Laserfiche WebLink
The roll call vote was as follo~;ys: <br /> <br />AYES: Councilmen Berat]is, Pearson, Spiliotopoulos and Mayor Reid <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: Councilman Getton <br /> <br />Report Re: Kaiser Sewer <br /> <br />Mr. Edgar requested that this matter be discussed on November 8, 1971 <br />Amendments to Traffic Resolution No. 70-26 <br /> <br />Mr. Campbell reviewed his report, dated October 26, 1971, which rec- <br />ommended the approval of the following ammendments to Traffic Resol- <br />ution No. 70-26: <br /> <br /> That Section 8n-1 establishing diagonal parking on the north <br /> side of Neal Street from First to Second Streets be deleted. <br /> <br /> 2. That Section 11, two hour parking zones, of said resolution <br /> be amended by the addition of the following subsections: <br /> <br /> a. lld-1 Division Street. On the north side of Division St. <br /> between ~14ain Street and 250 feet east of Main Street. <br /> <br /> 3. That Section 4 mid block crosswalks, of said resolution be <br /> amended by the addition of the following subsection: <br /> <br /> a. 4h-1 tIopyard Road. Crossing Hopyard Road approximately <br /> half-way between the Pleasanton Canal and the Arroyo Mocho. <br /> <br />After some discussion, it was moved by Councilman Spiliotopoulos and <br />seconded by Councilman Beratlis that Resolution No. 71-220, approving <br />the amendments to Traffic Resolution No. 70-26, as outlined in the <br />report of the Director of Public Works, dated October 26, 1971, be <br />adopted. <br /> <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br /> <br />AYES: Councilmen Beratlis, Pearson, Spiliotopoulos and Mayor Reid <br />~OES: r.~one <br />ABSENT: Councilman Gerton <br /> <br />Matters for the information of the Council <br /> <br />Mr. Edgar stated that the following items have been fon~arded to the <br />City Council for their information: <br /> <br /> 1. A copy of a letter to Itonorable Homer H. Hyde, Chairman, and <br />Members of the California Regional Iqater Quality Control Board, dated <br />October 26, 1971 retarding an adopted policy on restricted growth. <br /> <br /> 2. A copy of a letter to the Contra Costa County Board of Super- <br />visors, dated October 26, 1971 regarding an adopted policy on rest- <br />ricted crowth. <br /> <br /> 3~ A copy of a letter to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors <br />dated October 26, 1971, regarding an adopted policy on restricted <br />growth. <br /> <br /> 4. A report from DeLeuw, Cath and Company, regarding the Liver- <br />more-Amador Valley Transportation Needs Study. <br /> <br />P3PORTS OF THE CITY ATTORNEY <br /> <br />There were no reports from the CitV Attorney. <br /> <br /> 5. 11-1-71 <br /> <br /> <br />