HomeMy WebLinkAbout1966-06-08; City Council; Minutes* , . .'. . I i ',, -8, '\ ', i CITY OF CAi!LSGAB 3 '\ "\
!Date of iieeting: June 8, 1966 '\ '\ 7:oo P.i4. I Name '8, ' :Time of ileeting: Counci 7 Chambers : of " ', i PI ace of ~~32ti ng : ! Member
: Pii nutas of: CITY COiJldCIL (Adjourned Rehul ar)., '\;\
: I""""""""""I-""""""""""""~""""""""""""""-"""""""-
t I
I I i ROLL CALL wasn answered by Councilmen Weiswender,;
:Atkjnscn, 9unne and Jardine. Also present were : i City Hanager t-iamaux, City Attorney bdilson and I I I I I I I 4
t Ci ty Clerk Adaats.
! TH~!OCATfLIE was offered by Councilman Neiswendet-s i
I I I I I VP
1-
I 1 I 1 krPR2VA.L OF F:IIIJilTES:
I ! I i (a> i4inutes of the regular meeting held Hay 17, INeiswendt : 1966, were approved as corrected. i Atlci n~on
I I Dunne
1 I Jardi ne
I
I
I ! I I : CORRESPOP4DEMCE :
!
I I I I I I I (a) The P4ayor recognized a letter from the Girl :
:Scouts extending their thanks and appreciation I
i to the City of Carlsbad's Employees kssociiation : ! for the contribution made towards the vests they i :will be wearing when they are in k,:ashington, D.C.:
! They \.:ill be leaving from Oceanside by tPain ion June 16, 1965, ar,d they asked that the citizeni : Prorn Carlsbad be at the train depot to see them ;
i (b) Letter dated May 31, 1966, from Sidney A. : Fuller, was presented, stating he had received ani : official notice from the Building Inspector, I requesting 'chat he remove a lamb from his properti :at 3015 Valley Street. This is his daughter's i
:4-H project and will be disposed of at the Del ; iClar Fair or the Escondido Fair. i4r. Fuller re- i :quested that he be given a reasonable extension :
I of time to handle the matter. I I
! By motion of the Council it was agreed that Jr. INeiswende /Fuller be given an extension of time to dispose !Atkinson
I of the lamb until after the Fairs, L Dunne !
I I
i off. I I l I I I I
D I
1 I
* I 1
1 i Jardi ne
I
I i ORAL CO8i*lUNICATIOF4S:
I 1
I I 1 1 1 1
I a
I I ;.;! p, . ROBERT KRONEWYER, stated he was an attorney i .. 1 from San Diego, and was appearing on behalf of : :i..ir. Geier, President, of the Yellow Cab Company I jof Oceanside, concerning the application submit- : : tcd by the Avocado Cab Company at the last Council jmeetfng. Due to an unfortunate set of circum- I I :stances he was cut of town and i4r. Uieier spoke I i in opposition to the application. At that: time :
:he asked for a continuance of the heariRg but I I the Council felt it should be heard. i t4r. Kronenmyer asked that the Council give furthe! jconsidcration to the Yellow Cab Company's service;
!The primary concern is adequate cab serwice to I ithe community. The question is whether there is ; i enoughi:business for two cab companies. If: there i lis not sufficient business for two companies : it will hurt the service and the community. The i i Yellova Cab Company has been in business for 25 : :years in this area. The headquarters of the corn-!
ipany is in Oceanside, ~e met Iglr. Geier at; the I I jcab stand in Oceanside and they rode a cab to ithe City Wall Annex in Carlsbad, which took three:
!minutes. One of the main points that was brcught:
1 I 1 I * I
I I c I I #
I I *
I I I ? !
* I I I !
I 1 I t I' \\ '\ 't, '%* I I
I ~ 3 .%
I
4
I +
I I '8, ".,'8,
4 i Name \\
I : of ?,
~"""""""""""""""~"""""""""""""""""""~-""l"-""--"" I Msrnber
!out at the hearing was that the Avocado cab corn- i !p?r!y would mai ntai 'rl an office i n Carl sbad. In i ;some of the infomiation sent to him by the City i
:Attorney it ~isted 11 pieces of equipment. AII I
:of this equjpment would not be available l;o the f !C:-ity of Car'lsbad. Solne of the equipment 'Fisted I
ia~e limosine aEd are ca~iig~tt~kn"just for C. Pe?Bliton. iidr, Bo~kout, opJEnar of the Avocado Cab Company 1s : :not wor!<ji~g at this business full time. fie is I i;n the tiarine Corp, and if he were sent to Viet :
!!dm the business would suffer. Nr. Geier works i jfuli tinre at the business, and he wished to con- : Itinue a hjyh level of business. I I
I Frog tht. i9l'nertes of the Council it does not show ! ithat the City i;'ianager's office has checked this : :applica$ion. In San Diego this is checked out i
!by the City i'fanager's office. There was no show-: :?jaag nade as to the service being given by the I 1 i\(r.~ :ov cab 1:ornpany; tl?ere 113s been n~ indication i i 2s to how many permits Avocado Cab Company can : thavct. Yellow Cab Company has three at this time. I i The thing that impresses him with the Ye1 low Cab :
:Co. is tile k4gh standard of requirements for the ! I ci~ivers. There was no statement in the app1 icatiin ia,s to the distance of the flag drop. If the Couni :cil would examine the application they would find: :thzt ~ellow Cab CO. is giving service at a lower i :rate than the Avocado Cab Co. Further, the state: jment attached to the application does not show i :a sufficient amount cf insurance.
Ih closing i4~. Kronenmyer stated according to the! i City Attorney there is no provision in the ordi- I : nance for recourse by the Yellow Cab Co. Howeverj :he would like the Council to give this matter I I :further consideration.
iCmn, Dunne asked if the Yellow Cab Co. serves Vista : as we71 as Ocsanside and Carlsbad?
il4r. Kroneninyer informed the Council they did.
1 Cmn. DLBE?;~~ stated in other words there are two : i cab companies serving the three areas. I I
~CLIM. Neiswender stated the remarks made and out- i : 'I ined by Mr. Kronenmyer are important factors, !which the people should be made aware of. The ! :deficiencies pointed out will come out in time. i
! ! i Cmn. Jardinc stated he felt it might be well for i : the City Attorney to make note of the points 1 brought out by ilr. Kronenmyer and make a report i : to the Council.
: fgU3LTC IIEARINCS:
I I 8, , ',
\ '\ - I \'
I
I I 8 I I I
I I
I I I
I 8 I
I I I 1
I I I I 1 I
I I I
I I 1 I
I I I
I i
I I s I 0 1 I
I I
I I
I I I I I I I I I
c I I I : (a) Appeal of the decision of the Planning Cornmis: jsion in denXing a request for reduction in lot : : width from 60 feet and reduction in lot area on : i Parcles A, B sated between :
i Stratford Lane and Knowles Ave. 9 Easterly sf Pi0 i
*- :Pic0 Dr. Appei2ant: Joseph J. Hhitfield. I I
i The EIijayor annoui?ced th-is was the ,time and place : i fixed by the City Council to hear all persons de-:
; siring to speak in regard to the above appeal, I
"- I
""
"_ I
1 I I
I I I
I I I I I 1 I k
I
I t' I I \\ ', ., '\
I * I I X\ '.\' '\
I I '\ \ '. I # \' ', 8%
t -3- I i Name \\, 8'
I : Qf '3
~""""""""~""""""""""""""""""""""-""---""",-------"-----
; The Clerk presented the Affidavit of Publication i i and the Council ordered the same filed.
I The City Clerk informed the Council the follwring! E correspondence had been received: * 1
i Letter dated Hay 19, 1965, fu'om Donald H. Holly, i : *. Licensed Land Stirveyors stated he was represent- i
Il'ariance, in which he requested certain reductionb : in lot frontage and area for a proposed Lot Split: i ckl a parcel of land lying between Knowles Ave. a I and StraLfo:*d Lane. The application was denied i i tay the Planning Commission, and the primary rea- i i son for denial was the staff and the Planning i : Commission felt f4r. \$hitfield could secure addi- ; i t5onal property from his neighbor on the Yest, : E'irs. Hunt, enabling him to provide the legal size! i lots. XI-. Holly urged that the Council consider i : the application as originally presented, setting : i Forth several reasons the variance should be I I I granted. I I
i Letter dated May 27, 1966, from Rabco Land Cor- i
:p:,rsticjn, 2937 Hadison Street, stating they op- 't i posed any reduction in lot width or lot area in :
! Chis neighborhood, as they are presently c:onstrucb- i i ng two hones which wi 11 sell for $21,900 and : $24,903 and also have property in escrow ctn the i i north side of Stratford Lane to build a home for i :a client which will cost $25,500. i:?v. Greg Losa ; i is building a house on this street that is. valued! ;at a minimum of $28,000. I I
; Mayor Atkinson announced the Council would hear i i from the applellanl or anyone wishing to speak i :in favor of this variance application. * 1
i i4Re DOR HOLLY stated he was representing the applf- i cant and the letter stated their position. dr. : : Whitfield cannot develop the property as the City! !has proposed. There are deviations from standard! :size lots and one is coming up tonight, request- : i ing lots between 7000 and 8000. He did not feel i i the tlsquest: filade by k!r. Elrhitfield was unreasanabl8,
!i4ia. Don Schoell, City Planner, presented a plat 1 :map of 8r. tlhitfield's property, shwing the pro-! iperty divided into four parcels, A, 3, C. and D, i tas proposed by the owner. t I
:Can. Jardine asked if the parcel with the exist- i jing structure was undersized, and r"4r. Holly r stated it was.
iCrnn. ilunne slated the width of the lots is sub- i : s tcinrlard. I I
:Mr. Holly stated they are approximately 53 feet. i
:M2. IdHITFIULD str?ted his family and himself oper-I i ated the Whitfield Pantry for a number of years, t
:a variance for a ?ot split to buj14 a house on i :Lot D for his father, and the area was less then : i7500 sq. feet. Since his fsther passed away this! :has been an excellent rental. He is the on1.y pro+ iperty owner on Stratford Lane thzt had to give i
I I I 8 \\
I
I I tj i Member
a 4
I I I 1 i I
I I
; 'iq 14r, !!:hitfield who has made application for a !
I I
I I
1 I
I I I I
I I I
I I I e
I I
I I
I I I I I I 1 I I
I I
I 8
I I
t & i !Pr.i~r co th.ts request for a lot split he received:
t I I I 1
I I I I
I !
I I I'
! I ', \. '\
I I I ',, '\,"\, ",
I I I '\ '\\ '\
I I I b 1 I
-4- I -t - I Name '*x, ' '\
; of " ',
I 8 )"""-""""""""~""""""-"""""""""""""""""""~""""""" : Member I t I : land on Isotih sides of the street for street pur- i : posess consisting of approximately 5,500 sq. ft. ;
; street opening, and he feels he is being taken. : : It is impossible for him to purchase property : i from ~rs. ~unt, the adjoining property owner. HE! : wo~Id certainly rather have two houses on small i i lots -than a commercial enterprise. ~n closing : : i!lr, !::hitfield assured the Council he would not i i build" anything that was substandard.
i Tho :%,?;.layor asked if there wBrc any persons desir- : i j~g Lo speak-in..opposition to the appeal. I I
!I i "~e ZISO lost some 0% his avocado trees due to t~ils
I 1
I I
I I 1
I I
0
l I I I
I I I
I I 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 I 1 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 t 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 1 I I I !
I
I
As there were no persons desiring to speak, the i Mayor declared the Public Hearing t'losed 43t ' I I 7: 52 P. 3. I I
The City Planner reported to the Council the original property was split in !.larch of 1357 intQ
two lots, one lot, Parce'l I), being 6,940 sq. IL. ;
and the other lot 22,490 sq. ft. after the seve-i rence by Stratford Lane. This property vJas sp?it administratively and Parcel D was not a i legal size lot, It should have gone before the i Counci'l. The original drawing for Stratford 1 I Lane was presented, which t.las prepared in order i to come up wi til the necessary funds for enginee- : ring costs, showing i4r. !,.!hiEfield's property I divided into 4 parcels. Later a lot stud,y was ! made by the Planning Commission and indications i were made as to the properties that could be split. It was proposed in this study that this i property be split into 3 parcels. By spliting : this property into 3 parcels there wi 11 stiI 1 i be a substandard lot; however, it may be imanda- i tory to approve this lot. His recommendation :
quest to split the property into 4 parcels. The ; P1a.nning Commission did deny the request, and i suggested that the owner purchase additional pro+ perty from the adjoining property owner, 'which i would give 7,500 sq. feet for two lots and one : would have 15,000 sq. feet. I I
i42. JACK KUBOTA, 3800 Skyline Road, stated he i was concerned with the conduct of this hearing. I We owns property two lots away from this property. The City was the agent for all the work on Stratf ford Lane. This is the second property o'wn2r : on Stratford Lane that has come before the Councfl
with a problem. This street project represents : a kind sf a subdivision. There is no overhead i
lighting prouids-d for this street. We is a pro-: poneni of LI.lt-, Whitfield and feels he should be i
given consideration. I I
I t I I 4
I I
I I
to the Planning Commission was to deny the re- i
I I
1 I ! 8r. Lon Holly stated he presented the other pro-: i perty owner and he was tuaned dovrn on a qualifie$ I basis, They were not turned down because of the: I I I I I I I I 1 t a I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I
width of thc property.
The City bianag2r informed the Council thla corn- i ment made by ?4r0 Kubota in regards to overhead i utilities is d6e to the Street Opening Act. I t This petition was circulat.cd over two years ago,: prior to the ordinance requirenent. As it !::as t necessary to state in the petition the exact improvement to be made, ai:d this item was omitte!!, the City could not require overhead fight'ing. 1 <
I I I I 1
i I t
I I
I
I I
I' I , '.\ ' , ?a. \ '
;
?
I 1 , - .> =
.. ', \
I I ', 8 'x I 9, '\ ' I .' I Name '\\
' '\
8
1 I ! of '. I""""-""""""""""""""""""""""""""".""""""~""""""- : Member e; I *. ; The Council indicated they would not be ir! faausr : .a : of reducing the lot viidth. 4 1 I I i P,fter further consideration the following resoluj i tion was preseilted:
4- i Resolution Ro. 5272. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY : : COUNCIL GF THE CITY OF CARLSSAD, MAKING FIb!DIl"dGS :Pieiswend& i AN5 DECISION AND DENYING THE APPEAL FOR PI VARE- :Atkinson I A24CE ON PZOPERTY LOCATED SET11EEN STRATFORD LANE iDunne : AFlD KP4OijEES AVENUE, was adopted by title only :Jardi ne
f and further reading waived, I ! ! 1 Cmn. Drr:?ne stated the reasons for denying the !
t appeal were as follows:
I 1 I I I
I I
I I t I I I
I I I
I I 1. Lack of proper frontage; and I I
I 2. It would downgrade the entire area. : I
I 1 I : 'The City Attopney'itiformed the Cduncil Items :(B)l i (c) and Item (a) under Planning should all be ; : considered at one time as they all concern the i I development of Laguna Riviera Subdivision. I I
i (b) Reclassification of certain property located : I- OR the Nesterly side of €1 Camino Real, Easterly i'
; from Park Dr. from Zone R-A-lO,OCO to R-1-7,000 : i and larger sq. ft. lots. Applicants: Karnar I I ; Construction Co.
I f
I I
I I
I 1
I i (c) Precise Plan on property located on the I Uesterly side of El Camino Real , Easterly from i : Park Drive.
, I I -
1 I
I I t I I I and I I
I I I I I
I I I I : Lentative map of Laguna Riviera Subdivision - i located on the Idesterly side of El Camino Real, i
; Eas-teri.\t from Park Dr. Subdivider: Kamar
; Constrg.c>ion Co. I I
I I 1 I-
I I I I i The Clerk presented the Affidavits of Publicatioi : on the proposed reclassification and for the Prc: i cise Plan, and the Council ordered the same filed.
i The City Clerk presented the following correspon:
i ehced development: I I
i Letter dated June 23, 1966, from f4r-s. Helen M. : Bendelow, 4213 Sunnyhill Dr., stating it 'was her: i understanding some people are still against pro-: i gress in this area, and she could see nothing i : against building beautiful homes. There are I I i some persons protesting who are business people i
I ?:id .i ~i rea I .i t$ w~u? d gain from new farni lies ... mobr- : i ing into the area. As of nows Sunnyhill #and 1 1 : Clearview ~a'll not be through streets, the pro- ; i posed lot sizes are adequate and wi 11 not detract ; from the area.
I I I I
0 i dsnce from persons in favor of. the above-refer- i
I I 1 I 1 I I
I I
I I I I I : Letters of protest were presented fren til!? folio$- i ing perscrns, on the grounds that the reduction : : sf lot size would reduce the value of property i
! !n tlhe Highlands, the develnpaent will not add :
I beauty to the City, it would cause a conjested i t; $
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 !
-6-
I' .' ; '\\'\\ '8, '\
I I I I
8, '\ ' '\ \ '4
i Name '\," ; of ':
\' \' ''
I I 8 ~""""""""""-""~~"""""-""""""-""""""-"""-""-l---""""". i Member
jeyesore, augment future zone changes and jis in- i I consistent with good planning: $ I
t I A. Garfolo, JP.~ N.9. 4155 Skyline Rd.t
! idrs. Prances A. Varbrough 4265 Sunnyhil'l :
I Clarence A. Halm 4083 Sunnybill {
I William E. Iiorehouse 4014 Skyline Rd.;
I I Rose and G.W. kiade 4050 Sunnyhill i
I George and Aary i4lerkle 4225 Sur-tnyhill I
I Edith tl. and Norman S. I
I Cathcart P.O. Box 554 I
I I i4rs. A4 ice Eymann 4140 SkyTine Rd.:
I Richard G. Cole P.O. Box 144 I
I Gertrude E. Lockwood 4073 Skyline Rd. i
I Dr. and 8rs. Edward A. I
I I Ri chards 4033 Skyline Rd.:
I 2lrs. Ri ta blJi ndrum 4230 Clearview i
I I Gaiser 3784 Skyline Rd. i
I I
I I I I f
I
I
I I
I I I I
I I
I I
I
1 I
I I
I I
I
I
I I
I Hr. and idrs. James 31. I
I I I I :The i'hyor declared the pub1 i c hearing open and 1
ii:lR. JERRY ROi';lBOTIS, stated he was represenWng i jKamar Construction Co. , and they feel that. they i :1have one of the finest planned communities. They: jhave spent many hours with the City's Engineering: !Department and Planning Department, as we1 1 as : :with the Veterans Administration and Federal I I :Housing Administration. They have oriented the : !lots as to view and topography; have provided for! jschool area and four acres for park area. blr. :Rombotis pointed out the park area was provided I :previous to the Park Ordinance being adopted. I I :This development conforms to all the requirements I :of the ?laster Plan. There is an average of 3.4 i :lots per acre, excluding streets. If you include; ithe park area they have an excess of 10,000 Isq. feet per lot. In developing this plan they ! !have taken many factors into consideration. It id ;their feeling this development will help the city; :aesthetically and monetarilly. I
!E\ nap of the proposed development was presented i :showing the density and lot sizes. Mr. Rombotis : :pointed out Kelly Road will meet El Camino Real i !and Park Drive will connect to the existing Park : :Drive. I I
:Mayor Atkinson inquired as to the distance-.:betweei ithe closest house in the Highlands and the sub- I :division. t I
iAr. Rombotis stated there is 600 feet between :the closest house and 800 feet between the near- i jest 7,000 sq. ft. lot. I I
Iklr.. Rsmbotis further stated they have proplosed ! :91 t-~ovnes for the 7,000 sq. ft. and larger lots, i !lo0 homes for the 8,000 to 10,000 and 114 homes I :for lots in excess 07 10,000 sq. feet.
:Cmn. Dunne asked how this compared with Falcon i jHi?ls Subdivision, and Mr. Rombotis pointed out i :the majority of homes are built on 7,500 sq. ft. I
!lots, with a buffer along Bass~ood Avenue of
i9,OOO sq. ft. and over. These hones se?? be-tueen! i$ZO,OOO and $30,00C. They propose to build this :
iasked if the developer wished to speak? !
I I
I 1
I I
I 4
I I I
0
I I I
I I
I I t I I
1
I
8 I
I I
I 1 I 4 I t1 I I
I I 1 I
* I I
I ! I
I I' * 1 I '\ '\,"\, ",
I I I '\ \\\'\\
* I '\ ' '
I ! " I ' ', ' I I I I !
-7- ' .. \ Name '\, '1 I of 'J I I 8 )"""""""""""""-"~""""""""""""""""""-"""-~""""""" : Member
:deve?&pment in 9 units. They nil1 have a density : !of 3.4 to tile acres and the Idaster Plan calls fori !a density of 3 to 7 homes per acre.
jThe i4ayor announced the Council would hear from ft la11 persons desiring to speak in opposition to :
:this matter. t I
it'lR. CIIA3LES €WANki9 4140 Skyline, read a letter i{ !opposition of the development, and stressing the : :"Future of Carlsbad as a Place to Live". I
!;I!?. J.H. CAWiICI-IAEL, 4135 Skyline, stated he bvoulcf !like to point out the affect this zone change ;would have. Kamar will get more money by reduc- i
ling these lots and creating more lots. By reduc- i jing the 3.4 per acre to 3.8 per acre there would ; ;be no need for a zone change. Plr. Rombotis point: :ed out there were 91 lots in the 7,000 sq. ft. $ jcatagorie. If this zone change were not allowed i :these lots would be divided into 68, 10,0010 sq. ; jft. lots. They speak of park dedication. This i !area in under power lines and is not suitable for; :residential development. Kamar stated they have i Ispent ccnsiderable time with the staff. Tihe City: :has ignored the citizens in the Highlands. The i jquestion of an alternate route for Tamarack-Kamar : :has evidently considered the extension of 'Tarnaracg Itrrrough this area. They will not give an answer i ;on this natter. tilaybe the Council can come up : :!,vi th one.
$!R. RSCIiOlRD D. COLES 4'150 Skyline Rd, stated he :
jhoped "Le Council wou7d take into consideration i :the seriousness of this matter. He would 'like to i :point out that I4r. Ronlbotis may get an average :
:out cF any given number. I I
?X. JOHN dALLETT, 3920 Skyline Rd., stated tonight/ ihe witnessed a Jittle rnan trying to deteriate a i Ilittle area, and you the Council denied this man. :
!You are now considering a large area. If tihe fsause is good for the goose it is good for the I !gander. I 1 I I
IAR. JACK KUMOTA, 3800 Skyline Rd., presented a jletter requesting consideration for the denial of i :the application for rezoning, and that the pro- i !posed subdivision and precise plan be rejected, : :or action uithheld until a definite routing has i
* I 1 +
I I I I 1 I 8
I I I I
I I
I I
I I
I I I I I
I 1
I * I
1 I
I I I I I e
jbeen established for Tamarack Ave. 1 I
4 I I I I I
I jiiWS. RITA WINDRU41, 4230 Clearview, asked fo'r a ;clarification of Kelly Drive, and if this was a i :limited access road. It was her feeling there i tshould be consideration given to a main road to : ithe Itarbor.
ibIr. Jerry Rombotis presented his rebuttal. The i !park and school site is not under the power line. ; :This line will be moved as shown on the top of th4 :map and will run thru Lot 311. i4r. ifrigg's pro- : :perty is zoned 7,500 and not 10,000 sq. ft. Kelly i :Drive will go around the upper lagoon. Park Dr. : :will be 63 feet, and Hillside R. is 60'. This i !type of planning is what DiciJFi has been talking i labout - a precise plan for a large area. I I
I !
I I I I I I
s
I I
I I
I
I I I 1
I I
I I' I I
I t
, \ '\ '\
I I I '\\ y,, \,
I '\. '\ '\ I I I l 0 1
-8- I -. ' ' '\ i Name '8, 8 : of '1 \.
I : Member 3 :"""""""""""""""""~""""""""""""""""""""~"""""-"-
:The ijayor declared the public hearing closed at ! :9:25 P.i'4. I I
iCrnn. Jardine stated the Council directed a study i
:made of alternate proposals for a major feeder. i !From Lhc Scach to Highland Dr. Tamarack is a majot :street. >le asked for a study of alternate routes i :for a major streei east of Highland Dr, I
idr. Don Sckoell stated the staff, DWJbl and the ! !Planning Commission made a study of an alternate i ; route for Tamarack and they could not come up I
!with any other route than the one proposed in thei :General Plan. i! meeting was held by the Planning: !Commission last Friday, and at that time no re- i i commendation was made.
i A study map was prcsented by the City Planner ; :showing proposed streets. He informed the Council lithis map was only the staff recommendation and ; : the Planning Commission has not made their re- 1 i commendation, There are three major streets :P!orth and South - The Freeway, El Camino Real and: !Kelly Dr. Tamarack goes from 102' to 54' up to i iI-lighland Drive. Elm Ave. and Tamarack Rve. will ;
I extend to the back area East of El Camins Real, 1
!They recommend three streets East and Liest, Elm ;
; Ave, 9 Tamarack Aye., Agua Hedionda, and ev'enluall$ ! Palomar Road.
i t4r. ~choc11 furtiler stated ttle staff fe1 t that ini : the event there was a .major 'street in the I !vicinity of Tanlarack Avenue, it would necessitate!
i three collector streets. The cost of constructiog ifor an? 34' street other than the Birch Street jalighnment brould run exceedingly high due do the i : grade and topography.
i Itlayor Atkinson stated he was in accord with Cmn. : !Jardine in t!lat there should be a major street i : through to El Camino somewhere in this area.
i Wr. Carmichael informed the Council he ws.1E:s with I jhis children and the dog from his home to El I I ICa~ino. He was sure he could find an alternate I i route. I I
i The City blanager pointed out Tamarack Ave. from ! :Highland Dr. through the Highlands to El Camino I i Real would be a 60' street with 48' of pavement. :
:Mayor Atkinson@.slated he still felt there should : :be a major street from Highland Drive through to r : El Canino in this area.
: The City bianagcr informed the Counci f the staff i ifeels there should be three collectors if there :
:is not going to be a major street in this area. I !The Planning Commission had not made their re- 1 I
i commendation as yet.
!bl!l. DONALD BRIGGS stated the Planner an6 [ir, i;lamabx
I injected words when the Council made their notion;l i last meeting concerning Tamarack Ave. i.1~. Schoel] ;stated the cost would be exhorbitant to construct: jtkese local streets. rne extension of Tamaraclc : :has been discussed many times and fie could not i ;see no reason for bringing up a "dead horse1' agaiP.
I
4 I I I
i I d I i t
I I I 8 t
r I
1 I I
I I I I I I
I I
# I I I t
I I
I I I I 6
I I
I I e S I
I I I #
I 1 t I I
I I I
1 I I
I * : I
"I
I I I 1 I I I I
I I I I 1
I I I
t
I 1 4 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 6 k I I
-9-
I' , \\ '\ .*, '\
I ', '8, '%, ''
I '\ ." ' ' t 8, '\ s i Name '\,'\! : of 'i?
I I
!
1 The City Planner informed the Council the facts i
1 concerning the collector streets recommended bit i I the staff are being prepared.
i After further consideration by the Council ., by i
! motion of the Council it was agreed that the I i Public Hearing be reopened and that the matter i Neiswendc : be continued until June 21 9 1966, in order to I Atki nson !I?ave the report froin the Planning Conmission i Dunne i concerning alternate routes for a major street IJapdine : in the area. 1 I
i ENGINEERIflG:
8; i Member ("""~"""""""""""""""""""""""~""""~.."""""-~~""""""
I
I I I I I I
I 1 I I I 1 I I I ! i (a) Agreement between City of Carlstad and Buenai :Sanitation District - Sewer capacity. The Council I was informed the City is purchasing capacity in i i the Suena line that runs along Pa1ornar.Airport i t Road, The City had the option of buying the capa- i city, outright or paying approximately $5,00 per ! jyear, and the comlnittec chose the latter. One of:
ithe prclvisions in the agreement is that within i I five years the City is required to install a I I I metering devi ce.
I Cmn. DGnne stated he found the agreement t.o be in! i order and recommended that it be approved.
i 3y motion of the Council the Agreement between th$?Neiswende I City of Carlsbad and the Buena Sanitation DistrictAtkinson i was approved and the Mayor authorized the agree- !Dunne i n~ent 00 behalf of the City of Carlsbad. : Jardi ne
I I I I I
t I
I I I I I
I I
1 I I I
I 1 I I I I i PLANNI I"\,1G : !
I 1 I ! (a) Tentative map of Laguna Qiviera Subdivision ; i- located on the liesterly side of El Camiflo,!
t Easterly from Park Drive. Subdivider: KamK 8 I :Construction Co. This matter was deferred due to! I the fact it was being considered in connection ; !with the Precise Plan and Reclassification re- i :quested by Kamar Construction Co. I k
: NE\;/ BUSINESS :
t
4 I
I I I I I 1
I 1 I ! (a) Tentative map of Laguna Qiviera Subdivision ; i- located on the liesterly side of El Camiflo,!
t Easterly from Park Drive. Subdivider: KamK 8 I :Construction Co. This matter was deferred due to! I the fact it was beinq considered in connection !
t
!with the Precise Plan and Reclassification re- i :quested by Kamar Construction Co. I k
: NE\;/ BUSINESS :
4 I
I I I I I 1
0 i i (a) Res. #127Gi, designating the intersection of i : Don&a Drive and Basswood Ave. as a stop inter- t jsection. The following resolution was presented i
! for Consideration. I I
I Resolution No. 1276. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY i I COUKCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, DESIGNATIP!G I I i THE INTEESECTIOM OF DOiiNA DR. AND BASSWOOD AYE, :
!AS A STOP INTERSECTION, AFID REQUIRING TRAFFIC ! i TO STOP Oil DOMA DRIVE.
i It was moved by Cnn. Jardine and seconded by Cmn.; :Dunne that Resolution X1276 be adopted. The I I follwing CfiscussioR was had concerning the :resolution as proposed:
i Cmn. Jardine asked if the Traffic Safety Committep! !had taken into consideration a four-way stop at i ithis intersection rather than a two-way stop. I !This is an idea7 spot for speeding on Basswood Ave.
I I
I 1
I I * I I I I
L I I I * I
t I I
:: I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
8 I
I I
k ! I
I 4'
I ! b. ', ', 3
8 8 .\ '8
I I I I I I I t !
* 70 - : of '<
* .- I ', 8, '\
I ', b 't
i Name '8.
I
I b' \' ',
I 8 :""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""-. : Member
!The City Manager informed the Council this; inter- i !section is at the point of a grade. It was the :
I I
;Traffic Safety Cornhittee's feeling that a four- i
!way stop would cause accidents by cars stopping I
:at this point. I I
iCnn. Meiswender stated he could not go along with! :the resolution as proposed, as lie did not feel : ithe stop on Donna Drive would stop the speeding ; :on Basswood Ave. lie suggested that the Nayor I
Iapp0in-t a member of the Council to the Traffic ; :Safety Conmi ttee. I I
:Cmn. Bunne inquired as to whether or not there I jhad been an actual police study made as to the ; :speeding on SassvJood Ave. I I
:?he City fvlanager presented a report mads by the i IPol.ice Department showing a check of vehicles jtraveling from :donroe Ave. to Seacrest.
ii3ayor Atkinson stated he did not feel that stop i
:signs sh~~ld be utilized for control of speeding i jtraffic. There were stop signs installed at I I :the intersections of Ocean St. however, this was i i due to the fact Ocean st. is so narrow. AS to i
:th2 appointment of one rnernber of the Council to ; Ith~ Traffic Safety Committee he did not feel this t :was necessary. I I
iCrnn, Dunne suggested that perhaps when a Council ! :member is interested in a particular problem that i jthey be notified as to when the Traffic Safety : : Committee wi 11 meet. I I
i By notion of the Council it was agreed that the jNeiswende \previous motion made by Cmn. Jardine be rescindediAtkinson :and that the matter be continued for two weeks. ;Dunne
8 :Jardine
!OLD BUSEi4ESS:
I I t
I
I I
1 I
t I
I t
t I 1 I I I I 1 I
1 I
1 I
I I I
I
I l e I 1 I I I I !
:(a> Second reading of Ordinance srU7034, consenlini
jto establishment of a portion of El Camino Real ;
jnance was presented for a second reading. I I
;as a part of Coun,$y Highway, The follovling ordi- i
0 I I
I I I I I :Ordinance 7034. AN ORDIiJANCE OF THE CITY iCO'JMCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD CONSEMTIPIG TG IlYei swende
!ESTABLISHMENT OF A PCIRTION OF EL CAHIMB REAL AS A IAtkinson :PART OF THE COUNTY fiIGtit.JAY FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES, tBunne ;was given a second reading by title only and !Jardine ! adopted. 1 I
I I I i CITY ATTORPtEY ' S REPORT:
!
I 8 I I I .
:Stipulation and Agreement - re: Library Plans. !
:The City Attorney informed the CounciJ an agree- i jment has been prepared in regards to the contract: :with Robert Melvin as to his fees and to charges I jrequired by moving the site of tire Library. The : :first part of the agreement is to elimiilate the I ifirm of Tanner, I3arquard.t: and Associates, as b!r. I 1 :ilelvin is no longer with that firm. They \vi11 be i'
:paid the sum of $17,719.00 no^ owing the firm, I I :and this will cancel the original contract. The ! t; I I
I 1 I I I I I I I I
t I s I I 4 I I !
I I I I I
I I I I 9 I
- 11 -
'\ > '\ ', I I \\ '\ ' .
I , \'\ '
I ', '8, '\
I ', \. '% I
i Name \\, st ; of '3
' -\
I # ~"""""""""""""""""""~..""""""~""""""""-"---l-""-----"" I Member
i second agreement i s wi th Robert Piel vi n 9 Archi tect i
;to revise plans for the Library to be constructed; fori the new site. The City Attorney pointed out i :the fees are the same as the original contract, ; :i.e., 2% of the construction costs and $221.50 perf :hour TOY' addi tianal documents. I I
j~he ~ounci~ inquired as to the cost of revising I i the p7 ans.
ibir. Melvin was present and stated he has estimated ithe cost to be approximately $3,000. I I I
i3y motion of the Council the ?dayor was authorized iijeiswende !to execute the Stipulation and the Agreement on :Atkinson :behalf of the City of Carlsbad. :I)unne
I I
I I I
I I I I I t I
I I
I I I :Jardine I * 8 t I I I t 1 ?lrdinancc - re: House moving. The Counci 1 was in- : I :formed the Building Inspector has requested the : !ordinance as submitted for the Coucil's consider- i :ation.
:Cmn. ilunne stated this does not provide for old : \structures that are being moved. There was an i jold hocse moved to the corner of Oak over a year : :ago and nothing has been done to the structure ye$.
:After further consideration it was agreed that i jthis inatter be held over for txo weeks of study. i
:Request for an ordinance Lo control junk. The :Building Inspector has also requested an ordinance! !prepared similar to the one adopted by San Diego. i
:The City CounciJ instructed the City Attorney to i iprepare the ordinance far their Consideration at 1 ithe next regular meeting. 8 I
I I I I 1 I I
I I I I
I I I 8 I I
I 1 ii I
I I I !CITY T4AtdAGER'S REPORT:
I
I I b I I I
!Request for use of Holiday Park. The Gem amd #in- i !era1 Society have requested the use of Hol,iday i :Park on Saturday, June 25, 1966. I I
:By motion of the Counci 1 it was agreed that the heiswendev irequest be granted for the use or" Holiday Park :Atkinson Ion Saturday, June 25, 1966. :Dunne
:Designating Santa Fe Deport as a Historfca:I~BuiId-~ jing. The Committee fcr the Depot has requested i :that the Depot be designated as a historical I $ui Idin9 3 to allow them to have re-wi ri ng done VJi jh
!the use of non-metalic, flexible wiring, instead ; !of the metal Lube required by the Electrical Code.!
I I I I 0
I I I ;Jardine
I I I
1
I I I B
$3~ common consent of the Council it was agreed tha!t ithe Santa Fe Depot be designated as a Historical : :Building and that permission be granted to use i $on-metalic, flexible wiring instead of the metal ; :tube. l
0 t I ! I isan Diego Regional \later Quality Control Board - i :re: Rescinding cease and desist orders. On Nay I :17, 1966, the San Diego Regional tJater Quality I 1
1 I * 1 I
$ I t 4
I I I I I I I I I
I " I I I
I '\\\\ : '8, '\' 'x 8,
I '\ '\ ' 1 I x, '. '*,
I \ '. ' I \ .. I i ~a me .\\,"I
I -12 - ; of '4
!
4 I 8; :"""""""""""""""""""""""~""""""""""""""~~""-"""-- 8 Member
:Control Board adopted Resolution 66-11 and 66-13,I :rescinding cease and desist orders agai.nst the ; i City of Carlsbad and waste discharge requirements: :for the City's now defunct sewage treatment plant; :idr. Dennis A, O'Leary, Executive Officer of the i :Board, stated the Board commended the City for : !providing an effective areaswide system of waste i :collection, treatment and disposal. I I
!Pa.rks and Recreation Commission - Pe: Granting o( ifease to Girl's Club in Holiday Pakk. The Parks ; :and Recreation Commission have recommended that : ithe Girl's Clnb be granted a leascl for lad in ! jlloliday Park for use in building a club houses I :the precise amount of land and placement to be i !determined at a later date. In granting this :lease they also recommended that a condition be : jset that any facilities be available in unused tilie ifor adult recreation and other activities that ; !would be compatible with Girl's Club Activities. i
!By motion of the Council it was agreed that the iNeiswende' ! Counci 1 i ndica.te thei r wi 11 ingness -:to work wi th :Atki nson :tile Girl 's Club as to the leasing of land in iDunne i Hol i day Park. jJardine
I I
I I I
I I
i 9 I I
1 I I I
I 1. I I !The Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company - re: i :Permission to park mobile equipment trailer. The: ;Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company have re- ; ;quested that they be granted pmrission to park a! !mobile central office equipment trailer on their I :property at 3368 Hardine Street, as they plan - : !certain modification work during a-period betwe& i !June 24, 1966 and approximately September 'I, 19661
!By common consent it was agreed that the Pacific i !Telephone and Telegraph Company be granted per- i :!nission to park their mobile trailer on their I :property for the period requested.
!Fox's Snug Harbor - re: Request for overnight pri: :vileges during Fourth of July Holiday. By letter: Ijune 7, 1966, Fox's snug Harbor have requested : :that they be permitted to extend overnight pri- i
:vi leges Lo a limited number of guests over the i :Fourth of July Holiday. I I
;BY motion Of the Council it was agreed thak FOX'S !Neiswendeu !Snug Harbor be granted permission to extend over- jAtkinson :night privileges to a limited number of guests :Dunne :over the Fourth of July Holiday. IJardi ne
:North Coast Y.F.I.c.c,. - re: Request for waiver of i :.Fees. The tdorih Coast Y.M.C.R. is planning to do i :some construction, plumbing and sewer hook-up Y I :work in the area of the Aquatic Park, and they i Iflave requested a waiver of fees and permit costs : :for the work to be done. 1
!By motion of the Council it was agreed that; a17 :Neiswender !permit fees and any other building fees be waived :Atkinson :in connectfon with the building program of the iDunne jNorth Coast Y.M.C.A. :Jardine
iCmn. Jardine stated he abstained as he is a membe;
I I 1 I
I $ I a I I
I I
0 I I
I 4 t
I I
I I
I I
I I I
t; I
!of the Y.SI.C.A. committee. !
I I , !
I I I 1 I I
.I .c
1 I I
I I I
I
- 13 -
I ',\'\"
'\ . . ', I I I I
x '\ '\ '\
I 8' '\, '\
I ', 8, '\ i Name '\\ '\d i of '\i
1 Member 8 ~""~""""~""~""""""""""""""~"""""""-~""-""-""""--"""~
t I
:Cmn. Dunne stated Mrs. Johnson had called his at- i Itention to the dumping area back of A and R Plumb-! ling Csnlpany on the East side of the rai'lroad I 4 !tracks.
iCnn. t!eiswender stated he was concerned v,riith park4 !ins on substandard streets. The City requires th< :developer to provide off-street parking and the 1 !parking areas are not being used. He suggested i :that "Ed0 Parking" be a1 lowed between the hours of : 12:OO A.i?. and 4:OO A.M. The two places brought : ito his attention are the :4orth end of Ocean Streed ;and Monroe Street a cross from the High School. i !During the time the High School holds games this : :becomes a problem. In low density areas this I jproblem usually takes care of itself. It is in ! :the high density areas this becomes a problem. I I
:AUTI-JOkIZATION FOR PAWENT OF BILLS AFID RATI'FICA- I ITION OF PAYROLL:
I I t I 1 I I
I I
I I
I I I I !
0
:
I I
!Authorization was given for the payment of bills i :for the General Expenses of the City in the amoung
!amount of $45,548.74 for the period May 17, 1966 atkinson
;to June 8, 1966, as certified by the Director of iDunne !Finance and approved by the Auditing Committee. gardine
IRati Pi cation of the payroll was given for the hei swender :second half of Zay, 1966, in the amount of #tki nson :$22,407.33, as certified by the Director of Dilnne :Finance and approved by the Auditing Committee. 3ardine
:of t $197,704.82 and for the Water Department: in theMeiswender
I I I
I I
I I I L I I I I I I I I I I I I I *
:ADJOUR%IdENT:
I I !i3y proper motion %he meating was adjourned at
)?aspectfully submitted,
:lo: 45 P.M.
I I
1 1
;/z77~+%4#7/%- ! t ,I c Y ~//&&>~ /f"
hARGA&f E . ADAMS iCi ty C1 erk
I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I 8 I t I I I I I I , I I I I I I I I s I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I 8 I 8 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 * t I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I 1 I I I . 8 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I t 1 I I 9 # 1 !