HomeMy WebLinkAbout1967-01-17; City Council; Minutes- s
I I I'
1
I
, \. \
I 1 ', '8,". i CITY OF CARLSBAD I .' '. ' ; Minutes of: CITY COUNCIL (Regular Meeting): i Date of Meeting: January 17, 1967 ; Nz me 8' '8,
I"9l~;R_Q-€.M~_e~_ing; ____ CQ-uncj-l.,Chamhe_rs ...................... i ~ _-__________. Member
! ileiswender, Atkinson, Dunne and Jardine. Also i i present were City Manager Mamaux, City Attorney i : Wilson and City Clerk Adams.
8 ', *
3'
; Time of Meeting: 7:OO P.M. : Qf '
I I 1 i ROLL CALL was answered by Councilmen Northing, : 1
! INVOCATION was offered by Councilman Neiswender, { I
I
1 I i
! f
1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: I
i ALLEGIANCE to the Flag was given. I 1
I I
I I I
1
I
1
1
8 i (a) Minutes of the regular meeting held January I i~~~thi~~
i 3, 1967, were approved, as presented.
1 I
:Nei swend
1 I :Atkinson
I
I 1 I I I
I : Dunne i Jardi ne
I I
I 1 I I
I CORRESPONDENCE: I
:There was no written correspondence presented. i > I
I 1
;ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
1 I
I I I I 1 I 1 There were. no oral communications. I
I
I I
I : PUBLIC HEARINGS:
I
I I I I 1 I 1
; (a) Improvement of. Jefferson St. , et al, A.D. I I i 2-1965 - I911 Act Proceedings. I
I I
I I I b {The Mayor announced the hour of 7:30 P.M. having : 1
'I f arrived, this was the time and place fixed by ; i this City Council for hearing objections or pro- ; : tests on the proposed work, or the extent of the i i assessment district, or on the proposed grades ; ;under the Resolution of Intention No. 1348, pro- I /hiding for the construction of certain street I
i improvements and appurtenances and appurtenant i :work on Jefferson St. and proposed easements and ;
i rights of way in said City, from its intersection: :with Elm Ave. northerly to a point 108.9.4 ft. I j northerly of the intersection with Las Flores Dr.;
i lication, Mai ling and Posti,ng were approved and ; Neiswend : ordered filed. i Atkinson
I : Dunne
I i Jardine
I
I
I I I : By motion of the Council the Affidavits of Pu6- ;Northing I
a
r
L I i 1 : The following wri'tten protests were presented: 1 i
I * I I Letter dated January 9, 1967, from Alfred C. I I I
{ Prewitt, 2665 Jefferson St. , stating he felt it i
i unfair to pay for new sidewalk and curb when they: i already have these improvements.
i ietxer dated January 17, 1967, from Helen D. I I
i ty located at 2720 Jefferson St., stating they ;
- ; St. for the following reasons: (7) It would :
i their property at the southwest c0rne.r; (-2) the : i proposed widening wi 11 bring the street too close! i to tne house; and (3) they feel it is unneces- ;
1
I
I
1 I I
: Carson and M. Deane Merillat, Co-owners of proper: I
I' ! 9Sjec:ted to the proposed widening of Jefferson I
- '0 ; necessitate the taking of five to six feet of i
I I I I
I < 1 1 1
I
I -\, '\ '
1 : ci ';
I ,' i Name .' \\
i :""""""""""""""""""""-~""""""~""""""""""""""""". i Member
.' -2-
I 1 I 1
I k 8 s ; sary to straighten the street to the proposed i i extent as Jefferson St. carries very fast traffic: : in its present condition and this improvement i i would make the street a speedway.
1 i
8
I P / A petition, containing signatures of 16 property 8 ;
i owners was presented, asking that there be no i i charge assessed either directly or indirectly to 1
i the owners of real property on the Nesterly side i
; of Jefferson St., between Laguna Dr. and Buena : : Vista Ave. for curbs and gutters. '
f
i petition were:
I
I I d
I The property owners who signed the above-mentioneid I
1 I I 1 t I 4 t I I
I i 1 I 1 I I $ I
i I I 1 I I I i I
Galen D. and Tressie B. Nornhold
2677 Jefferson Street
I C. M. and Georgianna DeNeese I I I i I
2685 Jefferson St.
I I 1 f I I t
I ? I $ !
I
.. L I 4 I I I
I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I
1 L f
1
1 I I I
..
I
1 I I L i I
Alfred C. and Elaine R. Prewitt 2665 Jefferson St.
John R. and Agnus R. Warden 2637 Jefferson St.
Joseph E. and Dora B. Barth
2541 Jefferson St.
(Mrs.) Charles .V. Chalupnik 2595 Jefferson St.
Pearl C. and John L. Barhydt 2563 Jefferson St.
Mrs. Marfe L. Seaberg 2585 Jefferson St.
ivlys. Mi 1 dred McIntosh
2499 Jefferson St.
Carl and Lydia Segerblam 2535 Jefferson St.
4 t 1 1 i I
i t I 1 I 1 3 4 I I I 1 I I 1
I I I 1 t 1 * I
1 I I I I 1 I I t I % I 1 1 1 1 4 t i I I 1 I I 1 I I 1
I f
i their representative, who had filed a written ;
1 protest that desired to speak? I
i support of their written protest, the Mayor I b
i tests or objections concerning the work. z XR. DONALD BRIGGS, JR., 2381 Jefferson St., I I
i Fro-iested having to pay for new sideway ks and i .I curbs, and was opposed to the design of the pro-: i posed improvements due to the following reasons: ;
; The Mayor asked if there were any persons, or I i
I As there were no persons desiring to speak in 2
: announced the Council would hear any oral pro- : I
: staTed he concurred with the property oMners who : I
L I
1 I b
I I
I
1
L I I I
I
1 1
I I
I 1. It has been the po?icy of the City for i
j mariy years to ir1pTove stwets with curb and I 1
0 ,,
i gutter with cold mix. The City has been short- ; I sighted not to keep this street up. I
I
I I
; 2. There are no plans for underground util-i I
i ities. I
1 I 6 1
1 I I !
I I I I I I I I I L I I 1
-3-
I' , '\ '\, 8.
I 8, '\ '
i NEme '\,
I
I *. ' ' I \'%
I ,' I .' 8'
: of '
I s :""."""""""""""."""""""""~""."""""""""-"""~""""~"-. : Memter
I 1 1 I
I I I
I 3. The City is proposing a 48' street in a : ! substandard right of way. This is a secondary i : street. I I
I 4. There has been no provision made for I ,' Street tree planting in a large portion of this ; 1 i street. Chestnut Ave. is a 48' street with a I : 60' right of way. There are still no street I i trees planted. This type of street does not make: : an attractive residential area. I
t I
I J I I
t *
I
I t I I I I 5. There have been several accidents at the I i westerly terminus of 'Las Flores Dr. as it is a ! ! dangerous intersection, and will be no better i i after the improvement is made. t I
I I I I 1 I I 4 6. According to the design there will be ; f vertical dirt slopes, and there is no provision i i to make these slopes attractive. 1 I
I I I I I 1 I 7. This is the only diagonal street to the 1 ; new shopping center. This road now carries more i i traffic than El Camino Real, 1 1
I 1 I I I I
'I I 8. The driveway to Mr. Brilharts property ; : as proposed wi 11 cause a hazard. 1
I property, instead of having a vertical slope. 1 I
i As there were no other persons desiring to speak,: : the public hearing was declared closed at 7:52 I i P.M. I 1
i The Engineer of Work reported that written pro- i : tests and objections had been filed. with the Cit; :.Clerk by owners of 9.05% of the total area to be ; : assessed for .the improvement. This did not in- i i clude Mr. Brigg's property as he did not protest; : relative to his property and the proposed improve:- ! ment. I I
,
I I b t * I 9. Something s.hould be done about Mr. Martinj's
I I t I
I I 1
t I I I
i I The Assistant Engineer informed the Council the i : estimated cost of the project is $160,894. It i i is the intention of the City to participate I f ; through various funds $90,000.00, which consti- i 1 tutes 58% of the entire cost'of the project. In ;
; respect to the existing curbs and gutters, accor4- i ing to the stamp on the sidewalk, they were in- ; : stalled in 1925.. On the west side of the street; : from Laguna Dr. north, the first 500' is practi- i : cally flat and the remainer runs from the exist-;
i ing crown to 5/10 percent below the existing I I [ ,crown. In the City's endeavor to salvage any : : of the sidewalk it would have necessitated addind i l l/Z feet on each side of the right of way. I 1
\ The estimated cost of the relief the property i : owners are requesting amounts to approximately i i $6,000.00. This would nave to be borwby the ;
; method. The sidewalk as it now exists does not : I fit in with the official grade.
I
I I I I
t property owners in the district or by some other; 0 + I
I L 1 1 c 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1
I I I I I I I I 8 1 I I I
-4-
I' , \'\ *
I 8, '\ ', '\
I ,'\
I \'< I ', '. ' I . " I Nzme '\, \
' '\
t
I Of 8' 1 '.
% t 1 '"""""""""""""~""""""""~""""""""""""""""""~"""". : Member)
I 1 I
1 I i Crnn. Northing asked if a sidewalk and curb were i : put in last year and the grade were changed 10 I i or 40 years from now, would the property owner : I be charged for the new installation?
! Mr. Thornton informed the Council the City would! 1 not allow sidewalk and curb construction prior I
I to the grade being established.
: Cmn. Neiswender asked if the City were able to i i determine whether the State or County installed :
f the existing curb and sidewalk in 1925, and Mr. : i Thornton stated they attempted to gather this ;
t information but were unable to find out any in- i i formation. I
i Mayor Atkinson stated it was pointed out that no i
f provisions had been made for street trees.
i Mr. Thornton informed the Council at. the time thd 1 plans and specifications were presented to the : : Council for approval , it was pointed out at that i i time there would be 90 property owners who t.he ;
t city is in hopes of getting voluntary easements i
!
I t *
I I
t
I
I , I
t 8
I I I
I
I
I I I
1
; 1 from for tree planting.
I I
I I I I: As to the intersection of Las Flores and Jeffer-I
; son St. it is so designed that there will be b i ample view for safety. I I
i The Assistant Engineer further stated the City i
; will be taking approximately 6' of the Merillat i i property at the southwest corner. This property; : was appraised and it was felt that $165.00 was i i a fair market value, with no severence damage, ; : due to the fact the city would not .be taking the i i.6' the entire length of the frontage. 1
i The City Attorney pointed out that at this hear- I : ing the only concern of the Council is the im- i i provement of the street itself. As to credit on;
t the construction of the curb and gutter this can: i be discussed at the time the assessment is being: : spread.
; Cmn. Jardine asked if there was some way a pro- i t vision could be put in the oidinance or resolu- ;
; tion whereby it is the intention of the city to I i plant trees.
t The City Attorney. informed the Council if the i
; Council wished to make some provision regarding i I trees , it should be done by a separate document : ; -and not as a part of the 1911 Act Proceedings. i
: Cmn. Northing stated he had some points he wish-: i ed clarified.
I I
I I I
I I
I I I
I I 1
6 9 I I I
I ,I
I I I I
I I I
I I
1 I + I
I I 1 I i I 4 I 1. The petition signed by the property
e ! owners protesting the additional cost of curb, I i gutter and sidewalks. I
i The Assistant Engineer pointed out the property i i owners were not protesting the project-itself, i
1
I I I
I L I I I
1 I I 1 I
$ - -5- .*, '\ ' , , ',
: ?.!a yT;e '\ 'I
\' \' c
t c
i I
1 I .s y \a
I~~~"""""""""rr-",-,,,,,,,_,""""~~"~""""""""""""""~"""". I ; y.572k57
I represents 9.C5% of the total assessitbie frontage; ;
1
i but is to the duplizatio;-! cf cost for curb and i, 1. 3 % ; s-idewalk. Ihe property owners who protested $
; i ii? the district. L
i i4eyi:lat property.
.!MY. ;hornton stated thfs 3s bej;;,g taken in order i : to g2-t an zcceptable horizontai curve alignment ; i througn,the existing angle point of the existing i ;. right of way.
I
{
8
$ 2. The taking of 6' of property from the z
I I
Y I 3
"
P
3. Slope easements.
t
I The Assistarit ingir,fer infomed 'che Council the g 'E one property owner whose p~operty is affected I
; c,nd instructed the city to cut vertically at his 1 i right of way. I
i -;he greatest chose not to greet a slo?e easement 0 ;
< 4. Nr. Briggs Fainted out that a 6C' right :
t It b!as pointed out by ~ir~s .. Assistant Engineer I
i LC j,, a i i' ;r the City 'cook addstiona, 1 land -fop 2 621 i
: project another $8,000.0~1 t~ $9,OOO.OO. -. !his 's i
I
! of way for a secondary street is substandard. I
i
i. t ;n:ght of way it WOL~!~ ruc up the cost of the
! wi?y the city is trying to acqujre easements for ::
I the tree planting rather than acquiring add'" L Li0n-i
E al land. This area.is already built up.
j Cmn. Worthing asked if this would be setting a i ! pipecedent by fmproving a Substandard right. of I
f way, and the Assistznt ERgfnezr stated tn kSs P i
i aiready built up.
3 Aftee:. further ai scussicn it was tke general feel -i i .?:i:g of the Council these items \\;ere engineering : 1 matters and shou:d be handled as such.. L
f i ?,e fo7lowing resolution was presenleci:
l
e
$ 3
I
i opinicn it would not due tc~ the fact the area is i L
I
4 I"
I
3
,t
................ ." - ~ .
0
I.
i i kosola~~on Nc. 1356. A RESGLUTIOX OF THE C-ITY. r
i OBJECTIONS, A. D. No. 2-1965, (Jefferson S-k:.eet :Atkinson : et c:), was adopted by title only and further i Dunne i readirig waived. i Jardine
*- i Cgui,CCIL OF TEE CITY 05 CAgLSBAD, CAL7,rCRNLp,,. .. i I..ioy-thi;r,g
i sl.+K::<G FIbjDIpIGS AiaD 'O\]EgRzLING PROTiSTj AND : Nei sweild;
......... - .. - . .- I .. ~ . ~~ ~ ~. "~ - ""_ __ .
i (b) Ordinance #8046 ~ ado--'- u ~3 * ng ugi for^ zuj 1 din^
I CcGe, I 904. Ed?: ti on. The Cfty P,ttorney rnformea f i the Councfi at a previous meeting the Council 1 i adop-ted the Plotice of Intertion 20 adop'i th.e 1 t
7 rr-
I
j ;go$ Edition of the Buf 1d-i.g Code. The j\iotice i
: , !,I- ~ds i;roperly advertised <n the newspzpzr.
" , ; ,;;e :v(2yor anr,ouncec the Cocnci? would /?ear from i
; c I ! ?ersons desiying to speak fn iavo,r of or ; i s.9a-i ,?St 'ihe proposed o;pGjnance. I
i ; p. s -!- 1 3 Lcer~ weye no p2rsons pYesel7-L desjring. to i
t speci, the pubiic hearing was declared ciasee at i : :: 8:3G P.M. I
, "-
i
1 i
j
I
;
I L
\"
I \'
\'\
( L $ 7 c I I I
I -6- \\ ', ' ! ?.; 2 9 e ' '\ ',
:"""""""""I""""""""-"""""""""""""""-""~"""""~""". ; P,"",, i,Acjj,;c,
I ,,
I 9; \
8 1 s :As Cxn. Jardine requested clarification of the i i changes proposed, the City Attorney was reques.tedj
i to make a report on the changes at the n,ext 1 i YeguIar meeting. ;
1 "
!BY motion of the Council the hearing was contin- .i ~i~~or-thing q i lied to February 7, 1967 at 7!30 P.M. ! : Ne; swendt
I
I c
tAtkfilson i Dunne I Jardine
I CIVIL DEFENSE: i 1 c I I i (a) Resolution #1357, authorizing certain per- > i
!over and under $2,50G.00. -, !ne City Manager in- i i sons to sjgn for purchase of Surplus Property
i formed the Council the Civil Defense A?ency re- i ;quests a resolution each year designating the i :persons authorized by the city to sign for pur- : ! chase of Surplus Property.
6
!
1
8 I
:The following resolution was presented: i
:
I I :
!Resolution No. 1357. A RESOLUTIGP; OF THE CITY h iKorthjfig
.I ; COUNCIL OF TIE CIT\/ OF CARLSSAD, APPROViP!G COM- ;?:e; . s we r; ii <
J sj250O.00, was adopted by ti'tle only and further iDume
.: readi ng wai ved. i Jartiine
i (5) Appointment of one member cf City Council to: : Civil De7ense Council. Mayor Atkinson appointed f
:himself to 'represent the city on the Civil De- i t fense Counci 1. I
i (c) Appointment of one nenber cf City Council as i t 2nd alternate to ci vi 7. Defense ~o.ur,.c'i 7. Cmn. a IJuiqne was appointed by the Xayor as th2 second i :alternate to the Civi? Cefense Council.
/ ; BINATION OF SURPLUS PROPERTY OVER AND UNDER i Atki nsan
f i
I
I i e
I
:PARKS AGD RECREATION: c
t i
I
i
I
f
t i c
I
L I d
'L I
<
1
I
(a) Memorandum from Pzrks and gecreation Comm'i's-t sion - re: Bed Tax Funds. A Xemorandum dated
Ccrnrr,ission was presented, in which they referred I
dated December !9, 1967, whereby the Chamber of i Ccmnerce requested that "Bed - lax Funds"be used i
for the downtown Christrnzs decorations. The Corn-: missior, is opposed to allocation of these funds i -?or any use other than as speci'fied by the origi-j
nai ordinance. I
Ey
be sent to the Parks and iiecreation Commission i -reaffirmin5 the Council's position of having the i
Jznuary 4, 1957, frorri the Pzrks and Recreation i I
-to an a w- i iic1e"in the San Diego Unicn newspaper, I
P d ccmmon consent it was ag~eed that a memoranciumj I
'j3ed /ax Fund" earmarked for ?ark purposes. ! -
I
.> ? ?\! ,, t - \i,r 8 (J s 1 N E s S :
6 I
i
0
i
j (2,) Recuzst for stuud~, of alley f:n~m the Post I 1 C;.-,=fice 10 Eeecn Street. Cm.. Duni-;? requested a i
: s-:udy made of the alley from the Post Office < "
1 t:;?o;gh: to Beech Street. $
I 3
:The Assfstant Engineer inic;emed the Council a I 3
; ,:e"'< L i cjor, ;s being circulated by on2 of the proper; ,y . . .- - cv~ners in order to open up the alley through i
I -~a Beech Street.
I.
.. .I !
i I + I 1 t A
-7-
& I 1
>, -, '.
\ ', \
I ', , ' 1 .' ' '\ '. I $!zrfie '
i
I >
L 1 t
t ; 0: \.
,"""""""""""~""""""""~"""~"""-..~""""~"""~""""""""-~ ; ;Lj.,,.r:tey
% i (b) Request for utility easement. In order to i
1 provide underground uti 1 i ti es for the Library , I ithe San Diego Gas & Electric Co. requests that the jcity grant an easement along Pic Pic0 Drive, due i ! 'i;O tile %act that when EImljJood was ciosed the main; [power line serving that area was abandoned. PI 1
;pole will he installed at the corner of Pic Pic0 ; 1 Dr. and Laguna Dr. for installation of the power i' ; ljne.
!Cy motion of the Council it was agreed that the :!*!orthing
i City of Carlsbad grant an easement to the San \ Nei swendt !Diego Gas & Electric Co. for utility purposes, ;Atkinson i and that the Mayor be allthorized to execute the %DEnne i document on behalf of the City of Carlsbad. ; Jardi ne
i
8 1 1
a 9 i CLD BUSINESS: e
i (a) Second reading of Ordiriance $8048, regarding!
S abatement of 2ubl i c Nuisances. The foll owing i i ordinance was presented for a second reading:
l L I
$ i + s 1 i Ordinance No. 8048. AI\: ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF :b:orth-;ns
I CARLSBAD REGARDING ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC i\iUISANCES,i Keiswecdc I was given a second reading 5y title cnly and i P't'. .c1 in5077 I adopted. f Danne
b i Jardi ne
I (io) Ordinance ir3072, regarding Assembly, Dis- : assembly or repair or' Xotor Vehjcles. he Mayor i E anncunced this item.was held over -from the last ;
i meeting for further study. i
i Cmn. Jardine stated this tyFe of ordinance is 4 f
; going to make some citjzens unhappy; however, the: 1 Council does have an cbligation 'LO the resicien- i E tia? areas". He fejt the suggestions submitted by: : Cmn. Dunne certainiy have n?eyit. C P
i ; : Cmn. Northing stated he was sure all the Counci,l-: i' inen had received a copy of Mr. h!e:rnigk's sug- ; C
i gesti ons, and he felt they were more restrictfve i
i would prohibit any major r29a-i~ being done by a r : car owner. Crnn. Northing further stated h.e 8 : LJOU!~ like to' see the ordinance as proposed trtedi i out, and perhaps later it would have to be made : : more restrictive. 1 E
E Crnn. Dunne explained the reasbc he suggested that! p the pe:rmit requirement be eliminated' was the f P ; fact it would be very djfficul t to differentiate ; i between major and minor repairs. As to his a other suggestion they would be allowed to 60 car f i ;..epair on their car as 'long as they di'd not cause!
i a nuisance. 1 I
i After further consideration, Cmn. Jardine asked ; i that he and ~mn. >!orthing be allowed to study i !
1 th'is matter further.
>
1 1 3 i -
9 i I I
1 than he would like .to see. One of his suggestion; I
6 E P I
I
'
i : (c) * Citizens Service b.wa:.d Cormsttee. !b.c I
L k .. ; ,'!;zyc;- annocnced the ~iti z~i~~s Servj ceTward Con- 1
I. 0 I r:;t'cc-c ;'s ccw functioning. The Cornm<ttee felt ; I 5 fcrm shouid be made up ?n order that names can i I be su5mi t'ced. Also it was the? r fee? i ng that a ; i mGre substantial award should be made rather
< If , 1 f
I L 1 I
I I !
i I t
t
I 5
-8-
.: \*..
I ,' , \ \\ >
i >.< a -, r, 8 'a
I ,*
'\\ '\, '
i >xc:l!" \\
, o!:
;"""""""""""""-"""- """" _"_ ~ """"""""""""""_ ).:Lz[ "__ ; ~~tc-?Lc
I i . .L ~i?ai; ! a CertiT' i . I I cate. % I ~cln. ~unne stated he -72; -; -ihe cer-t<fi cat? of laward should stf?: be si\jei? as 'chis is sornethjng i
; -they can frame and keep. 1 .I
1
1
i ; < pyoy
f t (,A' ,G! Letters from ci-lizeu?~ - re: Ch.r<stmmi:s Deccr;
Atkinson s'iatzd 'chat 14~. Cas'iorena \;/as GG?:n$
:award for consideration. c 1
: atforis for the Down-tol//n area. t4zyo~ F\-c~< :,son, .; 17- 'i ; formec: the Council a iarge number of ?etters had j i b3en received by the council from citizens in the! ;comz-~:nity, :I.equest?nS the City to provide ade- 1
;;;e had contacted Mr. Kirk, President of tho !Chamber of Commerce, and tnis matter will be dis-i ;cussed at a later date.
i to see -if he could propose -a more substantjal
c-
jquate- Christmas Decoratfons. -5 ifl? M~YG~ stated I
c
4
3
1
4 ; ! n -.* -
!
; Li !': ATT@R?\iE\('S REPORT: i t (a) Ordi napce #202~ ~ pro?:; .. bj-ti na F< res + :q ~or,e I i
1 i !le Cj ty Attorney jn-Formed the CG~RC~ 1 -:!?e ;-r -. re i ;
, 1 j c Lpa. v. ? ,," -L iment requested that certain chanzes be rnziet
.' " I
: concerning the buri?ing of fires. The main changej i was the prohi bit? ng of any fi res i n Fire Zone I, i i which is the downtown area. I
i ::?e following ordjnznce was presented: i ;
i
1
1 "I
1 a:-dfnance No. 2G25. A;! ORDI#A:iCE 05: THE CITY OF :Xor:h;zs E- - ; ;j,RLSBAD REGULATi;..jG AND PgCHIBITIfijG CERTAIrl - ! YPES; i{efswen.is
i readi ng wai ved. .- L ~ardine
L j z re zones. 1 he -. i-lre Departnent aiso :~equeste< 3
: OF FI,PES, AND REPE~~LI,"!G ORDINANCE NO. 2309, \,,,as 3~tkinsc;q i g-ivan a f-irst reading by title on?y and further i Dunne
t 1 i (b) O;pdinance #2027, crezting and establish-ing i
; this ordinance drafted< settjng. 2~ the vari ous : fire zones in the City of Carlsbaci. i
i .,r : -
t " . 1 ; : 22 fa:: cwing ordinance was preseated: f I
5 t~y~f!~~i?ce ?{ao 2027. AN 0g"-":'?[fF U~I~,&,I~~- OF THE CiT!' GF i r?:,:~ti?i~:~ , "___ ; C,hRLSS$,D CREATi;{G AND ESTfi,siISjjIi\jG FiRz ZO:dES s i Ee'sp!e;?&c
3 was ;<veri 2 first reacing by ti-t?e only and fur- ? ;Atki.r,son
; crier readir;g war veci. 3 DuRi2.e
; : jardine
i (c) gydi nance $7935, re: ~n~us-tr< ai Waste2. ! icfs ordii~ance was prepared for the purpose of t
I adoy": 'i~ ,ng uniform 'rules as to what can be put in f
i tbe sewerage system by inci;stries. The city has f i an expensive system and ')!ants to control what f
i ~yave adbpted similar rules.
$ Li;ii!. Dunne stateti thzt he a:;d Cmn, p{efswender i
* ..
I I P t I , " . -
I can 52 PU'C thi*OEgh the sys'cem. -. /he other agencfeis
..
, ,? ," ". : !.:e?: y;;eyc,be:-.s of the jojnt ?oI;!~:-s ~anmf ttee, and i ; thes, rzies ans reGgjzt-ic;-is hal/e been discussed I
; >y -;;-;E commi tj-e e for the ?ast six months. fi I
c ;-, >~r:,-,: - 'c 1A1j 7 i 52 recjuj res 0-y any iyew 0pe;ra~;or; 2s I
1 f
L, .. <-
0 -io hew they intend to ~TGC~SS their waste. !
j
< t
r 1
I !
. .-.
I I i t L I I I
e -Y-
L \\ '. -\
1 \"
I \'\
\ '. 1
%'%
i ttz.ne '8, \I
, 0.; '3 1
i :""""""""""""-""-""""""""~"""".,""""-""""""""~"""~"~. : ~ernber
I I 3 1 E 1 a; i Cmn. Neiswender stated these are the general I 1 provisions that have been approved by the Joint 1 : Advisory Committee. 3 I
t t J i Cmn. Northing asked if the working rules and I
f regulations would be presented at a later date, 1
I and he was informed that they would be. 4 I
f It was pointed out the operators, which is the i g County of San Diego, will establish the criteria I :they feel are necessary to prevent a breakdown i i in the system. I $
i The City Manager informed the Council that once I
1 the criteria is established, it wi 11 be up to the! i industry to process or pretreat their waste to : :meet the criteria. If they are not able to meet i i the criteria it could well be the city would not ; ; want the i ndustry. 1 I
i After further discussion the following ordinance i i was presented: f $ !
i Ordinaince No. 7035. AN ORDINAb!CE OF THE CITY t Worthi ng i COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD RELATING TO THE i Neisv!ende i CONTROL AND THE REGULATION OF THE DISCHARGE OF : Atkjnson : INDUSTRIAL-WASTE, was given a first readinq by i Dunne
1 1 #
t I
1 1
I I I
! !
i title only and further-reading waived. " i ; Jardine
I 1 f I 1 1
I 1 1 : CITY MANAGER'S REPORT:
1
s i t I 1
9 9 ; (a) Capital Improvement Program. The City Mana- i i ger presented a Capital Improvement Program for ; ; the Council's consideration.
: Mayor Atkinson stated he felt this item should be! i discussed at one of the adjour'ned meetings the : ; Council will hold for items such as this one.
: Cmn. Jardine stated he felt Mr. Namaux did a : i very thoughtful job on this project and he would i I like to compliment him on the report.
! (b) Employee's Fringe Benefit Study. In the City : i Manager's Report to the City Council, dateci I I ; January 13, 1967, a study of the Fringe Benefits i i for employees of the City of Carlsbad was in- 4 1 : cluded. The City Manager inforned the Council ! i this report was prepared through receipt of a 0 I
i magazine article from Cmn. Worthing, which; 9 t i according to the U. S. Chamber of Commerce, fringh ; benefits, on the 'average, how average 25% of the : i average company's payroll. In comparison, fringe! ; benefits for Carlsbad City employees represents : i 16.031%of the total payroll. 1 I
I L I
P I I $
$ f
4' 2 I f: I I
8 1 I
i 3 i
I t
0
i (c) Amendment to Agreemeilt for Library COnstrUC-i B
1 : tior, Grant. The Agreenent for iibrary C0nSti"UC- f
, i ti on Grant, dated Februar-y 18, 1966, be'cween the ! i State Librarian, of ti?? State-of California, and i i the City of Carlsbad, set the completion date for:
i the Library as February 28; 1967. The City I I / petitioned the State Librarian for an extension j i of "Lime. The City is ii? receipt of an Amendment i i to Agreement for Library Constructicn Grant, J P E extending the completion date to August'31, 1967.j i
; ?he following resolution has been prepared for : i the Council's consideration: 6 I
I
,-.
L ,' , \ 'x
! c.7 ,. -? ~, \ ', ; :'.c.$l8G \\
I 0: \
t 0
L I t {
-1 0- I '\, '\, '
I \I
i ; yci-C;75iy
~~~~****~~*=~*ueu~u~~~~u~~~~~-~~r-r~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~, I iiJl\\WUl
s r Resol ut ; COUNCIL ; fi,iqExjjp{c i GRAQT B
f by tit?
i-
f i CALI FOR
L
8
i on
OF NT T ETbJE
NIA,
e on
No o 1358. THE CITY 0 AGREEME
AXD THE
ly and fu
EN THE ST
A ?\ESOiiiTiON GF T!4E CITY i :
OF CARLSSAD, A?PROVixG i \<jorth< ng NT .FOR LIBRARY CONSTRYCTIOP4 3 Re<swend(
CITY OF CAZLSBAD, was adopted; Dunce
rther reading waived. s Jardi ne
ATE LIBXARIAN, STATE OF 1 1 Atk.: nson
a i (6) Request for Dance Permit. A request for a c j
i Dance Permit at Carlsbad Boat Landing 9 4509 Adamst : I s & L~ 'P Le-t, Q submitted by Mrs. Adel :a Stone, was pre- p J sented.
8 :The City Manager informed the Council the 'appli- i
;cation had been checked by tbe Poiice Department i i and find no objection to the pe:.mit being issued.;
i By notion of the Council a Dance Pernit was 2 : Worthing i granted to the Carlsbad Boat Landing, 4509 Atiams i;;eiswend~
t Street. 1'fi ,d,x1nson 4
t : Jartine
2 I
I i Dunne
8 I
I
!. (e) Euena Vista Lagoor; Drainage Channe! . A I 1
; Keith Tenaglia and Col. IL C. Atkinson, was pre- i i sented, regarding the Suena Vista Lasoon Drainage:
i Channel.
I letter dated December 20, 1966, signed by P,!ancy t ;
i r
c "Ir. i
: ;!le city Manager iniosmed the Council this same i i letter was presentec to the City Council of Oceanb ; side, and the Oceanside Council requested that i i their City Manager meet with the City Manager of ; i Carlsbad to discuss this Ratter.
f By motfon of the Counci.? The City Manager was in-YKorthing i structed to meet with the City Nanager of Ocean- / Ne-iswendc
f side -to discuss this matter. i Atkinson
$ 0
1 i I
t Dunne
Y
E i ; Jardine ; t Cmn. Cunne poicted ont the City of Vista was also! : i 'P ,,quested 0 to enter into the cost of the drainage J I channel , however, they did not feel they had any i i responsibility in tkjs natter. i a a i
j ((5) Report from Traffic SaSe'cy Committee - re: I : Streat Striping Poiicy. A 'report from the Traffib : Szfety Committee dated January 11, 1966, regard- ;
: -ng a Street Striping Pol icy, );as presented for i i the Council's consideratjon. - f
O.
r 1
i Cnn. Worthing asked if any adcli'cional points had i
y ~eec a.dded in the. Committee's report? 1
j T!?e City 3"iaager stated th-is was the same policy 1
; that has been tised, however, the Council asked ;
, 4 ; 3y 1 rsction of the Counc?: 1 the poi +cy for Street f i.icr-ch-i::g
; Stripfng as submitted by the Traffic Safety Corn- i tieis1~~eiidc
: R< ttee, was approved and ac,cepted. ' i Atk' ',TrSOZ
$0
?
2
4 i
1 'chat a written policy be presented. I
i.
; Du!:ne a- ; ~zrGjn2
i i Cmn. Neiswender inqairee as 'LO the progress 0-F j ; tihe work on aasswood Avenue. i
; ;he Assistant ~.ng?nser infsrmed the Couzcil they .i i are in hopes of starting the work thjs next week.!
0
2 . " . -.
I E
I r ; -1-i-
-, ' , i '\
I '\ ', '
I 2:e :a2 ', * .. '.
3
I \I
I I
; p,;.. 0 ".- '1 'rr 7 \
~"~"""""""'~"---""~"""""~""~"-""~-"..-"-""-------------~--"---------- i'.,dl!;U",
I I
%: i Easements for street t;nee plantina - re: Jeffer-: 5 son st. \I
i-
i
L
E By motion of the Co~ncii it was agreeti that the i 1r.rc~t17sng ; City proceed to acquire voluntary easements from -: :\lejsl,vendc
i the property owners for street tree planting on :Atkinson i :effeinson Street, and th2-t the City provide stree? DUD~E
i trees. ; Jardjne
i ~mn. ~arciine requested that a rsport be made to i i the Council regarding the trees on Chestnu;; Ave. i
r t
*
I ! AUTXO2IZATION FOR PAYMENT OF BILLS AND RATIFICA- t i
i nor4 OF PAYROLL:
I 1
L P ; Authorization was given for -the payment of b-il Is i I for the general expenses of the city in the 0
j amount of $183,661.24, and for the iKater Depart- lIriorthing i ment in the amount of $2,368.19, for the perjcd 1 riejswendt
I Janualry 3, I967 to Jacuary 77, 1967, as certifiediAtkinson i by the Director of Finance and approved by the i Dur,ne
i Audf ti ng Commi ttee. i Jardine
I 2ztiFication of the payroll was given for the i Worthicg i f-irst half of January, 1967, 'n the amount of 1 ?(e i s k,.re :c d c
i $23,767.72, as certified by the Director of i ~tk< nsor! i Finance and approved by the Auditing Committee. iDgi?i?e
I
b P
i
I t : :zrcine
< ; ADJGUR>jMENT:
3 k By Froper motion the meeting was adjourned to El;i'edr,esday, January 18, 1957, at 7:30 P.M.
I i The Mayor declared the regular meeting : at 9:lO P.M.
t
1 L I
i Respectfully submitted, ). G,
i
i t 1
I
$ I 1
$ I s
adjourned f I 1
f
1
3 i
I
+) 2q , y(./ ,~k&f&g/ x, d7 py"--@ i MABGEi$ET E. ADAMS i CityYClerk ).
"4 .'/&?,,,U,
i
I I
I 2 I 0 b t
i
I 1 c
z I @
I
L
i
I
1
i I
t
0.
I 1 i i I
I I 3
I I >
s I
e
I
c
P
;
1
D 7 3 1 t 8 2
I
I
; c
1
?
, i
I 1 1
L I
I i I > J I 9 t
I i I i