Laserfiche WebLink
171 <br /> • <br /> may 1,1985 <br /> • certainly could be used now with emch less danger and F <br /> asele citiz <br /> mvnd2er <br /> ens. Trains passing is as out of dace as building h ng ahome under an airport re hearts of our u tin nmy • <br /> in <br /> woulask your <br /> n declaring the <br /> theirri ght to cross surfacev streets,partvicelerlyl Pacif is Avvehs .fei ted <br /> • <br /> Bruce <br /> City Attorney,reviewed Ordinance N 234 which grantedthefranchise raroadcompany. <br /> ted that <br /> stipulates that successorNorthern was a successors are covhe eredu original <br /> ordinance ordinance <br /> • <br /> He referred to Ordinance Ordinance1 in which a } <br /> of the or i9onpan rdc 49234.the <br /> Thisek section a that the <br /> ••••railway company ns[ ct a highway bridge to creel across <br /> uce construct <br /> shall h roadways,each <br /> 25 ft.awi on two sidewalks,on each s of two <br /> bridge, t <br /> in wraeh aThe nd the 1 bridge shall to <br /> constructed o <br /> ink ander ridgetrshallyM1 strength ad Safelycarryd li <br /> support e b have such stline of railway and carry <br /> permanent pavement of wood,brick or asphalt,should city rat any i <br /> immake use of such pavement.' ca fi <br /> He pointed out Section 16 of Ordinance 2 which states at if e6 <br /> ninety days tocomply shall with <br /> pithy thime e fail neglect his or ordinance,teriod he <br /> shall be lawful cfor he Council <br /> ofn aidci[1 to ddeclare by <br /> , Ordinance the forfeiture City <br /> all rights s a i <br /> granted.' a said his opinion that theforfeiture9 der herein <br /> language, ifthecouncil c nevers it f substantial condition, the <br /> franchise may be forfeited n for failure of con to the <br /> bridges <br /> even though the c sea a mots of <br /> may g fateey.He SF <br /> franchises thecouncil <br /> all crossings of nthne streets torightto consider be forfeited. all he <br /> He then referred 11 Ord. which he said v <br /> 1 be t 3egaing The sa oadway <br /> bridge and becausethere <br /> Bridge will <br /> are testimony <br /> he Agee <br /> bridge was built be the city and the mBroadway bridge i a state 1 <br /> highhway bridin ge and ing at these <br /> ridgeare'That o present day standards.to e <br /> Iain t me control o the s alleys he ya Mof tEverett9 all <br /> • ped the <br /> sthis o a over like plto acti i sely ed c.f.rto <br /> exercised• the rights g a thich marmer as nots ordinance.....it was interfere <br /> 66161on, <br /> lcwas <br /> ria reasonable yexercise ofthe city's police en powers, <br /> Wag[dards forebri state <br /> ethenw which applvicehleets lasthe with current <br /> oad <br /> toloads <br /> dor bridges. sai <br /> d the 'railway cars' was • 111 <br /> interesting as by <br /> a g st although <br /> Ave.oad 1 thatashould <br /> considered y for t bridge, t baard <br /> Bridge a OaAve.tbridge r a the current standard <br /> : the City of parts Of the Eerett and those a the load limits rapplied n other <br /> y. <br /> said-because atout treporter w t,he w o keep <br /> of by <br /> track tl <br /> e s inc therew litigation o just <br /> the ;'0 <br /> a es Fe asked that the ordinance summ ry bemarked as <br /> Exh66. ibit procedure <br /> er <br /> bitNo Clu99 <br /> • 3 <br /> • <br /> • <br /> • <br />