BOOK 27_1957-06-17 to 1960-07-25

Browse Search

0 22 The specific questions are and which I would like to have someone furnish the answers to: 1. In view of the stringent situation of the water supply in the Emerald Lake Area, and the understanding we supposedly have with the county that no further building permits would be granted without this councils approval of water connections, and since a service station will certainly require greater quantities than a residence building, who has given this councils approval to the county authorities, or who has passed favorably on the application if one has been submitted? and if not sub- mitted why was it not? 2. Since the property is contiguous to our city limits, were we notified of the application for said use permit, and if so did any of our city officials appear to indicate our position in the matter. Certainly we are vitally concerned with the question, since it is our intent according to the land use plan now in progress to designate that area as a potential C -N district. Further,only recently we discussed the inadvisability of permitting service stations in C -N distruct when and if established. 3. Did any one give any thought to the sanitary situation, or has some one of our city administration authorized or indicated the possibility of their connecting to the city sanitary sewer system?" The Mayor referred to a policy matter set in 1950 in regard to previous water con- nections. This was followed by discussion in regard to allowing more than one con- nection to one water meter. Water Superintendent Winter stated that the service station was a live service from the previous property owner. The Gas Company con- tacted him with regard to water service and he informed them that they could get a water connection if there was a live service connection. The County has checked and this property is suitable for a septic tank. The City Engineer stated that they will not allow a sewer installation. This was followed by discussion. The only control the City has is the water problem and not the sewer problem. 'The Sidewalk Committee asked that the matter of Miss Heydenfeldt be placed on the agenda for next week and the Council to take a look at the property. Claims 22848 through 22995, totaling 6187,090.59, were ordered paid on motion of Council- man Weymouth, seconded by Councilman Granger. Councilman Weiss asked the usual questions if there were any water refunds involved and if all the expenditures were appropriated. The answer to this was there were not w ater refunds involved and all the money had been appropriated. The motion carried. J. D. CLARK, PLAZA LIQUORS, BROADWAY AT JEFFERSON AVENUE, CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF BUSINESS DUE TO THE BLOCK OFF OF STREETS ON SUNDAY, June 23, 1957• Councilman Stout moved that the claim be denied, and referred to the insurance carrier, seconded by Councilman Weymouth and carried. Councilman Granger moved that the meeting be adjourned to Monday, July 8, 1957, at the hour of 8:00p.m., seconded by Councilman Weymouth and carried,. Meeting adjourned 9:50 p.m. R. S. Dodge, C ty Clerk MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING Redwood City Council July 8, 1957, 8:00 P.M. Invocation was lead by Reverend Kenneth Senft, Messiah Lutheran Church. .ON ROLL CALL the following were noted present: Councilmen Floyd D. Granger, Sidney D. Herkner, Hiram S. Stout, Louis Weiss, Ray Weymouth, Mayor William H. Royer and City Clerk R. S. Dodge. Councilman Robert Spillers was noted absent. Also present were City Manager E. A. Rolison, City Engineer Glenn M. Jain, City Attorney Robert J. Costello, Water Superintendent H. L. Winter, Building Inspector S. H. Kreiss, Police Chief William Faulstich, Fire.Chief J. L. Lodi, Assistant to the City Manager L. A.