Minutes 1946 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

� 272 would materially impair the property witriout -due procesa of law... He reiter- ated Mr,.3�orrissey's argument in regard to the ownership of ti4lnklebleck 8treet � by tne Southern Pacific Company and to the plans whioh the rallroad oompany � _ � has Yor tne contemplated additional Yacilities to be inetalled in Redwood a � � City. He also stated that if the Southern Pacific ehould move its e.tation, � the need for the aetbaok to alleviate traffic would not be neceseary. He also queetioned wrietner a euit oF aondemnation could be Yiled againet the 1 Southern Paoifio to gain title to tnie etreet inasmuch ae a municipe.lity aannot file a condemnation euit against another utility. Mr. Milton Hinda appeared and explained that his underetandin� of the ori- ginal plan did not include cnanging or establiehing setback lines on 1 9Pinklebleck 3treet but only on Oalifornia and James. He believed that a ten Yoot eetback should be establiehed on James Avenue and Califorrila 9treet to allow the street to open ug for future bueiness and to relieve the traffiC on Broadwa.y, It was his opinion that Miss Reid ehould be compeneated for any detriment to her property.and asked that the Council come to a definite decieion in the matter, • Couneilman Armstrong asked what loss Misa Reid would sustain by eetablieh- ing the proposed aetback line. Qity Attorney McOarthy replied that he did not believe there was a detriment to Mies Reid inasmuch as ahe does not have ` plane for the immediate conetruction of a building and no plans.to use the property. He said the city could take the whole of her lot at e, fair prioe or oompensate her Por the area taken. He eaid it might be more expedient ' to.take the whole lot inaemuoh as there is.to be ten Peet taken on both sides of the lot, Mr. 0'Seefe again on the grounds that it would be taking property without due procese of law, Qouncilman Sritschgi moned that the.recommendation of the Planning Oommiseion regarding the se,tb�,ok lines on James Anenue, Winklebleak Street a.nd CaliYornia 5treet be deaied, seconded by 0ouncilman Armstrong, Under the queation,.Councilman Anderson eaid he would vote against this motion but would vote in favor of one for further study of the matter, Councilman Britschgi explained it was his in- � tention that the Planning Commiasion give the matter further atudy,_ Motion passed unanimously, Qounoilman Granger moved, seoonded by Councilman Anderson, that the matter be referred back to tne Planning Commission for further study and they be eupplied with the portion of the minutes in re- gard to this subject. Under the question, Councilman MoNulty aeked if this ' matter oould not be held over unt11 the master plan wae suomitted. Thie was not beliened to be wiee, hovuever, as most of the councilmen were of the opinion that some change should be made in the setbauk on James Avenue ae soon as possible. Counoilman Britschgi believed the Southern Pacific Oompa ny ' ehould be contacted in regard to their future plans for installing neR tracke moving of the station, ete. Motion pas�ed unanimo,uslq. City Attorney McGarthy asked if the Council desired recommendation to be reached in re- gard to tne setback linea on California and James Avenue and that the north side of VPinklebleck Street was not to be changed. Mayor Hilton advised thie was correct, �