CC MIN 1956 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

I R1 as specified in the letter (Maple and Cedar Streets). Motion carried. Councilman Granger spoke on the subject of the removal of gates as recommended by the Southern Pacific Company several years ago. Councilman Granger moved that the City favors the gates being installed as recommended but not at the expense to the City, seconded by Councilman Spillers. Councilman Herkner stated that some of the crossings are dangerous, however, he was of the opinion that crossings should be taken up at the rate of at least two a year. The crossings that have never had gates are the dangerous crossings. �rrr There was a lengthy discussion as to which gates had been removed, and also the gates that had been removed and replaced. Councilman Weiss was of the opinion that a letter should be written to the Utilities Commission establishing a policy. Councilman Weiss asked if Councilman Granger would go along on the program on the five crossings and negotiate on the last two. The crossings at Spruce, Cedar and Chestnut are the crossings which have never had gates. Councilman Weiss made a substitute motion by responding to the letter and err changing the priority to Chestnut, Spruce, Broadway and Main, Jefferson and Maple to receive final priority. The.substitute motion lost for lack of a second. Mayor Royer was of the opinion that a letter should be written going along with the project with the exception that since Jefferson and Maple originally had gates which were removed at the request of the Southern Pacific Company that the City does not feel -that they should participate in the cost of re -installing them, and Broadway to be placed last on the list. This was folloed by discussion after which Councilman Granger changed his motion to refer this matter to the Traffic Fact Finding Committee with the thought that gates be installed at the crossings that have never had gates, seconded by Councilman Spillers who requested a report back in two weeks. Motion carried. RESOLUTION COMMENDING BIRGE CLARK FOR HIS WORK IN REGARD TO THE VETERANS MEMORIAL BUILDING., Councilman Spillers offered RESOLUTION 2045 and moved its adoption, seconded by Councilman Herkner and carried on roll call, Councilman Britschgi being noted absent. one" COMMUNICATION FROM ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING FARM HILL ADDITION NO. 1 A NNEXATION. The Clerk read the 6" letter wherein Mr. Lebsack stated that this area had been approved by the Boundary Commission of the County of San Mateo and it is now in order for the Council to consider this annexation. It was his suggestion that this matter be referred to the Planning Commission for the recommendation provided in Resolution 1979 (th sum of $75.00 per building site was set at the fair value of municipal improvements already paid for by City Taxpayers, attributable to the property proposed to be annexed, and the Council d6clared a policy of referring all requests for annexation to the Planning Commission for a recommendation to the Council as to the number of building sites in any area proposed for annexation) so that they may report back to the Council in time for the June 18, 1956, Council meeting. Councilman Weiss did -not believe that this would give the Planning Commission enough time to make a complete study. Councilman Weiss moved that instead of June 18th that it be -extended to the third meeting in August (August 30th), seconded by Councilman Granger. This was followed by discussion with regard to how ow" soon this fee should be paid. The City Attorney said they should not wait for the final map. The motion carried. It was announced that this would be the last Council meeting before the hearing on the Woodside annexation boundaries. Councilman Herkner moved that the City Attorney represent the City in registering the City's protests Friday at 10:00 A. M., seconded by Councilman Spillers. City Attorney Currie was of the opinion mom that some members of the Council should be present to concur in the protest. Motion carried. bmo CLAIM FOR DAMAGES IN THE SUME OF $43,500.00 IS FILED BY PRICE BUILDING SPECIALTIES City Attorney Currie stated that the suit had been dismissed. The Council should go on record as denying the claim. Councilman Spillers so moved, seconded by Councilman Weiss and carried. Councilman Granger reported that he had checked into the matter of Union Cemetery. He checked the budget and found that out of the $2,000 which was appropriated that there was still a balance of $136.00. He moved that a survey be made of the cemetery by the proper official with regard to property fencing the entire