Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07111989 - T.3 (2) T. 3 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DATE: July 11, 1989 MATTER OF RECORD --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: Annexing Zone 21, Kensington Area, to the Countywide Landscaping and Lighting District Assessment District 1979-3 (LL-2) , confirming Engineer' s Report, ordering improvement and levying first annual assessment. This being the time fixed to consider the proposed annexation of Zone 21, Kensington area, to the Countywide Landscaping and Lighting District, Assessment District 1979-3 (LL-2 ) ; confirm the Engineer' s Report; order improvement and levy the first annual assessment. The Board this day conducted its hearing on the above matters and the following persons appeared to express their views: Rosemary Barnwell, 19 Lenox Road, Chairman of the Kensington Improvement Club Beautification Committee, and of the new advisory committee .for the landscape district, who presented a petition containing 81 names favoring the proposal. Lorraine Osmundson, 81 Kingston Road, a member of the Kensington Improvement Club, favored. the proposal. Robert Hansen, 24 Kerr Avenue, appearing as an individual and representing the Planning Club, appeared in favor, and advised that the Directors of the Improvement Club are unanimously in favor of the proposal. Linda Jones, 77 Kingston Road, appeared in favor. Jean Maderis, 374 Ocean View Avenue, Kensington, representing the property owners of the lower Kensington area, filed a petition containing 54 signatures protesting the proposed annexation of the Kensington area as Zone 21 to the County Landscaping District AD 1979-3 (LL-2) . Mrs. Maderis declared that all the improvements were planned for the Upper Kensington Area and no improvements were planned for the Lower Kensington Area. . Supervisor Powers suggested Mrs. Maderis contact the advisory committee to identify additional public areas that should be maintained. The Board determined that it had not received written protests against the proposal made by owners representing more than one-half of the area of the land, and thereupon adopted Resolution No. 89/472.