|
moved that recommendation be accepted,, seconded by Councilman Royer and carried.
<br />R. J. ROMAN, MANAGER, SAN MATEO PATROL SE$VICE, APPEARED AND STATED AS'IhHAD e had
<br />GESTED A SURVEY BE TAKEN TO SEE IF THERE.WAS A DEMAND FOR HIS SERVICE B�teetd
<br />a few merchants in each section of the City. About 85% of those contacted were rotor,
<br />+asted in patrolling of property and closing up at night. The Mayor said he had checked
<br />this type of service in S.F. and. the people up there felt they had better service thea
<br />the Police Dept. offered in S. F. City Atty. Currie advised that operations of this seiv
<br />vice mould be regulated but could not be denied. Councilman Jones moved license be
<br />ed on revocable yearly basis, including the recommendations in the Chiefs s letter great:
<br />and service not to extend into residential areas, seconded by Councilman Morgan, M,
<br />Roman stated they did not solicit any service in residential areas except where
<br />were away on vacation. Chief Wood stated this came under s pecial detailand he would be
<br />required to furnish the Police Dept. with a schedule of his work. Motion carried,
<br />TOM MC LAIN, 127 ST. FRANCIS, APPEARED IN RE TO DELAY ON PROJECT OF ST, FRANCIS ypRD;
<br />ING AND SAPPHIRE. Every one in the District was greatly inconvienced and handicapped
<br />with the delay. A strip of 16 or 18 concrete could be used for walking except where
<br />lumber was stacked on it. There were -about 40 children in the neighborhood and it was
<br />felt the mud and ddeep water holes were dangerous, but small children could not be
<br />kept inside all day. City Eng. was questioned as to how long the d elay would Contin.
<br />ue. He stated this was an impossible question to answer,but the contractor had been
<br />given 60 working days to complete the job and only working days could be charged to the
<br />job. He, could not approve of work if the contractor continued in the mud, unless the
<br />people were willing to take the consequences. On question, Mr. Jain stated the contras.
<br />for had not progressed as quickly as he could on the job; he could have started sooner
<br />and progressed faster before the rains. City Eng. Igad no objections to the qualityof
<br />the work, but objected. to the delays. There was no shortage of materials or supplies
<br />of any Bind to hmld up the progress of the work. Mr. Cooper, 334 Sapphire, protested as
<br />he had a large family and it meant many trips for supplies for the household and he astr
<br />for some temporary relief on roadway, as house, porch and garage was tracked withmud,
<br />Mr. Paul Jarvis, 211 St. Francis, Roger Fallen, 220 St. Francis and Mr. Kniepp,401
<br />Sapphire also appeared and voiced their dissatisfaction with the progress of the job,
<br />Mr. McLain thanked the council for their courtesy and wished the penalty would be de•
<br />manded of the contractor inan effort to get the work done. Mayor Britschgi statedhe
<br />was of the opinion future contracts should be denied L. C. Smith Co. due to the many de•
<br />lays experienced in this and other contracts. Councilman Spillers pointed out thatonil
<br />two contractors were bidding on projects on the Penindula and suggested people getothar
<br />contractors interested. Councilman Royer moved that City Clerk be instructed to write
<br />L. C. Smith that the job had not progressed as rapidly as expected and refer to the pea•
<br />alty on bond and City Engineers statement, seconded by Councilman Granger and carried,
<br />Under the following discussion on Whipple Ave. motion was made and carried and it in.
<br />cluded chat letter to L. C. Smith be registered with return receipt requested.
<br />CITY
<br />LAND
<br />were
<br />wrote:
<br />for e
<br />for'•
<br />detea
<br />ess°
<br />were
<br />the i
<br />ditic
<br />f orSE
<br />Mr.
<br />awe"
<br />RgDYIt
<br />1
<br />1
<br />PROTESTS ON WHIPPLE AVENUE PROJECT. Mr. Nugent, Circlr Road, appeared and objected to
<br />water doer n Circle and Whipple since the hospital was constructed. City crew had gone
<br />out and given some relief. Residents wanted to know what assurance they would have that
<br />this would not recur. City Engineer stated that contractor had cut off the old drains
<br />on. Whipple Ave. but had not provided temporary drainage to take care of the water until
<br />new drainage system had been installed. Upon questioning as to responsibility City Atty
<br />felt that the contractor was directly responsible to the people, and he could be liable `
<br />for suit if damage was caused to their property by his negligence, which would have
<br />to be determined. The natural course of drainage was down Circle Road and Mr. Jain state:
<br />this could not be diverted and if the forms had been removed from manhole under con- '
<br />struction, much of the water woul.d,have gone down the storm drain. Councilman Royer thott.
<br />this w as an exceptional year in re to the rain, but moved that L. C. Smith be notified
<br />that he may be liable for suit and that it be suggested to him that he endeavor to make
<br />arrangements so that people can get in and out from their homes. Motion secondedby
<br />Councilman Granger and carried. Mrs. Vera Burtz 136 Circle Road and Mr. Walter Huggins
<br />of 102 Circle Rd. stated their objections to the water from hospital grounds draining
<br />down Circle Road. Tom Hopkins, 112 Circle, appeared and asked what could be done'toal•
<br />leviate the condition. He s ais there were no complaints about any possible cost, and be
<br />thought Mr. Smith should be notified that they expect some relief. Mayor Britschgi
<br />thought the City Engineer and contractor, L. C. Smith would get together and work out
<br />something to.remedy the situation.. Councilman Granger moved that the City Clerk be Ins-
<br />tructed to write a letter in both this case and the one on St.Francis, Harding WSW
<br />phire notifying L. C. Smith of their action referringto the penaltyon bond, and send
<br />the letter registered requesting return receipt. Moton seconed by ouncilmanRoYe?
<br />and carried.
<br />PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO REVALUATION OF CITY'S STREET LIGHTING SYSTEM. The Co6notj had
<br />requested City Clerk Pro -Tem Miller to write PG&E and request information as to whether
<br />or not they were interested in acquisition of the City's street lighting system, and if
<br />they would be willing to submit an up to date survey and appraisel at no cost to the
<br />City for the City's consideration. This had been done and the PG&E had replied on Nom
<br />28th that they were interested and were willing to bring their former inventory up to
<br />date and to revaluate it in accordance with existing prices without cost to the City -
<br />They asked that the City let them know when they wished such an appraisal made and
<br />also justv'hat portions of 'bhe overhead s ste
<br />PVOO
<br />posal. Councilman Granger moved this be startedhimmediatelyd be sand rthatnthey der sgiv uch a s theft
<br />findings on overhead system, eliminating electroliers in various parts of the us
<br />Motion was seconded b C City
<br />y Councilman Royer and carried
<br />TRAFFIC FACT FINDINGlocations
<br />COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION RELOCATION BICYCLE RACKS. Sketch attached
<br />showing locations on Broadway at seven points using one car space at each locations
<br />Caau'
<br />oilman Morgan moved approval of recommendation seconded by Councilman SP his
<br />Committee recommended that this be considered at the time for the next budget,sbttThe
<br />did not obligate the Council to put in the racks according to Adm. Asst. Miller. mot -01
<br />CARPI
<br />DISAN
<br />TRAFI
<br />D,
<br />MRS,
<br />R01
<br />QDE4,
<br />
|