HomeMy WebLinkAbout100919611,0 .4(3
A
City Hall, Palo Alto, C.%lifornia
October 9, 1961
The Council of the City of Palo Alto met in regular
session on this date at 7:30 p.m., with Mayor Haight presiding.
Roll call as` follows:
Prescnt:Arnold; Bishop, Byxbee, Dias, Evans,
' Hight rd.
N;ax•s'hall, '1�,odgerS, Rohr Stephens, .v
Absr:nt:; Deb.s.'Porter., Rus,.Zweng,
The minutes of the meeting of September .,5, 1961 were
corrected, On Motion of CounCilworr:an Dias, on Page 8 (Page 19z.;
or, Council Manure -Book, , Vol.unne 14) to show that Mrs. Ernest
iohnson, Who was appointed as a member of the Civil Defense anw
Disaster Council, IS Pref d Sepnt of,t re P. T.
A. Core uncil. Wed this
corre�.tion the rnixiuieti a
McAintain View
A notice oxthe proposedannexation of "Middlefield No -
2 A„ to the City of M.ciuntain View was received and filed.
Stif:lter f}rQgram
Civil Defense,
...
~; x Edward P. SC.114LL1SS, j846
letter was received from r ovi.4.e
Carina Way; urging the City Council to adopt a plan to p'
sheltersfar all of -tie residents of Palo Alto, and asking that the
shelter program be given .priority over all ot'ner major projects.
The CttyManager stated that the City receives its
tats :grid Federal governments, and that the State
advice ram he S., the
UsreotU" �,f �,lvil i3eie�Late�oY'issued
Feu'2Ta1 p:`dr.sT�gC�a yhtrltcrynv. building' been
shelters before the
'approved,' and has scats Manager adv 5 d that that'a crash shelter program could ;
; at plans for community.
vc°ry;w3stt'ful. T're City g
sheiter5.arc being:.considered.oy the S* toand
being rcadral e bygrverr tins,
and that a;'survty of existing fa,cil 't people
that now the State leek that shelters to accommodate fifty 7
are consideredto be the right size.
The City M.anager.po.inted out that Palo Alto has an a up-
He advised that the city staff has no,'
to -date e C v 1 up -
'Defense ,- shelters. and that
dtscourag�e.d the'ouilding of group ndividua1 or p
?3' pc: rriita son -name sWateto finanCe the takenave been l•>�. i,dirgMoYlshelter'.', A`o.
a[ this
He noted that the Conks Y:
time is through an a:sscssrnent district or by the individual or y roUP
paying for the ;shelters thernsem es. ss shele ters s't are to
ber dieconstructed,
that: there rs irtdicat.A"t ,:hat it. told the
there will 2>e Federal 'or State funds
band g cidance as ropnr�ts
he,would cont;n, e to'.give'them informatio
and advice are reee°ived from the State or Federal government.
Court llnan.. Byxbee-.stated that before the Council cshou
there
take any �
efinite action regarding a shelter program.,
definite
be approved plans and. speci;.ic:ati.ons from the Federal government.
f -all
He. noted ,that if the City'financed a mass shelter program o-
residentS, of the 'City and if it cost. $150.00 per person as sc,.g ested
by Mz, Sehauss ,n his,letter,
it would cost the City between.
$9,000,000'and $30,`000,`000, and such an amount would use about
ali of the. City's bonding capacity. Mr. -Byxbee suggested that tht.
City M'axitlg er' mt ht submit information to o amand �he ople Y at in''the News-
letter •regardi:;:g the Civil. Deters(. prog,
tt> date
Councilman Stephens stated that itseemed
be rest hiM, t 1 to a
mater::is of 'sutfic ent iz ipo:rtance that it ,o
c ornrriittee and the „sta f to do some "' spade vro rk" so that the:
CoupCil'woul..d-be prepared to act when Stare and Federal pragra ns
are adopted The City Manager a visedhat thi is beis
unappointction
edof the C„itiil:D'efense and Disaster Council
in accordance with the recently .dt ptvdi �rdina.nceatter and Civil
Def n
rts
plan, a:'rrz-;t will 13n their duty pointed out �.t'.3t
and eoon rnenc'ar•iors to the Council. The Mayor p.n
the City Manager -s the key member of the Civil Defense- and
'Disaster Council.
The City Manager reminded the Council that the City
approval of its so. vfval plan booklet which h will be
published and distributed t. all homes in the
1t,'was srzoved, by 33yxhte,
seconded by Bishop, and
c a.r rigid that the Civil Defense and Disaster Palo Council
givbng;in ti r thej
to prepare a,booKlet for all citizens
:basic ihfOrrnati,ari on survival.
The City Manager reported that the , ali for bids for
;street resurfacing for. 1961-62 had been re -advertised, and that
two bids were received. He recommendedrttat the low
So dgroth Bros. 'in the amount o $
On motion of Byxbee and Bishop, the bid of Sondgroth
Bros, was accepted and the Mayor was authorized to sign the
contract,`
Pro ct 61'-1 E1 �atriinQ 3.e:
The. Assistant City Manager made a report on the status
eal
of the project for vhe and .;via �derort of El Creek. He ari�i�ed that then
State
University Aue're=z
Division' Of Highways had recently received bids
e n th et mate; that
e project,
and that the low'Sid was 9.35% above the Engras
the portion of ,tie cost to be financed
itit't'agented washe a.ssessrnent district
almost identical to the
for which the• C:i.;ty is ac ing
esr.rrx„atra; `bat ;that the City's tt Th(UCouncilthe lwati askedect would
increased ,appra�cimatc. y $16,000r.00, and re•�olu-:
consider the transfer 'of •'the additional funds required
tions confirming the assessment and authorizing the State to award
contract in aco,ordanCe with the low bid.
On rnc.Ition of r'bee and Woodward, and by unanimous,
ze
rorn
voice vote the'transfer of $16, 00 00t Fund was u1h 1rr Eld fror neh•�'-'al
Spedial �.xolects F'uz�zd to I P en
'project.:.,
r
Project
assessment, � W1,.
2 confirming Woodward, ane; on motion of Byxbee and'Resolution'Resolution No. 344' ��
61-1, was nirodued voice vote
adopted by unani.ni;us �tliorir:.
approving the low hid and a
;�4�3. 1 \vas inzxoducNa• and on
d o co tr £ 61 _ ons onic.r
contract for Project t w by unanimous of was adopt'
ing award ward,
r ,�k�ze; and w oc�d
motion cy. Ay,
vote .
aster ;ouncl.
"ivil cis , """"- for 'he appoint-
ment �--------.:.---=.-i the a:�yor
made by , . , e appoin BisY op
:Nominations, were it and ;vi.:. titelia. i
Howard Topping School Ui-
of Charles Hayden,H nrig , p.1to unified Sc.
count resenting
the Palo Council. On motion
4e and Disaster C< confirmed.
(the .i.tiCt<�r xep ` Civil T�cf�=n. ' � were co.
as
rs of thy. se e nomination
members � seconded, these xbe duly e .rtihip vs,
pf: By e' L ;,c ,.; ;n!ae � been,
-4, that Gor.�+�lett=ti t T`C1G ;T;b :':'� Ci.J. \'ilig
state three of the
It was Disaster Co i.. members
tiec Council,
and D Also serving thr as as
he.�i.Vli Defense the 1,�./j.:iV4.
tDiappointedrat ric last according to the ordinance, are . ,n -t and
Gouncl• Director
of Civil Defense Disaster the
City Man�:gi.r as D rit Director.
Fire Chief as ASSist-�
�„la.irrrian,
Disaster, and the
We bal a nuisance
� --..----:.",--2---7—=-..— --:-.2 declaring; we'd to be 13. l961, was
nerA
t ?,,��,� November
providing
a do r to be. held on No e.. �t, by
a hearing , an5 and Bishop, vvas adopted Yt7��- . ii 4 1 ,
and- o.c ' motion of
introduczd,' and on '
unanimous voice vole.
; a'lida tii r'-'rk--- 22:- : 1::"-."--11--
.`
_� reported o rte:?; thd.t. Committee
3nager z p .a•. tion
s5istant t:iCY�' parking validation The A and as a result of n ,
�ttioi,: to a �,.
given consideration Alto, Inc,a. were
, r had Attorney to
No, Downtown Palo C� and City legal
aN prapion �y D ,e,t the City. Managerate th various
L <1^1s
+i in revie its t invt stig t nclat,i _,
fliSGliS i? 05a1> 5 a"id rC.` OY"rirn ,
V1, a ?t�1r �rQp finding .t d by ti t%
asPeu.tcd' tQ rpd' and r�.port their �,•.nrzs:,
ir+volvt. was interes L Council ~nyrhers Iri
,aspects - that as there ,,,w o. the c if the-
e o the a and by some ng season to. t. the pror..m as shopping, be r
proponents gth of before the'Christen- n sent to 0n 1
has been tl:c'l�.ts, ready Written report '
}laving a considered, at this time,
a,r•�irovedt can be co �- he'd
program, the matter \viii not the Couael.l fa. t Co.µ ell meeting of 1 fact that the next
:n vic w ox .h_ 13. 196,1
until No.v:wznbe'r
reviewed the report which
revia tic
Manager vis�.d that rlie Assistant City M" n rd._, ad subject
t the „City operation at
a: stateA ent. tlia` lots far private lease
izzCuncil. lease the and. that any he
nL 1. has' authority to 7 Certain'control= + hours and the
t,au s 'retaining' �oWC to fix rates,
s the C4uTiGli it, 'tlle
e,;,�rve in. the C`. Y
'could = erati'on.
of oj3 Inc.
gent:xal rnodt Downtown Palo Alto, l s + M,
arkirig lots which. D rare are Lots It 0, .-
�r The �: � p"
'the val.ad�:tlon.,P`Qg' �v parking spaces.
desire to :having
for 410 o .f -street the area will still
a total of lots art, leased, ticking spa,,^c.
I, and cp `l1ae d O h 3 r
i't Glif�SC - iOth �;litfi
It was printed Out that- metered emit 3pparking
have 11 .245 .ec: or axtir�l y si nated ;,or p`
of which. 2�5 are -presently designated
The Assistant City Manager advised that if the Council
approves the,progxain,. it would be in order to instruct the City
P at the
Attorney to prepare a,:lease for consideration would at �ext e Council o rde r�
meeting <n November 13, 1.:61 ,
co au:tlxoriy�: the City Engineer to She services 'of an and specifications forcer.
to .prepare:.tost estimates, v,ras c>st�rnated that
tl r improvernent of each parking lo:. It
$1O>`000, wo ld,be required to improve the lots for attendant
parking and to provide the necessary equipment, and it. was
i Capital he a enance
suggested that if the costs of the improvements
t f'z Reserve �o1erC spart to he advanced
Sg_
entS
by the City, :the, •paxktr�g Meter Dints of recorxt:r..endc.d method of:'
should be utilized: The -basic p
financilx the inxprovemerit'' wt re outlined by the Assistant. City
Manager..
tions raised by Council members regarding
Several q^ses
details: of the `validating program were answered by Joseph
O'Danohue, Executive Director of Downtown Palo Alto, Inc.
It wa,,sbrought out in the discussion by the Assista:ni lots
City Jvarager that it well;•no.t be pa
ssible to have all of the.
ready o va1elatt d p Arking in time for the Christmas ovc sp heg
r `
season. bt t it would be the intent, if the Council apP ` irn x e.diately
grograna, tcs..c;nga�,e an engin
eer and have plans prepared .
o that work c ulcl be started on
two of the lots if the lease agreennent
is approved:by the C,ourical;on November 13, 1961: that it wou$also
h so the Council
be the irsterit.to'take bids _prior to Noverno l3t .er
would know at that r a,eeting the actual cost of the improvements.- -_
It wars moved by Bishop,' seconded by Stephens, and
carried by unanimous voice vote that the validation park g by the
progr.aM,as;proposed_b.e accepted; tn: c a lease be prepared
City and presented to the Council at led toe retain ve thcr�1, 3thc ,
G Y ;sneer be autho
meeting'', 'that the City, En,f�= detailed pian�;.and
of an engineer to prepare cost eStirnates,
specifications for the improvement of ea+ nds ch of he six
pa.rk kirigts
to be leased, and that an expenditure
Meter Reserve Fund fo,r. Capital Improverne.nts be authorized to
permit the engineering to proceed.
Bids on. Utili Roar' ProLxt 54 _ 1
The City Manager reported that bids were received
on this date for the construction of an access road to the CorHc
te
Madera pumping.5tation, in connection with Project 59-1 • 0 70 40
advised that foixr bads were r. l^.a
received: tt the low oid was $9,
wlxi ch: wa,a $1370.t0 over the Engineer's estimate of $7,1300.G0.
In view of the high amount ck.the bid, heaaityaltan gt,'s
recommended that all the bids be eti t dcnd tshined.
solution. to' provide. for interim access
On motion of Rodgers, duly seconded, Ali the bids for
the construction of this utility road were re;cetcd.
Pro ect 60-5 CaliforrO.:lvenuc BeattitIcation ProieiLtt
Street Lighting
ro ect -?, Calms xn a Avenue
Reyolutions prepared by bond counsel to amend theects
proceedings with respect to issuance of oonds on these p
roj
were presented. - It was explained that the principal change is to
provide for the bonds to bear the printed signatures of the Mayor
and City'Clerk, arid. to be manually signed by the City Treasurer.
Resoluti,on=No. 3445 amending; .Revolution No. 3410, „t
re»olution prov:idin;g for issuance -of bonds and directing levy of
a.d valorena'assessrzents to pay the principal and interest thereof,
Project No. 60-5; wa,s introduced, and on motion of Marshall and
Rodgers, was adopted by urianirnous voice vote.
Resolution No'. 3446,, amending Resolution No. 3436,
a resolution dete.rmining,unp ,id assessments and providing for
issuance of bonds, ,Project, No. 60-7, was introduced, and on
motion of Marshall and Rodgers, was adopted by unanimous voice.
vote.
Ladera Darn -Pro'e,ct.
Councilman Bishop, •Chairrnan of Committee No. 1,
reported that representatives of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineer
had made a presentation to the committee of the pints for the Ladera
Darn project, and'that the committee recommended that the Council
reaffirm its support ,of the project.
The ,City Manager stated that the staff has begin advised
that action by resoluti,>n.would be best, and he read a proposed
resolution which has been prepared for the Council's consideration.
The resolution reaffirms the Council's endorsement and support
of the Ladera Darn Project, requests the Board of Engineers for
Rivers.and, Harbors; the Bureau of the Budget and the Congress of
the United State.' to give; the project favorable consideration at an
early date,. and directs the City Cler.'k to send a certified. copy of
the resolution to the Board of .Engineers for Rivers and Harbors,
Washington 25, D. C.
A motion was made by Bishop, seconded by Marshall,
that the resolution be' adopted.,
Councilman Byxbee,noted that there has been some
opposition to the project and a question has been raised as to
whether it is absolutely necessary for protection of the lowlands
:frorn floods. He pointed out that the Army Corps of Engineers
.are specialists in flood control and that a rcason.able course o;
action is to follow -their advice.
The. City Manager advised that the project has been
studied for the past five years, and that both Sac. Mateo and Santa
Cara County have approved the project. He emphasized that if
the project .s to go ahead,it must have strong support, and that it
is important that people; who would be affected by floods support
it actively. He urged tiat;people favoring the project contact
their representatives in Congress, letting them know of the need
fo the dam and urging `their support and vote nn the project.
Mr. William McKaig, 45Z Marion Avenue, told the
Council that he ha, been interested in flood control in this
community for many years; that he feels the proposed darn as
recommended by the Corps of :Engineers is larger than necessary
and that -the costs naay be muchhigher than the estimates. He
suggested that: the funds allocated for this project rnisht be used for
other flood control work in the area.
The City Manager commented on Mr. _McKaig,'s state-
ments, advising that the larger portion of the cost would be paid by
the Federal Government, and that it is his understanding that funds
will, _not •be: availab'le for any project except the one recommendedby
the Corps of Engineers; 'that if the project is delayed, there would be
an increase in cost.. He also advised that Donald Curriin, Counsel -
Manager of 5a.nta Clara County Flood Control District, is
prepared to introduce legislation whic.'n would provide for State funds -
for acquisition costs, but that .legislation is not in order until
approval is granted by Congress.
The resolution supporting the Ladera Dam Project was
adopted by unanimous voice'vote.
r he'rai' Traffic Pan
A report was received from Committee No. 1 recorrii exid-
ing;that the Council ask the County Trafficways Co.nniittee to. consider
the feasibility of ;the peripheral plan proposed by the Citizens'
Cornrn'ittee..for ,Regiona.i Trafficways. Councilman Bishop, Chairman
of Committee No. 'l, advised that it was the feeling of the committee
that the plan has merit' and warrants further investigation.
During the .ensuing discussion reference was made to;
paragraph II of the County Expressway Policy Resolution adopted by
the Board of Suoervi,sors in December 1960 which states that the
Board recognizes that major changes may occur during the constr:ue
tio•n program' that may affect. the expressway projects de -ignated-as_
Phase I, and that the Board will not revise the projects in Phase:I
unless it finds that revision is essential and the City Council'of the:
affected City agrees with the revision. Attention was also called
to a;rrxotion adopted by the Santa Clara County 1. raificways Committee
at a recent meeting providing that any city which changes or withdraws
the lines': as previously established foe their expressway routes would
not be afforded any extra engineering assistance from the County.;
Councilman Arnold reported that a committee of the. Los
Altos City Council v ill consider the proposed peripheral plan at a
Meeting to be held on October 12, 1961.
A Motion was made by Rohrs, seconded by Mrs. Dias,
that the recommendation of Committee No. 1 he accepted and. that the
County Trafficways Committee be asked to consider the feasibility
of the peripheral; plan proposed by the Citizens' Committee for
Regional; Traffi cways .
Mr. Merritt, Holman, 2115 Ecigewood Drive, addre;ssec:
theCouireil atthi$etime representing a new or.ganizatior., the "Traffic
Action..-League".. :He told the Coun i l that this group feels that the
peripheral plan offers nothing constructive and was proposed as a
means of diverting attention from Oregon Avenue. he suggested that
the plan sirrip'ly be kept on file, as he felt it could only be embarrassing
to Palo Alto and neighboring communities.
Aster more discussion, the motion to refer the plan to
the County Trafficways Committee for a feasibility study was carried.
A �N
...'y"'"...„ ,. e, MMa Il inters
.- -----
ring, tia� A. repo -t ` �Ctip
the t r°o , ti was re -u
Pa � rate n� t� ail be tak ceiy:�l'tif.
�'' ✓[:Il �' l td en to r,or Cp
tiori � tod tC? ci ii�e t n7r;rttr?„
LIas Ro .: Cn rnetiti 'rime 9 'pan Sy .1'ca, we
ua. nor zshe epa atarn «r le ue``t :areem entl
,rd , o- rr P and t3y, bei �� airz� � stuff �`
"._•,,�._ a f21 C th• t> r, . 1 alra d b
rnG4 the a ``---- ` �4 ehda
by I1 �a d report was subr,, • " .
area Caty'� of the c1xt.
ea bounded t Cu4r -atnc °y Co
mr �tn� Oregon
� ,'�y �1� on an experimental
� d..Cu1 Ord r?irtk,e yV� f
A. venue. Street P rri:rra , rriL r .
nue �Et, pale mental basis
�stfrn ds r, in the
'nd�
"{alr3rdK kesolutio ro .? venue, for c? ar C tiCa
year,
d`Il xi Ran, Traffic' 3447 amending
'�;,•"r] lt'r e1d std
was introduced,
pale
by ur,,tiraiz and Alto Avenue.
Control SYst, Resolution ti
to o on venue rh z the a 37i c �''t�hll us voice vote, ql `�1'-a to
h d an a trial basis
or a ye o n2a <<'t bounded u 'cl ado).):
a e A tra,� and by
.a as rra asi nr understanding
r slra elan .,,.'1
.venue.
'�.t;�n 4�r�� a year, ntzarll, the system l, was ddt�'PtM��' �
"� ,tn�, October �,. =x �,uuld
of bus transportation,
196 issue
s rYs called
c��rr , i/r spa c attention 11�MD Evans
r X61 is r Statements
f the nn try
rho ans t formed �7<Not b Statem is .Ph Ito • an arS. ticle Council;
armed that
ens' corn bents by k� l'itr "R
until statements t4,t hr„{,a ittee 'llli Iritzr, . z?zc`
proposal that
=fie, the ;axes s surprised
l'llbli� transportation,
Flint. `e
al to } e e,o.r bed before CO
d that thin w Cty Chairman
the public the -Council tatai ti c or corning
would t
Cp spent ,� great
y C���nCilryaFtn ,�v � transportation � not ��n,rx;,ilth th<:. City
r
t rnmittee of dra . pl t arcs s problem.
rc,blem n Y up with
ax3v.,
eAh ri . 4 Which va sz,,i; bed that h tz
and l; r the he is Y:in Larry
,�, as mwt °the-,, chair a8 the Prebl tinlzttc�c o are the:
several mez a,i r' with C ax -r,1 that " has
r bet's 1rs everal zi rimes with ' has also °uthat ar the
t�' Ceryy z-r:-rula* z�aitt�,e. � the City considered
n''ir•nr � "r',.
a the .itte: � d, lnt maces Y st;or�• iati the <d anti
� new Ne 2.., n,a• r,ePer an'ze ic that at utter,
mew citizens'
z being
erg COtray. nt Eve t by the mxrie yd it last
Prphl ens, C,erzn Evans .�Q staff atzens
that err he saidC rnr*Si.tteecil Y1nt long n'„rrae in t any he to , which they. Wad 3 haC C
n°Chirac _, iz ns' wished being fo a to ion t ws<<, � rtat presented
a5 t e of
e lags rket tc, %yr,, cooperative
on inform rh,, Council lint
e City.is concerned.t lags by with the e°Peratiti,, the bus transportation
that
�n b`oirg r,,n � n�itt`' nr with the Council,
�,ansPerttie
G with regard
e a r ata;t car teed ba !y
x�Cess. r1 to the � d k;anw t
and oce s' as taken matter a , r
Council at this �ar.
� Cpun recom (hed time
7: cilt�•yara �t �. i(; 1�. rr,
,one C to Uthe eetiStephens left an d A. tn.)
a C after the
CeS.yl d not return
Ana r { ---.7.--„.., , c t u�:- �• ) a
Pa "�-� +cur 2,aylerranusl.v:r.ec .':w s c'ceiV :
dzad lr�rn �`'�enriila bed �razn the
'c�dCr an for
ar alnr, thy pl cat Gerrzzx
....Lange, of �atierz cr zau3lp„a
district zremRR°bl a d
end
R -3:P to F -C (apartments)
portion of Lot 6?, Wooster
Midtown. Court. However,
of district to rezone the R -
The :proposed development
of approximately 1.64 acres on a
Subdivision, otherwise known as 2721
the Commission recommended a change
1 portion of the parcel to R -3:P.
was reviewed by the Planning Officer.
It was moved by Marshal1, seconded and carried that
the recornrmenda.t;.on of the Planning Commission for denial of •:he
application for P-C'zoning be upheld, and that a proposed ordinance
rezoning the R-1 portion of the property to R -3:P be accepted:for
first reading.
Gone Chan e, 414_9 Middlefield Road
.A report was received from the Planning Commission
reco:mmt ending denial; by a vote of 4 to 2 of the application of C. H.
Helm for, achange of district from C -2:S to C-1 for the property
at 2849 Middlefield Road, being a portion of Lot 70, Wooster Sub-
divi:;io i.
A letter was received from David Freidenrich, attorney
for the applicant, supporting the application for the zone changeto
enablc the owner to erect`a service station on the property.
Mr. Leonard Ware,' attorney associated with Mr.
Freidenrich, addressedthe Council speaking in support of the
application: He urged the Council to allow the zone change so that.
a Richfield service station could be built on the property, stating.
that they 'felt ' this would be an improvement over the present use.
Mr. Ware advised :that in the opinion of the applicant and his
attorneys the objections raised to the proposed rezoning because of
the potential` traffic hazard to children attending the Hoover School
acrossthe street were' not. reasonable.
Mrs. 'Philip Towle.., Chairrnan of the Planning Commission
reported that the basic re .son for the denial b' the Commission was
because. of the location of the property on Middlefield Road.
A motion was made by Woodward, seconded by Rodgers,
that the zone change be granted as requested, and that an ordinance
rezoning the property in question from C-2:5 to C-1 be accepted .'
for first reading.:.' A roll ca1i vote on the motion was as follow;:
A.yes: Bishop, 'Evans, Rodgers, Woodward.
Noes:, 'Arnold, Byxbee, Dias, Haight, Marshall, Rohrs.
The motion was :declared lost.
A ,rnotic n- was then made by .Arnold, seconded by
Marshall, ti:at the recommendation of the Planning Coinmission':for
denial of the zone change application be upheld.
Councilman Byxbee rnoved to refer the matter to
Committee No. 1 with.a request to the staff to give its opinion .3s to
whether. therei`s a traffic problem caused by the Shell Station on
Middlefield Road in the same general area or if the site of this
station has proved satisfactory, also to advise as to whether there
would'be a problem because. of the proximity of the school. The
motion was,seconded by Rodgers.
Councilwoman Dias pointed out that the traffic circulation
is muchbe•tte,r at the Shell Station because Middlefield Road is wider
at that point.
The ixiot•ion to refer the matter to Comrnittee No. 1 was
carried by majority voice vote, and it was suggested that the staff
have a report on the directives for the committee when it considers
the matter.
When.t'he City,Munager noted that there is a meeting
.rf Corrnittee No 1 on October 16, 1961, but he was not sure if the
staff could have reports ready: by that time, the Chairman of
Committee No, 1 advised that this item would not be included on the
agenda .of.the committee at its October 16th meeting but would be
taken upat the meeting of the committee following that date.
Variance,_ 734 Mehl:l,le_Ayfenue_
A report was received from the Planning Commission
unanimously reconimcr;ding that the decision of the Zoning
Administrator be: upheld in denying the application o: Culver S. and
Martha S. Brown fora variance from the sideyard setback require-
ments for the Property at 734 Melville Avenue.
After : the Planning 'Officer had explained the reasons for
denial of the appfit.;ation, it was moved by Byxbee, seconded by
Marshall, and carried that the decision to deny the variance be up'ieid.
Lot Di�rision 978' Addison Qvtnue4115. ramsvamarzo----ta,
A report -was submitted by the Planning Commission
unanimously recommending that the decision of the Planning
Offi::er be upheld in -denying a lot division for the property of Coy
and Kate Guyton at '978 'Addison Avenue.
On.:n,.otion• of 'Marshall.and Woodward, the decision to
• deny the lot division was upheld.
Lot Divisicsr iy;o,neas $ane6nto o Etoa
A report was received from the Planning Commission
unanimously recommending that the decision of the Planning Officer `?
ve upheld in denying the lot division application of Stephen. G. Moore
Associates covering a portion of the P -C District on Byron Street
at San Antonio Road.
It was moved ;by Marshall, seconded and carried that
the decision to deny, this lot division he upheld.
Quitcia�ixrn• Deed to_McCuen
.M '1.E56 ppeN/MCO.+AciCdR1V�R
There was presented a deed to Peter A. McCuen and
Catherine C. McCuen, quitclaiming an unused easement onthe
northeast side of their, property at 638 Georgia. Avenue, portion of
Lot 103. Tract No. 948, Green Acres No. 2.
On motion of Rodgers and Bishop, a resolution authorizing
the Mayor to execute this Quitclaim Deed was adopted by unanimous
voice vote.
•
tr'e
4
'rl;c�r
1:'e Ott Aro h, r f -b 2
RNs ne �' s e•
cei rt`.re_.•. beel �t the y '26'
c/
w'th
as � f/ c P./ d
L
r1r at
•
rr4
1C'p. �1 '�
'°t6 .E � o a f Cr, arr 1t li
'1y°r 'y7,3 r� er a� i • rC.
toe byi r.et of` f
1 t
' to '�l
<• • r1
•
r}1a 'f It) E.
1,, �tX11y. 'Se,'ptN r}}oRtl
.1" rE. '?'1, y 1
r•hC` rj�/-N pGrr E,r r N4U
1 ��d ct?d 0,
i�'�A1jrh P,'C�j li; Cat rhC '�'1,
`�`111 lei., �t�G`ts o Oct rr fs.."1" irk'
U C
a�viS, �` S'
a u `~.
r ,c.,a met 11.2 O _�C11r ��
to r�raNCr .PIN i1� 'It 27.7,!? I.'?
B,
Co, )E, L7• J t/r /1e 1 e bNN •
ctrl 5,tllta rl''c,.,ic lnass�,'�a}il the 6' �=liaa
r, r-'81 1-'1(P'1'
� l`ts ;} /7 7'he'"li';t rp 111,_�`°'6'et 1'�a
er rk d b('''..'0
, qtr ` S'>f Nair ki�s �� f
N N /' F " C Ca a`��jhAra�o �r r, ��h u�2. are off{ ,��
aftc n.' E9Ue,Rr1?aIsl./Jo-4
• � a a a 1c'e 1rti:
Cot,
.71,,,-)(•,, s t� 1ll Aar •<Ye t, rC a' /1
C,„rte 'Ice r• 13y a ` e f�a t��h d to 1)?, -,-..‘l
'`� vet �e yea° VE h je w 3
s ''?; Nq N' rd olths
,�4thot. (� . `3d /1 ysr P CNd
}o 9 a1� A •
4-1'4>"
•111°J%-i.."
,.r , d 4? Cir
r'Co r,r `S �1 y �
rCf. 4hdl ,• 1 rtO1 � r
U oil, tl/a �Ni ney \:
AAA�1 n Cft d C VrE'sEnI
l
1959
f1 J i f1 1}�y a C,.
?t e -
"bee . tons�Q'e1 • t1s ac ha i lbe - 'CO t'�1g�o��C1'11 N1it p s tflp I
byN rh ed to 'hu �' f u
M C' r 7 1s �-. � Aa ,,r
te„ •t.,401
CO ' tit. N to to c•a�s th
this �c�•1'n r�it1U/ ha ;,N ea>Js •r t 41,
tec/
�att wc�4l��r' w;ae Of Ai. a .ic;in�Nr thhQ dN�ln,nall
e'o yr'11
c/
jr � er7rs , ;'It12e -Y ro /} of C.` c4s1 ?r}?r?z a6A.
e th1. > o�y ep
dN:ed s, a
•
W re
ctda�o rodriar?
L • .
ilr1,, r�
U�zr1.01
thaCO�r�SOhNr arr
es a>?� o'1 u Ctiof Ic;ts ctio,,.
,1 a
12 ih
WE('�c:
frd1 ' 're 1NCo aa�Ji� ac'11
t/2. NC r
AIa�U° coj.'s ikt
•
1C1'
N 10,
tion
l3. `or r1ttN by C 1r ar77 thrs zttNe �� Ind pt
a ri, hE, zc ,�, o
rj „
7'6E
E hei17
et: /20
�a Furth
SQ«• j N J'O• o,}1 ltttye faa '.11c4,1
8 a ii t�
rrl � 4.212R.• 3 Th• �tte a. /IT,W"ti/d• `� �3., r=�t•c, r?if l�rc
4'1./i 'ty, • 2', �.,PI �zsc ✓e =t 3
o ''h2'ara tsNlre, to d'th'rt''
°rced e1 St- 1t a ha v€ t
°ut � • 'C' ✓o,� he
w'i th tha r
r
tie
N t'va
e
CrE r 0, r 81
IarNd ''}C?
ad✓o s tc
ur1}NfC ah?e
9, car,
t I
Q. ah the
The ''City
3zid `The torney presented
Morris Y LouI, Reid, � Grant iced to Dorothy s S;ubd,vz Lo t ov, ring a portion o: theJ
recorded of the William r t, t d
on Apri;l 21 Curtner of the ,
1959, � " Tract, to carrE.c; a deed
�uthari,;izOn motion of Marshall and
voice vote.' the May to execute this deedrswa resolution
s adopted by unanimous
TheliczattliAstko
rrzontly re
taken ,*z emont on report of the Planning Ott.
rakeni2y report b applications Officer lots, actian
t the ns far r edivisiori of S�onth/y Zoni,ng Administrator
r'on applications for varies and the
received : or, act
ion r take and filed. variances and use n in
pe r,r� i t s; wc;.r,e
.
fa ilIt Park
Site
Councilman B
advised that at the yxbee, Chairman of considered
No.
ag the Amarillo Avenue as consid to
pCC people
the ,. enue area asked 4d lie r months
h5
respect
Po 3 sibi.lity of having a to be heard Dui ;h
IJrive_in.�}Yc�`,�tre on parkdeveloped ,i to tconsultants Amarillo p h planning
'tangy, g$'
had been 'elues*.ed Avenue: that zhe-plan � J��.cnt
on t park.
k PropoSal, �orte c to make a :specific recommendation
rt�l•1,�
again after committee had co de the a re is received agreed to con:sii.lNr
from the
JVz r . Byxbee stated piannc. r• s •
C vtrirni"ttee No. L to tated that technically
Committee consider the ) it is ther functionconsider of
}C •3e vi ttee to h - - the financing. park~ and
afteresi have a rCing. He asked
t do• middle to of joint meeting of Corn if it would
ilr an November to discus this
Committees No.
Evan 2 anti No. 3.
Co vcilm h Chairman i this o. 2, particular
e satisfactory �� Cozrizr�ittee �a � project.
Councilman
matter. considered y to hirr�; that advised'
.
de•� edeither b�. he mould b<� that
mattir. with Cbxn Corgi glad to 7iav „
meeting,
arrangements rnittee No. mittee No• Z itself r in c the
chairza for such a maeLing The
City Manager stated that
be worked out with the two
There being no further r. business
the meeting was decl s eto cane
ared adjourned before the
t' at 9:50 p.m.
APPROVE
'-
ATTEST.
CItY./. rk