HomeMy WebLinkAbout11021934City Hall ,, Palo Alto, California,
4ovember 2, 1934
The Council of the City of Palo Alto met in special
session at 7:30 p.m. on this date in response to the following
cavil of the Mayor,
"As Mayor of ;the City of Palo Alto, I hereby
call a special meeting of the Council cf the City
of palo Alto, to conveneat the council chamber in.
the City of Palo Alto, at the hour of 7:30 p.m.,
Iriday, November 2 1934, for the purpose of consider-
ing the protests against the location of the Butane
Plant, and such other mattersas may come before the
Council."
.iayor Thomas presided and roll call was as follows:
Present: Blois, Bonham, Cathcart, Collins, Crandall, Green,
Judson, Kelly, Mitchell, Mosher, Steprens, Thoits,
Thomas.
Absent: Christensen, Wood.
The minutes of the meeting of October 22, 1934, were
Protest on Butane ?last
A petition was received, signed by grs. Peter 1,acoste
with 52 other signatures, protesting against the establishment
of the Butane . Plant on Middlefield Road in Block 89, alleging
this was .a nuisance because of the danger and depreciating effect
on their property.
In answer, to questions by: the Mayor, the Director of
Utilities stated that this particular site was chosen as the
location of the Butane . Plant because the mains serving the entire
city run from this point, which has been the location: of the gas
meters for several years;; that if the Butane Plant were located
at the power house it would be necessary to increase the size, or
the :pains and the additional. expense would be 5
that he did not consider there was an danger in~establishing
sta or s more;
this plant close to residence —: y r e osts1 .i ar:<2g
plants is ,; . as the experience of similar
than:, no hazard is connected with them when operated
properly, and that the, Board of Fire Underwriters has advised
..,hat if the plant is insta:ledunder proper regulations there
would be no increase in rates for nearby buildings.
Az. Hail,. former superintendent of the Natural Gas
Corperdtion of California, was present ~ and stated that he had had
charge of similar plants and had never had any trouble from fire
or explosion,, and in ::his opinion . this plant vas perfectly safe
e.
for operation in that location.
The City Engineer, in . response to a question from the
Mayor, stayed that he had visited; other plants in the state and
ascertained that there ,was. no danger from such plants.
Reference was made by the :Mayor to the complaint in the
petition that the plant' would have a depreciating effect on.
surrounding property. It was .pointed: out that the Board of
Works has prepared a plan. for. landscaping this
roperty which
a snort time would hide the tanks from view. A sketch show;ingn
Lze plan for .screen] .the tanks and ;beautifying
it would not look like- an, industrial development ty aslpresented
u /
The Director of Utilities reported that the estimated
saving each `year by the use of Butane gas was $500000. or more.
He stated that the- plant would be in operation for approximately
three months of the year, and that during the remaining mine,
months of, :the year the tanks would be emptied and the plant idle.
He also stated that two inohes- of cork hadbeen placed around
the compressors to guard. agains t vibrations, and that double walls
had ' teen " built ` for the purpose of lessening the noise as much as
possible.
The Mayor then invited members of the audience to
speak. `'Mr., Sam E. Hays addressed the Council, and stated that he
believed there was still some hazard in connection with the plant
and that : it would depreciate property values inthe neighborhood.
A number of others addressed the Council, including ?fir. John,C.
Whipple,, Airs. Peter Lacoste, Mr. C. E. Miler, Mrs. Annie Sharkey,
Mrs. Anna Martin, Mr. H. B. Mathewson and Mr. Victor Farmer.
Mr. Whipple read excerpts from issues of the Palo Alto
Times ine the: year 1919 when the City was considering the
acquisition of a portelen of the property on which the Butane .plant.
is located. The deeds covering this property in Block 8'), part
of which was acquired in 1918 and the remainder in 1920, were
examined by the City Attorney who reported that there was no
restriction : in the deeds limiting the use of the property.
Mr. E. B. Parsons, who was employed by the Board of
Works to supervise the construction of the Butane Plant, explained
its construction and the safety precautions which had been taken.
After all who desired had spoken, the meeting was
closed to the audience:and the Council members 'proceeded to
discuss the matter. > Councilman Judson said .he could see no
reason why the plant `'would depreciates €'he neighborhood, and
called attention to the fact that some of the signers of the
petition lived several blocks away from the plant.
It was pointed out that there would be a loss of about
$20,000 if the Butane Plant was abandoned altogether, and Lhat it
would cost between $15,000 and $20,000 to remove' the tanks to
another location. Reference was made to the fact that several
years ago the Planning Commission established this property in
Block ;89 as ' the location for the gas meters. is the plant is
practically ready to operate, the suggestion was made that it
might be tried out withthe understanding that if any bad features
develop they would be corrected, and that as soon as the use of
the plant for this winter is completed a committee or board could
study the, matter and confer with the petitioners to see what their
attitude would be that time.
Mr. Hays, who had addressed the Council on .behalf of the
protestants,, said that if they could have assurance that the
question waild still be an open question after this season's use �.
the tanks he would be willing to withdraw his objection for the
present, ;with the understanding that the matter would come up ass
4 number of other protestants agreed with this statement.
On motion of Thoits and Bonham, the action on this
petition was deferred until a report is received from the Board t=
Works and Committee No. 1 on the operation of the Butane Plant at
the regular meeting in March, 1935.
Meeting of Peninsula Division of League
communication was read from Henry C. Collins, new
President .:of the Peninsula Division of the League of California
Municipalities, inviting the council members and city officials to
atte:nri the next meeting of the eeninsula Division to be ..held
at `6°2tierm ,, ti'�ednesday,: November 14, 1934, at the benj amin a e4;
! el ,in, San Mateo The City Clerk was asked to ascertain the
number `, who expect to attend this meeting.
a_ In
A
Francisco E4
November 23,
for the pur;
harbor .lines
was referred
Payment
authorize thl
with the sui'
proceedings,
costs alread
This was disc
appropriation
Cambridge Ave
Attest:
on
iieari_ oj' riarbor a.ne Board
A notice was received concerning
earng 0' the
Francisco Harbor Line Board to be held at 10 A.M., Friday, San
November 23, 1934, in Room 401, Custom House, an Francisco,
nor the purpose of consider applications
harbor lines along the western SanFrancfor iscobli skiing
was rexerred to the City Attorney and Board ofWorks. Bay ° This
Payment of Const.. b: e c s. Fee Cambridge L72-„,nue .
A .request .was made by the City attorney that the Co
authorize the payment of'66.00. unaii
with the suit for; the dismissal cof�the 1Cambridge s fees iAvenun newiien
proceedings, this being in addition to fees and
costs ahead the- attorney's s a:�d.
already by the City in accordance with court order..
This was discussed, and on motion: of Molts and. Judson, an
appropriation of 66.00 was made for this purpose from the
Cambridge Avenue widening fund, . by unanimous vote on roll call.
Oh motion of Mosher and Mitchell, the Council adjourned.
.rif est:
Civy.Clerk
hpproved