Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09121960California City . p�,%a .r 12s 1960 5epternbembe met , �eg�lax are - a ?al l.t dal' ?r regela' rxi Yth Tie Ga�� , _30 P « teat �iaiSht ax 4 Gi ste,�e:is > GB.i.�. 8.$ � r�drx:ra r ����� « S i Q5C" ,5a.2 '.. VJe ' Mz��re«� V. 1960,$ sho?, of A w ;' t 1� $�" of .Mhe ro ee}in The «.et1. ap9r vii fly ai5 pxa•Ect:39 LQ +AOn �``�'' �7 h0, tti hearing w f _ 2.=_--, , �`� • r �.�.`3` a Foat.. iPo ttug of ,;'..� v pe960, naear g wa.s. " ; ry CO '3 . of Pr4:-� .n.i^3^M, Onion bzOPerty Pot �o. 32.30 of heax"�� ' was .�e�o�p..t,�°'" ' c'' �.;;�' "a:r'�' sewer.©^ ��;t:tio�.s and he F'�'hl�c hearingand: xef'OXt,'' 1liil ols n 1�,,t�'After e eeei t o �c�, tga's Intention 2 ��"e6" - R �i3. ���.i�•�� i` t�,� x��, Ica. O for r"s i; owners ' w ��,-19 0. staff-: d tt�. .r;:�.tt� � the 1 ndC closed. ar e . to Sept rn."�eh h�report pf each COvt t� y�atl�^ were,,( �h anti Ca y T g�.. � %� �. ty ner The opy ,•a'- ?rev-1.0%151:y :.e` s„1r,. :�s.tea , tr from Ber noting that ,hed and �� ^• �r,... thebenefitsgse5 ,.. n ; ;� y �e. ;rse . o..t r.� o> d the a X • �' �X`�7�ittS,�s �t a� �3 � ��.}� exceed opinion attachedx a �'xsi"- they will. e <.,,a, : r.ia Op it whi c a er: faci it stating „.. cee dance linesa rttie the EngN' ee« ing a.`, z�.c * d e5pii n QeT b.e 3,iSe {.,.bent of been eq ,,', •u ; �e "a i '� },7,0 e =` '' sc sewer report. e nts have te of cost of rcpt..- �ted ?la ss e asap of a ..I e -port "' to the Los ; p,;nee the the ', an esti xS co�"s1�'�t�*",o+' ,e,,,•. g.. 1.a ..v y , �irectox ° d strongly b,er e eat by :-,..Tea. war p,�p%s�' w.,, .�, � :a= �w.,Pi s .�o1:.cv. `�ect. ass�� a�ex-Gas-Sewer C9as "fie �� , fit, 1.�%iz..tt,xx; sewer P" `� of fro c0., with ,tee , Tie ;, e � er t now, to • letter, Y'u �7i::4`, r WXt.. to ' A xe n; �a�t G� a G' proceed services for,. ��..e if sewer all aitb eici�n that 'that and in �t'l. p iin �,. adviseda �sy :n r0 s tyl-.Yr waiting t� R� w ar C,: c;^.std rat e s r �z� X� e��$x.e� �'.a'" c� tb��. riasje been c essd�ti°xs fox per c be °: ; ?s'�ap�x; d s'?,: ed a 4 - Noxi. s¢te a a e5 "", Ia nai xe. a MS a rt G � �}c1e t.2. b= bore ��an�� to ar�dit� an . eet, +cx: �- 350 , 00 y ,, o Q0 , be orl ea,,: The f� t'- e .. tat at o sr ec y� l�tar� der c. sti.X %. 'ted ` 3,15a. , area loaned a,ss estir?� car � e r. ed t1''� ,. n he ,� ies. of the- , cost, t 31 hex-_ to b, _ recove�e ,er.�4s v's,4'csewace f,,Glh_t t and the r c e e at connected Tatr men , ec , h the ystinf } t O. the would be i 0w the .nee wauid i o r periu etty s follows The play i%�"e'=o. e ; ;evel.o? ' ,�Q�,.?.d de e t withx e he e new fyr^ancin carrec 13,'b1T ` rnrnende"a .mot nit=•ict: e ava� Tlse xecaM. "'' szsre y beoox•"`' , three . in the aaae ' �� thxe�' areas e n G r tr a• at enC habzlatY cl nres an., or.%to' t o,.. �y ire _�_ _. ........__-.. :.LC- ..... �.4-�.w.l......w�'�`.:�L�A ���Jy.w��� :"�Slr_".r:�"l^�r.-"�+=.`.:�..r::Y"�:��.'."J:3..w. ��..-.......� Area 1. The.assessrnent cost to remain at $640 per. Area II. The :area;a.ssessment to be changed from $2,793 per acre to $2,.010 per acre and $350 per -connection, the connection charge payable whenpremises are connected. _Area III The area aeee83ment to be changed from' $1, 193 per acre to $768 per acre and $350 per connection, the connection charge payable when premises are connected. It was moved by Porter and seconded that the report and. recommended -financing: plan be adopted, and that Resolution No. 3270 -overruling protests on the Resolution of Preliminary Determina- tion and; of Intention be adopted. After discussion the motion...waa carried and the "resolution wa.a:,:adopted by unanimous :voice :vote.` Resolution, No: 3271, determining conveninence and necessity, adopting the Engineer -'s report, confirming assessment and ordering work.and acquisitions, was introduced, and on motion of Porter, duly seconded, ; was adopted by unanimous vote on roll- call. Annexation to.Meuntain View A notice of theproposed annexation of territory designated as "Middlefield No: 11" to the City of Mountain View was received: and filed. Cancellation of Taxes, Flood Control District A request was received from the Santa Clara County Flood Control. District for cancellation of taxes on property acquired' by the District for flood control purposes on San Francis quito Creek, being portion of Lot 7, dock 184, 'Tract 712, Crescent Park Addition No. 2, containing 0,042 acre, It was moved by Navis, seconded and carried by unanintous voice vote that the taxes on said ;property be cancelled. TheF:City Manager presented amendments to Gas Rate` Scbedules G71._ :and G=;1 -O to. reflect the rate increase of the Pacific: Gas _& Electric Company which was recently approved by the Public Utilities .Commis'sion'.' He advised that in conformance with the .. City's policy, the -new rates are identical with the PG&E rates. On:thotion of Porter and Nevis, the new rate schedules were approved ; The. City Manageradvised that the Public Utilities Cornrnission will continue to hold, hearings on the application of the Pacific ,Gas. &" Electric Company for additional increases in rates, and that" the city staff *ill -participate in future hearings and try to protect"the City's position in this matter. General -Plan Revision = Invitation to ry oasuitants to-ibmit.xoposals Reference was made by the City Manager to the acceptance by the Council: at -its last meeting of the goals and objectives as recommendedby the Mayor's Committee, and to. the instructionstohis office to invite interested and qualified firms to submit proposals for revision of the General Plan. He presented for the Council's information a letter he proposes to send to planning. consultant firms inviting them to submit proposals, and asked -.for any comments or suggestions council members or xneznbers of the Goals Committee may have on his proposedletter`:01 invitation „After discussion, it was agreed that -the letter was satisfactory and should be sent out immediately to; qualified.:firrns . Zone Change: Application (Carrell A report; was received from the Planning. Commission. unanimously recommending denial of the application of Powell C. and: Constance 5,, Carrel for a change of district from R -3-P to P -C (for a service station)` for the property at 2233 Alma Street being Lots 6 and 7, Block `60:, . Seale Addition No. 2, on the northerly. corner of Alma -Street. and California Avenue. Mr.. Ernest W. Schmidt, attorney representing. Dr. and Mrs.: Carrel, filed a written statement concerning the request-? ed zone:. change with"argsments for the proposed P -C zoning, and the proposed service station development. Mr. Schmidt addressed the Council in support of the application. Mrs. Philip Towle, Chairman of the Planning Commission, reviewed the past actions of the Commission with respect to this property and previous zone c:cxange requests which had been -denied; by the Commission and the Council. She advised that the Coxnan.ission felt it would be spot zoning of a commercial use in a residential area if the._, application were granted; that the commissioners recognized that Dr. Carrel has a personal problem but felt that': the proposed service station would be a poor use for the property..;. Mrs. Towle also advised that the Commission had asked the Traffic Consultant for his opinion, and had received a letter from him stating that the proposed service station at that location would add to the traffic problems in that area. It was moved by Haight and seconded that the recommenda- tion of the Planning =Commission for denial of the zone change be- upheld. ` After discussion the motion was declared carried by a majority voice vote. A requestwas made by a council member for a roll call, which was as follows: Ayes: Ball,,Byxbee, Davis, Giffin, Haight, Navis, Porter, Woodward, Zweng. Marshall, Rodgers, Stephens. The !notion; was carried and the denial upheld, •.)a Subdivision Problems on: Skyline Boulevard. FooteAnnexation _o. L report was received from the Planning Commission; referring specifically to properties within Foothills Annexation: No..3 along, Skyline.: Boulevard, unanimously recommending that the Council seek a solution to the problems involved in subdivision of parcels. that lie partially in Santa Clara County (and within the annexation area) and partially in San Mateo County, aimed at promoting a re-atignxnexrt<: of the boundary lines. It was moved, seconded and carried that the City Manager and`staff contact officials of San Mateo. County and discuss these problems with ahem.' Lot Division (Mrs. Landini t A report was submitted by the Planning Commission unaxumously, recommending approval of a lot division for the property_ of Mrs. A. Landini on the southerly side of California Avenue between Louis Road and Greer Road, being a portion of Lot 3, Block 3, Seale Subdivision No. 5, subject to granting public utilities and;service overhang easements as shown on the xnap and to furnishing evidence of payment of all payable city and county taxes. It was Pointed out that' this would overrule the technical denial of, the Planning Officer. After; review and discussion, it was moved, seconded and carried that this lotdivision be approved in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Street Pattern - Diablo Wad A report was received from the Planning Commission unanimously recommending adoption of a street pattern for the area between El Camino Way and the proposed extension of Wilkie Way, and; between West Meadow Drive and Jaynes Road, by installation and improvement of a; cul-de -sac off El Camino Way following the line ;of the private roadway known, as Diablo Way, and that this be accomplished by means of an assessment district. The Planning Officer advised that the. Commission feels that the problems in connection with this right of way, which is over a number of. existing ea.sexnents, should be resolved before there is further development in the area. He noted that there would be three property -owners involved inthe proposed assessment district. It was moved by Byxbee, seconded by Marshall, and carried that the recommendation of the Planning Commission be adopted -and that proceedings for the assessment district be anstiated (See Correction page 449 sal, Utah onstruction ae 1Vunxnt (0. A report was received from Committee No. 1 recommend ing that_ihe :Council make a request in writing to the Utah Constru Lion, & Mining Company for an extension of time to consider the proposal for development of -the Bayiands. The committee advised that if the ;extension =is granted, the committee would give further study to the Matter and report to the Council at the last meeting in October. ;` The City Manager reported that Mr. .Joseph K. Allen of the Utah Construction '& Mining Company has written a letter, as a result of the meeting of Committee No. 1, advising that the company is agreeable to an extension of ."nine until Tuesday, October 25, 1960. The company suggested that on or before that date; those in the city government wb`o are concerned with the proposition take whatever steps are necessary to refine the proposed agreeir ert to include -terms which would be acceptable to the City that when this refinement has been completed, the City would submit theagreement-to them as a counter-offer to their proposal subnutted-, une 30, 1960; that within ten days after receipt by Utah of- the refined agreement, Utah would either -accept or .reject the City's proposition. There being no objecIion from the Council, the Mayor advised that he would instruct the staff to communicate with the Utah Construction & Mining Company to the effect that the City will follow the course outlined in their letter. Project .5'9 3;''Bxzch Street Resolution. "No. 3272, amending Resolution No. 3218 determining that"thy?public interest and necessity require the - acquisitioon'df easerz ents for streets and thetaking of inu ediate poi'sessionthereof, '.Project - 594, ]3irchStreet, was introduced, and ox: motion of Porter, duly secorded,was adopted by unanixnous vote call. ft was explained that this amends the descriptions of three p .rcels' of property ro<he acquired. Project 59-11; Exxibarcadero Road East of Ba shore Reso1. ion. No. 327, deter: il:x-4 public interest and nt.cessity require the acquisition of easements for streets and:the taking of immediate possession thereof, Ernbarcadero Road East of Bayshore, Project 59,.11," was introduced., and on Motion of Navin and Stephens, was adopted by unanimous vote on. roll call. Pro ect 59 9.'' West'Char:eston Road" Resolution No. 32.74',deterrnini-.gtbat the public interest and "necessity require:the acqui'siiion of an easement for street purposes; ;.Parcel ."20-A,' Project 59-9, to complete the widening of. Charleston Road At El Carr '-o: Real, Was introduced, and on,xnotion of Byxbee, duly, seconded, was adopted by unanimous vote on roll call. Vacation of `-Portions of Arroyo and En-Lbarcadero Roads Resolution No 3275-, declaring intention to vacate. portions' of Emba:cadero Road and Arroyo. Road, easterly of the Bayshore Freeway,and setting October 10, 1960, at 7:30 P.M. as the tzne-for:hearing on the proposed vacation, was introduced. = The City Manager advised that a request for vacation of these 'portions;of :streets was made' by the property owners concerned and that the matter had been considered by the staff also'that the re.quir^ed •easenent for public utilities has been given to the City On motion, -duly made and seconded, the resolution was adopted by tn_anin ot.s voice vote. �- . voice axxotron Marshall,' No_v 8 960 be consolidated' Id exxaber 1 0 duly seconded, vas' op introduced, i adopted by moos' San Or'dinaace Ordinance No �� to �©' 1980; art/ending prohibited to elirn ate.bowlsn Section 9.03 of a;rd on minors in cert alleys fxci dified motion of lain instaacel m the eats $ vo�ce vote Nav�e, oily-geco wa$, giveza hmeate second was adopted se wins _read ng Notice of Referendum Y ualaneza�one -Election Referendum�dxraace IV'o;1. Electaax..of the 98l Zoning providing for Notice vote- with the Geneertain ral of Stanty ford University, Palo Alto azx of Special: al Election Un' s was azxd on ectxonfin' versi ,, to Ordinance No. .1943 a tiori of The City Attorney ymade a brief r do of t the. a x ' on=the' decision of the report, for the info/Illa- tion:of .Altos, i '� Cement -.between the �blic nfr►r.ma sion °_ Palo Utilities CozCmie Paci,iic. Go Alto;: Co City of amount Separataan Faxzy. for construction of the Sa tar and the ain �, uj h of Antonio Raid rn; C2azxr:��fox D Grade anna. es Marshall electric Conn . an . A- claim filed o report.wa,s receive $208„503.08„ 2p ged n July ` 2 8.; s 9 e d from the City ° ages ly 21; , bY. the. -Marshall Attorney Coon the �... X03 g out of -Electric a Pa$20 . Q8, for breach. of contract in the "A lt3 .;08„ for electrical,installation in the m unit for that the clai d Hospital Center, it co i of claim is the cu The City nstxuc ti advised the th t t e C ex rilnatiora of Attorney counsel ' l anag.+ex of lengthy Hospital, dvised �` Bettie Construction for the Cow a lah by , counsazay and t le brlon xa standing dispute with the Marshall and A. m hy.and'then g company, T. he Marshall that and reco the claz ;i8. hot a he City Attorney ,Electric amended that it be rejected nr charge against the advised It was its entirety, City voice vote that the City by E Yxbee, seconded voice be dens ed City Attorney's report be cced carried by ima accepted and that. the ua Claim for *Duna: ndia Jeanne ,Li ht) A re claw filed by sport Was. received from the cClaim rfilea. It.Light for injuries in City Attorney on the '�jacent t Jeanne ,X.igt�t � she slipped cried by when Wilbur Fool. on the concrete hits daughter, The -City Attcailbu Pol.The of than, Crete surface' Was' concluded advised that the. accident claim beenwas investigated s and d t Wag Con that there is, no had or erbasis specified. the cLai bay part�of the; Cs negligence or of rejected He there her hams for. in entirety. fore recommended that t3''• It w,�.g xar ved unanimous: vows v by Byxbee and the claim tie-denied'..that-the torneded and carried by City' -Attorney's report ��accepted Trafficv�a+jy._s__P.axi Couzicihinas^,: Byxbee called attention to a report of the; minty Trafficways Committee which was sent to council members recently, which contained in the allocation of costs an amount assigned to, the: City of Palo Altofor the San Tomas Freeway. The. City Manageradvisedthathe had checked on this item`. and had been informed that money budgeted for the San Tomas Freeway,has been loaned for the Page _Mill Road improvement that this is a bookkeeping figure .ors a xeiixibursenxent basis. Hospxtat Meti:gx�gs �®wci.mwir- Cos:.icilman Byxbee raised the question of hospital operation and noted that there has been a', improvement in. the administration of the hospital in the past few months. As a means - of furthering public relations and increasing public c enfidenc'e in the hospital administration, Mr. Byxbeemoved that the Hospital Board be: requested to consider the possibility of opening its board zneeting:s to the public and press. The motion was seconded by Max'•, shall heMayor announced at this time that he has appointed Councilmen. i Haight, Davis, Evazis and Zweng to representthe City at the anr.ea,1 meeting of the Palo Alto -Stanford Hospital. Center on September 28, 1960. - In ,discussing the motion, Councilman Navis, a member of - the Hospital Board, stated that he thought it would be wise for Comxamittee. No:., 4 to explore this matter with the Board and medical staff before any further action is taken, pointing out that there are matters of doctor. -patient relationships and professional ethics which should not be, discussed in a public meeting. Councilman ian llaight suggested that the annual meeting wouldbe a good tune to bring up the matter because there would be representatives of both owners, Stanford University and the City, present as well`: as Members of the Board. Councilxnan Zweng suggested that the Board could snake a division of its meetings so that all, matters of policy aid finance could be discussed in public session.. After further discussion, the motion was carried and. the repress.ntatives;`of the City were asked to express the Council's sentiments regarding -board meetings at the annual meeting:; on September -28, 1960. - Resin a.tia., f: C ., _, v, ._.: Navis from H --._._, Board At this time the Mayor announced that he has received the resignation of Councilman Nevis from the Hospital Board,; with, the request it'take effect:immediate/y. Mr. Travis advised that' press of business makes it imanakee it'imisossible for him to devote the necessary time to hospital board affairs. It was moved by Porter, seconded and carried that the resignation be accepted with regret and that the appreciation and gratitude of the Council be expressed to Mr. Navis for his services on the Hospital Board. The Mayor asked the staff to prepare such a- letter for his signature. dos , itat Board 'A: u tmeats Council will have to The Mayor announced that the Coun i Directors illha e ite . a� expired, �eute. to the Board of Hospital erra . rlting, Sohn Beahrs t to reptace_ Davis who has just resigned, Jun m and; Councilman June 30, 196nY Noel E, Porto s issued .,Th"Mayor "M proclamation which he PORTER ;UAY:. ,The MaYox read a 1gS0: as NOEL E. October 4, who served as Mayor r�Pa o Alto Tuesday, ho Gilman Porter proclaiming. � honor Cowl service and community in •m 1 Alto: 1960 for his. outstanding from, 195S:to ,eider4shiP. t an • Memor of Su . rvisar Sla bt A, �r�eta and cm motion of estion of the Mayor, 05 �' • .t the;: sug8 a 'Meeting way adjourned at 9:05 , seconded, r L. Slaght who recently passed girders duty rrasa Orin of Sut?e ; Q�utal:1c service to the people in rese and nitioxi of hie great away, and in rec°g of Santa Clara County.