 October 13, 2004Back to the table of Contents Page
Classifieds
Palo Alto Online
|
Publication Date: Wednesday, October 13, 2004
Editorial: Retail Action Plan is long overdue
Editorial: Retail Action Plan is long overdue
(October 13, 2004) Update of zones, creating 'friendlier' business climate cited as keys to maintaining sales-tax base -- but let's not overdo it
Ways to safeguard Palo Alto's sales-tax base are being explored as part of a "Retail Action Plan" -- outlined to council members Tuesday evening at a study (no action) session.
A particularly long-overdue component is creation of a "Business Registry" -- the new term to replace the idea of a business-license tax, which community businesses have resisted in Palo Alto for nearly a half century.
The registry for the first time would let the city, Chamber of Commerce and others know precisely what businesses exist in town, who owns them, how many employees they have and what they do.
The new name is not a semantic disguise for a new tax, Planning Director Steve Emslie maintains. Its purpose is to create a "business census," of sorts.
But having an accurate list is one thing; knowing what to do with it is another. Building a friendlier business climate is much more than just some PR effort. It entails really getting to know and be responsive to the needs of local businesses and having mechanisms in place to provide them guidance and counsel when needed -- in much the same way shopping centers help promote their tenants.
The creation last year of the new Business Improvement District in downtown Palo Alto is a huge step in the right direction.
At the same time, making Palo Alto more business-friendly does not mean the city needs to set aside its standards for signs, setbacks, noise, lighting, appearance and landscaping -- many of which are designed to reflect community standards for taste and protect nearby residents from undue intrusions.
As with most sensitive issues, the Retail Action Plan will require a continuing balancing act between different interests, each with legitimate concerns.
Editorial: Council should reconsider Homer Tunnel bike link
Editorial: Council should reconsider Homer Tunnel bike link
(October 13, 2004)IIt is inconceivable to us that the majority of the Palo Alto City Council has opted for a signal-timing change as its solution for what to do with bicyclists coming out of the nearly complete Homer Tunnel onto Alma Street.
Once they get across Alma, council and staff members indicate they should walk their bikes for a block unless they head north on Alma in the traffic lane, with parked cars close on their right -- a kind of invitation to Russian Roulette, it seems to us.
The council's 7-2 rejection Sept. 27 of a "wrong way," contraflow bike lane along one-way Homer Street for one block was primarily to retain eight parking spaces that Ole Christensen, owner of Ole's Car Shop, said he needs for his overflow vehicles.
While Christensen's parking concerns are real, we think some solution could be found if creative people put their minds to it -- assign him some spaces in underutilized garages a block and a half north, for instance, or later in the 800 High St. garage
As it is, the city has moved forward on a $5.3 million pedestrian/bicycle tunnel under the tracks despite burgeoning costs that spiraled it far beyond the initial $1 million cost estimate. By building the tunnel at the end of an attractive bike path, the city has directly created an untenable, highly hazardous situation at the Alma/Homer end.
Does anyone seriously believe the vast majority of bicyclists will dismount, cross Alma and walk their bikes sedately along the sidewalks north, south or east? To ride on the sidewalks is illegal, possibly a vehicular moving violation. To ride on narrow-laned Alma is dangerous, north or south. To ride the wrong way on Homer is illegal and dangerous.
At the very least, the city should legalize bike riding on sidewalks in those areas and create safety barriers at building exits -- which creates additional hazards.
In most instances, drivers and cyclists bear the bulk of legal responsibility for their own safety. But the balance tips when a government agency does something to increase risk or create a hazardous situation -- and we think this may be a case where that balance has tipped.
The city should not wait for some cyclist to be seriously injured or killed to test the liability question, but should move to reconsider the matter and get specific legal advice on that point.
E-mail a friend a link to this story. | [an error occurred while processing this directive] |