My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
BOOK 20_1945-05-21 to 1946-09-03
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Minutes
>
1945 to 1946 Book 20
>
BOOK 20_1945-05-21 to 1946-09-03
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/12/2017 1:35:34 PM
Creation date
10/12/2017 1:18:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
City Council
Date
5/21/1945
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.
/
504
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
Councilman Granger reported that there was no report from the sign committee and <br />asked that the matter either be placed on the agenda for the next meeting or <br />jl tabled until such time as a report is available. It was agreed to table the <br />matter until such time as the committee can bring.in a report. <br />r; <br />City Manager Mead advised that.a report had been received from the Traffic Study <br />Committee in regard to unlimited parking zone in front of 719 Winslow Street <br />and asked that it be placed on the agenda for the next meeting. Councilman <br />Britschgi asked in regard to loading zone whether or not the Purity Store on <br />r ' Marshall Street eet could not be asked to load from their own parking lot. At <br />present they are loading in front of their store and obstructing traffic. City <br />Manager Mead advised'he would contact them and ask them to unload or load from <br />their own parking lot. Councilman Armstrong moved, seconded by Councilman <br />McNulty,_ that the matter of a loading zone at 719 Winslow Street be carried on <br />the agenda for a report from the Traffic Study Committee. Motion passed unani- <br />mously. <br />City Manager Mead'reported on the condition of the sidewalks on Avondale Avenue and <br />adjacent territory. He presented a map of the area with legend showing the con- <br />dition of the sidewalks. City Attorney McCarthy advised that the proper proce- <br />dure to follow would.b e to adopt a resolution of intention requiring the building <br />of sidewalks where there are none and the repairing of sidewalks where they are <br />' defective. Councilman Granger believed the property owners "should be notified <br />of the city's intention before adopting the resolution. Councilman Armstrong <br />moved that the proper city officials be instructed to send a communication to <br />r <br />the property owners in the area outlined on the map notifying them that their <br />sidewalk is in an unsatisfactory condition or that there is no sidewalk and if the <br />condition is not remedied the Council intends to take action to repair the side- <br />walk or put in new ones at their expense. Councilman Anderson seconded the mo- <br />tion if there were included that the sidewalks must comply with city specifications: <br />Councilman Armstrong accepted the amendment. Councilman McNulty was of the.opinion <br />that only the sidewalks which were defective should be repaired and that new side- <br />walks should not be required in which opinion Councilman Granger concurred. City <br />Attorney McCarthy advised that under the act governing such proceedings the street <br />' superintendent is permitted to do the work and not let a contract. The proceedings <br />are the same in all other respects. The motion passed with Councilman Granger <br />voting in the negative for the reason that he,did not believe the same letter should <br />be written to all the property owners in the area and that only the complaint should <br />be remedied at this time. <br />The introduction of the 1945-46 salary ordinance was next brought up for discussion. <br />Councilman Anderson moved introduction of the ordinance, seconded by Councilman <br />Britschgi. Under the question, Councilman Granger opposed the ordinance, be- <br />f• <br />31 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.