HomeMy WebLinkAbout03311959V"'
March 31, 1959
The Council; of the ,City of Palo Alto met on this date at
7 30 P.M., pursuant to adjournment of March 23, 1959, with Vice
Mayor Marshall presiding Roil call as follows:
Present: Byxbee, Corcoran, Cresap, Giffin, Marshall,.
Mitchell, Rodgers, Ruppenthal, Stephens, Woodward.
Absent: Bishop, Davis, Evans, Navin.,. Porter.
The minutes of the meeting of March 23, 1959, were
approved as distributed..
Foothills Annexation No. 2
This was the tiine andplace set for the hearing of,objec-
tions. and protests' to the proposed annexation.. of=territory designated
'as "Foothills No. 2 "+: The:; City Clerk reported that she had filed a
letter certifying that notice of the: hearing had been given by.publica
lion as required:by law and that an affidavit: -of publication is onfile;
also that aenotice Of.the hearing had..been mailed to.'ownersof interest
who had requested a notice in writing, as required by law.
The ;City Clerk reported' that the only written communica-
tion received is a:lett'erfrom A. W. Kantletzki, Executive Secretary`
of the Barron Park'-Maybel:leIxnprrovement Association, requesting
that he and Mr.rJack" Silvey,:,"' P.resident_ of the organization, be -
permitted to speak in protest to the proposed annexation as represen
_e m -
tatives of property owners who ar ei bers of•:this Association.
The City Clerk also reported:-thata statement had been
filedgy the;City- Assessor certify ng-that he had examinedthe
official records of Santa Claza:County which indicated that the total
assessed valuation of.-t'he land within the boun-aries of the proposed
annexation 'is $708, :7"50.00
The City -Attorney advised that as yet no legal protest has,
been filed, that the letter from the Barron Park-Maybelle Improve -
•
ment Association can riot be considered at a legal protest as it does
not set forth any ownership : and i8 not signed by any property owner
in:. the area:
I'he hearing as d'eclar'ed open. Mr. Silvey, President
of the ,Barron Park-Ma�sybelle: improvement Association, addressed
the Council, stating that he represented the owners of the L'Ome Iette •
Restaurant property it 4170° El Camino Real and the property Of
Mrse, Peter Mullen'at 4'192,E1 Camino :Real ti -at: they were.never
asked if they wished to have their::properties annexed to Falo Alto
and that they do not wish to be; included in the annexation. Mr Sxlye
indicated that no protests would have been made if the original map
of the annexation area, which did, net include the L'Ornelette and:
Mullen:properrties, had: not -been revised. Mr.. Kandetzki, Executive
Secretary of the Barron Park Maybelle Ixnprovernent Association,
also spoke on the matter, objecting particularly to the inclusion of
the property on El Carxiino Real, pointing out that the Barron-/: •11':
Fire ,District `does not wish; to be deprived of the taxes fro m such
'property. . -ie askedthaat the original map be adhered to, and stated
that the Association would cooperate in the anneation program,if
the-L'Omelette' and Mullen properties are deleted from the annexa-
tion.inap
1
r.. "5ohn CY911," _4173 Hubbartt,'Drive Chairman of'the
Foothxlls` No i.: Citxzens for' Annexation, asiureel the Counci1, that
the proponents in':the.area are _still very desirous: of,,annexation to
'Palo Alto ;and are; 'eager ,and rwa1lxng to,-put._in the:: time and effort to
carry on a successful' campaign for the annexation election.
Mr. Walter :Vdler, 4031 Arnaranta Avenue, also spoke in
:favor of the annexation
The Gity: Attorney advised that the law requires an
;additional ten days in Which.- :protests nnayebe filed, and that the only
;action the,Courcil,. can take -at this time, .s to•cortinue the hearing to •
thenext r.egtilar ineeting on April'13,' 1.95:9, that the statements made„
at this:` meeting ;cannot:be-:considered as 'an. official: protest and that
to date `no -legal protest has -been filed; by'a property :owner inthe.
;area,`;that,any,.further .protests: must be in writing and must be filed
;within ;ten' days,; and at the next .meeting on April 13, 1959,,' a"definite
',report,: can bye made to'tbe,Council.ds "o any -protests filed and:; the
;amount of assessed valuation represented by such >protests
'
The heaxing;was: then`continued to the next regular_ meeting,
of: the Council.:to be held on `:April' 13, 1.959, at 7;30 P.M.
Metre;Pclxtare Cuover inient
The Council`gay..e furthercons;id'eration to correspondence
from the;' League of California Cities and the League's Statern'ent of
4Prxnc pies on Metropolitan -Problems. After discussien, it was
;moved by Cresap„ seconded try ,Mrs. Corcoran, that a resolution.
:incorporating the`ba'sic thoughts. expressed in he sections 'headed
'Preamble' and "General: Principles" be adopted. The vote on roll
rcall was as follows:
Ayes: l3yxbee, Corcoran, Cresap, Giffin, Marshall,
Stephens, >Woodward.
Noes: Rodgers, Ruppenthal.
Councilzrian Mitchell was absent from the room during the
voting
The resolution, failing to receive the necessary 8 votes,
'was declared lot.
Cancellation of Taxes (State P.ro prt
A communication was received from the State Divisi'on`of
Hig -ways requesting cancellation of taxes on certain properties,
acquired by the State from 'L C. Smith and Edgar A. Morgan for
highway purposes.
On motiain of:'Byxbee and Woodward , the taxes on said
properties were cancelled:.
.Cancellation of: Taxes-. Flood Control District Pro ertv)
•�: A letter was received from the Santa Clara County Flood
>4:
'T, Control ;Control District requesting cancellation of taxes on certain properties
acqui;red-by.the District f< fiood control purposes, being the
;properties of the North, Los Altos Water Company and. Tsukagawa on
'Adobe Creek. On m.otaon=of •Byxbee.and ;Redgers., the taxes on said
properties= were cancel.led..
(Councilman Mitchell returned a.t this time and was
. present `for the rest of the meeting; );
•
aseek. A re.ment with Southern Pacific
.=
The City Manager •1ecommended`approval of an easement:
agreement between :the City -,of Palo Alto and the Southern Pacific,
Company for the. construction, reconstruction, maintenance and
operation of a .16. -inch :water, pipe line within a 24 -inch casing beneath
the tracks _and property of.;the Southern Pacific Company, in connec -
•
tion:w"ith:the :Lytton pumping; station.
A. resolution approving this easement agreement and
:authorizing its execution by the Mayor was introduced, and .on inotiori
' of Ruppenthal- and Rodger/Sy/as adopted by unanimous vote on,roll
call,
Amendment 'to.Buildin Code Si ns)
Ordinance No. 1842 amending Chapter 46 of the Building
Code regulatingadvertising devices, - signs and billboards, was
presented for *ec.ond -reading in a revised form as prepared by the
City Attorney. The changes in various sections were reviewed by
the City Attorney, who advi's'ed that he had;also prepared a:definitaon'
for "Sign Area.",`in the event the Council wished to include this in the
i ordnance..
On motion: of Mitchell and ,Rodgers, and by unanimous vote;;.
on roll call, the ordinance was adopted as amended, including the
definition of "sign area''.
Suit Against Meter Reader Lo�ez ;
A report was received from the City Attorney regarding
the case-of:Wood v.- Edward Lopez, a.m.eter` reader for the City,
in which it was asserted that he had attacked and injured,a. dog
'belonging to the',plaintiff ;whoasks damages in the amount of. some
$2620,00. The: -:City Attorneyadvised :that the City is not named as
a defendant, andionly'Mr." Lopez' personalliabilityis involved.
He :_pointed out that neither the"Viartex nor, the Administrative Code
includes 'a statement as to representation of employees against." whom
,personal liability is asserted for activities occurrrng during the
course of employinent; that he is willing to represent Mr. Lopez. but
;believes the "Council should .consent. to it:
In this ;connection the. City Attorney -brought to the Council's
attention the advisability of amending Section, 202 of the Adaninistra-
;lave Code to provide that the City, Attorney represent erriployees in
canes arising out the performance of their 'dutie$, and of;amending'
the cla i ms procedure:provisions of the 'Cede, :Section 408, to provide'.;
thata:,auit against an.•employee'.individualtY should also.:require:. a
veri:-fied claim with the employee within the carnetune iixnits as is
'now necessary in a;cla ni against the City.
On',motion .of Rodgers and Cresap, the Council gaee its
•
consent to the Gity Attorney to represent Mr. Lopez in this suit:
It was moved by Rodgers, seconded by Byxbee, and carried
that the .City Attorney .draft. 'proposed_ amendments to Sections 202:
and 408 of. -.:the. Administrative Code as he suggested in his report,
and 'refer Sucharnendments to. Committee No 3 for consideration.
4
'.A
Claim for Dama3es (Cuthbertsoe )
A report was received from the City Attorney concerning
claim filed by William H. Cuthbertson in the sum of $76.16 for
damages involving an alleged dangerous and defective condition
consisting of an open trench during the process of construction by
the Peletz Construction Cornpany. The City Attorney advised that
the company has paid the claim and has obtained a release for the
City. He recommended denial of the claim.
On motion of Mitchell and Rodgers, the City Attorney's
report was accepted and the claim denied.
Claim for- Damages (Windsor )
A report was submitted by the City Attorneyconcerning
claimfiled by Eugene A. "Windsor in the amount of $14.00:. for
asserted damages when employees of the urban Construction Company,
working under a contract with `the City, moved claimant's. car without
his knowledge and in so doing,` a door latch of the car was broken;,,
The City Attorney advised that no city employee was in any way
involved and there is no `reaponaibility on the; part of the City He
recommended denial of the _claim.
On motion:_ of Rodgers and Mitchell, the City Attorney's
report was accepted and the claim denied.
Claim for Dasnagea (Sissingh)
The City Attorney submitted a report concerning claim filed
by Gerhard J. Sissingh for damages in the amount of $23.95,'
assertee have resulted from an automobile accident at Colorado
Avenue and Louis Road on February 12, 1959 involving a police car.
The City Attorney advised that the facts indicate that the acci dent.
was not caused by the negligence of the police officer, and he there-
fore recommended denial of the. claim.
On motion of Byxbee and Mitchell, the Attorney's report
was accepted -and': the claim:;denied.
Therebeingno further business to come before the
Council, the meeting was declared adjourned at 8;30 P.M.
Vice yor
•