Minutes 1946 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

� . .. . ivai a ten Yoot setoack iine oe estiao3laned on .the.north.aide _of.James Ave- `+ � nue east of E1 Qamino Real, on the easterly side of California S.treet, on both sidee of �4inklebleck 3treet and on tae weat side of the driveway Yrom Broadway to Winklebleok Street. Mayor Hilton questioned the setback on both sides of �4lnklebleck Street, hie opinion being that the originl in- tent wae to include in the setbaok ahange only that propertq around the ' 3outhern PaolPic property. He also questioned the setbaok not being on botn sidee of California Street, City Attorney McCarthy advised that it was impractioal.to widen the weat eide oY California Street because of the theatre and Tribune buildinga. He also pointed out that there wae very ' little traffic on that portion of tue etreet inasmuch as it is possible to turn only right on to the highvray. Mayor Hilton aeked the etatus of YPinklebleek Street eaet oP Oalifornia Street. Oity Attorney MaCarthy advised that the 3outhern Pacific Qompany owne the property and that it is given to the citq on a lease basis, He said the city could.00ndemn the property for a public street if neceasary. Trie 3outhern Pacific Companq � has indicated that they will make no enange.in the property until theq add new traaka, etc., at whioh time it might be neceasarp to move the etation back, Mr. Bray of the Southern.Pacific Companq had inquired of�-the City Attorney what the effaot Rould be on the property if the eetback were � changed. He aas adviaed that the Planning Oommission wiehed to prevent the erectlon oY buildinge on that.part oY the block because it would add to the cost of acquisition if the oitq wanted to widen the etreet. ' Mr. W. H. Morriseey,attornep, appeared in behalf of hie client, A, B. Caeatnam who ovrna propertq on the north side of YPinklebleok Street. VPhen tne city wa.s planning to put in Winklebleok 8treet, Mr. aheatham deeded ten teet to the oity and agreed to pay one-half oi the street work. It was his underetanding that he aould build storee tacing on 9Yinklebleok Street. Mr. Morrissey pointed out that i! an ad8ltional ten Yeet were taken ofY Mr, Oheathem�8 property in the form oY a setbaok, it would not leave him • enough property to build on. He aleo stressed the fact tha.t the aity doea not have title to Winklebleck Street°and tha.t the Southern Pacific Company oan aancel the present lease on thirty days notiae if it wiehed to use part oi this etreet for railroad Yacilities: He stated that if the oitq put a setbaok on this etreet, it would work aa injuetice on Mr. Oheatham as it ' ` would deprive hiro of the uee of hie property eoen though the oity did not take adnantage of tne set�baok. Councilman Armetron� asked the width oY Oalifornia Street from Broadwaq to Winklebleck Street and the width oi �Pinklebleck. 8treet Superintendent Yiinter advised that both the streete 1 were fifty feet wide. It wae the general oonseneus oY.the Council that the north side of Winklebleok Street shou].d not be sub�ect to the setbaok onange. Mr. Jae. T. 0'$eefe, Jr., attorney, appeared�in behalf oi his client, Mise Lea Reid. Mies Reid owns a triangular piece of,property at the corner of James and California 56� x 150'. He stated that 1f ten feet were taken off • thia piece of property on James Avenue and also on California Avenue, it `