Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10261953City Hall, Palo Alto, California., October 26, 1953. The,Council of the City of Palo Alto net in regular session'on this date at 7:30 P.M., with Mayor Marshall presiding. Roll call. as follows: Present: Bishop, Byxbee, Cashel, Corcoran, Cummings, Drysdale, Hanley, Huston, Marshall, Mitchell, Porter, Rodgers, Ruppenthal, Simpson, Wickett. Absent: None. approved:. The minutes of the meeting of October 13, 1953, were Project 53-6, Street ]Lighting Reconstruction, District Two This was the time for a hearing on Resolution No. 2478 of Preliminary Determination for Project 53-6. Before, the hearing was opened, an explanation of the project was given by the City Engineer, with information on the proposed.improv;ement and the basis of assessment. He advised that the improvement contemplated is a continuation of the street lighting program completed under District One; that the present, District Two comprises the area previously proposed for Districts Two, Three and;Four of the original program, and that it is intended to follow thi's project with a proposal next year for the final district which would cover the area west of Alma Street including College Terrace. The City Engineer reported that. approximately 2900 property owners are involved in Project 53,.,6 - ;- that the improvement is assessed on a front foot basis, and the estimated cost is 41 cents a front foot except for the 2100 block on Byron Street where electroliers are to be installed at a cost of $2.10 per front foot. The -hearing was declared open. Mr. Robert E. Hackley, 353 Melville Avenue, .addressed the Council,.stating he is not opposed to the new lighting but questioned the method of. assessment. Ho read a statement and filed, a copy with the City Clerk, in which he requested the Council to make available to the public copies of the audit reporter:for 1950-51 and 1952-53; to prepare and make public a plan showing what utility -expansions are expected to be made in this fiscal year,`their estimated cost,and how they are to be paid for, and to continue this, hearing to a future date. Property owners who addressed the Council it:favor of the project included Charles Woods, 2171 Byron Street: Thomas Holland,.2150 Byron Street;` Floyd Pearson, 580 W. Crescent Drive; Major Donald Nichols, 1129 Parkinson Avenue; Mrs. 0, E. Eyman, 2065 Alma Street;; J. P. Swartz, 730 Bryant Street; Donna Miller, 945 Hutchinson -Avenue; Paul Kegley, 654 Gilman Street; i+l. A. North, 121 Santa Rita:Avenue:-,Mrs.: Juliet Cokely, 1000 Ramona Street; Mrs. W. L. Phillips, 25,1 Lincoln Avenue. Those who spoke opposing the project were Mr.: U. A'. Schall, ?95 N::Cal .fornia Avenue; Daniel Brown, 813 .1 .elvi.11e Avenue; Mrs.. Jeanette Redwine, 215 N. California Avenue,. Vern James,'604 Tennyson ANenue. Several others who spoke did not;' make, .definite objections but felt the assessments were: too hi zh, and asked questions regarding the assessments which Were answered: by the CitF Engineer. • 468 Mrs. Katherine Lancaster, 221 Nevada Avenue, stated that she and her neighbors felt there is adequate lighting in their block; however they would not oppose the project if new lights were installed:only at the corners; they did not want a light in the middle of the block. Mr. J. R. Harrison, 118g Fife Avenue, asked that the project be deferred to a later date because of the expense. Mr.' Samuel Vaughan, 2120 Byron Street, and Mr. Stacy French, 170 Lowell Avenue, suggested that the people involved be allowed to vote , by a' post card poll as to whether or not they are in -favor of .she pro ject The Ci tY Manager explained that monthly financial reports prepared.br".the Controller are available and that the annual report of the audit:has>been made available to citizens. He pointed out that.it has been the policy of the City in the past that property owners pay for the improvements benefiting their properties. After.'all who cared to do so had addressed the Council; the hearing was declared closed. Resolution No. 2483 requesting the consent of the Board of Supervisors of.:°Sa.nta; Clara County: to the exercise of extra territorial jurisdiction was presented, and on motion of Mitchell and ;Wl ckett, was' ad'.opted by unanimous vote on roll call. This resolution requests th' Board to consent to assessments against two lots in the Greer Partition, outside the city limits for she street'lightingimprovement.: ' A motion was'made by ►Wickett, seconded by Porter, ,that the resolution overr ling protests and determining to proceed without Compliance with the Investigation Act be adopted. Mrs. Corcoran moved as an amendment or a substitute,mo.tion that action Onthis resolution, and other resolutions on the project be deferred until a, pall is taken among the property owners involved in: the assessment,district:. Tniswas seconded by Rodgers, but the :notion as an aanendmeri or a substitute motion Gass ruled , out of order by the <City `At4 orrev; A roll,call vote on the motion for adoption of the resolution determining to proceed with the project resulted in the following vote:; Ayes: Bishop, Corcoran, Drysdale, Huston, Marshall, Mitc e11; Porter, Simpson, Wickett. Noes Byxbee, Cashel, Cummings, Hanley,, Rodgers, Ruppenthal.. As .this particular resolution required 12 votes, it was declared lost.. (Councilman Simpson left at this time, 9:00 P.M., and was absent for the rest of the meeting.) A motion was then made by Mrs. Corcornn, seconded by Ruppenthal, that all mattersin connection with the project be continued to November 23, 1953, at 7:30 P.M., and that a post card poll betaken at once of the property owners involved as to whether' or not they are in favor of the project, with a deadline for the return of the cards set for November 20, 1953. This motion was carried by the following vote on roll call: µ Ayes: Bishop, Byxbee, Cashel, Corcoran, Cummings, Hanley, Marshall, Mitchell, Rodgers, Ruppenthal, Wickett. Noes: Drysdale, Huston, Porter. p rGdo onv t r d b ~(3 ,�h p,��ylto G. p"Ta on''n' G . from N. alb ae taken " 4 tex from �,�a�;ved f rsde �n cannot , ,de �o years x l p 'letter tie need d spade de statement att take .� d take e w tao �- vat e ,yn whey '�. ` to th at '-.-t Xt woxu Ue aorta d ectI referred effect e ct that a1 c`ns and the earn re o Ar and to the e oat f\.-" nerov. State, to , ana,t mars th o � nt�n on the a y me ri r ? e to carry. r. -- out .;lax of es . tnvoIved, to 4 or ha fro 53-5 ,plans Dort vet. and. the r pro • ' ,v e, eex� ,redo en for peon o-, Bahr Charleston har cantxa by the epted. be as car m°tt n sa;�ce \\ to be `� b� ed �'' , oYx �0 ,• 2:484 of the �; � . � vas �h�s re,,a `' � � 1���' �esp�ut�gatem�nt a� na�,ce � �rad�er � � h .��ov emter accepted, • at th�� t'5.�� and v recess d �,� ���'� �.'M•� A ee P e 5 reconvened ec e �` Talbot, �`e'�� W A en'�'� Called r. t a�.�?ax��"�s a�rad. the �c.�ra ntex t ' Ct reported that t of the ox"J manner, ucnn e ea na&ex reP �.,m'��vema� �at,�s f�,c �, that the the . ended �� � �°� for com'p1eted and cec0�' st n Itoad �orter� n of drysdale and t ar�;n�'� ��e �. pro v ��� '�'� the Vas � 'rj�t�'!+'�Pn decd- �..�n,G� presented �ti;t'.�on w ''� a a r order�n the a � f oa � arte � 01 call,sw~ A cle AC�n m°you voce to far :ears date �,r r ,t V.c,A,\ aanaer. " �y unapt' as the tio the , r ada�t�d �,M•. set � 21 0 ona fr°mid �°'�a A• at �'' .�a kin t n B�-oc er presen e °p}t?red hro and �arCc� Pa" Ott/ I�ana'���,ve S. DoT, the 21 � �,end�n� The l Ghuxch,1of fac"� ��or rce e on vta in e �"°' Con ,reg vard and port wrU dot from Comm the tt C .tY r necessary and "ambl e the ''" rece�,v ed and that and sign , t0 co A report �� e he nc ,0ttat on eeclessar a h o.: the recox ,� �o \ acceptance of the 11 call, k mo`G ° E the ax�7�d t° cam. and ��J���y'vate on roll on v�� Ot sat the pro Sect vas contracts. n n of h e ac t be"�tr adoptedAy ' ?ands �;t Transfer zx �� �° cep s o per 's' Y eted On m°t c�pt�-'°Q~ �o and ha:d�. and the gy vot�n had been a o den es C ..,t f,�nds deers an for 1� x of �''�' reported g'ynGan'ad and ���a therefore t Ma ex wal s In a� arias and hefrom po dn The C b a 1440 00 for contract, ant transferred te f erre a .sY'o roll hat e 001440,00 f as done y n fit, and ote for 1n ,the that WorIc .e s7 of �On m °tt' n b 4ItChm°us eXenS�,ded that �1"�7 • author recomme1-01 nded pccd f da ata, N n� �� ll • transfer ~ .� �.tt � ca nsfex 2 �,cv�hes' at ee �° " -� �,e,�c ns hes at rBaseport ,Std cetved from C °`m .e ' c 0 �enc root wad ti�xe reA�est t has co'�'s�'dere°� 470 certain University Avenue 'busstops. The committee recommended that .a bench be placed at the bus stop on the easterly corner of Cowper Street and University,: Avenue, the location and design to be approved by the City Engineer, and that the City Engineer be requested to hmake a study and report on other possible locations for benches on University Avenue. In answer to a question by Councilman Cummings as to payment for the bench, the' City Manager advised that unless the Council authorized funds:for the purpose it is his intention to ask the bus company to pay for a bench that meets the City's specifications. Mrs. Ruth Johnson of the American Legion Auxiliary which previously presented the petition for benches at bus stops, spoke of the need for the benches, and Mrs. Stephanie Casaurang told the Council thatthere'is more need for benches at Waverley and Ramona Streets than at,Cowper Street. On motion of Porter and Wickett, the recommendation of Committee No. 2 was adopted. Truck Routes A report was received from Committee No. 2 recommending the adoption of an. -ordinance adding Section 19.36 to Codified Ordinance No. 5, providing for the establishment of truck routes, designating San Antonio Avenue from Alma Street to the Bayshore Highway, Alma Street from San Antonio Avenue to Page Mill Road, and Page Mill. Road'from Alma Street to El Camino Real, as truck routes for the movement of vehicles exceeding a maximum gross weight of three tons.' On motion of Rodgers and Hanley, the proposed ordinance was accepted for first reading-. Grade Separat;:on., South Palo Alto A report was received from Committee No. 2 recommending that the,proposed grade separation for South Palo Alto be located at Oregon -Grant Avenues. On. rrxotion of Ruppenthal and Drysdale, a hearing on thi. .; matter was set for November 9, 1953. Later during the meeting; this action was reconsidered' and the date of the hearing was &anged" to November 23, 1953 .U'se of Old City Hall ,Site ,A report was received from Committee No. 5 advising, that, it a.,s considering :the question of the old City Hall site, as to whether a more suitable use, can`. be made of the property than the off-street parking'>lot previously proposed; that complete informa tion is not yet available to enable the committee to ;Hake a final, report and: recomunendatior. at this time, and the committee requested, an extension Of t,irie to December - 3., 1953, in which to mare its' recoMMendationh It was pointed out that the date for demolition of the old City Hall-,:bUilding had previously been set for Npvember`1, 1953, having been p'o'stponed to that date from the date of September 1, 1953 erigina]ly`set-far demolishing the building. The Mayor inforred the' Council that he had received a petition from Mrs. Londa S..Pletcher, 1030 Parkinson Avenue, signed' by 212 residents asking for' a public hearing before the Council takes final action in regard to the disposition of the old. C:i.ty'Ha?1 building, and requesting that prior to such hearin the 7 471 r Mayor have the building appraised by an impartial, professional appraiser so that its real value may be known, advertise for sealed bids for sale of'the building, and advertise for sealed -- bids for the lease or rental of the building. The Mayor_ pointed out that a. statement on the petition was incorrect; that, the petition referred to the reference of the natterof the use of the old City all site to Committee No. 5 on August 10, 1953, when the Council postponed demolition`of the building, and, contained" e.. statement that as late as October 20th' the committee had not convened for the purpose of reviewing the Question, that Committee No. 5 did meet on August 27, 1953 and discussed the matter at:length, asking for certain information J and appraisals to be obtained, and that the committee had considered the question again on October 21st. It was pointed, out by Councilman Mitr..hell, chairman of Committee No, 5, that the questions asked in the petition have been before,the committee and that further. Information has-been received since its last meeting. The City Manager reported that the building has been appraised;, that>he had not been authorized by the Council to obtain sealed bids for the sale or rental of the buiiding,,but that 'he, had, informed` real estate agents that proposals w& J.d be accepted and.that tone have been received. He also reported' that the Building Inspector had made a report on the condition of the building and has estimated that it would cost approaimately $U•0,000:00,to bring the building up to standard. The City.,, Manager also reported that the County Executive has informed him -"that the County is not interested in the property. The City Manager read the report of Elmer M. Ber,liner, appraiser, who advised'that the best use of the land is for retail stores and that in his opinion the old building is of no useful value. The appraiser valued Parcel No. 1, the old City Hai site facing ; a:rona' Street, at $75,$00.00, and Parcel No. 2 having frontages: on both .Ramona and Bryant Streets, being the entire site where the 'old >City Hall and the Police and Fire building are located,' excluding,gthe pane area, at $185,000.00. The City. Manager also reported that he had received a. report regarding termite inspection of the building. Councilman, Mitchell pointed out that the written report, of the appraiser was not before Committee No. 5 when it asked for further time. There was considerable discussion of the whole question, including reference to the proposal for the establishment of a parking lot on the old:City Hall site. On motion of Cummings and Huston, the request of Committee No. 5 for extension of time until December 1, 1953, was accepted., Meetings, Statement of Policy A .report was received from Committee No. 5 stating that it has considered the ordinance proposed by Councilman Hanley providing that- all meetings of the Council, the Planning Commission and -the Committees of the Council be open to the public. The committee submitted a statement of policy, with the recommendation ;that the Administrative Coda be amended to provide that four hours' :notice of special Council -meetings be given to each local -newspaper, radio or television station requesting notice in 'writing.. The .report and policy statement pointed out that the proposed ordinance t V? fpa y- by the: terned aub .� 1 dV ,d cit .�, '19 i 'Z ' as. that e at Its' y. aft -.`'..�-_-�-�:;,._ aside th' last er the s°` 1` a t h �'m ith s r at do sessio called 4:11. tha aet t es .n n; ed Brown / mec db�"t he co otap that ���.� that rom is he i he ? mi ttee ply to the Gi v ado ' the cored, the Caunc it and Int feels th charter • .; toznop ed.` Tm� ttees tees 11 an e„t ° ��'t the cities ray Co ittee a.x�e st h C tees d the gl f Abe om CQuncjl ub Count �` -agr 3' hold an in { °wn .� : h tcO and `ire u wi czase Commission ��" dell °� the-Planning he p d "�e�Council's o with no executive meetings �, iSsi°� l� that ber+a ions be, orx z�s policy 4 p�erut t?� t t I c: present Administrative :� is re conducted openly. be taken the •ac�;� o E • �necia3 mi ytratAort -Cow, openly a actions °' ttz t provided or 3n t`o Ica Cole providese Ar°, 5 �, and that- / but Su, at ' notice 14�e twenty-four rent that the or n° � � each ch, �� ty`fo Rio xnemb �. f°r ur pointed out writing. y-fo newspaper, ,o t radio o notice not that hours' Brown noticel em telex sore stationcouncil I: amendment of it was mov nett 'en t to Committee sto by e requesting e nber newspaper, ew e ©f special Sr i . 5 yc acceptedell, seconded spaper k�eci,�l �s�r�.t tided b, writing be o the A ou.-�cxztative. Co,iet and that �thatproposed o � pre television tins rov the °r° that the p4r°d by ,, a be on requesting e lde that ` four the the discussions pa Vie; C1ty Attstato eyeue ci to each 1ocLLhour; hA,,rp�°le are rz tiri ed a sty*, notice in public d`scr�us led cO teas statement he roL�ed bel evnd pu Zit if observe are mimportant which he d relations ��, meetings committee that felt report off, Zt 'us e Council U e ale and the following ,Committee ng Eate r° • 5 ed by b� nley� Nee would b the tabled. red by ,} Ayes: The motion e) that y v. $a. ��� n was the ` , Cashel, Ranley, l° by Noes: Bishop / s �� St Corcoran, zey' r'r',• ') 3, / arhall rcoran, 3, ,t,;_, j repot After ' room l Cummings, nth l . of further Porter, Drysdale, / carried.ndm amendment Committee No. discus , r r� tJiclt i * `' dust° 5 an �t e, n y to prepare the Administrative thehCi motion to W • Use Permit. iVe Cod` City accept the recommerwed was �'eco endins z'ep t or selna approval s received j provided ded permit t° ofce ed from t one for, each at then conduct e applicatio e pzannln �? 5op square f day care n of .'ors • Cam Alger On 9umb .feet Children in tinter at z xere mite � adopted and t?�otion °f � °�' .lot area, attendance � Aber Drive, Deal nCmot r`mit .4 , s� na Huston, Batton 4o e ' reco, e zyeort a accordance ccordanee w the recommendation r,�. - / r - Z'''�'°, endti was: � ���c �a►�� o,� �'prov�I of received from �m J Street d :On Lot , tfie appli,c m the Planning `etweoxa o a approval lof'EZaour-unit a o{ D. J. apartment -building Commission raved,q On' motion ° .end Oregon k 'Avenues. ord C'�ty, uildir r Bps°p and Hanley, located ot°nbe i$h the recommendation was 473 Variances A report was received from the Planning Commission recommending approval ,of the application of George Sellar for variance,of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance to permit construction of a frame roof and steel sash enclosure of rear area, presently used as a loading zone adjacent to a 15 -foot alley, inside existing 6 -foot high concrete wall at 940 High Street, on portion of Lot 2, Block A, University Park. On motion. of Rodgers and Hanley, this application was approved. The P.lanni.ng Commission also recommended approval of the applica.ti:on o.f; Mr. „. Karras for e variance of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance to permit a carport, which is te be attached to the; house,, to, extend to the property line of Lot 4, Block 33,TJniversity Park, commonly known as .81 Hawthorne Avenue. On motion of.'Nlitchel1 and Cummins's, the recommendation was adopted. A -report was also submitted by the Planning Commission recommending approval of the application of the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce: fora variance from the requirements of the Building, Setback Map to `permit a 2G -Foot setback on Lots +, 5 and 6, Block 49 University Park, where a 40 -foot setback would otherwise be required. 0n motion of Mitchell and Porter, the variance was granted, Huston not voting on the motion. The PJ-anningCommission further recommended approval of the following applications of Barrett & Hilp for variances from the requirements of':'the Zoning Ordinance: (a) To permit side yards of 5 feet 10-7/16 inches on portion of Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block 16, Stanford University Villa Tract, where 6 -foot side yards would otherwise be required. (b) To permit side yards of 5 feet 10-7/16 inches on .port on,of Lots 7 and 8, Block 15, Stanford University Villa Tract, where 6 -foot side yards would otherwise be required. On motion of Rodgers and Hanley, these variances were granted in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Utility Basements On`"Motion of Mitchell and Porter, and by unanimous vote on roll call, the Council adopted resolutions accepting Utility easements from the following: a. Richard Be and Gladys M. Reinert, portion of: Lot.8., J. J. Morris Real Estate Company's Subei division of the M. S. Loucks Tract. t. Hazel McCormick and Fred McCormick, part Lot 53, Wooster;Subdl.vision. c . Second •Church of Christ, Scientist, part of Lot 58, Wooster Subdivision. Settlement of Claim for Damages . The City Attorney advised that a. suit is now pending in. connection with a claim for damages filed by Kathryn Wachhorst against the City for injuries incurred in a fall on the sidewalk on University Avenue on May 15, 1952; that he has been negotiating with the attorney for the plaintiff, and that he and the former ...�..,lae' '.,���.,`u CZ city attorney, Arnold'Rumwell, recommend that the City accept '`settlement of $2350.00 which they`feel 1s a good settlement in this. case. On mot ion of '.,Cummings and Huston, and by unanimous vote on roll call, the ;Counail accepted the City Attorney's recommendation that he be authorized to settle the case for $2350.00 and that the Fund, be authorized- to pay this sure from the Public Liability:: On motion, the Council adjourned, at 10:40 P.M.