HomeMy WebLinkAbout08271956City Hall, Palo Alto, CalItorriia
August 27, 1956
'Tne°'Councll 'of the City ,of Palo Alto : met in regular sea-
sion on this date at 7:30 'P. . , with Mayor Porter presiding. Roll
call as follows':
Bysbee, "Cummings, Davis, Drysdale,, Giffin,
Marshaall, Mitchell,' Porter, Rodgers, Rupperr-
thal; Simpson.
Abeent Bishop, : Corcoran;: Cresap, Nevis::
The minutes bf the meeting of August 13, 1956',,- were
i. .
Abandonment 4'Basesent
This anus the. time:land place set for ai hea ring on 'Reso`iu
tion No;. >2759 of ,Intention to abandon' street and' public_:uttilties.
easement on p ope;rty a '' the :.`South,- Palo Alto Church=Property Iric'.
known as Wooster Court. An affidavit of publication of the notic*.
of thin hearing, has \been:filed: ,The. City Engineer' reported ~that ""a-
reversion= to`,acreage of` the church 'property' is involved, and there,
is no curt -her need for: certain easements
Thee,,hearing: was declared open. There being: no one : present
!who wished to, speak on the matter, the hearing was closed. . ,
Resolution No. 2768 ordering the abandonment; :of said. ease-
ment wta.4ntrodueed, and on motion of Rodgers and Marshall, was
adopted by iunanimous- vote on -roll call.
Projects -7,` Middlefield -Colorado Parking District:
_ Thie, was= also t'axe `tire and; place:for a hearing on RReolu-
i tion NO`.,2766 `of Preliminary .Determination and of .Intention' to :eke
changes :and uodlfioations,"�and on Resolution No. ,.27#9 of` Intention
to make aaquititione avid' improvements, Project No.. 56-7:0,: A notioe
of the :he'aring was published as required by -law. The City Clerk . re-
ported : that no `written' protests have been received. -
The- hearing was declared open. There being no one present
;;who wished t ;speak_ on' the :matter, the: hearing was cloued.'
Resolution No. 2769 overruling protests on the Resolution
•
• of Intention,,?liesolut on No 2770 determining convenience: and neces-
sity and orde;rinvehnngest'_and od#fications, and Reaolut:on;No.- 2771
ordering, acquisitions and: improvements and confirming asaesament
were introduced,• uand on motion :of Cummings and Byxbee, were ac+eipted
!. by unanimous ;rote: on r.611, call; '
Weed Abatement.
'This was4bi time tor ;hearing of proteeta' against.. assess.-:
ments,for weed' abatement as = provided in Article 32 (a),rtof. Coditi,ed
Ordinance No.:5. All"'notices as required by law have barn pub"
s liahed. 'The7, C'i°tt:°Bngineev has filed his report listing the `iota or
parcelr of iand afros ;which -weeds have been removed, toget?ter with:
the• .xpense proposed; to.' be:assessed against: each separate lot or
parcel of µ land
• The'' ;hearing tots declared, open: There being no
to speak on the 'der; ; #►he bear•3ng .was closed.,
one' preient
-Reeolati ar -No. 2772 confirming the City ]engineer's report:
and assesaaent` list' for weed abatement was' introduced, and on motion
of Mitchell' and'Byxbe'e, was adopted :by unanimous vote on roll call.
:Stanford-:Annexation'No 5
:Action on the. 'pi'opoaed ordinance approving the annexation i
of certain Uninhabited territory designated as "Stanford Annexation.
No. 5" -had .been deferred` at ;tne :las�t;;meeting" pending receipt of= '
signed agreement , froa _the' Veteran' , Adainiatration for :sewer eerv-...' l
ice The City Manager :reported: that the agreement . has not ,yet, been:
received-; that he:has contacted the Veterans' Administration in
Washington and has ;:been ;advised that: the .matter is being given at (.
'tention, and :that .the' ,agreement may, be executed before the next meet=
ing.
On motion, of Mitebell and.Qiffin,, action on the annexationd
Ordinance' -was postponed.
Zoning of Stanford- Annexation No. 5 1�
E =
•
i.
Councilman Byxbee reported tnat, Coamittee Na. 1 had_ con
eidered the zoning :of Stanford Annexation -No. 5 area and recommended;
that:=An y0 -A Die,trict of .•50 teet -be .eistabliehed adjacent to . Robie ; 1
Ridge .tof:include ,15 feet of.Y"Aplanting;: to protect , the nearby property;
owners, when the property is deveaopelt ,witip' building atruoturee
(The: Planning Commission.had:,previouhly recommended a 90 -root wide.?
0-.A District..) 4Cog uittee, No: 1 .concurred with the other recoaaend'a
tions..-of the -`P, lanning Coa ia*ion- •for: -the zoning of this area, ae ro1=
Lows:: The remainder ot.the;'area between the existing city liaits
and. the Veteran' ,-Hospital ,s'ite to :be L-M:S ;the ;Veterans' Hospital
site :;.to Abe zoned ,R-8 the .area bstwseo 4the Veterans' Hospital and;;
the p )poeed:elub sates=;to be L.-NtS; and the proposed club sites=to
be zoned R=R.. ,
A motion was lade/ by Mitchell,` seconded by Byxbee, that.
the_ recommendation ofComaittee:No. 1Ito,establish an 0-A District:
of 50 feet, insteada:of 90 feet, the 50 -foot 0-A to include 15.feet
of pleiting, be; accepted:
•
Mr.r Andriw M.. �Spea're,: 950 Matadero Road, addressed the
:Couneil in behalf:, or residents of Roble Ridge who *object to the_ in-;
duatr.,ial developtrent ;so ;close to' their residentl•,al properties, urg-
ingathat the; 0-A,dlatrict bs:at;least 100 feet wide.
Letters -,wire read-.,troa. iary 0. Steers, 999 Matadero Road,
and trop Hen. H. Slothower, 995 Matadero Road, concerning their -ob-
jection to industrial buildings which.obetruct their view ofthee
.foothills;,, ;and :asking- - that at leaa:t::90 feet of Open -Area be requiredi
next to Roble; :Ridge .
.After discussion by. council members, the vote on the mo=_
tion to make the .0` A District 50 feet` was. as follows:. on roll call :
"Ayes.: ' Bribe*, ° Drysdale, Kitchell, Porter.
Noes : Cummings, : Davis ,, Giffin, Marshall, Rodgers ,
Ruppenthal, `Siapeon.
The: motion was, declared:loat, and the0-A District will
remain 90 feet= as -provided ,3�n them ordinance previously accepted',:tor
first reading.
.2The other '.`recpmmendation 'for zoning: portions of the area
as L- -I1:S and the Veterans', Sospital and the club sites _as R -B:- (Rea -
dential ,Retate)-- wwre eonatdsz ed4,. -. It.; was reported that -the Univer-
sity (.01Ub And .the Tennis: Club:,,prefer R -a zoning for the club sites:.
instead of R -E, so that `it would not be_neceeea:ry for them to obtain
a': use.''perait• :14r.., Joseph(, lam spoke? n behalf' of the University
ub Cl , advising that th.,..elub -And-Stanford -;University request R-#.
zoning and(,'pointi'ng: out that they' feel there is -,sufficient control
in the leas*..betweep the Clule. and, Stamford. He`stated that the Club
is willing :to .atiptlate; tthaV.; if :at any tides :in the future they
should want to'sell,:rtney would be willing to re -submit the zoning,
question at that time.
•
•
moved by Rodgers,, .seconded by Simpson, ,., and, _carried
voice vote"that
p
;:by _ '" the .. roposed 'club -sites be ',zoned R-.
Second r.rding and action on the ordinance establishing;:`
the zoningt of 'y the Stanford Annexation, No . 5 area were .postponed: un-
til :ihe,.,ordinanceapproving the annexation of the area has been
adopter
Project ;55 31k Middlefield Road et al. (Width of =Ma rlew Ave.).
A ::pet'ition ;wee received from ten property owners, ;•who
state they rrpres:ent fourteen parcels of land, asking;Hthat the w►,,:dth
of,: Mayview ..Avenue be 'reconsidered; and that Mayvi•w ,be made
i:;toot..rlgbt of way. ;;' Reference was made to the action of the' Council
at .its.: laet..meting: white '.the plans. were modified : by deleting.,k11 ac
quiaitions ^on Mayv►iew: Avenue to provide a 50 -foot right: o! way. - ,;An-
other petition:was'filiduat,4thie time:from the owners -of eight. par
eels expressing -satisfaction wl.th the Council' a previous; decision to
let Mayvietc. Avenue remain as-. a 50 -foot street. •
E . During the rdiscuesion, : Mr, -R. A A. Berkheiser, .765,.,Mayview.
- ; Avenue,. and lMz►;. Frank White, Jr., ; 796 Mayview Avenue, spoke finc favor
of -a 50-foot.,.'right of -.way.:;.. -Mr. S. E. Poster, 748 Mayview Avenue;
spoke in .support orr petitioners fora ` 60 -foot might of way,,,,and
pointed-:oi that although.:Mayview is only a :street. of "twoblocks.in
length, there is, an extension of the street through, the,:Meadowpa.rk.
Subdivision, called Rosa Road; which is more truly an zextension of
Mayview-*venue
The :staff was :asked to check the front footage involved
and the -number 01 parcels,, on Mayview Avenue, to determine. whether or
not` a' majority. 0!=•the property owners favor 'a 50-foot,:or a .6,041.: -..,Root
`might o1�, wary,'' Further consideration of the matter to be given :eater
w oti_ -during this , meeting._
8leanor:Park•Derelopment
2-,-A letr^er was received from' ;Virgi 1 S., Hauge , Chairman of
the.. Executive Coaaitteeo ;the Eleanor Park Development •0rganiza-
tion, :; aubaitting reooaaendat ions for the 1andscaping: and ,;,development
of -8leanar: ;Park, and L,further ;recommending that as soon as , praetical
the: datalyptue trees be trimmed and the .undergrowth`and`bruah near
the Dixon home be cleared away.
:.:The Mayor rei'erred.;;the- letter to Committee ,No.: 2, , e.tating
s that plane for`':Eleane. ;;Park wild be:considered but that; a number, •Of
other parka - have a :'t 1gher' priority, so, the matter may '4,be : in' coeaaittee
. for eoae'tiae,'before any action is taken. Mr., Haugse -was :present :.
!:and,:: stated that the- group he".:repreeeints requee:t that the triauing-r' o
the-enea tue trees be: *cc:oapliahed 'as soon: as possible. The City
a Manager 'ad'vis'ed .that the staff and;, committee would have: to:• inveie:ti
gate and =determine; how'.' extensive the tree -trimming program- should w
i. be, and:An . appropriation,; of funds might be required, so 'no . dctipn-:;
can :be taken on,;this .part of the request' until :the matter: is dis-
cussed pith C:oaai'ttee�N 2.
a
= Councilman:Ayxbee;asked the status of -.employing a land=
i scape architect, :for park developaen _ plans. The City Manager re
plied that Councilman Cresap,-:Chairman ;of the spectal,:co'uai'ttee. on::
selection of ,the. asahitect,, has asked that Interviews be scheduled
. to start in t:he week -coi aencing • September 10, 1956_.
•
Coaplatnt .on garbage :Service
A:le.ttir;;was:-_rceived fr?m thirty residents of Amherst .
Street �conc•rning the .:noise and nuisance caused by the � rb
ge a a c:o,l--
; lection ^servie. ion .Saturday, .,August: 18th, which commenced-; operations
on thst date ;on'A hers.t•-,Street at 3:45 A.M. This :was referred -.to
the. P.ublfc . Works .Deppartment :�Por_ action.
•
Ntt
•
Pro ect 5� ii, Midd1erfi' ld Roadite't =al'. (Sale' of Excess: Dirt.)
;The C t 7
,i y Ii'Aager reported that the -in the ;
co itract for AProject 5 13 provide `t atr: oil- -zfecoved'- from tkie exec-•
vat.Lng and,. $1' ing wmac: ;would be ''deposited in the vicinity of= thew,
new':Palo Alto w
retus d1sposal area7tor the purpose -:01' --'filling; i,n.thett
.burrow pits andalso used ae:fill" iri`cer>ta n ; locations at th. golt'
couree The: aaoant of exe•as dirt a proximates 35;;000- cubic yards!
Tkaei 'Ci`ty Manager advised „„that L. C ' ith,' ;the : cor:tractor,� , hae ar �: �1
fere& to purichaee this *oils for $30, 0.00, ;and it was his , recoe--
mendation that four-titths of ?thia; eount;'be 'tra'neterred to Project '
55-11;and•'that` one=fitt. M ch repreimente the share the City rha�e
• contributed to •the ;pro3eeit •tie'; 'a ll ora't'ed' ',for 7111 to be Yaaaad in tiY e; {
golf. couree area. ' 'The City;'Manager,"'itated that the till is too:"goodi
s :-fora use iti'reoiaiuing thsObarrow ,pits;; and' because :of the favorable
,� "price -.:it :is adriaable to' sell it and turn most _of the money back in -
II to the ,pro jeet � rhich would''result' i'n -reducing the aaseasoents to,"a
figure wapproxisati-nfr thr`-".•s't 1ettes . !
Resolution No.:2773 •awarding°wale of'excess dirt from
Project 5;5'-11 to LL.' ;C. , Siith -Cony for• :a total price of $30,00(Y.00.•
-was I introduced <:and:ion cot"ion •of be and` -Cummins ,� g , -was adopted by,
' unan� i.ous vote ,.yon roll cti"1; '-and, by unenimoua :vote the sum Of --_,'$21_4,
.000.00 was transfari'ed 'to Project: '55-11 ac'punt and *6,,;000 .:00 'waxy
;tiransferred to'Account '•178P n aaeiordaance with he City Manager'=s:;'
: recoaurend&tion.
GradingHoapital -Sits (Agreement with Stanford for ,etti' •,
dontrait f
The `•City:,,'Manager,',presented a . proposed agreement between ! Y
Stanford University :and The. City of Palo Al -to providing. for letting r
of contract for gradiag of the. Palo Alto -Stanford Hospital Cents:
site by Stanford, pending execution ° of the :ground lease The Lagree 9
meat 'provides that •3tan1ord shall:, contract with J.: 0.- Archibald fore
cite grading ;for the; snm of 420,3,00'4,001.w accordance with his : bid off
August 10, 1956:, -and with Lawrence Q:. 'Brian; civil Engineer,; .for
taking for gredie at the hospital" eit.s: with a': guaranteed maximum ;'
price not °to "•exceed *2,000 0.0 , The -agreement further provides' that,
' sand When the'lease between Stariford;4ind ;the City in executed;':.. the
City sha'11`'•pay:to' •Stantord.cits -proportionate share of the contract
Price.
On motion of Mitchell, duly seconded, the agreement was ap}~
proved 'and -a resolution authorizing the Mayor • to execute the agree-
merit=was adopted by "un'animout: vote• on roll.,. call .
Comaerei}a l' •Bleatrio:. Rate ! Schedule
:A proposed` eosmercial'el'ectri`c- rate- a°chedule,' Schedule E-
2; Was e1 bmitted. The City ,Manager 'pointed outthat the =1956.57
budget was; -bawd on 'a e:':5' *'-reduction in the comeercia 1 rate . He`
' advised' that 'some'-aounci'1 weabers: have aekel that the matter be re
terred to coiuittee for discussion' of the schedule in detail before
Councihaction is taken.
The "proposed eehedule
(A-'reoesa war tatlkan at; • this time,' 9:.00 P.M.,
and the Cou ici -Veconvened at 9:20 P.M. )
No.
was, referred to Committees No. 1 and;
Pro - vet -11 Middlefield Road Width• ��f Ma *view Ave .`
-At this ;time the Planning 0fficor reported for trf ;staff
on' -their :Check °of the parcels ;and Dront todtags involved on Mal view
:Avenue: ite stated' "thaat•8 propirty owners; representing 11 'paz els,:,
favor a 50=Loot • right at ..way; ;,that 403 'property owners reprea61n13:
12 parcel! us an , pl -a ddi`tional`�:°tvo ,:pa i ela if there wre:»e a lc�{,4 4,,,''T'j-
:sion favored a60 -foot ,right -of wwty; that the front footage `s _ by
those `desiring' a50=foot :s'treet mounts. to 847.15 'feet ani "•t'';. "°" wont
n
•
t•
1
..y
ilisommammekeessemakeassmosowageiske
1
f .footage owned by reons fitoring a 60 -foot street totals 92x.'65
1 aliethat;;Mthe' assese.sn`ta to. -;;be charged to p.1'operty owners 'desiring
the..:.60 foot rt$bt;tof w�iy' total a wor
e ore than~ -the as'eess lente :ot
thoss; who, wl Wh t& keep � the street Yaar a `'50 -'foot right: 01' Wa7',,:11 I'he:`:
.report^'.1adioatpdy*** kon the` .basis : of', each of the, factor,'a;' o vecked` :
the .;ais os f' n fa�Por'`a 6Q -toot;, ri ht of wa for lei
j�.
ht�'was ao�e�dM';by Byubee., and: seconded that, Resolutionv'No. :
277*: of :Preli inary nation; Oct of:; � Intention to o••o'hangeaf'-
and -110'
, eea% 55 ` 1. to provide for ,the ae;quieithoni oY
easeaente :: necessary to ,sake Mayview a: 60 -foot right: of :way,,,. and. set-
ting 'Septeaber 11', '195C as date of hearing on. the, :proposed :`modifi-
cation, ;tieadopted,: and ,,•the.:resolution was; passed by.' the following'
vote om`roll ea11:
Ayes: Byxbee, Cuaaings,. Davie, :Drys dale, alffin,
Mitchell,.:Porter, Ruppenthal, Si mpeon..
Rosa :: . Meers°hall, r Rodgers
Project °5 -11 ; Middlefield. Road et al. (River AsBessment )
A letter was received from L. M. Farasyn, attorney tor.
1: Mrs . rVslva er, owner; of property' located„ at 3215. Midd.etield-
Road, conoern the assessment on- her property for the improveamertte
on Middlelse�l oadt: tend 'herl'understending that she' would be assessed
for' an. additional::eeter.at4.a: cost of $260.00. The;• letter advised:.;
that 'Kra ` ,Ni.ver has`: no ;mention of ' dividing the property into two
lots -and requested that the sum of $260.00 for meter charges: be de-
leted tram t aase'eement.
The City, Engineer =explained that the portion of the aa-
seasment referred :to, in `the amount, of :$260.00, covers the.'insta:lla-
tian .of water.,' gas and eater laterals that a parcel of undeveloped,
'property "is involved and it .:has long been the policy :of :the ,City to
put. ,in the water, :gas,:,and sewer laterals when the .street., work is`
I constructed in: order to elisinat. the necessity of making cute. Ili::
the pavement when the properties are developed. He recommended: the
I request berry not approved They City Engineer' a report and`"recomeenda
tion:were :accepted.
Zone Change= :Application `(YMCA )
A report :was received frota Committee No. 1. advising that
it has oonsidtred- the.., a ppli,cation.of the YMCA for the- rezoning: of 'a
po'ation of Lot86,. Wooster ,,Subdivision, : a four and, one-half acre;
site:. on:. Ross_:, Road, :'fro vIt ?4,B=:.7.: to R-4. The committee;: recommended
that the::.recommendatjon rofthe• Planning Commission,. for denial of •:;the
applicationjor 'rezoning;. to ;:R -fir be sustained, andthat a use` permit
be ,granted: to t:he 'Y**CA .;,under.;:.; the 'existing R-1 zoning.
•
A Motion was made by Byxbee, seconded by Cummings; that
the 'recommendation, -.0f. 00imdttee No 1 be adopted.
Mr. Robert Blown, General Secretary of the YMCA, epoke in
support .ot': their 'application and .advised that it was the- intent of
the: YISCAthat the site would be used only for YMCA =purposes' and that
if they should.-cornaaderi;selling the property the City would benoti
tied., Re >asked_ for;., R * ,, zoning So that a use permit would. not be re-
guired. r
Mr. Floyd. Lowe spoke on the matter, stating .that.i.n the 1
•
tereate of good planning, he:believed the property, in question :
should be R * zoning, and he:supported the YMCA in' their -request.
. After discussion, the motion to: adopt the recommendation‘, -4,=
or Committee Xo:. 1 was: .carried by the following vote on
si`, xbee '4Cua kings, Dsvia,. Drysdale;, Giffin,.:
Noes.:'
N tahe3l.,' Ruppenthar.
�odgere, Simpson.
4
A�3abrati:o ° of eats': for Off-Site:.Improvements (Hospital ;"Area),
Coancilmp fibre read;`a report from Committee No . , 1 roc:
otemenidi g,approva1 of, t ,e11 'cationf<of -costa to the Palo Alto Boa-'
p;Lta:L-atanfox ,Nbspttal liedida1 School: area :.for off -site improve
mints ..(panitary sswtre;, 'store' chra3 ,,, water and gas mains, ,under-
ground power 'and street improvements , as outlined in proposal,sub-
pittau by the: City -1llana ,.dsited. Auguz:t • 14 1956. • It was recommend -1
Id' that ,. the, 'proposal ,sublit'ted„ serve.as the' basis:: for an agreement,.,1
'between the City and the.University subject to the following Bondi -.1
. That:-thed -pro ,ratio' of costs for aas, :Water and Storm
Sewer: be • allocated ,on the basis. of a known total:ritrea •I
of .benefit.
• That if, the area of;. ben'efit, should be enlarged or mod
ified for ° a'ny: Of these services, the new area be re- ! `
quired to share these costa either by reason of a oon- ,'
nection fee or charge, or by a reapportionment of the
ooata between :the Arnivbrsity and : the City for the -
aervieea and ;facilities to be provided.
3 :that it bey. understood byr Stanford that the City will
not :cake there services .4r facilities available to any
area. outaide thetty:. limits. This is to be applica
ble tto the:" drainage .ofd- storm waters from adjacent_
lands. ar well ' as utility, services.
On motion of Byxbee and Mitchell, the, recommendation of �f
the committee was adopted.
Treasurer' s',Sa lark
A report, wad received_ from Committees No. 1 and No. 2 rec.;-
ommend ng that the --salary of the,: City Treasurer= be increased' frown:-
$260.00 to '.*300.00: per Month.'
On' Motion of Mitcheal:and Byxbee, the recommendation was
adopted by vote on roll call, with 10 Ayes, Marshall voting No.
Use Permit, Grace Lutheran Church
A 'report was received from 'the Planning Commission recom-
mending' ttutt the :decision ofr the, ;Zoning Administrator be reversed:
rand tithe use perait application iof 1 the}=Grace Lutheran Church", 31*9
Waverley,S:treet', to ;allow the' use or two temporary buildings for
Sunday School'_purposee . for a'.;period of 18 months be approved,_ with of
the proviso, ,that ' now,,bond new .bond in:. the amount of $1,000.00 be issued so
that tht-City 1s guaranteed"that`• the Vuildings will be removed with
in a period of not to exceed. 18 months.
:On motion= of C:u`ings and. Byxbee,
the Planning Commission- was. adopted..
Traffic Code
report was received trod Committee No. 2 recoamending
adoption of the Traffic ;Code, Article 19 of Codified Ordinance No.
5, with an amendment. prohibiting: the riding of bicycles on side -
.‘,walks in the business :district, and an amendment relative to fees
for loading zone hoods.'onw-parking meters.
In behalf of the coimittee, 'it was ;,moved by Cummings and
seconded by Mitchell, that the Traffic Code with the as�endments
�
speilfied `be adopt+eQ�'
. Councilman Byxbee called attention to a provision inthe;
proposed"'S riff c Code it ahz-would .40tve the. City Manager authority t
determine the :.looation4'orilIi';'traffic control, devices; including I
:stop signs, yield signs, one-way; streets and parking limitations.
•
the recommendation' of
The City ;Manager advised. that this provision was recommended mby
Traffic Co a1ttee•, and�;the 'City Attorney, and reluctantly. accepted
by him with the understanding.that-contsroversial.and aajor items
would.be--brought. to� the `Council before `a decision ;was mdde that`
the 'co6er is::patterned''•after: the model trasfic ordinance recommended•
by the League of .; California Cities-:
Councilmen Rodgers • 'and Cummings objected to the delegation -:.of
such authority to -administrative officers, believing that the, deter-
minationo. of'-arterial`.atrea te, _atop signs, and so on is a function
which should be. retained` by the Council.
• The':wot1on :to..adopt the.' Traffic Code as recommended by Com-
mittee No. 2` -was a's follows on roll call:
Ayes: Davis, Drysdale, Giffin, Mitchell, Simpson
Noes: Byzbea; 1Cummings, Marshall, Porter, Rodgers',
Rnppenthal:
The motion -was lost.
The Cou ncil* then=' -son 'idered;'the principal changes in the .:pro-
; : posed Traffic code ;sae s t forth in letter of June 21, :1956, from
'' the City •' Attorney to ..the Council, in addition to Paragraph: 1 con-
cerning the de'legatior, of authority to • the City Manager .to deter
mine •location of tratfia"",�control 'devices, which a majority of the
Council have indicated they do not: approve.
Paragraph 2 .concerning,.proposed'changes irt, regulatiane cover-
ing: the parking of ,-coasercial: vehicles was, discussed, and o*: motion
of Ruppenthal and .Byxbee4 mat approved in principle,
Paragraph 3concerning{-proposed increase in the fee for:.night
parkingpermits frog $1;00 ;:ford x- si months to $2.00 per month or
,10.00 for six months seas discussed. It was pointed out': that fh1z
was a specific recoamendatioa of the Chief: of Police and was pro-
posed for the- pt rpose of discouraging night parking on the streets.
After discussion,. ai motion' to:nake no change in the preseant fee' for
'night parking'::was lost;, ;by the following vote on roll call:
'Ayes Byxbee, Marshall, Porter, Rodgers, Ruppenthal.
Noes-: Cummings, D vie, Drysdale, (tittin, Mitchell, _ Simpson.`
Paragraph t regarding bicycles was considered. 0ri motion ,Of
Cummings: and Rodgers, ther`recommendation of Committee, No:. that t�,.
riding of bicycles on sidewalks in the business,, district be prohib-
ited was adopted.
• ,Paragraph :5:concerning regulations relative to parking cater
:loading -zone hoods: waa coneidered. The City Attorney advised that
in addition to• the change proposed in the: code regarding fees for
loading 'zone hoods,. ' a (further ;change has been proposed by Committee
No. 2 togive the: -City Manager authority to issue permits for txoods
on meters. in parking lute, ` the fee for such, permits to -be, bused, on
tl average monthly revenue of the lot. It was explained that this
would ,permit the City; Manager to rent spaces to business people who
have : requeeted, -peroisaion to 'rent ,spaces on a monthly basta �in 1oge
i which are snot . used=to., theirfull capacity by -the public. It was
moved „by . Lodgers;,,seconded: and carried; that this recommendation be:'
adopted.
Tht, Council ;,agreed°. that..the use of parking meter ,funds -'should
be, covered^bar 'af °Councii. rea'b"lution as a policy matter, and not < in •
-
cluded asra section of the traffic code.
=:Citty �A'ttorner`:Mas,: instructed. to redraft the Traffic Code.
in accordance- with the Council's actions just taken, and to.- submit
the code whs redrtfted;'.for :further :consideration, together with a
resolution; on "the/vote or ',Parking meter ,funds.
Traffics �P1an
The ordinance ;adopting the Traffic Plan as outlined in
"Traffic and Parking Plan forcthe Uni'ereity Arrnue Business :Dis-
trict', April 1956 was. submitted.; for second reading. The proposed
plan containsthe following provisions::.
•
tr.
r..
a. Designation of ;one-wa;y, arterials:
Charming .west) and Homer (east) from Alma to
atutnda .:
High (south); from Hawthorne to Channing.
Byron{south) from,PaloAito Avenue to Lytton.
c..
Designation of arterials::
auinda from ] ytton, to Channing.
Wavi'r.ler frog,Lytton to 8mbarcadero.
Channing from Guinda to Newell.
Removal of parking as follows:
Road from San Franci.s
qui'to::-Crerk .to Char ring Avenue.
Both sides °.of Waverley . Street ,for one-half block,.
north',;and' •south ,01 University. , .
Bothw sides .df University Avenue from the Circle
to High '3'tre.et
The Planning :Offiosr reviewed the plan for peripheral and'
access streets. He.,,advia.d that ,:iri; Vi'ew of a problem affecting the
Palo' Alto Transfer- Company :located :at :_Homer ;and ,High, the Planning
Department has Changed" its recommendation regarding ; one-way' arteri--
als "for C.hanning 7Avenue"..and :Homer.Avenue and now. ,recomitende that
Charming, be ;madea-:�-one-Kay: arterial <:going east and Homer a one-way
arterial ;,going west. < .
Councilmaa,Cummings"'questioned _the necessity of eliminat-
ing parking. at �11 a ,times on Middlefield Road from the Creek to -,Chan-
ning Avenue.' as .reeomsiended. , He suggested that consideration be- giv-1
en to prohibiting parking in that locationduring the peak hours;'
only.
Councilman viola proposed -_: on :.c sideration of one-way
streets and diagonal parking In the'University Avenue business dis-
trict, Particularly,;in 52-13:��-district,-. which in his opinion 'would
'provide the additional parking spaces needed . in that area, and could
be put into -effe:et:':in a =very short, time.
After further discussion, at the suggestion of the Mayor,,
a trial vote Was taken on: the: traffic plan as recommended by the
Planning. Department .' . ,'The, vote: on roll call was as follows:
Ayes. Davia,skDryedale, Giffin, Marshall, Mitchell, Por-
ter, .Si peon
Noes: Byxbee Cummings, Rodgers
Not Vottngz Ruppenthal.
-A.,Imotion was made by.'Mitohelll, seconded- by -Drysdale, that:
the ordinance adopting the Traffio Plan be adopted.
A : motion was made ;b
y -Bribeas,`seconded by Cummings, that
the matter be referred, to` Committee. ,No 2. This motion was lost by
a voice vote.`
The vote on the- ordinance .was'. as followson roll call:
Ayes • Davit,Jryeda'le, T:Giffin , Marshall, Mitchell
Porter, v. 1aAson....,
•
rf
.Nose:.;`Byxbee,,.Cummings,, Rodgers, Ruppenthal.
The ordinance„was declared lost.
Shersan Crary, 113`5 Waverley Street, asked''that the
public have furthers: opportunity for a hearing on ,the aatter before
Waveriey:Street:„1s. made ;an arterial'.
;xt
Mr. Floyd Lowe. suggested that consideration_ be given to
making Lytton and klaailton alternate one-way atreets.
:On notion,, of :Ruppenthal and Byxbee, thee' eziti.re traffic
plan, end • the various suggestions • made at this -mee''�ting. re, r we eferred:
se.to Committee -No. ;2" for;.'turther study.
Prohibiting' Parking -on Portion El Camino Real
;A report;;,wae ,_,received from Committee No. 2, recolwending
the adoption ::of thei:proposed: ordinance prohibiting parking; on El:,
Camino ,Real between: San:;Prancisquito' Creek and Quarry`Road:
Ordinance No.;c 1706`;, prohibiting parking on this portion of
El Canino Real wet .given second reading, lnd a motion_ was•.:made •by
Cummings, seconded 'by Mitchell,: that the ordinance be adopted.,
--Counoi1aa:n'. Byxbiee: pointed out that cars have ;=bean : perii-t-
ted: for a■any .yeam'to ,park along El Camino Real adjacent: to: the 1
baaeba11 fiwld:(..The .,City, Manager advised that wtth.thei: ±cona.truction
of the ,access , road`°at; that :,,aoeation . there is not sufficient room for
• parking; -that c the :'.regulation t.o prohibit parking in the area: was
initiated by,the 7‘ptate: Division of Highways and the Highway Patrol.;
The notion to adopt ordinance No. 1706 was: carried by tre
; following :vote on.:.roll call:
Ayes s _ Cummings, Davis, Drysdale, 'Giffin, Marshall,
I�li,tche.'11,„ Porter.; Ruppenthal, Simpson.
;Moen : Byxbee,: frgodierec.
•
Amendment to Building Code (Incinerators)
A report was :;received from Committee No. 3 recommending
that Section 5108 of the Building Code relative to Incinerators.be
repealed. The City Attorney advised that there are conflicting or-
dinances ;in ;the ;Fare Prevention . Code and the Building Code. relating
to regulations for irncinerators .:
On motion of>Nitchell and Byxbee, the proposed ordinance:
repealing:;Section5:108 of the Building Code was accepted for `firat
reading,.
Acquisition of:Land for Sanitary Sewer Purposes
. Resolution No;. 2775, determining that the public interest
and naceswity o'f the City of Palo ,:Alto :require for : public 'use for
sanitary;4sewertpurpow.s;oertain land located in the County Qt Santa
Clara,, was; :introdua,ed, ,;and ton; motion of: Cummings and Drysdale, was'.
' adopted b7" unan:Cmoue-vote on. roll call. It was explained that :this
;'involves tho.; e.wer;: line' fOr,:the Veterans.' Administration.
Easement Agreement with `"Southern Pacific for Power Line
0n cation, of Cpaar n s and : Mitchell, and by unanimoua;;.vote
on roll,�cal�l, ^tb .C.ounci�1„adopted a resolution approving' easement.
nt betweeen rths Southersa,. Pa►cific. Company and :the. City: of Palo
Alto granting to the :City a;, license for an overhead: power :line.;- cross
:inn•,•at Bansen ,Wa, ;and authorizing. the Mayon to execute:.the.- agree=
meat: , °eharf� of ,tbe;, City,•
Ordinance .No. `1707 amending Section 1711 of they Building=
•
Code:was was given: aecondA?.reading;, andx oa :motion of ` Byxbee and Rodgers
WAS adopted by unanimous ; vote on- roil call_. =
Amend Bent to Fire Zone Maw
r Ordinance No. ;1708 amend ;ne the Fire Zone: Map to, change
the fire zone at ,2*99 Cowrper.:Street from Fire Zone No. 2 to Fire'
Zone.:Wo.. 3'was `-given- second,:reading, and on motion of Marshall and
Rodgere '.was 'adopted. by: unan1 oustvote:' `on roll call.
Sales and Use Tax
:0rdineneero'o.:,1749 "imposing fa city sales and use tax , prO-1
viding: for the performance by the{s3tate Board of Equalization. -'•of l.l
functions incident. to the adaainhetrat on, operation and: collection<,1,_.
off the sales .and taxw and` provid1'ngpen alties" for violations
thereox, was given -second reading.: It was pointed out that tie 'or-
dinance wouid be effective . October:1, 4956;, -provided .all cities
within= the` iCounty c have adopted. the uniform _ sales and use tax
nance;;- thatla11 ci'ttiet .1n'thCCounty'with the exception of , Milpi.tas f
have =indicated they ;would: adopt the uniform .tax„ and- that the county
wide tax will not go:°i.,n'to •efrwat unless-<;`)1llpitas changes its action
and adopts. the uniform tax proposal.
Attention`wae called to the action of the Board of Super
vieore indicating .that if. the:w,uniforw .tax were adopted, the tax rate -
set by: the County cou`ld•'.hevs, been`: -reduced 18 cents; that since Mil=
.pitae has failed to';,,act, `:the ,fax; rate must' be' set without considera-
Lion- of salestax revenue` a nc`e it `'ie not known at this time whether
or not' :he sales, -tax -w111::- be 'effective and that if' a sales tax i$
collected' 'during this..fiscal,, year, the' Hoard will set 'aside that
revenue and use it next year to reduce the tax raft.
A motion was. Made, by Mitchell; and seconded that Ordinance;
No. 1709 adopting' the unifo:ro. sales tax of 91% of '1% be- adopted:
Opposition wee:expressed•by'Councilaan Ruppenthal, who
stated that in his opinion -it would be a burden on the Merchants and;
that after a check of other cities of the size of Palo Alto, he felt
that;in the long run there would be.no significant reduction in prop-
erty taxes.
1
Tha ordinanoe:was,:then adopted -by the following vote on:
roll call:
Ayes: ' 'Byxbee,- Cummings;; °.Davis, Drysdale, Giffin, Marshall;
Mitchell,Porter Rodgers, Simpson.
Noes: ;•-; Rupper thal. �,-.
It was pointed'out:that the ordinance will be effective
only if theunifrr& sales_andOuse tax is county -wide.
Tax Rate
The Council {omen considered the fixing of the propert7
tajr rite for' the fiscal It was: moved by :Byxbee_ that
tie rate be.iset at 3.:17 4100.00 of, assessed _valuation (the same;
as'`iset= year's rite tii viex:°ar,the fact that there; is- no assurance
as to when; the`:`ealee tax ; sight take effect. 'There Was no second to
the motion.
Councilman'.Mitchell pointed oiat that the :condition in the
recovis ndation, pads :previous`ly; by 'Croaai.ttee No. ,3 that the tax rate
be eat yet 85 emits in 4%1:: eventa ci yaalee tax is effective by
September 1i' 1956, 'bas not bftn t amcr.'it would be unwise to'reduce"
the tax` rata 'to thaRt itigura`becau•a: of the di:Certainty as to when;
sales tax revenueway beezpco'ted. Se '-called attention to .suggest=
tions to reduce she utility ,rettemeand. to use revenue for capital ial
proveaents ,if and When the.:sales :tax beeones effective, which., are
questions .the Council will have to decide in the `future Cozmcilaan7
llitcholl 46vissd that: tbS ba ance between property tax :rate and u-
.!tility. rates is, a Question that has been discussed for manyyears
that the Property tax; rate : can not be :changed during 'tau `year after
I it has once been fixed but that utility rates cap be changed' at any
f time;
Counci,lnan ]litohell reported that since Co .ittee•No..2
had considered the tax. rate, the; final figures on the. -assessment
roll show a aarked increase: -in' the assessed valuation, ' and , it his.
also been determined7that. notes' Ruch eoney as previously. anticipat-
ed will -be needed' for bond interest a'.harges during the ooming a�r, ;.
so he suggested' ;that a tax rate of $1 11 be considered. fox' 1957 •
The City zllanager suppleaented Councilman Irlitchell's.`remarks with.a
further explanation=, to :show ` that a 3 -cent reduction :in ; the tax 'rate
could beiade -if the"Council . so desires
It waa7;moved by Kttehell, seconded and carried='by unani-
-mous vote on rollaall,rthat:;:Ordinance No. 1710'fixing this 'tar rate.
for ` 1956.-57 f4''$1.It per *100.:;of assessed valuation be ;adopted. .
At this time, Zounoilman Giffin moved that, tf the= sales
tax becomes' effective, 50% of the revenue be returned to ;the people
in the for of reduced utility rates. There was no second'to the
motion.
There, being."no';further business to come before the :Coun-
cil,: the meeting was declared adjourned at 11:1,5 P.M.
ATTEST:
`.i
APPROVED
ttt
erk
ayor
4