Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1955-03-22REGU-_~R ADJOUP~ED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO~ ~ TWJESDAY, MARCH 22, 1955 AT 4:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: PLACE: ROLL CALL: AIRPORT BLVD. SEWER APPEARANCE OF COUNCILMAN G~MLEN: APPEARANCE OF COUNCILM~N ROCCA: The meeting was called to order at 4:57 P. M. by Mayor Smith. Council 3hambers. Present: Councilmen Francis Lucchio~ Emilio Corteei and Telford Smith. Absent: Councilmen Andrew Rocca and Richard Gamlen. The first item ou the agenda was the protest hearing on the proposed changes iu the boundaries of the Airport Blvd. sewer District. Mayor Smith opened the protest hearing. A communication from the office of Wilsey and Hamm, dated March 18, 1955, authorized representatives of the San Francisco Bridge Company was read to the City Council by City Clerk Rodoudi. After the communication had been read, Mayor Smith asked Director of Public Works Goss if he had discussed this with Mr. Wilsey; to which Mr. Goss replied that Mr. Wilsey felt that the San Francisco Bridge Company would get no use out of the sewer lines. He further added that there were two schools of thought ou the matter. Mr. Randlett's being that the whole project was integral; and that if there were no sewer lines there wo~ld not be the need for a pumping plant. Mr. Wilsey felt that the San Francisco Bridge Company should pay only for the pumping plant. Councilman Lucchio remarked that he was inclined to believe with the San Francisco ~ridge Company that frontage seems to come up at all times. He further remarked that consideration was given the Land Company. Mayor Smith asked if in the amount of assessment made against the Bridge Company, was it taken into consideration, not Only the frontage; but area taken in to be benefited. Mr. Goss an~-~red yes, that the area to be benefited w~s taken into consideration and said that Mr. Randlett could answer this. Mr. Raudlett explained ~ha~method iu which the assessment was levied on a frontage basis for a six inch line and how the remaining cost was assessed ou an area basis. He also explained ou the less assessment being levied ou the remote areas to the sewer lines, that he had gone onthe assumption that the whole area benefited and had tried to derive the assessment accordingly. At this time, Mr. Blair of the firm of Wilsey and Bamm remarked that they had followed another vie~ of thought which was two projects, one a sewer line and the other a pumping station; and that they had made two breakdowns. They felt that it was more equitable to their c~mpany as to connect to this, they would have to lay more lines. Mayor Smith asked Mr. Blair that, supposing the Bridge Company property were left out of the assessment and the present connection had to be changed, what would they do. Mr. Blair answered that they would amk to connect to the p~mping station and pay a prorated share. He further remarked that the only objection is to the main sewer from which they get no benefit~ that they had to build lines to connect to it and that the only two people who had no frontage was Consumer Rock and Bridge Company, and therefore should be ou an area basis. At this ~ime Director of Public Works Goss read the assessment ou various parcels involved, giving the figures as prepared by Mr. Randlett and .~r.Wilseyo Mr. Louis Poletti then explained the percentage of his property that is frontage, iu comparison to the Bridge Company; citing the figures as given byMr. Wilsey's representative. Councilman Gamleu appeared present at the meeting at 5:23 P.M. and was present for the duration. City Attorney Lyons said that, in distributing the assessments, he did not feel that further discussion had to take place now; as further notice has to be given for final confirmation. He stated that the matter before the Council now is, if the other properties were to be inclu~, remarking on the notice that had to be published. Mr. Senaldi, one of the property owners, asked Mr. Blair, of the firm of Wilsey, if _Mr. Wilsey took the figures ou a frontage basis. Mr. Blair answered that it was on a frontag~ and area. Mr. Senaldi then asked how many fee~ frontage had Mr. Wilsey assessed him with, to which Mr. Blair answered 720 feet. At this ~ime, Mr. Raudlett remarked that he did not assess the City propertywith frontage assessment as it was across the street. Councilnan Lucchio then spoke on the section of the Government code which provides the City wi~h the power to omit itself from the assessment, stating that he could not see why the City could not omit itself from the assessment if the Laud Ccmpauywas. Further discussio~ then to~ place. 0ouncilmau Rocca appeared present at 5:37 P.M. and remained for the duration° City At~orney Lyons explained how the City could dispose of surplus property, which had been declared as surplus. Mayor Smith then explained to Councilman Rocca the prmvious discussions which had taken place ou the matter. Discusslou took place regarding the Laud Company being held on the matter of connecting to the lines and being charged for such connection and their heirs and assigns being held as well, which Ci~y Attorney Lyons explained. Mayor Snlth asked if there were any further protests. None were registered. Mayor Smith then declared the hearing closed, asking if there should be a motion regarding this. City Attorney Lyons said yes, there should be. City Attorney Lyons, at this time, read the ~etter of Mr. Wilsey to Councilmen Rocca and Gamleu, who were not present at the time it was originaLLy read. He also explained the previous discussion that had taken place prior to their a_-rival. A discussion then took place relative to the San Francisco Bridge Ccmpauy's present connection and if it was a legal one. Mr. Goss replied that the San Francisco Bridge Company could n~ continue their present connection to the sewer plant, that they would have to dis- continue when the industrial lines were ready for us, which would be iu about 60 days. CITY OWNED PROPFJT~Y DECLARED SURPLUS: RESOLUTION NO. 2125 AIRPORT BOULEVARD DISTRIC~/~R: RESOLUTION NO. 2126 ARTERIAL STOP SIGNS BRENTR00D AREA: HESOLUTION NO. 2127 OPPOSING ASSEMBLY BILL ~0. 519 ISSUANCE OF BUSINESS LICENSES: ~'o 7F N0. 3A: HEAVY EQUIPMENT CONMUR STREET EXTENSION: City Attorney Lyons remarked that the San Francisco Bridge Company should be given formal notice to disconnect within 60 days. City Attorney Lyons also explained, at this time~ to Councihen Rocca and Gamlen, Councilman Lucchio's thought of the City not being assessed on their pro~rty. He also explained regarding the City's disposal of property which was declared as surplus, giviD~ detailed explanation St to the steps involved. Ma~Smith ~hen asked Mr. Randlett for the record, how much of City property w~s included in the asaessmeut and the al~roximate depth. Mr. Ranilett replied, twelve acres. Mayor Smith then asked Mr. Randlett how many feet from Airport Road to which Mr. Randlett answered the area _~rom Airport Boulevard East to the slough but not beyond the slough shown on the map. Mayor Smith then asked if there were any other protesos. None were made. Mayor Smith then asked if it was the pleasure of the Council to close the hearing. Councilman Lucchio so moved that the hearing be closed, seconded by Councilman Rocca and regularly carried. At this time, ~yor Smith ~emarked that inasmuch as the City owned property was to be declared as surplus, should we not do so at this time. City Attorney Lyons remarked that it might be well to have the Council express themselves. Mayor Smith asked what the pleasure of the Council was. Councilman Rocca said he could n~t think of any municipal use for the property, which was to be declared as surplus. Councilman Lucchio asked, regarding the location of a corporation yard on the site. City Manager Mc Clung answered that it would be locating all the equipment at the extreme end of the City, but that where it now is situated, places it in the center of the City. Mayor Smith remarked that the point brought iu was for the Council to consider that it is surplus property and include as such in the assessment. City Attorney Lyons then remarked that it could be moved that the property of the City of South San .~_-h~aucisco included within the Airport Boulevard sewer district should bear 'tl~ assessment as proposed because such property is not being used for a public function; and as matters now appear there will not be a need for using such Property for public purposes, it being the ~elief of the City Council that such property should be declared surplus and sold for private use, at such time and under such terms as the City Council shall hereafter determine. Councilman Rocca so moved, seconded by Councilman Gam_l.en and regularly carried. City Attorney Lyons then remarked that he had prepared a resolution, in which the City Council ordered charges and modifications iu the boundry of the district benefited, mentioning the letter of Mr. Wilsey as a letter of protest. After a discussion, as to whether it vas or ~aan,,t ~a protest, City Attorney Lyons explained that it was a negative protest. Councilman Lucchio introduced "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of South San Francisco whereby said City Council orders changes and modifications iu the boundary of the district benefited ~y the construction and installation of a sanitary' sewer system." Councilman Gamleu asked City Attorney Lyons how the Laud Company's $25,000. could be connected to the assessment district. City Attorney Lyons explained the written contract to be formulated, as to usage of .property to the sewer also the fact that the agreement would be recorded. Council- man Gamlen then asked regarding the legality, to which City Attorney Lyons remarked that there was no question regarding the legality or validity. Councilman Gamleu then asked City Attorney Lyons if he would put this in writing to which he stated he would. Roll call vote was a follows: Ayes: CounciLman Andrew Rocca, Francis Lucchio, Richard Gamleu and Telford Smith. Absent: Councilman Cortesi (Councilman Cortesi left the meeting earlier) Noes: None. City Attorney Lyons then spoke on the notice concerning the filing of the assessment. After some discussion it was set for April ll, 1955 at 4:30 p.m. City AttorneyLyons next went on to the item of a Resolution concerning installation of stop signs. After brief discussion Councilman Gamlen introduced "A Resolution of the City Council of ~he City of South San Francisco with respect to the iust~llation of Stop Signs at Certain designated intersections." Roll call vote was as follows: As~s: Councilmen Andrew Rocca, Francis Lucchio, Richard Gamlen, Telford Smith. Noes: None. Absent: Emilio Cortesi. City Attorney Lyons then took up the one remaining resolution which had to do with opposition to Assembly Bill No. 571, concerniD~ issuance of Business Licenses. After brief discussion concerning the matter, Councilman Rocca introduced "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of South San Francisco urging opposition to a proposed measure pending before the California State Legislature, Assembly Division thereof: which would limit the powers of Cities to impose business license taxes." Roll call vote was as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Andrew Rocca, Francis Lucchio, Richard Gamlen, and Telford Smith. Noes: None. Absent: Emilio Corte~i. Director of P'~blic Works Louis Goss then took up the matter on the agenda of the Map of Rancho Buri-3Ari No. 3A. He explained the various type poles used for street lighting, which were wood, steel and alloy explaining the maintenance and upkeep. After brief discussion l~ad taken place, City Attorney Lyons rec~ended that apgroval of the map be given and a letter be placed on file regarding the installation of electric lighting standards as required by the city, fu_~her remarking that the light standards be held over to the time until Mr. Crawford Hill of the Pacific Gas and Electric Company ma4{es a report. However, he stated, that the map (~an' be accepted subject to a letter being posted by the subdivider to the effect that poles a_~e placed according to the City's specifications. He also spoke regarding the joint meeting of the P. G. & E. Co, the City Council and the Planning Commission, which had been requested by the P. G. & E. Co. Councilman Rocca then moved, seconded by Councilman Gsmtlen and regularly carried that acceptance of the map of Rancho Buri-Buri No. ~A be approved~ subject to a letter being posted by the subdivider, agreeing to the installation of the light standards according to the specifications of the City of South San Francisco and approval of the Director of Public Works. The next item on the agenda concerned the matter of Heavy Equipment Operator. City Manager Mc Clung explained, having spoken toM rs. Ottenfield today who reported that the oral examin- ation for the position was to be given tonight and that this could be ready for the meeting of April 4, 1955. Next taken up '~as the matter of Conmmr Street extension, brought up by Mr. Luther Berry, at the previous night's meeting. City Manager Mc Clung remarked that Mr. Berry stated he had not received any notice, however, a letter had been written to his attorney. Mayor Smith requested that the minutes show that a report was made on the matter and that Mr. Berry's Attorney was present and no mention was made regarding having received a letter dated February 11, 1955. Mayor Smith also suggested that a letter be sent to ~. Berry advising that a letter was sent to his counsel. STOP AND GO SIGNALS AIRPORT BLVD AND GRAND Discussion then took place regardin~ the installation of stop and go signals for Airport Boulevard a~d Grand Avenue. City Attorney Lyons remarked that plans and specifications as prepared by Mr. Goss could be approved and then a notice published in the paper. After an explanation had been given by Mr. Goss regarding the modifications in the plans to install push buttons for pedestrians to cross Airport Boulevard which wo~ld increase the estimate $600., it wsm moved by Councilman Rocca, seconded by Counci~l~n Lucchio and regularly carried that the matter be held over to the time when more information was available by Mr. Goss. There bein~ no further business, Councilman Lmcchio moved, seconded by Councilman Rocca and regularly carried that the meeting be adjourned until 4:30 P. M. March 28, 1955. Time of adjournment, 6:56 p.m. Respectfully submitted: City clerk