Council
RE: PROTECTION of PAP,KlNG LeT R
r&[~~~W~[ill
U M.M 2·~ 1992
C£PAATMENT OF PlANNING
CITY OF PALO ALTO
Dear Hr. Schreiber, Mr. Zaner and Council ~embers:
A rumor has come to my attention that He Paio Alto Housin~
Corporation is contemplating a project on Parking Lot R in the
downtown Palo Alto ~rea.
As a property owner of 116 University ,Q.venioJe, wnose pr'ope'!"'ty is
adjacent to this parking lot. 1 wish to extend to you rn,Y deep€st
concern about such a proposal. Any lessening of parking space in
this en~ of University AV€:1ue will be an absolute d~sa'jter to the
retail interests in this area.
At the present tir.1E: there are 01'llj fc>.J?" street parking .s.paCf~s en
the :.treet of Un'i'{ersity A'H~r''Je am! Th~ CirclE:. Alr:.ost Ol..Or €:ntir~
business depends upon having ao-=quat:.;! space in Parking Lot P.
With t~e addition of three new retatl lOentlJres ter.tatTve'iy scheduled
for tne 110 Ur.iversity CircTe are.;~ this will make the pading
situation even tighter.
Although the Palo Alto Housing Corporation and its p'!"'ojects in
Palo Alto are admirable, they should in ~o way infringe upon the
lifeblood of the dowrltown retail i:1tE:'rest5 \IOl;~ch are E'sser:ti.al to
the success of downtown Palo Alto.
Mr. Ken Schrei~er
Mr. B111 Zaner
Member of the Pelo Alto City Caur,il
ro\arch 23 ~ 1992 page 2
r strongly urge a negative vote Or] any proposal that miQht arise
concerning the reduction ro cnang€ of parking in lot R.-
7 1y.
/
/ :.cui~C4:7L Robe-rt H. Ten~yson
RHTjb
•
..,';., ....
t~~~ .
-
March 23, 1992
Mr. Ken Schreiber
Director of Planning
City of ~alo Alto
P.O. Box l0250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
Mr. Bill Zaner
City of Palo Alto
P.O. Box 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
Members of the Palo Alto City Council
RE: PROTEC~ION of PARKING LOT R
[Rl~C~Hf~rrJl
MAP. <4 1992 ill}
~j,:g-<FE"T OF PLANNING
PALO At TO
Dear Mr. Schreiber, ¥uo Zaner and Council Members:
As a Thember of the Palo Alto Chambe~ of Commerce and a retail
merchant for some 60 years In the downtown Palo Alto area, r
wish to extend my great concern about the possibility of a
housing project on parking Lot R in downtown PalO Alto.
The loss of any parking space ""h~t!:;oever in our area would be a
disaster to the merchants in this district and wO":..lld probably
require a relocation to another area.
I sincerely. hope that the members of the Palo Alto Council and
Planning commission ""ill vote "No" to such an anti-business
proposal. l
Very sinc'erel.Y.:1
r '
..
Charles R. Edelstein
355 San/a ,Cfr/a AW:'I'1~ .. ;e
Par" Atlo, Cal!f:Jmia 94'.101
March 29, 1992
Mr, Ken Schreiber
Director ofPianning and Urban Environment
City of Palo Alto
P,O, Sox 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
Mr Bill Zaner
City Manager
City of Palo Alto
P.O Bo,10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
HCfiorab!'e Citj Council of the City of Palo ~6Jto
Re. Use of Downtown ParkinS Lots for other than Commercial Purpo!.es
Deer J...fr. Schreiber, Mr, Zaner, and Members of the Clty Council
r write fOT the ownershIp of the properties at 550 Waverley Stzeet 636 Ramona Street, 299
Hamilton Avenue, and 437 Lytton Avenue, And, I write as a former board member of the
Palo Alto Housing Corporation who has continuously supported the addition of housing
units in commercial areas.
[am opposed to any plan whidl would 'joSe Do ..... l1tOWr', Parbng .A...ssessment District prope;-ty
for other than pa:ki ng purposes or In connection with a commercial development which
would clearly contnbute to the .::itahty of til e retail acti "it)" of the Dov.'Iltmvn
The specific proposal to use Lot R is unac.ceptable at a time of great dl:stress in the
commercial rea1 estate :narkets ami.in the economy generall)' Upon the filhng of the several
buildings arou~d Lot R, thtre ~ill be a new parking crisis that may well provO! rami to a
number ofretall and office users in that vicmity The one parking lot example we have,
Abitari, has proved to be pan of the problem rather than part ofth.: solution of improving
the vitality of the retail activiti es around It.
~~~~~~f~lill
. r.'Ao J' Ij~~
JEPAM '·~."i:.I"'1 OF PLAMlilNG
CITY OF PALO ALTO
~~" ..
: .':--;-: -
•
-
I do suppon the development of housing in the Down.tov.'O ] believe that the commercial
ser:tor is a good place for market rate, BMR, a!'ld SRO housing And,l feel the Ciry has
been remiss by reducing the commercial capacity of the Do~'T1l0V.'D \Vlthout pro\oiding
Sl.Iitable incentives 10 increase me bowing c,..1.paciiy the:-e
Fina.lly, the parldng lots may seerr; irresistible ~use they ere t.l]oughl to be "frei:" land for
lowo.COSl hoosing The lots Me not fr;ec r and my predecessors and ow.r feiiow property
owners paid and are paying For those lots. Th.e lots aff! an inlegral part e:f our ownership of
prop-Jty Downtown. If the City \Ioishe$ to take our property, the City must compensate us at
fair muket value
] specifically request that the Council not allocate any funds or any CnBG fiJnds toward the
development ofhousing on any parking lot in the Do .... ntown J ani equally eager tv see the
Council rethink the FAR in t.'e Downto'Wtl for housing purposes and for parking and to
allocate resources in that ciJrection.
RespectfuUy yours,
Chuck Edelstein
cc: Syhia Seman
" ... , , ,
.,~"","" -'--'--~~-----'-
April 1, 1992
Thoits Bros., Inc
(j_'') Em('1)..iHl ,')"'Ii,,!
PO 1)'4'>: 11
Pr.Ji1.l .11I1J. Cw);f,Jnr{IJ ,':",,_iU.J
r,'k'pix,'.w (41; ,I 323 4666
Mr. Gary Fazzino J Mayor and
Members of the Palo Alto city Council
City Hall
Palo Alto, California 94301
Osar Mayor and. Members of the Council:
I a. writing to join in the expressions of concern over the
proposal to utilize parking lot R for a housinq develcpmen~. The
existing downtown parking facilities have been acquired over a
period of many years and, with limited exception, paid for by the
downtown Palo Alto property owners and businesses. Limited as they
are, the Iota are essential to the "health" of the retail area and
to tha .. tforts to attract nS'iI/" and desirable retail buain ••• es
(oth9r than restaurants) to the downtown area. The private sector
has been making its contribution tovard these goals and deserves
the support and oooper~tion of the city. I sincerely beljeve that
it ¥ould be improper and irre&ponsihle to use any of the limited
assets of the parking districts (which include the subsurface and
air rights) for any purpose other than to improve the capacity and
efficiency of downtown parkinq.
Very tr~ly yo r~,
/I 1/0,/? trr waJUfit R • .J.goits
for
Thoits l Love l He~shberger , McLean
WRT:cnh
cc: Ken Schreiber, Director of Planning, City of Palo Alto
William Zaner, city Manager, City of Palo Alto
~~~~HH~~
P.P? PZ 1~;j2
oePARn~.ENT OF plJ\toll ... LN("
CITY OF PALO ALTO
• I
I
r , ,
........ 'L .
. ..
)/" l""f\tr~5·r;..,. A.n"I.1
?:'.:, I.,)h
{;>';\I"m",,'iot,Ij'·
'-'1", l;A :1;',
•
,
i
I
I
I
.,,:,
'.
~J. Ken Schreiber
Director of Plap~ing
City of Palo Alto
f.O. Bo)': 10250
Palo Alto, cA 94303
Dear Mr. Schreiber:
JOHN CHILDRESS ASSOCIATES
.t.JI5 WAVt:RLE'"I' StFlEET
~1" on'ICE et)X ~
P,.,LO "loTO, CAL.IF~NiA B-oI.:xu
1"~3)m.()l!67
April 9, 1992
HE: Parking Lot R
Palo Alto, CA
We write this letter to advise you of our opposition to the proposal
for I!l housing project OIl Parkin, Lot R in downtown Palo ~1to. The concept of
converting BDY downtown parking-space whBtsoev@r for the purpose of building
a housing project is contrary tp the interests of downtown retail
et!ItahHsbents and office t~nanb_ J..s a property own~l'" in downtown Fda Alto,
we pay an annual parking asse&saellt despi te the fact that we provide parldng
facilities for our saployees and visitors; we require no on strE"et or city
lot parking.
We f~l that Palo Alto c:annot continue to provide housing for the
undl!!'rprivileged at the expense of downtotffl retai.lers and prope .. ly owncr-s,
however noble the i;:;ter-est. It is our h"p~ that Ulembers of the City CO\.l!lcil
and the Planning ComaissioD will not e~dorse a prDposal te conv€'rt Parking
Let R for any other purpose.
:r&c/blp
1m ~ ~ rq ~ff ~ f[j1
IN, ~.PR 10 'J"C ll!J
DE'PAATMl;jljj \Ji= ?VJ",,~\NI.J,
CITY OF PAlO ALTO
.,
Cord.ially yours,
"
'-4{.u' -'/ .J _ )j,": (-+-~.tV .-
Jor~ B. Childress
~ I
I
1
I
I
i ,
..
VANDERVOORT ;JOPERTIES
Ken Schreiber, Ew,.
Di."'tClor of Planning:
City of Palo Alto
Palo Alto, California 94301
Bili ZaneT, Esq.
City Manager
City of l'.uo Alto
Palo }\J to. California 94301
Members of the Palo Alto Cit)' Council
1f505 Edg!:"wood Drive
Pat,") AI:/), CA 94303
April 10, 1992
Re.: Protection of Parking Lot R
Dear-Mr. Schreiber, Mr. Zaner arId CouIlcilmernbers,
The purpose of thi ... Jetter is to support other properry owne-:-s in Downwwn Palo Alto
who have organized to:
!. Oppose SRO housmg of Lo< R {speoificaI1y 525 Alma and 542 HJ gh)
2. Study the frnances Uld operations of parking district lots.
3. Srndy, pI'i1l1, and price future parking slJ1Jctures within the dhtrll.-:"L
Although the PaJo Alto HO;.J.sir.:g Corporation and its many pro3ects in PaID Alto are
admirable, we-as propeny owners in Downrown--musl be concerned about public parking
lots. We specifically request L~at the City not allocare CDBG funds for !?redevelopmcnt
costs related to an SRO projeol at Parking Lo< R.
\\re respectfully request that you cUn."',lder our viev.point in your future deliberntions~
cc: Chop Keenan, Esq., 700 Emerson Str"'...et
Very truly YOl.!!"5,
Jili Vandervoort
for Jill Vandervoort and
Kathleen Vandervoort Taylor,
Joint ow!":;.:rs of 542 High and 525 Alma
~ ~:p. ~~ ~9; ill)
DEPARTMENT Of pU\I>INING
CITY OF PALO AlTO
'.~ -.: ,~-:....
. ~:
•
I
April 11,1992
Mr. Ken Schreiber
Director of Ple"nlng
Cit~ o[ Palo Alto
p O. 8o~ 10:<50
Polo Alto, Colif. 94303
Deer Ker.
FASANI CARPETS
:'539 ,Io,LMA S rR!:E'r
The purpose of this letter is to oddress my OPPOSl tion to "non po11:1ng
str1Jctures" proposed for po11:mg lot R. As 0 merchont end property owner
the evoilebilJly end occessibility of sMe, con'eoient po11:109 1S essentiol
to the VitOllly of reteil business in do.,nlown Palo Alto These dlstncl
Do11:in9 loIs connot be reploced, they need to be pl-eserved now.
The Abotori condominium project hos adversely 'Impocted trofflc ond
pc11:ing and is on e~omple of whOt we con e',pect 1f "oir spoce
development" is olio wed. The city po11:In9 lot virtuolly d1soppeored ""th
thiS project. Upgrading or,d development hos been extensive in the lot R
ereo. This deY€lopment is dependent on lhe preservetlon of the perking
thet currently exists.
I recognize lhe need for SRO housing ond feel tnere 1S property thot is
currently zoned for this type of development tr,ot would not imp"ct end
lttke awoy thE'!" \oIllalily of the downtown merchonts ond propertl~ owners
Co not feel thot city property should be used to subs,diZ€ privote use
It is my proposol that until 0 comprehensiYc porking pion 15 deY.loped thot
"ddresses tne needs of lhe entire Downtown, the C1 ty should not olloeote
any CD6G funds related to SRO housing
Sincerely, ,
'\! cy' _,_, ,I
~,':Jt-~~~,:..r-;
Steve rose",
Fesoni Corpets
--
LOVIS fA.S .. 4.NI
sr~vE ~ASANI