Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1965-06-01; City Council; Minutes5 e I I I I I I I I I I I * I t I i I I I I i I I I I I ' CITY CF CAdLSEAD ' '\\. ' I : \, '\,", '.. I '\\ '8, i Name \, ; of '$ "~""""~"""""""""""""""""""""""~""-"~"""-~""""""" : Member Minutes of: CI TY CGUNCIE (Regular Meeting) i Date of Meeting: 3une 1, 1S65 Time of Meeting: 7: (if) P, M, Place of Meeting: Council Chambers €DILL CALL was answered by Councilmen Dunne, Neis- i wender, Atkinson, Hughes and Jardine. Also present : were City Manager Mamaux, City Attorney Wilson and i City Clerk Adarns, ! '8 ', '8 ', 8 '.L 8 I i INVOCATION was offered by .&v. Gordon J. Baker. ; ALLEGfANCCE to the Flag was given. i APPAOVAL OF MINUTES: I # i (a) Minutes of the regular meeting of May 18, 1965 were :Mei~wende~ : approved as corrected, !Atkinson 1 1 4 I I I 1 0 I I I I I I I I jDunne I I :Hughes I I !Jardine I I I I I I I I I # I i I I 8 I CORRESPONDENCE: : There was no mitten correspondence presented. 4 I I : ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: ? L $ * b I I : There were no oral communications. I f t I I I i The Mayor declared a 10 minute recess at 7: 20 E", M, Thb ; meeting reconvened at 7: 30 P. M, i PUBLIC HEAZINGS: I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I i ( a) Appeal of the decision of the Planning Commission in i i denying a request for reclassification on property located; : on the southwest corner of the intersection of Chestnut i : "Street, fr", I : Appellant: Jay tear, Inc. t I I I I * I 8 1 ; The Clerk presented the Affidavit of Publication, i : The Council was informed that Jay Lear, Inc., by letter i dated May 5, 1965, requested an extension of sixty (60) : days in regards to Resolution No. 394, in which the Plan- ! ning Commission denied a request for reclassification. : The reason for the additional time was to prepare proper : I information in presenting their appeal to the Council, ! I 8 I I I I .I 1 I I 1 I t I f i The City Attorney informed the Council he answered this : letter and informed Mr. Lear their letter dated May 5, i 1965, had been deemed to constitute an appeal of the de- : cision of the Planning Cornmission, and the hearing had i been set according to the usual order of events for June 1 : 1965, at 7: 30 P, M, Any change in this date may only be I granted by the City Council. i The Clerk presented the following letters of protest on I : the grounds the property was located across from the ; i High School,,and near the Magnolia Avenue Grammar i School and the future Junior High School; there is no need! : for any commercial planning in this area, due to the fact i i there are already two shopping centers plus the May Co, : : shopping center; the area is predominantly an R-1 area; i z this intersection is an extremely busy intersection now, : i downtown Carlsbad: I i John J. Batista and La Vange Batista 1940 Basswood A& : E. Fit . and Minnie Snedeker 3432 Adams St. ; i Mape V, and X. S. Loxerzan 1950 Magnolia Avd. : Oceanside-Carlsbad Union High School 150 S. Horne St. I I Oceanside I I I I 1 I I ; and is the only through route to El Camino Real from i I I I I I I I I 6 I I I I I I I I t I 4 I I I * I I I I t ! I 1- '8 I I ', '8, ', I I 8, '\ ' I I , < '\ I I I ', \ ", I 1 8 'L I I t I 1 I -2- i Na me "*,"* t : of '< ~"""~""""""""""-""~"""""""""""""""~"~""""-;"""-""". : Member : James R. and Kathryn G. Einum 3820 Monroe St. : : Mr. & Mrs. Gordon A. Johnston and i Mr. & Mrs. Bradford A. Johnston i Mr. & Mrs. Jack Y. Kubota 3800 Skyline Dr. : i James M. & Dorothy M. Gaiser 3784 Skyline Dr. 1 i The Mayor announced the Council would now hear from i i the appellants or anyone desiring to speak in favor of this: : appeal. I I ! MR. JAY LEAB, stated he was President of Jay Lear, 16~. / At the Planning Commission meeting they did not receive! : a very good reception. The reason for requesting the 60 : i day extension of time was to enable them to gather addi-I : tional information. Letters were sent out to schools, I i Sheriff's Departments and Police Department to see if i : statistics would show that a commercial establishment ; i near a school contributed to the delinquency of children. ! ! They did not receive nearly the response they had hoped ! i for. A letter was received from the Sheriff of Orange t ; County and he indicated that from their experience a corn; i mercial establishment near a school had not contributed i i to the delinquency of children. I I : Mr. Lear further stated as far as a license for alcoholic : { beverages, the State Board of Eq.ualization will not issue i : a permit for an establishment that is located xithin 600 i i feet of a church or school. Also they did talk to someonej I from the school and he informed him there were no statis; ; tics available showing whether or not a commercial es- i i tablishment near a school contributed to the delinquency i ! of children. 1 * I As there were no other persons desiring to speak in favo~ i of this appeal for reclassification, the Mayor announced i : the Council would now hear from all persons who were ; ! opposed to the reclassification, ! i MR. ROBEAT STRAUSS, 3291 Sighland Ave., stated he I ; had taught at the Oceanside-Carlsbad Junior College for ; i 14 years, and he is well aware of the conditions created i : by the Mission Shopping Center across from the school. ; i Thrifty Drug and Vons h'larket both have a liquor license. i ; Considerable time has been spent on the citizens commit-: i tee for the development of the Master Plan, and a com- i : mercial area at this location did not show up. I 1 : MR. IVAN MEWPORT, 2020 Karen Lane, inquired as to i I why his letter had not been read, opposing this commer- i : cia1 center. I I i The Clerk informed the Council and Mr. Newport she was: : not in receipt of a letter from Mr. Newport. I i AS there were no other persons desiring to speak, the ; I i Mayor declared the public hearing closed at 7:55 P. Me I : After further discussion by the Council the following i i resolution was presented: I : Resolution No. 1154, A iEE.SSEU"ICM CF TXE CITY l COUNCIL QF THE CITY QF CAr",LSBPB DFNYING THE iDunne : REQUEST FC8 8ECLASSIFICA"ir"wN OF CERTAIN P3C- ;Neiswender : PERTY IN T3E CITY OF CAL~LSBAD, F3.0M ZCNE :Atkinson i R- 3L TO %CNE C-1, was adopted by title 011ly and further$3ughes i reading waived. i Jardine 1 Pilgrim Congregational Church 2020 Chestnut Ave, ; I 0 I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 i I I t I I I $ I I I I I I I I I r $ I I I I ; I 1 I I I I I 1 * I I t I I 0 I # I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 7 I t I I ! I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I 0 I 8, s -, ' * ', ', '\ '. I '\ -, ' I ' ', I ', '. ' I I I . I -3- i Name '\,'! ., -. ! ; of ': ~"""""~~""~"""""""""~"""""""""~"-"--""-"""--;"------"---' : Member : Can. Dunne stated he based his motion on the fact the i i requested zoning is not cornpatable with tile surrounding ; ! zoning and would not be the best use of the land. I I I 4 1 I I I ' I (b) Precise Plan for Elm Avenue from Pi0 Pic0 Drive to i : El Camino aeal. 4 I i The Clerk presented the Affidavit of Publication. i The Mayor requested the Clerk to reat3 all written corres i i pondence concerning this matter. i The following letters of protest were presented: i Letter dated May 27, 1965, signed by Ernest Adler, Jr., \ : 2549 Carlsbad Blvd., stated as an owner of property i traversed by the City Engineer's proposed extension of i : Elm Avenue, he would like to request that the City i Council withhold adoption of the Precise Plan because of i : the following reasons: (1) The proposed extension has : i deterred development of his property for approximately i : one year and it severs the property into unuseable parcel! 1 for the type of development planned; (2) this proposed : i major through street will be detrimental to the residentiai i area and will be a hazard to school children; and (3) there j are other more suitable and economical routes possible i i that wculd not require cutting through the heart of I I i residential areas. i Letter dated May 27, 1965, signed by Allan Jandro, : Ernest Adler; Jr., and Group Ten Properties, requestin6 i that the City Council forego adoption of the Precise Plan i ; for the extension of Elm Avenue, the reason being the ! i route selected by the City Engineer is not in the best 1 : interest of the citizens of Carlsbad and the majority of I i the property owners concerned. The magnitude of this i : project warrants that documents be made available to all : i parties concerned; that proper studies have been made; I i and that the City's Master Planning Consultant, the Count$ ; Road Department and the property owners concerned have! i had an opportunity to review and concur with the City i Engineers plan. Also it is their feeling this matter shod4 ! receive thorough consideration prior to any af€irmative I i action. t i The Mayor announced the Council would now hear from alg i persons desiring to speak concerning the Precise Plan of: ; Elm Avenue. I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 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 t i I MiZ, RtALTEfi PINDERSON, stated he was an attorney and! i was here to represent his father, J, A. Anderson, who ; i is 81 years old and has been a resident of Carlsbad for : : 32 years. This proposed route will take a house on his i i fatherls property. Perhaps this could be resolved if he ; i could ask how soon the City anticipates the construction I ; of this project. I I i The City Manager informed the Council and Mr. Andersoi I that funds have been provided in next year's budget to i : acquire rights of way. The City anticipates acquiring ; i rights of way from Pi0 Pic0 Drive to Donna Drive within i : this next year. This plan has been approved by the State : i for State funds and has also been approved by the County. i i Mr. Anderson further inquired as to why the proposed i ; route veered to the North. It will take approximately 84' i i of his father's property. If the present prolongation were i I ! * I I I I 8 I 1 e I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 I I t I I 1 I I I I I I I 4 I I I t I I I I I 1- ! I 0 I I t I I I 1 I I 1 I I I 4 I t 1 , I t I I 4 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I t I I I I I * I I I I t I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I i ! a I t I I 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 1 I I I I I I I I t ! I I 8 I I I I t I I I I I I I I t 9 I I I I I I I I I I e l 8 I I I I 1 3 I I ? ! 1 I I I I I 0 I I I I I 4 1 + I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I' '. I 8, '\\ \\ '8 I '\ ', '8. a 8 ', 8 -\ t I X\ '\ ' i Name '\, 9 : of y ; Member -4- \ '\ """"""""""""""""""""""""~"""""""~""~"""""""""" carried out it would miss his father's property. In closing Mr. Anderson stated he objected to the alignment! of the proposed route from Elmwood to the westerly side; of Elighland Avenue. MLit, ERNEST ADLE:R, 2949 Carlsbad Blvd., stated he 1 would like to present his position in the form of a ques- ; tion, Would you deed to the City all of your land and the4 pay for 60'3"' of the cost of the construction and then absorb the severence damage and agree not to ask for access to I this particular street? This is what he has been asked td do and also other property owners in his area. He has i been quite persistent in this matter due to the fact it I I has prevented him from developing his property in the i manner it deserves. A good portion of the route is not ; correctly located. He has engaged three individual f + engineers to make on-sight inspections of the route pro- : posed through his property, and they concur 100% that i his particular segment is not desireable from an enginee$*s standpoint. I I In closing Mr. Adler stated he felt this matter should be i given considerable and additional information before the i Council makes a decision. The Master Planners for the : City have not had an opportunity to examine tnis route i property owners in his area have not examined the route, I Cmn. Dunne asked Mr. Adler what this plan would do to i his property? I 8 1 I I I I I I I I I nor has the County had an opportunity. Also some of the : I I . A plan of the proposed route was presented and Mr. Adlei. pointed out the location of his property. I The City Manager informed the Council this plan has bee4 reviewed by the Planning Consultant and the County Road : Department. I I The Engineering Department reported this precise plan i was ordered by the previous Council.. &hen completed i this route will provide a high type, four lane roadway i from downtown Carlsbad and beach area and Highway 131 i Freeway interchange to El Camino Real. It is the Engi- ; neering Depa.rtrnent conclusion that the plan has the most! desirable alignment available, based on topography, I I existing land use, construction requirements and econo- I mically sound for right of way acquisition cost. There- : fore, the Eogineering Department recommends consider-! ation leading to the adoption of this plan. I 1 The Assistant Engineer pointed out any east/west road i has the problem of crossing the Highlands area and Val- i ley Street area. It is their feeling a minimum of pro- : tests have been received. The reason for a curve at Highland Dr. is for the dollar value in taking property. i The plan will meet all requirements by the State. This i is not a freeway but a collector street. I I The Mayor declared the public hearing closed at 8:15 P. I$. After further consideration by the Council, the following ; resolution was presen'ced: Resolution No. 1155. A RESCLUTICN CF TWE CITY i Dunne CCUNCIL OF 'THE CITY OF CAhLSBAD A.D,OPTING A :Neiswender PIC0 DhIVE TC EL CAMINO REAL, was adopted by title: Eughes only and further reading waived. i Jardine I I I I I I I I * 1 I I I I I I PREcrsE PLAN FGR TBE ELM AVENUE F~OM pro i Atkinson I t a I * I I I I I I I I 8, t ., , I I I I I I \, '8 8 '\, I L 's, '\, ' I -5- i Name 'x ' I I I 'I '%,"8, I I ', I t : of 'x 1 I '* ~~""""""""""""""""""~"""""-"-""""--~"""""""""""-"" : Member : ENGINEERING: I I I I " I t I 0 I I i (a) nes, ff1156, adopting and submitting Budget for Ex- I ; pendituF-uFunds allocated from the State ~IE$iFay ; i j?=d to Cities, TfizSbterequests txe City Engineer0 i : submit a budget for expenditure of funds allocated from : i the State Highway Fun4 to Cities each year. This has i I been prepared by the City Engineer and the adoption of : I a resolution by the City Council adopting this budget is i ; required. I I I I I I i The following resolution was presented I I : Resolution No. 1156. A RESOLUTION CF TBE CITY I 1 i WTTNCIL OF TBE CITY OF CAZLSBAD ADOPTING .AND: Dunne : SUBMITTING A BUDGET FOR EXPENDITURE CF FUlaJDSMeiswende i ALLWATED FRGM THE STATE ZIG~AY FUND m $..tttinson I CITIES, was adopted by title only and further reading :Hughes 1 waived, gardine I 1 I 1 I I I i ! (b) Acceptance of Yarberry Street Improvement AgreemcGt i This agreement is in connection with a lot split granted i I approximately two years ago. The property owner re- i i quested a waiver of street improvements at that time and i : the Council granted the request. The property owner re-: i cently signed the agreement and it will be necessary for i : the Council to authorize the Mayor to execute the agree- : i ment. i By motion of the Council Mayor Atkinson was authorized punne : to execute the agreement on behalf of the City of Carls - : Neiswende i bad. i A. tlcins on I I I t I I I I I I I Bughes I i Jardine I NEW BUSINESS: ! 1 # t I 1 I I I I I" : There was no new business presented. t I I I : OLD BUSINZSS: ; "" 8 t 1 I t i There was no old business presented. I I I t * I i CITY ATTOZNEY'S REPORT: I I I t I 1 I 1 : Acceptance of deeds for Las Flores extension. The City I i ZEorney report4 the last two deeds have been received i : for right of way purposes forthe extension of Las Flores. ; I Mr. and Mrs. Odenthal were willing to deed their propertp : without cash compensation. Mr. Sparks appeared before '' i the Council last meeting to discuss his property. The f : City offered Mr. and Mrs. Sparks $500, %G for his portion! i of right of way needed, and Mr. Sparks felt he should i 1 receive more. Fie was requested to have an appraisal ; ; made of his property and submit it to the Engineering I : Department. The appraiser for the City appraised the : I property for $500.00 and Mr. Spark's appraiser appraise4 : the property at $1,000. The staff recommended that Mr. : ! Sparks be offered $750.00, and he is willing to accept i ; this amount if the Council approves this amount. I t I I I I I I I By motion of the Council the deeds from Mr. and Mrs. :Dunne : Odenthal and Mr. and Mrs. Sparks were accepted, and INeiswender i it was agreed that the amount of $740.00 be paid to Mr. :Atkinson : and Mrs. Sparks for their property. I I-Iughes e I I 1 i Jardine I I I I I I I I I t I I 4 I I a I I I s I 8 % I I 1 1 ! ! 1 I I \ . t! ! ', 'x, '\\ ', I # I 8*. '\ '8 ' b I I I I I I -. '\ s I I '8 ', '\ 1 : of '84 ~""""""~"""""""--"""""""~"""~""""""""""""'"""""""~ i Claim for damages.Letter dated May 28, 1865, from i : Vivian B. Kite, dba Vivian's Beauty Salon, 5806 Grand ; 1 Avenue, stating she felt the City of Carlsbad owes her i 1 compensation for loss of business during the time work ; i was being done on Grand Avenue, causing her to close i : her shop on May 18, 1965, and no water pressure for ; i several days, preventing her from giving service to her i : customers. I : By motion of the Council the claim was denied and refer- ! Dunne i red to the City's insurance carrier. : Neiswendt I -6 - i Name 'x\,'*! I : Member \f 0 I 8 s I I I I 8 ! Atkinson : i dughes I I I 4 I I : Jardine i A draft of an ordinance for street widening was presentedi : and- Cmn. Dunne questioned the wording as to requiring ; i each parcel of land that would be improved to put in 1 I 1 street improvements, in R-1 and 8-2 zones. I I I The City Attorney was instructed to prepare a new draft I i of an ordinance €or consideration at the next Council I ; meeting. I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I i CITY MANAGER'S REFG9T: I I I I I I I : Amendment to agreement between the City of Vista and I: I the City of Carlsbad re: Mutual Fire Fighting Assistancei i Agreedment. The City Manager informed the Council an ; ! amen ment to the agreement between the City of Vista 1 ! and the City of Carlsbad has been received. The original: i agreement only included the City of Vista and they wish I : to include the Vista Fire Protection District also. The : i staff bs approved the addition of the Vista Fire Protectiotj ; District, I : The following resolution was presented for the Council's ! ! consideration: i Resolution No. 1157. A 3ESOLUTIGN CF TEE CITY i i COUNCIL 6F TEIE CITY OF CARLSBf!!D AUTHORIZING : ; AND DIBECTING THE MA.YCR CF THE CITY OF L : BETWEEN TIHE3 CITY OF VISTA, THS CITY GF CAXLSE@.D, i CALIFGRNIA, A.ND TEE VISTA FIZE FWTECTION : Dunne i DISTSICT FCEt THE ADDITICN CF TBE VISTA FIRE i Neiswende ! INb ASSISTANCE AGIEEEMEMT DATED JANUARY 19, ; I Ekagties i 1965, was adopted by title only and further reading waive4. Jardine, i Buena Vista Sewers. Cmn. Jardine inquired as to when i : the hearing would be held on the Euena Vista Sewers Pro-: i ject. I ! The Engineering Department informed the Council they i : anticipate it will be probably scheduled in approximately : i one month. f I I I I I I I 1 4 1 I I CARLSBAD TC EXECUTE THCIT CEZTAIN AGREE MEN^ i PROTECTION DISTRICT TO THE MUTUAL FIRE FIG~T; AtEnson. I s 1 & I I * I 1 I I I 1 I I i AUT3TCRIZATION FGR PAYMENT CF BILLS AND I r RATIFICATI@N CF PAYiWLL: $ I t i I I I I I I Authorization was given for the payment of bills for the i : General Expenses of the City in the amoQnt of $96,491.14 i Dunne : and for the Water Department in the amount of $3,461. 97' ; Neiswende i for the period May 18, 1965 to June 1, 1965, as certified 1 Atkinson : Committee. i Jardine e 1 by the Finance Department and approved by the Auditing : Hughes I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I k 9 1 * I * I I I I I I t I t 7 0 0 I I I I * I I f 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 I 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 I * I I I I I I I ! I 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 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 4 I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I l e I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I' , \, ', .* '\ ' I *' '\ '8, ", 1 \, ', '* I -7- I .' . '. 8. .\ ' i Name '.,''? : Member *! : of '3 ,"-"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""~"""-l"""""""~ Ratification of the payroll was given for the second half IDunne of May, 1965, in the amount of $19,843.44, as certified Weiswendex by the Finance Department and approved by the Auditing :Atkinson Committee. I Hughes i Jardine ? By proper motion the meeting was adjourned at 8: 34 I?. Id. I 1 ADJOUhNMEMT: I I to June 9, 1965 at 7: 30 P. M. 1 t Respectfully submitted, t I I J k I r ,"T *'$%{ #&.& y MdL?d/Uy.J MARC&ARET E. ADAMS City elerk l e l I I I I I * I i 1 I t 1 I I I I I I I I I I * I ! I 1 l a s l e a I t t * I I t I 1 I ; I I I 1 I I I 1 t I I I I I I I I t I I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I a I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I * I I I I I I ! k I $ I I I I f J I I t a I * I a I I I l a I ¶ I I 1 e l 8