La Mesa City Council
December 9, 2025

LA MESA CITY COUNCIL AND CITY OF LA MESA SUCCESSOR AGENCY AGENDA

A Regular Meeting of the City Council and a Special Meeting of the City of La Mesa Successor Agency

Date: Tuesday, December 9, 2025, 6:00 p.m.

Location: City Council Chambers, 8130 Allison Avenue
La Mesa, California
Elected
Officials:

Mayor Mark Arapostathis
Vice Mayor Lauren Cazares
Councilmember Patricia N. Dillard
Councilmember Laura Lothian
Councilmember Genevieve Suzuki
City Treasurer Matthew Strabone
Staff: City Manager Greg Humora
City Attorney Glenn Sabine
City Clerk Megan Wiegelman
The City Council meeting may be viewed in-person or live on Cox Cable Channel 24 (within La Mesa City limits), AT&T U-Verse Channel 99 (in the San Diego Region), the City’s website (www.cityoflamesa.gov), the City's YouTube channel (www.youtube.com/cityoflamesa) or using the following Zoom Webinar options:

The public may view the meeting live using the following remote options:

Teleconference Meeting Webinar
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84472650722
Telephone (Audio only)
(669) 900-6833 or (253) 215-8782 Webinar ID: 844 7265 0722 Copy and paste the webinar link into your internet browser if the webinar link does not work directly from the agenda.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
In-Person comments during the meeting: Join us for the City Council meeting at the time and location specified on this agenda to make your comments. Please complete a “Request to Speak” card and submit it to the Council Hostess. When the Mayor calls your name, step to the podium and state your name for the record. Comments will be limited to three (3) minutes.
•
How to submit eComments: eComments are available once an agenda is published.

Locate the meeting in "upcoming meetings" and click the comment bubble icon. Click on the item you wish to comment on. eComments can be submitted when the agenda is published and until 24 hours prior to the meeting. eComments are limited to 3700 characters (approximately 500 words). eComments may be viewed by the City Council and members of the public following the close of the eComment submission period (24 hours prior to the meeting). Email your comment to [email protected] if you have difficulty submitting an eComment. eComments will not be read aloud as a regular meeting item; however, any member of the Council or member of the public may do so during their respective comment time.
•
PLEASE NOTE: Public Comment will be limited to 3 minutes per item. The timer begins when the participant begins speaking. Time cannot be combined or yielded to another speaker. *Live Remote Public Comment ONLY permitted during Councilmember teleconferencing pursuant to California Government Code Section 54953 (AB 2449).
*Zoom Audio Comments: To provide oral public comments during the meeting, join the Zoom meeting by computer, mobile phone, or dial in number. On Zoom video conference by computer or mobile phone, use the “Raise Hand” feature. This will notify the moderator that you wish to speak during a specific item on the agenda or during non-agenda Public Comment. Members of the public will not be shown on video but will be able to speak when called upon. If joining the meeting using the Zoom dial-in number, you may raise your hand by pressing *9. Comments will be limited to three (3) minutes. No further comments will be entertained after the Mayor closes public comment. •
Citizens who wish to make an audio/visual presentation pertaining to an item on the agenda, or during Public Comments, should contact the City Clerk’s office at 619.667.1120, no later than 12:00 p.m., the Monday prior to the meeting day. Advance notification will ensure compatibility with City equipment and allow Council meeting presentations to progress smoothly and in a consistent and equitable manner. Please note that all presentations/digital materials are considered part of the maximum time limit provided to speakers.

Agenda reports for items on this agenda are available for public review at the City Clerk's Office, 8130 Allison Avenue, during normal business hours.

Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office, 8130 Allison Avenue, during normal business hours.

ACCESSIBILITY: The City of La Mesa encourages the participation of disabled individuals in the services, activities and programs provided by the City. Individuals with disabilities, who require reasonable accommodation in order to participate in the City Council meetings, should contact the Human Resources Department 48 business hours prior to the meeting at 619.667.1175, fax 619.667.1163, or [email protected].

Hearing assisted devices are available for the hearing impaired. A City staff member is available to provide these devices upon entry to City Council meetings, commission meetings or public hearings held in the City Council Chambers. A photo ID or signature will be required to secure a device for the meeting.

Pages

1. CALL TO ORDER

1.1 INVOCATION - VICE MAYOR CAZARES

1.2 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

2. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS

3. COMMUNITY BULLETIN REPORTS

4. ADDITIONS AND/OR DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA

5. PRESENTATIONS

5.1 HEARTLAND FIRE AND RESCUE INSURANCE SERVICES OFFICE (ISO) CLASS 1 RECERTIFICATION PRESENTATION

6. PUBLIC COMMENTS – (TOTAL TIME – 15 MINUTES)
NOTE: In accordance with state law, an item not scheduled on the agenda may be brought forward by the general public for comment; however, the City Council will not be able to discuss or take any action on the item at this meeting.

If appropriate, the item will be referred to Staff or placed on a future agenda.

7. CONFLICT DISCLOSURES

8. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time in which members of the Council or audience may pull items from the CONSENT CALENDAR for discussion. Public Comments are also invited on Consent Calendar items.

9. CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 9.1 through 9.14)
The Consent Calendar includes items considered to be routine. Unless discussion is requested by members of the Council or audience, all Consent Calendar items may be approved by one motion.
*If a public hearing item is part of the Consent Calendar, the public hearing shall be deemed held if the item is not removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion and possible action (Items 9.4, 9.6, 9.9, and 9.14).

Recommended Motion:

Approve Consent Calendar Items 9.1 through 9.14.

9.1 APPROVAL OF MOTION TO WAIVE THE READING OF THE TEXT OF

ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS AT THIS MEETING
Recommended Motion:

Approve.

9.2 APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR

MEETING AND LA MESA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY SPECIAL
MEETING HELD WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2025
1 Recommended Motion:

Approve.

9.3 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH

INFRASTRUCTURE PRODUCTIONS, LLC, FOR VIDEO AND

MULTIMEDIA SERVICES
13 Staff Reference: Ms. Lee
Recommended Motion:

Adopt Resolution.

9.4 *PROJECT 2025-1470 (CHURCHILL) - REQUEST TO DESIGNATE THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4250 EASTRIDGE DRIVE (APN 475-
230-09-00) AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK AND ESTABLISH A

PROPERTY PRESERVATION (MILLS ACT) AGREEMENT
32 Staff Reference: Ms. Santos
Recommended Motion:

Adopt Resolutions.
a. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE H.J. MOREHOUSE/O'NEIL
HOUSE AT 4250 EASTRIDGE DRIVE AS A HISTORIC

LANDMARK
Recommended Motion:

Adopt Resolution.
b. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A HISTORIC

LANDMARK PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT

WITH THE OWNER OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK KNOWN
AS THE H.J. MOREHOUSE/O'NEIL HOUSE AT 4250

EASTRIDGE DRIVE
Recommended Motion:

Adopt Resolution.

9.5 RATIFICATION OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD'S APPROVAL OF
PROJECT 2023-2716 (CROSSBY PROPERTY LLC)
126

RESOLUTION RATIFYING THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD'S
APPROVAL OF PROJECT 2023-2716 FOR AN 18-UNIT RESIDENTIAL BUILDING LOCATED AT 7285 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, APNs 474-181- 17-00, 474-181-18-00, AND 474-181-19-00 IN THE C-F-D-MU (GENERAL COMMERCIAL/FLOODWAY OVERLAY/URBAN DESIGN

OVERLAY/MIXED USE OVERLAY) ZONE
Staff Reference: Ms. Santos
Recommended Motion:

Adopt Resolution.

9.6 *2025 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE 143

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025 EDITION OF THE
CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE, TITLE 24 OF THE
CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, WHICH INCLUDES: (1) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (WITH APPENDIX J)
INCORPORATING THE 2024 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE; (2) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE INCORPORATING THE
2024 UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE; (3) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA
MECHANICAL CODE INCORPORATING THE 2024 UNIFORM
MECHANICAL CODE; (4) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE INCORPORATING THE 2023 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE; (5) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE INCORPORATING THE 2024 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE; (6) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE; (7) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA
EXISTING BUILDING CODE INCORPORATING THE 2024
INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE; (8) THE 2025
CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE; (9) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA
HISTORICAL CODE; AND (10) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA REFERENCED STANDARDS CODE; AND AMENDING TITLE 14 OF THE LA MESA

MUNICIPAL CODE AND ALL OTHER ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT

THEREWITH
Staff Reference: Ms. Santos
Recommended Motion:

Approve the second reading and adoption of the Ordinance.

9.7 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA ADDING A NEW SECTION 24.053.080.D TO THE LA MESA

MUNICIPAL CODE REQUIRING CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZATION TO

APPROVE CANCELLATION OF AFFORDABLE OR SENIOR HOUSING

AGREEMENTS
154
Staff Reference: Ms. Santos
Recommended Motion:

Approve the second reading and adoption of the Ordinance.

9.8 RESOLUTION TO APPROPRIATE GENERAL FUND RESERVES AND APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH OPENGOV, INC. FOR SOFTWARE

SERVICES
157
Staff Reference: Ms. Esenwein
Recommended Motion:

Adopt Resolution.

9.9 *2025 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE 178

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025 EDITION OF THE

CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE, KNOWN AS THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF
REGULATIONS, TITLE 24, PART 9 (CCR, T-24, P-9),
INCORPORATING THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE, 2025 EDITION

PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL, WITH
CERTAIN AMENDMENTS, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS; AND
AMENDING TITLE 11 OF THE LA MESA MUNICIPAL CODE AND ALL

OTHER ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT THEREWITH
Staff Reference: Chief Koch
Recommended Motion:

Approve the second reading and adoption of the Ordinance.

9.10 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FIELD ALLOCATION AND USE

POLICY AND REPEALING THE EXISTING FIELD USE SCHEDULING
POLICY
190
Staff Reference: Ms. Thompson
Recommended Motion:

Adopt Resolution.

9.11 POLICE CHIEF’S QUARTERLY OPERATIONS REPORT (JULY 2025 – SEPTEMBER 2025)
199
Staff Reference: Chief Sweeney
Recommended Motion:

Receive and file.

9.12 RESOLUTION ADDING SUBSECTION 12.28.030(74.21) TO THE LA

MESA MUNICIPAL CODE, DESIGNATING OAKLAND ROAD A STOP

STREET AT KIOWA DRIVE
214
Staff Reference: Mr. Throne
Recommended Motion:

Adopt Resolution.

9.13 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH

MOBILE MODULAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION FOR THE

PURCHASE AND DELIVERY OF A MOBILE MODULAR OFFICE

SPACE FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS YARD (CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 8612)
247
Staff Reference: Mr. Throne
Recommended Motion:

Adopt Resolution.

9.14 *RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT WITH PRECISION

ELECTRIC COMPANY FOR THE DESIGN AND INSTALLATION OF A

SOLAR ELECTRIC SYSTEM AT THE PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS
YARD
253
Staff Reference: Mr. Throne
Recommended Motion:

Adopt Resolution.

10. CONSENT CALENDAR - SUCCESSOR AGENCY
(Items 10.1 through 10.2)
The Consent Calendar includes items considered to be routine. Unless discussion is requested by members of the Successor Agency or audience, all Consent Calendar items may be approved by one motion.

Recommended Motion:

Approve Consent Calendar Items 10.1 through 10.2.

10.1 APPROVAL OF MOTION TO WAIVE THE READING OF THE TEXT

OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS AT THIS MEETING
Recommended Motion:

Approve.

10.2 CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTIONS OF THE SUCCESSOR

AGENCY TO THE LA MESA COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
290
Staff Reference: Ms. Esenwein
Recommended Motion:

Adopt Resolutions.
a. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGET
FOR THE 12-MONTH FISCAL YEAR PERIOD FROM JULY 1,
2026, THROUGH JUNE 30, 2027 (ROPS 26-27 PERIOD), AND

APPROVING RELATED ACTIONS
Recommended Motion:

Adopt Resolution.
b. RESOLUTION APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE

RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE (ROPS
26-27) FOR THE 12-MONTH FISCAL YEAR PERIOD FROM
JULY 1, 2026, THROUGH JUNE 30, 2027, AND APPROVING

RELATED ACTIONS
Recommended Motion:

Adopt Resolution.

11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS (3 MINUTE LIMIT)

12. AB 1234 REPORTS (GC 53232.3 (d))

13. CITY ATTORNEY REMARKS

14. ADJOURNMENT
1 La Mesa City Council and La Mesa Public Financing Authority Meeting Minutes
Date:

Location:

November 12, 2025, 6:00 p.m.

City Council Chambers, 8130 Allison Avenue
La Mesa, California

Present: Mayor Mark Arapostathis
Vice Mayor Lauren Cazares
Councilmember Patricia N. Dillard
Councilmember Laura Lothian
Councilmember Genevieve Suzuki
Staff: City Manager Greg Humora
Assistant City Manager Amanda Lee
City Attorney Glenn Sabine
City Clerk Megan Wiegelman
_____________________________________________________________________

1. CALL TO ORDER
The City Council minutes are prepared and ordered to correspond to the City Council Agenda. Agenda Items can be taken out of order during the meeting.

The Agenda Items were considered in the order presented.

Mayor Arapostathis called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m.

1.1 INVOCATION - COUNCILMEMBER LOTHIAN

1.2 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

2. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS
There were no comments.

3. COMMUNITY BULLETIN REPORTS
The Mayor, Council, and staff made announcements and reported on various events taking place in the City. No action was taken.

2 4. ADDITIONS AND/OR DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA
Consent Calendar Item 9.11 was deleted from the agenda.

5. PRESENTATIONS

5.1 PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING RANDYE HEDGECOKE FOR

RECEIVING THE TRADE WOMEN BUILD NATIONS LIFETIME

ACHIEVEMENT AWARD
Vice Mayor Cazares read and presented the proclamation recognizing Randye Hedgecoke for receiving the Trade Women Build Nations Lifetime Achievement Award.

Carol Kim thanked the Council for honoring Randye Hedgecoke and shared a brief overview of the industry and Randye’s notable contributions.

Randye Hedgecoke thanked the City Council for the recognition and expressed her appreciation to her family, friends, and colleagues for their support.

5.2 PROCLAMATION COMMEMORATING LA MESA FIRST UNITED
METHODIST CHURCH'S 130TH CELEBRATION SUNDAY
Mayor Arapostathis read and presented the proclamation recognizing La Mesa United Methodist Church’s 130th Celebration Sunday to Reverend Christian DeMent.

Reverend DeMent thanked the City Council for the recognition and highlighted the Church’s work in the community.

5.3 CITY TREASURER'S QUARTERLY REPORT
City Treasurer Strabone made a presentation regarding the investment earnings for the quarter ending September 30, 2025.

Following Council question and comments, no action was taken.

3 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS – (TOTAL TIME – 15 MINUTES)
Martha Bertles spoke in support of expanding the MacArthur Park off-leash dog park.

Melody McElroy spoke in support of expanding the MacArthur Park off-leash dog park.

Christine Bond spoke in support of expanding the MacArthur Park off-leash dog park.

Ziba Ahkami spoke in support of expanding the MacArthur Park off-leash dog park.

Andrew Storrs spoke in support of expanding the MacArthur Park off-leash dog park.

Kiana Caton spoke in support of expanding the MacArthur Park off-leash dog park.

Steve Bindel spoke in support of expanding the MacArthur Park off-leash dog park.

Linda Morton submitted a comment regarding the MacArthur Park off-leash dog park.

Julie Ramsey submitted a comment requesting that an item be added to the agenda regarding the MacArthur Park off-leash dog initiative.

7. CONFLICT DISCLOSURES
There were no conflicts of interest disclosed.

8. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CONSENT CALENDAR
Barbarah Torres spoke on Item 9.4.

Jamie Jenkins spoke and submitted a comment on Item 9.11.

Sean Connacher spoke on Item 9.11.

4 9. CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 9.1 through 9.17)
*If a public hearing item is part of the Consent Calendar, the public hearing shall be deemed held if the item is not removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion and possible action (Items 9.6 and 9.9).

Vice Mayor Cazares provided comments on Items 9.4 and 9.8.

Councilmember Lothian provided comments and made inquiries on Item 9.13.

Chief Sweeney responded to Councilmember Lothian's inquiries on Item 9.13.

Moved By Mayor Arapostathis
Seconded By Councilmember Dillard
Approve Consent Calendar Items 9.1 through 9.17, except for 9.11.

For (5): Mayor Arapostathis, Vice Mayor Cazares, Councilmember Dillard, Councilmember Lothian, and Councilmember Suzuki
Approved (5 to 0)

9.1 APPROVAL OF MOTION TO WAIVE THE READING OF THE TEXT OF

ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS AT THIS MEETING
Approve.

9.2 APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR

MEETING, LA MESA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY SPECIAL

MEETING, AND CITY OF LA MESA SUCCESSOR AGENCY SPECIAL
MEETING HELD TUESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2025
Approve.

9.3 APPROVAL OF MOTION TO CANCEL THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 23, 2025
Approve.

9.4 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH TOWNSEND
PUBLIC AFFAIRS, INC., FOR GOVERNMENTAL SUPPORT AND

GRANT WRITING SERVICES AND APPROVING A BUDGET
ADJUSTMENT TO APPROPRIATE $60,000 FROM THE GENERAL
FUND RESERVES IN FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026
Resolution No. 2025-132
Adopt Resolution.

5 9.5 PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY QUARTERLY UPDATE (JULY 2025 - SEPTEMBER 2025)
Receive and file.

9.6 *2025 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE, TITLE 24 OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, WHICH INCLUDES: (1) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (WITH APPENDIX J) INCORPORATING THE 2024
INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE; (2) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA
PLUMBING CODE INCORPORATING THE 2024 UNIFORM PLUMBING
CODE; (3) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE
INCORPORATING THE 2024 UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE; (4) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE INCORPORATING THE 2023
NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE; (5) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA
RESIDENTIAL CODE INCORPORATING THE 2024 INTERNATIONAL
RESIDENTIAL CODE; (6) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE; (7) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA EXISTING BUILDING CODE INCORPORATING THE 2024 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING
BUILDING CODE; (8) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE; (9) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL CODE; AND (10) THE 2025
CALIFORNIA REFERENCED STANDARDS CODE; AND AMENDING
TITLE 14 OF THE LA MESA MUNICIPAL CODE AND ALL OTHER

ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT THEREWITH
Approve the introduction and first reading of the Ordinance and schedule the second reading of the Ordinance and the required public hearing for Tuesday, December 9, 2025.

9.7 ACCEPTANCE OF THE CITY OF LA MESA HOUSING ASSET FUND

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND ADDENDUM TO THE ANNUAL
PROGRESS REPORT FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Approve.

9.8 RESOLUTION AWARDING THE PURCHASE OF A PIERCE AERIAL

LADDER TRUCK FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO SOUTH COAST

FIRE EQUIPMENT
Resolution No. 2025-133
Adopt Resolution.

6 9.9 *2025 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA

FIRE CODE, KNOWN AS THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, TITLE 24, PART 9 (CCR, T-24, P-9), INCORPORATING THE
INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE, 2025 EDITION PUBLISHED BY THE

INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL, WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS,
ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS, AND AMENDING TITLE 11 OF THE LA

MESA MUNICIPAL CODE, AND ALL OTHER ORDINANCES IN

CONFLICT THEREWITH
Approve the introduction and first reading of the Ordinance and schedule the second reading of the Ordinance and the required public hearing for Tuesday, December 9, 2025.

9.10 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT

DISSOLVING THE REGIONAL COOPERATIVE CARE PARTNERSHIPS
Resolution No. 2025-134
Adopt Resolution.

9.12 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE AND

APPROPRIATION OF A GRANT FROM THE CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF

TRAFFIC SAFETY TO CONDUCT A LOCAL TRAFFIC SAFETY
PROGRAM FOR DUI ENFORCEMENT TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2026
BUDGET
Resolution No. 2025-135
Adopt Resolution.

9.13 HOMELESS OUTREACH AND MOBILE ENGAGEMENT (“HOME”)
PROGRAM QUARTERLY REPORT (JULY 2025 – SEPTEMBER 2025)
Receive and file.

9.14 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE REIMBURSEMENT OF PROJECT

EXPENDITURES AND APPROVING A RELATED CHANGE ORDER

FOR THE INFLOW AND INFILTRATION MITIGATION PROJECT,
PHASE 6 (CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 8103), IN THE
AMOUNT OF $9,618,582
Resolution No. 2025-136
Adopt Resolution.

7 9.15 RESOLUTION AMENDING CHAPTER 12.64 OF THE LA MESA

MUNICIPAL CODE TO DESIGNATE THE FOLLOWING STREET
SEGMENTS AS SAFETY CORRIDORS IN THE CITY OF LA MESA:
(1) VIOLET STREET FROM PEARSON STREET TO WAITE DRIVE
(VISTA LA MESA ACADEMY); (2) LOWELL STREET FROM

UNIVERSITY AVENUE TO NORMAL AVENUE (HELIX CHARTER HIGH
SCHOOL); (3) ORIEN AVENUE FROM NORMAL TO HELIX’S SOUTHWEST CORNER STUDENT PARKING LOT DRIVEWAY EXIT (HELIX CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL); (4) JUNIOR HIGH DRIVE FROM

CINNABAR DRIVE TO LOWELL STREET/ORIEN AVENUE (LA MESA
ARTS ACADEMY); (5) PARKS AVENUE FROM STURGESS AVENUE
TO NORMAL AVENUE (DALE ELEMENTARY); (6) OLIVE AVENUE

FROM STURGESS AVENUE TO NORMAL AVENUE (DALE
ELEMENTARY); (7) TOWER STREET FROM 70TH STREET TO TERRY LANE (ROLANDO ELEMENTARY); (8) MARYLAND AVENUE FROM

OAKLAND ROAD TO GUESSMAN AVENUE (MARYLAND AVENUE
ELEMENTARY); (9) LEMON AVENUE FROM GLEN STREET TO
JACKSON DRIVE (LEMON AVENUE ELEMENTARY); (10) GLEN

STREET FROM LEMON AVENUE TO GLENIRA AVENUE (LEMON
AVENUE ELEMENTARY); (11) MILDEN STREET FROM WATER
STREET TO WASHINGTON STREET (GROSSMONT HIGH SCHOOL);
(12) GREGORY STREET FROM HOWELL DRIVE TO HENDERSON
DRIVE (NORTHMONT ELEMENTARY); (13) PARK PLAZA DRIVE
FROM DALLAS STREET (PARKWAY MIDDLE SCHOOL); (14) EL

PASO STREET FROM JACKSON DRIVE TO LAKE MURRAY
BOULEVARD (MURRAY MANOR ELEMENTARY); AND (15) JACKSON

DRIVE FROM LAIRD STREET TO THE NORTH CITY LIMIT (MURRAY

MANOR ELEMENTARY)
Resolution No. 2025-137
Adopt Resolution.

9.16 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH
OPENGOV, INC. FOR CARTEGRAPH ENTERPRISE ASSET

MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE
Resolution No. 2025-138
Adopt Resolution.

8 9.17 RESOLUTION AMENDING SECTION 12.44.130 OF THE LA MESA

MUNICIPAL CODE INSTALLING A DISABLED PERSONS PARKING
SPACE AT 4162 CHARLES STREET
Resolution No. 2025-139
Adopt Resolution.

9.11 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FIELD ALLOCATION AND USE

POLICY AND REPEALING THE EXISTING FIELD USE SCHEDULING
POLICY
This item was deleted from the agenda.

10. CONSENT CALENDAR - CITY COUNCIL AND LA MESA PUBLIC FINANCING

AUTHORITY
(Item 10.1)
Moved By Mayor Arapostathis
Seconded By Vice Mayor Cazares
Approve Consent Calendar Item 10.1.

For (5): Mayor Arapostathis, Vice Mayor Cazares, Councilmember Dillard, Councilmember Lothian, and Councilmember Suzuki
Approved (5 to 0)

10.1 ACCEPTANCE OF BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT FOR THE CITY OF LA MESA
FOR THE YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2024
Approve.

11. STAFF REPORTS

11.1 SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED REGIONAL WASTEWATER

DISPOSAL AGREEMENT
Environmental Manager Kuhn provided a PowerPoint presentation summarizing updates to the Second Amended and Restated Regional Wastewater Disposal Agreement (SARA), which introduced a new Functional Allocation Billing (FAB) system. FAB allocated costs based on each agency’s actual use of regional facilities and introduced new peak capacity charges expected to begin in 2027. For La Mesa, the estimated

9 additional cost was approximately $750,000 per year, with any necessary sewer rate increases to be phased in over time.

La Mesa’s Metro Wastewater Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Representative and former City Councilmember William Baber provided an overview of the collaborative process behind developing the SARA and its objectives.

City of San Diego Executive Assistant Director of the Department of Public Utilities, Lisa Celaya, outlined the SARA’s purpose and how it reinforced the partnership among the participating agencies.

Lemon Grove Sanitation District’s Metro Wastewater JPA Representative, Chair, and former City Councilmember Jerry Jones commented on the collaborative process and the significance of the SARA.

Resolution No. 2025-140 and Resolution No. 2025-141
Moved By Mayor Arapostathis
Seconded By Vice Mayor Cazares
Adopt Resolutions.

For (5): Mayor Arapostathis, Vice Mayor Cazares, Councilmember Dillard, Councilmember Lothian, and Councilmember Suzuki
Approved (5 to 0)
a. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SECOND AMENDED AND

RESTATED WASTEWATER DISPOSAL AGREEMENT AND

AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT
Resolution No. 2025-140
Adopt Resolution.
b. RESOLUTION APPROVING METROPOLITAN SEWERAGE
SYSTEM ADMINISTRATIVE AGREEMENT NO. 1 FOR UNIFIED

MANAGEMENT OF INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE

PRETREATMENT AND ENHANCED SOURCE CONTROL

PROGRAMS
Resolution No. 2025-141
Adopt Resolution.

10 12. HEARINGS/ORDINANCES: FIRST READING

12.1 CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA ADDING A NEW SECTION 24.053.080.D TO

THE LA MESA MUNICIPAL CODE REQUIRING CITY COUNCIL

AUTHORIZATION TO APPROVE CANCELLATION OF AFFORDABLE

OR SENIOR HOUSING AGREEMENTS
Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and at the time specified in the notice.

Mayor Arapostathis opened the hearing for Item 12.1.

City Attorney Sabine read the title of the Ordinance.

Vice Mayor Cazares provided comments.

Moved By Vice Mayor Cazares
Seconded By Councilmember Suzuki
Close the hearing.

For (5): Mayor Arapostathis, Vice Mayor Cazares, Councilmember Dillard, Councilmember Lothian, and Councilmember Suzuki
Approved (5 to 0)
Moved By Vice Mayor Cazares
Seconded By Councilmember Suzuki
Approve the introduction and first reading of the Ordinance.

For (5): Mayor Arapostathis, Vice Mayor Cazares, Councilmember Dillard, Councilmember Lothian, and Councilmember Suzuki
Approved (5 to 0)

11 13. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS

13.1 CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION UPDATING COUNCIL INITIATED

AGENDA ITEM PROCEDURES
RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2002-059 AND

ADOPTING A NEW RESOLUTION WHICH REQUIRES TWO

COUNCILMEMBERS (INCLUDING THE MAYOR) TO PLACE A

COUNCIL INITIATED ITEM ON THE AGENDA AND CLARIFYING
PROCEDURAL RULES RELATED THERETO; AND, REAFFIRMING AN

EXISTING POLICY (ADOPTED BY COUNCIL MOTION) REQUIRING

THAT THE COUNCIL SHALL ONLY CONSIDER ITEMS REQUESTED

BY THE PUBLIC WHICH DIRECTLY IMPACT CITY ADMINISTRATION

OR OPERATIONS
Council Ad Hoc Subcommittee: Mayor Arapostathis and Councilmember Dillard
Mayor Arapostathis explained the purpose and intent of the updated Council initiated agenda item procedures.

City Attorney Sabine read the 2009 Council initiated agenda item policy, which was approved by Council motion.

Council questions and comments ensued.

Manny Aceres spoke in opposition to the item.

Jack Shu spoke in opposition to the item.

Council questions and comments continued.

Following Council discussion, no action was taken.

14. COUNCIL INITIATED

14.1 CONSIDERATION OF REINSTATING THE LIBRARY TASK FORCE TO

HELP FACILITATE COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

IN THE CIVIC CENTER UPDATE AND FUTURE LIBRARY EXPANSION - VICE MAYOR CAZARES AND COUNCILMEMBER SUZUKI
Vice Mayor Cazares and Councilmember Suzuki explained the purpose of the request to reinstate the Library Task Force.

Kirsten Iversen, President of the Friends of the La Mesa Library, spoke in support of the item.

Council questions and comments ensued.

12 Moved By Councilmember Suzuki
Seconded By Vice Mayor Cazares
Reinstate the Library Task Force to help facilitate community and stakeholder engagement in the civic center update and future library expansion, and open recruitment for applicants.

For (5): Mayor Arapostathis, Vice Mayor Cazares, Councilmember Dillard, Councilmember Lothian, and Councilmember Suzuki
Approved (5 to 0)

15. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS (3 MINUTE LIMIT)
The Mayor and Council reported on various outside boards, commissions, and committee meetings they attended. No action was taken.

16. AB 1234 REPORTS (GC 53232.3 (d))
There were no reports.

17. CITY ATTORNEY REMARKS
There were no remarks.

18. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Arapostathis adjourned the meeting at 8:04 p.m. in honor and memory of Officer Lauren Craven, who served the City of La Mesa and the La Mesa Police Department with dignity and courage and became a police officer to make a meaningful difference. May her memory be eternal.
_________________________
City Clerk

REPORT to the MAYOR and MEMBERS of the CITY COUNCIL
From the CITY MANAGER
DATE: December 9, 2025
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH

INFRASTRUCTURE PRODUCTIONS, LLC, FOR VIDEO

AND MULTIMEDIA SERVICES
ISSUING DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office
SUMMARY:

Issues:

Should the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing an agreement with Infrastructure Productions, LLC, for Video and Multimedia Services? Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing an agreement with Infrastructure Productions, LLC, for Video and Multimedia Services.

Fiscal Impact:

The cost of the agreement with Infrastructure Productions, LLC is for $40,000 per year. Funds are budgeted in the Fiscal Year 2025-2027 Biennial Budget in the Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) account 1321-6430.

City’s Strategic Goals:
 Promote a high quality of life that current and future generations can afford to call home.
 Nurture an organizational culture where employees are recognized for the delivery of high-quality services to the community.

Report to Mayor and Councilmembers
Date: December 9, 2025
Page: 2 of 3
BACKGROUND:

On January 26, 2021, the City Council adopted the 2021-2023 Community Engagement Plan to enhance public outreach and strengthen communication with residents, businesses, and stakeholders. The Plan emphasized the importance of delivering City news and information, incorporating social media, the City’s cable government channel, newsletters, website and other platforms for communications that meet the resident’s needs.

Following the Plan’s adoption, the City entered into a professional services agreement for video production services. That contract has since expired, and the City has continued to expand its communication efforts across multiple platforms using high-quality videos and vignettes. Residents have responded positively to the State of the City and other video content, increasing the demand for how-to videos, Mayor’s Minutes, public service announcements, and behind-the-scenes features.

To meet the community’s growing needs, staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP 26- 03) tailored to secure comprehensive video and multimedia support.

DISCUSSION:

On August 6, 2025, staff issued RFP 26-03 for Video and Multimedia Services. RFP 26- 03 was advertised on the City’s website and on PlanetBids. On September 8, 2025, the City received 11 responsive proposals from the following vendors:
 Bakers Man Productions
 Geoff Stevens Videography
 Infrastructure Productions, LLC
 Loma Media
 LV Productions
 Motion Productions
 Prometheus
 R3 Services
 Studio Luniste LLC
 Tripepi Smith & Associates
 Video Approach
Staff reviewed all proposals based on predetermined criteria identified in the RFP, including overall proposal, capacity to deliver, and value. The six highest-scoring bidders were invited to provide samples of their video and digital media work before an evaluation panel of staff from multiple departments. Following this review, staff recommends awarding an agreement with Infrastructure Productions, LLC.

Infrastructure Productions, LLC is a San Diego based company who has extensive experience working with local governments including SANDAG, City of San Diego, North County Transit District, City of Poway, City of Carlsbad, Port of San Diego, County of San Diego, and the Office of the San Diego County District Attorney.

Report to Mayor and Councilmembers
Date: December 9, 2025
Page: 3 of 3
The proposed agreement is for $40,000 annually. The agreement includes a one-year term with two optional one-year extensions upon mutual consent.

CONCLUSION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing an agreement with Infrastructure Productions, LLC for Video and Multimedia Services.

Reviewed by: Respectfully submitted by:
____________________ ____________________________
Greg Humora Amanda Lee
City Manager Assistant City Manager
____________________________
Grecia Aguilar
Communications Manager
Attachments:

A. Resolution
B. Agreement with Infrastructure

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-____

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA

AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH INFRASTRUCTURE PRODUCTIONS,

LLC, FOR VIDEO AND MULTIMEDIA SERVICES
________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, the City is in need of high-quality video and digital media services to support effective and engaging communication with the community; WHEREAS, RFP 26-03 for video and multimedia services was published on the City's online bid system and 891 firms were notified by automatic email with 45 prospective bidders accessing the RFP documents and 11 submitting proposals; WHEREAS, staff evaluated the proposals and determined that Infrastructure Productions, LLC best meets the City's needs for video and multimedia services; WHEREAS, the Agreement includes a one-year term with two optional one-year extensions upon mutual consent; and
WHEREAS, funding is budgeted in the Fiscal Year 2025-2027 Biennial Budget in the Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) account 1321-6430 for video production services.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT AND IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Mesa, California, that the Agreement is approved for Video and Multimedia Services.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of La Mesa, California, held the 9
th day of December 2025, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK
I, MEGAN WIEGELMAN, City Clerk of the City of La Mesa, California, do hereby certify the foregoing to be a true and exact copy of Resolution No. 2025- , duly passed and adopted by the City Council of said City on the date and by the vote therein recited.

MEGAN WIEGELMAN, CMC, City Clerk
(SEAL OF CITY)

STANDARD AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Between the City of La Mesa and

INFRASTRUCTURE PRODUCTIONS, LLC
for VIDEOGRAPHY AND MULTIMEDIA SERVICES
This Agreement is entered into by City of La Mesa as of ____________, by and between the City of La Mesa, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "the City", and INFRASTRUCTURE PRODUCTIONS, LLC, hereinafter referred to as "Contractor," hereinafter this agreement.

WITNESSETH THAT:

WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted Resolution No. _________; WHEREAS, the City has need for professional services to perform VIDEOGRAPHY AND MULTIMEDIA services and is willing to compensate Contractor for such services; WHEREAS, this Agreement is based on Request for Proposals 26-03; WHEREAS, the City desires to engage Contractor to render certain technical and professional services in the providing of said professional services; and WHEREAS, Contractor is qualified to provide said professional services for VIDEOGRAPHY AND MULTIMEDIA services.

NOW THEREFORE, the parties do mutually agree as follows:

1. ENGAGEMENT OF CONTRACTOR
The City hereby agrees to engage Contractor and Contractor hereby agrees to perform the services set forth in this Agreement. This Agreement shall be for an initial term from the execution date of the Agreement through December 8, 2026 and may be renewed for an additional two one-year terms by mutual written consent of both parties. The City Manager shall have sole and exclusive right to exercise any options contained in this agreement on behalf of the City.

2. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED BY CONTRACTOR
Contractor shall commence performance of the Project upon execution of this Agreement by both parties. The term "Project" as used in this Agreement shall include all of the tasks and items listed and described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein as part of this Agreement.

3. LOCATION OF SERVICES
Contractor agrees to provide the services remotely as well as on-site within the City of La Mesa or other mutually agreed-upon locations. Filming may occur at City facilities, parks, project sites,

2 or community event locations within the City for the full term of this Agreement. No changes will be made without prior written approval by the City.

4. CITY REPRESENTATION
The City Manager for the City of La Mesa, or their designated representative, shall represent the City in all matters pertaining to the services rendered pursuant to this Agreement and shall administer said Agreement on behalf of the City. This person shall hereinafter be referred to as the "City's Representative."

5. PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE
Both Contractor and the City recognize that time is of the essence in the completion of this work and the following schedule is dependent upon timely actions by the Contractor and the City.

Accordingly, the Contractor shall complete all of the work outlined in Exhibit "A" and as scheduled therein.

The Contractor shall not be responsible for damages or be in default or deemed to be in default by reason of strikes, lockouts, accidents, or acts of God, or failure of City to furnish timely information or to approve or disapprove Contractor's work promptly, or delay or faulty performance by City, or governmental agencies.

Contractor shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably necessary for satisfactory performance of Contractor's obligations pursuant to this Agreement.

6. COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR
The total fee for professional services shall not exceed $40,000 per year, with a total contract ceiling amount not-to-exceed $120,000, as described on page #14 of Exhibit "A".

The City shall compensate Contractor for the services performed hereunder within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of Contractor's invoice for the services performed.

The City shall promptly review invoicing and notify Contractor of any objection thereto in writing within fifteen (15) days of receipt of the invoice; absent such objection the invoice shall be deemed proper and acceptable.

In the event that any undisputed invoice is not paid within thirty (30) calendar days after receipt of the invoice by the City, it shall commence bearing interest on the date that the invoice was rendered at the rate of 1% per month and the City agrees to pay all accrued interest, together with the charges for services rendered.

7. HOLD HARMLESS
To the furthest extent allowed by law, Contractor shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend City and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers from any and all loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs and damages (whether in contract, tort or strict liability, including

3 but not limited to personal injury, death at any time and property damage), and from any and all claims, demands and actions in law or equity (including reasonable attorney's fees and litigation expenses) that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of Contractor, its principals, officers, employees, agents or volunteers in the performance of this Agreement.

If Contractor should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, Contractor shall require each subcontractor to indemnify, hold harmless and defend City and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers in accordance with the terms of the preceding paragraph.

This section shall survive termination or expiration of this Agreement.

8. INSURANCE
Throughout the life of this Agreement, Contractor shall pay for and maintain in full force and effect all policies of insurance required hereunder with an insurance company(ies) either (i) admitted by the California Insurance Commissioner to do business in the State of California and rated not less than "A:VII" in Best's Insurance Rating Guide, or (ii) authorized by the City Manager or his/her designee at any time and in his/her sole discretion. Contractor shall provide City with certificates of insurance (COI) evidencing all coverages and endorsements. Contractor agrees to name City, its elected officials, officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers as additional insured under said policy prior to providing the services in this Agreement. The following policies of insurance are required:

A. COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY insurance which shall be at least as broad as the most current version of Insurance Services Office (ISO) Commercial General Liability Coverage Form CG 00 01 and include insurance for “bodily injury,” “property damage” and “personal and advertising injury” with coverage for premises and operations (including the use of owned and non-owned equipment), products and completed operations, and contractual liability (including, without limitation, indemnity obligations under the Agreement) with limits of liability of not less than the following:
o $2,000,000 per occurrence
o $4,000,000 general aggregate
o $5,000 medical expense
B. ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT CERTIFICATE
C. WAIVER OF SUBROGATION
D. COMMERCIAL AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY insurance which shall be at least as broad as the most current version of Insurance Service Office (ISO) Business Auto Coverage Form CA 00 01 covering, Code 1 (any auto), or if Contractor has no owned autos, Code 8

4 (hired) and 9 (non-owned), with limits of liability of not less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

E. WORKERS' COMPENSATION insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer’s Liability Insurance with limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.

F. PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY (Errors and Omissions) insurance appropriate to Contractor’s profession, with limits of liability of $2,000,000 per claim/occurrence and $2,000,000 policy aggregate.

The certificate holder should be stated as:

City of La Mesa Attn: Risk Management, 8130 Allison Avenue, La Mesa, CA 91942 Should Contractor maintain insurance with broader coverage and/or limits of liability greater than those shown above, City requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage and/or the higher limits of liability maintained by Contractor. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to City.

Contractor shall be responsible for payment of any deductibles contained in any insurance policies required hereunder and Contractor shall also be responsible for payment of any self-insured retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to, and approved by, the City Manager or his/her designee. At the option of the City Manager or his/her designee, either:
(i) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects to City, its elected officials, officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers: or (ii) Contractor shall provide a financial guarantee, satisfactory to City Manager or his/her designee, guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. At no time shall City be responsible for the payment of any deductibles or self-insured retentions.

All policies of insurance required hereunder shall be endorsed to provide that the coverage shall not be cancelled, non-renewed, reduced in coverage or in limits except after 30 calendar day written notice has been given to City. Upon issuance by the insurer, broker, or agent of a notice of cancellation, non-renewal, or reduction in coverage or in limits, Contractor shall furnish City with a new certificate and applicable endorsements for such policy(ies). In the event any policy is due to expire during the work to be performed for City, Contractor shall provide a new certificate, and applicable endorsements, evidencing renewal of such policy not less than 15 calendar days prior to the expiration date of the expiring policy.

The General Liability and Automobile Liability insurance policies shall be written on an occurrence form and shall name City, its elected officials, officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers as an additional insured. Such policy(ies) of insurance shall be endorsed so Contractor’s insurance shall be primary and no contribution shall be required of City, its elected officials, officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to City, its elected officials, officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. The Workers’ Compensation insurance policy shall

5 contain a waiver of subrogation as to City, its elected officials, officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers.

If the Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) insurance policy is written on a claims-made coverage form:

A. The retroactive date must be shown, and must be before the effective date of this Agreement or the commencement of work by Contractor.

B. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least 5 years after completion of the work or termination of the Agreement, whichever first occurs.

C. (iii) If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a retroactive date prior to the effective date of the Agreement, or work commencement date, Contractor must purchase extended reporting period coverage for a minimum of 5 years after completion of the work or termination of the Agreement, whichever first occurs.

D. A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to City for review.

E. These requirements shall survive expiration or termination of the Agreement.

Contractor shall furnish City with all certificate(s) and applicable endorsements effecting coverage required hereunder. All certificates and applicable endorsements are to be received by City and approved by City Manager or his/her designee prior to City’s execution of the Agreement and before work commences. Upon request of City, Contractor shall immediately furnish City with a complete copy of any insurance policy required under this Agreement, including all endorsements, with said copy certified by the underwriter to be a true and correct copy of the original policy. This requirement shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement.

If at any time during the life of this Agreement or any extension, Contractor or any of its subcontractors fail to maintain any required insurance in full force and effect, all work under this Agreement shall be discontinued immediately, and all payments due or that become due to Contractor shall be withheld until notice is received by City that the required insurance has been restored to full force and effect and that the premiums therefore have been paid for a period satisfactory to City. Any failure to maintain the required insurance shall be sufficient cause for City to terminate this Agreement. No action taken by City hereunder shall in any way relieve Contractor of its responsibilities under this Agreement.

The fact that insurance is obtained by Contractor shall not be deemed to release or diminish the liability of Contractor, including, without limitation, liability under the indemnity provisions of this Agreement. The duty to indemnify City and its elected officials, officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers shall apply to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of

6 indemnification to be provided by Contractor. Approval or purchase of any insurance contracts or policies shall in no way relieve from liability nor limit the liability of Contractor, its principals, officers, employees, agents, persons under the supervision of Contractor, vendors, suppliers, invitees, Contractors, subcontractors, or anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them.

If Contractor should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, Contractor shall require each subcontractor to provide insurance protection in favor of City, its elected officials, officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers in accordance with the terms of each of the preceding paragraphs, except that the subcontractors' certificates and endorsements shall be on file with Contractor and City prior to the commencement of any work by the subcontractor.

9. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT FOR CAUSE OR CONVENIENCE
If, through any cause, the Contractor shall fail to fulfill in timely and proper manner their obligations under this Agreement, or if the Contractor shall violate any of the covenants, agreements, or stipulations of this Agreement, the City shall thereupon have the right to terminate this Agreement immediately by giving written notice to the Contractor of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof. In such event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs and reports prepared by the Contractor under this Agreement shall, at the option of the City, become its property and the Contractor shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed hereunder.

In addition to termination for cause, the City may terminate this Agreement for City’s convenience upon not less than fifteen (15) days written notice to Contractor. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement unless said notice provides otherwise. If this Agreement is terminated as provided in this paragraph for City’s convenience, the Contractor shall be required to provide to City all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, services, etc., prepared by the Contractor as may be requested by City and such work shall become City’s property upon payment to Contractor for the value of the work performed, less payments of compensation previously made.

Notwithstanding the above, the Contractor shall not be relieved of liability to the City for damages sustained by the City by virtue of any breach of the Agreement by the Contractor, and the City may withhold any payments to the Contractor for the purpose of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from the Contractor is determined.

10. NOTICES
Notices and requests to the City or Contractor shall be delivered at the following addresses, either served personally on the designated representative or by U.S. Postal Service at the following addresses:

7 City:
 City Manager
 City of La Mesa
 8130 Allison Avenue, La Mesa, CA 91942
 (619) 463-6611
Contractor:
 Christopher Holloway, Partner
 INFRASTRUCTURE PRODUCTIONS, LLC
 2831 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 204, San Diego, CA 92108  (858) 361-8319

11. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
The City shall require that all Contractors agree to submit any unresolved claims, counterclaims, disputes, controversies and other matters between them and the City or the Contractor and/or any subcontractors of any tier arising out of or relating to their agreement with the City or the breach thereof (“disputes”) first to mediation and then if not resolved, to non-binding arbitration prior to initiating suit or judicial proceeding.

If applicable – As provided in Public Contract Code section 9204, any claim filed by the Contractor on a public works project shall be reviewed by the City with 45 days and a written statement will be provided to the Contractor identifying what portion of the claim is disputed and what portion is undisputed. Upon receipt of a claim, the City and the Contractor may, by mutual agreement, extend the time period or it may be extended to allow City Council approval. The Contractor shall include reasonable documentation to support the claim. Any payment due on an undisputed portion of the claim shall be processed and made within 60 days after the City issues its written statement.

12. CONTRACTORS
Contractor may utilize the services of the following subcontractors during the course of this study:

1. Alex Espinosa

2. Justin Burquist

3. Marlee Ehrenfeld

4. Javier Agosto Nunez
Payment for such services shall be the responsibility of the Contractor. No substitution of proposed subcontractors shall be made without prior written approval by the City.

None of the services covered by the Agreement shall be subcontracted without the prior consent of the City. The Contractor shall be as fully responsible to the City for the acts and omissions of

8 their subcontractors, and of persons either directly or indirectly employed by them, as they are for the acts and omissions of persons directly employed by them. The Contractor shall insert in each subcontract appropriate provisions requiring compliance with the labor standards provisions of this Agreement.

Contractor shall not assign, delegate, or transfer this Agreement or any work hereunder, nor assign any monies due or to become due hereunder, except as expressly stated herein. In no event shall any contractual relation be created between any third party and the City without prior written consent of the City. A consent to one assignment shall not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment.

13. INTEREST OF MEMBERS OF THE CITY
No member of the governing body of the City and no other officer, employee, or agent of the City who exercises any functions or responsibilities in connection with the planning and carrying out of the program, shall have any personal financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement; and the Contractor shall take appropriate steps to assure compliance.

14. INTEREST OF CONTRACTOR

STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS
The Contractor covenants that they presently have no interest and shall not acquire interest, direct or indirect, in the study area or any parcels therein or any other interest which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of their services hereunder. The Contractor further covenants that in the performance of this Agreement, no person having any such interest shall be employed. City may require Contractor to complete and submit a Form 700, Statement of Economic Interests, in accordance with applicable law, to City Clerk.

15. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of City. City shall have the right to control Contractor only insofar as the results of Contractor's services rendered pursuant to this Agreement; however, City shall not have the right to control the means by which Contractor accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement.

16. PERS ELIGIBILITY INDEMNIFICATION
In the event that Contractor’s employee and/or agent providing services under this Agreement claims or is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS of the City, Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employer and employee contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of the employee as well as for payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions which would otherwise be the responsibility of the City.

9 Notwithstanding any other agency, state or federal policy, rule, regulation, law or ordinance to the contrary, Contractor’s employees providing service under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any claims to, any compensation and benefit including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in PERS as an employee of City and entitlement to any contributions to be paid by City for employer contributions and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.

17. CONTRACTOR NOT AGENT
Except as City may specify in writing, Contractor shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Contractor shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.

18. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, furnish all facilities and equipment which may be required for furnishing services pursuant to this Agreement.

19. RECORDS
Contractor shall maintain adequate records to permit inspection audit of Contractor's time-andmaterial charges under this Agreement. Contractor shall make such records available to the City and to other public agencies responsible for approval, funding or auditing the project, during normal business hours upon reasonable notice. Nothing herein shall convert such records into public records and they will be available only to the City or to public agencies involved with approval, funding or audit functions. Such records shall be maintained by the Contractor for three (3) years following completion of the work under this Agreement.

20. DESIGN CHANGES OR REVISIONS
No design changes or revisions will be required and no payment therefor will be made except pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. No extra compensation shall be paid the Contractor for revisions required by reason of omissions or errors by the Contractor in the preparation of the original document, plans, working drawings, or specifications. Changes to the scope of this Agreement shall be negotiated prior to commencement of extra work.

21. OWNERSHIP OF WORK
All finished or unfinished documents, studies, reports, computer files and materials prepared by Contractor and subcontractors under this Agreement shall be considered the property of the City and will be turned over to the City upon demand, but in any event, upon completion of the Project.

The Contractor shall be allowed to retain copies of documents for his permanent records, if desired.

22. INTEGRATION; AMENDMENTS
This Agreement sets forth the entire understanding of the parties with respect to the subject matter herein. There are no other agreements, expressed or implied, oral or written, except as set forth

10 herein. This Agreement may be amended upon written mutual consent of both parties hereto.

Amendment requiring changes in compensation shall be subject to the City's change order procedures.

23. ADDITIONAL SERVICES OUTSIDE SCOPE
Only after written authorization from the City, additional services that Contractor could provide, or cause to be provided, include the following:

A. Additional work related to the Project but not included in the Scope of Work.

B. Additional work caused by changes unrelated to the Scope of Work described herein.

Contractor will be compensated for Contractor time and direct personnel expenses as approved by the City.

24. CHANGES
The City may, from time to time, request changes in the Scope of Services of the Contract to be performed hereunder. Such changes, including any increase or decrease in the amount of the Contractor's compensation, which are mutually agreed upon by and between the City and the Contractor shall be incorporated to this Contract.

25. NON-DISCLOSURE
The designs, plans, reports, investigations, materials and documents prepared or acquired by the Contractor pursuant to this Agreement (including any duplicate copies kept by the Contractor) shall not be shown to any other public or private person or entity, except as authorized by the City.

The Contractor shall not disclose to any other public or private person or entity any information regarding the activities of the City except as authorized by the City.

26. JOB SITE SAFETY
The general or prime Contractor who is responsible for means, methods and procedures of the project shall be responsible for job site safety.

The prime contractor and all subcontractors of all tiers shall:

A. Be responsible for the safety of their respective employees as required by law.

B. Come under the jurisdiction and supervision of the general or prime contractor’s job site safety program.

C. Exercise reasonable care to avoid risk of injury to others as required by the professional standard of care.

11 27. BUSINESS LICENSE
The Contractor, including all subcontractors, shall obtain a business license for work within the City of La Mesa pursuant to La Mesa Municipal Code Sections 6.08.010 through 6.08.240.

No payments shall be made to any Contractor until such business license has been obtained, and all fees paid therefor, by the Contractor and all subcontractors. Business license applications and information may be obtained from the Finance Department, City Hall, 8130 Allison Avenue, La Mesa, CA 91942-5502, (619) 667-1118 or online at cityoflamesa.us/buslic.

28. PREVAILING WAGES FOR PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS

IF APPLICABLE
A. No professional Contractor or subcontractor subject to the requirements of State of California’s prevailing wages may be awarded a contract, or contracted with, for a public works project (submitted on or after April 1, 2015) unless registered with the Department of Industrial Relations pursuant to Labor Code section 1725.5 [with limited exceptions from this requirement for bid purposes only under Labor Code section 1771.1(a)].

B. This Project is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations.

29. CONFLICT BETWEEN AGREEMENT AND OTHER DOCUMENTS
In the event of a conflict between this Agreement and any documents incorporated by reference in this Agreement, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall supersede those contained in any such document incorporated by reference.

12 30. SIGNATURES
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Contractor have executed the Agreement.

INFRASTRUCTURE PRODUCTIONS, LLC
By: _________________________________

CHRISTOPHER HOLLOWAY, PARTNER
Date: _____________

CITY OF LA MESA,
A Municipal Corporation
By: _________________________________
Dr. Mark Arapostathis, Mayor
Date: _____________
By: _________________________________
Greg Humora, City Manager
Date: _____________

APPROVED AS TO FORM
By: _________________________________

GLENN SABINE, CITY ATTORNEY

13 EXHIBIT “A”
A. General
Infrastructure Productions, LLC a California limited liability company (“Contractor”) shall provide the City of La Mesa, a California municipal corporation (“City”) with videography, photography, post-production, and as-needed graphic design services in support of marketing, public information, emergency communications, and community engagement activities. Services shall support the City’s efforts to transparently communicate with residents through high-quality video and multimedia content.

B. Location
Services shall be performed remotely as well as on-site within the City of La Mesa or other mutually agreed-upon locations. Filming may occur at City facilities, parks, project sites, or community event locations.

C. Services
Contractor shall provide full-service, turnkey multimedia production support, including but not limited to:

Videography and Video Production:

1. Produce videos and vignettes ranging from one to ten minutes in duration as requested by the City.

2. Provide concept development, scriptwriting, pre-production, filming, and postproduction support.

3. Master video and audio media for dissemination across City communication platforms.

4. Provide aerial drone footage as needed.

Photography:

5. Provide high-quality photos suitable for print, online, and social media use, including: buildings, parks, landscapes, facilities, events, programs, and staff profiles.

Graphic and Multimedia Design:

6. Develop collateral media including brochures, fact sheets, infographics, social media motion graphics, maps, signs, and banners.

7. Provide creative direction and design consulting to ensure modern, industrystandard quality.

Post-Production:

8. Edit raw footage and images with proper lighting, composition, audio leveling, captioning, color grading, and branding alignment at no additional cost.

9. Deliver final videos in MP4 or other formats compatible with City distribution systems.

14 10. Maintain a video library of previously broadcast programming, B-roll, and graphics for City use.

11. Provide all project files, including raw footage, upon request or at contract end.

Project Management:

12. Coordinate detailed timelines and milestones for drafts, revisions, and final deliverables.

13. Submit drafts for City review and incorporate feedback and revisions as needed.

14. Schedule filming with at least 2-3 days’ notice.

D. Scheduling
Contractor shall perform work in between the hours of 5 a.m. and 6 p.m. Pacific Time, Monday through Friday, unless otherwise requested for evening/weekend City events.

E. Contract Price and Payment Terms
The total fee for professional services shall not exceed $40,000 per year, with a total contract ceiling amount not-to-exceed $120,000.

Compensation shall be billed on a time-and-materials basis and paid within 30 days of invoice after services are performed.

F. Term
This Agreement shall be for an initial term from the execution date of the Agreement through December 8, 2026 and may be renewed for an additional two one-year terms by mutual written consent of both parties.

REPORT to the MAYOR and MEMBERS of the CITY COUNCIL
From the CITY MANAGER
DATE: December 9, 2025
SUBJECT: PROJECT 2025-1470 (CHURCHILL)
A. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE H.J.

MOREHOUSE/O’NEIL HOUSE AT 4250 EASTRIDGE

DRIVE AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK
B. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A

HISTORIC LANDMARK PROPERTY

PRESERVATION AGREEMENT WITH THE OWNER

OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK KNOWN AS THE
H.J. MOREHOUSE/O’NEIL HOUSE AT 4250

EASTRIDGE DRIVE
ISSUING DEPARTMENT: Community Development
SUMMARY:

Issues:

Does the property at 4250 Eastridge Drive qualify for designation as a historic landmark, and should the City enter into a property preservation (Mills Act) agreement with the owner?
Recommendation:

On November 4, 2025, the Historic Preservation Commission unanimously voted to recommend that the City Council adopt resolutions (1) to designate the property known as the H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House located at 4250 Eastridge Drive as a historic landmark based on eligibility criterion A for association with mid-century development patterns of the greater Eastridge Estates/Mt. Nebo community, criterion C for embodying distinctive characteristics of Mid-Century Modernism, criterion D for representing the notable work of architect Larry Weir and the Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company, and Criteria F for embodying elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials, and craftsmanship

Report to Mayor and Councilmembers
Date: December 9, 2025
Page: 2 of 6
(Attachment A); and (2) that the City Council authorize a Mills Act Property Preservation Agreement with the owner (Attachment B).

Fiscal Impact:

The amount of property tax to the City would be reduced by approximately $150 annually. In exchange for discounted property taxes, the City receives guaranteed property maintenance and improvements to ensure the ongoing preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration as stipulated in a property preservation agreement.

Well maintained historic landmarks can increase neighborhood property values.

City’s Strategic Goals:
 Promote a high quality of life that current and future generations can afford to call home.

Environmental Review:

The project is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301 and 15331.

BACKGROUND:

The Historic Preservation Element of the General Plan provides a framework for the City’s Historic Preservation program, of which a Register of Historic Landmarks is a key component. Chapter 25.03 of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance provides for the designation of historic landmarks by the City Council. A cultural resource may be designated as a historic landmark if it meets one or more of eight criteria listed below.

A. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City’s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history; B. It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history; C. It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship;
D. It is representative of the notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect; E. It is identified with a person or groups who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City;
F. It embodies elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail materials, or craftsmanship;

Report to Mayor and Councilmembers
Date: December 9, 2025
Page: 3 of 6
G. It is an archeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value; or
H. It is a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of sites, buildings, structures, improvements, or objects linked historically through location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and/or association, in which the collective value of the improvements may be greater than the value of each individual improvement.

Properties with historic landmark designation are eligible for a reduced property tax assessment through the Mills Act. California Government Code Section 50280 et seq. authorizes cities to enter into property preservation agreements with owners of qualified historical properties to ensure and support ongoing preservation, maintenance and restoration efforts. The program, known as the Mills Act, is implemented through a 10- year preservation agreement. Each year, on the anniversary of the effective date of the agreement, a year is automatically added to the initial term of the agreement unless either party files a notice of non-renewal.

On November 4, 2025, the Historic Preservation Commission held a public hearing and adopted resolutions recommending that the City Council approve the property owner’s request for historic landmark designation of 4250 Eastridge Drive (Attachments C and D). The Commission determined that the property met the following designation criteria:
 Criterion A for association with mid-century development patterns of the greater Eastridge Estates/Mt. Nebo community.
 Criterion C for embodying distinctive characteristics of Mid-Century Modernism.  Criterion D for representing the notable work of architect Larry Weir and the Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company. and
 Criteria F for embodying elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials, and craftsmanship and recommended that the City enter into a Mills Act Preservation Agreement with the owner.

DISCUSSION:

The subject property is located mid-block between Summit Drive and Cinnabar Drive in Eastridge Estates, a 1950s subdivision of single-family view lots developed with custom homes. The residence sits on a one-half-acre hilltop site that slopes steeply downhill towards the west. A vicinity map is shown below.

As described in the landmark nomination report (Attachment E), the Historic Preservation Commission determined that the residence holds historical and architectural

Report to Mayor and Councilmembers
Date: December 9, 2025
Page: 4 of 6
significance as an excellent example of mid-century custom adobe architecture. It retains a high degree of all seven aspects of historic integrity: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.

Completed in 1963, the property is part of
the city’s Post-War suburban expansion
and reflects the aesthetic values of the MidCentury Modern movement. Its siting, design, and materials embody the
architectural sensibilities of the era. For
exemplifying distinctive elements of La
Mesa’s cultural and architectural history,
particularly through its association with the
mid-century development patterns of the
greater Eastridge Estates/ Mt. Nebo
community, the property is eligible for
landmark designation under Criterion A.

The residence has also been determined to
be eligible for landmark designation under
Criterion C for embodying distinctive
characteristics of Mid-Century Modernism
through its rare fusion of traditional adobe craftsmanship and modernist design principles.

It was constructed with handmade adobe blocks, recycled timber beams, and a low-slung roofline that harmonizes with its natural surroundings. It retains a high degree of integrity in form, materials, and detailing, and stands as a testament to the architectural and cultural legacy of the builder.

As a representative example of the notable work of the architect Larry Weir and the Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company, a master design-builder firm whose influence helped shape the architectural identity of Post-War San Diego County, the property is eligible for landmark designation under Criterion D. From 1947 through the 1980s, the Weir Brothers constructed over 200 custom adobe homes, blending traditional earthen techniques with modernist design principles to create residences that were regionally authentic, environmentally responsive, and artistically refined.

Report to Mayor and Councilmembers
Date: December 9, 2025
Page: 5 of 6
The residence embodies the architect’s signature circular design vocabulary, including sculptural turrets, arched adobe walls, a prominent chimney, and a low-sloped gabled roof with deep overhangs and exposed Douglas Fir beams. These elements not only reflect the architectural innovation of the Weir Brothers firm but are also sensitive to the Southern California climate, landscape, and historic adobe traditions. For embodying elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials, and craftsmanship, the resource is eligible under Criterion F.

Mills Act Agreement
To ensure preservation of the contributing interior and exterior features described and illustrated in the nomination report, the owner is seeking to enter into a Mills Act property preservation agreement with the City concurrent with the landmark designation. While the residence is in excellent condition, planned maintenance and stabilization items listed below would be funded with the Mills Act tax savings.
 Repair in-kind and repaint garage door (by 2027).
 Restore or replace in-kind the atrium exterior wood wall and doorway structure outside the master bathroom (by 2028).
 Restore or replace in-kind the wood pergola in the front courtyard (by 2029).  Engage an adobe expert to evaluate the wear on the west-facing adobe blocks, especially the fireplace. Research best practices for the surface protection of adobe and implement the advised plan (by 2030).

Public Notice of Project
Notification of the December 9, 2025 public hearing to consider the historic landmark application and the Mills Act agreement was mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject property and published in the Daily Transcript on November 24, 2025. No comments have been received.

Environmental Review
The historic landmark nomination request is exempt from environmental review pursuant to categorical exemption Class 1, Existing Facilities and categorical exemption Class 31, Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation, as provided by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15301 and 15331, respectively.

Section 15301 exempts activities involving negligible or no expansion of use of an existing facility. Section 15331 exempts the preservation and conservation of historical resources when carried out in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for

Report to Mayor and Councilmembers
Date: December 9, 2025
Page: 6 of 6
the Treatment of Historic Properties. Exterior alterations to historic landmarks are subject to development approval by the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) to ensure that cultural resources are being maintained in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. The project serves to protect the resource by ensuring that future alterations are subject to the standards described in Section 15331. None of the exceptions in Section 15300.2 apply.

CONCLUSION:

The Historic Preservation Commission recommends that the City Council adopt resolutions (1) designating the property known as the H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House located at 4250 Eastridge Drive as a historic landmark under criterion A for association with mid-century development patterns of the greater Eastridge Estates/Mt. Nebo community, criterion C for embodying distinctive characteristics of Mid-Century Modernism, criterion D for representing the notable work of architect Larry Weir and the Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company, and Criteria F for embodying elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials, and craftsmanship (Attachment A); and (2) authorizing a Mills Act Preservation Agreement (Attachment B).

Reviewed by: Respectfully submitted by:
____________________ ____________________________
Greg Humora Lynnette Santos
City Manager Director of Community Development
Attachments:

A. Draft Council Resolution for Historic Landmark Designation B. Draft Council Resolution for Mills Act Agreement
C. Resolution HPC 2025-03 Recommending Landmark Designation D. Resolution HPC 2025-04 Recommending a Mills Act Agreement E. Historic Landmark Nomination Report

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA
DESIGNATING THE H.J. MOREHOUSE/O’NEIL HOUSE AT 4250 EASTRIDGE

DRIVE AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK
WHEREAS, Steven Churchill, owner of the property located at 4250 Eastridge Drive, APN 475-230-09-00 in the R1S (Suburban Residential) zone, has submitted a request to designate the property as a local historic landmark of the City of La Mesa; WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission of the City of La Mesa held a duly noticed public hearing on November 4, 2025, and accepted public testimony in considering the request;
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission did adopt Resolution HPC 2025-03 on November 4, 2025, recommending to the City Council designation of the H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House at 4250 Eastridge Drive as a Historic Landmark, based on eligibility criterion A for association with mid-century development patterns of the greater Eastridge Estates/Mt. Nebo community, criterion C for embodying distinctive characteristics of Mid-Century Modernism, criterion D for representing the notable work of architect Larry Weir and the Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company, and Criteria F for embodying elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials, and craftsmanship; WHEREAS, the City Council received and considered a staff report on the Historic Preservation Commission’s determination; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Mesa did hold a duly noticed public hearing on December 9, 2025, and accepted public testimony in considering Project 2025-1470, a request to designate the H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House at 4250 Eastridge Drive as a historic landmark in the City of La Mesa.

THE CITY COUNCIL FINDS AND DETERMINES AS FOLLOWS:

1. That the project is exempt from environmental review under California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Sections 15301 and 15331. Section 15301 exempts activities involving negligible or no expansion of use of an existing facility.

Section 15331 exempts the preservation and conservation of historical resources when carried out in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. The project serves to protect the resource by ensuring that future alterations are subject to the standards described in Section 15331. The project meets the criteria for the exemptions and none of the exceptions listed in Section 15300.2 apply.

2. Project 2025-1470 complies with Section 25.03.010 of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, Historic Landmark and Historic District Designation Criteria, finding that Criteria A, C, D, and F of the Section apply to the historical and cultural significance of the property, which includes the interior and exterior features of the resource described and illustrated in the historic nomination report.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT AND IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Mesa as follows:

1. The foregoing findings of fact and determinations are true and hereby made a part hereof.

2. The City Council designates the H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House located at 4250 Eastridge Drive and further described in “Exhibit A”, attached thereto and made a part thereof, as a Historic Landmark.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of La Mesa, California, held the 9
th day of December 2025, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK
I, MEGAN WIEGELMAN, City Clerk of the City of La Mesa, California, do hereby certify the foregoing to be true and exact copy of Resolution No. 2025- , duly passed and adopted by the City Council of said City on the date and by the vote therein recited.

MEGAN WIEGELMAN, CMC, City Clerk
(SEAL OF CITY)

Exhibit A
Legal Description
Lot 10 of Eastridge Unit #1, in the City of La Mesa, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 3586, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, February 1, 1957.

APN: 475-230-09-00

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA

AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A HISTORIC LANDMARK PROPERTY

PRESERVATION AGREEMENT WITH THE OWNER OF THE HISTORIC
LANDMARK KNOWN AS THE H.J. MOREHOUSE/O’NEIL HOUSE AT 4250

EASTRIDGE DRIVE
WHEREAS, Steven Churchill, owner of the property located at 4250 Eastridge Drive, APN 475-230-09-00 in the R1S (Suburban Residential) zone, wishes to protect and preserve the characteristics of historical significance of their historic property by entering into an Historic Landmark Property Preservation Agreement with the City authorized under the Mills Act; WHEREAS, properties listed on the City of La Mesa Historic Landmarks Registry are eligible, through a Historic Landmark Property Preservation Agreement, for an assessment of valuation pursuant to the Provisions of Chapter 3, part 2, of Division 1 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code, also known as the Mills Act;
WHEREAS, on December 9, 2025, the City Council of the City of La Mesa adopted Resolution No. 2025-XX designating the H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House at 4250 Eastridge Drive as a historic landmark; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Mesa did hold a duly noticed public hearing on December 9, 2025, considered a staff report, and accepted public testimony in considering the request for a Historic Landmark Property Preservation agreement.

THE CITY COUNCIL FINDS AND DETERMINES AS FOLLOWS:

1. That the project is exempt from environmental review under California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Sections 15301 and 15331. Section 15301 exempts activities involving negligible or no expansion of use of an existing facility.

Section 15331 exempts the preservation and conservation of historical resources when carried out in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. The project serves to protect the resource by ensuring that future alterations are subject to the standards described in Section 15331. The project meets the criteria for the exemptions and none of the exceptions listed in Section 15300.2 apply.

2. That the project complies with California Government Code Sections 50280 et seq. as set forth in the Historic Landmark Property Preservation Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT AND IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Mesa as follows:

1. The foregoing findings of fact and determinations are true and hereby made a part hereof.

2. The Mayor is hereby authorized and instructed to execute for and on behalf of said City that certain Historic Landmark Property Preservation Agreement with Steven

Churchill, owner of the property located at 4250 Eastridge Drive, to be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk, subject to the following schedule of improvements:

A. Repair in-kind and repaint garage door (by 2027).

B. Restore or replace in-kind the atrium exterior wood wall and doorway structure outside the master bathroom (by 2028).

C. Restore or replace in-kind the wood pergola in the front courtyard (by 2029).

D. Engage an adobe expert to evaluate the wear on the west-facing adobe blocks, especially the fireplace. Research best practices for the surface protection of adobe and implement the advised plan (by 2030).

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of La Mesa, California, held the 9
th day of December 2025, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK
I, MEGAN WIEGELMAN, City Clerk of the City of La Mesa, California, do hereby certify the foregoing to be true and exact copy of Resolution No. 2025- , duly passed and adopted by the City Council of said City on the date and by the vote therein recited.

MEGAN WIEGELMAN, CMC, City Clerk
(SEAL OF CITY)

1 |
Historic Landmark Nomination
H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House
Designer: Lawrence (Larry) Weir
Builder: Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company
Prepared for: Steven Churchill, Property Owner
4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, California 91941
Submitted to: City of La Mesa, Community Development Department, Planning Division, Historic Preservation Commission,
8130 Allison Avenue, La Mesa, California 91942
Prepared by: Patricia Churchill & Steven Churchill
Acknowledgements: A technical review of this report was completed by James D. Newland, MA Public History, Historic Resources Consultant. Extensive research was performed in partnership with James Newland of the La Mesa History Center.

Table of Contents
I. Historic Landmark Nomination Form .............................................................................................. 4 II. Executive Summary........................................................................................................................ 8 Criteria for Designation as a Historic Landmark .............................................................................. 8 III. Property Identification.................................................................................................................... 9 IV. Property Description..................................................................................................................... 10 Design, materials, and layout....................................................................................................... 10 Exterior Façades........................................................................................................................... 12 East Elevation (Front Façade)....................................................................................................... 12 North Elevation (Non-Public Facing)............................................................................................. 14 South Elevation............................................................................................................................ 15 West Elevation ............................................................................................................................. 16 Proposed for Inclusion in Historical Designation ........................................................................... 19 V. Historical Context......................................................................................................................... 20 La Mesa City................................................................................................................................. 20 Development of Eastridge Estates (1957–1972) ............................................................................ 20 Morehouse and Weir Brothers’ Eastridge Homes .......................................................................... 21 Eastridge: Mid-Century Custom Tract........................................................................................... 22 Mid-Century Custom Homes of Eastridge Estates......................................................................... 25 Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company: Legacy of Adobe Craftsmanship and Regional Influence ...................................................................................................................................... 25 Lawrence W. “Larry” Weir (1924–2012): Architect, Builder, Visionary ........................................... 27 Homer J. Morehouse: Developer of Distinctive Adobe Homes in La Mesa and East County............ 29 The H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House, 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, California ............................... 30 The O’Neil’s.................................................................................................................................. 31 Current Owners, The Churchills .................................................................................................... 31 VI. Historical Eligibility Evaluation ..................................................................................................... 32 Criteria for age, historical and architectural significance, and historical integrity .......................... 32 Historical Significance Criteria...................................................................................................... 32 Assessment of Historic Integrity: H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House ................................................... 34 VII. Statement Of Significance.................................................................................................... 35 VIII. Supporting Documentation.................................................................................................. 36

3 |
Assessor’s Parcel Map................................................................................................................... 36 Historic Maps ............................................................................................................................... 37 Historical Records ........................................................................................................................ 40 Application for permit .................................................................................................................. 40 Final Inspections, Notice of Completion ....................................................................................... 42 Current Owner Grant Deed........................................................................................................... 43 Original Construction Documents................................................................................................. 44 Article “Old Adobe Goes Modern in Today’s Homes.” ................................................................... 47 Eastridge Estates - Historical Advertisements and Articles ........................................................... 49 Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company: Legacy of Craftsmanship Documented................... 57 Current Photographs of the H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House............................................................ 67 References ................................................................................................................................... 77

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
4 |
I. Historic Landmark Nomination Form

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
5 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
6 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
7 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
8 |
II. Executive Summary
This nomination proposes the designation of 4250 Eastridge Drive as a City of La Mesa historic landmark based on its architectural integrity, historical significance, and contribution to the Mid-Century development of La Mesa’s Eastridge Estates. Designed by noted adobe architect Larry Weir and built by the Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company, the home was commissioned by adobe specialist Homer J. Morehouse as part of a trio of “contemporary adobe” residences he constructed in the Eastridge development between 1959 and 1963.

The home exemplifies Mid-Century Modern architecture, featuring adobe masonry construction, expansive glass walls, a post-and-beam ceiling, and open-concept living areas with sliding doors that seamlessly connect indoor and outdoor spaces. Designed to follow the site’s natural elevation, the split-level layout offers line-ofsight panoramic views throughout and direct access to the outdoors, emphasizing harmony with nature.

The Post-War adobe construction, blending tradition with modernist aesthetics, stands apart from tract-built homes, offering a more expressive and intentional architectural narrative. It is a rare fusion of traditional adobe craftsmanship with modern design principles, featuring handmade1 adobe bricks, recycled timber beams, and a low-slung roofline that harmonizes with its natural surroundings. It retains a high degree of integrity in form, materials, and detailing, and stands as a testament to the artisanal and architectural values of the Weir Brothers’ Post-War adobe construction legacy in San Diego County.

As one of only three adobe homes built in Eastridge Estates— the property holds exceptional value in representing La Mesa’s Post-War suburban identity. Its preservation would honor the city’s architectural diversity and celebrate a unique chapter in Southern California’s Mid-Century history.

Criteria for Designation as a Historic Landmark2
The H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House at 4250 Eastridge Drive qualifies as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark for its architectural distinction, cultural relevance, and exceptional craftsmanship.

Criterion A – Cultural & Architectural Significance
Built in 1963, the home reflects La Mesa’s post-war suburban expansion and the aesthetic values of MidCentury Modern design. Its siting and materials embody the character of the Eastridge Estates tract and the city’s evolving landscape.

Criterion C – Craftsmanship & Construction
This residence showcases a rare fusion of handmade adobe construction and modernist design. Features like the sculptural adobe walls, recycled timber beams, and custom fireplace demonstrate a high level of integrity 1 Rob Weir, “We Dig Adobe: The Making of Adobe Bricks,” Weir Brothers Adobe Homes Blog, October 31, 2014, https://www.weirbrosadobe.com/blog/2014/10/31/we-dig-adobe-the-making-of-adobe-bricks 2 City of La Mesa, “Historic Preservation Commission,” La Mesa Municipal Code, Title 25, Chapter 25.01, Section 25.01.060, accessed August 4, 2025, https://library.municode.com/ca/la_mesa/codes/code_of_ordinances.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
9 |
and artisanal quality.

Criterion D – Work of a Master Builder
Designed and built by the acclaimed Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company, the home represents their signature approach—regionally authentic, environmentally responsive, and artistically refined. It stands among over 200 custom adobe homes that shaped San Diego County’s architectural identity.

Criterion F – Outstanding Design & Detail
Architect Larry Weir’s circular design vocabulary is evident in the turreted3 living room, arched walls, and lowsloped gabled roof. These elements reflect a deep sensitivity to climate, landscape, and adobe tradition, elevating the home beyond standard tract construction.

The property retains historical integrity in location, design, materials, and workmanship, making it a rare and distinguished example of custom adobe architecture in La Mesa.

III. Property Identification
Property Overview: 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941.

Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN): 475-230-09-00
Located on an east-west trending ridge extending west from the Mt Nebo area of La Mesa, California, this single-family residence sits on Lot 10 of Eastridge Unit #1, as recorded in Map No. 3586 filed with the San Diego County Recorder on February 1, 1957. The property carries a zoning designation of R1S (Suburban Residential), affirming its use as a single-family dwelling within a quiet, established neighborhood.

The home spans 2,329 square feet on a 0.48-acre lot, offering ample space for both indoor living and outdoor enjoyment. It features two bedrooms and two bathrooms, thoughtfully arranged to maximize comfort and privacy.

This parcel, legally described as TR 3586 LOT 10, combines the distinctive scenic view character of its ridgetop and hillside location as typical of the Eastridge suburban development model that led its developers to justify its high-end custom tract status. This home’s location reinforces Eastridge’s distinctive place in booming PostWar La Mesa’s suburban residential landscape. 3 Dominic Calarco, Modern Adobe: Preservation of Pre- and Post-World War II Residential Construction in Southern California (2008), PDF file, accessed September 4, 2025, Google Drive link.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
10 |
IV. Property Description
Design, materials, and layout
The property was featured in The San Diego Union, in a prominent article on August 17, 1969 titled, “Old Adobe Goes Modern in Today’s Homes.” A brief excerpt from this article provides a concise description of unique design, materials and layout of the property that are still extant today:
“More modern in design and decor is the residence of Mr. and Mrs. Warren O'Neil, 4250 Eastridge Drive, illustrating the versatility of building with adobe. This dwelling is different from the old both in its shape and its open feeling. It is a split-level design, with a half-circle sunken living room walled with glass to take full advantage of a spectacular view overlooking La Mesa. The room fans out from a center supporting column of steel faced with adobe. The drop in levels from the kitchen and dining room-also an open area-gives the living room a high ceiling, which further contributes to the open, spacious feeling. Ceiling beams fan out from the center column like spokes in a wheel.

A circular home bar is at the
dining room level, adjoining
the steps leading down into
the living room. The bar floor
is thus at a lower level giving
it a sunken pit effect. The
O'Neil residence is one of the
smaller dwellings built by
Morehouse-2,300 square feet
with two bedrooms and two
bathrooms. However, it also
has a den off the living room,
which can be either closed or
opened to the central area by
means of folding doors. The
den could be converted into a
third bedroom. The builder
followed the shape of the
terrain in building this home.

A terraced, stair-step adobe
wall surrounds the property
from the street front and shields an attractive front court. One of the greatest tributes to modern adobe is that the concrete block industry strives to simulate the appearance of the earthy product- and is doing a good job of it- with a block called slump-stone, colored and shaped to resemble the adobe block. People who live in adobe houses are enthusiastic about them. With any choice, they would not live in any other kind of dwelling. They like the appearance of the brown block. They enjoy the feeling and the atmosphere that it creates.”

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
11 |
From the same article, “Old Abobe Goes Modern in Today’s Homes,” by Clyde W. Smith – San Diego Union on August 17, 1969: “Adobe Block, molded from the earth, is a versatile product, lending itself to modern as well as traditional design. The home of Mr. and Mrs. O’Neil, 4250 Eastridge Drive, features half-circle living room.” Recent photographs of the property reflect no modifications.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
12 |
Exterior Façades
East Elevation (Front Façade)
The east elevation is composed of a low, overhanging asymmetrical gable roof that shelters both the two-car garage and a recessed entry courtyard. The exposed timber beams are visible; the adobe façade wraps the entrance and remains crisp and unaltered. The adobe block walls exemplify the property’s material integrity, preserving both the thermal mass benefits of adobe construction4 and the clean lines of mid-century design.

At the entrance of the courtyard sits the original wrought-iron gate. The gate’s dark patina stands out against the adobe walls, its clean geometry echoing Larry Weir’s modernist style. Beyond it, the original paneled front door is unaltered, complete with period hardware and a narrow sidelight on both sides of the door, channeling daylight into the foyer. Together, gate and door create a layered threshold, balancing privacy with invitation.

Passing through the gate, a brick-lined pathway carves a clear axis through the home. With the main door open, it offers framed vistas of the west-facing back patio. Once inside, the full impact of the panorama becomes very prominent, looking through the extensive glazing on the west side of the home.

The landscape design emphasizes simplicity, functionality, and regional appropriateness, consistent with the home’s architectural ethos. Hardscape elements, including stone pathways and a low retaining wall, echo the earthen tones of the adobe and reinforce the home’s grounded presence. 4 “Why Adobe?” Adobe Is Not Software, accessed August 4, 2025, https://adobeisnotsoftware.com/why-adobe.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
13 |
“Old Abobe Goes Modern in Today’s Homes,” by Clyde W. Smith – San Diego Union-Tribune on August 17, 1969: “FRONT LANDSCAPING is also enhanced by the use of adobe at the home of Mr. and Mrs. Warren O’Neil in Eastridge, a contemporary styled residence. Note how front wall is stair-stepped to follow the terrain contour. The adobe has been splashed with white for aging effect.”
Front Courtyard Description: Transitional Quadrant Between East and North Elevations Positioned just to the right of the main gate, the front courtyard of 4250 Eastridge Drive forms a quiet architectural quadrant, nestled between the east elevation’s public-facing façade and the north elevation’s private side. This spatial pocket serves as both a visual threshold and a transitional zone, offering a moment of pause between the street and the interior sanctuary of the home. The courtyard is paved with red brick, echoing the materials used in the rear patio and reinforcing continuity across the property. Potted succulents under the pergola, low shrubs, and seasonal greenery offer color and softness against the adobe boundary walls. The courtyard is partially visible from the street, especially when viewed through the main gate. This glimpse offers passersby a preview of the home’s architectural character—its earthen palette, handcrafted textures, and layered spatial composition—without compromising privacy. The courtyard’s visibility also contributes to the home’s public-facing identity, acting as a subtle invitation and reinforcing the residence’s integration with the surrounding streetscape.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
14 |
North Elevation (Non-Public Facing)
The north elevation of 4250 Eastridge Drive is intentionally austere, reflecting both its functional role and the architectural ethos of mid-century adobe design. Entirely shielded from public view, this elevation serves as a quiet backdrop to the home’s interior spaces, reinforcing privacy and thermal efficiency. Functionally, the north elevation backs onto a private walkway at the north edge of the hillside lot, further emphasizing its role as a non-public, service-oriented façade.

Constructed primarily of 16-inch-thick adobe walls, it presents a continuous surface that reinforces the home’s thermal mass and sturdy structure.

Windows and openings on the north elevation:

While originally designed with a window opening in the master bedroom, the actual construction opted to omit the window for a more enclosed approach—enhancing insulation and privacy.

There is a small window serving the walk-in closet, discreetly positioned to allow natural light and ventilation without compromising the elevation’s overall solidity and privacy.

Most distinctively, the north elevation incorporates a private internal garden atrium, enclosed and only visible from the master bathroom. This feature exemplifies mid-century ideals of indoor-outdoor integration, offering a secluded visual retreat that enhances both the spatial experience and the emotional resonance of the home.

The atrium is framed by an adobe wall, wood and Plexiglas, but not open to the sky, allowing filtered light and seasonal air to permeate the master bathroom while preserving complete privacy.

The north side massing contributes to the building’s sense of permanence and rootedness, while also providing a visual counterbalance to the more open and articulated elevations elsewhere.

Master Bathroom and enclosed atrium.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
15 |
South Elevation
The south elevation of 4250 Eastridge Drive is only partially visible from the street and offers a clear expression of the home’s material integrity and functional design. This side of the residence balances utility with stylistic continuity, reinforcing the adobe structure’s cohesive identity.

The elevation is capped by a low-pitched roof, consistent with the home’s mid-century profile. The roof’s gentle slope extends across the garage and main structure, with exposed beams visible beneath the eaves. The entire elevation is constructed of 16-inch-thick adobe wall. Two functional doors punctuate the elevation: A laundry room door, and a garage access door, offering direct entry from the exterior. Both doors are framed in materials and finishes that match the home’s overall palette, maintaining visual consistency. A single garage window offers natural light and cross ventilation into the garage interior.

A long walkway runs parallel to the elevation, framed by a low retaining wall that defines the edge of the property. The walkway’s linearity complements the horizontal emphasis of the adobe wall and roofline. This elevation, though utilitarian in function, contributes meaningfully to the home’s public-facing identity; showcasing the thoughtful integration of traditional materials and modernist form.

South Elevation Feature: Terrace. Tucked into the southern edge of the property and partially visible from the street, a small, secluded terrace forms an integral part of the home’s architectural rhythm. This outdoor space is not merely decorative, it functions as a transitional zone, blending interior living with the natural environment in true mid-century fashion. The terrace is anchored by large sliding glass doors that open directly from the dining room, creating a seamless visual and physical connection between indoors and outdoors. These doors span nearly the full width of the dining wall, allowing natural light to flood the interior and offering unobstructed views of the terrace garden. The glass panels are framed in minimalist aluminum trim, echoing the home’s clean lines.

Terrace at South Elevation. Left photo: Seen from the Dining Room. Right photo: Seen from the outside.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
16 |
West Elevation
The west elevation features a semi-circle wall of glass and the two largest sliding glass doors of the home, an elegant fusion of openness and sculptural form.

The surrounding walls are constructed with 16-inch-thick adobe, consistent with the rest of the residence. The adobe’s earthen texture and thermal mass deliver visual warmth and environmental efficiency, grounding the elevation atop the hillside.

A tall brick chimney on the west wall provides vertical contrast to the horizontal form. Serving the fireplace within, it also anchors the façade, introducing clear divisions and architectural rhythm.

To the left of the central chimney, the elevation features a sequence of four fixed glass panels paired with a ten by eight-foot sliding glass door, serving both the living room and adjacent study. These transparent surfaces allow uninterrupted sightlines and natural light to flood the interior, while the sliding door offers direct access from the back patio garden to the study and living room.

To the right of the chimney, four fixed glass panels extend the glazing, reinforcing the living room’s continuous band of transparency, strengthening the horizontal rhythm of the elevation. The chimney itself acts as a vertical anchor, dividing the elevation while emphasizing the room’s expansive horizontal reach.

The west elevation offers a secluded garden experience, not visible from the street, while still contributing to the residence’s overall architectural narrative.

From the inside, this architectural design provides the observer with a spectacular 180-degree view of downtown San Diego, the San Diego Bay, the Coronado Islands to the south, the Pacific Ocean straight west, and Mt. Soledad to the north.

On the far-right side of the west elevation is the master bedroom. The original blueprint depicted a window on the west facing adobe wall of the master bedroom. Before construction, this design was revised to be a large sliding glass door, offering direct access from the master suite to the adjacent outdoor space, enhancing the spatial experience and reinforcing the home’s connection to its natural surroundings. The sliding door spans 12 feet wide, a significant portion of the wall, framed in minimalist aluminum trim that complements the home’s overall theme and period materials.

The master bedroom, study, and living room all face west; each with direct access to the west elevation. This orientation embraces the sunset light, privacy, and indoor-outdoor flow emblematic of mid-century California living.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
17 |
West elevation showing the semi-circular living room with expansive fixed glass panels and sliding door. This design enhances indoor-outdoor flow and preserves the feeling and integrity of Larry Weir’s original concept.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
18 |
Expansive mid-century window wall with exposed beams and adobe detailing, preserving the home’s feeling and design integrity.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
19 |
Proposed for Inclusion in Historical Designation
Exterior, Site Features, and Property Perimeter
The property described in the preceding section reflects the original 1963 construction as envisioned by developer Homer J. Morehouse, designed by Larry Weir, and built by Weir Brothers Construction Company. To the current owner's knowledge, and based on available building permits archived by the City of La Mesa, the residence has remained unaltered since its completion. No modifications have been made to its exterior appearance, side patios, the pergola, the atrium connected to the master bathroom, adobe walls, siding, perimeter structures, and boundary walls (including attached main gate and the exterior light features), preserving its architectural integrity and historic character.

Interior Features
The home’s interior showcases an open-beam ceiling, a hallmark of Contemporary Modernist design from the Mid-Century era. This architectural feature not only adds vertical spaciousness but also fosters a seamless connection between indoor and outdoor environments—an essential principle of the period’s design philosophy. Additionally, the residence includes a custom-designed adobe-covered turret, a distinctive element of Larry Weir’s architectural style that contributes to the home’s unique character. Both features remain intact and authentic, as confirmed by original construction plans and current photographic documentation.

Conclusion
These original elements, exemplifying the craftsmanship and design intent of architect Larry Weir and executed by the Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company, should be formally recognized in the landmark nomination. To ensure their continued preservation, they must also be explicitly protected under the terms of the Mills Act agreement, reflecting their architectural integrity and historical value.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
20 |
V. Historical Context
La Mesa City
La Mesa—Spanish for “the table” or “plateau”—is a city located approximately nine miles east of downtown San Diego. Known as the “Jewel of the Hills,” La Mesa was officially incorporated on February 16, 1912, though its historical roots stretch back centuries.

Before European colonization, the region was home to the Kumeyaay people, who practiced horticulture and lived in self-governed clans. Following Spanish settlement in 1769, the area became part of the lands of Mission San Diego de Alcalá, and later, under Mexican rule, was included in the Rancho Ex Mission San Diego land grant.

In 1869, stockman Robert Allison purchased 4,000
acres from the heirs of Santiago Argüello, establishing what became known first as Allison Springs and later
La Mesa Springs—named for its abundant natural
springs, which remain a defining feature of the city’s
geography and identity. The arrival of the San Diego
and Cuyamaca Eastern Railroad to Allison Springs in
1889 further spurred community development,
connecting La Mesa to regional commerce and
growth.

By the early 20th century, La Mesa had evolved into a
small but thriving community of citrus and poultry
farmers, home-seekers, and entrepreneurs. Starting in
1906, La Mesa Springs saw its initial suburban
development away from its agricultural community
roots that led to its incorporation and steady
residential growth during the next few decades. Its
exponential Post-World War II expansion mirrored
broader suburban trends, with neighborhoods like
Eastridge Estates showcasing custom homes that
reflected the city’s mid-century architectural diversity and upward mobility.

Today, the majority of La Mesa’s land use is
residential, which helps reinforce its small-town charm and “hometown” feel while preserving a rich
architectural and cultural legacy, making it a vital part of San Diego County’s historical suburban landscape.

Development of Eastridge Estates (1957–
1972)
Following World War II, La Mesa experienced a boom
of suburban expansion and population growth,
mirroring national and regional trends but retaining its distinct topography and character. Eastridge Estates
(1957–1972) was one of La Mesa’s most ambitious mid-century developments, aimed at professionals seeking custom homes with cutting-edge, high-end features, distinctive styling, and modern conveniences.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
21 |
Following the mid-century interest in open-plan, indoor-outdoor friendly homes—especially in booming postwar California, San Diego County, and across the nation—the Eastridge developers and builders adapted popular California ranch and split-level home styles. They employed a variety of cutting-edge construction methods and architectural styles, reflective of their marketing strategy for a custom-built, exclusive development aimed at attracting more affluent homebuyers to their valuable ridgetop and hillside view lots.

Eastridge builders took advantage of the tract’s unique ridgetops and hillside lots with open-plan, split-level and two-story type homes that addressed the challenges of sloped and terraced lots while creating designs that reinforced the inspirational views and a strong connection to the unique natural setting and elevated location of the tract.

In addition, several Eastridge builders used the exclusive tract to introduce innovative construction techniques in their spec homes. Examples include Frank Hope and John Mock’s steel-frame home on Eastridge Drive, local builder Mark Uselton’s all-aluminum “House of Ease,” and Homer Morehouse’s introduction of the Weir Brothers’ regionally unique adobe block houses. These projects reflect the Eastridge developers’ approach to creating a distinctive and forward-thinking community landscape.

Therefore, unlike mass-produced, Post-War pre-built tract subdivisions in the City’s northern and western neighborhoods, Eastridge and its group of associated local builders and contractors also showcased a wide variety of popular period styles onto their custom house types, including “Tropical Hawaiian Moderns,” “Oriental,” “Ultra-Contemporary,” “Storybook,” Colonial, and Modern. Examples included a large number of local builder/designer Ed Heacock’s “Colonial/Americana” style custom ranch homes, found throughout the Eastridge tract.

Eastridge’s distinctive architectural styling and cutting-edge modern conveniences were noted and recognized during its development years (1957-1972)
5 . For example, many homes were recognized with “Gold Medallion” awards for their advanced all-electric appliances and energy efficiency. Such honors provided Eastridge marketers with valued recognition and homebuyers with acknowledgment of their homes’ cutting-edge residential amenities.

Morehouse and Weir Brothers’ Eastridge Homes
Within this eclectic mix, the MorehouseWeir adobe homes stand out as a significant thematic grouping—
representing a unique architectural
thread that ties together craftsmanship,
cultural heritage, and mid-century
innovation. Their presence elevates the
historical value of the neighborhood and
offers a tangible link to San Diego County
and La Mesa’s unique Post-War
architectural identity.
5 James D. Newland, “Eastridge Estates”, 2018
Morehouse/Smith House (1959) – First of the Morehouse adobes built in La Mesa 4245 Cobalt Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
22 |
Within this context, 4250
Eastridge Drive exemplifies
a rare and significant
example of contemporary
adobe architecture,
designed by Larry Weir and
built by the Weir Brothers
Adobe Construction
Company for Homer J.

Morehouse, adobe specialist
and contractor. As one of
only three adobe homes
constructed in Eastridge
Estates, it reflects a
deliberate fusion of
traditional craftsmanship
and modernist design,
embodying the spirit of La Mesa and Eastridge’s Post-War identity: innovative, regionally rooted, and architecturally expressive.

The H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House’s unique adobe block construction methods, original materials, and visual connection to the surrounding hillside landscape make it not only a product of its time but a significant contribution to La Mesa’s architectural heritage.

Eastridge: Mid-Century Custom Tract
In 1956, a group of San Francisco-based
developer-investors envisioned a new
suburban destiny for the rugged ridge
stretching west from Mt. Nebo and Windsor
Hills. Sydney Ackermann, Harry Gamel,
Anatole Ponve, David Fein, and William
Herman acquired land within the old Murray
Acres tract, adjacent to Windsor Hills, and
secured initial approvals for its
transformation. Their partnership led to the
formation of the Eastridge Company, and
their exclusive new development would be
known as Eastridge Estates.
1958 Thomas Bros. Map, crop of Sheet 16, courtesy
La Mesa History Center
Morehouse Adobe Home #2 (1962) – 8030 Shadow Hill, La Mesa, CA 91941

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
23 |
That fall, both the Helix Water District and
the City of La Mesa Planning Commission
approved the first phase of the project (San
Diego Union, 10.8.56; 10.17.56).

The first major public announcement came
on November 11, 1956, in the San Diego
Union, amid coverage of plans to build
20,000 new homes countywide. Eastridge
stood apart: rather than constructing
homes, the Eastridge Company would
focus solely on land development and
infrastructure. Lots would be sold to
individual families and builders,
encouraging a community of custom-built
residences. To ensure architectural
integrity and elevated property values, the
company implemented design review
standards and set home prices between
$25,000 and $50,000—well above the
$15,000 average tract home price of the era
(San Diego Union, 11.11.56).

Grading for streets and lots began in
December 1956. Though the company
envisioned up to 1,000 homesites, the first
unit would include 102 lots. That month
marked the start of a yearlong effort to
install streets, sidewalks, sewers, and
utilities. Promotional materials described
Eastridge as “the inland Beverly Hills of San
Diego,” boasting “the most spectacular
view lots in Southern California” (San Diego
Union, 12.16.56).

By spring 1957, the Eastridge sales office
opened at 7760 University Avenue, with the
L.O. Townsend Company—formerly the John S. Severin Co.—serving as real estate brokers. (Note that the Severin Company worked with many of the same Eastridge builders/contractors on their custom Severin Grossmont Hills tract on the northeast end of La Mesa during the same period). Lot sales officially launched in August 1957, with prices ranging from $5,200 for lower lots to $12,500 for ridge-top view parcels. Advertisements heralded Eastridge Estates as a “new prestige community” nestled in the “view-tiful hills of La Mesa,” conveniently located near new schools, shopping centers, and freeways. The company announced that paving would soon be completed on the first 102 lots, with 100 more prepared by year’s end (San Diego Union, 8.18.57).

By fall 1957, custom homes were already rising in the initial unit, bringing the Eastridge vision to life.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
24 |
Grading the “Ridge” 1957-58
Looking north at Eastridge States circa 1964
Images courtesy SDHC

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
25 |
Mid-Century Custom Homes of Eastridge Estates
The custom-built character of Eastridge Estates quickly became evident in its earliest homes, which showcased a striking diversity of architectural styles, materials, and design philosophies. While many residences reflected the high-end California Ranch typology—often adorned with Colonial or Americana flourishes popular in 1950s suburban architecture — Eastridge also embraced bold departures from convention. Several properties stood out for their innovative use of form, space, and materials, echoing the cutting-edge trends of Mid-Century Modern and Contemporary design.

The Eastridge Estates tract encouraged architectural individuality and the use of distinctive building materials, fostering a climate of innovation within its suburban framework. Adobe specialist Homer J. Morehouse embraced this opportunity, collaborating with the acclaimed Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company to build three notable “contemporary adobe” residences. The first was completed in 1959 on Cobalt Street, followed by a second on Shadow Hill Drive in 1962, and a third on Eastridge Drive in 1963—each reflecting a rare fusion of traditional adobe craftsmanship with modernist design sensibilities (San Diego Union, 3.8.1959;

5.6.1961; 8.17.1969).

The Eastridge Estates community (1957–1972) stands as an example of high-end, custom mid-century suburban development in La Mesa. While custom homebuilding continued in older Pre-WWII hillside enclaves such as Windsor Hills, Boulder Heights, La Mesa Highlands, and the west slope of Mt. Helix, only Eastridge and Severin’s Grossmont Hills tract—located west of Grossmont High School—offered large-scale, customdesigned tracts specifically tailored to the professional market.

Despite the repetition of certain home models across individual streets, Eastridge Estates showcases an exceptional and eclectic blend of Modern and Contemporary architectural styles. The tract reflects the evolving aesthetics of mid-century design, combining custom craftsmanship with forward-looking styling to cultivate a refined suburban lifestyle for its residents.

Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company: Legacy of Adobe Craftsmanship and Regional Influence
Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company was founded
in Encinitas, California in 19476 by brothers Jack and Larry Weir, later joined by their brother Bob. Emerging from a humble beginning, they constructed their first adobe home on Idaho Street in Encinitas. The firm quickly evolved into one of Southern California’s most respected builders of custom adobe residences.

Specializing in handcrafted adobe structures, the Weir
Brothers combined traditional earthen techniques with
modernist design sensibilities, creating homes that were both regionally grounded and architecturally expressive. Larry Weir, the firm’s principal designer, developed a signature style characterized by circular turrets, arched walls, deep overhangs, exposed beams, and low-sloped gabled roofs. These elements gave their homes a sculptural quality, blending old California aesthetics with Post-War innovation. 6 Dominic Calarco, Modern Adobe: Preservation of Pre- and Post-World War II Residential Construction in Southern California (2008), PDF file, accessed August 4, 2025, Google Drive link.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
26 |
While many designs were conceived in-house, the Weir Brothers also collaborated with prominent architects such as Sim Bruce Richards. Their collaborative spirit wasn’t about outsourcing—it was about enhancing artistry, whether through architectural dialogue or client-driven customization.

By the 1950s and 1960s, the Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company had achieved regional prominence, building over 200 custom adobe homes across San Diego County, including in Rancho Santa Fe, Escondido, Pauma Valley, Valley Center, Poway, and La Mesa. Their reputation attracted a distinguished clientele, including:

Gene Klein, former owner of the San Diego Chargers.

Harry Summers, founding developer of Rancho Bernardo.

Allen Paulson, aviation entrepreneur and Gulfstream Aerospace magnate.

Reuben H. Fleet, aviation pioneer and philanthropist, founder of Consolidated Aircraft.

Dan Fouts, Hall of Fame quarterback for the San Diego Chargers.

These commissions reflected not only the firm’s technical excellence but also its cultural prominence—Weir Brothers adobe homes were seen as symbols of permanence, artistry, and regional pride.

The Weir Brothers’ firm is regarded as a Master Design-Builder firm with over 200 custom built adobe homes constructed throughout San Diego from 1947 to 1963. In September of 1963, Larry established his own firm, Larry Weir Adobe Company. Both Weir brothers continued to build custom adobe homes in San Diego County well into the 1970s, and additional timber frame homes through the 1980s.7 The firm’s legacy continues to shape the architectural identity of Southern California. Their homes are celebrated for their durability, craftsmanship, and timeless beauty, and many—including the H. J.

Morehouse/O’Neil House in La Mesa—remain intact today, serving as living testaments to a bygone era of artisanal building and visionary design.

According to architectural historian Keith York on his site ModernSanDiego.com, the design philosophies of the Weir Brothers diverged in striking ways: “It has been said that Jack's designs were square, while Larry's depended on circles, turrets, and more rounded, creative patterns.” This distinction underscores Larry Weir’s unique architectural vocabulary—favoring sculptural forms, curved adobe walls, and expressive spatial gestures that set his work apart within the Mid-Century Modern movement. The H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House reflects the stylistic design and signature of Larry Weir.
7 San Diego Union-Tribune, “Remembering Jack Weir,” San Diego Union-Tribune, March 23, 2009, https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2009/03/23/remembering-jack-weir/.

Jack, Larry, and Bob Weir with Ted Berryman—
working hands-on in the early days of Weir Bros.

Producing adobe in small on-site batches ensured a
close tie to the land.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
27 |
Lawrence W. “Larry” Weir (1924–2012): Architect, Builder, Visionary Born on November 5, 1924 in Chicago, Illinois, Lawrence W. Weir was the third of six children to Patrick Weir and Stella Bourgeois. His early life was shaped by resilience and service—he joined the U.S. Navy in 1939, serving throughout World War II in the South Pacific, where he delivered supplies and briefly served as an aircraft gunner. This experience would later inform his design sensibility, with nautical motifs
Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company Founder
After the war, Larry relocated to San Diego, where he and his brothers Jack and Bob founded Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company in Encinitas in 1947. Jack served as contractor, while Larry took on the role of lead designer, shaping the firm’s architectural identity around handcrafted adobe homes. By 1948, the company was building small, affordable twobedroom units, and by the early 1950s, they had expanded into Rancho Santa Fe, creating high-end masterpieces that attracted elite clientele.

Larry moved to Escondido in 1951, gaining access to a rich supply of adobe near what is now Kit Carson Park8. Under his leadership, the company grew to over 80 employees, and his designs became increasingly bold and sculptural—featuring circular turrets, arched walls, low-sloped gabled roofs, and exposed Douglas Fir beams. These elements became hallmarks of the Weir Brothers style, blending regional materials with Mid-Century Modern principles.

Design Philosophy & Craftsmanship
Larry Weir’s approach to architecture was deeply site-responsive. He often built homes around existing boulders, trees, and terrain, allowing nature to shape the structure. He sourced reclaimed wood from train trestles and piers decades before sustainability became mainstream, and embedded wagon wheels, natural stone, and other found objects into walls and fences, creating homes that felt sculpted from the earth.9 Larry, according to Jack, “. . .was everything; a builder, creator, and master craftsman. He was extremely talented and did all of the house designs after the second house while they were still working together.” “…Larry possessed a talent for welding, and he was an expert in all of the building trades.” 10 His designs were rarely conventional11. He favored rounded forms, expansive glazing, and deep overhangs that invited light while maintaining thermal comfort. His homes were not just shelters—they were expressive environments, reflecting both the land and the lives of their occupants. 8 Heritage Architecture & Planning, Historic Evaluation Report: Veterans Village San Diego, prepared for Veterans Village San Diego – Escondido and Delawie (San Diego, CA: Heritage Architecture & Planning, October 31, 2014). 9 Keith York, “Lawrence W. Weir,” Modern San Diego, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.modernsandiego.com/people/weirbrothers-weir. 10 Jack Weir, telephone interview by Dominic Calarco, February 23, 2008, quoted in Modern Adobe: Preservation of Pre- and PostWorld War II Residential Construction in Southern California, 2008, PDF file, accessed August 4, 2025, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1W2lO_dXcinSxehlPmAmKLtTqekrKjyyA/view. 11Adobe Home Tour Committee, Weir Brothers – Adobe Home Tour (San Diego County, CA: Adobe Home Tour, 2015), https://adobehometour.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Weir-Brothers.pdf.

Larry Weir as portrayed in the book authored by
his daughter, Maria Weir Werth. “Larry Weir His
Life and Works” 2020

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
28 |
Collaborations & Influence
While many homes were designed in-house, Larry also collaborated with architects like Sim Bruce Richards.

Together, they created homes that fused organic architecture with adobe craftsmanship, helping define what “modern” meant in Post-War San Diego—not glass boxes, but soulful, site-sensitive dwellings.

Larry’s work influenced generations of builders and designers, and his homes remain among the most distinctive and enduring examples of regional architecture in Southern California.

Personal Life & Legacy
Larry married Maria Ravettino on June 23, 1951, and together they raised nine children: Larry, Maria, Estelle, Thomas, Christine, Catherine, Theresa, Michael Damian, and Joani. He was also a gifted singer, known for his warmth and creativity beyond the drafting table.

In September 1963, Larry launched the Larry Weir Adobe Company, continuing to build homes across Rancho Santa Fe, Escondido, Encinitas, Poway, and beyond for four decades. He passed away peacefully on July 11, 2012, at Cedars-Sinai Hospital in Beverly Hills, leaving behind a legacy of artistry, integrity, and architectural soul.

Larry Weir is
overseeing a designbuild project in the
North Escondido hills
for Ted Butcher, a
producer of the TV
series MASH.
12 Larry Weir architect license13
12 Robert Weir and Scott Hulet, “Weir Brothers Adobe Homes”, with contributions by Keith York, Ben Loescher, and James T. Hubbell (Tadler Books, 2020).
13 Maria Weir Werth, Larry Weir: His Life and Works (2020).

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
29 |
Homer J. Morehouse: Developer of Distinctive Adobe Homes in La Mesa and East County Homer J. Morehouse was a mid-century developer active in the La Mesa and Mt Helix area of East San Diego County, particularly known for commissioning adobe-style homes in collaboration with the renowned Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company.

Morehouse was active as a local builder during the late 1950s through the 1960s, a time of exponential growth for La Mesa/Mt Helix area. One among several independent custom builders active in the region during this transformative period, Morehouse took advantage of the opportunities for custom builders to construct and sell spec houses throughout the area. The majority of his known builds are situated in upscale custom home neighborhoods such as Mt Helix, Horizon Hills, El Jardin Verde, Alpine, and Fletcher Hills in addition to his three Eastridge Estates houses. His work is especially notable for its use of adobe block masonry construction, a technique that evokes both regional heritage and sustainable design.

Homer John Morehouse was born in South Haven, Michigan in 1908. His father, Carleton Morehouse, was a factory worker and the Morehouses moved around Michigan before settling in Dearborn, Michigan where Homer grew up. Homer received a grammar school education and in the 1930 US Census at the age of 21, he listed his occupation as a brick mason. In 1937 Homer married Evelyn Cable, also settling in Dearborn. By the time of the 1940 US Census Homer listed himself as a self-employed roofing contractor in Dearborn. Homer served in the United States Marine Corps during World War II in the Pacific Theater. This was likely his initial introduction to California. Morehouse returned to Dearborn after the War, resuming his roofing business. In the 1950 US Census, he, Evelyn and their 9-year-old daughter Joan and 5-year-old son Richard, were still living in Dearborn.

Sometime around 1955-56 Homer Morehouse moved his family to San Diego County, settling in La Mesa. In the 1958 San Diego County directory the Morehouses are listed as living at 7930 Cinnabar Drive, in one of the first batch of houses built in Eastridge. Around this time, he purchased a lot on Cobalt Drive and constructed his first spec house, partnering with the Weir Brothers as designers and contractor. In the 1960 Directory they are listed as living nearby in an apartment on Sturgess Avenue before moving to another new house at 4565 Cobalt Drive, as documented in the 1961-62 Directory. Interestingly, 4265 Cobalt is two doors down from the first Morehouse/Weir spec house–which was sold to Ameda Smith in 1959. In the 1963 Directory 4265 Cobalt is listed as vacant. This may be connected to the idea that the 4250 Eastridge house may have been initially considered for the Morehouse’s own residence, as noted on the original plan set.

It appears that Homer Morehouse stopped building houses in the 1970s. Sales listings for some of his houses appear in 1980s newspaper advertisements as existing houses, but it seems that he had likely retired from the contracting business by the mid-late 1970s. It’s believed that Homer and Evelyn (who appears to have obtained a real estate license) lived in both Arizona and Michigan before relocating for retirement to New Port Richey, Florida, near St. Petersburg, circa 1985. Evelyn passed away in April 1990 and Homer passed away on January 20, 1991.

Collaboration with the Weir Brothers
The Weir Brothers were master adobe builders based in Escondido, celebrated for their craftsmanship and integration of natural materials. It is documented that Homer J. Morehouse commissioned several homes from them, including the aforementioned three in Eastridge Estates:

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
30 |
Property Year Address
Spec House #1 1959 4245 Cobalt Drive, La Mesa
Spec House #2 1962 8030 Shadow Hill Drive, La Mesa
Personal Residence 1963 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa
These homes are characterized by thick adobe block walls, exposed beams, and integration with the surrounding landscape—hallmarks of the Weir Brothers’ style and Morehouse’s vision for timeless, livable design as he noted in a San Diego Union article in 1969. It seems, although further research would be needed, that Morehouse did continue to partner with Larry Weir after the Weir Brothers on some additional houses.

Interestingly, historian James Newland also has documentation that Morehouse likely partnered with local master builder John Mortenson as contractor for the c1966 adobe Modern house at 1760 Circo de Cielo in the El Jardin Verde subdivision in the City of El Cajon.

Legacy and Preservation
Homer Morehouse does not appear to have been a prolific builder in the La Mesa/East County area. However, the houses he built are all outstanding examples of custom home building of the Post-War Period. Although the number of homes seem to be fairly small (perhaps a dozen), his insistence on working with the Weir Brothers and other local designers of merit, such as John Mortenson, indicates why all of his homes are of unique type and style, providing a significant contribution to the Greater La Mesa area’s built environment. His insistence on working with high-quality partners and collaborators, reflects a thoughtful embrace of San Diego County’s regional architectural identity and craftsmanship. Several of his properties are cited in historic inventories and preservation efforts, especially among those advocating for the recognition of San Diego County’s distinctive mid-century adobe architectural heritage.

The H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House, 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, California The third and last Weir/Morehouse Eastridge adobe home, this house emphasizes the “Modern” style found in the
Weir Brothers most notable homes in comparison to the
more traditional “Southwestern” adobe styling of the other two Eastridge spec houses. Homer J. Morehouse made the
original land purchase of this lot on February 1, 1957. He hired Larry Weir of the Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company to design and build this home. Mr. Morehouse
filed the “Application For Permit” with the City of La Mesa in early February, 1963. At the time, Morehouse listed the 4265 Cobalt address as his address on the permit. The City provided final inspection approval on July 23, 1963 – the official completion date of the home.

The original architectural plans note the house as,
“Residence for H.J. Morehouse." Since he was the lot owner14, it is possible the original idea might have been for the house to be for the Morehouses themselves. If Morehouse intended to occupy this house with Evelyn, his wife, and their family, they apparently changed their mind as they sold it to Warren and Alberta O'Neil, on November 4, 1963.
14 City of La Mesa. Building Permit Application No. 17922. February 7, 1963

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
31 |
The O’Neil’s
Warren Arthur O’Neil and Alberta Mae Denaple O’Neil were the first, and long-time residents, of 4250 Eastridge Drive. Warren and Alberta were both living in Los Angeles when they wed on September 30, 1938 in North Hollywood, California.

Warren O’Neil was born in Tucson, Arizona on November 17, 1917. His father Andrew O’Neil was a phone company employee who had moved his family to Los Angeles in the late 1920s. Warren also started his career with the phone company while living in Los Angeles in the late 1930s.

Alberta Mae Denaple was born February 21, 1920 in Cleveland, Ohio. Her parents Richard and Ruby Denaple later moved their family from Ohio to Washington state before resettling in Los Angeles in the 1930s.

In the 1940 US Census, Warren and Alberta were living in Los Angeles in their home at 10940 Landale Street. Warren was working as a telephone company installer. By the time of the 1950 US Census, they were still living in the same home. At this point Warren had risen to an equipment manager and Alberta was working as a personnel clerk with one of the aircraft manufacturing companies in Los Angeles.

Circa 1955 the O’Neils moved to San Diego County where Warren obtained a job as an engineer with the Pacific Telephone Company. By the early 1970s Warren had risen to the position of the Engineering Supervisor for the company. The O’Neils had no children. Warren passed away on July 6, 1980 at the age of 62. Alberta lived in the home till her passing on January 23, 2010.

Research in newspaper databases did not reveal much information on either Warren or Alberta. They appear to have been very private in their interests and activities. The only newspaper articles outside of the August 17 1969 San Diego Union feature article, noting the home’s adobe architectural character, are some ads for the sale of Warren’s tools and electronics testing equipment in January 1981. One thing that is clear is that the O’Neils did a great job in maintaining the authenticity and integrity of this home. The original kitchen (including appliances), bathrooms (sunken tub and atrium), hardware and fixtures, and cocktail bar were all in pristine condition at the time of selling the home to current owner Steven Churchill in 2010. Mr. Churchill noted that he found, tucked away in drawers, Alberta’s notes on how to best care for the home and its features.

Current Owners, The Churchills
Steven Churchill is the current owner, having purchased the home from Alberta O'Neil’s heirs on April 5, 2010.

Steven and his wife Patricia have also been vigilant in the care, maintenance and preservation of this unique and pristine architectural resource property.

It is the current owners’ wish that the property at 4250 Eastridge Drive be formally recognized as the H.J.

Morehouse/O’Neil House, in tribute to the daring vision and entrepreneurial spirit of developer Homer J.

Morehouse, whose collaboration with the Weir Brothers helped shape La Mesa’s mid-century adobe legacy.

Equally, this residence stands as a testament to the exceptional care and reverence shown by the O’Neil family, who have thoughtfully preserved its architectural integrity and historical significance for generations to come.

Warren and Albert O'Neil on their wedding day
September 30, 1938. Courtesy the Denaple Family

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
32 |
VI. Historical Eligibility Evaluation
Criteria for age, historical and architectural significance, and historical integrity To be eligible for listing as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark a property must meet the criteria of age; establishment of historic, architectural or cultural significance through well-researched and documented historical context; and assessment of historical integrity.

This property meets all three components for eligibility. Documentation confirms that the Morehouse/O’Neil House was constructed by noted Master Builder/Contractors the Weir Brothers in 1963, over 62 years ago. This confirms the age criterion compliance for “test of time” for this property.

Historical Significance Criteria
The H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House holds historical and architectural significance as a distinguished example of mid-20th-century modernist residential design in Southern California. It reflects the Post-World War II development of the Eastridge tract, stands as a notable work of the Master Builders, Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company, and is an outstanding representation of custom adobe architecture, thoughtfully designed by Larry Weir.

The documentation presented in this nomination report as summarized in Section II and supported through historic research and contexts found in Section V has demonstrated Significance under City Criteria A, C, D and F.

The summary of the determination for eligibility under those criteria follow below:

Criterion A: It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history.

The H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House exemplifies distinctive elements of La Mesa’s cultural and architectural history, particularly through its association with the mid-century development patterns of the greater Eastridge Estates - Mt. Nebo community. Completed in 1963, the property is part of the city’s Post-War suburban expansion and reflects the aesthetic values of the Mid-Century Modern movement. Its siting, design, and materials embody the architectural sensibilities of the era. The residence stands as a tangible representation of La Mesa’s evolving landscape during a pivotal period of transformation, anchoring its significance within the context of 1960s regional development.

Criterion C: It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.

The H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House embodies distinctive characteristics of Mid-Century Modern architecture through its rare fusion of traditional adobe craftsmanship and modernist design principles. It was constructed with handmade adobe blocks, recycled timber beams, and a low-slung, roofline that harmonizes with its natural surroundings. It retains a high degree of integrity in form, materials, and detailing, standing as a testament to

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
33 |
the architectural and cultural legacy of the Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company tradition.

The home’s siting on a hillside and its material palette reflects a deep sensitivity to its surrounding. Its construction demonstrates exceptional craftsmanship, particularly in its masonry, timberwork, and spatial composition. The adobe walls are not merely structural, they are sculptural — offering thermal mass and visual depth. Interior features such as the custom fireplace, exposed beams, rounded circular patterns like a turret as a focal point on the main living area, and built-in shelving reflect a hands-on approach to design, where utility and artistry coalesce.

Criterion D: It is representative of the notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect. 4250 Eastridge Drive is eligible for historic designation under Criterion D as a representative example of the notable work of Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company, a master design-builder firm whose influence helped shape the architectural identity of Post-War San Diego County. From 1947 through the 1980s, the Weir Brothers constructed over 200 custom adobe homes, blending traditional earthen techniques with modernist design principles to create residences that were regionally authentic, environmentally responsive, and artistically refined.

Founded by brothers Jack and Lawrence “Larry” Weir, the firm achieved widespread acclaim not only for its technical mastery of adobe construction but also for its ability to attract and serve a distinguished clientele.15 Their portfolio includes residences for high-profile figures such as former San Diego Chargers owner Gene Klein; Rancho Bernardo founding father Harry Summers; industrialist Allen Paulson; aviation pioneer, philanthropist, and founder of Consolidated Aircraft, Reuben H. Fleet; and Hall of Fame quarterback Dan Fouts. These commissions reflect the firm’s reputation for excellence and its appeal to clients seeking homes that embodied craftsmanship, permanence, and architectural distinction.

The residence at 4250 Eastridge Drive, completed in 1963 for adobe specialist contractor Homer J. Morehouse, exemplifies the Weir Brothers’ signature approach. Constructed with locally sourced adobe block, recycled Douglas Fir beams, and a low-slung roofline that harmonizes with its hillside setting, the home retains a high degree of integrity in form, materials, and detailing. It stands as a testament to the Weir Brothers’ commitment to sustainability, regional identity, and artisanal quality.

As one of the few mid-century adobe homes in La Mesa—and one of only three adobe residences in the Eastridge Estates tract—4250 Eastridge Drive offers a rare and tangible link to the legacy of a master builder whose work helped define the unique regional architectural character of San Diego and Southern California’s Post-War era.

Criterion F: It embodies elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials or craftsmanship.
15 Robert Weir and Scott Hulet, “Weir Brothers Adobe Homes”, with contributions by Keith York, Ben Loescher, and James T. Hubbell (Tadler Books, 2020).

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
34 |
The H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House, constructed in 1963, is a compelling example of Mid-Century Modern architecture that seamlessly integrates adobe materials and site-responsive design sensibilities. Designed by Larry Weir, the residence embodies his signature circular design vocabulary, including sculptural turrets, gracefully arched adobe walls, a prominent chimney, and a low-sloped gabled roof with deep overhangs and exposed Douglas Fir beams. These elements not only reflect the architectural innovation of the Weir Brothers’ firm but also demonstrate a deep sensitivity to the Southern California climate, landscape, and historic adobe traditions. The home’s form and detailing reveal a level of craftsmanship and spatial sophistication that elevates it beyond standard suburban tract residential construction, making it a rare and distinguished example of custom adobe design in La Mesa.

Assessment of Historic Integrity: H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House The H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House retains a high degree of historic integrity across all seven aspects recognized by the National Register of Historic Places: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Together, these elements affirm the property’s continued ability to convey its architectural and cultural significance.

Location
Constructed in 1963, the H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House remains on its original site within the Eastridge Estates tract of La Mesa. Its placement on a hillside parcel was integral to its design and orientation, and the property has never been relocated. As such, it retains full location integrity.

Design
The residence exemplifies the signature circular design vocabulary of Larry Weir, including turrets, arched walls, prominent adobe chimney, and a low-sloped asymmetrical gabled roof structure with deep overhangs and exposed beams. These defining features remain intact and unaltered, preserving the home’s design integrity and architectural authenticity.

Setting
The surrounding hillside environment and street context have remained largely unchanged since the home’s construction. The Eastridge neighborhood continues to function as a single-family residential zone, and the spatial relationship between the residence and its landscape remains consistent. The property retains a strong sense of setting integrity.

Materials
The home’s original materials, including locally sourced handmade adobe blocks, reclaimed Douglas Fir beams, and custom masonry, remain in place and well-preserved. While the roof has been updated with composite materials, this alteration is sympathetic to the original design and does not compromise the overall material character. The residence maintains a high degree of materials integrity.

Workmanship
The craftsmanship evident throughout the residence is characteristic of Weir Brother Adobe Construction Company, known for their artisanal approach to adobe building. Key features such as the arched walls, expansive glazing, exposed beams, and large adobe chimney showcase the firm’s attention to detail and regional expertise. The property retains its workmanship integrity.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
35 |
Feeling
The residence continues to evoke the aesthetic and historic atmosphere of a mid-century Weir Brothers’ adobe home. Its spatial flow, material palette, and architectural detailing convey a strong sense of time and place, preserving the feeling associated with its original era and design intent.

Association
As one of only three documented Weir Brothers adobe residences constructed in the City of La Mesa during the firm’s most prolific period, the H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House maintains a direct and meaningful association with a master builder whose work shaped the architectural identity of Post-War Southern California.

VII. Statement Of Significance
The H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House stands as a unique, significant, and well-preserved example of mid-century adobe architecture in La Mesa, embodying the distinctive design philosophy and craftsmanship of Master Builder/designer Larry Weir and the Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company. Through its unaltered location, expressive circular design, enduring materials, and evocative setting, the residence continues to convey its historic and architectural significance with clarity and depth. As one of only three Weir Brothers’ adobe homes built in the City of La Mesa, the property holds a unique place in La Mesa’s cultural and architectural legacy. Its integrity across all seven aspects affirms its eligibility for historic designation and underscores its value as a tangible link to the region’s Post-War identity and artisanal building traditions.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
36 |
VIII. Supporting Documentation
Assessor’s Parcel Map

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
37 |
Historic Maps
Eastridge – Unit No.1 - January 9, 1957 – City of La Mesa Eastridge – Unit No.1 – March 22, 1960 – City of La Mesa

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
38 |
La Mesa, 1930 – Courtesy La Mesa History Center
Eastridge – Unit No.1 – February 3, 1983 – City of La Mesa

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
39 |
La Mesa, 1965 – Courtesy La Mesa History Center
La Mesa, 2025 – Google Maps

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
40 |
Historical Records
Residential Building Records
Application for permit
According to this historical document, the “Application For Permit No 180036” was filled with the City of La Mesa on February 28, 1963. The document indicates the “Location of Job” at 4250 Eastridge Drive, listing Homer Morehouse as “Owner” and “Contractor”
The document also established the project as a “New, Dwelling, in Phase 1” Date for “Rough Inspections” was March 6, 1963 and the date for “Final Inspections” was July 23, 1963.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
41 |
Plumbing Permit

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
42 |
Final Inspections, Notice of Completion

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
43 |
Current Owner Grant Deed

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
44 |
Original Construction Documents
The construction archive for 4250 Eastridge Drive in La Mesa, California includes five original documents: a floor plan, foundation plan, right and left elevations, and detailed foundation specifications.

Foundation Plan

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
45 |
Floor plan

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
46 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
47 |
Article “Old Adobe Goes Modern in Today’s Homes.”
The H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House was featured in The San Diego Union, in a prominent article on August 17, 1969 titled, “Old Adobe Goes Modern in Today’s Homes.” Morehouse and Weir are quoted, as shown below:

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
48 |
Morehouse himself says he
only tries to blend the adobe
dwelling with the natural
terrain. For the actual design,
he takes his ideas to either
Lawrence Weir, who has had
long experience in adobe
building, or to Thomas
Hayward of Encinitas. Both
are licensed building designers.
"Actually," said Weir, "we have
added a bit of elegance to the
old traditions. But we have
omitted many things that the
early padres did. In fact, we
build much better because we
have improved, refined
methods."

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
49 |
Eastridge Estates - Historical Advertisements and Articles Advertisement published in San Diego Magazine 1960

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
50 |
Eastridge Estates: Several Eastridge builders used the exclusive tract to introduce innovative construction techniques in their spec homes. Examples include Frank Hope and John Mock’s steel-frame home on Eastridge Drive.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
51 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
52 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
53 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
54 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
55 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
56 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
57 |
Weir Brothers Adobe Construction Company: Legacy of Craftsmanship Documented

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
58 |
Images from Maria Weir Werth, “Larry Weir: His Life and Works”

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
59 |
Robert Weir and Scott Hulet, Weir Brothers Adobe Homes, with contributions by Keith York, Ben Loescher, and James T. Hubbell (Tadler Books, 2020).

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
60 |
Robert Weir and Scott Hulet, Weir Brothers Adobe Homes, with contributions by Keith York, Ben Loescher, and James T. Hubbell (Tadler Books, 2020).

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
61 |
“As an antidote to '5os frumpiness, an indoor pool ensured stories and high times at The Colby Adobe.” Image and text from Weir, Robert, and Scott Hulet. Weir Brothers Adobe Homes. Tadler Books, 2020.

Weir, Robert, and Scott Hulet. Weir Brothers Adobe Homes. Tadler Books, 2020. Image retrieved 8/3/2025 from:
https://www.weirbrosadobe.com/the-book/jsbue4hvte5h58zma7arhmtk5ln77w

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
62 |
Pictured above: an example of a Modern California Adobe home. Designed and built by Larry Weir in Poway, early 1970’s. 16630 Avenida Florencia, Poway16
Weir Brothers’ Adobe Construction trade magazine advertisement (1976) [Reprinted from “Adobe News,” Issue 8, 1976]17
16 Adobe Home Tour Committee, “Adobe Community Resources,” Adobe Home Tour, accessed August 14, 2025, https://adobehometour.com/architecture/adobecommunity-resources/ 17 Dominic Calarco, Modern Adobe: Preservation of Pre- and Post-World War II Residential Construction in Southern California (2008), PDF file, accessed September 4, 2025, Google Drive link.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
63 |
Partial List of Weir Brothers Projects
18 Project Name Year Location
Adobe Home for Mr. & Mrs. M. Hallen 1958 2640 Loma Vista Dr., Escondido Anderson, George R. Residence II 1952 1221 Windsor Rd., Encinitas Anderson, George R. Residence I 1951 288 Neptune Dr., Encinitas Armfelt House 1964 2952 Verda Ave., Escondido
Aspel Residence 1964 3149 Old Post Rd., Fallbrook
Barend Residence 1967 2945 Verda Ave., Escondido
Beebe Residence 1960 9458 Del Dios Hwy., Escondido
Bergman Museum 1955 Aguanga, CA
Beust Adobe Residence 1965 315 Olive Ave., Carlsbad
Bilty Residence 1951 Neptune Dr., Encinitas
Butcher Adobe 1985 Camino de las Lomas, Escondido
Colby Adobe 1961 Hwy 76, Pauma Valley
Copeland Residence 1960 1514 Park Hill Ln., Escondido
Crabe Residence Undated Country Club, Pauma Valley
Danylcheck Adobe / Greenbriar Lodge 1955 Hwy 395, North San Diego County Donahue Adobe Undated Montecito, CA
Dorgan Adobe 1963 Via De Fortuna, Rancho Santa Fe
Fenton Ranch & Bandy Canyon Remodel 1958/70 16251 Bandy Canyon Rd., Escondido Fouts Residence Undated San Diego
Freeland Adobe 1968 15390 Las Planideras, Rancho Santa Fe Goodbody Residence 1964 1514 Robyn Rd., Escondido
Green Ranch Las Palmas Undated Escondido
Hays Adobe 1972 408 Olive Hill Way, Fallbrook
Hayward Adobe 1951 Birmingham Dr., Encinitas
Hinrichs Residence I Undated 2362 Royal Crest Dr., Escondido Hinrichs Residence II Undated Escondido
Holcombe Adobe 1977 La Gracia, Rancho Santa Fe
Hotchkiss Residence 1965 3050 Donee Diego Dr., Escondido Jackson Residence 1964 2775 La Palmas Ave., Escondido
Jamaica Project – Eaton Hall 1967 Ocho Rios, Jamaica
Johnson Residence I 1970 2453 San Pasqual Valley Rd., Escondido Johnson Residence II 1969 12415 Mesa Verde Dr., Valley Center Kaufman Residence 1959 3125 Montesano Rd., Escondido
Kirchman/Brubeck Adobe 1958 2362 Royal Crest Dr., Escondido Klein Residence Undated San Diego
Kurtz Residence 1967 11146 Valley Lights Dr., El Cajon
La Costa Spec Home 1986 Venado St., La Costa
18 Keith York, “Lawrence W. Weir,” Modern San Diego, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.modernsandiego.com/people/weir-brothers-weir.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
64 |
Lee Residence Undated Pauma Valley
Lindsey’s Casa de la Tierra 1978 Aliso Canyon Rd., Rancho Santa Fe Mariner’s Point Model Home 1975 Via Toluca Dr., San Clemente Martony Adobe 1955 1410 Windsong Ln., Escondido
McGurty Residence 1964 575 W. Armsley Sq., Ontario
Moonlight Playhouse & Brengle Terrace 1982 Vista, CA
Morehouse Residence 1963 4250 Eastridge Dr., La Mesa
Morehouse Spec House #1 1959 4245 Cobalt Dr., La Mesa
Morehouse Spec House #2 1962 8030 Shadow Hill Dr., La Mesa Myskier Adobe 1955 Las Palmas, Escondido
Pala Mesa Resort ca. 1970s–80s Pala
Pala Mesa Village ca. 1971 Via De Todos Santos, Fallbrook Pala Mesa Village Homes & Clubhouse 1963–1965 Old Hwy 395 & Hwy 76, Pala Pala Mission Restoration, Fountain, Shrine 1955–1959 Pala Mission, Pala Palm Mortuary 1959 1919 E. Valley Parkway, Escondido
Paulson Residence Undated San Diego
Pauma Valley Country Club Undated Pauma Valley
Paxton House 1948 2608 South Escondido Blvd, Escondido
Pretorius Adobe 1953 1350 Windsong Lane, Escondido
Private Residence 1948 1121 Via Loma Vista, El Cajon
Private Residence 1954 2635 Loma Vista Dr., Escondido
Private Residence 1957 3196 Old Post Rd., Fallbrook
Private Residence 1958 16630 Avenida Florencia, Poway
Private Residence 1959 3118 Quiet Hills Dr., Escondido
Private Residence 1959 3188 Quiet Hills Dr., Escondido
Private Residence 1959 3125 Montesano Rd., Escondido
Private Residence 1960 2678 Groton Pl., Escondido
Private Residence 1961 3215 Bernardo Ln., Escondido
Private Residence 1962 32946 Camino Ortega, Warner Springs Private Residence 1964 29433 Cole Grade Rd., Valley Center Private Residence 1964 3355 Old Post Rd., Fallbrook
Private Residence 1965 Aguanga, CA
Private Residence 1967 4326 Citrus Dr., Fallbrook
Private Residence 1967 3870 Laketree Dr., Fallbrook
Private Residence 1968 2377 Royal Oak Dr., Escondido
Private Residence 1969 13735 Acorn Patch Rd., Poway
Private Residence 1969 13747 Acorn Patch Rd., Poway
Private Residence 1970 1735 Caudor, Leucadia
Private Residence 1972 1317 Windsor Rd., Cardiff
Private Residence 1973 14213 Hwy 76, Pauma Valley
Private Residence 1975 3839 Ladera Vista Rd., Fallbrook Private Residence 1976 10082 W. Lilac Rd., Escondido
Private Residence 1976 14702 Tyler Rd., Valley Center

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
65 |
Private Residence 1977 4057 Ladera Vista Rd., Fallbrook Private Residence 1978 17210 Archie Moore Rd., Ramona
Private Residence 1978 2050 La Serena, Escondido
Private Residence 1978 4033 Ladera Vista Rd., Fallbrook Private Residence 1982 1881 Rockhoff Rd., Escondido
Private Residence 1988 14217 Hwy 76, Pauma Valley
Private Residence Undated 2159 Rockhoff Rd., Escondido
Private Residence Undated Cambria Ct., San Diego
Private Residence Undated Big Sur, CA
Private Residence – Castle House 1964 2765 Las Palmas Ave., Escondido Pusateri Residence 1969–70 32350 Katkat Ct., Pauma Valley Ravettino Adobe Remodel 1952 Max Dr., San Diego
Ridder Adobe Ranch & Equestrian Facility 1963 Murrieta, CA Rimrock Design & Plans 1987 Camino de las Lomas, Escondido Ross Residence 1961 2705 Ross, Escondido
Saar Residence 1991 14927 Lyons Valley Rd., Jamul
Shaw Residence 1959 661 Melba Dr., Encinitas
Smith Residence Undated Off Cole Grade Rd., Valley Center Spivey Residence 1981 131 Seeman Dr., Encinitas
Stolp Residence Undated Boyle Ave., CA
Stone’s “Villa Sardinia” 1993–96 Via Cantamar, Escondido Summers Residence Undated San Diego
The Adobe Villas 1962 1540 S. Escondido Blvd., Escondido Thunder Residence 1964 2195 E. Madison Ave., El Cajon
Varner Residence 1979 111 Seeman Dr., Encinitas
Villa Crova Design & Plans 1989 Camino de las Lomas, Escondido Wadsworth Adobe 1978 3225 Emma Ln., Vista
Walseth Residence 1964 705 Idaho Ave., Escondido
Weir Bros Adobe Office & Larry Weir Home 1955–63 1536–1538 S. Escondido Blvd., Escondido Weir Bros Offices 1970s Sterling Ct., Escondido
Weir, Jack & Connie Residence 1958 738 Idaho St., Escondido Weir, Maria Werth Adobe 2008 Neely Rd., Tehachapi
Weir, Patrick Adobe Home 1948 47 E. H St., Encinitas
Weir, Robert Sr. Residence 1966 1914 Summit Ridge Dr., Escondido Weir/Ott Spec Home 1972 13254 Arroya Vista Rd., Poway, CA 92064 Windsor Residence 1947 Windsor Rd., Encinitas

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
66 |
Modern San Diego19
19 Keith York, “Lawrence W. Weir,” Modern San Diego, accessed August 14, 2025, https://www.modernsandiego.com/people/weirbrothers-weir.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
67 |
Current Photographs of the H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House
“They built these houses for people who liked to party, and they partied with them,” Robert Weir said.20 20 Martina Schimitschek, “Brick by Brick: Weir Brothers Built Their Adobe Homes into a San Diego Legacy,” San Diego Union-Tribune, July 4, 2020, https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2020/07/04/brick-by-brick-weir-brothers-built-their-adobe-homes-into-a-san-diego-legacy.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
68 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
69 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
70 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
71 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
72 |
“One of the most beautiful features of the
homes is their open-beamed ceilings. In
addition to their beauty, the beams play an
integral part of the structure. They are
securely attached to the walls and therefore
prevent the walls from moving in or out. The
main beams throughout the houses are 16
inches by 8 inches in size and are made from
Douglas fir. To complement the beams, the
face of the ceilings is made of one hundred
percent open-faced Douglas fir wood. The
beams are all hand hewn, and the hewn marks
enhance their architectural appearance.”21
21 Hu Stone, “The Adobes of Eastridge,” La Mesa Courier

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
73 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
74 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
75 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
76 |

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
77 |
References
Historic Designation Report: H.J. Morehouse/O’Neil House, 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA Adobe Home Tour Committee. 2017 Adobe Home Tour Program. San Diego County, CA: Adobe Home Tour, 2017. https://adobehometour.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/2017-adobe-home-tour-program.pdf. ———. Weir Brothers – Adobe Home Tour. San Diego County, CA: Adobe Home Tour, 2015. https://adobehometour.com/wpcontent/uploads/2015/10/Weir-Brothers.pdf. ———. “Adobe Community Resources.” Adobe Home Tour. Accessed August 14, 2025. https://adobehometour.com/architecture/adobe-community-resources/.

Calarco, Dominic. Modern Adobe: Preservation of Pre- and Post-World War II Residential Construction in Southern California. 2008. PDF file. Accessed August 4, 2025. Google Drive link.

City of La Mesa. Building Permit Application No. 17922. February 7, 1963. ———. Eastridge Unit No. 1, Map No. 3586 Sheet 2 of 3 Sheets. Recorded March 22, 1960. Subdivision map filed with the San Diego County Recorder’s Office, San Diego County, CA.
———. “Historic Preservation Commission.” La Mesa Municipal Code, Title 25, Chapter 25.01, Section 25.01.060. Accessed August 4, 2025. https://library.municode.com/ca/la_mesa/codes/code_of_ordinances. ———. Zoning and Subdivision Maps: Eastridge Unit #1. Accessed 2025.

City of San Diego. San Diego Modernism Historic Context Statement. Submitted to the State of California Office of Historic Preservation, October 17, 2007. https://www.sohosandiego.org/resources/SanDiegoModernismContext.pdf.

County of San Diego. Assessor’s Parcel Records for 4250 Eastridge Drive. Accessed 2025.

Heritage Architecture & Planning. Historic Evaluation Report: Veterans Village San Diego. Prepared for Veterans Village San Diego – Escondido and Delawie. San Diego, CA: Heritage Architecture & Planning, October 31, 2014.

Newland, James D. “Eastridge Estates.” La Mesa, CA, 2018.

San Diego Union-Tribune. “Remembering Jack Weir.” San Diego Union-Tribune, March 23, 2009. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2009/03/23/remembering-jack-weir/.

Save Our Heritage Organization. La Jolla Survey Report: Volume 1. San Diego, CA: SOHO, 2004. https://www.sohosandiego.org/enews/images/0125lajolla2004volume01surveyreport.pdf.

Schimitschek, Martina. “Brick by Brick: Weir Brothers Built Their Adobe Homes into a San Diego Legacy.” San Diego UnionTribune, July 4, 2020. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2020/07/04/brick-by-brick-weir-brothers-built-their-adobehomes-into-a-san-diego-legacy.

Stone, Hu. “The Adobes of Eastridge.” La Mesa Courier.

The San Diego Union. “Old Adobe Goes Modern in Today’s Homes.” August 17, 1969.

Weir, Jack. Telephone interview by Dominic Calarco. February 23, 2008. Quoted in Modern Adobe: Preservation of Pre- and Post-World War II Residential Construction in Southern California. 2008. PDF file. Accessed August 4, 2025. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1W2lO_dXcinSxehlPmAmKLtTqekrKjyyA/view.

Historic Landmark Nomination Report – H. J. Morehouse/O’Neil House 4250 Eastridge Drive, La Mesa, CA 91941
78 |
Weir, Rob. “We Dig Adobe: The Making of Adobe Bricks.” Weir Brothers Adobe Homes Blog, October 31, 2014. https://www.weirbrosadobe.com/blog/2014/10/31/we-dig-adobe-the-making-of-adobe-bricks. Accessed August 14, 2025.

Weir, Robert, and Scott Hulet. Weir Brothers Adobe Homes. With contributions by Keith York, Ben Loescher, and James T.

Hubbell. Tadler Books, 2020.

Werth, Maria Weir. Larry Weir: His Life and Works. 2020. “Why Adobe?” Adobe Is Not Software. Accessed August 4, 2025. https://adobeisnotsoftware.com/why-adobe.

York, Keith. “Lawrence W. Weir.” Modern San Diego. Accessed August 14, 2025. https://www.modernsandiego.com/people/weir-brothers-weir.

Visual Documentation
• Original construction drawings. Floor plan, foundation plan, elevations, and foundation details: Larry Weir, 1963. • Property photographs. Exterior and interior views. Taken 2013–2025 by Steven Churchill and Patricia Churchill or noted otherwise.
• Historical images courtesy of La Mesa History Center and San Diego History Center.

REPORT to the MAYOR and MEMBERS of the CITY COUNCIL
From the CITY MANAGER
DATE: December 9, 2025
SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL RATIFICATION OF DESIGN REVIEW
BOARD’S APPROVAL OF PROJECT NO. 2023-2716
(CROSSBY PROPERTIES LLC) – AN 18-UNIT
RESIDENTIAL HOUSING PROJECT LOCATED AT 7285

UNIVERSITY AVENUE IN THE C-F-D-MU (GENERAL

COMMERCIAL/FLOODWAY OVERLAY/URBAN

DESIGN OVERLAY/MIXED USE OVERLAY ZONE)
ISSUING DEPARTMENT: Community Development
SUMMARY:

Issues:

Should the City Council ratify the Desing Review Board’s determination that the proposed project’s design meets the intent of the Urban Desing Overlay? Recommendation:

That the City Council ratify the Design Review Board’s approval of Project No. 2023-2716 (Attachment A).

Fiscal Impact:

There is no fiscal impact on the General Fund related to this project. The City’s policy is to recover 100% of the cost of staff time through the project’s application fees.

Environmental Review:

The proposed project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines pursuant to Section 15332 In-fill developments The project meets the criteria for the exception and none of the exceptions in Section 15300.2 apply.

Report to Mayor and Councilmembers
Date: December 9 , 2025
Page: 2 of 6
BACKGROUND:

The proposed project site is approximately 15,000 square feet in size and is comprised of three parcels situated on the south side of University Avenue between Massachusetts Avenue and Yale Avenue. It is square in shape and nearly level. Existing improvements dating to the 1950s-60s include two single-story commercial buildings and one two-story commercial building. Also present are a billboard sign, paved parking, and an openchannel storm drain within an easement across the rear. The west half of the site is currently fenced with the neighboring property to the west.

DISCUSSION:

The Urban Design Overlay requires design review for new development and major renovations to ensure projects follow the City’s Urban Design Program and the MixedUse Overlay Design Guidelines. On September 9, 2024, the Design Review Board considered the proposed project and determined that the proposed design meets the intent of the Urban Design Program and Mixed-Use Overlay Design Guidelines. The DRB Certification of Action approving the project is provided as Attachment C.

A summary of the Board’s determination is provided below.

Building Location and Orientation
The project is designed with its primary frontage along University Avenue. In accordance with the design guidelines, no ground-floor residential uses are proposed; instead, the ground floor includes an entry lobby and stairwell, a leasing office, and parking. Both the design guidelines and zoning standards require that at least 50 percent of the ground-floor frontage facing the public realm contain clear, untinted windows. The project meets this requirement by providing a floor-to-ceiling aluminum storefront system across the full width of the lobby, adding visual interest and contributing to a more pedestrian-oriented streetscape.

Architecture
Visual interest is proposed through street level full-height, transparent, aluminum storefront windows topped by a metal awning and tall, narrow, evenly spaced openings in the front wall of the parking area. The proposed finish materials, which include khaki brown fiber cement shiplap siding, white and dark grey stucco, and black cable railing, are proposed to unify the appearance and fit into the pedestrian realm context. As part of the design review board recommendations for project approval, the applicant will use a lighter tone of gray on the exterior wall of the stair tower to contrast with the oversized address numbers and will use a softer white tone for the primary wall color. The design review board also recommended the applicant provide a floor to ceiling aluminum storefront system across a minimum of 50% of the front elevation of the ground floor to provide visual interest to pedestrians at the street level.

Report to Mayor and Councilmembers
Date: December 9 , 2025
Page: 3 of 6
Height
The overall height of the project is 42 feet which complies with the 46 foot maximum height allowed for within the C zone.

Circulation
The subject site is located mid-block with no alley access. Proposed vehicular access and circulation are oriented towards University Avenue, minimizing impacts to the single-family residential neighborhood located to the south. As mentioned, three individual lots will be consolidated, with a single driveway entrance from University Avenue. Consolidating multiple driveways into a single access point will enhance safety and convenience for pedestrians and bicyclists along the corridor. Reducing the number of curb cuts minimizes potential conflicts between vehicles and non-motorized users, creating a more continuous and predictable path for walking and cycling. The applicant has sited the adjacent street trees in consideration of vehicular sight distance.

Parking
The underlying zoning requires two parking spaces per unit, plus 0.4 guest parking spaces per unit, for a total of 44 required spaces. The project proposes one very low-income rental unit, which makes it eligible for a density bonus. As part of this density bonus, the applicant is requesting a waiver to reduce the required parking, proposing a total of 27 spaces.

Lighting
Exterior lighting is integrated into architectural and landscape design. A combination of pole lights and Monaco adjustable inground lights will illuminate building and site entrances, walkways, parking areas, and other spaces to enhance design, landscaping, safety, and security. Lighting will be down-directed and shielded to reduce glare and prevent spillover onto adjacent properties.

These considerations will reinforce and strengthen the project area, creating a transition that will provide for safer and more attractive walkways, parking and planting.

Landscape Design
The applicant has prepared a landscaping plan for the site. The parkway strip between the curb and sidewalk is proposed to be planted with four 36-inch box Canary Island Pine trees, which are on the City’s list of approved street trees. The common open space is proposed to have landscaping and shade trees. The project proposes 4 street trees, which will be sited in consideration of vehicular sight distance. Open space will be provided through private balconies and within two common patio areas on the second story. The common areas are centrally located with landscaping, including shade trees. Recreational furnishings will be provided

Report to Mayor and Councilmembers
Date: December 9 , 2025
Page: 4 of 6
Pedestrian Orientation
The project will provide non-contiguous sidewalk along the entirety of the frontage, partially in the right-of-way and partially within a public easement to be granted on the subdivision map. The parkway strip between the curb and sidewalk is proposed to be planted with four 36-inch box Canary Island Pine trees, which are on the City’s list of approved street trees.

Safety Design
The Urban Design Program encourages the consideration of safety when designing a development in ways such as creating defensible spaces that clearly define physical spaces into areas of public, semi-public, semi-private, and private spaces. Along the street frontage of the project site, street trees and additional landscaping are proposed. The project meets the intent of the safety design guidelines through the use of space between the public right-of-way and private property, and creates a transition and symbolic barrier on the site.

Trash and Refuse
The project proposes a two-dumpster bin trash enclosure located within the parking garage.

EDCO waste & recycling services reviewed the project and agreed to the location of the proposed dumpsters, a will-serve letter was provided.

Objective Design Standards
The proposed project was submitted prior to the adoption of the City’s Objective Design Standards (ODS) and therefore is subject to the Urban Design Program and Mixed Use Overlay design guidelines. However, below is a summary of how the project design characteristics align with several of the objective design standards.

Natural Site Features and Grading
The proposed project has preserved the natural features of the site by building into the existing landscape. The new building has been integrated as part of the topography of the project site. The rear yard setback area will be graded and planted consistent with the requirements of the ODS, which also serves as an open space area for the residents.

Street orientation
As stated above the new development will be located and oriented towards the street with at least 90% of the building at the property line street edge.

Report to Mayor and Councilmembers
Date: December 9 , 2025
Page: 5 of 6
Open space
The proposed project has included common outdoor recreation areas. The ODS states that mixed-use residential shall include at least on shared recreational area with a minimum width and depth of at least 15 feet per every 20 units. The proposed project has included open space within the second floor for residents as well as the rear open space area which measures 24 feet by 120 feet.

Vehicular and pedestrian circulation
The proposed design meets vehicular access design for garage parking. The design includes private garage access. Pedestrian circulation includes a pedestrian realm that is properly lighted, and it connects to the public sidewalk along each street.

Building form, massing and scale
The proposed project has a minimum of 2 foot variation in wall plan including a change in depth using color and material change. The project was also set back 24 feet from the residential neighborhood located to the rear.

Roof design
Change in facade and roof heigh was added with a minimum of 2 foot in vertical height.

Façade articulation
All building elevations facing public street were treated of equal level of architectural detail and design. The building was designed to differentiate between a defined base, middle and top. The project incorporated the use of at least 2 façade materials including the sides and rear. The design provides primary building entrances located at the corner with different materials and window patterns.

Parking structure design
The parking structure openings have been screened using architectural elements in the rest of the project to prevent for full transparency. The parking structure included landscaping between the building façade and the sidewalk.

Utilitarian elements and screening
Rooftop equipment has been placed on the rooftop and has been completely screened from view of adjacent properties. All mechanical equipment has been placed within the building footprint and not within setback areas.

Landscaping planting
Street trees have been provided using the varieties listed on the City’s approved street tree list. At least 75% of the new plant material is of native species found in San Diego County. A minimum of a 3-foot landscape area has been provided along the base of the building.

Report to Mayor and Councilmembers
Date: December 9 , 2025
Page: 6 of 6
Lightning
The building, entries, parking areas, outdoor areas and pedestrian pathways include lighting for safety and security. Lighting will be fully shielded and located in a way to illuminate only the intended area preventing it from spilling beyond the project’s property line.

CONCLUSION:

Staff Recommends that the City Council ratify the Design Review Board approval of project No. 2023-2716.

Reviewed by: Respectfully submitted by:
____________________ ____________________________
Greg Humora Lynnette Santos
City Manager Director of Community Development
Attachments:

A. Draft Resolution ratifying the DRB Approval
B. Project Plans
C. Design Review Board Certificate of Action

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA RATIFYING THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD’S APPROVAL OF PROJECT 2023-2716 FOR AN 18-UNIT RESIDENTIAL BUILDING LOCATED AT 7285 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, APNs 474-181-17-00, 474-181-18-00, AND 474-181-19-00 IN THE C-F-D-MU (GENERAL COMMERCIAL/FLOODWAY OVERLAY/URBAN DESIGN

OVERLAY/MIXED USE OVERLAY) ZONE
WHEREAS, the Design Review Board held a public meeting, received and considered a staff report, and reviewed Project 2023-2716 for consistency with the Urban Design Program and Design Guidelines for Properties in the Mixed Use Overlay and recommended approval (via Certificate of Action) of the project on September 9, 2025 (“Project 2023-2716”); WHEREAS, on September 9, 2025, the Design Review Board issued a Certificate of Action determining that the project meets the Urban Design Program and the Design guidelines within the Mixed Use Overlay Zone subject to City Council ratification; WHEREAS, the City Council did receive and consider a staff report on the Project; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Mesa did hold a duly noticed public meeting on December 9, 2025, and accepted public testimony in considering ratification of the Design Review Board’s approval of the project.

THE CITY COUNCIL FINDS AND DETERMINES AS FOLLOWS:

1. The proposed project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines pursuant to Section 15332 In-fill developments The project meets the criteria for the exception and none of the exceptions in Section 15300.2 apply.

2. The proposed design meets the intent of the Urban Design Program and the Design Guidelines for Properties in the Mixed Use Overlay.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT AND IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Mesa as follows:

1. The foregoing findings of fact and determinations are true and hereby made a part hereof.

2. The foregoing findings of fact and determinations are supported by the staff report, minutes, plans, and exhibits, all of which are herein incorporated by reference.

3. The City Council ratifies the Design Review Board Certificate of Action .

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of La Mesa, California, held the 9
th day of December 2025, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK
I, MEGAN WIEGELMAN, City Clerk of the City of La Mesa, California, do hereby certify the foregoing to be true and exact copy of Resolution No. 2025- , duly passed and adopted by the City Council of said City on the date and by the vote therein recited.

MEGAN WIEGELMAN, CMC, City Clerk
(SEAL OF CITY)

*$7(
(/(9$725
33 87,/,7<
83 6/23( 6/23(
83 /2%%<)2<(5
),5(87,/,7<
0$,/%2;(6
0$1$*(0(17
2)),&(
6/23( 6/23( 6/23(
83 
 











$
$


$






6<0%2/ 47< %27$1,&$/1$0( &200211$0( 6,=( :8&2/6
6<0%2/
75((6
47< %27$1,&$/1$0( &200211$0( 6,=( :8/&26
6<0%2/
68&&8/(176
3(5(11,$/6
*5$66(6
6+58%6
47< %27$1,&$/1$0( &200211$0( 6,=( :8&2/6
*5281'&29(56
3/$176&+('8/(
$
$











5()(5(1&(127(66&+('8/(
1RUWK
    
6FDOH 
35(/,0,1$5<127)25&216758&7,21
5(9,6,216
2)6+((76
6+((7
6&$/(
-2%12
'$7(
&+(&.('%<
'(6,*1('%<
'5$:1%<
81'(5*5281'6(59,&($/(57
&$//
72//)5((

7:2:25.,1*'$<6%()25(<28',*
2:1(5
)$5,'0$-,',
81,9(56,7<$9(18(
/$0(6$&$/,)251,$
08/7,)$0,/<352-(&7 VLJQDWXUH
H[SGDWH
GDWH


/3/$1'6&$3(3/$1 &21&(378$/
*5281')/225
1')/225
0$:$$1'(7:8&$/&8/$7,216

DATE: December 9, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Megan Wiegelman, City Clerk
VIA: Greg Humora, City Manager
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF AN

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA
ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE, TITLE 24 OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE

OF REGULATIONS
At the Council meeting of November 12, 2025, the Council unanimously approved the introduction and first reading of the Ordinance adopting by reference the 2025 Edition of the California Building Standards Code, Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, which includes: (1) the 2025 California Building Code (with Appendix J) incorporating the 2024 International Building Code; (2) the 2025 California Plumbing Code incorporating the 2024 Uniform Plumbing Code; (3) the 2025 California Mechanical Code incorporating the 2024 Uniform Mechanical Code; (4) the 2025 California Electrical Code incorporating the 2023 National Electrical Code; (5) the 2025 California Residential Code incorporating the 204 International Residential Code; (6) the 2025 California green Building Standards Code; (7) the 2025 California Existing Building Code incorporating the 2024 International existing Building Code; (8) the 2025 California Energy Code; (9) the 2025 California Historical Code; and (10) the 2025 California Referenced Standards code; and amending Title 14 of the La Mesa Municipal Code and all other ordinances in conflict therewith.

Staff recommends the Council approve the second reading and adoption of the Ordinance.

Attachment: A. Draft Ordinance
B. Review of Changes in the 2025 California Building Standards Code

ORDINANCE NO. 2025-

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE, TITLE 24 OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, WHICH INCLUDES: (1) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (WITH APPENDIX J) INCORPORATING THE 2024 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE; (2) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE
INCORPORATING THE 2024 UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE; (3) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE INCORPORATING THE 2024 UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE; (4) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE INCORPORATING THE 2023 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE; (5) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE INCORPORATING THE 2024
INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE; (6) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE; (7) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA EXISTING BUILDING CODE INCORPORATING THE 2024 INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE; (8) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE; (9) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL CODE; AND (10) THE 2025 CALIFORNIA REFERENCED STANDARDS CODE; AND AMENDING TITLE 14 OF THE

LA MESA MUNICIPAL CODE AND ALL OTHER ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT

THEREWITH
The City Council of the City of La Mesa, California, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN as follows:

SECTION 1: Findings of Local Conditions. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Sections 17958.5 and 17958.7, the City Council hereby makes the following findings:

A. Mediterranean weather conditions, hilly terrain, density of development, canyons with dry dense brush, and the environment existing in the City of La Mesa constitute that the California Building Code and the California Residential Code be modified as expressed herein.

B. The high water table, expansive clay-like soils, and history of unregulated grading, including uncompacted fills existing in the City of La Mesa, constitute that the California Building Code be modified as expressed herein.

SECTION 2: Chapter 14.04 of the La Mesa Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety and rewritten to read as follows:
“Chapter 14.04

BUILDING CODE

14.04.010 Adoption of the California Building Code. There is hereby adopted by reference the California Building Code, 2025 Edition (Part 2, Title 24, California Code of Regulations), incorporating the International Building Code, 2024 Edition, published by the International Code Council. Said document is hereby adopted as the Building Code of the City of La Mesa for regulating the erection, construction, enlargement, alteration, repair, moving, removal, demolition, conversion, occupancy, equipment, use, height, area, and maintenance of all buildings or structures within the City of La Mesa. There is one (1) copy of said Code on file in the office of the City Clerk for use and examination by the public as required by law.”

SECTION 3: Chapter 14.05 of the La Mesa Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety and rewritten to read as follows:
“Chapter 14.05

GRADING

14.05.010 Adoption of Appendix J of the California Building Code. There is hereby adopted by the City of La Mesa for the purpose of prescribing regulations governing the excavation and grading on private property and the issuance of permits and providing for the inspection thereof, Appendix J of the California Building Code, 2025 Edition, one (1) copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of La Mesa.

14.05.020 Permits Required. Section J103.2 of Appendix J of the California Building Code, 2025 Edition, adopted by reference in Section 14.05.010 hereof is hereby amended to read as follows:

J103.2 Exemptions. A grading permit shall not be required for the following:

8. An excavation or fill which is less than three (3) feet (915 mm) in depth and does not create a slope steeper than two horizontal to one vertical and does not exceed 100 cubic yards (76.5 m3) on any one lot and does not obstruct or alter a drainage course.

SECTION 4: Chapter 14.08 of the La Mesa Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety and rewritten to read as follows:
“Chapter 14.08

PLUMBING CODE

14.08.010 Adoption of the California Plumbing Code. There is hereby adopted by the City of La Mesa for the purpose of prescribing regulations governing the installation, alteration, or repair of plumbing and drainage systems, the California Plumbing Code, 2025 Edition (Part 5, Title 24, California Code of Regulations), incorporating the Uniform Plumbing Code, 2024 Edition, published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials. There is one (1) copy of said Code on file in the office of the City Clerk for use and examination by the public as required by law.”
SECTION 5: Chapter 14.09 of the La Mesa Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety and rewritten to read as follows:
“Chapter 14.09

MECHANICAL CODE

14.09.010 Adoption of the California Mechanical Code. There is hereby adopted by the City of La Mesa for the purpose of prescribing regulations governing the design, installation, alteration, or repair of heating, ventilating, cooling, refrigeration systems, incinerators and other miscellaneous heating producing appliances within the City of La Mesa, the California Mechanical Code, 2025 Edition, (Part 4, Title 24, California Code of Regulations), incorporating the Uniform Mechanical Code, 2024 Edition, published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials. There is one (1) copy of said code on file in the office of the City Clerk for use and examination by the public as required by law.”

SECTION 6: Chapter 14.10 of the La Mesa Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety and rewritten to read as follows:
“Chapter 14.10

ELECTRICAL CODE

14.10.010 Adoption of the California Electrical Code. There is hereby adopted by the City of La Mesa for the purpose of operation and maintenance of all electrical wiring and electrical apparatus of any nature, whether inside or outside of any building, the California Electrical Code, 2025 Edition (Part 3, Title 24, California Code of Regulations), incorporating the National Electrical Code, 2023 Edition, published by the National Fire Protection Association. There is one (1) copy of said Code on file in the Office of City Clerk for use and examination by the public as required by law.”
SECTION 7: Chapter 14.12 of the La Mesa Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety and rewritten to read as follows:
“Chapter 14.12

RESIDENTIAL CODE

14.12.010 Adoption of the California Residential Code. There is hereby adopted by reference the California Residential Code, 2025 Edition (Part 2.5, Title 24, California Code of Regulations), incorporating the International Residential Code, 2024 Edition, published by the International Code Council. Said document is hereby adopted as the Residential Code of the City of La Mesa for regulating the construction, alteration, movement, enlargement, replacement, repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, maintenance, removal and demolition of every detached one- and two-family dwelling, efficiency dwelling unit, and townhouse not more than three stories above grade plane in height with a separate means of egress and structures accessory thereto within the City of La Mesa. There is one (1) copy of said Code on file in the Office of the City Clerk for use and examination by the public as required by law.

14.12.020 Climatic and Geographic Design Criteria. Table R301.2(1) of the California Residential Code, 2022 Edition, adopted by reference in Section 14.12.010 hereof is hereby amended to read as follows:

TABLE R301.2(1)

CLIMATIC AND GEOGRAPHIC DESIGN CRITERIA
Ground
Snow Load
Wind Design
Seismic
Design
Category
Subject to Damage from
Winter
Design
Tempe
Ice Barrier
Underlayment
Requiredh
Flood
Hazardg
Air
Freezing
Indexi
Mean
Annual
Tempj
Wind Speedd
(mph)
Topographic Effectsk WeatheringaFrost Line
Depthb Termitec
Zero 95 No D1 Negligible 12” Very Heavy 44oF No Footnote ‘g’ Zero 63.4 oF For SI: 1 pound per square foot = 0.0479kPa, 1 mile per hour = 0.447m/s.

Footnotes:
a. Weathering may require a higher strength concrete or grade of masonry than necessary to satisfy the structural requirements of this code. The weathering column shall be filled in with the weathering index (i.e., “negligible, “moderate” or “severe”) for concrete as determined from the Weathering Probability Map [Figure R301.2(3)]. The grade of masonry units shall be determined from ASTM C34, C55, C62, C73, C90, C129, C145, C216 or C652.

b. The frost line depth may require deeper footings than indicated in Figure R403.1(1). The jurisdiction shall fill in the frost depth column with the minimum depth of footing below finish grade.
c. The jurisdiction shall fill in this part of the table to indicate the need for protection depending on whether there has been a history of local subterranean termite damage. d. The jurisdiction shall fill in this part of the table with the wind speed from the basic wind speed map [Figure R301.2(4)]. Wind exposure category shall be determined on a sitespecific basis in accordance with Section R301.2.1.4. e. Temperatures shall be permitted to reflect local climates or local weather experience as determined by the Building Official.
f. The jurisdiction shall fill in this part of the table with the seismic design category determined from Section R301.2.2.1.
g. The jurisdiction shall fill in this part of the table with:
(a) the date of the jurisdiction’s entry into the National Flood Insurance Program (date of adoption of the first code or ordinance for management of flood hazard areas), i.e., City of La Mesa Ordinance 2002-2721 06/25/2002,
(b) the date(s) of the Flood Insurance Study, i.e., Study date 01/31/2001 adopted by Ordinance 2002-2721;
(c) the panel numbers and dates of all currently effective FIRMs and FBFMs or other flood hazard map adopted by the authority having jurisdiction, as amended, i.e., Panel 06073C1643H current effective date 09/28/2006; Panel 06073C1644G current effective date 09/05/2006.
h. In accordance with Sections R905.2.7.1, R905.4.3.1, R905.5.3.1, R905.6.3.1, R905.7.3.1 and R905.8.3.1, where there has been a history of local damage from the effects of ice damming, the jurisdiction shall fill in this part of the table with “YES”. Otherwise, the jurisdiction shall fill in this part of the table with “NO”. i. The jurisdiction shall fill in this part of the table with the 100-year return period air freezing index (BF-days) from Figure R403.3(2) or from the 100-year (99%) value on the National Climatic Data Center data table “Air Freezing Index – USA Method (Base 32o)” at www.ncdc.noaa.gov/fpsf.html.
j. The jurisdiction shall fill in this part of the table with the mean annual temperature from the National Climatic Data Center data table “Air Freezing Index – USA Method (Base 32oF)” at www.ncdc.noaa.gov/fpsf.html.
k. In accordance with Section R301.2.1.5, where there is local historical data documenting structural damage to buildings due to topographic wind speed up effects, the jurisdiction shall fill in this part of the table with “YES.” Otherwise the jurisdiction shall indicate “NO” in this part of the table.”

SECTION 8: Chapter 14.13 of the La Mesa Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety and rewritten to read as follows:
“Chapter 14.13

GREEN BUILDING CODE

14.13.010 Adoption of the California Green Building Standards Code. There is hereby adopted by reference the California Green Building Standards Code, 2025 Edition (Part 11, Title 24, California Code of Regulations). Said document is hereby adopted as the Green Building Code of the City of La Mesa for establishing minimum standards to improve public health, safety and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the use of building concepts having a reduced negative impact or positive environmental impact and encouraging sustainable construction practices. There is one (1) copy of said Code on file in the Office of the City Clerk for use and examination by the public as required by law.” SECTION 9: Chapter 14.14 of the La Mesa Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety and rewritten to read as follows:
“Chapter 14.14

EXISTING BUILDING CODE

14.14.010 Adoption of the California Existing Building Code. There is hereby adopted by reference the California Existing Building Code, 2025 Edition (Part 10, Title 24, California Code of Regulations), based on the 2024 International Existing Building Code. Said document is hereby adopted as the Existing Building Code of the City of La Mesa for regulating alteration, repair, addition, and change of occupancy or relocation of existing building and structures. There is one (1) copy of said Code on file in the Office of the City Clerk for use and examination by the public as required by law.”
SECTION 10: Chapter 14.15 is added to the La Mesa Municipal Code and written as follows:
“Chapter 14.15

ENERGY CODE

14.15.010 Adoption of the California Energy Code. There is hereby adopted by reference the California Energy Code, 2025 Edition (Part 6, Title 24, California Code of Regulations). Said document is hereby adopted as the Energy Code of the City of La Mesa for the purpose of prescribing regulations for the conservation of energy in buildings where energy will be utilized.

There is one (1) copy of said Code on file in the Office of the City Clerk for use and examination by the public as required by law.”
“Chapter 14.16

HISTORICAL CODE
SECTION 11: Chapter 14.16 is added to the La Mesa Municipal Code and written as follows:

14.16.010 Adoption of the California Historical Building Code. There is hereby adopted by reference the California Historical Building Code, 2025 Edition (Part 8, Title 24, California Code

of Regulations). Said document is hereby adopted as the Historical Code of the City of La Mesa for the purpose of prescribing alternative building regulations for the rehabilitation, preservation, restoration, or relocation of designated historic buildings. There is one (1) copy of said Code on file in the Office of the City Clerk for use and examination by the public as required by law.” “Chapter 14.17

REFERENCED STANDARDS
SECTION 12: Chapter 14.17 is added to the La Mesa Municipal Code and written as follows:

14.17.010 Adoption of the California Referenced Standards Code. There is hereby adopted by reference the California Referenced Standards Code, 2025 Edition (Part 12, Title 24, California Code of Regulations). There is one (1) copy of said Code on file in the Office of the City Clerk for use and examination by the public as required by law.

SECTION 13: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is invalidated by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Council of the City of La Mesa hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, respective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid. If any provision of this Ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid. Such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications and, to this end, the provisions of the Ordinance are declared to be severable.

SECTION 14: This Ordinance shall be effective January 1, 2026 and the City Clerk of the City of La Mesa is hereby authorized to use summary publication procedures pursuant to Government Code Section 36933 utilizing a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of La Mesa.

INTRODUCED AND READ at a Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of La Mesa, California, held the 12th day of November 2025, and thereafter PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular meeting of said City Council held the 9
th day of December 2025, by the following vote, to
wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
__________________________
MARK ARAPOSTATHIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
MEGAN WIEGELMAN, CMC, City Clerk

CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK
I, MEGAN WIEGELMAN, City Clerk of the City of La Mesa, California, do hereby certify the foregoing to be a true and correct copy of Ordinance No. 2025-______, duly passed and adopted by the City Council of said City on the date and by the vote therein recited and that the same has been duly published according to law.

MEGAN WIEGELMAN, CMC, City Clerk
(SEAL OF CITY)

Review of changes in the 2025 California Building Standards Code The following provides a summary of significant changes in the 2025 edition of the California Building Standards Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations) compared to the existing code affecting permits in the City of La Mesa.

Summary
The following are Building Codes that staff have identified as relevant to future design and development within the City of La Mesa. This adoption cycle, the California Building Code strengthens fire safety by adding requirements that address continuity of fire-resistancerated exterior walls. The Residential Code incorporates pointers to the new WildlandUrban Interface code (adopted by the State Fire Marshall). The Plumbing Code provides updates and clarifications that align with the State's Health and Safety Code. The Energy and Green codes encourage the State's clean energy goals with the use of heat pump water heaters, electric readiness, stronger ventilation standards, and higher percentages of installed EV’s for new commercial and multifamily projects. 2025 California Building Code (2024 International Building Code) CCR Title 24 Part 2
CBC 705.6 Continuity
Adds parameters for fire-rated exterior walls to extend the required rating from the foundation to the underside of a roof sheathing or floor/ceiling assembly. 2025 California Residential Code(2024 International Residential Code) CCR Title 24 Part 2.5
CRC 102.7 Wildland-Urban Interface
Added a new section as a pointer to the new California Wildland-Urban Interface Code (CWUIC), which applies to houses built in a wildland-urban interface area. 2025 California Plumbing Code (2024 Uniform Plumbing Code) CCR Title 24 Part 5
CPC 408.3 Water consumption
Amended to align with appliance efficiency regulations adopted by the California Energy Commission in Title 20 and showerhead requirements in CalGreen. 422.1.1 Fixture calculations and 422.2 Separate facilities Repealed the existing California amendment and adopted the model code regarding all gender restroom fixtures to add to the required fixture counts. Added an exception to the requirement for separate facilities for both sexes, where rooms have fixtures designed for both sexes and urinals and water closets are in privacy compartments.

2025 California Energy Code
CCR Title 24 Part 6
A) Residential
Section §110.3(c)7B Air-source heat pump water heaters (HPWH) Adds ventilation or minimum room volume required when installing heat pump water heaters.

Section §150.0(c) Wall insulation & (q) Fenestration products Updates maximum u-factors for wall insulation, fenestration, and Solar Heat Gain Coefficients (SHGC) for fenestration (including skylights).

Section §150.0(s) Battery energy storage systems (BESS) ready Updates the mandatory battery energy storage system (BESS) readiness for newly constructed single-family, one- or two-dwelling units.

B) Non-Residential
Tables 120.1
Updates minimum ventilation rates, minimum exhaust rates, and classes of air streams and sources.

Section § 120.6 (k)
Adds mandatory requirements for electric readiness for commercial kitchens. 2025 California Green Building Standards Code
CCR Title 24 Part 11
A) Residential

4.106.4.3 Electric vehicle charging for additions and alterations of parking facilities serving existing multifamily buildings, hotels, and motels
Modified existing requirements for EV-capable spaces to include a requirement for either a low-power Level 2 EV charging receptacle or a Level 2 EV charger. Removed the EVcapable spaces percentage requirements and added that each parking space being added or altered will be required to be equipped with a low-power level 2 EV charging receptacle or charger.

4.106.4.4 Bicycle Parking
Made previously voluntary measures mandatory for newly constructed multifamily buildings, hotels, and motels. Amended to clarify the type of long-term bicycle enclosures and anchoring required for hotels and motels.

B) Non-Residential

5.106.4.1.1 Short-term bicycle parking
Provides a new compliance method for required Bicycle parking based on the number of anticipated “peak daily visitors”, instead of the number of parking spaces.

5.106.4.1.2.1, 2, & 3 Long Term Bicycle parking
Provides a new compliance method based on the number of “tenant-occupants”, instead of the number of vehicle parking spaces used by workers, and increases the percentage from five (5) to ten (10) percent.

5.106.5.3.1 EV Capable spaces
Added columns to the table for office and retail specifically, and increased the amount of EV-capable and EV chargers installed for new commercial projects.

DATE: December 9, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Megan Wiegelman, City Clerk
VIA: Greg Humora, City Manager
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF AN

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA
ADDING A NEW SECTION 24.053.080.D TO THE LA MESA MUNICIPAL

CODE REQUIRING CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZATION TO APPROVE

CANCELLATION OF AFFORDABLE OR SENIOR HOUSING
At the Council meeting of November 12, 2025, the Council unanimously approved the introduction and first reading of the Ordinance adding a new Section 240.053.080.D to the La Mesa Municipal Code requiring City Council authorization to approve cancellation of affordable or senior housing agreements.

Staff recommends the Council approve the second reading and adoption of the Ordinance.

Attachment: A. Draft Ordinance

ORDINANCE NO. 2025-

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA ADDING A NEW SECTION 24.053.080.D TO THE LA MESA MUNICIPAL

CODE REQUIRING CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZATION TO APPROVE

CANCELLATION OF AFFORDABLE OR SENIOR HOUSING AGREEMENTS WHEREAS, currently, requests for cancellation of affordable or senior housing agreements required pursuant to La Mesa Municipal Code 24.053.080 may be approved administratively by the Director of Community Development (subject to appeal to the Council); WHEREAS, on July 8, 2025, this Council directed the City Manager not to approve said requests without City Council authorization;
WHEREAS, this Ordinance implements the requirement for said City Council authorization;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution PC-2025-19, on October 15th, 2025, on file with the Office of the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference, recommending approval of this Ordinance;
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on October 28th, 2025, regarding this Ordinance;
WHEREAS, notices of all said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and
WHEREAS, this Ordinance, is not considered a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code §21065 and CEQA Guidelines §15378) because the action would not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT AND IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of La Mesa, California as follows:

SECTION 1: The City Council finds and determines the following:
a. That the foregoing recitals are true and correct and an integral part of the City Council’s decision and hereby adopts such recitals as findings. b. That the Ordinance, to amend Title 24 of the La Mesa Municipal Code, adding a new Section 24.053.080.D, to establish the cancellation process of affordable and senior housing agreements, is not considered a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code §21065 and CEQA Guidelines §15378) because the action would not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

SECTION 2: A new Section 24.053.080.D is hereby added to the La Mesa Municipal Code to read as follows:
“Cancellation of affordable or senior housing agreements required pursuant to this section shall only be authorized by the City Council.” SECTION 3: This Ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its adoption and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to use summary publication procedures pursuant to Government Code Section 36933 utilizing a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of La Mesa.

INTRODUCED AND READ at a Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of La Mesa, California, held the 12th day of November 2025, and thereafter PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular meeting of said City Council held the 9
th day of December 2025, by the following vote, to
wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
______________________________
MARK ARAPOSTATHIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
MEGAN WIEGELMAN, CMC, City Clerk

CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK
I, MEGAN WIEGELMAN, City Clerk of the City of La Mesa, California, do hereby certify the foregoing to be a true and correct copy of Ordinance No. 2025- , duly passed and adopted by the City Council of said City on the date and by the vote therein recited and that the same has been duly published according to law.

MEGAN WIEGELMAN, CMC, City Clerk
(SEAL OF CITY)

REPORT to the MAYOR and MEMBERS of the CITY COUNCIL
From the CITY MANAGER
DATE: December 9, 2025
SUBJECT: Resolution to Appropriate General Fund Reserves and Approve an Agreement with OpenGov, Inc for Software
Services
ISSUING DEPARTMENT: Finance
SUMMARY:

Issues:

Should the City Council approve a resolution to appropriate General Fund reserves and approve the agreement with OpenGov, Inc for software services? Recommendation:

That the City Council approve a resolution to appropriate General Fund reserves and approve the agreement with OpenGov, Inc for software services.

Fiscal Impact:

The cost for one year of the software is $81,374.53. Funds are available in General Fund Reserves for appropriation into account 1305-6486.

City’s Strategic Goals:
 Ensure a strong financial outlook through careful planning, sustainable service levels, and fiscal sustainability.

BACKGROUND:

The City of La Mesa entered into an agreement with OpenGov, Inc. on June 27, 2019, for budget and financial software. In 2020, the agreement was expanded to include a full financial system with payroll and budgeting modules, and in 2021 the agreement was amended to add upgrades and a procurement module.

Report to Mayor and Councilmembers
Date: December 9, 2025
Page: 2 of 3
OpenGov Financials was implemented for three Fiscal Years (2023-2025). However, the implementation was not entirely successful. Several key functions were missing.

To ensure a fully functional and reliable financial system for FY2026, the City returned to its prior financial system, FinancePLUS by CentralSquare Technologies.

FinancePLUS continues to maintain all financial records prior to FY2023 and resumed maintaining the City’s financial data beginning in FY2026. It does not contain financial transaction data for FY2023-2025, with the exception of payroll records, which remained in FinancePLUS throughout.

DISCUSSION:

OpenGov Financials must continue to be maintained because it contains the City’s financial records for FY2023-FY2025. Preserving full access to these historical records is critical, as the FY2025 audit is currently underway and the City will continue to rely on this data for audit support, financial research, and reference for prior year transactions. While staff has been actively downloading reports and exporting financial records, the absence of an active financial system for these three fiscal years would significantly hinder the City’s ability to research past activity An agreement for $81,374.53 will allow the City to maintain access to the financial system, including support, through November 30, 2026. Features that had been part of the earlier agreements but were never implemented or are no longer in use, such as payroll and procurement modules, are not included in this renewal.

The City's Purchasing Officer may waive formal competitive bidding if the commodity being purchased is required to match or be compatible with equipment presently on hand, and the purchase is made from the supplier that supplied such other equipment, per La Mesa Municipal Code Section 2.40.070(a)(3). Entering into an agreement with OpenGov for an additional year of their financial system will maintain the City’s complete financial records for FY2023-2025 which is essential for audit completion, historical accuracy, and to minimize inefficiencies in researching past financial activity.

Under these facts, the circumstances are that OpenGov previously provided a financial system, and the system needs to be maintained for a period of time and, as such, staff recommends that it is in the best interests of the City to award the agreement to OpenGov without a formal bidding process.

CONCLUSION:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve the resolution to appropriate General Fund reserves and approve the agreement with OpenGov, Inc for software services.

Report to Mayor and Councilmembers
Date: December 9, 2025
Page: 3 of 3
Reviewed by: Respectfully submitted by:
____________________ ____________________
Greg Humora Shannon Esenwein
City Manager Director of Finance
____________________
Scott Munzenmaier
Purchasing Officer
Attachments: A. Resolution
B. Agreement

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA TO

APPROPRIATE GENERAL FUND RESERVES AND APPROVE AN
AGREEMENT WITH OPENGOV, INC. FOR SOFTWARE SERVICES
WHEREAS, the City of La Mesa entered into an agreement with OpenGov, Inc. for budget and financial software which was implemented for three Fiscal Years (2023-2025), however, the implementation was not entirely successful;
WHEREAS, the City returned to its prior financial system, yet OpenGov Financials must continue to be maintained because it contains the City’s financial records for FY2023-FY2025; WHEREAS, an agreement for $81,374.53 will allow the City to maintain access to the financial system, including support, through November 30, 2026; and WHEREAS, the City's Purchasing Officer may waive formal competitive bidding if the commodity being purchased is required to match or be compatible with equipment presently on hand, and the purchase is made from the supplier that supplied such other equipment, per La Mesa Municipal Code Section 2.40.070(a)(3).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT AND IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Mesa, California, that the City Council intends to appropriate General Fund reserves and approve the agreement with OpenGov, Inc for software services for $81,374.53.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of La Mesa, California, held the 9
th day of December 2025, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK
I, MEGAN WIEGELMAN, City Clerk of the City of La Mesa, California, do hereby certify the foregoing to be a true and exact copy of Resolution No. 2025- , duly passed and adopted by the City Council of said City on the date and by the vote therein recited.

MEGAN WIEGELMAN, CMC, City Clerk
(SEAL OF CITY)

1 OpenGov ERP Master Services Agreement City of La Mesa, CA | Revised December 1, 2025 OpenGov Master Services Agreement
Between the City of La Mesa and
OpenGov, Inc.
for Enterprise Resource Planning
The parties to this Master Services Agreement (this “Agreement”) are OpenGov, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“OpenGov”), and the customer named in the signature block below (“Customer”). This Agreement, which becomes effective when fully executed (the “Effective Date”), sets forth the terms and conditions under which OpenGov will provide its products and services to Customer.

1. Definitions

1.1. “Customer Data” means the data that is provided by Customer to OpenGov pursuant to this Agreement (for example, by email or through Customer’s software systems of record), including any data transmitted through the Software Services.

1.2. “Documentation” means any written, electronic, or online materials produced by OpenGov, and made available to Customer in connection with the Software Services, including user guides, training materials, FAQs, and technical support content, but excluding Product Documentation.

1.3. “Intellectual Property Rights” means all past, present, and future intellectual property rights including those associated with works of authorship, copyrights, moral rights, trademarks, trade names, trade secrets, patent rights, and any other proprietary rights in intellectual property of every kind and nature.

1.4. “Order Form” means the document(s) separately executed by the parties or attached as an exhibit, that specifies the Software Services and the Professional Services that OpenGov will provide to Customer. All such Order Form(s) are incorporated into this Agreement by reference.

1.5. “Product Documentation” means the technical specifications that describe the features, functionality, configuration, and intended operation of the Software Services located at https://opengov.my.site.com/support/s/agreement-product-documentation, which is incorporated into this Agreement by reference.

1.6. "Professional Services" means the implementation, configuration, training, consulting, or other professional services provided by OpenGov or its authorized partners, and identified in the applicable Statement of Work.

1.7. "Software Services" means the commercial-off-the-shelf software products and services provided by OpenGov and identified in the applicable Order Form.

1.8. “Statement of Work” or “SOW” means the document(s) separately executed by the parties or attached as an exhibit to this Agreement or any applicable Order Form, that specifies the Professional Services that OpenGov will provide to Customer. All such SOW(s) are

2 OpenGov ERP Master Services Agreement City of La Mesa, CA | Revised December 1, 2025 incorporated into this Agreement by reference.

2. Software Services and Professional Services

2.1. Software Services.

2.1.1. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, OpenGov will use commercially reasonable efforts to provide the Software Services.

2.1.2. Support and Service Levels. Customer support is available by email to [email protected] or by using the chat messaging functionality of the Software Services. Customer may report issues any time; however, OpenGov will address issues during business hours. OpenGov will provide the applicable level of support in accordance with the Support and Software Service Levels located at https://opengov.com/service-sla, which is incorporated into this Agreement by reference.

2.2. Professional Services.

2.2.1. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, OpenGov will use commercially reasonable efforts to provide the Professional Services, if applicable.

Unless otherwise specified in the SOW, any pre-paid Professional Services must be utilized within one year from the Effective Date.

2.2.2. Travel Expenses for Professional Services. Travel expenses, if any, will be set forth in the applicable Order Form or SOW. Any additional travel expenses shall be subject to Customer’s prior written approval and will be reimbursable by Customer.

3. Restrictions and Responsibilities

3.1. Restrictions. Customer may not use the Software Services in any manner or for any purpose other than as expressly permitted by the Agreement. In addition, Customer shall not, and shall not knowingly or negligently, permit or enable any third party to: (a) use or access any of the Software Services to build a competitive product or service; (b) modify, disassemble, decompile, reverse engineer or otherwise make any derivative use of the Software Services (except to the extent applicable laws specifically prohibit such restriction); (c) sell, license, rent, lease, assign, distribute, display, host, disclose, outsource, copy or otherwise commercially exploit the Software Services; (d) perform or disclose any benchmarking or performance testing of the Software Services, including but not limited to load testing or stress testing; (e) remove any proprietary notices included with the Software Services; (f) use the Software Services in violation of applicable law; or (g) transfer any personal, sensitive, or personally identifiable information to OpenGov in a manner that violates Customer's obligations under the Data Processing Addendum.

3.2. Responsibilities. Customer shall be responsible for obtaining and maintaining computers, third-party software systems of record, and application programming interfaces needed to connect to, access, or otherwise use the Software Services. Customer shall also be responsible for: (a) ensuring that such equipment is compatible with the Software Services, (b) maintaining the security of such equipment, user accounts, passwords and

3 OpenGov ERP Master Services Agreement City of La Mesa, CA | Revised December 1, 2025 files, in accordance with industry standards, and (c) all uses of Customer user accounts by any party other than OpenGov. OpenGov is not responsible for the operation, support, or security of any third-party software, systems, or services not provided by OpenGov.

3.3. Data Processing Addendum. To the extent OpenGov processes any Customer Data that contains personal information, personally identifiable information, or sensitive personal information on behalf of Customer in the course of providing the Software Services and Professional Services under this Agreement, the parties agree to comply with the terms of the Data Processing Addendum, located at https://opengov.com/data-processingaddendum, which is incorporated into this Agreement by reference.

4. Intellectual Property Rights; License Grants; Access to Customer Data

4.1. OpenGov’s Intellectual Property Rights. OpenGov exclusively owns and retains all right, title, and interest to the Software Services, Professional Services, Documentation, and Product Documentation, including all Intellectual Property Rights therein. This includes, without limitation, all underlying technology, software, user interfaces, visual design elements (such as the “look and feel”), custom fonts, graphics, workflows, button icons, and any derivative works (e.g., enhancements, modifications, or corrections), including but not limited to those that are created in connection with or through the use of the Software Services, Professional Services, Documentation, or Product Documentation.

Customer may not reproduce, modify, distribute, or create derivative works based on any part of the Software Services, in whole or in part, without OpenGov’s prior written consent.

4.2. License Grant to Customer. OpenGov grants Customer a non-exclusive, non-transferable, non-sublicensable, royalty-free license to use the Software Services, Documentation, and Product Documentation during the Term for its internal use and the purpose as described in this Agreement. No additional rights or licenses shall be deemed granted.

4.3. Customer’s Intellectual Property Rights. Customer retains all right, title, and interest, including all Intellectual Property Rights, in and to Customer Data. Customer grants OpenGov and its authorized partners (such as cloud hosting providers) a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to access, use, store, edit, reformat and otherwise process Customer Data for the purpose of providing, maintaining, developing, and improving OpenGov’s products and services.

4.4. Aggregated and Anonymized Data. Customer agrees that OpenGov and its authorized partners may use aggregated and anonymized data derived from Customer Data to provide, maintain, develop, and improve OpenGov’s products and services, to provide general customer service support and improvements, and to perform data and usage analytics. Any insights, developments, or improvements arising from such aggregated, anonymized data shall be owned by OpenGov.

4.5. Access to Customer Data. Customer may download Customer Data from the Software Services at any time during the Term, excluding during routine software maintenance periods. For a period of 30 days after expiration of the Term, Customer may request that

4 OpenGov ERP Master Services Agreement City of La Mesa, CA | Revised December 1, 2025 OpenGov complete a one-time transfer of Customer Data in a format customarily used in the industry at OpenGov’s then-current hourly rate.

4.6. Deletion of Customer Data. Unless otherwise requested pursuant to this Section 4.6, upon the termination of this Agreement, Customer Data shall be deleted pursuant to OpenGov’s standard data deletion and retention practices, which is to delete Customer Data 45 days after termination or expiration of the Agreement. Upon written request, Customer may request deletion of Customer Data prior to the date of termination of this Agreement, in accordance with the notice requirements set forth in Section 10.2.

4.7. Feedback. “Feedback” means any suggestions, comments, ideas, recommendations, usage, or other input provided by Customer to OpenGov regarding the services. Customer grants OpenGov a non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide license to use such Feedback in the Software Services, Professional Services, Documentation and Product Documentation. OpenGov will exclusively own all right, title, and interest, including all Intellectual Property Rights, in and to any improvements, modifications, or derivative works to the Software Services, Professional Services, Documentation or Product Documentation that are based on or derived from such Feedback.

5. Confidentiality

5.1. “Confidential Information" means all confidential business, technical, and financial information of the disclosing party that is marked as “Confidential” or an equivalent designation or that should reasonably be understood to be confidential given the nature of the information and/or the circumstances surrounding the disclosure. OpenGov’s Confidential Information includes, without limitation, the software underlying the Software Services, Documentation, and Product Documentation.

5.2. Confidential Information does not include information that: (a) was publicly known or becomes publicly known through no breach of this Agreement by the receiving party; (b) is required to be disclosed upon request under any applicable federal, state, or local public records laws; (c) Customer expressly directs OpenGov make publicly available; (d) was lawfully known to the receiving party without restriction on disclosure before receipt from the disclosing party; (e) is disclosed to the receiving party by a third party who has the right to make such disclosure without restriction; or (f) is independently developed by the receiving party without access to the disclosing party’s Confidential Information.

5.3. Each party agrees to use the other's Confidential Information only in connection with this Agreement. Each party further agrees to protect the other party's Confidential Information using the measures that it employs with respect to its own Confidential Information of a similar nature, but in no event with less than reasonable care. If a party is required to disclose Confidential Information by law, subpoena, or court order, it must, to the extent legally permitted, promptly notify the other party in writing prior to the disclosure to give the other party an opportunity to oppose or limit the disclosure.

6. Term and Termination

5 OpenGov ERP Master Services Agreement City of La Mesa, CA | Revised December 1, 2025

6.1. Agreement Term. This Agreement begins on the Effective Date and will remain in effect until the termination or expiration of all active Order Forms entered into under this Agreement (“Term”), unless earlier terminated pursuant to this Section 6.

6.2. Renewal. Each Order Form shall automatically renew for additional terms equal in duration to its initial term (each, a “Renewal Term”), unless either party provides written notice of non-renewal at least 30 days prior to the expiration of the then-current term.

6.3. Termination for Cause. If either party materially breaches this Agreement and fails to cure such breach within 30 days after receiving written notice by the non-breaching party, the non-breaching party may terminate this Agreement.

6.4. Termination for Non-Appropriation. If required by applicable law, Customer may terminate this Agreement if it does not appropriate funds for a future fiscal year. In order to terminate for non-appropriation, Customer must provide at least 30 days’ prior written notice, provided it is after the first full year of the Agreement. Obligations to pay fees are non-cancelable, and payments are non-refundable. This section may not be used as a substitute for termination for convenience.

6.5. Effect of Termination. Upon termination of this Agreement pursuant to Section 6: (a) Customer shall pay in full for all of the Software Services and Professional Services for the then-current annual term; (b) OpenGov shall stop providing the Software Services and the Professional Services to Customer; and (c) with the exception of Customer Data, the return and deletion of which are addressed in Section 4, each party shall, upon request of the other party, return or delete any of the other party’s Confidential Information.

7. Payment of Fees

7.1. Fees; Invoicing; Payment; Expenses.

7.1.1. Fees. Fees for the Software Services and Professional Services are set forth in the applicable Order Form, and OpenGov will invoice Customer accordingly. Customer agrees to pay invoices within 30 days of receipt. Invoices are deemed received when OpenGov emails them to Customer’s designated billing contact. Obligations to pay fees are non-cancelable, and payments are non-refundable, except as expressly provided in Sections 8.1.2 and 8.1.3.

7.1.2. Annual Software Price Adjustment. OpenGov shall increase the fees for the Software Services during any Renewal Term by 5% each year or as otherwise agreed upon in the applicable renewal Order Form.

7.1.3. Travel Expenses. OpenGov will invoice Customer for travel expenses provided in the SOW or Order Form as they are incurred. Customer shall pay all such valid invoices within 30 days of receipt of invoice. Receipts shall be provided for the travel expenses listed on the invoice.

7.2. Consequences of Non-Payment. If Customer fails to make any payments required under any Order Form or SOW, then in addition to any other rights OpenGov may have under this Agreement or applicable law: (a) Customer will owe a late interest penalty of the maximum rate permitted by law; and (b) if Customer’s account remains delinquent (with

6 OpenGov ERP Master Services Agreement City of La Mesa, CA | Revised December 1, 2025 respect to payment of an undisputed invoice) for 10 days after receipt of a delinquency notice from OpenGov, which may be provided via email to Customer’s designated billing contact, OpenGov may temporarily suspend Customer’s access to the Software Service for up to 90 days to pursue good faith negotiations before pursuing termination in accordance with Section 6.3. Customer will continue to incur and owe all applicable fees irrespective of any such service suspension based on such Customer’s delinquency.

7.3. Taxes. Each party is responsible for the tax effects this Agreement imposes upon it. If Customer is tax-exempt, it will provide OpenGov its tax exemption certificate.

8. Representations and Warranties; Disclaimer

8.1. By OpenGov.

8.1.1. General Warranty. OpenGov represents and warrants that it has all right and authority necessary to enter into and perform this Agreement.

8.1.2. Professional Services Warranty. OpenGov further represents and warrants that the Professional Services, if any, will be performed in a professional and workmanlike manner in accordance with the related SOW and generally prevailing industry standards. For any breach of the Professional Services warranty, OpenGov will reperform the applicable services. If OpenGov is unable to re-perform such work as warranted, Customer will be entitled to recover all fees paid to OpenGov for the deficient work. Customer must give written notice of any claim under this warranty to OpenGov within 90 days of the completion of the Professional Services pursuant to the applicable SOW to receive such warranty remedies.

8.1.3. Software Services Warranty. OpenGov further represents and warrants that for the Term, the Software Services will perform in all material respects in accordance with the then-current Product Documentation. The foregoing warranty does not apply to (a) any Software Services that have been used in a manner other than as set forth in this Agreement, or (b) any pre-release features, functionality, or beta software services that Customer elects to use in the beta phase of development. For any breach of the Software Services warranty, OpenGov will repair or replace any nonconforming Software Services so that the affected portion of the Software Services operates as warranted. If OpenGov is unable to do so, Customer may terminate the Agreement and will be entitled to a refund of the pre-paid, unused portion of the fees from the date of the discovery of the defect. Customer must give written notice of any claim under this warranty to OpenGov within 90 days of Customer discovering the defect to receive such warranty remedies.

8.2. By Customer. Customer represents and warrants that (a) it has all right and authority necessary to enter into and perform this Agreement and (b) OpenGov’s use of Customer Data pursuant to this Agreement will not infringe, violate or misappropriate Intellectual Property Rights of any third party.

8.3. Disclaimer. OPENGOV DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE SOFTWARE SERVICES WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE; NOR DOES IT MAKE ANY WARRANTY AS TO THE

7 OpenGov ERP Master Services Agreement City of La Mesa, CA | Revised December 1, 2025 RESULTS THAT MAY BE OBTAINED FROM USE OF THE SOFTWARE SERVICES. EXCEPT AS SET FORTH IN THIS SECTION 8, THE SOFTWARE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED “AS IS” AND

OPENGOV DISCLAIMS ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT

NOT LIMITED TO, IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, TITLE, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT.

9. Limitation of Liability

9.1. By Type. NEITHER PARTY, NOR ITS SUPPLIERS, OFFICERS, AFFILIATES,

REPRESENTATIVES, CONTRACTORS OR EMPLOYEES, SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE

OR LIABLE WITH RESPECT TO ANY SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS AGREEMENT UNDER ANY CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, OR OTHER THEORY:
(A) FOR ERROR OR INTERRUPTION OF USE OR FOR LOSS OR INACCURACY OF

DATA OR COST OF PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES OR LOSS OF BUSINESS; (B) FOR ANY INDIRECT, EXEMPLARY, PUNITIVE, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES; OR (C) FOR ANY MATTER BEYOND A PARTY’S REASONABLE CONTROL, EVEN IF SUCH PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH LOSS OR DAMAGE.

9.2. By Amount. IN NO EVENT SHALL EITHER PARTY’S AGGREGATE, CUMULATIVE LIABILITY

FOR ANY CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY RELATED TO THIS AGREEMENT

EXCEED THE FEES PAID OR PAYABLE BY CUSTOMER TO OPENGOV FOR THE SOFTWARE SERVICES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT IN THE 24 MONTHS PRIOR TO THE ACT THAT GAVE RISE TO THE LIABILITY.

9.3. Limitation of Liability Exclusions. The limitations of liability set forth in Sections 9.1 and

9.2 above do not apply to, and each party accepts liability to the other for: (a) claims arising out of fraud or willful misconduct by either party; (b) either party’s infringement of the other party’s Intellectual Property Rights; (c) breach of obligations under Section 3.1; and (d) payment obligations under this Agreement.

9.4. No Limitation of Liability by Law. Because some jurisdictions do not allow liability or damages to be limited to the extent set forth above, some of the above limitations may not apply.

9.5. Notwithstanding any provision contained in Section 9, or otherwise in this Agreement, limitation of liability, pursuant to this Agreement, shall not apply to personal injury or death proximately caused by either party.

10. Miscellaneous

10.1. Logo Use. Upon prior written approval, OpenGov shall have the right to use and display Customer’s logos and trade names for marketing and promotional purposes in OpenGov’s website and marketing materials, subject to Customer’s trademark usage guidelines provided to OpenGov.

10.2. Notice. Ordinary day-to-day operational communications may be conducted by email, live chat or telephone. For notices required by the Agreement the parties must communicate

8 OpenGov ERP Master Services Agreement City of La Mesa, CA | Revised December 1, 2025 more formally in a writing sent via USPS certified mail and via email. OpenGov’s addresses for notice are: [email protected] with a mailed copy to OpenGov, Inc., 660 3rd Street, Suite 100, San Francisco, CA 94107.

10.3. Anti-corruption. Neither OpenGov nor any of its employees or agents has offered or provided any illegal or improper payment, gift, or transfer of value in connection with this Agreement. The parties will promptly notify each other if they become aware of any violation of any applicable anti-corruption laws in connection with this Agreement.

10.4. Injunctive Relief. The parties acknowledge that any breach of the confidentiality provisions or the unauthorized use of a party’s intellectual property may result in serious and irreparable injury to the aggrieved party for which damages may not adequately compensate the aggrieved party. The parties agree, therefore, that, in addition to any other remedy that the aggrieved party may have, it shall be entitled to seek equitable injunctive relief without being required to post a bond or other surety or to prove either actual damages or that damages would be an inadequate remedy.

10.5. Force Majeure. Neither party will be liable for any delay or failure to perform its obligations under this Agreement, due to any events beyond its reasonable control, including but not limited to acts of god, acts of governmental authority, war, riot, labor disputes, failures of performance by any third-party services, utilities, or equipment failures, or any other events beyond the party’s reasonable control. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Customer shall remain obligated to perform its obligations under Section 7.1.1.

10.6. Severability; Waiver. If any provision of this Agreement is found to be unenforceable or invalid, that provision will be limited or eliminated to the minimum extent necessary so that this Agreement will otherwise remain in full force and effect and enforceable. Any express waiver or failure to exercise promptly any right under this Agreement will not create a continuing waiver or any expectation of non-enforcement.

10.7. Survival. The following sections of this Agreement shall survive termination or expiration:

Section 5 (Confidentiality), Section 7 (Payment of Fees), Section 4.6 (Deletion of Customer Data), Section 8.3 (Warranty Disclaimer), Section 9 (Limitation of Liability), and Section 10 (Miscellaneous).

10.8. Assignment. There are no third-party beneficiaries to this Agreement. Neither party may assign, or otherwise transfer this Agreement without the other party's written consent, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, either party may assign, without such consent but upon written notice, its rights and obligations under this Agreement to its corporate affiliate or to any entity that acquires all or substantially all of its capital stock or its assets related to this Agreement, through purchase, merger, consolidation, or otherwise. Any other attempted assignment shall be void. This Agreement will benefit and bind permitted assigns and successors.

10.9. Independent Contractors. This Agreement does not create an agency, partnership, joint venture, or employment relationship, and neither party has any authority to bind the

9 OpenGov ERP Master Services Agreement City of La Mesa, CA | Revised December 1, 2025 other.

10.10. Governing Law and Jurisdiction. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of Customer’s jurisdiction, without regard to conflict of laws principles. The parties submit to personal jurisdiction and venue in the courts of Customer’s jurisdiction.

10.11. Complete Agreement. Either party has made no other promises or representations to the other party than those contained in this Agreement. Any additional or different terms in a purchase order or click-through agreement are expressly rejected by the parties and are void. Any modification to this Agreement must be in writing and signed by an authorized representative of each party. No third parties are authorized to modify this Agreement. If there is a conflict between this Agreement and any other attached or incorporated document, the terms of this Agreement shall control unless expressly stated otherwise.

10.12. HOLD HARMLESS
OpenGov shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend Customer and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers from any and all third-party claims, loss, liability, fines, penalties, costs and damages, demands and actions in law or equity (including reasonable attorney's fees and litigation expenses) that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the gross negligence or willful acts or omissions of OpenGov, its principals, officers, employees, agents or volunteers in the performance of this Agreement.

Procedures. Customer shall (a) promptly give notice of a claim to OpenGov, (b) give OpenGov sole control of the defense and settlement of the claim, (c) provide to OpenGov all available information and reasonable assistance, and (d) not compromise or settle such third-party claim.

Sole Remedy. The foregoing is OpenGov's sole obligation and Customer’s exclusive remedy with respect to indemnification. The indemnification obligations set forth in this Section are subject to the limitation of liability provisions of this Agreement.

10.13. INSURANCE
Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder and the results of that work by the Contractor, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors.

The certificate holder should be stated as:

City of La Mesa
Attn: Risk Management
8130 Allison Avenue, La Mesa, CA 91942

MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMIT OF INSURANCE

10 OpenGov ERP Master Services Agreement City of La Mesa, CA | Revised December 1, 2025 Coverage shall be at least as broad as:

Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office Form CG 00 01 covering CGL on an “occurrence” basis, including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury and personal & advertising injury with limits no less than $2,000,000 per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location (ISO CG 25 03 or 25 04) or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

Automobile Liability: ISO Form Number CA 00 01 covering any auto (Code 1), or if Contractor has no owned autos, hired, (Code 8) and non-owned autos (Code 9), with limit no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

Workers’ Compensation: as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer’s Liability Insurance with limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.

If the Contractor maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage and/or the higher limits maintained by the contractor. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.

Cyber Insurance (If applicable):

Cyber Insurance, with limits not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence or claim, $2,000,000 aggregate. Coverage shall be sufficiently broad to respond to the duties and obligations as is undertaken by Consultant in this Agreement that shall include, but not be limited to, coverage for third party claims and losses with respect to network risks (such as data breaches, unauthorized access or use, ID theft, theft of data) and invasion of privacy regardless of the type of media involved in the loss of private information, crisis management and identity theft response costs. This should also include breach notification costs, credit remediation and credit monitoring, defense and claims expenses, regulatory defense costs plus fines and penalties, cyber extortion, computer program and electronic data restoration expenses coverage (data asset protection), network business interruption, and funds transfer loss. Technology Professional Liability Errors and Omissions Insurance appropriate to the Consultant’s profession and work hereunder, with limits not less than $2,000,000 per claim. Coverage shall be sufficiently broad to respond to the duties and obligations as is undertaken by the Consultant in this Agreement providing coverage for, among other things, unauthorized access to or use of a computer network, unauthorized access to or dissemination of personally identifiable information, and breach of any law, whether statute, regulation or otherwise, governing the safeguarding of personally identifiable information.

The Policy shall include, or be endorsed to include, property damage liability coverage for damage to, alteration of, loss of, or destruction of electronic data and/or information “property” of the Agency in the care, custody, or control of the Consultant.

If the Consultant maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums

11 OpenGov ERP Master Services Agreement City of La Mesa, CA | Revised December 1, 2025 shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage and/or the higher limits maintained by the Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.

OTHER INSURANCE PROVISIONS
The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:

Additional Insured Status
The City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Contractor including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations. Coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Contractor’s insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 or the addition of both CG 20 10, CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38; and CG 20 37 if a later edition is used).

Primary Coverage
For any claims related to this contract, the Contractor’s insurance coverage shall be primary and non-contributory and at least as broad as ISO CG 20 01 12 19 as respects the Entity, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor’s insurance and shall not contribute with it. This requirement shall also apply to any Excess or Umbrella liability policies.

Umbrella or Excess Policy
The Contractor may use Umbrella or Excess Policies to provide the liability limits as required in this agreement. The Umbrella or Excess policies shall be provided on a true “following form” or broader coverage basis, with coverage at least as broad as provided on the underlying Commercial General Liability insurance.

Notice of Cancellation
Each insurance policy required above shall provide that coverage shall not be canceled, or not renewed, except after 30 calendar day written notice has been given to City. Upon issuance by the insurer, broker, or agent of a notice of cancellation or non-renewal, Contractor shall furnish City with a new certificate and applicable endorsements for such policy(ies). In the event any policy is due to expire during the work to be performed for City, Contractor shall provide a new certificate, and applicable endorsements, evidencing renewal of such policy upon renewal.

Waiver of Subrogation
Contractor hereby grants to City a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of said Contractor may acquire against the City by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance. Contractor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.

12 OpenGov ERP Master Services Agreement City of La Mesa, CA | Revised December 1, 2025 Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers authorized to conduct business in the state with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A-:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City.

Claims Made Policies (applicable only to Technology Errors & Omissions and Cyber Liability, see below)
If any of the required policies provide claims-made coverage:

The Retroactive Date must be shown and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work.

Insurance must be maintained, and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least three (3) years after completion of the contract of work.

If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the contract effective date, the Contractor must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of three (3) years after completion of work.

Verification of Coverage
Contractor shall furnish the City with original certificates and endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. All documents are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the Contractor’s obligation to provide them. These requirements shall survive expiration or termination of the Agreement.

Special Risks or Circumstances
Modification to these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances, shall only be affected upon mutual written amendment.

If at any time during the life of this Agreement or any extension, Contractor or any of its subcontractors fail to maintain any required insurance in full force and effect, all work under this Agreement shall be discontinued immediately, and all payments due or that become due to Contractor shall be withheld until notice is received by City that the required insurance has been restored to full force and effect and that the premiums therefore have been paid for a period satisfactory to City. Any failure to maintain the required insurance shall be sufficient cause for City to terminate this Agreement. No action taken by City hereunder shall in any way relieve Contractor of its responsibilities under this Agreement.

The fact that insurance is obtained by Contractor shall not be deemed to release or diminish the liability of Contractor, including, without limitation, liability under the indemnity provisions of this Agreement. The duty to indemnify City and its elected officials, officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers shall apply to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by Contractor.

13 OpenGov ERP Master Services Agreement City of La Mesa, CA | Revised December 1, 2025 Approval or purchase of any insurance contracts or policies shall in no way relieve from liability nor limit the liability of Contractor, its principals, officers, employees, agents, persons under the supervision of Contractor, vendors, suppliers, invitees, Contractors, subcontractors, or anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them.

10.14. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Customer shall require that OpenGov agree to submit any unresolved claims, counterclaims, disputes, controversies and other matters between them and the Customer or OpenGov arising out of or relating to this Agreement with the Customer or the breach thereof (“disputes”) first to mediation and then if not resolved, to non-binding arbitration prior to initiating suit or judicial proceeding.

14 OpenGov ERP Master Services Agreement City of La Mesa, CA | Revised December 1, 2025

10.15. SIGNATURES
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Contractor have executed the Agreement.

City of La Mesa: OpenGov, Inc.

A Municipal Corporation
Signature ________________________ Signature __________________________ Dr. Mark Arapostathis, Mayor
Date ________________________ Name __________________________ Signature ________________________ Title __________________________ Greg Humora, City Manager
Date __________________________ Date __________________________ ATTEST

City Clerk Date

APPROVED AS TO FORM

City Attorney Date

OpenGov Inc.
660 3rd Street, Suite 100
San Francisco, CA 94107
United States
Order Form Number: Q-12722 Prepared By: Allen Rosenbaum Created On: 12/01/2025 Email: [email protected]
Order Form Expiration: 12/25/2025 Contract Term: 12 Months Subscription Start Date: 12/01/2025
Subscription End Date: 11/30/2026
Customer Information:

Customer: City of La Mesa, CA Contact Name: Scott Munzenmaier Bill To/Ship To: 8130 Allison Ave Email:

La Mesa, California Phone:
[email protected]
619-667-1113
91942
United States
Order Details:

Billing Frequency: Prepaid
Payment Terms: Net 30 Days
SOFTWARE SERVICES:

Product Name Start Date End Date Annual Fee
OpenGov Financials and Budgeting 12/01/2025 11/30/2026 $70,874.55 Premium Support - Platinum 12/01/2025 11/30/2026 $10,500.00 Customer Billing/Service Periods:

Period: Total:
12/01/2025 $81,374.55
Order Form Legal Terms:

This Order Form incorporates the OpenGov Master Services Agreement ("MSA") attached here or available at https://opengov.com/terms-of-service/master-services-agreement/.

The "Agreement" between OpenGov and the entity identified above ("Customer") consists of the Order Form, MSA, and, if Professional Services are purchased, the Statement of Work.

Unless otherwise specified above, fees for the Software Services and Professional Services shall be due and payable, in advance, 30 days from receipt of the invoice.

By signing this Agreement, Customer acknowledges that it has reviewed, and agrees to be legally bound by the Agreement. Each party’s acceptance of this Agreement is conditional upon the other’s acceptance of the Agreement to the exclusion of all other terms
City of La Mesa, CA: OpenGov, Inc.

Signature:
____________________________
Signature:
____________________________
Name:
____________________________
Name:
____________________________
Title:
____________________________
Title:
____________________________
Date:
____________________________
Date:
____________________________

DATE: December 9, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Megan Wiegelman, City Clerk
VIA: Greg Humora, City Manager
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF AN

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA
ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA

FIRE CODE
At the Council meeting of November 12, 2025, the Council unanimously approved the introduction and first reading of the Ordinance adopting by reference the 2025 Edition of the California Fire Code, known as the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 9 (CCR, T-24, P-9), incorporating the International Fire Code, 2025 Edition published by the International Code Council, with certain amendments, additions, and deletions, and amending Title 11 of the La Mesa Municipal Code, and all other ordinances in conflict therewith..

Staff recommends the Council approve the second reading and adoption of the Ordinance.

Attachment: A. Draft Ordinance
B. Ordinance Strikeout and Code References

ORDINANCE NO. 2025-

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE, KNOWN AS THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, TITLE 24, PART 9 (CCR, T-24, P-9), INCORPORATING THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE, 2025 EDITION PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CODE
COUNCIL, WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS; AND AMENDING TITLE 11 OF THE LA MESA MUNICIPAL CODE AND ALL

OTHER ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT THEREWITH
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA MESA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: Findings of local conditions. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17958, the City Council makes the following finding:

A. Hot summer Mediterranean climate (Koppen), hilly terrain, density of development, canyons and dry dense brush, and the environment existing in the City of La Mesa constitute local conditions which require the California Fire Code be modified as expressed therein.

SECTION 2: Chapter 11.04 of the La Mesa Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety and rewritten to read as follows:

Chapter 11.04

FIRE CODE

11.04.010 California Fire Codes, 2025 Edition – Adopted by reference The California Fire Code, 2025 Edition, as adopted by the California Office of the State Fire Marshal and including Appendix Chapters 4, B, BB, C, CC, H, and O but excluding section 112 and 113.4 as published by the International Code Council, is adopted by reference as the fire code of the city (the "fire code"), for protecting the interests of health, life and safety as they relate to the use or occupancy of building or premises. All of the regulations, provisions, penalties, conditions and terms of the California Fire Code 2025 Edition, are referred to, adopted and made a part of this chapter as though fully set out in this chapter, excepting such portions as are added, deleted, modified or amended by this chapter. The California Fire Code is referred to in this chapter as the "CFC" and one copy is on file in the office of the city clerk.

11.04.020 – Repealing of Previous Ordinance
Ordinance 2022-2901 of the City of La Mesa adopting by reference the California Fire Code, 2022 Edition, known as the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 9 incorporating the International Fire Code, 2021 Edition, published by the International Code Council, and all other ordinances or parts of ordinance in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

2 11.04.030 Section 101.1 Amended - Title
Section 101.1 of the CFC is amended to read as follows:
101.1 Title. These regulations will be known as the Fire Code of the City of La Mesa, hereinafter referred to as "this code".

11.04.040 Section 105.3.1 Amended – Expiration
Section 105.3.1 of the CFC is amended to read as follows:
105.3.1 Expiration. An operational permit shall remain in effect until reissued, renewed or revoked, or such a period of time as specified in the permit. Construction permits shall automatically become invalid unless the work authorized by such permit is commenced within one hundred eighty days after its issuance, or if the work authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned for a period of one hundred eighty days after the time the work is commenced. If a final inspection is not obtained within the three-year time period, a permit will become invalid and a new permit will be required. Before such work commences, a new permit shall be first obtained and the fee to recommence work, if any, shall be one-half the amount required for a new permit for such work, provided no changes have been made or will be made in the original construction documents for such work, and provided further that such suspension or abandonment has not exceeded one year. Permits are not transferable and any changes in occupancy, operation, and tenancy or owner shall require that a new permit be issued.

11.04.080 Section 108 Amended and Added – Schedule of Fees Section 108.2 of the CFC is amended to read as follows:
108.2 Schedule of fees. The permit fees for all permits authorized by this code shall be as listed in the City of La Mesa Schedule of Fees.

Section 108.2.1 of the CFC is added to read as follows:
108.2.1 Cost Recovery. This section is to establish authority to obtain reimbursements from responsible individuals for the expenses of any emergency response and/or code enforcement action by the City of La mesa Fire Department to protect the public from fire or hazardous substances and situations as allowed by the general laws if the State of California and the La Mesa Municipal Code.

Section 108.7 of the CFC is added to read as follows:
108.7 Reimbursements. (a) in accordance with the Health as Safety Code Section 13000 et seq., any individual who acts negligently or in violation of the law and thereby requires the jurisdiction to provide an emergency response to a danger posed by a fire or hazardous substances shall be liable for reimbursement to the agency for the cost incurred.(b) In accordance with Government Code Sections 53150 through 53158, any individual who is under the influence of an alcoholic beverage or any drug or the combined influence of an alcoholic beverage or any drug, and whose negligent operation of a motor vehicle, boat or vessel, or civil aircraft caused by that influence, proximately causes any incident and thereby requires that agency to provide an emergency response shall reimburse the agency for the cost incurred.

3 Section 108.8 of the CFC is added to read as follows:
108.8 Expense Recovery. This section establishes authority to obtain from responsible individuals for the expanse of any emergency response and/or enforcement action by the City of La Mesa Fire Department to protect the public from fire, hazardous substances and dangerous situations as allowed under the La Mesa Municipal Code and by laws if the State of California.

Section 108.9 of the CFC is added to read as follows: 107.9 Cumulative Remedies. The remedies contained in this code are cumulative and inclusive of other remedies contained in the La Mesa Municipal Code. Nothing herein prevents the City Attorney or appropriate enforcement officer from pursuing remedies at law or equity to address violations of this code. Nothing herein shall prevent the application of civil remedies authorized by La Mesa Municipal Code Section

1.12.010(e).

11.04.050 Section 112 Amended - Board of Appeals
Section 112 of the CFC is amended to read as follows:

Appeals Board. Appeals to the decisions or determinations made by the Fire Marshal or Fire Code Official relative to the application and interpretation of the Fire Code adopted by the City, the applicant may appeal the decision to the Fire Chief and the City Manager within thirty (30) days from the date of the decision appealed and further defined in the City of La Mesa Municipal Code 11.12.030.

11.04.060 Section 113.4 Amended - Violation Penalties
Section 113.4 is amended to read as follows:

Violation Penalties. Any person who violates a provision of this code or shall fail to comply with any of the requirements thereof or who shall to erect, install, alter, repair or do work in violation of the approved construction documents or lawful directive of the fire code official, or of a permit or certificate used under provisions of this code, shall be guilty of an infraction or misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000 dollars or by imprisonment in the County jail not to exceed six (6) months, or both such fine and imprisonment. Each day that a violation continues after due notice has been served shall be deemed a separate offense. The imposition of one penalty for any violation shall not excuse the violation or permit it to continue, and all such persons shall be required to correct or remedy such violations or defects within a reasonable time as determined by the fire code official: and when not otherwise specified, each day that prohibited conditions are maintained shall constitute a separate offense.

11.04.070 Section 113.4 Amended - Failure to Comply
Section 113.4 of the CFC is amended to read as follows:

Section 113.4 Failure to Comply. Any person, who shall continue any work having been served with a stop work notice, except such work as that the person is directed to perform to remove a violation or unsafe condition, shall be liable to a fine of not less than $250 dollars or more than $1,000 dollars.

4 11.04.090 Section 202 Amended – Definitions
Section 202 of the CFC is amended by adding the following definitions:

Accessory Structure is a building or structure used to shelter or support any material, equipment, chattel, or occupancy other than a habitable building. (A) (See Structure).

Combustible Vegetation is material that in its natural state will readily ignite, burn and transmit fire from the vegetation growth to any structure: this includes ground fuels which are any native or landscape vegetation not considered a tree and generally in contact with the ground.

Fire Authority Having Jurisdiction (FAHJ) is the designated entity providing enforcement if the fire regulations as they relate to planning, construction, and development. This entity may also provide fire suppression and other emergency services.

Fire Department is any regularly organized fire department, fire protection district, a legally formed volunteer fire department recorded with the County of San Diego, or a fire company regularly charged with the responsibility of proving fire protection to the jurisdiction.

Fire Hazard is anything that increases or could create an increase of hazard or menace of fire to a greater degree than customarily recognized as normal by persons in the public service regularly engaged in preventing, suppressing or extinguishing fire or anything or act which could obstruct, delay, hinder or interfere with the operations of the fire department or egress of the occupants in the event of fire.

Fuel Modification Zone is a strip of land where combustible vegetation has been thinned, modified or both and partially or totally replaced with approved drought tolerant, fire resistant, and/or irrigated plants to provide an acceptable level of risk from vegetation fires. Fuel modification reduces radiant and convective heat, thereby reducing the amount of heat exposure on the roadway or structure and providing fire suppression forces a safer area in which to operate.

Hazardous Fire Area is any geographic area mapped by State or local jurisdiction as a high or very high fire hazard area, or as set forth by the FAHJ that contains the type and condition of vegetation, topography, weather, and structure density to potentially increase the possibility of vegetation conflagration fires shall be considered a hazardous fire area.

Heavy Timber Construction as described in the California Building Code.

Off-site Roadway is a road, street, public highway, or private road, used for fire apparatus, access from a publicly maintained road to the boundary of the subject property.

On-site Roadway is a road, street, public highway, private road, or driveway used for fire apparatus access within the boundaries of the subject property or land division. Planning Authority Having Jurisdiction (PAHJ) is the identified authority regulating and enforcing planning and/or construction standards.

Response Time is the elapsed time from the fire department's receipt of the first alarm to when the first fire unit arrives on the scene.

Travel Time is the estimated time it would take for a responding agency to travel from the fire

5 station to the furthest structure in a proposed development project, determined by measuring the safest, most direct, appropriate, and reliable route with consideration given to safe operating speeds for heavy fire apparatus.

Vegetation Conflagration is an uncontrolled fire spreading through vegetative fuels, and exposing and consuming structures in the advancing path of fire.

11.04.100 Section 503.2.1 Amended – Dimensions
Section 503.2.1 of the CFC is amended to read as follows:

Section 503.2.1 Dimensions. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed improved width of not less than twenty (20) feet, except for single family residential driveways not to exceed 150 feet in length from the public-right-a-way and serving no more than two single family dwellings, shall have a minimum of sixteen (16) feet unobstructed improved width. Any of the following, which have separated lanes of one-way traffic: gated entrances with card readers; guard stations or center medians, are allowed, provided that each lane is not less that fourteen (14) feet wide. All fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen feet six inches (13'6"). Vertical clearance or road width shall be increased when, in the opinion of the fire code official, vertical clearances or road widths are not adequate to provide fire apparatus access.

11.04.040 Section 503.3.1 Added – Fire Lane Designation Section 503.3.1 of the CFC is added to read as follows:
503.3.1 Fire lane designation. Where the fire code official determines that it is necessary to ensure adequate fire access, the fire code official may designate existing roadways as fire access roadways as provided by Vehicle Code Section 22500.1 (public) or 22658(a) (private).

11.04.010 Section 505.1 Amended – Address Identification Section 505.1 of the CFC is amended to read as follows:

Section 505.1 Address Identification. Address Numbers. Approved numbers and/or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings and at appropriate additional locations as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or roadway fronting the property from either direction of approach. Said numbers shall contrast with their background, and shall meet the following minimum standards as to size: minimum three inches (3") high with a one-half inch (~"- stroke for individual suites and apartments, minimum four inches (4") high with a one-half inch (1/2") stroke for residential buildings, minimum eight inches (8") high and one-half (1/2") stroke for commercial, multi-residential building, and industrial buildings. Additional numbers shall be required where deemed necessary by the fire code official, such as rear access doors, building corners, and entrances to commercial centers. The fire code official may require larger address numbers based on visibility and the needs of emergency response personnel.