Laserfiche WebLink
'T <br />14 <br />217 <br />regular meeting thereof held on the 4th Day of February, 1946, by the fol- <br />lowing vote: 1 <br />.AYES and in favor of the passage and adoption of the foregoing resolu- <br />tion: Councilmen: C. C. ARMSTRONG, C. A. BRITSCHGI, E. A. FLETCHER; F. D. <br />GRANGER, G. W. MCNULTY and W. W. HILTON. <br />NOES and against the passage and adoption of the foregoing Resolution: <br />Councilmen: NONE. <br />ABSENT: Councilmen:. H. F.'ANDERSON <br />W..W. HILTON <br />Mayor of the dity of Redwood City. <br />ATTEST: <br />R. S. DODGE <br />Clerk of the City of Redwood City <br />• I <br />I hereby approve the foregoing Resolution this 4th day of February, j <br />1946. t <br />W. W. HILTON <br />M§.yor of the'City of Redwood City. <br />City Attorney McCarthy advised that he had prepared an ordinance repealing <br />ordinance passed in 1942 which permitted the raising of chickens within <br />twenty-five feet of a dwelling house. He also provided in the ordinance <br />that no chickens or rabbits shall be raised in the first residental area. <br />i He advised that it is possible to postpone the effective date of an ordi- <br />nance beyond the thirty day period after enactment. Councilman Armstrong <br />i <br />suggested the effective date be set at May 31, however, the majority of the <br />l_ Council was of the opinion this was too far in advance and were in favor of <br />s <br />setting it as April 30. Councilman Armstrong offered introduction of the <br />ordinance repealing raising of chickens within 25 feet of a dwelling and <br />prohibiting the raising of chickens.in the first residential district. The <br />z motion was seconded by Councilman Fletcher and passed unanimously. Included <br />,4 <br />t in the motion was the provision that the effective date of this ordinance <br />3 <br />be set as April 30, 1946. q <br />City Manager Blom reported that in company with Bui1d'ing Inspector Duncan and <br />Mr. Clair Stilliman he inspected smoke houses at Sunnyvale and San Jose. He <br />stated that neither of these smoke houses are -located near residences, how- <br />ever, he believed that after inspecting these two smoke houses it would-be <br />i <br />possible to operate one without creating a nuisance to the adjoining area. <br />It was his opinion that it depends entirely on the manner in which it is <br />operated. It was his recommendation that If Mr. Silliman presents a plan <br />which meets with the approval of the Building Inspector and the City Manager <br />he be granted the permit to operate a smoke house with the understanding <br />that the Health Department keep a close watch on the operation with the idea <br />that at any time it is objectionable it will be removed. Councilman Granger <br />moved, seconded by Councilman Britechgi, that the permit be granted subject <br />to the plans of the smoke house being submitted to the Building Inspector <br />I <br />and that an agreement be signed by Mr. Silliman that he will remove the <br />smoke house if in the opinion of the Building Inspector, Health Department <br />