Laserfiche WebLink
` -OLD BUSINESS (Cont'd.); <br />1 <br />)"':2. Los .:Altos School District - Request for Acceptance of Gardner: <br />Bullis Sewer Line. <br />After a study by the City Attorney and agreement by the.County <br />Council and...the=Los-Altos School District to amend the accept- <br />ance agreement to include the phrase "at least", the City <br />Attorney recommended the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to - <br />execute the 'agreement for acceptance of the Gardner Bullis <br />Sewer Line. <br />ACTION: <br />That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized <br />to execute the agreement of acceptance of the <br />Gardner Bullis Sewer Line, in accordance with <br />Exhibit "A", dated August 1, 1962. <br />MOTION: Bowler; SECOND: Henley; VOTE:. Passed unanimously. <br />NEW BUSINESS: - <br />l. Wils Foster - Status of Lot. <br />The .City .Clerk read a letter dated June 22, 1964, from <br />Fred W. Armstrong, attorney representing Mr. Foster, requesting <br />I <br />Council action as to the official status of Mr. Foster's lot <br />since the State has reduced his lot below the minimum acre lot <br />size by a fee "take" in order to widen El Monte Road. <br />The City Attorney recommended Alternative 3 of Mr. Armstrong's <br />letter since the Council cannot say what rights are in the <br />future due to unforseeable changes of agencies and bodies <br />of. the, Town. <br />Mr. Foster commented it was his understanding that thePlanning <br />Commission .and City Council agreed to the improvements and <br />"take" of certain strips of land and all agreements were based <br />on the contingency he had abuilding site'. After considerable <br />expense and effort spent on his home and landscaping, Mr. <br />Foster urged the approval of his building site. <br />. <br />It was the judgment of the Council that Ordinance No. 99 pro- <br />vides the proper procedure for granting approval of a building <br />site. <br />.Due to July 30th trial date set by the State, it was the <br />opinion of the Council that this matter could be :referred to <br />the Planning Commission to be taken up at its July 13t meeting. <br />-2- <br />