DOCSLIB.ORG

Peninsula Community Plan and Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Peninsula Community Plan and Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Peninsula Community Plan and Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Peninsula Community Plan and Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan July 14, 1987 This plan has been prepared by the City of San Diego Planning Department and the Peninsula Community Planning Board. City of San Diego Planning Department 202 C Street, MS 4A San Diego, CA 92101 Printed on recycled paper. This information, or this document (or portions thereof), will be made available in alternative formats upon request. - i - Peninsula Community Plan The following information has been incorporated into this December 2005 posting of this plan: Date Approved by Resolution Date Adopted by Resolution Amendment Planning Number City Council Number Commission Peninsula Community March 12, 1987 6866-PC July 14, 1987 R-268871 Plan adopted Certified by California Coastal Commission October 11, 1989 Type B CPIOZ June 20, 1989 R-273822 established Single-family neighborhood September 11, 1989 R-274362 protection designation North Bay Revitalization January 19, 1999 R-291202 Program Amendment NTC land use September 28, 2000 October 3, 2000 R-293938 designation changed Land use redesignation from Industrial-Commercial December 18, 2003 April 27, 2004 R-299138 to Multifamily Residential. Land use redesignation from Industrial, Commercial October 7, 2008 R-4092 May 31, 2011 R-306814 Fishing/Marine Related Industry to Commercial Recreation - ii - CITY OF SAN DIEGO MAYOR Maureen O’Connor COUNCIL Celia Ballesteros Bill Cleator Mike Gotch William Jones Judy McCarty Gloria McColl Ed Struiksma Abbe Wolfsheimer CITY ATTORNEY John W. Witt CITY MANAGER John Lockwood PLANNING COMMISSION Ron Roberts, Chairman Paula Oquita, Vice Chairman Henry Empeno Don Guevara Albert Kercheval Yvonne Larsen Ralph Pesqueira PLANNING DEPARTMENT Michael Stepner, Acting Planning Director PLANNING STAFF Allen Jones, Deputy Director, Community Planning Bill Levin, Associate Planner (Project Planner) Graphics: Linell Maloney, Sam Riordan, Janice Roane Word Processing: Sabrina Lozano, Peggy Cooper, Marsha Lorraine - iii - PENINSULA COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD, INC. P.O. Box 7466 San Diego, California 92107-0466 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Kingsley Boyd Joe Bradley Francesca Condon Albert Decker Dave Ferbrache Gordon Getline Chris Ghio Barry Green Jim Huffman Dorothea Laub Vernon Lontz Joe Luther Kay Martin Ned Titlow John Townsend Fred Trull Byron Wear Paul Zucker POINT LOMA IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE Lyle Butler Birch Ertle Don Hartley Bill Kettenburg Fred Kunzel Dick Lareau - Chairman Mack Lovett Norman Magneson P.A. "Dusty" Rhodes Members of Board - iv - I. INTRODUCTION Scope and Purpose .......................................................................................................................- 1 - Peninsula Profile ..........................................................................................................................- 2 - Community Boundaries ...............................................................................................................- 2 - Planning History ..........................................................................................................................- 4 - California Coastal Act..................................................................................................................- 5 - Peninsula History .........................................................................................................................- 5 - neighborhoods ..............................................................................................................................- 6 - Transitional Areas ........................................................................................................................- 9 - Land Use Plan Summary .............................................................................................................- 9 - Overall Community Goals .........................................................................................................- 11 - General Plan Consistency ..........................................................................................................- 13 - II. PLAN ELEMENTS Residential .................................................................................................................................- 19 - Commercial ................................................................................................................................- 33 - Industrial ....................................................................................................................................- 43 - Naval-Related Industry ........................................................................................................- 43 - Commercial Fishing and Marine-Related Industry .............................................................- 44 - Parks and Recreation..................................................................................................................- 48 - Transportation and Shoreline Access Element ..........................................................................- 54 - Vehicular Circulation ..........................................................................................................- 54 - Parking Facilities .................................................................................................................- 59 - Public Transit ......................................................................................................................- 63 - Bicycle Circulation ..............................................................................................................- 69 - Pedestrian Circulation and Shoreline Access ......................................................................- 72 - Community Facilities .................................................................................................................- 78 - Schools ................................................................................................................................- 78 - Libraries ..............................................................................................................................- 81 - Fire Protection .....................................................................................................................- 82 - Police ...................................................................................................................................- 83 - Public Works .......................................................................................................................- 83 - Conservation and Environmental Quality ..................................................................................- 85 - Urban Design ........................................................................................................................... - 104 - Cultural and Heritage Resources.............................................................................................. - 145 - Jurisdictional Interface ............................................................................................................. - 149 - Local Coastal Program ............................................................................................................. - 150 - Implementation ........................................................................................................................ - 157 - 1. Type of Housing Units in Peninsula Area 1984 and 1980 ........................................................ - 20 - 2. Designated Historical Landmarks in Peninsula Community .................................................. - 147 - 3. Other Potentially Significant Historical Resources ................................................................ - 148 - - v - 1. General Location Map ................................................................................................................. vii 2. Revised Plan Area Boundaries .................................................................................................. - 3 - 3. Peninsula Neighborhoods .......................................................................................................... - 8 - 4. Transitional Areas ................................................................................................................... - 10 - 5. Land Use Plan ......................................................................................................................... - 12 - 6. 1980 Census Tracts ................................................................................................................. - 21 - 7. Single-Family Residential Designations ................................................................................. - 30 - 7a. Protected Single-Family Neighborhoods ................................................................................ - 31 - 8. Multifamily Residential Designations ..................................................................................... - 32 - 9. Commercial Areas ................................................................................................................... - 42 - 10. Industrial Areas ....................................................................................................................... - 47 - 11. Parks and Recreation Areas ..................................................................................................... - 50 - 12. Existing 1984 Vehicular Circulation System
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CVS Ready to Move in on Former Apple Tree Location — but Not Without Liquor License
    WANT TO GENERATE INCOME? Learn how to buy multiple units with as little as 3.5% down Call Lanz (619)564-6355 BRE#01883404 www.correiagroup.com San Diego Community Newspaper Group THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2013 www.SDNEWS.com Volume 27, Number 22 MAYORAL SPECIAL ELECTION: PLHS students join outcry CANDIDATE STATEMENTS EDITOR’S NOTE: To better inform our readers about the political views of the four over whale captivity most prominent candidates in the Nov. 19 mayoral special election, the San Diego Community Newspaper Group developed a seven-pronged interview for the political hopefuls. The candidates queried were former City Attorney Mike Aguirre; District 8 City Councilman David Alvarez; District 2 City Councilman Kevin Faulconer; and for- mer state Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher. Fletcher’s campaign did not respond. issue? Candidate: MIKE AGUIRRE A: Homelessness is a regional issue. (Former City Attorney) The county’s 18 cities and our county government should consolidate, coordi- What is the nate and share efforts, including greatest chal- churches, nonprofits and other organi- lenge/challenges fac- zations. We can achieve higher efficien- ing our beach com- cies by working together, as well as pool- munities and how do ing scarce resources and obtaining you propose address- greater amounts of grant funding. In ing this/them? Orange County, funding is being provid- A: Stormwater ed through Proposition 10 (1998) that The Cinematic Arts and Video Production students at Point Loma High School had a strong reaction to the documentary runoff fouls our created a tax on cigarettes and other "Blackfish" that was broadcast on CNN in October.
    [Show full text]
  • Naval Training Center)
    STATE Of CAliFORNIA·· THE RESOURCES AGENCY GRAY DAVIS, Govemor CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION GO AREA TROPOUTAN DRIVE. SUITE 103 • EGO. CA 92108-4402 {619) 767-2370 RECORS ?ACKET COPY May 30,2001 Tues 6c TO: COMMISSIONERS AND INTERESTED PERSONS FROM: DEBORAH LEE, SOUTH COAST DEPUTY DIRECTOR SHERILYN SARB, DISTRICT MANAGER, SAN DIEGO AREA OFFICE DIANA LILLY, COASTAL PROGRAM ANALYST, SAN DIEGO AREA OFFICE SUBJECT: STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON CITY OF SAN DIEGO MAJOR LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT #6-2000(A) (NAVAL TRAINING CENTER) SYNOPSIS SUMMARY OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending denial, as submitted and subsequent approval if modified, of the proposed Naval Training Center Land Use Plan and Implementation Plan . The majority of the development planned at NTC appears to be generally consistent with •• the Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act. However, as proposed, the LCP lacks explicit policies that ensure that future development on the site, in whatever form is eventually approved, will conform with the resource protection, public access, visual protection, public recreation and visitor-serving policies of the Coastal Act. Therefore, staff is recommending substantial revisions to the plan to add detailed, specific policy language and goals regarding the protection of natural resources, visual resources, and public access and recreation. Suggested modifications address the provision and protection of view corridors, impose limitations on the height of new development in the office/research and development portion of the planning area, require the provision of adequate parking areas, a parking management plan, and transit provisions, increase plan provisions regarding pedestrian orientation and public access to the boat channel, limit uses in biological sensitive areas, and require the provision of additional public.
    [Show full text]
  • Geomorphic Classification of Rivers
    9.36 Geomorphic Classification of Rivers JM Buffington, U.S. Forest Service, Boise, ID, USA DR Montgomery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA Published by Elsevier Inc. 9.36.1 Introduction 730 9.36.2 Purpose of Classification 730 9.36.3 Types of Channel Classification 731 9.36.3.1 Stream Order 731 9.36.3.2 Process Domains 732 9.36.3.3 Channel Pattern 732 9.36.3.4 Channel–Floodplain Interactions 735 9.36.3.5 Bed Material and Mobility 737 9.36.3.6 Channel Units 739 9.36.3.7 Hierarchical Classifications 739 9.36.3.8 Statistical Classifications 745 9.36.4 Use and Compatibility of Channel Classifications 745 9.36.5 The Rise and Fall of Classifications: Why Are Some Channel Classifications More Used Than Others? 747 9.36.6 Future Needs and Directions 753 9.36.6.1 Standardization and Sample Size 753 9.36.6.2 Remote Sensing 754 9.36.7 Conclusion 755 Acknowledgements 756 References 756 Appendix 762 9.36.1 Introduction 9.36.2 Purpose of Classification Over the last several decades, environmental legislation and a A basic tenet in geomorphology is that ‘form implies process.’As growing awareness of historical human disturbance to rivers such, numerous geomorphic classifications have been de- worldwide (Schumm, 1977; Collins et al., 2003; Surian and veloped for landscapes (Davis, 1899), hillslopes (Varnes, 1958), Rinaldi, 2003; Nilsson et al., 2005; Chin, 2006; Walter and and rivers (Section 9.36.3). The form–process paradigm is a Merritts, 2008) have fostered unprecedented collaboration potentially powerful tool for conducting quantitative geo- among scientists, land managers, and stakeholders to better morphic investigations.
    [Show full text]
  • Morphologic Characteristics of the Blow River Delta, Yukon Territory, Canada
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1969 Morphologic Characteristics of the Blow River Delta, Yukon Territory, Canada. James Murl Mccloy Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Mccloy, James Murl, "Morphologic Characteristics of the Blow River Delta, Yukon Territory, Canada." (1969). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 1605. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/1605 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 70-252 McCLOY, James Murl, 1934- MORPHOLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BLOW RIVER DELTA, YUKON TERRITORY, CANADA. The Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, Ph.D., 1969 Geography University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan Morphologic Characteristics of the Blow River Belta, Yukon Territory, Canada A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Geography and Anthropology by James Murl McCloy B.A., State College at Los Angeles, 1961 May, 1969 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Research culminating in this dissertation was conducted under the auspices of the Arctic Institute of North America. The major portion of the financial support was received from the United States Army under contract no. BA-ARO-D-3I-I2I4.-G832, "Arctic Environmental Studies." Additional financial assistance during part of the writing stage was received in the form of a research assistantship from the Coastal Studies Institute, Louisi­ ana State University.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20Th Century
    u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service Co l\Ietland Trends In the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century November 2004 A National Wetlands Inventory Cooperative Interagency Report Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century Ralph W. Tiner1, Irene J. Huber2, Todd Nuerminger2, and Aimée L. Mandeville3 1U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory Program Northeast Region 300 Westgate Center Drive Hadley, MA 01035 2Natural Resources Assessment Group Department of Plant and Soil Sciences University of Massachusetts Stockbridge Hall Amherst, MA 01003 3Department of Natural Resources Science Environmental Data Center University of Rhode Island 1 Greenhouse Road, Room 105 Kingston, RI 02881 November 2004 National Wetlands Inventory Cooperative Interagency Report between U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, University of Massachusetts-Amherst, University of Rhode Island, and Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management This report should be cited as: Tiner, R.W., I.J. Huber, T. Nuerminger, and A.L. Mandeville. 2004. Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northeast Region, Hadley, MA. In cooperation with the University of Massachusetts-Amherst and the University of Rhode Island. National Wetlands Inventory Cooperative Interagency Report. 37 pp. plus appendices. Table of Contents Page Introduction 1 Study Area 1 Methods 5 Data Compilation 5 Geospatial Database Construction and GIS Analysis 8 Results 9 Baywide 1996 Status 9 Coastal Wetlands and Waters 9 500-foot Buffer Zone 9 Baywide Trends 1951/2 to 1996 15 Coastal Wetland Trends 15 500-foot Buffer Zone Around Coastal Wetlands 15 Trends for Pilot Study Areas 25 Conclusions 35 Acknowledgments 36 References 37 Appendices A.
    [Show full text]
  • New York State Artificial Reef Plan and Generic Environmental Impact
    TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................... vi 1. INTRODUCTION .......................1 2. MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENT ..................4 2.1. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE. ..............4 2.2. LOCATION. .....................7 2.3. NATURAL RESOURCES. .................7 2.3.1 Physical Characteristics. ..........7 2.3.2 Living Resources. ............. 11 2.4. HUMAN RESOURCES. ................. 14 2.4.1 Fisheries. ................. 14 2.4.2 Archaeological Resources. ......... 17 2.4.3 Sand and Gravel Mining. .......... 18 2.4.4 Marine Disposal of Waste. ......... 18 2.4.5 Navigation. ................ 18 2.5. ARTIFICIAL REEF RESOURCES. ............ 20 3. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES .................. 26 3.1 GOALS ....................... 26 3.2 OBJECTIVES .................... 26 4. POLICY ......................... 28 4.1 PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION .............. 28 4.1.1 Permits. .................. 29 4.1.2 Materials Donations and Acquisitions. ... 31 4.1.3 Citizen Participation. ........... 33 4.1.4 Liability. ................. 35 4.1.5 Intra/Interagency Coordination. ...... 36 4.1.6 Program Costs and Funding. ......... 38 4.1.7 Research. ................. 40 4.2 DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES .............. 44 4.2.1 Siting. .................. 44 4.2.2 Materials. ................. 55 4.2.3 Design. .................. 63 4.3 MANAGEMENT .................... 70 4.3.1 Monitoring. ................ 70 4.3.2 Maintenance. ................ 72 4.3.3 Reefs in the Exclusive Economic Zone. ... 74 4.3.4 Special Management Concerns. ........ 76 4.3.41 Estuarine reefs. ........... 76 4.3.42 Mitigation. ............. 77 4.3.43 Fish aggregating devices. ...... 80 i 4.3.44 User group conflicts. ........ 82 4.3.45 Illegal and destructive practices. .. 85 4.4 PLAN REVIEW .................... 88 5. ACTIONS ........................ 89 5.1 ADMINISTRATION .................. 89 5.2 RESEARCH ..................... 89 5.3 DEVELOPMENT .................... 91 5.4 MANAGEMENT .................... 96 6. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ................. 97 6.1 ECOSYSTEM IMPACTS.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the Temporal Dynamics of the Wandering Renous River, New Brunswick, Canada
    Earth Surface Processes and Landforms EarthTemporal Surf. dynamicsProcess. Landforms of a wandering 30, 1227–1250 river (2005) 1227 Published online 23 June 2005 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/esp.1196 Understanding the temporal dynamics of the wandering Renous River, New Brunswick, Canada Leif M. Burge1* and Michel F. Lapointe2 1 Department of Geography and Program in Planning, University of Toronto, 100 St. George Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 3G3, Canada 2 Department of Geography McGill University, 805 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, Quebec, H3A 2K6, Canada *Correspondence to: L. M. Burge, Abstract Department of Geography and Program in Planning, University Wandering rivers are composed of individual anabranches surrounding semi-permanent of Toronto, 100 St. George St., islands, linked by single channel reaches. Wandering rivers are important because they Toronto, M5S 3G3, Canada. provide habitat complexity for aquatic organisms, including salmonids. An anabranch cycle E-mail: [email protected] model was developed from previous literature and field observations to illustrate how anabranches within the wandering pattern change from single to multiple channels and vice versa over a number of decades. The model was used to investigate the temporal dynamics of a wandering river through historical case studies and channel characteristics from field data. The wandering Renous River, New Brunswick, was mapped from aerial photographs (1945, 1965, 1983 and 1999) to determine river pattern statistics and for historical analysis of case studies. Five case studies consisting of a stable single channel, newly formed anabranches, anabranches gaining stability following creation, stable anabranches, and an abandoning anabranch were investigated in detail.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix E Fish Habitat Utilization Literature Review
    Appendix E Fish Habitat Utilization Literature Review East Kitsap Nearshore Assessment Appendix E Appendix E - Fish Habitat Utilization Literature Review Toft et al. (2007) City Shoreline Fish Distribution Study objective: study the abundance and behavior of juvenile salmon and other fishes among various marine shoreline habitat types near the city of Seattle. Focused on 5 types of shorelines - cobble beach - sand beach - riprap extending into the upper intertidal zone - deep riprap extending into the subtidal - edge of overwater structures Also examined stomach contents of juvenile salmon. Fish sampling methods included enclosure nets and snorkel surveys. Riprap often results in greater beach slopes and steep embankments which effectively reduces the intertidal zone. These characteristics in turn, result in habitat loss for juvenile flatfishes. At high intertidal habitats, more crab were encountered at cobble beaches compared to sand beaches and riprap. Demersal fishes (cottids) were found in greater numbers at riprap. Differences in species density between habitat type were more apparent for demersal fishes than for pelagic species. Densities of salmon were significantly different among habitat types. The highest densities occurred at the edge of overwater structures and in deep riprap. Deep riprap creates some structured habitat which seems to attract surfperches and gunnels. Threespine stickleback, tubesnout, and bay pipefish were also more prevalent at deep riprap than at cobble, sand, and high elevation riprap. Beamer et al. (2006) – Habitat and fish use of pocket estuaries in the Whidbey basin and north Skagit county bays, 2004 and 2005 Pocket estuaries are characterized as having more dilute marine water relative to the surrounding estuary.
    [Show full text]
  • The Journal of San Diego History
    Volume 51 Winter/Spring 2005 Numbers 1 and 2 • The Journal of San Diego History The Jour na l of San Diego History SD JouranalCover.indd 1 2/24/06 1:33:24 PM Publication of The Journal of San Diego History has been partially funded by a generous grant from Quest for Truth Foundation of Seattle, Washington, established by the late James G. Scripps; and Peter Janopaul, Anthony Block and their family of companies, working together to preserve San Diego’s history and architectural heritage. Publication of this issue of The Journal of San Diego History has been supported by a grant from “The Journal of San Diego History Fund” of the San Diego Foundation. The San Diego Historical Society is able to share the resources of four museums and its extensive collections with the community through the generous support of the following: City of San Diego Commission for Art and Culture; County of San Diego; foundation and government grants; individual and corporate memberships; corporate sponsorship and donation bequests; sales from museum stores and reproduction prints from the Booth Historical Photograph Archives; admissions; and proceeds from fund-raising events. Articles appearing in The Journal of San Diego History are abstracted and indexed in Historical Abstracts and America: History and Life. The paper in the publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Science-Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. Front cover: Detail from ©SDHS 1998:40 Anne Bricknell/F. E. Patterson Photograph Collection. Back cover: Fallen statue of Swiss Scientist Louis Agassiz, Stanford University, April 1906.
    [Show full text]
  • Dune Nourishment Fact Sheet
    StormSmart Coasts StormSmart Properties Fact Sheet 1: Artificial Dunes and Dune Nourishment The coast is a very dynamic environment and coastal shorelines—especially beaches, dunes, and banks—change constantly in response to wind, waves, tides, and other factors such as seasonal variation, sea level rise, and human alterations to the shoreline system. Consequently, many coastal properties are at risk from storm damage, erosion, and flooding. Inappropriate shoreline stabilization methods can actually do more harm than good by exacerbating beach erosion, damaging neighboring properties, impacting marine habitats, and diminishing the capacity of beaches, dunes, and other natural landforms to protect inland areas from storm damage and flooding. StormSmart Properties—part of the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management’s (CZM) StormSmart Coasts program—provides coastal property owners with important information on a range of shoreline stabilization techniques that can effectively reduce erosion and storm damage while minimizing impacts to shoreline systems. This information is intended to help property owners work with consultants and other design professionals to select the best option for their circumstances. What Are Artificial Dunes and Dune Nourishment? A dune is a hill, mound, or ridge of sediment that No shoreline stabilization option permanently stops has been deposited by wind or waves landward of all erosion or storm damage. The level of protection a coastal beach. In Massachusetts, the sediments provided depends on the option chosen, project design, that form beaches and dunes range from sand to and site-specific conditions such as the exposure to gravel- and cobble-sized material. An artificial dune storms. All options require maintenance, and many is a shoreline protection option where a new mound also require steps to address adverse impacts to of compatible sediment (i.e., sediment of similar the shoreline system, called mitigation.
    [Show full text]
  • 556119 Adopted on Jfln 04198?
    (R-82-1069) Rev. RESOLUTION NUMBER R- ^556119 Adopted on JflN 04198? A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO ESTABLISHING A CITY OF SAN DIEGO SUPPLEMENTAL PENSION SAVINGS PLAN FOR ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES OF SAID CITY WHEREAS, the City Council of The City of San Diego has directed that the City withdraw from participation in the Social Security System effective January 1, 1982; and WHEREAS, the City has declared that certain benefits shall be provided to employees in lieu of social security participation; and WHEREAS, included in the benefits so indicated is a Supplemental Pension Savings Plan for all affected employees, to be effective after withdrawal from Social Security; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of this Council to provide such Savings Plan as a permanent benefit for eligible employees, the conditions of which may only be amended by a vote of said eligible participants; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of The City of San Diego, as follows: 1. That the final plan statement for the City of San Diego Supplemental Pension Savings Plan, as set forth in Attachment A hereto, which by this reference is fully incorporated herein, be and the same is hereby approved and adopted. 2. That the City Manager be, and he is hereby authorized to establish a Supplemental Pension Savings Plan (herein called "Plan") for eligible employees of The City of San Diego, with PAGE 1 OF 2 00146 terms and conditions of the Plan in accordance with the Plan appended as Attachment B, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk as Document No.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet
    NFS Form 10-900a OMB No. 1024-0018 (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES CONTINUATION SHEET Section ___ Page __ SUPPLEMENTARY LISTING RECORD NRIS Reference Number: 03000472 Date Listed: 9/22/2003 Rosecroft San Diego CA Property Name County State N/A Multiple Name This property is listed in the National Register of Historic Places in accordance with the attached nomination documentation subject to the following exceptions, exclusions, or amendments, notwithstanding the National Park Service certification included in the nomination documentation. /^ Signatured off the Keeper Date of Action Amended ^Ctems in Nomination: Level of Significance: The level of significance was not provided on the original nomination. The appropriate level based on the documentation provided is: State. [While A. D. Robinson may have had national influence, the current documentation does not provide an adequate national context for the field of horticulture during the period in question. The documentation clearly establishes and supports significance at the local and state levels.] U. T. M. Coordinates: The correct U. T. M. Coordinates are: 11 476990 3619580. These revisions were confirmed with the California SHPO office DISTRIBUTION: National Register property file Nominating Authority (without nomination attachment) NPS Form 10-900 '" i ™.——————— —9*iQfr , No. 1024-0018 (Oct. 1990) "RECEIVED 2280 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service APR I- 5 ?no3 National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NAl IjEGISTER OF HISTORIC PLA Ctt NATIONAL PARK SERVICE This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and disl IBlff"l5? ! 1*fl9tR3GIKlT1srkrfie)ifioill9mipf te the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A).
    [Show full text]