Laserfiche WebLink
M <br />CITY OF SAN LEANDRI- <br />INTEROFFICE MEMO <br />TO <br />FROM <br />G. homer Hamlin, <br />Arthur M. Carden, <br />Director of Public Works DATE May 28, 1963 <br />City Attorney <br />SUBJECT <br />Abrams - Mendonca <br />Annexation <br />1 <br />1 am submitting Report <br />No. 77S of the Alameda County Boundary Commission re- <br />2 :hard <br />i ng the above annexation, <br />3 <br />Although the last <br />five lines beginning with "it also appears, etc.," is not <br />4 clear <br />to me. 1 believe <br />the Boundary Commission is recommending that we eliminate <br />5 the <br />one -inch stria on <br />the northwesterly boundary of the area proposed for annexation <br />6 from <br />Nimitz Freeway to <br />the most northwesterly corner of the property proposed to be <br />7 annexed; <br />and thence to <br />the southwesterly line of Merced Street. When you have the <br />8 so-called <br />corrections <br />to the legal description submitted by us checked, will you <br />9 have <br />this point checked <br />out also? <br />10 <br />In the event this <br />work is not completed before I get away on my sunxner vacation, <br />11 it <br />is my thinking that <br />the elimination of the one inch strip is in direct violation <br />12 of <br />- <br />the provisions of theCcde <br />as -it now exists and as it has existed since the pro- <br />13 hibi <br />r <br />tion of the creation <br />of an island of 'itaincorporated land. As originally adopted, <br />14 this <br />prohibition merely <br />prohibited the creation of an island completely surrounded <br />15 by <br />the incorporated city. <br />It was my opinion then that the one -inch strip was legal <br />16 under <br />this provisinn, <br />inasmuch as the annexing city did not surround the unincorporating <br />17 2rea <br />The section since <br />has been amended to provide that the strip must be not less <br />18 than <br />two hundred feet <br />In width. Under this we are clearly prohibited from creating a <br />19 one <br />-inch strip or any <br />other width up to the two hundred feet, but in my opinion, the <br />20 extension <br />of an existing <br />nna-inch strip would not be in violation of the Code, whereas, <br />21 the <br />creation of an island <br />completely surrounded by the incorporating city is in <br />22 violation <br />of the Code <br />and such annexation may be void. <br />23 <br />In any rasp, It is <br />a debatable issue. If no one contests it, we get by in either <br />24 rlase_ <br />if it is contested, <br />we would probably be knocked out. If we do not comply with <br />25 *L,e <br />.tee. ._.....1.1 <br />4—.- - <br />OMI <br />