Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1954/08/26 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL ~ETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFOPJNIA Held Thursday August 26, 1954 The City Council met at 2:00 P.~. in the Council chambers of the City IIall on the above date pursuant to "Consent for Holding Special Meeting" signed by all Council members. Present: Councilmen Hobel~ Rader, Halferty, Riesland, DeWolfe Absent: None Also Present: City Administrator Floyd, Principal Engineer Johnson DISCUSSION - Authorization for City Administrative Officer to have Engineer make recommended revisions to 1911 Act Plans and Specifications. Councilman Hobel recommended that revisions on the plans be approved by the Council, but that all sidewalks be eliminated with some exceptions such as those within a school area. Councilman Riesland stated that the primary reason for eliminating sidewalks in the revised plans was to exclude agricultural tracts. When subdivided, sidewalks would be put in by the subdividing property owners. ~,~ayor Halfsrty took the opposite stand. He said he fe~ls that he would be letting the school children dowu if sidewalks were eliminated. In many instances, he continued, it is necessary for children, and for adults too, to walk around a car parked on a street v~thout sidewalks, thus jeopardizing motorists as well as the pedestrian. Also, where strip paving exists and there are no sidewalks, buses must stop on the paved strip in rainy weather, and it is impossible to make a right turn on a twenty foot strip pavement. Councilman Rader declared that he favors the original proposal of a 1911 Act District as presented by former City Administrator Bryant, whereby construction of sidewalks, curbs, shoulders and so on would be made only where they do not now exist. Taxpayers should not be obliged to pay for new pavement when maintenance in the past has not been ade~uate. Councilman Hobel pointed out that when the entire city shares in paying for improvements in any given area, such as by bond issue or general fund, the ultimate result may very well be a ghost town. Industry and businessmen ~ll pull out of the City because they cannot pay for improvements throughout the City. Councilman Rader stated that the City of San Diego maintains its streets. He also inquired as to what fund would be used to maintain streets should they be constructed under the 1911 Act. Although a good many changes have been made in the original plans, a lot more should be deleted. The 1911 Act is for reconstruction; unappropriated funds should be used for maintenance. Councilman Hobel asked what the term "unappropriated funds" referred to. CityAdministrator Floyd answered that the City of Chula Vista, by Charter, must maintain a bank balance of $100,000.00 and no withdrawals may be made except in emergencies. Such withdrawals must be returned to the bank account during the same fiscal year. There is no so-called surplus in the budget. If streets are paved and reconditioned, it will reduce the expense to the taxpayer of approximately $50,000.00 a year for maintenaUce. If sidewalks are in poor condition, it is the responsibility of the property o~rner to repair them. Principal Civil Engincer Johnson stated that, in compliance with the City's present subdivision laws, anyone who expects to buy a home in a new subdivision in Chula Vista must pay for sidewalks. He added that it is his suggestion that tr*o members of the Council be appointed to go over the field notes again - this time pa~e by page - to make certain the revisions are in accordance with those recommended by the Council. Councilman DeT;olfe stated that it was his understanding that the field notes had been covered in a meeting of the Committee after the field trip. city Administrator Floyd, in answer to a question raised by ~ayor Halferty, said that the City and/or the property owner are responsibile for any injuries suffered by pedestrians on a sidewalk. The City issues a warning to the property owner when sidewalks are in need of repair. At this point Commander Farrell in the audience asked permission to speak. ?~en granted, he stated that the school bus picks up children who live beyond ]/~ of a milo f~om~ a school. He suggested setting aside the whole 1911 Act proposal and start over utilizing the city's engineers. The general public's feelirg, he declared, is against the 1911 Act and the Council will be held responsible for results, should they continue with it. Councilman DeWolfe asked the Commander if~ in his opinion, a sufficient number of people at some time in the future, would come to the Council and ask that a 1911 Act Improvement District be formed. Until such time as they do, he added, a great waste of t~xpayers money is going toward street maintenance. If financed over a ten year period by the 1911 Act, the least amount of financial hardship would result to property owners, and they could be enjoying the improvements for those ten years. A general bond issue would not be eq'uitable. City Administrator Floyd called attention to those instances in which individual requests for substandard sidewalks were granted to protect trees or facilitate installing driveways and so forth. This caused the City a great deal of trouble. Sidewalks, he believes, should be left out where they cannot meet standard specifications, particularly those areas where sidewalks would be above grade. Councilman Riesland contended that all sidewalks should be eliminated from the plans at this time and taken up as a separate issue at a later date. ~ayor Halferty stated again that he is against removing any more sidewalk~ from the plans because, if just one mishap occurs to a child because of this action, it would not be worth it. ~alter Davis, Secretary of the Chamber of Commerce quoted figures indicating that sidewalks would cost approx~u~ately ~1.20 a lineal foot or approximately $60.00 for a ~0 foot lot. He suggested bank loans be obtained by property owners to pay for them. Councilman Rios]and said that at a Council Committee meeting at which four contractors were called ~n, it was felt by said contractors that the engineers' estimates we~ from ~0 ts ~0 percent too high. The reason for the high estimate, he explained, is that the 1911 Act engineer must put in an estimate at a price over the bid. Should one bid be received that is higher than the engineers' estimate, the entire plan must be throvm out. The object of the protest meeting was to give the Council an idea from the people as to their views. Councilman Hobel inquired of Hr. Lloyd Lee, a local contractor in the audience, what he thinks about sidewalks under the 1911 Act~ and if he felt they should be deleted. ~. Lee replied that it is a matter of personal preference. I!e added he feels that if the school groups feel the need of additional sidewalks, they should contribute toward them. Councilman DeWolfe stated that he would like a motion to be made that the sidewalks be deleted from the present plans and if, in the future, a sufficient number of people petition the City, sidewalks can at that time be given every consideration. Councilman Hobel added that tho motion should read that the plans be approved and, in addition, all sidewalks be deleted. City Administrator Floyd said a motion must be acted upon now if sidewalks are to be eliminated~ as tho attorneys must be informed so that they may determine whh~heror not a new resolution of intention must be presented. It was moved by Councilman DeWolfe, seconded by Councilman Hobel, and carried~ that the plans for the 1911 Act District be approved with the incorpora- tion of all deletions that had been recommended by the Nayor's Field Trip Committee and, in addition, that all sidewalks be eliminated from the plans. The motion carried by the follovgng vote, to-wit: AYF~S: Co,mucilmen Hobel, Halferty, Riesland, DeWolfe Noes: Councilman Rader Absent: None Councilman Rader stated that his reason for voting "no" was on the grounds that the plans v~re incomplete as far as he is concerned, and that more deletions should be made. He added that in regard to street maiutenance, it is his opinion that the l?ll Act should not be used for this purpose. In answer to ~r. ~loyd Lee's statement that he~ too, felt that the l~ll Act should not be used for repairs, Walter Davis agreed that, although technically correct, the best way to finance such work with the least expense to the taxpayer, would be by means of the 1911 Act. Over a period of ten years, the average improvements on a 50 foot lot would run around $266.00 under the Act; whereas ~under a twenty year bond, for instance, the cost to the same property owner would be approximately Commander Farrell, at this point, reiterated his statement that the Council will be held accountable for continuing with plans for the 1911 Act Improvement District, and expressed his desire that tP~s statement be included in the !~nutes of this meeting. ADJOURN~NT It'was moved by Councilman Hobel, seconded by Councilman DeWolfe, and carried, that the meeting adjourn sine die. Chula Vista, California ~e, the following ne~bers of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista~ California~ do hereby consent to the holding of a S~ECIAL ~?XHG to be held August 30, 19S4, at 2~00 PoMo in the Council Cha~ers of the City Hall for the purpose Authorizing the City Clerk to ~__?loy additA~al aeeistants to ex~aine the recall petition and/or eu~ple~e~tal petitic~. A. A. Rie~d, Co~c~a~ C~cil~an Chula Vista, California August 24, 1954 We, the following members of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby consent to the holding of a SPECIAL MEETING to be held August 26, 1954, at 2:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the City Hall for purpose of: Authorizing the Chief Administrative Officer to have the Engineer make recommended revisions in the 1911 Improvement Act plans and specifications. George/DeWolfe, Co~n~flilman A.A. Riesland, Counctilman / W. Ray ~oyle~n~her Kenneth-P. Campbell,, City Clerk SO4S mO ~8 ~SO ~SO lin Moro Soft hXX mn. City of CbuXIB Viii&.mPotty Camb Fund Yr. lubm~ript io~ Council Ia,ekes lid Pry, pomtmmwtor, Cimla Yiita 1004 rrm BnvOXOlmm L.C. i-hilum Cb. - Inv. P4- Ioer. Coster Allied Ote~e-Bitio Cb. treo PolttilBktnl cb. immo~ilBted Pump & ~. ~. itl~ hi~ & lf~. ~, M'S bff~ bp Virgil bt~- C.V.P. ~t. ~a Vt~a ~ ~. ~a V~s~a ~ ~ ~. Cheely*m Amtm Pmztm Cot~mll' m mm,.t I~raud, limrtff, ~Ounty of {.D. Cmmty of lan Mowo - Dept. of WiXmom f. CXo~k btrtbuM, he. mrm~o ItieI SOpplF cb. t%eetrie & Dtomol Bluip. Cb. r~e~trie h~ll~ D~atr. Co. Y~' lB cbtol TOwl · LAm Supply a~lo~d BFom., ho. Gemor~l C~mtrmb Co. poetize- All Sopti. l~ll - I~eyo! Comtributioum City S beordtq Wit# Adu_Xt Bound Trmf., rmmom, flmmbXWhtm Topo p~per Dmo-fmmt !tlBpZem ApprmilmA - BI pm~eolm paimt · SOppli# Ju~y Toge~ f~rvieom Plulfer Tubo8 · C~ilm I5. O0 474.60 10.00 10.50 SO.IS I?oSS 8.10 ~.T8 9,1~ ~.M 41.M 3, 74S. 31 l. JO XS.~ 13. lO BTI. 43 ~.~ 3.4T J8.44 70.63 lO. 07 1.~ 9.~0 17. SS 78.38 17.9S 081,497.93 U40 m,407.00 loth mt 8641 lbo E.L Imtttif Cb. J~vetile Boelm-Ltbru7 J. rind KmkXe b Mm Ke~le~ i Gollura ~ C. boblor I1~. Jsne Ihfer - C.~. leer. hater I.D. &ltoF hppl! & Cimioil I.~. off lee kppO7 a B~utp. Cb. I.D. Ipriml & Briko Worim, Imm. $ 1.~BO 1~.~0 lO.O0 11.06 11.?0 1M. 17 1.08 ~01.84 2.04 44S.00 Bolt Belml]l - P.D. Judtt. logy. for q~r. ~t ~ - ~ 4 ~. ht~ ~t 14.01 ~ V~. ~ty ~tp. ~ ~ M 3.40 ~1 ~ & ~tt~ 6.~ ~mte I ~ ~ 8.~ ~y ~ ~.78 ~t~,m~, ~t~ I~'~prea4- tK Z!~ ~t. ~ht~ & ~ bM. ~8.~ ~ ~ ~m 78.18 O?H. 78 1444 8~54 8670 8671 88?3 $ Ilotozola ]td~. dmo~imm &misty of FAming Officials ~hula V~ It~ f~e a ~, Ltd. dmt J~ VomJ. ~ ~le ~d ~ty of ~a Vista - ~tty ~ ~ 3.60 1.06 37.00 16.73 S0.97 1~.~ 4.~4 1014.83 4.~ Attorneys fm- July 60e. O0 i~abl. Imp. l,m. p, ~ Alle~-~aZ ~6. ~ 3, loth Au~mt