Laserfiche WebLink
-3- <br />2. Tatter of Land use. Proper future use of land and the <br />established previous use of land should be considered. <br />the Railroad is est ablislaed. <br />3. Matter of injury to property owners or cost to the State <br />of acquiring the right of way. <br />4. The esthetic value. The route through the hills is not <br />desireable because of the scarring of the hills and spoil- <br />ing of the landscape, <br />5. The cost of the Freeway. <br />The State Highway Department is opposed to the "B -C" route and <br />opposition to this route has been expressed by Stanford University, <br />by the City of Los !altos, and the Board of Supervisors of the <br />County of Santa Clara. The "C" route is recommended by the State. <br />The Town must state its views for a plan, the most efficient plan <br />being where it will do the least injury to property owners. <br />Comments and opinions were expressed regarding the reports of the <br />Freeway Committee and the Planning Commission. <br />It was suggested that the comments of Mr. Piellquist and the report <br />of the ?Tanning Commission should be considered in preference to <br />the report of the Freeway.Committee. <br />It was stated that the Freeway Committee's report was not impartial. <br />The Mayor stated that the Committee had brought in the recommend- <br />ation as instructed. <br />Opinions were expressed regarding just what stand the Council <br />should take. <br />It was noted that the proposed "C -b" route recommended by the <br />Freeway Ccmmittee and the proposed "B -C" route recommended by the <br />Planning Commission were two different routes. <br />Mr. Kinkead was asked to secure more data regarding the "B -C" route. <br />The Mayor stated that he would like the Council to consider the <br />report of the Planning Commission and. evaluate the opinions and <br />comments of the townspeople before making any decision. He stated <br />that the Town had gone record as opposing the "C" route a year ago. <br />Councilman Treat and Mr. William Geer were appointed to prepare <br />the presentation for the hearing on be held with the Highway Com- <br />mission on F"ay 71b, 1958, and to represent the Town at this hearing. <br />Suggestion was made teat Mr. Kinkead be appointed to serve on the <br />Committee. P'_r. Kinkead declined. <br />4 Councilman Clayton stated that the Town, in opposing the "C" route, <br />should be able to point out the disadvantages, and that the de- <br />cision should lay the ground work for a bargaining position. <br />5-1-58 <br />