HomeMy WebLinkAbout1961-05-16; City Council; Minutes. i CITY OF CARLSELJ) I , ',, \, '\ '. '-
CITY COUNCIL (Regular Meeting) I Minutes of: ,8\\ : Date of Meeting: May 16, 1961 i N a me ', ',$\ '8\*~* i Time of Meeting: 7:OO P. M, i ,""""L"""""~"""""--""--""""~"""~""""""""---"""---------"-----------'--~--- Place of Meeting Council Chambers ; Member $'@\&?.a
I' ,\.\ 8"
L t ' ", 8, '\, 'x, '8,"\ 1 I I 6f
'.$'%X8 '\ 'f&
I ;'I 1;:
t I :::?:
; La Roche, Sonneman and McPherson, Also present were City : :a:::
::::I I Manager Stater and City Attorney Hayes. 4 *I,;: I ;4,,8 I I 4:;: ! ALLEGIANCE to the Flag was given. 6 :::I:
I I ::!::
',, ', '8 ', '. 'N,
i af 8?d%,$8 &*
i ROLL CALL was answered by Councilmen Guevara, Bierce, I
I
I
I t
I I I I
I ; INVOCATION was offered by Councilwoman Sonneman. I I I : APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
1 I
I I I I I I
::;:; ::::: :::::
::;I *I
-.
:;I 11;: 8
.!I I I l a. Minutes of the regular meeting of May 2, 1961 were i Guevara i jxix i I
I i La Roche i i :X: i
1 I : Sonneman :X: :X: :
T' 1 ! McPherson: i :XI ;
I I , ;:':I .!'I
i approved as corrected. : Bierce : : !x: :
I
t
t i CORRESPONDENCE : 1 11)': I
I I
I I l a. Letter dated May 8, 1961, from the Atchison, I i Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company, requesting permission: i to have a representative appear before the Council to
t speak on the proposed acquisition of the Western Pacific I I Railroad Company. The City Manager advised the Council Mri
:,Fuller was present, representing the A. T. & S. F, 9 I
I MR. FULLER informed the Council there is a conflict betweei i the Southern Pacific and the Santa Fe over stock control of : the Western Pacific, The S. P. bought up 10% of the West-: i ern Pacific Stock in order to gain financial control of i : the W. P, and petitioned the Interstate Commerce CommissioQ i for financial control of the W. P. The W. P. became alarm: : ed and advised the Santa Fe. The Santa Fe in turn bought : i up 20% of the Western Pacific stock and then peisitioned the : I, C. C. for financial control of the W. P, The hearing : i is tentatively set for June 6th. If the S.P. is successful : in gaining financial control it would cut off all through i i transportation to the North and also from Stockton to Salt I
! Lake City. At the present time the W.P. has a line from :
:,Stockton to Bieber and from Stockton to Salt Lake City, i : which the S. F. has been using for transportation to the : I North.
I Mayor La Roche asked Mr. Fuller what the condition of the i : freight rates would be in the event the S.P. would take ! i over control.
I i
I I I
1 t t I f
I 4
4 5 1 t i
ai;:; ::::: :::/ :*;:; ;;$ ::p
:I&
11;;
I:'I;
:I11
l!!I :.'I ::I: ;::; :i::
81 ::di
i::; ;::;
;:I1 81
1::;
;:i: ;:' :: :i::
:::I I;:! 4:; :::; :::; :::;
::;I :;:i :::: :'::
1l:I
:It4
Ill'
;I::
I:!1 I i Mr. Fuller stated the freight rate schedule would not be i i competitive. Competition tends to lower the rates. I I
1 I I
::::
:I:: ;::;
-vi
11
l:!l + : After consideration by the Council, by motion of the i Guevara d iX iX ! i Council it was agreed that the City Council support the i Bierce :X I :Xi : Santa Fe in their endeavor to keep this condition competi- : La Roche : : !X:
; tive. i Sonneman i I !X i I ! : McPherson i ; ;X f I I I b. Mrs. Robert Strauss - re: Future Carlsbad Library i : building. Letter dated May 11, 1961, from Mrs. Xobert t 1
; Strause, President of the Carlsbad Board of Library Trust-!
i ees, stating that at the May meeting of the Board of L€bra- i ry Trustees, a discussion was held concerning the best i i available site for the future Carlsbad Library building. : : It was the Board's belief for the long term interest of i ! the library, the land owned by the city presently occupied: ; by the Adult Library and the used car lot is completely i I acceptable as a future library site. They requested that :
i if the members of the Council agreed with their desire tha6 ; a resolution of intention be adopted designating this site! : as the future City Library site, and that the City Attor- ; i ney be instructed to instigate the proper legal procedures i : to insure this land to be set aside for future library use,:
!
.I
I I
'ti;
:::t :::i
:::I ::;:
:;I1
1,;:
:;I: 1::; ;::' :::I
1::;
'::;I
a;:: ::;:
:I;: 18
If;:
::I: :::;
1:;l
:I;:
!:I? i It was suggested that a committee be appointed to study tfi6 ;;I' I( !I,! i matter.
I I I I I I r 5
I b ;vi; # 1 :::;
I I i;::
I I ;::I
L 11:: E!*,
I
I I 1 I !
* : 1 t I
I 1
I -2G7 I I
8
t
I I I I 1 1 ! ;""""""~"""""--"~"~"""""""""""""""~"""""""~"
: Councilwoman Sonneman stated that this site has been con- i i sidered many times as the future library site, and felt-the: : City Attorney should look into the legal aspect of such a ; i transfer or designation.
i Mayor La Roche appointed Cmn, McPherson, Cmn. Bierce, the i : City Manager and the City Attorney to study the matter and; i requested the matter be put on the agenda for the next i i meeting. I I
i Purchase of Woman's Club property. The City Manager advisi i ed the Council he had received a reply from the Woman's : : Club as to the City*s offer of $6,250.00 for their properti i in Holiday Park, and by vote of the membership they have i i agreed to accept the City's offer,, providing it would be ;
; a cash transaction. By motion of the Council the City i : Manager was authorized to transfer sufficient funds from : i the Contingency Fund to pay cash €or the property,
i ORAL COMvlUNICATIONS:
i MRS. ROBERTA A. TRUSS, 3212 Garfield Ave., stated she had i i just completed construction of the Bird of Paradise Apart-; ; ments, and is having a problem renting them. She had i hoped to rent them on a lease basis, however, she finds i i that she will have to go into the summer rentals, which i i would come under the Motel or Hotel classification. The . f ; City has an ordinance relating to sewer 'service charges I : in which apartments are charged $1.00 per unit. On motels : i or hotels and that type of lodging the charge is not quite i i the same. She requested that she be allowed to come under :
; the hotel or motel rates.
i Mayor La Roche informed Mrs. Truss that she should contact i i the City Manager or staff in this matter, as it would de- :
i pend on the zoning in the area. I t
; PUBLIC HEARINGS :
I t I
1 I I 1 t
I I
I I
I
I I I 1 I I t I I
I I - I 1
I I
I I I I I
I 1
I 1
I I t I I I 1
I 1 I I 8 a. Decision of the Council on an appeal of the decis- I I ion of the Planning Commission to grant a Conditional Use : : Permit to South Coast Asphalt Co. I I
I A letter dated May 16, 1961, from Mr. Glenn R. Feist, apol4 i ogizing for the misunderstanding occurring at the last : regular meeting of the Council, as it was his intention i i to assert only those rights granted an attorney for a i client. He stated he was present this evening to present i i expert testimony on the effects of blasting upon surround- : : ing property owners, Enclosed in the letter were pictures { i showing operations of the type which are proposed. t I
i Mayor La Roche stated the Council was appreciative of the : i apology and the advice that .Mr. Feist has offered. I I
: Cmn. Bierce stated he felt all the members of the Council i i had given this matter considerable study, and he would likd i to move that the resolution of the Planning Commission be i I upheld subject to the following additional restrictions; i
(1) No quarry operations to be below existing creek :
I I I
I I
I I
I I
t I
I I
I I
I I I I :
I I
I I e : level.
; Tri-City Hospital prior to controlled blasting operations. i I 1 (2) Notice to be given to the Administrator of the :
I (3) In lieu of Surety Bond, applicant to furnish pro06
I (4) Upon termination of quarry operation, all propert$
I I *
I I
i of liability insurance in the amount of at least S50,COO. i
I 4 I &
I
I
i which has been worked is to be leveled in a workmanlike : : manner, 1 4
J I I I I f
I I I 1 I I
I I
I
', .', t'.
\\ ', ' '\ '. '\ , \\ '\ * \ '
\, \\ '8
',, 8, '\, ", '8,8'\, 6' ',
Name '\ '$& ',, \ \\\& '+;qj+, ' ' \@' ,p Of '\@f+&zq
;;;i i::: 4:; ::;;
::;I ::;:
::I: ii::
:::; 4:;
::;t
:I::
Member \o\.s~,P~~~ .""""""""""""
#I:*
I @I , l.1 I
+I I
Guevara : :X :Xi
Bierce :X : :X ;
La Roche i i :X:
Sonneman I i :X i
HcPhersort ; !X i [i;;
I:;#
::I: ;;::
l:1I I:;!
I;**
It;: :: I
:;:I I:;: 1:
11:; iiii iiii ::ii :I;:
I 'I
II
@I
:::: ::;:
:I:: :: I
11:: ;:I; :I:: I;::
;I:# ::::
1:::
;all :I:: ::;i it:; ::;: ;; ,I:: :::: :::: ::;; ;:
4: I I :: I!:: i:;:
:::I
:;;I ::::
:e;: ::;: ;: ;: :I :;I;
:::I
1;': iiii
:::: ;:::
f;;l !::I
' ::::
:::I
1:;:
8;:
11:
I 11
:I I(
iI,I
e ;: !i ii::
::;; :;;:
i::: ::::
11;
11::
;a::
l;el
I:*
$1
If:;
4 I I I .\ t' r ', 'I, '\, ',- '\ '8
. \\'
i
I I I I I I I J $
*3-
t I I I I
I I 1
I I ,
; the fact there were additional restrictions propssed by i i the Council, I
I By common consent the matter was referred back to the ; Planning Commission far their consideration. I I
I I I I 1
I I 1
I I 1
-\, '\ '\, '\, -8, ', ' '8 \, ', ',,'%, '\, '\ , , 6t
of @-&9\,&cL.
N a me 't.,,-&ij,, 'X,\ \<+\, '\ '.Q.
I I i:li /;;
I:'I ;i:;
:I:: ':::
:I;; :ill :::; i;::
mi . Member \&X&+\+< ~""""""""""-"-""""~""""""~."""""""""-""~~"~~.~~.""~""""-""""""
: The City Attorney informed the Council this matter wouid ; ; have to be referred back to the Planning Commission due to!
)tit
1'
:',I
.!I 1 1 I I b, Reclassification of certain Property On the east- i
; North side of Palm Drive, on the North by the South side : : of Elm Avenue. I
,I ; er-y side of pi0 Pic0 Drive, bounded on the South bY the :
I I I I L
I" 4:::
::;:
:111 1:;s
::I:
#I!#
;:::
'I
i The Clerk certified that proper notice had been given to i : all property owners concerned in the manner prescribed by ; I law.
i Res, #207 of the Planning Commission was presented, where-: : in they recommended the reclassification of certain prop- : I erties on the easterly side of Pi0 Pic0 Drive, bounded by i ; Elm Avenue to the North and Palm Avenue to the South, $ 1
: The Mayor declared the hearing open.
I I I I I I 4
I I I I I I I
I I I I I The Mayor announced the Council would hear from all personb ; desiring to speak in favor of this reclassification,
I As there were no persons wishing to speak in favor of this: : reclassification, the Mayor announced the Council would : : hear from all persons wishing to oppose this reclassifica-i i tion, There were no persons desiring to speak,
1 The Mayor declared the public hearing closed at 7:44 P. M,:
: After discussion by the Council it was agreed that the : i Council concur with the findings of the Planning Cornmiss- i : ion.
: The City Attorney presented the following resolution for : i the Council's review: 1 I
i Resolution No, 746, RKSCLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THEi : CITY OF CARLSBAD AP!PJf?UNCZNG FINDINGS AND DECISION REGAiW ; : ING CWGE OF ZONE CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN DESIGNATED :
: x,;;~~ adopted 3: tf 21.~ or?f>7 ai;( ~:ly~h~r ::~zc?$ng ;a2 i.-;?<?*
I t
I 1 t I I I I
I I I I I I I
1 I I I
I I 4 I I I I
I I I 1
I PROPERTY IN THE CITY CF CiSLSBAD FRON ZONA R-1 TO ZONE R-3:
I : The following Ordinance was presented for a first reading:!
: Ordinance No. 9116. AN OWINANCE OF THE CITY OF CAZLSBN) i : AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 9060, CHANGING CZRTASN DESIGNATED : : PROPERTY FSOM ZONE R-l TO ZONE R-3, IN THE CITY OF CARLS- I i BAD was given a first: reading,
I I I I 6
I I I I I 1 I I I * C. Conditional Use Permit - Carlsbad Woman's Club, : I I , I \ The Clerk certified as to proper notice having been given I
i to all adjoining property owners and as to publication in : i the manner prescribed by faw,
: A petition was presented dated May 11, 1961, signed by 12 i : residents of Oceanside, stating they were residents near i : the site of the Oceanside Woman's Clubhouse, located at i i 1608 Missouri, and have not found the clubhouse in their i : area to be objectionable. I I
i A petition was presented from metnbers of the Woman's Club : : of Carlsbad, together with other citizens and taxpayers of! : Carlsbad, petitioning the Commission and Council fcr an : i unrestricted granting of t5e application for a Ccnditional: i Use Permit Ordinance. The petition contained 219 signature$,
s I t I I
I
I * 1 I 1
I I I
I I I
1 I I
I I
I I
li.1 1:;: ;I:; ':::
::;I :::i :::: i:::
l:II
11:; ii::
11;;
:;I1
:;I: 11 :I:: i:::
1:;;
:::: !I :::; I::: ::I: ;: 1;;:
:::: !:#;
1:;) I;:!
ill( 'I
::it
1s;; i:;:
;!I; ;I :I
!!;: 1::
4I 'I
;;SI
Guevara ; i Xi Xi
Bierce :X: ;X:
La Roche ! i :Xi
Sonneman \ I !X;
??r,Phsxscn: ; !x: ;;;; iili :ir:
Guevara i jXiX!
Bierce !X: !Xi
La Roche ; i :X:
Sonneman I i i xi
McPhersoni : ; 81 ;
1I;t ::;: ::;:
41; :::: ::f;
:::I :::I :i::
11;: ::;:
::;;
:a'* ;::: ;:::
1:;1 :::: :;::
:::I
*#I; :::i i;::
;*:a
I ;'I ::!I 1:
::;; (Ill
8 I
I I '.., ', .X\ '\ '..* .%,
I I '*, 8, -. '\ \\\'.\ , 8 y.,
I , , \ "'\ 6:
1 i iq 2 me ',, '+\ '.\\8?&3\
I ; 0: $55'. ' .p,
1 I +-2\%\. + +&
+
l
- !?+ .\ '\ \\ \, '\ ',
a ' \$?.x
: Kember \S@\Fxp.$ ;"_____.I _____"__ ____," _~"__.._"_ __ ._""^""_" ""__.."".".." - """- * I-.. .!""""""""""""" ;;;;
: The Mayor declaro,d the pub1 ic hearing open and asked if ; ::;:
Ill* i there were any ptrsms present who iJi.shed to speak i- Ca.v-! :;I: I $1 : CP of the afpllcetion. There were no pzrscns present 1 1;:; i desiring +e spek in favor of the granting of tde conditi+- :::: ;ilv i a1 use permit, o 3::!
0 1 i 1
I
I I I :I::
I I : The Kayor asked if ttlrrc were any persons prescnt Ces;ring: i to speak in cppositiot; to the granting of the pemit. As I
i there were no parsons present desiring to speak in oppos- i I ition the Mayor dec~cre~ the ?tearing closed at 8:11 P.M. ;
;;18
.I
:;;; :::i I::;
1::;
*111
:!!I 1;;) :: The Clerk advised tile Councii there were signed dccuments i Guevara !X: :xi
1 in the fj ie =hat ;^~GuJ+. be presanted beSorrr the riearing i BiCXce : i 'x' i was declared clospd, 3y motion or' the Cout?cil the hearfag: La Roche : ' ;x: I,!*
I was reopeneds : Sonrreman pk i X! I NcFhsrson: : :X:
i The hearing was declared open at 8:12 P.M. I 1:'I
91;; *I #,!I 1 1 I t
i A letter was present& addressed to the Planning Comiss- 1 i ion containing 17 signrtares, protesting the granting oE i : this condition use perr:.it, as they zze property omcrs i? : : the area, and feel this Termit if granted vould be detri- i
i mental to this residzntial &rea.
: A petiCio:-L wzs prfsenired signed by sixtee- property owners!
; protesting the granting of the ccndItionaf we permit to ;
i the Woman's Club, stating they were residents of the ; affectzd area. I
I 1
t + I
I I 1
;i;:
(**I
I 11 Ii't
;I, 1::: ::r:
1;: ;!!:
I;*!
l'!l
;*I
;'I1 1;'l
;'*I
,:!I
.'I :i:i
'I
11
I I I.'# I 1 $12 ! The, hearing was declared closed at 8:16 ?.Ma I ::I:
:*
t l:!l I I
$ I 1
; Councilwoman Sohneman stated theye w2rz mafly names that i i signed the petition in favor of the clubhoclse who do r.ct / : live near the proposed iocation of the clubhouse, but who ! I know that it will be used for reasonable p~rposes~
: AEter consideration by the Council it was their decision I : that the Conditional Use Dcrrnlt should be granted, subject: : to the condition tIt&k &.ay s';ructure erected upon 'ihe
; aforesaid deszribed property shall not be used fcr pub?.ic I i aances.
i The Mayar ask2d if any rrenbers or' the hncil. had sigvLed i : the petition and Cm-. McFnexson stated he hd. Ths r'*..s "1LJ ;
i Attorney si;ated he could use his descretion in voS,i3g,
%
I t I I I *
I t
1 I I r I I I
I I i I I
1i;1
::I; ::;;
I111 :::: i;b
1:: i:::
1:;: :::; :;::
11;; : ; ;.I I:;:
1::: 4::
:;SI
;e::
1:;l
;*b;
11
101 i:!~
t I 1 The City Attorney presented the foliowing resolution Cor i i the Ccuncil's reviev: I I
t I I 9 1 : Resolurion No. xi' X RESULUTICN CIF THE CITY C6UP:CIL DF ; i THD CITY OF CAXLSBAD, MAKING FINDINGS 'TWT O&DINANCE NC, i : 9060 BE AMBNDED TC ALLOW 4 SPECIAL USE PSWAIT Ol'I PSOPEK'TY i I LEGALLY DESCRTBZD AS A PORTWN OF TRACT 252 AND 25:. rL.h~l;~ ; !
: LANDS, was adopted ty title only and further reading * I i waived.
i The f,llowing OrdSnence was presented for a first- reading, i
t I 1 l I I a
I t
ij;;
I+ I1 !:;I :y:
Guevara I ;: 1 $:
i3 i €?ice i [x:x i
LS Rcc-tie : ; !X:
Sonnenan !X: :X:
McPherson i ; ;x!
&;:I :;::
;;It
1;:; i::: .*!*
I Crdinan~:c Eo, ?1?.7, AN OFGINARCi.2 OF TK CI'TY CF C4RLS3.42 t Guevara ; : :X: Ii'I
: CRAMTIKG A SFZCIAL U3Z TZL?MLT FGR FZCPH=ATY LZGALLY DS;SCRII)d Bierce i ; :Xi I ED AS A PORTION OF Ti34CT 252 3nD 253, 'E-iKI ?.ANDS, vas i La Roche ; i :X i : adopted by t itls oniy ad Eurther reading waived. ; Sonneman :X ; !X :
t I McPherson ; :X :X i
I d, Appeal of ;.hi &~isio:x of the ??snv:."rrg i.xnmission ; I. :1;1
11: : in granting a Vc-<lav;i: on property descri\?ed as ~ots 62 i ::i; ; and 43, Granville Park, Map No 1782., said sr)~~e~'! being LY ... I I&;: i made by Viilard 2. ad L!.Llian 3;. ..':;r-cett, 1 :'I: *!!t
I """"". -
0 I I
I
:;
I
1 I 1 i The Clerk certified as to progcr nocice hav;:1.... s :v~I; ;;itrp_rL i : ir: the rnaaner prescribed b~r ;altje
I I I 1 1 I I I 1
L , t I I
!
1;;1
!*I1 11:
11;;
::;I
;I I1
I:;:
1;l:
1:::
:I:!
81
i:::
I I I I I I I I I I I !
.-5-
8' I \ '\ '..
I t, , '. .'
1 t I
.' \ '.
! Name ' : of
I
("""""""""""""""--""---"""".-.,""""""""-"""""""""-
I
1 i Member
I i Letter dated April 20, 1961 from Lillian M. and Willard D, i i Garrett, appealing the decision of the Planning Commission : ; in granting a variance on Lots 42 and 43, Granville Park, i i particularly to that portion of the variance which would : ; authorize a front yard setback of five feet and the crea- i i tion of one uncovered and paved off-street parking space ; ; extending to the westerly lot line of Lot 43 and to the i
i front lot line. It was pointed out in the letter of appeat : that no other property owner on this comparatively short : i street enjoys such a privilege, The front yard setbact of i : the properties in the vicinity of these lots is eight to i : ten feet, and the minimum existing setback is seven feet. : : In conclusion they stressed they had no objection to the i i development of a four-unit dwelling, but felt a front line ; : setback tu seven and one-half feet to conform with adjacen4 i structures would not cause a hardship to Mr. Vasquez, Also: : attached to the letter was an affidavit from Mr. and Mrs. i I Kramer, builder of Mrs. Garrett's duplex on Lot 41,
i Letter dated April 20, 1961 from Mr. and Mrs. C. M. De Mot<
I stating they wished to protest the granting of this var- i i iance as it would spoil the unity of the present setbacks i : on Ocean Street,
i Letter dated April 7, 1961 from Hazel B. Robinson, address{ i ed to the Planning Commission, stating she could see no i : reason for a variance not being granted, and in her opin- ; I ion their proposed development would be a beneficial im- I i provement and asset to the neighborhood. I I
: Letter dated April 10, 1961, addressed to the Planning i i Commission, from Mr. and Mrs. John Dorlan, stating they i
I were in favor of a renewal of variance being granted to ; i Mr. Vasquez on Ocean Street.
I Resolution No. 205 of the Planning Commission was present-: : ed to the Council, wherein they granted a variance on Lots: i 42 and 43, Granville Park due to other properties in the i : area having been granted similar variances. I I
: A plot plan of the area was presented for the Council's : i review, The Clerk pointed out that Lot 41 has a 10' set- ; : back, Lots 42 and 43 has an 8' setback now with the exist-: i ing structure, Lot 44 an 8' setback, and Lot 45 has 10' I I : plus setback.
I The Mayor declared the hearing open and announced the i Council would hear from the applicant if he so desired. :
i MR. EDDIE VASQUEZ stated the plot plan had not changed : : since he was granted a variance a year ago; due to finan- i i cia1 reasons he was not able to build within the one year : : period, therefore he had to reapply for a variance. The { i building will extend 2,45 feet in front of the Garrett ; : property; there will be 10' separating the buildings, and i r the view will be to the front. The setback will be 5' and: i there will be a 10' setback in the back yard. He plans to! : widen the present driveway in order to have the extra park+ : ing space. There will be three garages and he will need ; \ parking space for one mre unit, His plans have cost him i
; considerable money and he is hopeful the Council will I I : allow this variance as requested.
I I I I 1 I
I I I 1 I
I 1
I I
L I
I I I I I
I I
I I
I I
I I I I I I I I
I t
I I
I I I
I I ej 1 I I I I t I I I
: Cwn. Sonneman stated she felt a 5' setback was a very : short setback. , I I
i MR. MATHEW JARVIE, a member of the Planning Commission i i stated Mrs. Garrett had mentioned in her letter that he i : had not been courteous to her at the time the matter was i ! heard before the Planning Commission. He wished to apolo-j i gize to Mrs, Garrett. He was the only member on the I i
I I I
I
I I
1
I I I
1 I I I I I
\\' , .x' , .*
\* '\ '\\'*\
, ',$, '.,'.& ', +\$. ', \$A.
'h?$$$\q>,;@
iil:~
:!I:
,, ', '\ . 8 . ' '\ 71
\'\ 8 8
"""""""_ ,o '0 <.P??'d
;lt;~
111::
i1tl
1::;
::I#
4:;
:::; '1::
:I ::Ii :i:; 11 ::;:
:;;I :;:i
:$I1 i:;;
:::I ;:::
,:#I * ;; ii;; ;::: :I:: :I!: :::; :i:: it::
$81 ::i': :::: :::: ::::
;;I1
1;:; :;::
:;I1
::;t ::;; :::i ::;: i::; :::I :I:; :;:;
I: I*;: 9 :;::
::,I ::
:::I ::;i ;:;; :;:: iii: i:::
::a:
l#::
;:st ;:ii
1:::
:I;;
1:::
1::: ::;: i:;:
:is: :;:: ::;; 11 ::;: ::;:
::I (8:: :;:i :::: :::: i:!:
1:;:
:::: i;::
:ti:
::I:
;i:l
!;I?
;:
1 It
'1 I l
It1
I 11
:a:,
'1 ij;i
la4'
:*'I
I*'
iii; :I'
:hi :I
#*I1
**I:
# * , \\ ,' \.' 1 I
I
4
I
I
1 I
I I
\\ '.\'X., y\ x, '< 8..
I I '\\ '. *\ *\, x.,,'\, 7 1
I i N a me 8 **\ 8, "?J8
I ; of '\O\?+ \ q...
I
I
I -6" \'\ X,\\\\ \\ '\\ ' '\
' +\@' \, ,>\
0: ~""""""""""""~"""""""""""""""~""""-"~.-..~~"-~"--""------"--"--"-- ; Member '**9+,92\?<,$ \o %Q h.6 e
I '11;
I Commission when Mrs. Garrett applied for a variance approx: ii':
I imately three years ago and he was just attempting to give ; :Ill 11 i the other members of the Commission a brief background as : ;i;; ; to what had transpired at that time, I I ;;I1
i MRS . GORDON JOHNSTON, 260 Normandy Lane, stated at the t im4 i Mrs. Garrett applied for a 5' variance she was against it. : i];: : However, since the back yards are now 10' apart she does i , :;- 1; i not feel that Mr. Vasquez should be denied his request, I ;;VI
I I 1;; : COL. W. C. ATKINSON, 2505 Ocean, stated he did not feel : ::;I
:;ai i this particular parcel of land could be compared to other i ' :;'I : parcels in the city. At the present time there are five : :::I
:*I: i houses on the south side of the street. In the interest i 1::; I of the neighbors it is the appearance of the houses on the: :I11
I:;&
; land and not the lot that should be considered. He has seer( ;l':l i the plans for Mr. Vasquez, and according to the plans the :
; structure would enhance the other five lots. As far as the i /ijij $1
; view, the Academy owns the property across the street, and I ;I,
a;:ll i they plan to build in these lots some day, which would no i ;:;:a I doubt obstruct any view these parcels might have. As a I I ::::I i friend and neighbor he would like to support Mr. Vasquez's 1 1;:s; i request. I 11;
: MRS. LILLIAN GARRETT, 2282 Ocean Street, stated they had : : no objections to the multiple units. If this varfance were i i granted would Mr. Vasquez be allowed to cover the parking : : area? I I ;;,:I ,I:::
! 1 111;
; Mrs. Garrett was informed that Mr. Vasquez would not be i i allowed to Caver this parking space,
I :::I
I I I I 11:: I:II 01
I
I
I
11
I I
11
11
;i;t3 1 .: 1
,'I::
I ;:I:(
I I I:::;
I:::I
:::*I :;::;
:I;:) !It I
::::I
:::I:
1 t 4
15
I
I
I
I
I I I;:!;
;:::I ;::;: ;:;;i :I,:: I1 i:: I: :I; :;
I I ::::: ::I:: :;:I:
;#I;; :::I:
1;:*4 1:::;
I :::::
I I 1:::: I i::::
1 I 111+1 i;;;:
I ,:::,
I I I :::I i Mrs. Garrett further stated that in granting a 5' variance : i:::; *I
: this would make the building protrude 2 112 feet in front ; i of her building, It has also been stated that Lot 44 has : i a 6 1/2' variance. We have an 8' setback on Lot 41 and a i' ; 10' setback on Lot 44. On the letter of protest that you I 8% : were unable to read, the name should be Mrs. DeMott. At : i the time we applied for a 5' variance Mrs. 3ohnston signed i 1:;:: : the petition opposing this variance, I I :;:::
;As there were no other persons desiring to be heard, the t i Mayor declared the hearing closed at 9:12 P:M. 4
:After consideration by the Council, it was the feeling of I I the majority of the members that the decision of the Plann-i :*u:t : ing Commission should be upheld, and the appeal denied,
: The City Attorney presented the following resolution for ! ::::I ; the Council's review:
i Resolution No. 748. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE; Guevara ; ! :Xi ! : CITY OF CARLSB.0 ANNOUNCING AND DECL.4RING FINDINGS, AND : Bierce : Xi i X: ; i DENYING AN APPEAL FROM THE VARIANCE GRANTED BY THE PLAMN- i La Roche i i I Xi : i ING C0F"ISSION TO EDDIE R. VASQUEZ, was adopted by title : Sonneman i : : I Xi : only and further reading waived. i McPherson: : X: Xi i
: PLANNING : I ,',I:
III
I
1 I
I I
I I I
I
I I
I
I I It
I , I I ::;:I
I I I #;,;I ::
1 r iii
I a. Request for extension of time on tentative map of i Guevara : I :X: i
I
I :; / Laguna Terrace, On behalf of the Subdivider, the Engineer : Bierce I t XiXi : : for the Laguna Terrace Subdivision has requested a one year: La Roche : i !X: : I extension of time, The City Manager informed the Council : Sonneman !X: ;Xi i
:there is a drainage problem in that area, and this was i McPhersoni i i X: : i discussed at the time the tentative map was approved, and 1 ::i;; I:
ireconanended by the staff that this time be extended for one: ::I:: ; year. By mot ion of the Counci 1 it was agreed that a one : ::: ;:I::
:year extension be granted.
B
I
I I ::::;
I ,:::;:
I I I 1:"; I ; .I
I I I
Id::
I b. Approval of tentative map of Lebarr Estates Unit #2j :::GI
1:;::
'11:;
I I 18'
I I I! I!
I
!The tentative map of Lebarr Estates was presented for the i :;;I:
1 I I
I
I I
I
I
I
I t
I I $ 1 I I I I I
DI I"
I
I L
I ', \ -\ '\ ', *\ 1 I '\ '*, '\\ '\ " ',, I '\ , \ ', ', , 7:
t I '\\'\, '\ " y., I -749 I Na me ''\''$& '\,'?$$$, , "\ ', , '
: of \,% \O', ' i Member +?\-?,J'4* \,& 0 8.2. .o', q' '*
.""~""""""""""""""~"""""""""""~""~""""""""""""""""""". ,o '@ \.& \\<
I i;;i: *I
::;::
1 I ii:;;
Council's review. Resolution No. 208 of the Planning Corn- i ;:I::
mission was presented wherein they recommended approval of!
the tentative map subject to certain conditions. I I ::;I:
Ill
L. : After consideration by the Council, it was the decision i I of the Council that they concur with the decision of the i
i Planning Commission as set forth in their Resolution No. ; i 208.
i The City Attorney presented the following Resolution for i : the Council's review: I I
I I I I I I I
I I
1li;l
::;I:
:;dl
/;I:
;:::I ::::i
::::I
#:;a; ::;i; i;::;
#s&:t
i Resolution No . 744, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF i Guevara l : i X: ; I THE CITY OF CARLSBAD APPROVING TENTATIVE MAP OF LEBARR : Bierce i Xi : Xi : i ZSTATES, UNIT #2 , was adopted by t itlc only and further ; La Roche i : i X: ! : reading waived. i Sonneman ; i X: X: i
: ENGINEERING: 1 , ::'I: 41
;;'I;
I I I : McPhersonj : i Xi t
I I I 4;
1 !:!!I
1 8 a. Sidewalk improvement policy. A policy for the I i repair of sidewalks was presented for the Council's review: : Discussion was given as to the City's participation in re-i i pair of sidewalks that have been damaged due to tree roots:
I After discussion by the Council, by motion of the Council i i it was agreed that the city make all repairs to sidewalks :
I due to damage caused by trees in the parkways or else- I I i where on city property; and that notice be given to prop- I ; erty owners where sidewalks have been damaged by other i
i than city trees.
i OLD BUSINESS:
i The following Ordinances were presented for a seconding i ; reading: I I
a, Ordinance No. 9115. AN O2DINANCE OF TH2 CITY OF :
: NO. 9050OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, was adopted by title i i only, and further reading waived.
I I 1 1
: CARLSBAD AMENDING SECTION 83.1 OF ORGINANCE NO. 3032, BY 1 I ADDING SUBSECTIONS %" AND osuer, REQUIXING TRAFFIC TO STOP i : ON BASSWOOD AVENUE AT PINE AVENUE, AND ON CHESTNUT AVENUE : I AT VONROE STREET, was adopted by title only and further i
I reading waived. I I
I I I I I 1 I I I I
* 1
I 4
I I I I I I ! CARLSBAD WENDING SECTICN 403, SUBSECTION (e) OF G~INANCE!
I I L
I I I b. Ordinance No. 3045. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF I
I I I : FXNANCE :
I
I I I I I
I l a. Res. 1745 - providing for the storage and safe- : i keeping of city property deposited with the Security Bank 3
i of Los Angeles, Carlsbad Branch. The Council was informed: i that the Security Bank would like a resolution adopted, i
! authorizing Wesley F. Greek, City Treasurer, to enter into: : an agreement in accordance with bank's requirements, for I
i the storage or safekeeping of any property belonging to the i City of Carlsbad. The following resolution was presented i : for the Council% review; I I I I
B
'I p:i: 4:;: :;;
::::I 8: Guevara i : ; X: !
Bierce : i X: Xi i
La Roche i ; i Xi :
Sonneman : X: :X: i
McPhersonj l i Xi : ;:::: ::;'*
/I::
;:@I:
1;::: ::::I
!l:!l ::ii; :::;: 4:;;
::::I
Guevara i x; :x: ;
3ierce 1 : 1 I ;xi ;
La Roche : ; : X: i
Sonneman i : I X: I
McPhersoni i Xi X: i :::::
Guevara i i XI Xi i
Bierce !X: :Xi :
La Roche : ; i J i
Sonneman I ; I I
McPhersoni ; : X: i
In::#
1::s:
!;I:!
,'If :I::I ;:::I ::: '; ;::I:
+::I:
;:I::
!;;:I
:;::a
::I;: :I: :::::
::::I
ii::i 1::
: Resolution #745. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBWD PRO-! i VIDING FOR THE STORAGE AND SAFSKEEPING OF CITY PROPERTY i : DEPOSITSD WITH THE SECURITY FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LOS : i ANGELES, CARLSBAD BRANCH, was adopted by title only and i : further reading waived. I
; CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT:
: Utility Poles - Lebarr Estates Unit #lo P. meeting was he14 i with the San Diego Gas & Electric, members of the staff, I : City Manager, City Attorney a representative of the sub- ; i divider. The gentlemen representing the subdivider stated:
I I I
I I I I I I I I
I I I
I I I I
I I I
I I I
I
I .I
i::al .I
:;,:I :;:;i
:I:::
;::I,
;:'I;
;:PI
4;:; ::: i:,:;
::!:I ::::; ::::: :i::: 4;
::::I
lsll: :::;:
:::a:
lll:t
l;'l,
:Is
l!a:l
B+
I. , . ,, , , ,,
b,
I 'I I
; ', '.\\'\\ k ' '-
I '.. . \ 8. .- , . -, .\ '\ .' I 1 I
,I ,c . 'I
I \\ '\ ' '\ "\", 7:
I I of ' \\& 0 '4" ,&; P'
I I I ., ' .18* .. \, ', '8 '\ \ \,
. 81 "
,. ., . I.
L ,' I, 1 *, ,. , I. IF. , 'I
I ': 1 Name '",+'\o' ', 8,J%,
*'$&, '+?& ,, . I.
I
I t Member .a@,@& :"""""~"""-""""""""""""""""""""""""""""-!""""""""""""~" I
4 7. ;!I;
: . right. 1 I i::i' I!
I I ! :;::;
I I I I I I * I I I I I I I I I- mi
I 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I i I 1 I t I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 I I I I I s I I I t I I I I I I I I 1 4 I I I I I I
I
I I 1
I I I I 1 I I I I *
I
I I I I I * I
I I I I * I I I I I I I 1 I < I I
I
I *
1 I I ' I 1 1 8 I 1 I b I 1 I I 1 I I t I I 1 t I b I I I I I I I I I I 1 I
-9-
I I I I I I I I
I I I I I """""""-"""""""""""""""""""""""~"""""--~-
I
After consideration by the Council it was agreed that the i
City Attorney prepare an emergency ordinance providing fo?
a load limit on that portion of the Palornar Road that lie?
within the City Limits for action at the next regular I I
meeting of the Council.
Joint sewer proiect. A letter has been received from the I
County Chief Division of Engineers, with a resolution I I
attached, requesting the City of Carlsbad to adopt this i
resolution authorizing the preparation of an Engineer's :
report. There has been some act ion by the Town Council of i
Vista to bring the main transmission line along the Cala- t
vera Gap. This was proposed in the early discussions. A i
study was made by the County at that time and the costs :
for Route toA'e, which would come along the Buena Vista * I
Creek, and Route @We, the Calavera Gap. As the costs woulq
be less under Plan '*A", all plans have been made in accor4
dance with Plan OcAes, The City had another meeting with the
County, members from the Vista area, and Supervisor Cozenq,
and ironed out most of the difficulties. Tuesday of the i
following week the Board of Supervisors authorized the :
Public Works Department to make a study of Plan 19Bts.
The following resolution was presented for the Council's i
review: I I
Resolution No, 749. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF i
THE CITY OF CAKLSBAI), AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS:
DEPARTMENT TO PREPARE AN ENGINEER'S REPORT, was adopted bd
title only and further reading waived.
New street rehabilitation policy. A new street rehabili- I
t.ation policy has been prepared for the Council's conside$-
ation. Discussion was given some time ago regarding the i
drainage problem on Elmwood Street. There will be a meet-;
ing Wednesday evening at 7:30P.M. with the residents on i
Elmwood and the staff, to discuss their problem, and if :
the Council approves this new policy, these costs will be:
used in the discussion. After consideration by the Coun-:
cil, by motion of the Council it was agreed that the new i
street rehabilitation policy be adopted. I I
Planning Commissioner Jamie was present and announced :
there would be a County Planning Congress meeting on May i
29, 1961, at 12:OO P.M. in San Diego, and requested that :
any of the members of the Council that were able to atten4
to make reservations. Councilwoman Sonneman stated she i
would try and attend.
I I I I 1
I I I I I
I I
I I I 8 I
I I i
I I I I 1
RATIFICATION OF BILLS AND PAYROLL : I 4 6 t
I
Ratification was given for the bills for the general ex.-
penses of the City in the amount of $8,452.65 and for :
the Water Department in the amount of $70,674.25, from i
May 2, 1961 to May 16, 1961, as certified by the Director:
of Finance and approved by the Auditing Committee. I I
1 I
Ratification of the payroll was given for the first half i
of May, 1961, in the amount of $14,522.90 as certified :
by the Director of Finance and 'approved by the Auditing i
Committee. I I i I I I 4 I I I
ADJOURNMENT :
By proper n?'ction the meeting was adjourned at 10:56 P.M. I
Respectfully submitted,
*L /"
MAR&AKET E. ADAMS '
-rL 8f ,,;7& ,c J fl~1&&43& { J , :,, -<4 r >4
/
Deputy City Clerk
I 1 + I I I I I I I I I I i I 1 I I a 1
I
'\" \, ', '8, \'. 'x.'\,'\,
\\'\' , . ' ', '\ '\ ', ' ', 47 '\
~ame ',, ++ ',"S, \\ \\\"\ '\ ' '\
Member .s@'p$? \$!! '0 ' 4. .$:
:::: 'I
;:I1 II :::: 'I i:d I:;&
:;#I t;;
I:::
;,;I
,a*:
I:;# ::;; i:::
l:II 1111
l:4I
11;;
:I:;
:::e
;:I8
;:@I :::: lII;
l:II
:#I
11:;
!I;: It@:
!:'I ;::; 11
$1: ::I: ;:::
of '$'?&, '8 'f*
""""""""""""
pi IO
I 01
iiii SI1
IIII
Guevara i ! k i
Bierce :X : > 1
La Roche! 1 k :
Sonneman i b k i
McPherso4 ; $ :
;I:: II
;:#I
I*
I::; 11;
Guevara :X : b !
Bierce i i Z i
La Roche ; : :x:
Sonneman i !X k i
McPherson i : :X i ; !ii;; :: Ilii: ;r::i
:;l:l l:;Il
:I:&:
1:::; I:;:: ::4;
:1:11
1::;: :::::
;:If,
1:;:: Guevara IX: :X : :
Bierce ; jXtX: i
La Roche i : :Xi i
Sonneman: i :X : I
McPhersoa : :Xi :
tIl:l
;::a: ;:$:
Guevara i i !Xi i
Bierce ; : :X: : La Roche: : :Xi :
Sonnemani ixixi :
McPhersoS: :X: I
:::!I Il)l
::::I
;It1: ;::::
1:;:: ::;:: :;;::
$::: ":;
'::::c
;:I::
1:':; :I:
:::;I : : yy ;-
!!.I!
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
MARTHA L. COLE, CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER
._
PUBLIC HEARING OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL,
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, TUESDAY, MAY 16, I
1961, 7:30 P.M.., RE: DECISION OF THE
COUNCIL ON AN APPEAL OF THE DECISION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO GRANT A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO SOUTH COAST
ASPHALT CO.
Present: I WILLIAM J. LA ROCHE HAROLD E. BIERCE WILLIAM G. GUEVARA EARL H. MC PHERSON JANE C. SOE\TNEMAN BARBARA LANG HAYES JOHN SLATER
Mayor Councilman If
If
Councilwoman City Attorney
City Manager
GLENN R. FEIST, Esq., on behalf of Union Title Insurance
MARTHA L. COLE, C,SR, RepoPter.
Company and Mrs. Sally Cornell.
I
[ ',
1,
~~
-
MARTHA L. COLE, CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER 3
1 1 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, TUESDAY, MAY 16, 1961, 7:30 P.M. 1
I 2l -LO - -
3
We .first have the decision of the Council on an 4
NAYOR LA ROCHE: Let 1 s have this Item No. 7.
5
a Conditional Use Permit to South Coast Asphalt Company. 6
appeal of the decision of the Planning Commission to grant
7 COUNCILTiOMAN SONNEMAN: Is there anythirg special that
8 we have to do?
9 CITY ATTORNEY HAYES: . No,. but there has been a letter
10 presented, which the City Manager might wish to read at this
..
11 time.
12 CITY MANAGER SLATER: "ds is addressed to:
13 "City Council
14
15
,
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
"City of Carlsbad
If Carlsbad, California
Re: Conditional Use Permit Application East Vista Way-South Coast Asphalt Products, Inc .
II Gentlemen:
'"ay I first take this opportunity to apolo-
gize for the misunderstanding occurring at your
last regular mee'ting. It was certainly my inten-
tion to assert only those rights which are granted
an attorney' for a client who is protesting the 1
I
granting of an application, which the client feels
25
millions of dollars of investment. 26
jeopardizes a substantial property right and
1
MARTHA L. COLE. CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER 4
1 "I am present this evening to present to you
2
surrounding property owners, and the dust and 3
expert testimony on the effects of blasting upon
tial properties, as well as the effect upon the 5
other consequences of-such activity upon residen- 4
6 Tri-City Hospital.
7 "It is still my considered opinion that the
8
9
granting of this Use Permit will set the course
already invested, as well as the many millions, 11
of Vista Way is concerned. The millions of dollars 10
for many years to come insofar as the development
which have been,committed or will be invested, 12
13 would be placed in jeopardy.
14 "The investment of South Coast Asphalt Pro-
15
17
City, is insignificant, compared to the benefits 16
ducts, Inc., and '.any revenue realized by your
ing the developrrent of Vista Way in the proper ' 18
your City would receive by encouraging and support-.
19 direction.
20 11 I enclose herewith pictures showing opera-
21
"Please feel free at your meeting tonight 22
tions of the type which are proposed.
23 to call upon me to answer any questions, or upon
24 my experts for any testimony you might desire.
25
"Glenn R. Teis t. It 26
' Yours truly, II
<
-
MARTHA 1. COLE, CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER 1
1
5
MAYOR LA ROCHE: We are very grateful to l!Q. Feist, and
I- 2
matter of the Council now simply deciding on the use permit. 4
any further, because the hearing has been closed. 4t1s a 3
we appreciate his apology; however, we can't go into this
5 CITY ATTORNEY HAYES: Mr. Mayor, if you wish, any member
6
wish to reopen the hearing. 8
is within the Council's discretion as to whether or not, they 7
of the Council could move to reopen the hearing, but that
9 MAYOR LA ROCHE: Well, t€&* s true. If anyone wishes
10
Would you like to reopen it anyone? 11
to reopen it on the Council, well,, you certainly can do it.
12 CITY COUNCILMAN BIERCE: No, Mr. Mayor, .I have given
13
sure -- but to give my best opinion, I would like to move 15
take this job to win a popularity contest -- that's for 14
this a lot of thought, and believe me, realizing that I didnt.;
16
added. 18
in its entirety with some supplemental restrictions to be 17
that the Resolution of the Planning Commission be upheld.
19 I have given these restrictions quite a bit of
20 thought. I would like to mention them.
21 Number 1, no quarry operations to be below the
22 existing creek level.
23
24
25
26
L
Number 2, notice to be given to the Administrator
of the Tri-City Hospital prior to controlled blasting opera-
tions.
Number 3, in lieu of a surety bond, applicant
to furnish proof of liability insurance in the amount of
~~~~-
\ 1
MARTHA 1. COLE. CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER I
1 fifty thousand dollars,' and ' '
6,
2/
Number. 4, upon termination of quarry opera'tion,
3
a worhanlike manner. 4
all property, which has been worked, .is to be kvelled in
5 COUNCILWOMAN SONNEMAN: Is that,a motion?
6 COUNCILMAN BIERCE: That is a motion.
7 COUNCILWOMAN SONNEMAN: I second it..
8 MAYOR LA ROCHE: It's been moved and seconded that this
9
in regard to the conditional use permit to the South Coast 10
-- that the decision on the appeal of the Planning Commission
11
12
Asphalt Company be approved with the additions by Mr.
Hal Bierce. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
13 (Affirmative response).
14 I . ' MAYOR LA ROCHE: Contrary, no. I
15 (None).
16 CITY ATTORNEY' HAYES: Mr. Mayor, that should be
17 I referred back to the Planning Commission to study the
18 recommendations you want.
19 CITY COUNCILMAN BIERCE: Does this open it up again?
20 CITY ATTORNEY HAYES: No, it would be under Section
21.
22
23
24
1 25
26
1812: If your decision is anyway contrary to the action
taken .. by the Planning Commission, the City Council shall
refer their findings to the Planning Commissfon and request
a further report of the Planning Commission on the matter.
MAYOR LA ROCHE: Well, the only difference is this --
COUNCILMAN BIERCE: This is merely an addition to their
..
I I I 1
i
MARTHA 1. COLE, CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER
7
i
1
2
3
4
5
6
original findings.
CITY ATTORNEY HAYES: That's right, but it is a differ-
ence in the findings,.and you should refer it to them, and
they report back to yau they concur in your fipdings, or
.-
they disagree in your findings, or if they take no action
in forty,days, that is deemed to be approval by the Planning
,. .
I
7 Commission. . .I
8 COUNCILWOMAN SONNEMAPJ: D0e.s it take a motion, or just
. ..
9 from the .Mayor?
10 CITY ATTORNEY HAYES: No, that is just pursuant to the
11
would be announced then by a resolution. 12
ordinance and following their action, then your decision
13 MAYOR LA ROCHE: Okay, you will just refer this back
14 to the Planning Commission?
15
16
CITY MANAGER SLATER: Yes.
MAYOR LA ROCHE : Okay. All right. ,
17
18
"-0"-
I
19 .I
20
21
22 ..
23
24 I
25
26
..
I J
MARTHA L. COLE. CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER
1
COUNTY OF SAN DTEGO j 2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA) - ss. " 71
3
4 I, MARTHA L. COLE, Certified Shorthand Reporter and
5
of California, do hereby certify: 6
a Notary Public in and for the County of Ban Diego, State
-7 That I reported in shorthand the proceedings had
8 at the hearing he33 in the foregoing matter on'the 16th day
9 of May , 1961, that my shothand notes were later transcribed
lo
a true record of the proceedings had at said hearing. l1
into typewriting by me, and the foregoing transcript contairs
12 DATED at Oceanside, California, this 22 day of
13 May, 1961.
14
15
16
17
18
<& Q
p-.p 4-i5 A&, /I
Certr'if ied Shorkhdnd Repor~ter Notary Public in and foF,fi;he -County of San Diego, State gf California
4-t! c_ -1
,.
I.% ~ -, .. 2. .x
i, .. .. q ,- -
h r,
. " :.
19 "CY, ' ,,
c-.
My commission' expires: May 11, 1962. .- .
20 ..
I ., -3" ".- -; "
21
22
.,
23
24
25
26
.. .- .. . ,.