BOOK 26_1955-11-28 to 1957-06-17

Browse Search

O -A- 88 Mayor Herkner explained that if two 16ts were taken into the City then it would create an island but if Mr. Riff Is lot was taken in alone there would not be an island. City Engineer Jain explained that normally this would not be good annexation planning. This was followed by discussion after which Council- man Royer moved that the annexation be allowed to proceed if Mr. Riff agreed to pay for the sewer line and let the people join onto his line and he to be reimbursed at a later date, seconded by Councilman Spillers. City Engineer Jain stated that there were areas in which people have had to put in sewer lines and had not been reimbursed and he was of the opinion that Mr. Riff should not be reimbursed as it would be setting a precedent. This was followed by discussion on reimbursement and how the sewer could be built. City Attorney Currie stated that Mr. Riff could have a private agreement with his neighbors for paying for sewer connection if and when they are allowed to connect. Councilman Britschgi amended the motion to have the City Engineer, the City Manager and the City Attorney work out the problem with Mr. Riff. This was followed by discussion after which Councilman Britschgi Is amendment to the motion lost for lack of a second. Councilman Royer offered amendment to the motion approving the annexation, Mr. Riff to install sewer at his own expense, seconded by Councilman Spillers and carried. . CITY ENGINEER REPORT ON CONDITION OF SIDEWALK FRONT COAST ELECTRIC COMPANY. The Clerk read the original report submitted by the City Engineer dated April 29, 1955• The report is as follows: At the adjourned meeting of the City Council April 25th we were requested to submit a supplemental report on the condition of the sidewalks recently constructed around the Coast Electric property at Broadway and Cassua Street.14ith any suggestions we might have for improving the appearance. As stated in our previous verbal report, we do not feel that the contractor on the project can be held responsible for uplifting of the sidewalk, caused by encroach- ment of water in the subgrade. It is our opinion that the contractor complied with the plans and specifications. As previously stated, similar conditions develop where ever excessive moisture can penetrate the area under a sidewalk or pavement, particularly in the late Summer of Fall seasons when the adobe soil is cracked and shrunk to its minimum volume. As soon as the rainy season starts the water enters and travels along these cracks for condiderable distances, apparently causing the maximum expansion of the subgrade and subsoils wherever the greatest saturation occurs. We have checked with many agencies, and have found no guaranteed solution to the problem, where expandable soils are encountered. In this particular case, large sections of the sidewalk could be removed and replaced, but there could be no guarantee that the same condition would not occur again when the construction had gone through one or more complete annual cycles. To remove and replace the worst sections'on Broadway would probably cost at least 0500. In our 1955-56 budget we have requested a piece of equipment which, among other uses, could be used in jacking or raising depressed sections of concrete sidewalk and pavement slabs, and which could be used to some extent in this particular section of sidewalk. Those sections of sidewalk which have raised above other sections would probably have to be removed and replaced. We have also requested authorization to purchase a poweroperated concrete saw so as to perform a more satisfactory job of cutting concrete slabs. As previously reported verbally, the owners of the property were advised, both during construction and since, to pave or concrate the unprotected area between the sidewalk and their building, and the floor of that portion of the building exposed to the weather, to prevent the accumulation and penetration of water under the sidewalk, which to date has not been done. We appreciate the concern of the property owners in paying a large assessment for improvements, and having conditions such as these develop. Inasmuch as we do not feel the contractor can be held responsible for conditions which developed after acceptance, through no fault of his own, it would seem that the only way that this condition could be corrected would be for the City to expend the necessary funds, providing that the owners waive any claim for further damage which might occur. Councilman Stout reported that he investigated the place and he couldn't see where the sidewalk was raised to any particular amount. It was explained that there was at least a 211 depression and the a City Engineer reported that the water was still getting under the sidewalk. Councilman Britschgi moved that a copy of the report be sent to Mr. Wm. Phoenix, attorney for Coast Electric Company, seconded by Councilman Royer and carried. REPORT ON FLOOD CONDITIONS, 14IDDLEFIELD ROAD AND SPRUCE STREET. City Manager Rolison stated that the reports were downstairs and he was excused to get the reports. I 0