Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> Vice Mayor Hartnett summarized the Five-Year Budget Projection and Council's <br /> comments, and determined there was consensus for the recommended budget guidelines <br /> as presented to the Council, including Item VII, the HSF A recommended budget. <br /> MIS: SANFILIPOIBUCHAN TO APPROVE THE SUGGESTED LIST OF <br /> BUDGET AR Y GUIDELINES TO ASSIST STAFF IN DEVELOPING A BUDGET <br /> THAT WILL MEET THE POLICY DIRECTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL. <br /> CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOICE VOTE: <br /> A YES: COUNCILMEMBERS BUCHAN, HOWARD, LA BERGE, <br /> SANFILIPO AND VICE MAYOR HARTNETT <br /> NOES: COUNCIL WOMAN STEINFELD <br /> MINUTE ORDER NO. 94-055 <br /> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br /> Vice Mayor Hartnett declared a recess at 9:12 P.M. <br /> Meeting reconvened at 9:22 P.M. <br /> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br /> B. Railroad Grade Separation Project Updates (105) <br /> REPORT: City Engineer, March 6, 1995 <br /> l. JEFFERSON A VENUE GRADE SEP ARA TION <br /> City Engineer Luck and Project Engineer Lee presented the staff report, and advised <br /> that the anticipated increase of CalTrain trips between San Jose and San Francisco has <br /> convinced the San Mateo County Transportation Authority and the State Transportation <br /> Commission to fund grade separations at various grade crossings along the peninsula. <br /> Safety is the primary justification for these railroad overpasses and reducing congestion <br /> is the other most important motivating factor. <br /> Project Engineer Lee discussed the proposed Jefferson grade separation first and <br /> showed architectural renderings and a model of the railroad overpass. Project Engineer <br /> Lee used overheads to point out certain engineering aspects and clearances of the <br /> overpass, pedestrian walkways, wheelchair and disabled accessibility, detours during <br /> construction, taking of some property, where the shoofly would be, and adjacent <br /> property and traffic impacts. Meetings with the Task Force and time lines for <br /> construction were also discussed, as well as the process requiring Council approval. <br /> In response to Council questions, Project Engineer Lee stated that SMCT A and SCTC <br /> were funding this $11 million project, and PG & E and Pacific Telephone were paying <br /> for the cost of relocating their own equipment. <br /> MINUTE BOOK NO. 53 <br /> Special Council Meeting Minutes Page No. 089 <br /> March 6, 1995 <br /> Page 5 <br /> -" <br />