Laserfiche WebLink
387 <br /> ( July 21st ) . He also stated Staff in review of this subject feel that an amendment <br /> to the Code may be required , as would become applicable to all new buildings <br /> throughout the City . ( Memo 7/8/69 ) <br /> Mr . Ribera , before presenting the final and revised planning <br /> for the two park areas for Dolphin Mini Park and Marlin #1 Neigh - <br /> borhood Park, asked that if Council approved planning , an authori - <br /> zation be given to proceed with the working drawings for their <br /> development . <br /> Dolphin Mini Park and Marlin #1 Neighborhood Park described from <br /> illustrated drawings showing both the previous planning and the <br /> revised plan with apparatus play area being shifted as it was <br /> not possible to obtain another lot to enlarge area as had been <br /> previously discussed . He also noted the tree area which had been <br /> increased for further wind protection and described the additional <br /> section . He detailed by sketch the wooden fishing pier and tennis <br /> court plans . He also noted these park plans had been reviewed and <br /> approved by both Staff and Park and Recreation Commission , <br /> Council questioned costs of a concrete fishing pier vs . the wooden one proposed , <br /> to which Mr . Ribera stated costs would be explored , as not available at this time . <br /> It was noted that fishing pier just completed at the Municipal Marina was of wood <br /> construction . <br /> Council also questioned parking proposed , which was noted to be limited as parks <br /> are neighborhood type , and traffic mostly would be pedestrian; lack of lighting <br /> for tennis courts and request this be considered ; lack of heating for swimming pool <br /> considered a detriment to its purpose of training young children to swim; type of <br /> trees being considered . <br /> Councilman Henderson suggested that a summary report be made cf plans and specifi - <br /> cations of these parks when finalized and before presenting to Council for action <br /> in order they might be more easily reviewed , ( Memo 7/8/69 ) , <br /> Councilman Keckley moved to approve the development plans for these two park areas , and <br /> authorize preparation of the working plans and specifications , seconded by Council - <br /> man Rosselli and carried . ( MINUTE ORDER #69-133 ) <br /> Mr , Riberia thereafter described from illustrated sketch <br /> the Master Street Tree Plan for the Marlin Subdivision <br /> area , denoting the 3 basic types of trees proposed , <br /> California Pepper , New Zealand Christmas Trees and Palms , <br /> picked for range of height and color , and denoted their <br /> placement in the area . He also stated they were making <br /> suggestions forbuilders to recommend to property owners <br /> for private planting the type of trees preferred in rear <br /> yard areas to tie in with this planting scheme . <br /> Mr . Ribera then proceeded to describe the revised Parkway <br /> fencing plans which he requested , if approved by Council , <br /> be authorized again for going out to bid . He advised since <br /> last bidding procedure and rejection of bids , they had met <br /> with various specialists in fence construction fields and <br /> had since simplified details of the fencing , although <br /> visual appearance would remain the same as that previously <br /> proposed so that mass construction processes could be used <br /> and make construction less costly . He stated estimates <br /> from this revised planning now appeared to be from $ 6 . 50 to <br /> $ 8 , 00 per lineal foot . <br /> Mayor Bury questioned fact that height proposed for this fencing seemed to be at <br /> variance with City ' s present regulations concerning fencing heights and how this was <br /> planned to be resolved , City Manager stated fencing height was quoted at a 72 foot <br /> height which would make it at variance with City ' s regulation height , but that he <br /> would recommend that bidding process be approved at this point because rejection of <br /> previous bids had delayed construction of the fencing . He said this particular <br /> .0", 7 t9 <br />