My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
CC MIN 1956
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Minutes
>
1956
>
CC MIN 1956
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2017 1:34:09 PM
Creation date
7/25/2016 10:19:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
City Council
Date
1/3/1956
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
339
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
289 <br />would be impossible for him to attend tonights meeting and asked for a postponement of one week. Wayne <br />Millington, acting for Mr. Dell'Ergo who was the attorney for Mr. Knecht and Mr. Taylor, asked that this be <br />delayed for two weeks for further consideration and study. Councilman Spillers moved that this be carried <br />on the agenda for two weeks, seconded by Councilman Weiss. Councilman Britschgi asked if Mr. Dell'Ergo, <br />Mr. Wattenburg, the prople an Kansas Street and Mr. Guida would get together and hold -a meeting and discuss <br />this matter sometime before this matter comes up before the Council. The motion carried. The Mayor asked <br />r that Mr. Millington set a date. Mr. Millington asked all those present to meet him in the loby and they <br />. would decide on a date. <br />COUNCILMAN STOUT REPORT REGARDING BRANCH LIBRARY. Councilman Stout reported that the plans have not been <br />corrected and Building Inspeoctor Kreiss has not had time to consider the plans. Councilman Stout moved <br />R"" <br />to carry this on the agenda for two weeks, seconded by Councilman Britschgi and carried. <br />CITY MANAGER REPORT REGARDING PRESENT STATUS PROPOSED ANNEXATION EMERALD LAKE AREA. The following is a summary <br />of the present status of the proposed annexation of Emerald Lake area as requested by the City Council: <br />The following is a summary of the present status of the proposed annexation of the Emerald <br />Lake area as requested by the City Council. <br />On March 120 1956, the Council received a Petition for Consent to the Commencement of <br />of Annexation Proceedings signed by 91 residents of the Emerald Lake area, which was referred <br />to the Planning Commission. On April 30, 1956s, the Council received a communication from the <br />Planning Commission approving the proposed annexation. There was also received a cammun - <br />cation from eight persons requesting exclusion from the proposed area. <br />Also, on April 30, 1956, the Council will recall, the City Engineer presented a compre- <br />hensive report, including an illustrated map of the above area. While the City Engineer stated that <br />a portion of the above area, which was indicated on the map, could be served from the <br />existing sewer system, it was estimated that it would cost between $50,000 and $60,000 to <br />construct an interceptor sewer for the remaining portion. This would be in addition to the <br />normal assessment for sewer laterals, in the event the total area were to be annexed. <br />He also estimated that the cost of providing adequate water supply, including pumping <br />stations, supplymains and reservoirs, would call for an expenditure of at least $180,000, <br />in addition to the distribution lines, which would normal3y be assessed to the property <br />{ owners. <br />11r�w <br />On May 7, 1956s, the Council instructed the City Engineer to prepare a boundary descrip- <br />tion and map of the area that can be served by the existing sewer system, and which is <br />roughly bounded by Jefferson Avenue, Lakeview Way, Oak Knoll Krive, and`the present City <br />limits. <br />The City Engineer also advises that the boundary description has been completed, and that <br />the map will be ready by August 15, 1956• <br />While the above is a brief summary of office records, since the City Engineer states <br />that a very substantial expenditure must be made for pumping stations, supply mains and <br />reservoirs, in addition to the construction of distribution water lines normally assessed to <br />property owners, it would seem that some method of financeing these major items aunt <br />necessaryily be developed before initiating annexation proceedings. <br />Respectfully submitted, <br />E. E. ROLISON, City Manager <br />The Mayor stated that he asked for this report so the Council could show the people that the Council has <br />not lost contact of this project. He asked that a xopy be made for the press and also for each of the <br />.,, Councilmen. <br />LW PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL D. C. MOHR APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE TO ALLON REDUCED REAR YARD SETBACK <br />RANGING FROM EIGHT TO TWENTY-THREE FEET INSTEAD OF TWENTY FEET (423 EATON AVENUE). The Commission feels <br />that there will be a sufficient average rear and side yard to fulfill the purposes of yard requirements. <br />There were no protests at the publichearing. Councilman Britschgi offered Resolution No. 2077 and moved <br />adoption, seconded by Councilman Spillers. Fire Chief Lodi stated he had no objections to this variance, <br />after which the motion carried on roll call. <br />ADOPTION QF RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING RULES AND REGULATIONS VETERANS MEMORIAL BUILDING. Cbmeilman,Spillers <br />offered RESOLUTION 2078.RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR VETERANS MEMORIAL BUILDING and moved its adoption. <br />Councilman. Granger wanted to know if the resolution gives consideration to who could make use of this build- <br />ing. This brought on a very lengtby discussion especially with regard to what and who constituted a Veteran <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.