HomeMy WebLinkAbout1959-11-17; City Council; Minutes:CITY OF CARLSBAD I '1, ', **, ', '\ -8 I ,' S'' 16
1 I '\\\\\'*,\ ',, '\ '.
: of *$ O', .,'?&. .Q?%J,.p &+ IPla~-~_of"e~-~~~~- "c-!?nci_l -Gk@?ST9_" -" - - - --.. "" - -" - ., - - - .. ._- - - i-" -" -" - L "- - - _" - -" '1 " * 1 I ;:;:'
IRULL CALL was answered by Councilmen Sonneman, Ledgerwood, ; :I 1:::
lMcPherson and La Roche. Also present was City Manager t I iiii
f Palkowski. I :;'I
I I 11;:
I I :::I :INVOCATION .'was offered by Mayor Ledgerwood, I I :::I
I ::!:
I \\
!Minutes of: city Council
!Date of Meeting: November 17, 1959 i N a me '\, '\%, .,,"%\ :Time of Meeting: 7:OO P.M,
, t . 8,".
i Member $3'@,?\9\$
I
I
I $1
I
I
I : APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
I I
I li'l I I ;I:;
I 1 ::I;
l!!I : 1. The minutes of the regular meeting of November 3, i Sonneman :xi i i
:1959, were approved as presented. i Ledgerwood i : :X: I I 1 i McPherson i iXiXi
I i La Roche ; ; :X:
I I I ::I:
I I I I:::
I
I I
:CORRESPONDENCE: I I:', I $1
I I :!!I
I ; 1, Letter dated November 9, 1959, from the Tri-City
!Hospital District stating that the Board of Directors of i
:the Tri-City Hospital District have agreed to act as spon- i i sors to set up a meeting of all interested parties to dis- :
:cuss the .gewer problems of the Tri-City area. As soon as a I
!meeting can be set up the board will extend an invitation i
:for the City's participation in said meeting. By comon i
iconsent of the Council the letter was ordered filed.
I I
I I 1 I I I
;;;:
;;It
l:ll :;::
::I:
;*I
,'I: :i::
::;I
::I:
::I1
:a::
11
11
*I
11
l!!l : 2. Letter dated November 5, 1959, from the Ocean Water : ;;SI
:Pipeline Corporation, stating that it is now possible to I :::; 4:; :use saline water for conversion to potable water, at prices i :::I
:equal to, in many cases, or cheaper than using conventional; i::;
:meteoric or magmabic:.: waters. They further stated that I l;al I :ai:
!methods of financing or leasing this equipment have been i Sonneman :Xi :X:
:worked out, and that they would welcome any inquiry. By : Ledgerwood ! ! :X {
:motion of the Council the letter was referred to the City i McPherson ; !XiXi
:Engineer for study. i La Roche : 11 : !X; i 3, Letter of resignation dated October 29, 1959, from i Sonneman :Xi :Xi :George A. Clizbe, Planning Conmissioner, was read and : Ledgerwood i : :X: :accepted, and a 'Letter of appreciation ordered sent to Mr, I McPherson ; iXiX i :Clizbe for his services. : La Roche t I :X !
I ! !;:!
$1
I I I:::
t I 1:
:ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
!There were no oral communicaticns.
I I
I I
1 1 I I I I I 6 I 1 i PUBLIC HEARINGS : I I
I ! I I
: 1* Continued hearing - Jefferson Street Improvement
:1911 Act. Assessment District 3-1959.
1
I I I I I 1 1 I
iT. Bruce Smith, attorney for the project, advised the Coun- i
icfl this matter had been postponed for sixty days until
ithis time and place, Due to the fact the percentage of I
\protests would have to be figured on an area basis rather I
:than a front footage basis, it might be well to continue ;
!the matter. However, the Council may overrule the protests:
:received, but it would take a 4/5ths vote of the Council; :
:or the Council may grant the protests and the matter could i
;not be brought up again for one year. I I
:MR. JAMES MOORE, attorney for the Protestants, stated that i
\he would like to point out this matter has been continued i
:once; the Protestants feel that two months is sufficient :
:time for the Council to make their decision. Mr. Moore i
jpresented additional letters of protest. A map was pre-
;sented showing that 67% of the property owners were legal i
:protestants, and there were an additional 15% who did not :
:register their protests at the time and place stated. He i
:further stated this matter was a cloud on the property, and :
!prevented them from making any transactions with their
:property, Mr. Moore requested that Cmn, La Roche discpalif$
;hiaself as he was not on the Council in September of this I
:year when this matter was first heard and could not lzgally ;
yote.
I I
I 1
I 1
I l a
I 1
8 I I I I I I i I I
I I I I
:::i :;;: :::I :::;
:Ill ,!!I :ii! i::' ;::: :::; ::::
1;;1 ::::
:::I ::::
'111 :;;!
i;:: \i:: :;
::;; 1::;
:;:; ::::
:#I:
-11; ;ii:
::I;
:I:: :;:: ::i: -;; :::: :; :; 1: ::;: 1:
::'I :::;
!!'I
1 :: ::::
I;aI I:::
1::: :;::
4 :; !:I,
l:ll
I I - %" I <'X:. ... SI 'II'
i .. ... !tl: .I
I I I I I I t
I
I I I I I I 1 -2 - ! I 1 I I I
I 8 I I I I
~""""""""""""""""""~""""""""""""-"-""""""-~~
iT. Bruce Smith advised the Council Cmn. La Roche could
:legally vote, but since he was not present when the matter i
!was first heard, it would be unwise. However, if the 1
:Council chose to hear any testimony this evening, and if i i they chose. to override the decision of the Planning Cam- i
:mission it would take a 4f5ths vote, due to Mr. Grober's ;
:absence there would not be four members present. Also if I
:they heard any testimony this evening and chose to continue; Ithe matter until the next meeting, it would be unwise for i
!Mr. Grober to vote at the next meeting. t t
I !
1
I I
'\, ", '8 ', 't,.',
s ', '8, 8, \ ' 161
'8, '\, ", ', ' '\ \\'
Na me ''x '\@, 8 '\, ".&
Member $3 6;j',*(?y
:::11
1 511 4:;: :I1
"1:;
"$8@, ' "&\, Of \QL',o \a\,#+
1i::I
1::;; I: iii::
I::;:
:I 1;::; ii::i
:;::I :;::1 ::;:I
'"""""""""""1".
I'
,!It!
;al#l
:Mr, Smith further advised the Council as far as a cloud on :
ithe tltle of the property, this would not become a lien i
ion the property until such time as the assessment roll is : ; recorded. The percentages as presented by Mr. Moore should i
:be verified by the Engineering Department. I I
:Cmn, La Roche advised the Council he had no intention of ;
!entering into any discussion on this matter and would
!abstain from any voting. t $
I !
I I I I I
I + t
;;@I;
:!I;; :'I
:I 1::~
'I i::: 1
:+
::;; :: :.; ~
!::I
t:::
1::: l111 :I::
4 I :Cwn. Sonneman stated that in order to serve all parties i
:concerned she felt this matter should be continued. By i Scmneman
:motion of the Council the hearing was continued to December: Ledgerwood ; 1, 1959, at 7:30 P.M., in the Counci 1 Chambers of the City i McPherson
:Hall of the City of Carlsbad, : La Roche
i 2, Skyline-Clearview Sewers .I 1911 Act. Assessment 4 I
:District 3-1958,
!The Mayor announced this was the time and place fixed by i
Ithe Council for hearing objections or protests on the pro- I
:posed work, or the extent of the assessment district, or on:
ithe proposed grades under Resolution of lntention No. 603 i
:providing for the construction of certain sanitary sewers ;
!in Skyline Road 280' north of Alder Ave., to the south
:boundary of Carlsbad Highlands No. 2; Alder Ave. 171.21' i
:west of the intersection with Skyline Rd.; Birch Ave.
i204.31' west of intersection with Skyline Road; Clearview i
!Dr. 419' north of the south boundary of Carlsbad Highlands :
:No. 2 and easements along the southerly boundary of Carlsbad
:Highlands. I
@n behalf of the Clerk, T. Bruce Smith, attorney for the i Sonneman
:project, presented the affidavits of publication, mailing : Ledgerwood
!and posting. By motion of the Council the affidavits were i McPherson
$pproved and ordered filed. : La Roche
Zhe Mayor asked for all written protests to be read. I I
better dated November 16, 1959, from John L. Wick in which i
:he asked if this project was instigated by a petition, if so!,
pho circulated the petition, were the signatures on the I 1
petition verified, Also, if this project was invoked by I
:the Health Department what cases were specified. I I
?he attorney advised the writer this project was instigated ; py the Health Department and no specific cases were specif ieb*
kwo petitions with identical wording were presented signed i
by a total of 23 signatures, which read as follows: I I
I I I
I I I I I I I
I I
1 I
I I
1 I I
t I b
I I
I I
I I I
I I
I I I I
I I t I
1
L 1 PROTEST PET 1T ION
bo THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD:
I
I I I 1 I I I I I ! I I
I Re: 1911 Act - Sewer Trunk Line on Skyline I
I Drive, I
I. 1 I I
I I I I I I We, the undersigned, do hereby protest the proposed 1911 I
hct assessment district to be form%d for the purpose of ! I
i;;i
:::I :x; :xi ::;;x ; ;xixi
;:::
It;; :!II I!;:
l 1 It ;:;:
,:If ::I: ;;:: !;:;
1::: I;:: ::;: :::i
:I ;;:: *:ii
:I;: :I:: :::;
:;;I
::I: i i E: : ; $q F: F;
i;::
:111 l11I
' x: ; (Ill
1'11 I!!#
I VI
:i:;
l:lt :'I,
:ii:
::ii iiii
:;:I ::;I
;:$I ::::
11::
::I: ;::: :::: ;::; ;:::
::e:
1;;1 ::i: :I::
:;I:
:a::
I ; ; ;.
::;I ::;: i:;:
l1I$
I!#:
I
I I
..
I :I
I 11
! ?!*I
1'81 -. .I :::I
I I 1 ::;I
I 1 :I:: I ;:::
I
I I
1
I 1 'X, '\\ ', '\ -\ '
I . '\ '\ '\,'\\ 15
I 33 a I Name ', \,$\ '\,"&\
&$%$& '\ q?A' : of y&++q+, I ; Member $'$',*p$ :"""""""""""""""""""-~"""""""""""""""""-~"""""""""""-~"-
I I ;'I 1
:constructing a sewer line along Skyline Drive in Carlsbad I 1;;:s
I ,::
!Highlands. Our protest is based upon the following facts: !
: 1. Almost half of the homes are built on the low side : i;::: i of the street with the sewer lines much lower than the strekt ;I:
t)lll :grade, necessitating great expense in connecting to the i ii;:;
:proposed sewer trunk line.. I I,,:,
I 2. Most of the lots have long frontages resulting in i ;$; !high assessments for the benefits which would be derivedr : I 1:;:: :::::
! 3. The houses an the high side of the street largely t :I:;:
:drain to leach lines feeding towards El Camino Real and i I (,I
:thus have unlimited drainage area with no poterrtial : problem.
I 4, The entire area is subdivided into large lots which [ :I::' i have adequate area for leach line drainage.
i 5, No problems have been encountered requiring a sewer i i system at this time.
: Dated: November 17, 1959.
I I I I I I
I
1
1 \' .' ' \\ '\ 8\, '\ '\ \\
I m: ::;la ;:
I I :::;;
:is::
1 I I I:;;: $1
4 :;;::
::;I;
1 I :;;:; & ::I:)
I I ;I:;; $::I
I I 11:::
I :;VI1
I 11::: ::;I;
:'I:;
I I ti:::
I I :;;:;
I I i;::;
I I I 1:::;
i I
I I I
I
I
I I
I I I
I I
I
!I,!I : NAME
I 4 I I i Anne S, Huking
i Geo, W. Tassie
:Mary R. Tassie I Walter F. Jennings
:Katherine K. Jennings
!Mrs. H. E. Kemp : Herbert E. Kemp { Vera E. Hermsen : Bernard A, Hermsen i Elsie M. Kelly ; John Lb Wick
:Marietta Wick
;Paula 3. OlBryan i Maxine Browning
; Eugene G. Nelson \ Claude G, Brohing : A. L. %oyer i Laura 3 o Boyer
:Joe D, McCarthy I (By Glenn R, Feist,
:Glenn Re Feist
!Glenn R, Feist
:Elizabeth Le Feist
:Elizabeth L. Feist
I I
I I
I I
I
I I I STREET ADDRESS -- PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ;
4005 Skyline Dr.
3915 Skyline Road
3915 Skyline Rd.
3906 Skyline Rd.
3906 Skyline Rd.
4004 Skyline Rd,
4004 Skyline Rd.
4061 Sky1 ine
4061 Skyline Rd.
4060 Skyline Rd.
4080 Skyline
4080 Skyline Rd.
4134 Skyline Rd.
4155 Skyline Rdr
4260 Skyline Rd.
4155 Skyline Rd.
4120 Skyline Rd.
4120 Skyline Rd.
k070 Sky1 ine Rd.
4073 Skyline Rd.
(Lot 21)
4073 Skyline Rd.
(Lot 14)
4073 Skyline Rd.
(Lot 21) 4073 Skyline Rd.
(Lot 16)
Arty.)
I
I :The Mayor asked if there were any persons present who
:wished to speak in support of their written protest?
I I I I I I I I * I 1 t I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I i I I I I I I I I I I I 4 I 1 I * I 1 4 I I I I I I I I 1
..
:;I@;
11:;;
!I:1~
::a
I I I :MR. JOHN WICK stated his letter was complete and he had no i
:further comment at: this time.
!There were no further oral protests and the Mayor declared i
ithe receipt of any further protests closed,
:The Mayor asked the Engineer of Work to advise the Council :
:what per cent of the total area to be assessed for the \improvement is represented by written protests or objec- : itions filed with the City Clerk. The Engineer of Work
@vised the Council that up to the hour of 5:OO P.M. no i
:protests had been received by the Engineering DeparSmhr.t, i
1 I I I I
I b
@i
I 1 I I I
I I
I 4
I I I I 1 4
:cii
::I:!
;::;I ;I;:: 11'
;q;;
::(:I
1::::
:;;I( :!::I
Il:II
:I;:;
::I:;
::!:I
::I:!
;::I I:
$1:
$81
1:: iii:.
:I;;I
I:,::
:::I;
::I:; ::;:; :I1
::,;I i::::
I:;:~ ::;': :;;; ::::
!::I
;::I 1; I :'I ;: ii
1:;: I:;: :;;I
.I
,841;
IIII
t;:*l
!Il! *I-. :;:;
1 :;;
::I$
1::Il ::I: 1.-1 ;::;
l;:l I::: :::i
:::I
*a;;
::I: :;;; ::;; :::; I::; :ii:
I 11'
!I,! I I
1
I I i;i:
I I I :.' ; 1 c ::Il
'I #:!;
I
I
I t
1 I I I I I 4
I
I I -\<\ y,, '\\ \\\'\,
I '\, '\ '\, '8, ', 'x i Na me \, ',$\ '8, \'&\
- \' re, 1
,'
I 4. I \e'' \ .p>, I I '\S\O,*, '\ +',
~"""""""""""~"""""""~"""""""~"~""~"""""""-~""---"---"~----"---~-- iii:!
I i : Member Of %o\g\,&,?i( %'+\+\e 4
I I I Di i therefore, they were not prepared to give the percentage i ; at this time,
:The Engineer of Work presented the assessment map and
t stated that in his opinion all of the area included within!
ithe assessment district would benefit.
:By motion of the Council the hearing was continued to i Sonneman !X! :X! :7:30 P.M. on December 1, 1959, in the Council Chambers of I Ledgerwood ; I :X: i the City Hall of the City of Carlsbad. : McPherson : iXiXi
I I !&I,
::I:
I :111 I II'I I :I::
I I 4:;
$+I(
:'I1 #)(I * ;::I , I:#:
I I ::::
XI
I
I
t I 11
11
1
1 I ; La Roche i I i Xi
I I :A short recess was called at 8:20 P.M. The meeting re- : convened at 8:30 P.M.
4 I I I 1 I I I I I : PLANNING :
: 1, Memo Re: Reclassification of certain properties
\from R-1-15 to R-1-10.
:Memorandum from the Planning Commission was read wherein
:they had reconsidered this reelassification in accordance :with the Council*s instruction and that . by a unani-
:mous motion the opinion of the Planning Cmission to not I rezone the subject property was sustained.
I I I
I I
I I
I I I 1 I 8 6
$ I I I I I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I
:Letter dated November 12, 1959, from George A. Clizbe, one i
:of the Planning Commissioners, stating that :he felt the i
\Council should proceed very cautiously in overruling two ;
lunanimous votes by the Planning Commission and that his i
!decision was influenced by two factors, (1)Residents of I I
:Sunnyhill had purchased sites with the distinct under-
Istanding that the entire area was zoned R-15; and (2) :Statement by residents in the area that no lot in Sunny- i
!hill had a frontage of less than 90 feet, He felt that the;
!way to solve this di1exzr.a is to leave the square foot area I :at 15,000, hut require a frontage of 100 feet as a lot :lo0 x 150 feet would provide more flexibility for design- i :ing a really fine home,
:Letter dated November 17, 1959, from Eugene G. Nelson and i :Georgia Nelson, 4260 Skyline Road, in which they stated i :they wished to vigorously protest any reduction in lot size,:
!as any lot under 15,000 square feet in size is totally I 1
:inadequate for recreational area+ !
I I I I 1
I I
I I
I I I I
I s I I
;'ti I:'#
I:'I
!I::
11 ;:::
;:'i ;,::
1::: ::::
:@tl ;:I1
1:;: ::::
1:;: I::: iil' 1:
:I;: IIII
::I:
!I:!
1 I Setter dated November 11, 1959, from Chamion McMillan,
I4085 Sunnyhill, stating that &e was in favor of small lots !
:as they are more easily landscaped and better maintained. l
$hd further stated they had the largest lot on Sunnyhill
:(over 170 foot frontage) and the cost and time in attempt- :
$ng to maintain it properly is more than most of us can * 1
'afford; there is one 80' lot on one side of their property :
bnd three 78'' lots going in to the North of them, andhe I poes not feel that they will in any way depreciate their I
property .
$he Mayor stated this matter has worked up quite a bit of :
!team. We are all intelligent people, and he hopes this i
patter can be resolved in an orderly fashion. The big
Problem involved seems to be the front footage, and perhaps I
pome solution can be worked out as to a satisfactory front :
Footage.
PR. MERKLE asked if any members of the Council had read the i
fetter from Gordon Whitnall. Cmn. La Roche and Cwn, Sonne- :
ban stated they had attended the meeting of the Planning :r ;Commission when Mr, Whitnall's letter was read and they did ;
!not feel it was necessary to have it read at this time,
:MR. PRODOPAPAS stated that: in the Highlands there is not a i :lot less than 90 foot frontage.
I I
I I I
I I I I I I
I 1
I I I I I I I
I I 1 1 I I I
I I t I I I I
I I I I
;;I;
a:*l :I::
::;I i::: :::;
1:::
,I::
::I: if:;
1:::
:I;1 :::: :;/
;:I: ,::: i$i ::I:
;;:I
,#It ::::
$11 *I 4:;
::'I *I :::;
'I
:#I
!::! :I1 :i:i
'1:; i:::
1:::
:I;: ;:I,
:;I'
:;I1
1::
'1;: :I1
::II 1:
$11 11
1::: :;;I i'rii
:ltl 4:;
::;I
:El:
:::I
::II 1:
;:'I 11 :::; I::: :ii:
;It: ::I:
1:;;
:::I ::;: ::::
::a: :::; :ii;
-4
)'It
l111
I It
)*11
i
I I '{I( .I
L ::al
I 8" 8.' I I I \\ 8\ \\ 88 '\\'\, I t \\ 't ' % 16
I
I ', 8t888\i '\ '8 '8
I -5- i N a me '\\, '.%8, ' \\ '$ $I
I i of '%%, "8 .4/'
I ' k' I I
1 ~,&~0\9\$?zI\ :"""""""""""""""""""-""""""""""""""""""!""""""""."~""~" : Member \@@$$$
I I $ I ! MRS. DOROTHY MORGAN asked, that since the property owners i
I are directly affected would it be possible to put the I I i matter to a vote to decide this matter. The property I owners should have., something to say on this matter. The i i Mayor informed Mrs. Morgan that was the Letlson this public i : hearing was being held, I I
i MRS. ROSE WADE stated that when they purchase3 their properti I they were informed there would be nothing but 15,000 squarer i foot lots in the area, Why should not the property PLwners i
; be protected? I I
:MR. &TON ANNABLE, 4220 Sunnyhilf Drive, stated there is \ i a minimum of 90 foot lots. On the east side of Sunnyhill : ! there is not a lot less than 100' deep, I I
;DONALD BRIGGS, JR., advised the Council there were three i
I78' lots in this area and four tract homes.
i MR. ANDERSON, subdivider, requested that the Council make i
t its decision on this matter tonight; the Council has heard ; I sufeicient evidence. The question the Council has to :decide is whether these lots will depreciate the value of i i the adjoining property.
iCmn. McPherson asked the subdivider if he was aware of the i i required lot size when he purchased this property. Mr, I I
:Anderson stated they were, however, that is why this
:property is still in escrow subject to this property being i ; reclassif Sed.
ICmn, La Roche read a portion from the Community Plan
:wherein it states that when an amount of zoning in any
:one classification exceeds the demand then that amount of I :excessive zoned property might become a blighted area. I I
:FRANCES HOUTZ, stated that she felt it was too bad that we : :have to put everything on a monetary basis. They wanted i
:large lots in order that their children would have a place :
:to play so they would not have to play in the street.
iCwn, Sonneman advised the Council she had talked to
:builders who have built in different areas and they in-
!formed her that 10,000 sq. feet is a popular lot size.
1 !
I 1
I I t
I 1 I 4 I
I I I I
I 1
6 I I I
I 1
1 I I I 1 I I
I I
I I *
L I I I I I
I I I
1 I 5 I I
I I I L I I I I 6 I I I I I
i::;i ::;#;
*Ib;,
:;@I' :::;
:*I,
1:::
31;; ::;:
:::I
::I:
;;#I
lo::
1::; i::;
1:;t ;:::
11
It
i:;i
&.*I
11 ,:VI ::::
::,I :;:: :;I1
::::
;I;:
:!ll 1:
+!!I
:Ill
1;;; ;::; ;::; ;I;: ;:::
l::l
:;I:
:a:!
::to
1::: :::; i:II ;;:: l*:: ::ii
:::I
1: I I ::I:
:I;{ 11
8: 11 :I;: il:: ;::: ;:::
1::; i:;:
::I8 I:,, 1: IIii !!!I :ii:
:!I:
I I
!MYRTLE STRAYHORN stated she was under the impression that I
!zoning or classification was made for the protection of the i
:property owners. She did not feel it was fair to have one i
!company, individual or business concern come in and change i
:everything. The majority of the property Owners should be ;
Icons idered.
!MR. GLENN FEIST stated that he has been on the Architec- i
:tural Conmittee for the Highlands €or 7 years and their I 1
!deed restrictions are 22,000 square feet. He felt the
:Council was loosing sight of the fact these people want. t I
:these large lots or they would not have built or bought in i
:the area.
:Cmn. La Roche stated that the Council does not operate as ;
:separate units but as a whole.
$he Mayor declared the public hearing closed. I
fiftew discussion by the Council, Cmn. La Roche moved that i
:the area be reclassified and that the appeal be granted. I I
$he motion diad for lack of a second,
$he various lot sizes as proposed by the subdivider were i
:reviewed by the Council. I I
I f I I 1 I I
1 I I
I
I I I I I 1
* 4 I I I I I
I I
I 1 mi
I I I I 1 I I
I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I L I I
t I 3 I I I I 2 1
1"r :!;: ;:I: ::I: ;:::
1:::
:::I
i;:;
::::
1: 4 1
::;I :::; :::: $1 I::;
1::; ::::
:::I ::;i :::;
::::
a:#;
:;;I
:*I: ;:&I
lt:: ;::; ;::; ;:'*
,a:; ;::: ;::; :i::
11:;
::;I
:!I;
Ill1 11:
*:'I I 11
!:!I
;;:e
1:
* \.. I
I
I I
I
I I I '\\,,".>' \ , ., \' '."\\ 1 fj $
I -6- ! Name ", 'x!& '\,"& ',$$$\ '\ 'f*, \?22&A,+?@ i """ .. .."""""" "I """"""""L""."" """"""""""""" 4 """""""_ _ "" :.f&2.
I ;;;:;
,:I1' ::;
::#:I
1 majority 1 I::::
I I 1';$ 1:
I r ::::;
I 1 ;;::I 11:
I I ii;:;
t I ::;;:
s !::!I fi:
1 '\ '\,'\', 8, '\ ',
I 4 : of
I I I 0
; Member $$f t \o c
;It 1 :Cwn. SonnWn moved that the developer be requested to i submit a revised plan as to area and frontage. However, i I it was pointed out that unless the area was reclassified i :;!;!
I ;I i the minimum lot width of 75' would still remain. I 1::::
i Due to a lack of a Him vote the matter was closed.
i PARKS AND RECREATION:
i 1. Memo - re: Appointments to Commission.
I 4
I
I I +
1 I
$
I + :I1 I
!Memorandum dated November 13, 1959, from the Parks and
:Recreation Commission stating that the terms of the i following commissioners had expired:
i Nacho Herra, Clint Pedley and Fred Maerkle,
I I I I t I I I I I I I I
1 I
1
I i The Commission requested that the following persons be 1
:considered to fill the vacancies: I I
i Clint Pedley, Fred Maerkle, Harry McMillan, Angel Crosswaite I and Mrs. M. J. Nay.
f The Mayor stated that with the consent of the Council he i
jwould like to reappoint Mr. Clint Pedley and Mr. Fred : Sonneman ; Maerkle for a four year 'term, and Mr. Harry McMillan to i Ledgerwood : fill the expired term of Mr. Nacho Herxera. By motion of :McPhersan
ithe Council the appointments were confirmed. :La Roche
8 1 I
I I
I I 1 I
I I i HARBOR. -*
I
I 1 I I I I i I, Recommendation for formation of a Harbor District. i
I I I !The Council was advised that at the last meeting. of the i i Harbor Cammission a motion was passed that a recommendation:
:be sent to the Council €or the formation of 8 Harbor I i District. Attached was a map showing the boundaries pro- $onneman
:posed. By motion of the Council the matter was deferred ;Ledgerwood
:until the City Attorney was present to discuss the procedurfi McPherson tof the Eormation of a Harbor District. ;La Roche
: C IW MANAGER'S REPORT:
:Letter from Paul S. Swirsky, who represents the Joseph0 i i brothers, regarding the secondary water rights in the San I
:Luis Rey Valley was read. The City Manager recommended ; i this letter be referred to the City Attorney for her i recommendat ion.
ILetter dated November 1, 1959, from the Oceanside Jr.
:Chamberettes, cordially inviting the members of the City i
:Council to attend the 10th annual Candlelight Ball Eo be ; i held Saturday, December 12, 1959, at the Twin Inns.
:Tickets are available at $5.00 a couple.
!Letter dated November 10, 1959, from Mayor Batterton of I
!Denver, Colorado, stating that the 1959 American Municipal i
!Congress will be held in Denver November 28th through I I
:December 2nd, and 8s this is their Centennial Year, he
jwished to exgend a personal invitation to the members of i
:the Council to accept Denver's hospitality on this occasion{
:Letter dated November 12, 1959, from Jean L. Vincenz,
!Director of the Department of Public Works, informing I I
:the Council that the North County Supplemental Sewerage i
:Survey, authorized by the County Board of Supervisors is :
:underway. Staff members of the survey will be calling I I
!upon the many local groups and agencies for information I
:accordingly, all possible assistance and cooperation will i i be appreciated. I I
I a I I 1 I I
I I * I
I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I 1 I I I
t I 1 *
I I
I I I I I I 1 0
I * I I I 8 I I 8 1 1
I I
i;;;:
I ;::
I:,;,
:;;I;
!:I:;
l!!l
;;i;4 ;* 1;::; '1: I::;: 4::: #I
I:':; jiili
;:I#: ;:j::
Iy::
;:I:: :xi !xi ; : : :x: : i !$x: : : : :xi :
:;11; ::::I
,lI11
1::::
l1l1I I::::
1I:l: ::::I
:111: ;!!;; ::;:i *I !x: :xi ; : : :x: i : I! : :x: 1
t :xjx: i
:I l:*:l '::;I
;I 1:::;
!;I;;
:;p
':::i !!:;i
11 11:; I:;;; !:;!;
;::I; ::;:
::lo 11 :I:: :I;: ;::: $'ij
::I8
;:I8 ii::
1:: :::I
:I:: I!;: :pi
:a::
:::I ::I:
91: ii:; i;::
11::
1- ; :. I
:::: :'I:
::::
:::a
It;: ::::
:;:a
1: 1;
:#I 1
I 11
81'
,,:I,
r:,
I I I I :; is
I I :!I:
I I I iL: ::
1 I
I I I I
I I 1 I
.8 8, . '\,'\\ .- '\ 'b,",
I I I '\, ', ''8 '8, '8,'8,1 7 [
I -7 - I I i N a me \+, \\%, "8 '*?A
I ; *f .$,O', '' *& I I '?&&, 9" '?+' :"""""~"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""~~-"""--"-""""""-~. I Member $'$',@$
I ;::I: i Notice of the League of California Cities, San Diego I * I:::: i County Division, November meeting will be held Friday I I ;::::
I 'I:
:evening, November 20, 1959, in the Officers' Club at Ream i ii::: : Field in Imperial Beach. I I I I ;:::i
I i:::; (*I :The City Manager presented 8 bill from the Boyle Engineer- : I:1# i ing Company, for services rendered on the Jefferson Street i :$:i
iproject, in the amount of $4,771,50, stating they would ; :I::: : appreciate payment not later then January 1, 1960. I
!:4:
I I I :::a ::;
I iii;: 1:
:PAYMENT OF BILLS AND RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL:
i Authorization was given for the payment of bills for the [ I general expenses of the City in the amount of $7,650.22, : Sonneman i Xi i Xi ; ; and $17 , 942.66 for the Water Department from November 3, I Ledgerwood ; i : X: i : 1959, to November 17, 1959, as certified by the Director : McPherson : : Xi Xi ; i of Finance and approved by the Auditing Committee. i La Roche i : :X i
i Ratification of the payroll was given €or the first half of; b Sonneman ; i Xi X: : i November, 1959, in the amaurrt of $12,664.20, as certified : Ledgerwood : : ;Xi : : by the Director of Finance and approved by the Auditing iMcPherson ! Xi i X: i i Ccnmittee. 1 La Roche i ; : X: :
I I ;:::* i The Mayor informed the Council he had received a letter i 1::::
: from Mayor Dail of San Diego, requesting him to submit ;i::#
I 1s; i two names of persons who would- be willing to serve to I
::4:
:declare war against litter. As he had no one in mind he ! :;!::
::;I: i asked the Council for recommendations. It was suggested I 1:::: : that the name of Wesley F. Greek be submitted, The City ; i::::
!Manager was instructed to inform Mayor Dail of this nomin- I 1:::: i ation. I
- :;;I;
I I I :;;:; i ADJOURNMENT: I I :::::
I I I I i;::; I By proper motion the meeting was adjourned at 10:15 P.M. i 1) 1:::;
I I I I i;t*l 'I::;
!Respectfully submitted, I I ;I:::
I I I ::::I
I :I: I I ::;::
I I 1:;:;
I I ;::;; 61
I I 1 iii
I I ::;!I
I I I::::
I I I ::;;;
I I :::I!
I I I ::;'I
I I :;;:;
I I I:;::
I I :L;1
I I ;::'I
I I ;:':I
& I 1:::;
I E 8 ::::; :#I:;
I I I I ;:::;
I ;:;:;
I I ;:::;
1 I I *'I!;
I I ::: It1;
1 I I ::::;
I 1 I I::!;
I I I ::;:I ;If;;
;::I;
1 I ::;:I
4 I 1;:;;
I I ::4; :1::1
I I ;::'I
I I I 1:::;
4 I 1 :::I;
I I 1:;:;
I I 6 !:::!
I I I:*:' I 1 'I:;;
I I Ii:;~
I I I I :;::;
I I :!!:
x, 'b ', '8 *
I I 0 b
11 ,:I1'
I I
'1
I
i I 1
4 I I 1 :::*: I:;::
:*I::
I 1 ;:If1 p::;
I
t
4
I+ 11
I
*
I )1*1
I
I ;zz I a.A?.d 27 Q-
I E. ADAMS :Deputy City Clerk I I :;:'I I I I
I
I I
I *
'I I
I
I
I
I
1 I b 1 ;:::I IIII
I I
1
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
11'
L I ,
1
I 1 I
I
I I
I
I
I I
1
I
at 1
mi
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
fi
:a1:1
1
8
I I
I
I
I I
I I
I I ai;;
3 ! :#I .I*!