CC MIN 1969 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

(1(79 Alternatives to full creek improvements were suggested and discussed . Councilman Keckley moved to approve City Manager ' s recommendation to proceed with pre - liminary engineering studies for this section of creek and report back including study on feasibility of eliminating improvements above Fernside , seconded by Council - man Henderson . Councilman Rosselli moved to amend motion to exempt area north of Fernside from improvement proposal , seconded by Councilman Henderson on basis that every con - sideration will be made , but feels motion premature and will oppose motion on the vote , but willing to bring the amendment to a vote . William H . Royer , 1047 Whipple , supported remarks of Councilman Rosselli in that Council did assure property owners in this section at time of hearings on bond issue boundaries were set up that consideration would be given to modifying the improvements . Councilman Arnett felt burden of proof is placed on the Consulting Engineers to prove that improvements needed or not needed . Director of Public Works advised it was thought true that area downstream will not be adversely affected if area upstream is not improved , but as indicated there are areas upstream that do show evidence of erosion and believe this fact would support evidence for improvements . Motion on amendment lost on roll call vote , Councilmen Arnett , Henderson , Keckley , Weymouth and Mayor Bury voting no , Councilman Rosselli voting yes , Councilman Petersen being noted absent . Main motion reread and carried , stating in effect authorization to proceed with studies for this area toward planning improvements , one including possibility of placing pipe in this area , and other possibility of eliminating section above Fernside from improvements , Councilman Rosselli abstaining because of lack of full information , Councilman Petersen being noted absent , on roll call vote . ( MINUTE ORDER #69 -213 ) Stulsaft Branch ( Boundary comprising Goodwin Avenue , Carson Street , Connecticut To Foothill , etc . ) Director of Public Works advised there had been a 63% protest on improvements , 26% favoring improvements , and no opinion received from 11% , and illustrated on chart how lots spaced . He advised it was similar to other area in that insufficient information makes it impossible to recommend a definite design on whether improve - ments should consist of piping , or box culverts . It was agreed this section should also be considered for exclusion from improvements but need for study to be made before any recommendation can be made . It was also noted there was evidence of erosion in this area and of construction of retaining walls by private parties , in an endeavor to stop erosion . It was also pointed out any improvements constructed should be of adequate size and design for a 50 year storm , and spot improvements would involve maintenance problems referred to earlier . ,e." fi" to