HomeMy WebLinkAboutD-523 Tract 76VOL1r_,Jr_, PAGE4X
8656 '•
COVENANT FOR TEMPORARY ERECTION
OF IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE PUBLIC
RIGHT OF WAY
FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the issurance of a revocable
permit to erect improvements within the public street right -of -way, said improve-
ments consisting of: Free standing concrete block fence adiacent
to 6 -font integral sidewalk 9
the undersigned owners of property hereinafter described hereby covenant with
the City of San Luis Obispo that, upon thirty (30) days written notice by said City,
the undersigned owners will remove all or any portions of said improvements
without cost to the City which said City may from time to time so request.
Said property is located in the City of San Luis Obispo, County of San
Luis Obispo, State of California, and is described as follows:
Lot 26, Block B, Tract No. 76
Assessor's Parcel No. 52- 353 -26
This covenant shall run with the land and shall be binding upon the
undersigned owners, their heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns.
DATED this 26th day of Larch 1964
RAE l Lt/a-L
MARION H. BAIN
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ) ss
On 26 March 1964 , before me, the undersigned, a
Notary Public mi an for said County an State, personally appeared
MYRNA S. JOHANNES and MARION H. BAIN
to me to be the person(s) who executed the within Instrument, and
A)34wledged to me that theme executed the same.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
•'jiy . y G ?; 1. N. FITZPATRICK
• _ i' .f NOTARY PUBLIC
SAN LUiS G &ISPO COUNTY
��y�`4t, �'::_ F. CALi'-CR!IiA
X004 GLbbt�:•v� —
n
-v
F.►
O
co
rn
Cr
Cn
C!i
VaQ92 PAGE 451,
46 0
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the interest in real property conveyed by
the Covenant dated March 26, D 19 64
from Myrna S. Johannes and Marion H. Bain
to the City of San Luis Obispo, a Political Corporation, is hereby
accepted in accordance with Resolution No. 549 (1959 Series), re-
corded May 26, 1959, in Volume 1002, Official Records, Page 292,
San Luis Obispo County, California, and the grantee consents to
recordation thereof.
DATE!—
%� ;�•. ^ITk 0 9N LUIS OBISPO
J ,
bocument No- ---- -- - -- - --
AT_ =.. M IN'
. PAil' M. MAYOR
x..01 R. P.--4'r '�.- —a •, ti
AN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY. CAL. -1 +2
` -
APR 1 01964
'We
e, /
011 Rec
By 2--� eputy
Fee $._.- ,,tk1_1ndexed
COMPARED
From: Jerry Kenny
To: MBERTACC, Marson, MMCCLUSK.
Date: 1/23/98 11:28am
Subject: 198 Ramona - Forwarded - Forwarded
I re -read my email and found an error - re: consideration of the fence height
exception - last paragraph - the word "not" should be deleted - ie, the
decision should be based on "other than sight distance concerns ". Sorry, I
restructured the sentence and missed that.
From: Jerry Kenny
To: SLOIPO.MCodron
Date: 1/23/98 11:19am
Subject: 198 Ramona - Forwarded
See attached memo from Deb Larson.
It has been determined that-the new fence is a problem and needs to be
relocated tout least the R/W line. The wall is in the R /W, but was approved
in 1964 and presumably has not been a sight distance problem, even though Deb
says it would be "better" to remove the top course between the corner and the
new fence - certainly any new top cap should be removed.
In summary, this department will not allow the new wood fence to remain and
certainly would not approve another "covenant ", which would be required if the
new fence were allowed to remain in the public R /W. The removal of the top
course of block is not required at this time. The existing covenant proms -ides
for removal at any time - within 30 days, upon written notice by the City
Engineer.
.If Planning allows the fence height exception "at or near the R/W line ", it
should be based on other factors, because vehicular sight distance will
not be compromised in that alignment. Also, by moving the fence away from the
retaining wall, it becomes an exception for a 116 ft. high fence" - not a 119
ft. fence ". (technically, the current request is in error in this regard) If
I can be of further assistance, let me know.
CC: DLarson, MBERTACC, MMCCLUSK
From: Deb Larson.
To: JKENNY
Date: 1/23/98 10:05am
Subject.: 198 Ramona
Jerry,
As a driver is exiting Ramona sight-distance is difficult with the slight
curve in the roadway and has been further compromised with the.wall and fence.
It appears that loose bricks have been placed on top of the block retaining
wall further compromising the sight distance of oncoming vehicles. In the
front of the yard, it does not appear that the wall is retaining soil and the
first row of blocks could be removed - improving sight distance, at least to
the side yard where the wood fence has been constructed.
The wood fence compromises sight distance and should have not been placed at
the wall but rather behind city right -of -way.
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.
Fence Height Exception
Section 17.16.050
Worksheet -
Project Address:
Request (to appear on poster): G 5-(X ua e,e
cA r) Y1 C� ;1-i( i/� ZI
Applicant:
Mailing Address:
Phone Number:
Representative: _
Mailing Address:
Phone Number:
Project Planner:
1-.c, IEY)i rp (A q
Comments: i'(EjCd A(-+ (,)Y-) o E(-r
01 /08/98 i:on 10140056 A03
PLAN APPL FEES $85.00
Action: Date:
mjke.
nave recely� -cl a ✓��w.�erl -4 CO MS M C- lj\�.� �.�s - 1- V�f,e, LeG4v -w-
`/lSlJl11 oi- Gyrj i"'Vf✓11hF� �l C'J �4�MoJ�ccJJ4 �v�cL .ON'�J � �v1'Na�1 .�"��'
Z�.nlh gr�vi4t�ohS 02.0 cn,�vo�leL� 1✓.ie� sec: QV� T
�-1.y� �.� �,rg1+�¢w^ r�4� d2�- e�vtni,n�, �/151bt�1 fe4�.t ✓e,nnehTj �ov, Troae -,- S`� 1n
(}����i�/1CR.5. Jc1l eeCyC. Yvvvtic, vez Lv1� r{Ou, cie ►e, n G �`� YL'�A✓c� l Nq "per
-�e�n,�e. h¢�y�� aid place..,�e�� ct�- ��,�ts �wFevsac,jloV►.
�1e e,X15��� Tev�Ce, wad ��t, illeta,l) ' 6j%4\t\J pe -,-%, , cL -� is ✓ldw bey 3 vevIeA A!
�or q,n etcc�,� �►�. I
n? _ }. —� / �. Q, 1. \� I '!+\•� .v ,� � .�l
FAT v
.(.n � is � c� � l ��. _ � �•� +
� - I
\ �, � � •'� rL I � I I t
.�E � •�� .:��� -: ,t, ice- - - , ;.. c, f ^ _ .
• ,qty .t :i. :;.." c?�. ;� 'i.�
. . {a � ,..:i;.l+;��. n•"•iS.S'i�lf °aF _... �..:�f6i�e.'�:. }`. _���: .cZT �.: