Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04101961City Hall, Palo Alto, California April 10, 1961 The Council of the City of Palo Alto met in regular session on this date at 7:30 p.m., with Mayor Ball presiding. Roll call as follows; Present: Ball. Bishop, Byxbee. Davis. Evans, Giffin. Haight. Marshall, Navis, Porter, Rodgers, Stephens, Wood- ward and Zweng. Absent: Mitchell. The minutes of the meeting of March 27, 1961, were approved as distributed. Zokthills Annexation No. I This was the time and place set for the hearing of objections and, protests to the proposed annexation of uninhabited territory designated as "Foothills Annexation No. 4" containing 844 acres. A notice of the bearing was published in the Palo Alto Times and was mailed as required by law to property owners in the area proposed to be annexed,' and affidavits of publication. arid: mailing :are on file. It was reported by:. the City Clerk that no written protests have been filed. A. report was received from the Planning Commission recommending as follows: .:a) Shouldit:be the decision to proceed with the annexation, it is unanimously recommended by the Commission that the area northerly of San Antonio Avenue, and referred to as Parcels 1", 2,`5, 6 and 7, be zoned R -E (Residential -Estate). b) Recorrxxnends by a''vote of 3 to 2 that the area southerly of San Antonio` Avenue, and referred to as Parcels 3 and 4, be zoned A -C (Agricultural Conservatib;i). c) That:it be made a matter of policy that no use permit for quarrying be approved for the area recommended for A -C :zoning.' d) Unanimously recoxnrnends that annexation of the prope:ty be not approved until such time as all pertinent matters of litigation have been resolved and the _General Plan hasbeen updated. The hearing was declared open and the Mayor suggested that owners of -property in the proposed annexation area or their representatives speak first. Mr.; John Mar lais, attorney for the owners. Mrs. Ethyl Neary and Mr. George Neary, proponents of the annexation, addressed the Council. He described the location of the property which is" adjacent to the City :of Palo Alto and to the Town of Los Altos Hilts. A' map of the. area wab displayed. • a ca.y has been Marl�zs advised they de n fac tha= s� 'eci rosldcreo by th that the goes �itY h -collie a Near ton of stated and resit into Y's f annexation if ci that they would es for the develalooIte i:: for their oral perty tiara tcs �. property remained, not arik Pment o f ° obtai ` . . . th Marlais , . u the City to do :heir r property. n city fee the eary Quarry, hut. th nincnrporat area more Perry, die r.in operationin on" " at .there i ed area o for theme most s 38 acres s an existingf the Ca than Po"rtioh�`the r°a��bu ice X9,35; that (erred to as quarry, known i been -the .r ce_ ding in the guar. Parcel awn as n used. 13whi this are quarry which containingParc.a:r which Contains a, He"also suPPIire rock has is for acr_ Y1ng purpose._ atthi advised that c4 for mountainous: ra, lie 'spot '- that this approximately I50 ac a. terrain; h parcel the has of San Antonio Avenue d Parcel 4 entire g,�� ue and they area., acres . Mathis remarked Antonio is :re nzax�.ce Avenue side d that to e w ntial; the aka it would re 1 however eventual engineers suira�,'ie far quire considerable onsid er the area use of the a report on the a: reside rat use. l e development e oPmhn south of n had,rnadP - aaI vel sari potential andwere He adri tin order havalvin: the area Max2ais; come he property. sent plans and zz�g bee ea .to the commented o Whet near south a she zoning a I'er the pro by the •pxs"t of San Antonio ding /it; the °r. . ari Perry h 'beingrict Attorney'snla Avenue terms din matter 8r Whet. quarried , office to an action e ce tr;al dot has e er it is in violation determine quarry a has :been see pending far one valid non_cony of theCounty that" th an the 38_a Mr; Mar, and one-haI razing use; been a ' 4 -acres": re Parcel is not al' palmed out - but no that I50� quarrled� but: acquired in the sus that the acre Par' ceI they Would I q56, known leer of any Iit existing designated as Parcel ar to 3 continue pdru Parcel 4, haste t' Continue Mr. ,A,1ar. 13, 4 err.. on the lais> state, at the there,'u)d . that :FreewayPresent time; ai ' O to if quarrying continue wool mu that re trucking traffic is a ha Foothill d be'an he: beIi or ed t CaouLl , effec'ti�ve kar rieed xhe between the Ju quarry ere is between the nipera Serra :.., associated At this time quarry a made aced. With IVtr. me Mr. .Sra2 net e by `them about Charles. nerd Plehn xhi a n civil Prope�.t d -a sketch showing ' reported engineerand be. similar as .a high `Wing the proposed creel development Parcels °n the faint study area with AIans`:� recreational x to-the d elo mentin the Los ttos oust of the area, He of the area f ofacnlit �5' �?r If course cad Altar Caunr:area, would acs require . P/elm a small Country Club and to Opportunity extensive pointed that e t area Pepple . e u• t3' was then ar�d �'arth. elapment g. ro speak either 4within ,a reasrnatbl residents of nnexati spoke i Mr. 'will' or against the prople osed af�he alo Alto natural n favor, of they 1clCaig, 45 ~d annexation annexation annexation of to the annexation, stating Marion Avenue, Chem Mr, Char/es City of Palo Alto. hhat he believes e iev alo Alto, Chamber °f Commerce, r /e, Keenan, representing It as a resolutio adopted Alto a n at the 'leering !f of the Board of Director_ s of the Chamber on January 1 1 , 1961, opposing the annexation of "Foothills Annexation Nb. 4" at this time. Mr. Keenan. advised that the Chamber of Commerce feels that no action should be taken on the;: matter until the litigation is settled -and the revised General Plan has been adopted. Mx. Colin Peters,attorney representing approximately 125 residents in the immediate vicinity of the Neary Quarry, told the Council that they are concerned about the possibility of further quarrying on Parce `3;; Mr.: Hugh C. jackso»,''represerting the Board of Trustees oz Foothill CoPege, stated that the College is disturbed by the noise and dust from the quarry and object:, to •the. probable increase in the traffic hazard if quarrying operations are allowed.to continue.. Mayor 'John Fowlc of Los Altos Hills ',addressed the Council, stating that he represented many people who arc concerned %with the matter, and that he felt the controversy which would arise from the annexation would.be very serious. He s,sid that the peopl.. of Los Altos feel that the annexation as proposed is not in the sphere of inf1unce of Palo Alto, and he urged that the Council consider the matter' carefully and reject the annexation. Mr. Donald Harris of Los Altos Hills, who stated that he is a resident in the immediate neighborhood of the quarry, presented a map and showed some slides of the quarry area and the nearby residential area of Los Altos Hills. Mr. Frank Duveneck, owner of a large area in the foothills adjoining the Neary property, told the Council that he has lived there for a long time; that he is sure there is not enough water in the creek for a golf course or anything else, and that water would have to be brought in for any development which takes place. Mr. Duvene`ek' remarked that he has willed 1.000 acres of his property to Santa Clara County for a county park, and that it would , b'e appropriate for adjoining owners to a,ddsome of their land for the same purpose. Therebeing no others who wished to speak on the matter, the hearing was ,declared closed. In answer to a question from Councilman Porter, the City Attorney advised that the Council could not bind itself or a future Council regarding a use permit for'"a quarry, as an application mould have to be made for use pern-nt and the matter considered at that time; that the Council could:not prejudge the matter. In reply to a question from Council;rnar. Naves, the City Attorney advised that the Nearys have a right;to quarry under a non -conforming, use. The City Attorney; further advised, that he knows of ro method by +hich the City -can±xnp&se conditions on an annexation. It was moved'by;Davis, seconded by Porter, that. the Council uphold the recoii-itndation of the Planning Commission that the :annexation be not approved at this time., and reject the annexa- tion of "Foothills Annexation No. 4".. After further discussion the motion was carried by majority voice vote. yr ater Y,}c and `tth S. ICenrel4 tt�;x..�°-t'=r- d £x °m r `' y cost. Y wa ��ti�r whatever, Let�c� at j,, INIo. "� View o£ "Gh'xleyta favoxing etc t °un r ��e),�,ta..a'-�M he �Xa��se eC� � � ��d £il.td• � notice xt View ,uas x r a°t ! aitt.,,�. th 3 ��,e s 3 . to the GitY °£ roc+ �sion "" ew COntractt re. palo Alex a .Fxeentxant Caz'cessi years, at �a�n`p 'Q4 —�-�� City- �anag the restaurant three area -the. operation °£ a period °£ tract ga" ra £ox ,,,he Co' se fax se Con the Snit" 1 �,Qf is license behalf. D£ Municipal ter $'rid 'Na`tita execute it e be year' an tx' ayox was authorized pox atop=. °�' Exte�x—zse~ a Pr °Ye d. ang the r l - �.1� ..- ` Ct with,, City. ark G+?."z�....-�-- z�''-..�.- license contract -May c°z'._-- ` Manager resented a li enie co tress it ,, The " , Mayfield, the Ye£ eb ine s canoe e-May „ hor t eratz.°r::a£ wing May a11c a .. rls. the , t rn c6in nen 00 y 1, apex°wed Eaiter ece ber 31, ` 9, , wtith fee °f $1,000' this cortxa,c.t wai t+ . incox� gO id Haight, behalf, of the f)an 1 the r , t paled toocec-ate it jn Or, Illation x z rb� MaY°x way Guth° oY ��----�" at"or o � a cx for authorization �t���zk ar jgiti — by the City Manager adc.:£�c' station �1e eta sti wa a rap , Tract, tor as the e c. � eztY °n request �;ceYtaix?7p �avber d det�,Y.;n:. public •�s o£ Te. occ°x ., D.Z'oti 3� £itid'�> a� uixe, fox P the Git`r acquire 0 t t 337 City e9 located 'g DduCed' to pn c berg °ldczoz?1'40 ty .ai said ity land re, way j is u- in u nd certain d loc be rt�a uxp e interest �r ptiiYac�S' G*a will bell o5ed as. public The tor At-,, s buildings ye d Poxtia"�. ge advised that 2 e property = oon wi az�th io O lto, G� � r<S�} x• " Palo �' start 't'1 x the father , T�,e p.».�i �.h4dget £a �3a- 5. riy the �� an : ntin toed portion the 1961-6'1 `3�i' i}e tatx xeprese von1ed, tz�Ye a F Site a£ bdceto, errs an , to aco c.a. tor the fir+ Ito, Sa- r of the'`ott�e proposal Iola t arfxe o, :riot :-� about ve os .ght inter Saoperty., ,tat ehappy ° ed t° de .aria. e entire C,iaca17�° tazj'ilY is..' t1neY'j'dh hP fire s- 1 his ,. t?�s t th at ceto fax -oily �°urci „�� `i j d, felt o£ theirpal 4' >pDye�d e1o�,xse that the Sam a $elected reside"a lans'Ci o-ed. out site �o e City h their F sna9e ��jn,.nci chat the site that the not wit tl h 1, wr er tit to d undeveloped. e -the 'Board of Fire lecher r C r s n the esign ::::: abe e boyhoo 1 at�, . the ?� cio� bein8 d gas voice �Da n° , y v^ ar if ,�O' 33'75 `NO'S adopted 67 Transfers: of Funds Uponrecommendation of the City Manager, and upon motion duly made and seconded, the following transfers were authorized, by unanimous voice vote from the Special Projects Account:; a) $20,000 to Account 105C (Planning), and b) $85, 000 to Improvement Fund 61-1, El Camino Real. Utility Rules and Regulations Amendment The City Ma::age: r _ ecornrn ' ded. that the following amendment be :Wade: to Utility- Ru'.c; ;1;-d Regulation No. 2 (Sheet Ne. 34) by the addition of Section 1) to read as follows: "D., I_nsta.ilatio'r.‘ or Charge c'f Se.rsTic.e in Case of Ordir_ancc Viv:utioi; Notwithstanding any rule or regulation herein to the .contrary, r:u ch;.r ge or alteration in any utility service, agreement. connection or facility, including any insi;ai:otjC,r. or reinstatement thereof, shall be :-tad'- or pern,itted by the city where the purpose or '.ff!':c:t rrle-.c:o. we::u'd i;e to servr, facilitate or snake pOssible o so, C>c'c. ti pra:':. e: j st:n .ict.;J e or other c:on,di:'ion, \\;;>icti i '; tut is;r3 be i;: violation of the %o'_^_ing. Ord.i '�-r.Ce, the Buiidi: g_ Code or ar;, , ordinance ci they Cy , „ It was movedby Navis, seconded and carried that this amendrnc ^t to •Ru-li:s and Rcgul;.,tiors k -,e adopted. Oregon Avinnc:-Page Mill Road Grade Separation Supplcrnerta.f eerneat with a,o_uthern Paci The. As,s .,st;.tn.t Git - Manager reported that there was received today 'from th.v Southern P;.:ic'Jic Ccr ipany ''.he final accounting o"!. Ow... Costs •of -i s p: :'t't 11?.,'..�" i'i Lt:i' Orc"(!on Avenue - Page Mill Road ..n.derpass. ,a".d that: an. ;; r endmzent to the agreement is regi,ired^fc;- the irribti.. e-ncnt to ;e railroad of the sum of $27, '577.60 -which represents the c�xce:ss of the actual charges paid by the railroad over tlfer estimate. The Assistant City Manager advised that the original cost estimate for the 'cr.tife pr ojec:t was $2, 266, 259; Chat the final coy:, was $2.014, 89h or wh.;t:h $x92, 024 was allocated to the State, $892, 024 :to the City and $230,850 to th.c Southern Pacific Company. It was pointed out that the railroad company has expended the sum of$258, 427. 60. A supplemental agreement between the City and the Southern Pacific Company, providing that the City pay to the Railroad the excess over the agreed sum, which excess amounts to $27, 577.60, was submitted,.,and on motion of Byxbee and Bishop, the agreement was approved and the Mayor was authorized to sign it in behalf of the City. Zone Chan e Application .{Stephen G._Moorej entat_ve u zvi.sion ate, arkeston out, A report was received from the Planning Commission recommending, by a vote: of 4 to 1, denial of the application of Stephen G. Moore for a change of district from R -1:B-8 to P -C (bank) for a portion of the property at 705 Charleston Road. The P',larsiing Commission also recommended, by a vote of 4 to 1, approval of the tentative subdivision map as presented by Stephen G. Moore for Charleston Court, being a portion of Rancho Rincon de. Sari Francisquito, located on Charleston Road approximately 150 feet northeast of Middlefield Road. A letter was received from Mr. Moore stating that nearby residents have raised a question as to the assurance that the street and subdivi ion, will be developed once the zoning of the corner parcel has been changed. ;Mr. Moore asked that the Councilgrant the ;zone change subject to the property being dedicated for the street and the posting of performance bonds with respect to the development of the new street. The City Attorney advised that the dedication and posting of bonds as proposed by Mr. Moore could not properly be made a condition of the zoning. Maps of the proposed P -C development and the sub- division were displayed. Mr John support Done add -erred the Council iit g?.n, attorney for Mr. Moore, ,. ppor,t of his application for the zone change, stating that he felt the corner property is not suitable" for residential purposes and would be appropriate .fora bank as proposed. AC,this point Councilman Haight asked that the record show that he:,is not'' participating in'the consideration or action on this item. Mr. Fred Oliver, 3888 Grove Avenue, spoke of the concern of residents in the area over any use for the property except;, single family residences; that he understood there is space for a bank in the Charleston Shopping Center on another corner of the intersection :.f Middlefield and Charleston Roads. 'Councilman Navin pointed out that the property in question is a problem corner. It was moved by Navis and seconded that the Council approve the application to change the zoning of the corner property to P -C for a bank, and approve the tentative subdivision map for the balance of the property, Mr. Kenneth Crittenden, 342 Parkside Drive, addressed the Council, stating that people in the area are opposed to the zone change which they felt would destroy the residential character of the community. He asked that action be deferred until the General _. Plan is revised. Mr. John Berwald, 261 Creekside Drive, stated that he was authorized by the Board of Directors of .;he Greenrneadow Association to protest the proposed rezoning, pointing out that this would be ,anextension of commercial zoning in an area where full use has not been made of the existing commercial zoning, _69 V a .' Mr. Walter ;Stromqiiis�t, Vice Commission,' reviewed the. Commission's Chairman C noted the. missions discussion of the Planning problems, «f zoning discussion or this and advised that the g the corner matter. to allow Co missio son Middlefield Road, small develo n feels that it increases the pMents such as the o: problems- , proposed. After further discussion, xssion , to approve th�a , a roil call vote was taker. .on and to approve the tentativeapplbca application for P -C zoning PiOPerty; The vote w subdivision on the corner as as follows; map for the: rest of the Ayes: Byxbee Noes: ,, Davis, Giffin, Navy Ball, Marshall, Porter, Stephens, Woodward. Not g: Evans an d P 7 weng, c, fiaight. , The motion', was declared lost. (Councilzzan ; Bisho the icjl P was absent from the seuss2On and voting on this item.) room during Mr.Donegan then n _ the tentative subdii , in behalf of Mr. zone than PP vision map in view'o Moore, withdrew; ge a lication•. f the ac.ior, taken on the Zoiae zi . �e�-.�F..�_ic at�on or., an - e_t_Val , Title a erect A repot was recei ved from the Pla 4nmending denial of the Planning Commission Vall Title- . Company for change of district application of. Valley, Xitle property at 4215 Alma Stiree from R-l:B_8,A to P -C for the the best interests of theCity:y having found the change :got to be in;. Mr. Frank Crist sed the Council , attorney for the applicant, stating that thev • the at this particular' are not prepared to make a presenta- tion eta- feel the time bet have a proposal - Presents.. proposed development is a very p al to moake; residential feel then t which v fine type that they dlet the, City. send a- uld fit in with this community. y. resir.?ential t000k over the planning mmunity. They offered Baldwin '�dnsultant, at their expense, to Icok study of the Plans. Hills development in a Mr, Crist Los Angeles and make No. asked that matter be referred to Committeeng e� Nl pending such a study, or `vh n they would be prepared to put t the make next A motion was a presentation. made by .Byxbee, and seconded recommendation zone change of the Planning Commission , that the the application "ion be upheld and be denied at this time. Mr. Leonard Cornell, 42 the Creen:xzeadaw Association asked Adobe Place, the Greeni:. President but of take action tonight ta'dcr that than be no r?e�, Y the application. ",y that Th by the pl'annine motion to deny the: application as recommendedg Commission was carried. (The Council took a recces at this time:, 9:40 and reconvened at f)Sins: nendr ient'to P -C Development Plan' 29rebmeier M $., o. i e ie td Road A report was received from the planning Commission unanimously:recornrnending approval of the amended Development Plans as submitted by the Grebmeier Manufacturing Company for the P -C District at 4151 Middlefield Road, subject to the following conditions: a) Perinitted-Uses: Professional, Administrative, Research and Manufacturing Uses as permitted i.n L -M zones. b) Floor Area: c) ght First - 12,240 sq. ft. (gross) Second - 7, 180 sq. ft. (gross) Net Utable ,. 16, 700 sq. ft. 22 ft. maximum.Any roof structures to be of a reasonable nature and to be screened in an attractive manner or otherwise architecturally treated: d) Parking:• A total of 67 permanent off-street -parking stalls shall be provided. e) Screen Planting As indicated on plot plan. an. a ..anasc.aping: In accordance with Sign Ordinance for L -M Districts, plus the additional requirement that they'be approved by the' Zoning Administrator. g) Fire Protection: Adequate provisions shall be made .to ----Insure fire protection as determined by the Fire Chief. h) Development Construction to start within 8 months iecuYc ._.. of the effective date of Council approval. i) xterior Lighting: Shall be designed, constructed and • installed in such a manner' as to protect neighboring residential developments... Resolution No. 3376, approving and amending ,the development plan for the P -C District at 4151 Middlefield Road, in accordance with the above recommendation of the Plar.:ling Commission, and.-ressindirg Resolution No. 2986, was introduced, and on'motion d Porter and. Rodgers, was adopted by unanimous voice` vote: Final- Map of=Tract 2313 Par .Royal Associates - Kev�kiai of a of Tract .477 Amarillo-1rllag : 41 A report was received from the Planning' Corn-nission. unanimously: recommending approval of the final subdivision map as presented by Park Royal Associates for Tract No. 2313, being a resubdivision of Tract No. 407, Amarillo Village, subject to: a) Council action revoking original map of Amarillo Village. b) Abandon -merit by City of existing easements rio loriger required. c) Granting '20 x 20 ft. public utilities easement shown in red `or rn:ap. d) Selection' of a street name other than La Cresta Drive or Helfand Drive. This wa,s the time set for hearing to determine whether the final :reap of Tract No. 407, Amarillo Village, shbuld be revoked. The hearing,was declared open. There being no one present whoa wished to speak on the matter, the hearing was closed. Resolution. No. 3377, revoking the final map of Tract No. 407, Amarillo Vi;, ege, pL_ suant to Business and Professions Code Section 11640, was introduced, and on motion duly made and seconded, was, adopted by unanirious voice vote. Resolution No. 3378, approving final map of Tract No, 2313, in accordance with the reeo:r_menda4ion of the Planning Commission, was introduced, and on motion, duly made and seconded, was adopted' -‘y unanimous voice vote. A resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a Quitclaim. Deed, releasing and quitclaiming easements or portions of easements to Park Royal Associates, was introduced and on -notion of Rodgers arnd Navis, was adopted byunarimous voice vote. Mr-. Calvin ,Tones, engineer for the developer, suggested "Lenore" for the name of the new street, and told the Council that if this name is not satisfactory to the Planning Department or Fire Depa_txnent,they could select a snitab.e norne. Lot_ Dwisi oi'L 1:260 Mar.uela Avenelt A ropot ;was s;,z nittted by the Plan: ink; Commission unanimously recommendingthat t"re decision t' ,.cr. of nc Planning Officer be upheld ir. denying a lot division to H. W. Currie for the property at 4260 Mar_uela Avenue, being,a portion of Lot 7, Mesa Tract. The Planning Officer advised that due to a, rnisundt:rstanding the applicant.diid not appear before the Planning Cornrnission and wo;:ld like an opportwnit,r to be considered. He recommended that the lot division be refer4.E.ed back to th.: Piannir.g Commission, and it was so moved, seconded and car tied. ...r9Leet h0-8 C ifor. ria,_Avt?-u.- QT rent Parking; The Engineer's report, consisting of plans and specifications, cost estimates, assessrent ;roll and assessment diagram, was, presented and filed. A further report and review. on the project were given by the Assistant City Manager. Resolution No. 3379 of preliminary approval of the Engineer's Report, Project 60-8, wros introduced, and on motion duly made and seconded, was adopted by unan.rnous voice vote of council members present. e Resolution No. 3380 appointing time and place of hearing protests in relation to theproposed acquisitions and improvements, and directirg notic4,' Project; 60_8, was introduced, and on emotion duly seconded, was adopted by unanimous voice vote of all members present. This resolution fixes "May 8, 1961 at 7:30 p.m. as time of hearing. (Councilman Bishop left during the discussion of the above item and was absent for the rest of the meeting.) E1 Carniao Annexation No 5 Ordinance No. 2011 approving the annexation of certain uninhabited territory designated as "El Camino Annexation No. 5 to the City of Palo Alto, was given second reading' and on motion, duly made and seconded, was adopted by unanimou's voice vote. Mon.�thly Reports The monthly report of the Planning Officer on action taker in March on applications for redivision of lots, and the monthly report of the Zoning Administrator on action taken in, March on applications for variances and use permits, were received and filed. Hoszitai Tax Support Study Councilman Zweng proposed that a study be'',rnade of the desirability and, feasibility of regular tax support for the hospital . • He noted that the hospital budget for the coming year will be reviewed soon and that it would be appropriate to make such a study now, suggesting that the .matter of the rebate to Palo Alto citizens and:general financing problems involving public 'funds be included in the study. It was moved by Zweng and seconded that this matter be referred to Committee No. 3 for si.udy. Councilman Evans thought the proposal seemed premature at this time, and Councilman Byxbee agreed that such a study+ynade before the Hospital Board has a chance to rnaie its position clear could be premature. During further discussion Councilman Zweng stated that the staff could get all the facts and figures for the committee', which could investigate the general policy of tax support. Councilman Navis and others agreed that long-range financial planning for'the hospital is needed. The motion to refer the matter to Committee No. 3 study was carried. fnr. Wes=.. r Pr ogri3i. Councilman Byxbee brought up the c;uestion of the water, program, pointing out that Palo Alto must make a decision as to. whether it will enter into`.a contract with San Francisco for Hetch Hetchy water or join in the Santa Clara County program which is considering the State's.South Bay Aqueduct plan and the Pacheco Pass plan of the Federal Covern.inent. Mr. Byxbee noted that. the improvernerts to the City's distribution system are about complete.` } It was moved by Byxbee, seconded by Navis, that the matter be referred to Committee No. 1 for review of the water situation from the point of view of procuring water from outside sources, with particular attention being paid to proposed negotia- tions with the San Francisco Water Department for Hetch Hetchy water. Reference was made to a meeting of the Council as a Committee of the Whole: with representatives of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission and San Francisco Water Department on April 3, 1961. The City Manager advised that the staff is attempting to appraise the information and report of the San Francisco representative -s, and will prepare some rate schedules. on the cost of San Francisco water. After discussion the motion to refer the matter to Committee .No, 1 for review was carried. The: e being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:25 p.rrm.