Laserfiche WebLink
Dr. Mayer. The Planning Commission held a special meeting on June.24th to consider <br />this matter and they recommended a variance from the official plan lines subject to a <br />grant deed for the following described property in exchange for the City assuming the <br />responsibility for installation of the ,sidewalk on the Jefferson Avenue frontage. Dr. <br />Mayer has agreed to the arrangement. <br />A portion of Lot 52 Block 2, Villa Lots of J. V. Diller, as designated on <br />that map entitled "Map of the rroperty in Villa Lots of J. V. Diller j <br />situated in Redwood City," recorded in the office of the County Recorder <br />of San Mateo County, California, in Book "E" of Maps at Page 77, being more <br />particularly described as follows: <br />Beginning at the intersection of the northeasterly line of Middlefiedl Road <br />(formerly Webster Street), 60.00 feet in width as said road now exists, and . <br />the westerly line of Jefferson Avenue (formerly Washington Street), 80.00 <br />feet in width as said avenue now exists; thence northerly along the said ' <br />westerly line of Jefferson Avenue North 30 30+ West a distance of 20.00 feet; <br />thence South 410 30' West a distance of 7.07 feet; thence South 860 30+ West <br />a distance of 13.26 feet to a point on the said northeasterly line of Middle- 2 <br />field Road; thence Southeasterly along said northeasterly line of Middlefield <br />Road South 540 061 East a distance of 23.63 feet to the point of beginning. <br />Containing 149..5 sq. ft.. <br />The City Attorney stated that this also had the approval of our Planning Consultant <br />i <br />Larry Wise, The City Attorney also recommended that this be done. The Mayor asked <br />the Clerk to contact the City Engineer, Planning Commission, City Attorney and the <br />Traffic Committee and have all the necessary information and recommendations for the <br />next Council ideeting. i <br />Councilman Spillers -moved to have the necessary information before the Council at the <br />next meeting and to continue this matter until next week.. seconded by Councilman <br />Herkner. This was followed by discussion in regard to whether or not this matter <br />should be continued or be taken up as a new matter on the next agenda. The motion ' <br />i� <br />carried with Councilmen Granger and Stout voting NO. <br />REPORT ON BID OPENINGS; (a) piling and (b) ramp, Marine Harbor. The following bids were <br />received for piling at the Redwood City Marine Harbor - <br />CONTRACTOR ALTERNATE ALTERNATE ALTERNATE <br />No. 1 No. 2 No, 3 <br />Healy Tibbitts Construction $7,138.00 $59030.00 $4,875.00 <br />Company, San Francisco 4 <br />The Duncanson -Harrelson 8,175.00 5,880.00 5,645.00 <br />Company, Richmond <br />William R. Cole, Berkeley 8,136.00 6,504.00 6,342.00 <br />PRELIM. ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE 90000.00 8,700.00 6,600.00 <br />The City Engineer recommended that the base bid of Healty Tibbitts Construction Company <br />for Alternate No. 3 in the amount of $4075.00 be accepted, and that all other bids be <br />rejected. This was concurred in by the City Manager. Councilman Herkner remarked on <br />the $155.00 difference between alternates 2 and 3 and asked if they should put in <br />alternate 2. The City Engineer stated that he checked into the matter and there is a <br />difference of only two piles so he recommended alternate 3. Councilman Spillers moved <br />to accept the low bid of Healy Tibbitts as recommended by the City Engineer, seconded <br />by Councilman Herkner. Councilman Weiss read the following prepared statement: <br />The continued question of expending money on this project and yet refusing to <br />take necessary steps toward ascertaining ultimate costs or to permit the pre- <br />paration of comprehensive plans and reports as to status and operation serves <br />to aggravate my curiosity as- to the whys and wherefores of the whole project. <br />At our last meeting I made a motion requesting the City Manager to prepare such <br />a comprehensive report on the operation of this activity. If this activity is <br />not being used as a sort of political football there should be no reason for it <br />not being handled by the proper administrative authorities and the employees <br />hired for that purpose rather than by a member of this council. Nor should there <br />be any reason for any of us objecting to such a report if politics is not <br />