Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - April 15, 1959398 OIT= COCNCIL. CITY OF LODI 07_,CIL CH -3-.R' Ci=w ------- APRIL 15, 1959 This regular meeting of the Ci+.. Council of the City of Lodi Held beginni 9:00 o'clock~ of ed.nesda. - ril J 1_5, 1959: ' ouncilmen Cun-lbertson, a.zakian,:itche11 . Robinson and Brown (avor) present; Director Rodgers and =administrative Assistant Brown present. YIN iT73 Un motion of Councilor-. Katzaki an. Culbertson second. .he minutes of --_ail 1, 1959 were approved as written end mailed after making the following correction: Insert before the last sentenceein pa_... -_a.._...- e^titled "_11ied Grape Growers Industrialclaste" the following sentence: "Also, in the event that it is necessary to in Crease fa,Ciliti es. the OonD?^'r would bear its .,roper share of the Capital ul_i tl sv. " PT BLTC JE-Ri_!GS TOK..Y STR'__T L T ;� TIN G DISTRICT RES. NOS. 2220. 2221 AND 2222 11.01 -.PTD :[a ror Brown called for public hearing on the intention to. construct street light= in the `_'okay Street Lighting District. £'r. G. C. Spitzer. '10 'est •_,ka-r, stated that he .ranted• street lights but wonted to kno-r if he would save an^ money by waiting for a larger district. He was told that there were too many factors involved to be able to give "yes" or "no" answer. [r. Lee -Heintz, 707 South California Street, stated he would prefer waiting until the 'whole area decided to have lights and wanted his name removed from the petition. Hr. Erwin Sailer. 635 South Orange, considered it unfair to assess _ corner lot on two sides. Mrs. Willard Siegel 720 South California Street stated she though the Petition was to ."•re.. the To'k'-, Gardens Subdivision then she signed it. -. Sie el said he was it fano.r of street lightS but thought th.t the district should include a larrer .._ea instead of piecemeal operations. The People present were informed that namesandcould not be __moved from the petition and thatit would have required signatures atures of owners of 504 of the area in the ronosed lighting district in order to override the petition; that corner lots sre reouired to be assessed according to footage: and that it is up to the people wanting lights ani circulating the petition to deride on the size of the district. -z letter from R. E. nnrton, 541= Tokay Street favoring installation of the Street lights. was read. Since there were insufficient protests to override the petition, on motion of C Cu..nil ^an Robinson. Culbertson Second_ the Councilu adopted :Resolution _o. 2220 overruling theaprotests. On motion of Councilman K ....akin . l'-itnhell secon: the Council adopted Resolution No. 2221 ordering t e work, and on motion o:' Councilmen Mitchell, Katsa'.,:i ___ second; the Council _topted Resolution No. 2222 directing the assess... nt to 'oe prepared for the Tok_v Street Lighting District. .,n'.-_._ of -- , _n..ea 399 ."0 OD -_ri. _ _ or _n c.,,ei -or zbl - the 3 13 Ck LI -1-2 of -he tCouncil to ss`_L i s" a setb?c_. l_____ nn '.iesr,•.,rocd _venue 25 '__t '^om the .,enter u]. 1 ,_'1 _in_ f said street. he_- ere oro`S _i+hx+r n f7) -1 0- __ql On ...ion _ Crunoilman 'nnit,er ;c nn a S _.__ .,.'nd, the :01....01_ -...r-)Beed Or... �. .arca _in, 4 -Al r+a.b11S._inr the , etnon_ line nn ,.est:rocd r?nue by a 4 4n grof title on __r and .._._v?._... the _-ali... of the ordinin^_.. -_ _ u,1l_. a1—)-) '.1-._L ^.a _ -­.nn=n '.'',omnis- iJ_o, t,n-t the 'at... .. fon _-epilert-al ct_.,_contained -he )5 _.-.._aR."h-!_•r; s,on Ord in an0 s be ._n!i+''el' .. ha -in r:.c ci. ,_ -- -tand _rd of-. 95' _- at of ..._. with Ln' -: -oa t- FO' _ of •ra with ?i_, .,+ili on e ch .,id _n- .,_th a -'0' ., .. _...ant. - . ?n -q ,.r .O,�la ,allow hOngG ?lq ^'_aced fru^ +%,e ert_ - o" "oa qt-•eet _nd ?0' fro-+ the side: --.11,: rather "7=' _roe! the ce..+a_ c_ the street and »=� -on :e idew.-.l... Co-noilman - obinson, _:itchel.l 7irrea th?. , the recommendation. of t7,s Dl n... _n - .:pi:^..=gSi.j "1 ?,� ..a io0icrl ::.a no cho.np? be Arlo in he motli.n •r'.7: :Olin Oilr•ien - .:lbe_tSo"1. ..it^-. c11 a ROnl^S^.- an-! Brown '?la._.4 ,_ .. .o-..rlin._=-? ss ion - _con d that the ;;+•, fi5 .G _„ of south of the _m 3. -.7-T0'' as :icho�l for a.._r'_c site. The five are .lr - ;?-acre tract that is be _,..`tired bef-)-e the co^:nlet=on of the 1- ...-., of the ab3; ri._ ... '_"-is r'_: site ha_ . ......11 an; he. -1 been `'-..-....._..._._s'i the �49._ _ ..:on sa10n. _t was nla_ ned to devel On the arca _s a nssi`r= car* to be -1 -sed in .^njunction laith ^e 3^hool,S n1_--rzrnund 2r_ ..olinoilnen Culbe_ .son .... . ian felt the - s''_o„ l a rchas= the :,•-t•i l.�74 _ av .11Cb=e. �0'lnni l.m .-.l p__,•nhgll an,' 4- -n s -n felt that tine :it,, should not nurc'^ase l!,nd for ._rk -+urncses -tresent oresen.+ n�-'� s4-,tes. Cm.lncilman - ; n.n mo reg :,ilbertson se_ _. that the ; T -_ .,:tel o' riv-] ».__o. more ._ less, sou+1' of * _... .? ;• :{agce School for -55750 npr acre. nassqa b; the ` Io-; vete: ._--~: +O'...01'_7e._ � L'.,_7c_tc�(7n K-at7:aki..._ _n,i �ro..._ n c -_- :en and 3obinson . R 7 70 :l_ 0.. rlanninz Commission re^_om-enled that Lots 1 ..nd S. .:,J"'`,':{_. _ 3^.u^_Ca _1 ._;nor Subdivision l7-'9 and 901 South =hi._s e5 -_aa+) be rezoned from the ?-2 one-fa._il•� znne to the 3-3 limited mu.1tinle fame-! -941dantia1 y�nc. ;.:n --tion of :o'.noilma_l atsakian, _,l_bertson second. the _.atter was set for nzhlic '-sarin- on .. 19=9. 400 CVD, LCC i;otice of the Central Valley Division, Leacue of California Cities, meetin> t0 be held in L -s Banos on April 71;. 1959. S^---- CO:+,p= - Letter fro -- the State Co*nnensstion Insurance ?,ini 9:.1I0'. _. S. not,*f vin. the City of _ refund of i7,101.22 on the Dremi id d+grin the Do__cv ne_=od _^ding u1. 1. 1453, which amcuntc to _ net savin^s of 5:1.1' Of 7)reMiUM at basi ra ;es and co^..nen' inc _+,- .rloyees for their safet,record. T h e _until requested teat _ _>tte_ be -.mitten to the e^Dlovees commend=n- them for their fine achievement in -ed,-,s.ion of accidents. REPORTS OF THE C=TY YAj-li';° In bri n;-in� uD the matter of the storm draina-e master D'.i_f:13L 'L.._'( ola.., the City-ana-er reported that the Division o. Hi hways had reopened the zuestion of draina?e of the bar -Diss and it was dcubtful if the Ciry would ee. between 3 5 J-70,000 _Coe t eState for -:pis Dernose. He also stated that the doodbridg-e Irri�,tion District .has not willinrr to re -mi` the City to dis- char,e storm water into the can-�.1 on prorary ..asis _ noint soU.t'n of tPP_ �1`'vlS DU^:') at nettle^aP_ The Dir. .,tor of Public ';forks then exglaine-�, -wi th tha oi.d of a _._in, the ^,lan for stor- draina= . and -he revisions that had been :rade in the Wilser and Plan. -Ile stated that the cost of the enti- ._ar. •,-)Ul.d b? ._round 31,120.000. It w _ecldeI folio'.di_n.4 si,.tions o_ —e =1_.._^.z ..-^..mission .,__ renortod: _. Denied_ the ..e'luest -rs. ^il,;e for a _ vari?..nce to er-ice t^' --establ is~- mentofa -1-u'.,binz sl-ior as a_ nn.--confo_nin. iso ?+ �l� °cute Gar=ield Street 4n t" -3 _esid-ential zone. 2. --,-0roved the tentat've LI? _ of Son -Ha'." _.-S-nor S,1b^ivisien. 3.=nnroved the +.en tat;•re Mao of Carell park S•ybdi-r i9ion7. . .;5 5 E=.°LE =-,Deal of I, :rs. -illie Slle1z1e from the aro ;on or `he ='_=L P'ann;r Comm.issinn in den�-in� her _ecaest for _. varz -_ce to ner-+it the re-establishment of a -ilu-b- _n. shoo at 515 South Garfield Street as a non- conformin.s nese. The matter was se+, for public ._ ._rind• on I-'.a�r 5, 1959 on ^._o I of Councilman C,1'oe_ts0^. Catza'•:ia._ sec�ad. Council -an ulberts0.1 recommended +'^2.t the Council see the place in n u e S t l on LOCb_E=ORD Petition from owners of Dro,)erty on the south side S^. ._.... .:-_- Of >je-t T. --o Street for annexation o the .._-. TIO::, Of anrroximately seven __^_es. The City Clerk certl__cc t..._ _ are less t;—'n twelve registered 'voters in ?ES. OP _i;'.. erre end the boundaries have beer. aDDroved b•r th? 0. 2223 Counte3ou^dary Uommission. Resolution 710.2223, ?_D0PIP EJ resolution o'_' intention tb annex said Dronert.v as the 'Nest Lockeford Street nddition and se*.tin::- public in- thereon for idav 20. 1459 was asoD-ed on _._,tion of Councilman Katzakia.n. itchell second. 'a:..i3 =+,tee from i'_. l rah C. C'.a,xroh and i•=_ arthr_ Varouardt, former owners of the Lodi ..ews-Sentinel. than!<ing the Council for the tribute Daid them b? Resolution No. 2219. CVD, LCC i;otice of the Central Valley Division, Leacue of California Cities, meetin> t0 be held in L -s Banos on April 71;. 1959. S^---- CO:+,p= - Letter fro -- the State Co*nnensstion Insurance ?,ini 9:.1I0'. _. S. not,*f vin. the City of _ refund of i7,101.22 on the Dremi id d+grin the Do__cv ne_=od _^ding u1. 1. 1453, which amcuntc to _ net savin^s of 5:1.1' Of 7)reMiUM at basi ra ;es and co^..nen' inc _+,- .rloyees for their safet,record. T h e _until requested teat _ _>tte_ be -.mitten to the e^Dlovees commend=n- them for their fine achievement in -ed,-,s.ion of accidents. REPORTS OF THE C=TY YAj-li';° In bri n;-in� uD the matter of the storm draina-e master D'.i_f:13L 'L.._'( ola.., the City-ana-er reported that the Division o. Hi hways had reopened the zuestion of draina?e of the bar -Diss and it was dcubtful if the Ciry would ee. between 3 5 J-70,000 _Coe t eState for -:pis Dernose. He also stated that the doodbridg-e Irri�,tion District .has not willinrr to re -mi` the City to dis- char,e storm water into the can-�.1 on prorary ..asis _ noint soU.t'n of tPP_ �1`'vlS DU^:') at nettle^aP_ The Dir. .,tor of Public ';forks then exglaine-�, -wi th tha oi.d of a _._in, the ^,lan for stor- draina= . and -he revisions that had been :rade in the Wilser and Plan. -Ile stated that the cost of the enti- ._ar. •,-)Ul.d b? ._round 31,120.000. It w _ecldeI _ _zpril 15 . _9,9 cor:-in 1.._d 401 STOC y"O'; -h= 'City !.'an stated that when plans for Bl s' -el �a„k hid l - 13=.. bee e. Stockton Street was desi.-.._,el _ _n6;• . �^-foot a.ved width and if it were at e? 3L -_..3L_ id_ned f4ve feet atV31akely Park, it would »_ quire the Dj°{ resattin:- of telephone roles, the relocation o., wet=r line and the removal of 12 trees. It -made _en ae.ermined that it would be less extensive tc -)1ant new trees rather than to attempt relocating- the existirr- tress . it is estimated that the cost of widenin�zthe street, inclua.in� the extra navin-, would be aro;,nd -::In-.-, the Director of =ubl_. crkr _..emi. t--3 .r _.:l costa ,herof for th? next five :jea_o on each -,-earls ,worK and also itemize st:,= dr__._.._„ cos's for the e¢ !"ive rears: ,:i9 is to b� Drese^t__ - :.._ corncll at its meF.tirF of Fav 20. T_ic � wla _ms in `h= _nount, of 627.257.3�, were ._... rC"e^. on motion of Councilman iA tchel1. Katzakian seco^_. SP_'D 2ne Ci -t- C_?..-....._ Stated that Suryevs hay been ^,cni` cmai of the ,_wffi,, on _aS, lockeford Street bet`d?a 0i �S"C ,+oc{tor, Street and :r.aro'.:ee T ane and +hit _ d LOC.=v_?_RC be..__ dete_...ined that the nreset speed limit of ST R:7 miles Der hour is hazsrdous and he recommendel t•�a: ,... 14-.._. be set at 3; miles ,:)- 'nov.r. On m., -i^.. Rcs. ib C. u2.7Y of Cc'ircilnsn C'llbertson Second. ;h- -'I—nil adopted .'.esnlu*ion :4o. 22?4 establishing he speed limit on -.qt Lnolceford Street betwewn - S,:03'•:ton Street and Cherokee Lane as 35 miles .. _- 'nozr. _L1�3 1?.P= roDosedwith»eement with allied '3rane Growers rROJEOS il,o.!emun t'r Wineries) for ;ischarge of i.d:STC=? wastes ;,�_ I•_3: was .,res _..ted by the City XansTer. The City Council r:s:^.ea it clearly understood that the rates ..__mein were in accordance with Orli_nance :io. 350. :he wastes dls Dosal ordinance, or any amendments -hereto, and __ motio_. of I�ounci loran Uulbertson, Katzak_a__ second, the a�reement was approved and the Ys. -or authorized to execute the same after the agreement ha D - en chancel b -r including reference to Ordinance .;n, 750 therin. r'sL S `"_t The _tv has received notice from the State ?pard of COLL.^CTIO_i :•ivalization that, lesrialation is beine enacted wl ere- bv .- u --e 3oard would be able to transmit sales .ax c7I1e^tions to the City "neriolicallp as ^roe^t1-. as fea- ,is"-nstead of nonthl'r as at nreser_t. This is exrected to accelerate transmittal of the collections to t:^._ City by al�)Droxina+tela five weeks. 20 exredits -:., ,.ars, the Board has forwarded to the City an amendment to tae Present a.ereeme t f or execution. Coune=lm___^ ., .,_.;'.ti an moved that the agreement with the 6tate3oar3 of aation for State administration of local sales =ales tares collected she'll be transmitted to the as DroT.otiv as feasible and that the avc» be _..thorize, to execute said amendment. The motion was secon:ed b,,r Councilman Mitchell and Passed br •in^^ --mous vote. STOC y"O'; -h= 'City !.'an stated that when plans for Bl s' -el �a„k hid l - 13=.. bee e. Stockton Street was desi.-.._,el _ _n6;• . �^-foot a.ved width and if it were at e? 3L -_..3L_ id_ned f4ve feet atV31akely Park, it would »_ quire the Dj°{ resattin:- of telephone roles, the relocation o., wet=r line and the removal of 12 trees. It -made _en ae.ermined that it would be less extensive tc -)1ant new trees rather than to attempt relocating- the existirr- tress . it is estimated that the cost of widenin�zthe street, inclua.in� the extra navin-, would be aro;,nd 402 - .. 1 nri l r Dn `-- :- x12-0. not countinz the trees. z the :tree, widened,, th -eraser reco:7-neniei that the 77one•r be used to develop the Park ..ar`�inz lot as he felt that `^_0 -foo- rsv-1 width tJnald be a^^le street a_ ar i s and -t it would be safer f ._ the . eo^le usin- the .._r'f, to_ D'-. ..he rt{'___lot '_"a n. _.__ than �.__ . . stre. *. ccsof�develonin_nthe oar'<in lot srDula be -r-1 .51500. "'os of the CD` n^iZ -embers _'elt that wide_in The street wo--ild be _ safet- fact,- an-: o^ - motion of Coun-zil^tan iobinson. se^ond. au4-'--i7el wideninz S to!::ktnn 5tre + at B1._.el. pa^ -'C -y? Teet tO a'14e the street a 65F 2_7>a wi.ith +h.? _01 l 7w4no Vote: 'S: CO"1nCi1*..1en - �.. lberStO^� _._tche_l. Robinson and -OES: Oounciingn katza'_•{ian. -T 7T D •7'.STaves retorted that tha civil de==nse ordinance nee -lel re74-3ion and n-^esented a new Drain_..^e for +'^e 0''.D. _i0. 612 Conn^_i1's aaoroval. On motion of Coo.ncilma .lbertson, i..TROTD ,ED t:i-e11 cDna. t:-.. Co•..ncil introluc- u,..inance 6 yi9 -.0.r; dines Tor ^i,,il ie'ense and d's `_.S e_ Onera_tion .nd _..-:eal-in.. Ordinance -+o. -427 and 432 by _eadi_._ of ,i tl e cnly and waiving ^ead In OT the o..a, ince in 0RDTCi ..i7 :,S E_ -:.,Y DD="IO'JOPD-- -2-'ICE 'f0. 6^_0. entitled "ORDI1,iPPRC`rI i^,, iR7. G, OERm3I'a, Ii:`IT_i a3T1 l) nro?TTC-iv. DESIi'i-^E7 DDi TO;-' ^0 :? E _.Y 0� ODi. '?D CLASS 'I r'} ORD. 0. 6n_0 '?a(loaRnv TIT -1117E C-2 ^0'--:I3CIiL 7.='_iEu �fin_a _DQtn7D been introd,.tced at the regular meeein> of •-aril 1 to o Was l.,.ne-cnt un for nassaae on the.mo tion of ,Co nCil ^.an , lobi^,son second. Se:on,.7, r?s unit+ea after by title. and was than „asset. sloo+,ed �rd.._ea to mint b-. the _"ollowirz rote: Councilmen - Culbertson. Robinson and -rosin Co`lnciT_men - "(one S i2: Councilmen - -ions Cn- TIT Car, ^0=.'E� rot -rosin stated that he felt it was no T_cn<er ._eces-- =^'0`1ED F.'.0 sa---r '-or 1i counci'_^art to be on the City Plannins Corr - PLA .::=_-, mission. as ,he Citv now has a Planninr7 Detector who T as -. liaison b= -Jeer. the Co.tncil and _ Co*^ission i+ •.Jai-3cinte(1 0..t ...a -t in ,._.,es of anre41 from decisie- ^f .^P Plan.--. Commission, one ^e^be_ of =,e Council Was alrea"IV biasedw ..-^.h was unfair t0 the artella^t. ?obinsonfelt that +Ye Council ..as already too :such authority and she- ._ member of the Coln^~l should ret-isin on the Con.mission. oancilm__. Kat:.'cian moved that the Co,incil me^ber be elimir_sted fro- '=tv Pla.nnin- Commission and that the van.anc`r °' _.lied by ,_ l .. rson. 'fhe motion was �ecor.ded ov _,or :gown arta `.J::s sdooted by _-__ follo.,in- vote: ._J.j.Council.....__ - V'llb nit Sn" ..at_^_Sado. �o'an.._1^... - -tubi .soc :,ttq t— -3o at^ ^ibal3i