The URL can be used to link to this page

04-25-1960 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA April 25, 1960 The meeting was called to order by Mayor Heath at 7:35 P. M. in the West Covina City Hall. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council- man Barnes, with the invocation given by Rabbi Halpern of the Citrus Valley Jewish Center. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Heath, Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder Others Present: Mr. George Aiassa, City Manager Mr. Robert Flotten, City Clerk Mr. Dwight Newell (for the City Attorney) Mr. Thomas Dosh, Public Service Director. Mr. Harold Joseph, Planning Coordinator Absent: Mr. Harry C. Williams, City Attorney APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 11, 1960 - approved as corrected, as follows: Page 29 - last paragraph - the statement of Mayor Brown should read: "I do not agree on the lease deal" instead of "I do agree on the lease deal", as shown. CITY CLERK'S REPORTS PROJECT .;NO..'' :C"8211; Accept Storm Drain Improvement ('Tony Pipeline Construction) APPROVED LOCATION: Lot 7 - Tract 14110 Rio Verde Drive and Arturo Street Accept storm drain improvement and authorize release of Founder's Insurance Company Performance Bond No. 20521 in the amount of $837.38. Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Brown and carried, that storm drain improvement in Project No. C-82 be accepted and authorization given for the release of Founder's Insurance Company Performance Bond No. 20521 in the amount of $837.38. PROJECT NO, C-69 Approve plans and specifications • (Wescove School Site) APPROVED LOCATION: California Avenue, between Merced and Vine Avenues Approve plans and specifications for street improvements and authorize the City Engineer to proceed with project. Mr. Aiassa: At the last meeting the Council approved a provisional contract with the West Covina School District relative to their share of this project with the City. s C. C. 4-25-60 PROJECT NO. C-69 - continued Councilman Towner: 0 how a project of this nature Page Two I understand the school districts have some problems in contributing to off site improvements and I am wondering is handled. Mr. Aiassa: The City Council directs me to meet with the school district officials and to go over the entire off site improvements in which we and they will participate. We usually only participate in the matter of grade lowering, etc. In this matter we had cul-de-sac drain and street lowering program and the school participated almost as much as a subdivider would, but we usually participate a little bit more than we do anywhere else. Councilman Brown: The State has become more lenient in relation to street improvements than on the school site itself. Mr. Aiassa: The area of Hollenbeck and Merced is a new school site which is a reversion to acreage and on which the school is accepting all improvements as approved by Council to the subdivider. In those conditions the school will have to place those improvements as Council approved them. Relative to the Bassett School District we have three streets. The most that can go in are two streets and we have a problem there which will have to be referred back to Council. Councilman Brown: Get Sunset and let one of the others go. Mr. Aiassa: One street is already in. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried, that the plans and specifications for street improvements in Project No. C-6#gbe approved and authorization given for the City Engineer to proceed with the project. PROJECT NO. SS-7 Approve plans and specifications (Wescove School Site) APPROVED LOCATION: California Avenue between Vine and Merced Avenues. Approve plans and specifications for sanitary sewers, Project No. SS-7 and authorize the City Engineer to proceed with the project. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried, that the plans and specifications for sanitary sewers in Project No. SS-7 be approved and authorization given for the City Engineer to proceed with the project. •PROJECT NO. C-122 Approve plans and specifications (Fire Station No. 2) APPROVED bid basis. Estimated cost, LOCATION: Cortez Street between Hollen- beck and Citrus Streets Approve plans and specifications for reinforced concrete slab at Fire Station No. 2 and authorize the City Engineer to proceed with the project on an informal $1,000.00. Mr. Aiassa: on the black top the surface This is a budgeted item brought up last year. It was proposed because where the big fire trucks are parked for servicing does not hold up so it was suggested we C. C. 4-25-60 Page Three PROJECT NO. C-122 - continued Mr. Aiassa - continued: make this area one square of concrete for parking of fire trucks. • Councilman Brown: I do not remember it, but at the time this area was paved it was paved over — mud and slush and it is surprising any- thing stays in there. Mr. Aiassa: It is good protection because if work is done on the trucks in that area, and oil and grease are spilled, they can be easily washed off, while on black top this presents a problem. Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Brown, that the plans and specifications be approved for Project No. C-122 and authori- zation given for the City Engineer to proceed with the project on an informal bid basis not to exceed the amount of $1,000.00. Councilman Towner: I notice the motion indicated "not to exceed the amount of $1,000.00". Councilman Barnes: That amount was set up in the budget for this project and that was the estimated cost. We do not want IDexceed that amount in the bid. Mayor Heath: This is only receiving informal bids, so perhaps that should be struck off the motion. Councilman Brown: Informal bids can be accepted under the amount of $2,000.00, and if it is over then Council can deny or approve it. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Brown, Noes: None Absent: None PROJECT NO. C-115 Award of Contract (Palm View Park Culvert) APPROVED Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath LOCATION: Southwest corner of Palm View Park Informal bids received and opened in the office of the City Engineer April 7, 1960. Engineer's report Bid Alternate Bid Crowell & Larson $Ulzi—.00 $-676.13 Raymond R. Dollar 650.00 675.00 Boddum Constr. Co., Inc. 947.50 1,054.31 • The recommendation of the City Engineer was for the bid to be awarded to CU°well & Larson in the amount of $676.13 because although they were not the lowest bidder, there being a difference of $1.13 between them and the lowest bidder, Raymond R. Dollar, the recommendation is based upon the fact that this firm has the contract forthe construction of street improvements in Tract No. 20199 and can therefore better coordinate the construction of this box culvert with the construction of street improvements. C. C. 4-25-60 Page Four PROJECT NO. C-115 - continued Mr. Aiassa: The Council is familiar with this drain problem and last year authorized this -in our budget to correct the problem rela- tive to the sump hole in there that collects water. To the question as to whether this slightly higher bid can be accepted rather than the lowest bid, Mr. Newell stated that since this is an,informal bid it is within the Council°s jurisdiction to make this choice. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes, that the City Manager and City Engineer be authorized to proceed with Project No. C-115 relative to the bid being awarded to Crowell & Larson in the amount of $676.13, with the expenditure not to exceed the amount of $700.00. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Brown, Noes: None Absent: None RESOLUTION NO. 1823 Approving final map Tract No. 25527 (Trask Land Company) ADOPTED Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING A FINAL SUBDIVISION MAP OF TRACT NO. 25527, ACCEPTING DEDICATION THEREIN OFFERED AND ACCEPTING AN AGREEMENT BY THE SUBDI- VIDER AND SURETY BOND TO SECURE SAME" Founders Insurance Company Bond No. 21028 in the amount of $24,300.00 for street and sanitary sewer improvements. LOCATION: West side of California Avenue, south of Walnut Creek Wash. Councilman Brown: The corner was marked "not a part" and we asked for improvements there. Mr. Aiassa: That was a condition and that is covered. Mayor Heath: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the Resolution. Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Brown, that said Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath Noes: None, Absent: None Said Resolution was given No. 1813 RESOLUTION NO. 1814 The City Clerk presented: is Open 1-foot lot for street "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF and highway purposes THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING FOR (Evanwood Avenue) STREET AND HIGHWAY PURPOSES CERTAIN ADOPTED REAL PROPERTY HERETOFORE GRANTED AND CONVEYED TO SAID CITY" LOCATION: North end of Evanwood Avenue, north of Service Avenue. Open 1-foot lot #39, Tract No. 22831 for access to Tract No. 25527. C. C. 4-25-60 Page Five RESOLUTION NO. 1.814 m continued Mayor Heath: Hearing no objections, we'will waive further reading of the body of the Resolution. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes, that said Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath Noes: None Absent: None Said Resolution was given No. 1814. RESOLUTION NO. 1815 The City Clerk presented: Accept Grant Deed "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE Precise Plan No. 39 CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A CERTAIN Zone Variance No. 133 WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING THE (Charles W. Varney, Jr.) RECORDATION THEREOF" ADOPTED LOCATION: Portion of Thelborn Street between Azusa and La Breda Avenues. For street and highway purposes to be known as Thelborn Street. Mayor Heath: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the Resolution. Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Towner, that said Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll, call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath Noes: None Absent: None Said Resolution was given No. 1815 SCHEDULED MATTERS BIDS PROJECT NO. C-101 LOCATION: 1444 W. Garvey Avenue Award of Contract. (City Hall Addition) The bids were opened at 10:00 A. M., April 21, 1960, in the office of the City Clerk, as advertised, and referred to the Engineering Department for recommendation to the City Council at this meeting. The bids were as follows: Waale Construction Co. Charles T. Smith Arthur E. Isensee Prime Contract Bid $40,845.00 43,890.00 Alternate Bid 39,969.00 41,877.00 46,890.00 10% Bid Bonds were received from all of the above bidders Mr. Aiassa: The estimate on this project was $35,940.00 but it did not include the items shown on the plans as future air conditioning units in the amount of $1,000.00 which would bring the estimate to $36,940.00. C. Co 4-25-60 Page Six PROJECT NO. C-101 BIDS - continued Mayor Heath: How much was in the budget for this? Mr, Aiassa: We budgeted the amount of $14'000:00- • and the rest was to be from appropriated capital outlay and to use monies from the sale of the old police station, figuring an estimatedamount of its sales at $25,000.00. Mayor Heath: We have the finances to obtain this? Mr, Aiassa: We will use the appropriated reserve, which we have budgeted for. Mayor Heath: What if we do not sell the old police building? Mr, Aiassa: We still have enough in the reserve. Mrs, Van Dame: What are the offices to go in here? Mr. Aiassa: We will be removing the Sanitation De- partment from the basement and the Service Department will be all under one roof. Mrs. Van Dame: Isn't the basement good enough? Mr, Aiassa: There are no windows. Mr. Dosh: There is only one exit from it. Councilman Towner: I notice there is an alternate bid on the other two bidders and I am wonder- ing whether everything will be included in the work of the low bidder. Mr. Dosh: Yes, it is. The low bidder gave us one bid and that was an alternate bid which includes everything on the plans and specifications. The alternate is for three additional air conditioners, and the reason for originally leaving these out was we did not know whether or not these offices using these would be used for this par- ticular purpose at that time. There will be 6 new air conditioners and a transfer of three air conditioners from the Planning Department. Mr. Aiassa: Aside from the original specifications there was the matter of bringing in rest rooms and the east -south wall not on the original plan, which added to the costa Councilman Barnes: The original estimate was $30,OOOo00? Mr, Aiassa: It was thirty-one thousand and something, • Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes, that the award of contract for Project C-101 be given to the Waale Construction Company in the amount of $39,969.00 as the lowest responsible bidder, and all other bids and bid bonds be returned to the unsuccessful bidders. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath Noes: None Absent: None C. Co 4-25-60 DISTRICT A°11-57-5 Sanitary Sewer District Award of Bid Page Seven LOCATION. Cortez*Street, Hollenbeck_' Street and Vanderhoof Drive Sewer .District (Falcon Construction Corp,) Bids were opened as advertised at 10:00 A. M., April 21' 1960, in the off ice of the City Clerk and referred'to the.City" Engineer for recommendation to the City Council at this meeting. Notice of Publication in the West Covina Tribune on April 7 and 14, 1960,"has been received and this was placed as a news item in the Green Sheet on March 31, 1960. The bids received were as follows: Falcon Construction Corp. $256,653.71 Bo J e Zarubica 268,957.21 J. L. Construction Co. 271,839.49 Matt Jo Vukojevich ) John Kordich ) 279,291.77 Martin Kordick 279,796020 Mike Prlich & Sons 299;085065 Charles L. Burch & Sons 305,569.06 Mike Ramljak Co. 314,431.60 Correction $271,839.56 279.288.52 2999095.41 314,446.61 10% Bid Bonds were received from all of the above bidders. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes, that the bid on Sanitary Sewer District A111-57-5 be awarded to the Falcon Construc- tion Corporation in the amount of $256,653.71, as the lowest responsible bidder, and that all bids and bid bonds be returned to the unsuccessful bidders. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes. Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath Noes: None Absent: None Councilman Barnes: What was the cost per lot? Public Service Director Dosh: The amount in excess of $5.00 per running foot was the estimate but the bid would make it less than that. RESOLUTION NO. 1816 Award of contract to perform sewer work in District A111-57-5 (Falcon Construco Corp,) ADOPTED Mayor Heath: The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AWARDING CONTRACT TO IMPROVE VANDERHOOF DRIVE AND OTHER STREETS AND RIGHTS OF WAY IN THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH RESOLUTION OF INTEN- TION NO. 17601, (A°11-57-5) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the Resolution. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes, that said Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows. Ayes: Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath Noes: None Absent: None Said Resolution was given No, 1816 C. C. 4-25-60 HF. AR. i NaR ZONE CHANGE NO. 156 James W. Hathcock APPROVED Page Eight LOCATION° Southwesterly corner of Sunset and Service Avenues. Recommended for approval by the • Planning Commission relative to the request to reclassify from Zone R-A, Potential C-R, to Zone C-2 under their Resolution No. 890 of April 6, 1960-.; Maps were presented by theCity Clerk and the Resolution of the Planning Commission was read. Mayor Heath opened the public hearing,' stating that Council was operating under Ordinance No. 502 relative to 3 minutes limitation of time regarding testimony and if more was required the proponents should so state so that Council could consider the request, which would also give the opponents the same time that might be indicated, and that all those desiring to present testimony should rise and be sworn in by the City Clerk. IN FAVOR Mr. Donald A. Thompson: I am speaking for the proponents and for the First' -Federal Savings of Alhambra now located at 152 S. Glendora Avenue. We feel there_ is no reason for any longer time to be spent on this as the Planning Commission has gone over this thoroughly. The Council has now zoned this for C-2 with architectural overlay to protect the interests of the City. We will be glad to participate in building up this area and feel that we can do a good job for the City in this area if we can proceed. There being no further testimony, the hearing was declared closed. Councilman Towner-. I have only one question to assure that proper action has been taken, and as a matter of record. As I understand it, action was taken by the City Council making the zone change and adopt- ing the ordinance on architectural overlay covering this and other properties? Councilman Brown-. That is correct. A was final a week ago tonight. Mr. Aiassao For the benefit of those Councilmen who were not present at the Council meeting regarding this matter of zoning, I would like to indicate that the change in the setback lines on Sunset Avenue is as shown on the map on the board and was in relation to the recommendations of Council regarding this setback. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Towner And carried, that Zone Change No. 156 be approved, subject to the recommendation of the Planning Department. • ZONE CHANGE NO. 158 LOCATION-. Southeasterly side of Service Jett & Associates Avenue, between Sunset Avenue and APPROVED proposed Center Street. Planning Commission recommended approval of the reclassification from Zone R-A, Potential C-R, to Zone C-2 on April 6,1960, Resolution No. 891. Co Co 4-25-60 ZONE CHANGE NO. 158 -,continued Page Nine Maps were presented by the City Clerk who read the Resolution of the Planning Commission. Mayor Heath opened the public hearing and stated all those desiring to present testimony should rise and be sworn in by the City Clerk. There being no testimony presented, the hearing was declared closed. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried, that Zone Change No. 158 be approved, subject to the recommendations of the Planning Department. UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT LOCATION: Southeast corner of Merced NO. 43 (Christian Science and Butterfield Road. Socity of West Covina) REFERRED TO PLANNING Planning Commission denied request for COMMISSION Church use and Sunday School use in Zone R-1, Resolution No. 880, on March 16, 1960. Appealed by the applicant on March 25, 1960, and hearing set for this date at request of applicant. Maps were presented by the City Clerk and Planning.--Comm1§st,�n_.r.esolution was read. Mayor Heath opened the public hearing, stated the time limitation for testimony under Ordinance 502, and that all those desiring to present testimony should rise and be sworn in by the City Clerk. IN FAVOR Mr. Franklin Fry: I am chairman of the Building Committee of the Christian Science Society of West Covina and speak for the proponents. As I understand this, it was denied because the cul-de-sac was 700 feet long and parking facilities were inadequate, and these were the only reasons for denial. We have submitted a new plan as indicated on the board and I would like to go over some of the conditions of the Planning Department prior to the Commission meeting which we were to abide by if zoning was granted. In answering those conditions we have a written communi- cation on March 14, 1960 addressed to the Planning Department of the City. We had no opportunity to present this letter to the Commission and it wasn't discussed with theme Mayor Heath: Was there any other new testimony pre- sented here that was not presented to the Commission? Mr. Fry: None, except we submit two alternate • plans which is an extension of Leaf out to Butterfield and an extension of Leaf out to Merced. We submitted the original plan of the cul-de-sac which is more acceptable to the residents of the area because they feel they did not want Leaf Avenue extended. However, we hadn't been told we could submit an alternate plan so nothing was said about alternate routes. We have submitted a new plan and either plan will be acceptable to use The parking area will be revised to take care of alternate plans whichever way you go relative to the street. C. C. 4-25-60 UNCLASST'FIED ,USE PERMIT NO. 43 - continued Page Ten Church zoning is very important and there are - very few -places left- - in the City for church use except on major highways which are'riot good for such a use and I think you will agree. This'loeatibn"is'very • adaptable to a church as recommended by the Planning Department. M. Lyle I have no connection with -this Clurdh, 1518 E. McWood but I believe that a Church should:'be closer to the homes and I do not see how such a use can be detrimental to a residential area and opposition is not 100% against this. Mrs. Westcott I think it is very important that a 1229 Leaf Street Church, rather than anything else - or a vacant lot for 5 years - should go in here. IN OPPOSITION Mr. A. D. Schultz I have been asked to speak for the group 1234 Robin Road who are against this and I have a peti- tioh of 146 signatures of those Who ire opposed to this use here. r. We were told at the time of purchasing our homes here that the area - would be totally developed in R-1 and Leaf Avenue cut through. C.ir- cumstanees would now lead us to believe that the subdivider is not going to fulfill his obligations to those who bought homes in what was definitely indicated to be a residential area. We also believe this use will create more traffic hazard. This is also spot zoning and it is our fourth trip here in relation to the area. We believe our investments should be protected and that it will devaluate our real estate, as you will get a lesser amount of loan equivalent if there is a church in a residential area. According to planning of church facilities there is another parcel of land, west four -tenths of a mile, proposed for a Church and we know you have considered closeness of churches in an area before, Mr. Tuesle'y I am a block and a half from this site. 1703 E. Merced I am against spot rezoning. The pro- perty was zoned residential and it should stay that way. I object to any rezoning of this property for any use which would tend to complicate the safety and welfare of the residents in the area. I feel the Church would create problems which encouraged the Commission to refuse this application. As Director of Public Relations of Los Angeles, Ventura and Orange Counties, although I am speaking as a'citizen of this City and not . for my organization, spot zoning of residential is,a bad thing gener- ally and should be kept out. IN REBUTTAL Mr. Fry; In the original planning of our City it is obvious that church zoning was: not laid -out in the master planning and we have to have spot zoning for church needs. The only other areas are on wide boulevards and the cost is prohibitive for'such land and it isn't good for the community or people to place them there. C. Co 4-25-60 Page Eleven UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT NO. 43 - continued Mr. Fry - continued: This will cause less of a traffic hazard than if it were subdivided into 12 homes. We use the Church 11 hours on Sundays And possibly 1' . hours on Wednesdays. We have no social activities in ouk'organization and only occasional meetings for our committees and lectures possibly twice or three times a year, so traffic hazard is nominal so far as compared to homes that might go in here. So far as the petition, I understand that only 14 of the people signed this petition who live within the 300 foot radius. A church is necessary in the community and is the only location we have been able to find that is desirable for this particular use. In reference to our plan, we had a misunderstanding before about -that plan and if there are any changes that might have to be made as indi- cated by Council, or any City departments, we will be glad to make the necessary changes. There being no further testimony, the hearing was declared closed, Councilman Brown: Has there been a subdivision map filed on this proposed Church site? Public Service Director Dosh: The subdivision was filed 7 years ago and this section was left out, but in order for it to be approved the Commis- sion asked how it could be subdivided if it would be done in the future and this map you have was drawn up as to how it could be done. Councilman Brown: This is owned by Walker Built Homes? Public Service Director Dosh: It was, but I do not know if it is now. Councilman Brown: I am concerned about the map being filed on it and from all indications here it seems to be insinuated that the developer owned or controlled the property to where he assured that the street would go in and I do not think he is keeping faith with the purchasers of the properties. There is a school going to the north of the proposed Church site. The drainage would have to be acquired in case this would be passed, I had several letters come to me in protest on this Church and anyone has the right to protest any zone change regardless of where they are in the City. The only ones that have to be notified are within the 300 foot radius of the property, although petitions should have no legal bearing with the Council and Planning Department and the decision should only be based on the facts relative to the matter. A petition isn't worth the paper it is written on in making a decision on facts presented. The plan hasn't been looked at by the Commission. There is supposed to be a proposed church zoning adjacent to this. Where is that? Councilman Barnes: I would like to ask Mr. Joseph if he has maps of an overlay of this area because I believe any people wanting a church site should go to the Ministerial Association. We laid out an overlay map showing possible church sites, although I don't think this was one of them. Co Co 4-25-60 Page Twelve UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT NO. 43 continued Mr. Joseph, I do not have it with me. We had a. report of churches in West Covina and` I would imagine the map is attached to it, . Councilman Barnes - and three-quarter mile radius. Mr. Joseph-, Mr. Aiassa-, I am not speaking of a report but of sites marked in green on map, with overlay of circles showing half mile Do you have such a map? Not to my knowledge. That was never adopted by the City, Councilman Barnes-, There was a committee of the Planning Commission, City Council and Ministerial Association who adopted this map in committee to present to Commission and Council as a possible guide. Councilman Towner- I would indicate these Unclassified Use Permits are pretty much in the nature of spot zoning and Aifferent than we ordinarily have on commercial or other uses. You have a special situa- tion with churches because you do not know when you draw a master plan just exactly where they are going to locate. It is generally agreed churches should be placed near homes, but the problem with this particu- lar piece of property is in trying to protect adjacent home owners from the type of use that would go in if the Church goes there. Alternatives indicated are first, a cul-de-sac which the Church applied for which is unsatisfactory because of the length of the cul-de-sac and the Police and Fire protection problems it indicates. Alternative is one going out to Butterfield, and as brought out at the Commission hearing this would put a street within 7 feet of the side'of an exist- ing home. Unless the Church donated some property tothose home owners for adequate setback, they wouldn't have proper protection for homes on the south side of the street going out to Butterfield. I also think you would have additional traffic not contemplated in the original map and layout of the area. I haven't seen the map with the street going out to Merced, although I understand there are drainage problems, but perhaps they can get it out that way but it would split the Church property in two. We haven't seen this plan or had a hearing on it. I believe it is the old sub- division -study in relation to Merced for Walker Built Homes which shows this alternative. Mr. Aiassa- The only thing legally before the Commission was a review of this precise plan submitted which was the one with the cul-de-sac. Councilman,Towner-, This precise plan is objectionable to me for the same reasons stated by the • Planning Commission. I was a member of the Commission and voted on this at the time it came up and I have seen no acceptable alternatives nor have any been Submitted for public hearing. Councilman Barnes- In looking over this map, and if this tract map was proposed, I think the Church should follow the same qualifi- cations and the drain would have to be covered. I do not think the long cul-de-sac is good because of Fire and Police protection and I do feel Co C. 4-25-60 UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT NO. 43 - continued Councilman Barnes - continued - Page Thirteen the people in this area are being deprived, unfairly. They -were - promised homes there and I do not think they should be deprived of this use. I think we have before us an alternate plan which the Commission hasn't seen. I am not in favor of the existing plan before us tonight. Councilman Snyder- I would go along with the previous remarks the Council has made. I am not in favor of this plan, although that doesn't mean I am against the Church location, if they can come up with a better plan to solve some of these problems. We do not have the alternate plan legally before us tonight, so I feel that possibly we should deny this plan that is before use Mayor Heath- This is an appeal case and on that we - can°t accept other than what was presen- ted to the Commission. It would not be an appeal if additional information was presented at -this time and unless presented to the Commission we can't accept it either. I agree with the comments made. Sunday I examined this area quite thoroughly. There is a drainage problem there and I do not know how it could be solved unless with a fairly large underground drain, or we put in the street. This cul-de-sac is out of the question because it 1,s too long. I could not accept, this on the present plan as presented. Councilman Snyder- We are not denying this zoning, neces- sarily, but denying this plan waiting for further, information on an alternate plan - so far as I am concerned. Councilman Brown, As pointed out by Councilman Towner, if Leaf Street was brought out to Butter- field Street, it would make Lots 84 and 71 illegal lots. We had this happen in one of our other Church cases and it became the responsibility of the applicant in that case to make those lots legal - to move the stLreeto St. Christopher°s Church had to give a 12 foot strip to two property owners to make their lots legal size Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried, thatthis matter be referred back to the Planning Commission for further study of a new Precise Plan, Mayor Heath called a recess. Council reconvened at 9-10 Pe Mo ZONE CHANGE NO. 161 LOCATION- East side of Azusa Avenue, and between Pioneer and Puente Avenues. PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN N0,226 Ed La Berge, et al. Planning Commission denied the request DENIED to reclassify from Zone R-*Ito R-P and denied request for adoption of Precise Plan of Design on April 6, 1960. e C o Cu 4-25-60 Page Fourteen ZONE CHANGE NO. 161 - PRECISE PLAN NO. 226 continued Appealed by the applicant on April 7, 1960 Maps were presented by the City Clerk and the Resolutions of the Planning Commission were read. Mayor Heath opened the public hearing, indicated the stipulation of time for testimony under Ordinance No. 502, and stated that all those desiring to present 'testimony should rise and be sworn in by the City Clerk. Mr. La Berge requested extra time, about 35 minutes, to state his case. However, Council indicated. a 15 minute time limit to present the matter. Mr. La Berge protested this time limitation stating he could not present the matter, but Council held to 15 minutes, plus time for rebuttal, and Councilman Brown indicated that actually the time is limited by ,law to 3 minutes and Council has granted 12 minutes leeway, plus time for rebuttal, IN FAVOR Mr. E. La Berge The .Land under discussion, Council 20150 Rancho Jose Drive should remember, is the only remaining Covina vacant lots north of the Freeway to the City limits that is not zoned C-1, R-P or Potential C-1 or R-P. Planning Commissioner Thompson stated our case very well and supported us in his statement as indicated in the Minutes pertaining to this hearing, and I quote, "I cannot see by waiting how it will protect the property owners any further, I can't see single family along Azusa. This is probably, to my way of thinking, the next best thing to Ingle family residences and the most desirable. We are trying to hold C-1 down and when they come in with a plan of this nature I feel we should cooperate with the Planning.Coordinator and approve these plans subject to his recommendations andconditions"o Commissioner Towner stated, and again I quote, ",The plan shows diligent study and effort to do something with a difficult problem piece of property, but I believe that before making a zone change we should make an overall. study" An intensive zone study was made at the time that Mr. Eichstaedt°s property was approved and I would ask Mr. Joseph to explain how much that land use study involved and how he came to favor the recommenda- tion c this land use hereo Commissioner Towner stated "it was a mistake to allow strip zoning to start along Azusa Avenue". One pertinent thought strikes me, that if we let these remain R-1 as they are, with more intense zoning on all sides, this would be strip zoning all by itself there. These are the only lots north of the Freeway to the City Limits not zoned R-P or C-10 Mr. Joseph's recom- mendation is in favor of making these lots conform to the zoning already along Azusa Avenue. Commissioner Launer stated, "We are running into very many proilems on Azusa, falling into the .same categories as on Glendora Avenue, and I do believe that we should have a study as indicated by Commissioner Towner". We feel, and hope that you feel, that sufficient study has been made by the Planning department who is paid to do it and is expert in that study. What would further study do except to prolong a situation where we know it, is going to go heavier than R-12 C � Co 4-25-60 Page Fifteen ZONE CHANGE NOu 161 - PRECISE PLAN NO. 226 - continued Mr. E o Ira Berge - continued Commissioner Renwick°s comment was minor but it hurt when he indicated that Mr. Smithy who lives next door, and who will be protected by a block wall, would have his property damaged and that no one would pur- chase it. I am in the real estate business and know this business and I know what affects values. I wish Commissioner Renwick were were tonight to hear me state that when I bought this property Mr. Smithy stated that he hoped I would do something with this property which has been here so long and that anything would be an improvement i,n here and he agreed that my plan would be good for the .whole ni.; J`1,ghbsr°h:oodo Speaking as a realtor with a high code of ethics, which we have, the Smithy property is hurt more by leaving this vacant; and not by building on it. If we were asked what was going in on this vacant area we would have to say "certainly not homes". Mr. Joseph has recommended it is, already suitable for other than R®1 so certainly no homes are going in there, -if we wanted to sell it. We are asking for approval here, but at least if you do not give approval we want a decision as to what is best, If it should remain R®1 say so, but; if you think it should. go R-P tell. the property owners here tonight so they will. know. We are not like these big Azusa Avenue property owners. We are not going to hold it,- we are small business men and we bought it at top R-P prices and have gotten four owners to go in on this plan to which they all agreed. Mr. Joseph agreed this could be recommended for approval and we di.sire a decision tonight one way or the other, Mr. Oo Smithy I adjoin this property at the rear and 1809 Dames Drive on the side and have lived here for 7 years. I have enjoyed a weed patch on these .lots for 7 years which are 5 feet high until the City discs them down and then I have enjoyed a plowed field for the rest of the summer with all, the dust - for 7 years. Now they have changed Azusa to a higher use with all its noise., cars, and trucks and you do not glare to raise a window because of so much dirt and noise This won't hurt me one bit. I think the man is entitled to it and it will lay another 5 years before they build residences on it. I do not want this for another 5 years. Mr. Jo R. Drown I am adjacent to this property and I 1814 Danes Drive :feel it would be an asset to the area strictly on the arguments of Mr. Smithy, .The opponents came with a petition with the main argument that real estate values would go down, but Mr, Ira Berge has stated the plan would make real estate values go up. Mr. Jo Wallace I am a realttor, dealing with them, and 643 Hillward Avenue we want to build something nice to conform to the neighborhood and not .leave an empty lot C.C. 4-25-60 ZONE CHANGE NO. 161 - PRECISE,PLAN NO, 226 - continued Page Sixteen Mrs. La Berge Here there ate two minority groups. . - 201.50 Rancho San Jose Dr. Forty-eight people are against this and we are for it and I think that is the most beautiful thing about America in that minority groups are considered. I thank you have a difficult problem to decide as to what is best for all of us and whether we want it or not. If it is unsuitable, make us face it now and save time and expense to all concerned. Why should we keep coming here if homes won't be built here? IN OBJECTION Mr. W. Cuffli.n It Is quite obvious from the recommenda- 1839 E. Eckerman Ave. Lions of all departments of the City that this plan entails considerable expense to the property owners on Ecker- man and Danes and to a certain extent, Pioneer Drive. West Covina is a City of beautiful homes. We built our homes and came in knowing what the zoning was and there were certain restrictions on the land and verbal commitments given with these lots. We are not rich people by any means and if we want to improve our pro- perty and spend our money we realize the City will realize the property has increased in value,- but the City should determine who is going to tap their pocketbooks. Are we going to let a real estate broker come in and make a "'fast buck"'? He has no interest here except to come in and to make a "'fast buck" We have a fire hydrant 20 feet from Eckerman and the proposed plan indicates it will be taken away from us. The one other fire hydrant is located 20 feet from Phillips Avenue and if we lose one, that one would have to be used to fight any fire in the whole area, otherwise fire department must run hose lines which isn't satisfactory and according to the Fire Department isn't good practice. This area is depending on what occupants go in there and there is no guarantee it will be R-P forever, it may go C-10 We have a Junior High School near use To the rear of it we have Covina High School. Have you given thought to what might go in here and that the children might be materially affected as to what goes in here'?' These papers I place before you are not a petition in that respect, but have the names of 33 people that live in Tract 15061 as shown on these two plans. The tract is never going to be changed from an R-1 zone until the year' 1979. There is a covenant which ran with land which was given to all of the occupants of lots 1 through 30 in Tract 35061 and I would read the covenant relative to that. It indicates it is to be used for residential purposes exclusively - lots 1 through 30 in Tract 15061. It shall run with this land under said covenant and after 1979 it can be extended for 10 years more and so can throw this whole thing out, • IN REBUTTAL Mro La Berge- As to the fire issue and other issues, I agree with their deficiencies in the plan because of the nature of the land. It is very shallow and that there are deficiencies, we know that, but it was also stated that we must comply with the recommendations of the various departments and so we muss; move those fire blocks, etc., at our expense. Co Co 4-25-60 Page Seventeen ZONE CHANGE NO. 161 - PRECISE PLAN NO. 226 - continued Mr. La Berge - continued-, It has been stated we are interested only in making a 'fast buck", and •although we won't answer that insinuation I would state that by the' time we get through with this and all the expense we must put into it we will be losing money, There being no further testimony, the hearing was declared closed. Mr. Joseph-, On February 3, 1960, when Mr. Eichstaedt came in for reviewing of his precise " plan, the Commission went over the pro- perty along Azusa and I have made my comments relative to the matter in the Minutes of February 3, 1960. We went over this at the time of that former hearing. This is what the applicant is referring to in regard to the study, Councilman Brown-, It sounds more like Mr. Joseph drew this precise plan than Mr. La Berge, from the applicant's testimony. I believe under the Zoning Ordinance, to seek a zone change or change of precise plan, the applicant must own or.have control of said pro- perty, that is correct? Mr. Newell - Mr. Joseph-, Mr. La Berge-, I am not familiar with this aspect. Yes, I believe so. cation. That is correct. It was a joint appli- Councilman Brown-, I do not believe that as a Council, or the Commission, can consider this piece of property until those two streets are sold, disposed of or in some other way turned over to the applicant. In the ordinance I am positive it says, "must have control of" and these have belonged to the City for five years. It is the most ridicu- lous thing before the Council to ask the City to give up two City streets to benefit four, parties. This is asking the general taxpayer to support an application for three or four people. It is surprising to me our City staff even considered such a thing. Mr. Joseph-, The first recommendation of the Planning staff, brought out in our re- marks to the Commission, was that the streets would have to be vacated before this plan was carried through. We were aware the streets were City property and pointed out the appli- cants would do the cul-de-sac work on Eckerman and Danes and that be- fore it was approved the Council would have to say "yes" to the vacation of, the streets Councilman Brown-, Have you discussed this with our City Attorney? I do not see how the City can vacate dedicated streets to benefit four property owners. The only way it could be done would be a bid on them and what would stop me, or any other individual, to state a high price on thesestreets and bleed an individual?' Mr. La Berge-, You don't mean to tell me this hasn't been done on other streets that have dedications approved? r� C. C. 4-25-60 Page Eighteen ZONE CHANGE NO. 161 - PRECISE PLAN NO., 226 - continued Councilman Brown: I very much doubt it under-sudh circum- stances and I would like toi1-see you prove it. I would -certainly vote "no" against such a ridiculous proposal. Councilman Towner: In relation to the dedicated street problem brought up by Councilman Brown, I am sure that such things might be worked out on a reasonable basis if this was the plan to be put on the property. We do have a problem on this property and it is an extremely difficult situation due to the uneven development of single family homes. I think the applicant has done a diligent job of trying to bring this problem property together. Speaking of the zone change, we do have the recommendation of the Planning consultants that we have too much R-P in the City. There is R-P to the north, and a plan, but it has had no use for a long period of time,and when I spoke of a study being made what I had in mind was whether this or some other type of use should go in here. I doubt if home owners can expect single family homes out to Azusa. I think we do have a difficulty on Pioneer Drive with 1803 and 1809 in that Drive and a problem of 1809 Danes Drive < :.. Even' .thgugh-�the:..,present owner agrees with this, it is a planning problem. We have;addresses at 1807 and 1808 Puente Avenue of single family home lots and this present plan injects'a heavier use against those existing homes. I think an effort has been made to protect the homes, but I am not satisfied with it in the present situation for the same reasons as I stated in the Planning Commission hearing. Councilman Barnes: I would agree with the statements of Councilmen Brown and Towner: I know we are over -zoned with R-P in the City and this was brought out in Mr. Bennett°s report of a survey taken in the City. Like Councilman Brown, I question the.vacating of street for private use which is already dedicated to the City. I think the traffic problem in the City is bad enough at its best in most cases and I do not think we should hinder it so far as traffic flow is concerned„and as to flood control„ in this area we do have a considerable amount of water. I feel as these others present, this would require some study. I do know we are going to make a land use study of the City and it might be this would be a use other than R-P but I can't see more R-P use in our City at the present time. Councilman Snyder: I would go along with Councilman Brown. I do not see how you can vacate streets 41 without the permission of all the people down the street and I agree with Councilman Towner and Barnes and have no other comments. Mayor Heath: I think the plan has good and bad points. The good points would be that we have enough streets emptying out on Azusa Avenue and possibly we could stand a few being cut off. However, I do not know if this is the proper way to cut them off or if we have answered the problem of how we can vacate an area consisting of what is now dedicated streets. C. C. 4-25-60 Page Nineteen ZONE CHANGE NO. 161 - PRECISE PLAN NO. 226 - continued Mayor Heath- continued: I feel that some day there will be something else going in -there " besides R-1,- Azusa having the traffic it presently has and having the possibility of being a main artery from above Azusa to --Huntington Beach as a throughway, so I do not feel R-1 will be satisfactory right along that street. However, I do not think that this is the time to change it because of too many other problems ahead of us here. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried, that Zone Change No. 161 and Precise Plan of Design No. 226 be denied. ZONE CHANGE NO. 160 LOCATION: Northeast corner of Barranca Teril & Company and Cameron Avenues DENIED Planning Commission denied request to reclassify from Zone R-A, 40,000 to Zone R-1, Area District III on April 6, 1960. Appealed by applicant on April 8, 1960. Maps were presented by the City Clerk and Resolution 889 of the Planning Commission was read. Mayor Heath opened the public hearing, indicated time of testimony under Ordinance, and stated that all those desiring to present testi- mony should rise and be sworn in by the City Clerk. IN FAVOR Mr. R. Roelle The reason for denial on this matter 19903 E. Cameron was that the grades are up to 30%. However,there is only a 12% grade from the hump to Cameron Avenue and that is the steepest part of the property. When the property was first submitted, Mr. Joseph agreed it would be a good plan but recommended it be denied when he came before the Commission. Where he got the idea there was 30% grade I will never know. Mr. Gordon asked me to include him in this plan but I did not do it because he has sold a bootleg subdivision, which is without improvements. Prospero Drive has a bootleg subdivision and why it is opposing a good subdivisiop, I do not know. There is no basic reason for denial of this and there is no 30% grade on the subdivision at all, if that is why it was denied. Mr. T. Walsh I am the engineer for this plan and I 127 N. Lang would apologize for this map as part of the confusion on grades. These maps were taken from government sheet and they are about 10 feet off. The maximum grade is 12% with others 2% to 5%, so that when the map was originally laid out we didn°t feel this was suitable for 40,000 square feet as it would be uneconomical to develop under those conditions. We felt that Zone IV area was made only for hillside subdivisions when they came in. Our intent was to cut down 12 feet to 8 feet so that differentially from front to back as to feet there is about 8 to 10 feet. C'o Co 4-25�66 Page Twenty ZONE CHANGE NO.- 160 - continued Mr. Roelle: This was -taken in under an uninhabited annexation and my -only protest- "at "the time was that I would like to be con- sidered for Zone III. Mayor Heath: On that annexation the stipulation at that time was this would be Zone IV. Mr, Noice In laying out the streets this is 524 S. Meadow Road about the only way it can be laid out. No matter what the size, all the lot depth will be consistent. In the 40,000 the lot front frontages of 165 x 128 and 133 x 150 are not a (saleable) lot. I have been in this business a long time in West Covina and I find people coming out do not want great big lots. They like adequate lots and we feel these are adequate with plenty of room to build nice homes on them. This will be about a 3/4 million tax return to the City. IN OPPOSITION Mr. R. Gordon Mr. Burkeheimer is not here`and this 19050 E. Cortez St, is of particular concern to him, but he has written a letter and I.would request it be read after I finish. There is no doubt about it that it is a prime thing for Mr. Noice and Mr. Roelle to get good, practical real estate use out of this and it is possible to put more than 18 houses.on this acreage. It was indicated I was shown a map of this subdivision, .but I was not shown a map and he had no such plans at the time he talked with me. In fact, everybody has an acre or more touching Mr. Roelle and he has three acres so he is a better "bootlegger" than most of them. Mr. Noise has indicated that people want small lots, but everybody around there has an acre and they seem to be satisfied. They also seem to be improving their acreage and are running out of "elbow room" all around me and I want two acres. That is "elbow room" area and we do not want lots smaller than the District IV. The thing was given careful consideration and it was felt it should be Area IV`and it touches on no Area III, If this is granted I can't do the same thing and I wouldn't want do to the same thing - all we "bootleggers". Mr. Thompson I am one of the "bootleggers" referred 1450 N. Prospero Dr, to. When the property was in the County it had acre zoning on it and houses were built to that and we are not "boot- leggirg"anything. When taken into the City there was every intention of zoning this Area IV and it was made IV in the hopes of taking in more area there under that zoning. It should be developed rather than kept as vacant grounds and Area IV should be placed upon these grounds. Mr. Elshire I am adjacent to the property in question. 19101 E. Cameron I have no objection to a housing develop- ment in this area but I do object to the fact that there is an attempt to some- what downgrade the extent and value of the land. C. C. 4-25-60 ZONE CHANGE NO. 160 - continued Mr. Elshire - continued - Page Twenty -One Mr, Noice mentioned they plan to sell these homes in the neighborhood .of $30,000.00 to $35,000.00, which is a nice price, but Mr; Roelle when he was remodeling his home told me he was remodeling for that - price, so it seems inconsistent to place homes here that will not cost as much as remodeling. Mr. Chisholm of 2622 No Prospero Drive stated he would go on record as being opposed to this being zoned to Area III instead of keeping it Area IV as it would downgrade the area. IN REBUTTAL Mr. Roelle- I would like to clear up the term "bootlegger" which does not refer to individuals but is a term used "bootleg subdividing" which means selling without putting in improvements. I spent better than $35,000.00 for remodeling of my home and none of the land is adequate for subdividing or I would have done so, but there is a steep grade at the corner. The house is now worth $125,000,00 so I do not believe I would jeopardize my home to make a "fast buck Mr. Noice°s homes look nice and I have indicated certain things that must be done, I.will look onto these proposed homes for many years, and across the street there has been a purchase of land for Kindergarten. I do not know what is to the north. Prospero Drive is a dead-end, unimproved, and I do not know what they will do as the City won't accept it. There being no further testimony, the hearing was declared closed. Councilman Brawn- At the time this was annexed into the City I was very opposed to this annexa- tion. It was held up 3 or 4 months in the process of being annexed and I possibly held it up. Now that it is in the City I can see nothing,personally, wrong with this subdivi- sion map. There is a high school to go across the street. There is accepted in this annexation an unimproved street, and who knows what will happen back there, and the other side of Cameron has still smaller lots than will be in,this subdivision. Mayor Heath-, Prospero Drive is not a street but an easement which the people got together on and arranged for, but it is not accepted by the City as a street, Councilman Brown- I realize that and it was the only way that I voted in favor of the annexation after battling various Councilmen not to accept it as a street. Councilman Towner- I have a letter from Mr. Roelle that should be made a part of the hearing and I would turn it over to the City Clerk. The City. Clerk read the letter in full, received it to be filed for the record, and indicated the letterhead reads "State of California, Divi- sion of Real Estate" showing W. A. Savage as Real Estate Commissioner and then names the Commissioners, of which the applicant is one. Co C. 4-25-60 ZONE CHANGE NO, 160 - continued Page Twenty -Two Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Snyder and carried, that this entire letter be entered for"the record and be con- sidered as a part of the Minutes of this hearing. "W. Ao Savage Real Estate Commissioner Commission Members Willard L. Johnson Maurice Go Read Wm, E. Rempper Roger Roelle Thomas R. Rooney Frank L. Whitelock STATE OF CALIFORNIA DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE "Mr. Frank M. Towner City Councilman City of West Covina, Calif. Dear Mr. Towner: April 18, 1960 SUBJECT Zone -Change No. 160 Resolution No, 889 Edmund 'G. Brown Governor "Weare appealing to you, personally, as a Member of the City Council., in the matter of our request for a zone change. We feel that the Planning Commission has been incorrectly informed and that we have been treated unjiustly as regards this property since the beginning of our negotiations. First, by an uninhab- ited annexation, without consideration of our rights as owners, also without consideration for our request for Zone III if annexed, and by subsequent developments since the annexation. "Our recent request for a change to Zone III was denied recently by resolution No. 889 for the following reason: ";(Paragraph two) "the site is one varying topographically from level areas to slopes of up to 30%. It would be impractical to develop such slope sites under area III requirements." "This entire paragraph is UNTRUE. The property measures some- what more than eight acres, Six and one-half acres are prac- tically LEVEL with NO WASTED GROUND. The remaining one and one- half plus acres does slope to Cameron Avenue, and ACCORDING TO SURVEY has a 12 J %© grade, WITH EVERY FOOT OF GROUND USABLE. "We would appreciate your personal inspection of this property at your convenience, so that you can render a just and fair decision. Yours Truly, Roger Roelle (Signed Roger Roelle" Councilman Towner: The denial by the Commission was based primarily and substantially in that we felt the area was suitable for Area IV and was brought in on that consideration and that it could be reasonably C. Ca 4-25-60 ZONE CHANGE NO, 160 - continued Councilman Towner - continued: Page Twenty -Three developed along those lines and that we had to draw a line" -somewhere •relative to this Area IV. There are existing large lot sizes in the area, plus other considerations relative to the property owners living there and we felt we should stick by that (Area IV). Apparently Mr. Roelle knew it was annexed as Area IV and that :the City expected it to be developed that way, Mayor Heath- At the time he bought this property the first reading had been made on the ordinance relative to this annexation. Approximatilely one week after you bought it this second reading went through -'and at that time you requested you be given some other zoning but at the time Council did not feel it was appropoo It was all "je.11edt' before you came before use Mro Roelle: You didn't consider my request, as the new owner, to change the zoning, Councilman Barnes- I feel this should continue as Area IV and I went up Sunday and took a look at this property. All of the area around it is Area IV and I do not see why we should put Area III, or smaller lots, in an area zoned IV, particularly when we took this into the City as Area IV. With everybody knowing this, I see no reason to deviate from it now. So far as the cul-de-sac street coming in from the east, they were told they could come in but it would never be a part of the City unless it was brought up to City standards. Councilman Snyder- I; think this is a good map and I do not see why these homes could not be°put on these size lots. However, I am new to the Council and apparently it was the consensus to make these Area IV lots and so I would have to go along with it. Mayor Heath- Since this was brought in for the express purpose of being Area IV, I still have to be shown why it can't develop that way and I do not, think it has been proven tonight. I do not see how we can deviate from our original conditions and grant it other than what we originally considered it to be. Councilman Brown- When this was under discussion before Mr. Roelle bought it, it was brought to every Councilman's attention,- the committee working on it and everybody else, to make this whole piece of property Area III. The only reason Area IV was placed on it was. to stop any R-3 going in here. It was graded up to stop apartments from going in and I think this subdivision is better than any R-3 going in. It was brought in on Area IV because we were against any apartments going in there, Mayor Heath: I was chairman of the committee and go-between with the people owning the property and Council, and this property was at no time to be reported or presented to the Council as R-3, it was considered as Area IV and nothing else but Area IV and I never brought back any proposal other than Area IV, nor did anyone ever speak about anything other than Area IVo So far as this R-3 is concerned, I have no knowledge of it and I should have if I worked with it. C. Co 4-25-60 Page Twenty -Four - ZONE CHANGE NO, 160 - continued Councilman Brown- I will not debate on -it but I. am sure " .. you know about the R-3, of that I am sure. Mr. Roelle- You did not negotiate with me, you- • negotiated with a man named Saunders and others, and I would like -to get the record straight here especially if you have a personal interest. Mayor Heath- I was never interested in this property and never intended to have any interest in it. Mr. Roelle. Did you, or did you not, say you dealt with the owners of the property. Councilman Brown- Since you have elected to discuss this issue again, I think it is only fair to state that prior to my commitment you stated you negotiated with the owners and Mr. Roelle proceeded to correct you. Councilman Towner- In normal. procedure I can ask for the floor and I am entitled to it, and I would request that I be given the floor. We are concerned here as to whether this shall be granted as a zone --- change from R-1 40,000 to Area III. The reason for a Commission denial was that a line had to be drawn somewhere and it was very possible to draw it here and for a good reason - to protect property - and what went on before has no effect on the outcome as to the zoning we should place upon it. It is more suitable for Area IV and on that reason only it should be given a decision in relation to zoning. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that Zone Change Noo 160 be denied. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Towner, Noes.* Councilman Brown Absent- None ZONE CHANGE NO. 157 and PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN NO. 218 Arthur Jo Stinton, et al. HELD OVER Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath LOCATION- East side of Azusa Avenue, between Puente and Badillo Avenues, Planning Commission denied request to reclassify from Zone R-P to Zone C-1 and denied request for adoption of precise plan of design on April 6, 1960 under Resolutions No, 892 and 893. Maps were presented by the City Clerk and the Resolutions were read, Mayor Heath opened the public hearing, stated the time limitation under Ordinance No. 502, and that all those desiring to present testi- mony should rase and be sworn in by the City Clerk, IN FAVOR Mr. Po Eggley At two prior hearings of the Commission 244 W. College St. the applicant was represented by an F. W. Woolworth Company representative who has an option to lease the property. I was engaged this afternoon for the reason that the applicant feels he needs legal counsel, in this matter. I have not acquired too much knowledge on this matter and we would desire to have a continuance until your newt regular meeting. C . C o 4-25-60 ZONE CHANGE NO, 157 - continued Mr. Po Eggley continued: Page Twenty -Five I notice there have been items before you -.this evening which -involve Azusa Avenue and evidence indicates you have a multiplicity of R-Po . This is presently R-P zoning with a -" p y g portion C-1 being used -for �a service station. It would appear without further study that it would be a good idea if we can have further time and study this relative to a revision of this particular usage. The usage proposed would come under C-1'and whether there are more nurseries in the City than this can stand I do not know, and perhaps the applicant should come in with a different manner thana zone change. I feel. we should be given the opportunity to go into the matter further and ask for a two week continuance. IN OPPOSITION Mr. Cufflin Although we are not quite as affected 1839 E. Eckerman by this change as on the previous hear- ing, I should like to point out to you that there seems to be quite an effort on the part of newly acquiring owners of land in this vicinity, or people having property .for some time and unsuccessful in their ability to use the property at its present zoning, to suddenly decide that if they obtain another zone they can make a "fast buck". Under commercial use here we would be affected in Danes, Eckerman and Pioneer Drive and ,you should again remember the schools in the immed- iate vicinity and the affect on the children attending these schools relative to what can go in for a C-1. use. There are more uses permitted in C-1 than in R-Po You have some control of what is going to go in, in C-1, but on the other hand if a man can't use it when he has already gotten R-P from- R-1 why should he rezone it so as to get even more profit from it? Those people in the back of this area have $25,000.00 to $30,000.00 homes and there is also the apartment house rentals to be considered in proximity to this proposed use. The owners have had a sign up for two years to build to suit tenants but they can't get any to go into an R-P zoning. I do not think it should be changed at all until some over-all study is made and a concise plan can be gone into as to what should be done in the whole area. IN REBUTTAL Mr. Eggley"- The argument that the land is not being used under the present zoning is probably as good an argument as can be used for a change of zone because as I understand it the highest and best use of the land is the one indicated by the zoning developed and the only way you can tell is place it for the particular use as stipulated by the City and see if it works out. The applicant has it zoned for 9 years and it seems that this period of time is long enough, especially with an active campaign for the attempted use of this property, for a test as to whether it is the highest and best use and if it can't devel- op under the stipulated zoning.it is up to you to see what can be properly placed upon this property. Co C. 4-25-60 Page Twenty -Six ZONE CHANGE NO, 157 - continued Councilman Snyder- I would be for granting"'continuance-on this matter. Apparently --he wants -to take time to see if -he can bring ' plans •up to meet the various recommendations. The land has been held'f6r'9 years, although maybe not R-P all that time. I think his continuance should be granted. Councilman �arnes- These folks from up in that area have come down here and it has been a bit inconvenient for them to keep coming back, but I do think it is a bit unfair if this man is not permitted an opportunity to get better acquainted with the property and the case and to express his opinion in a different light. I feel this should be granted a continuance until next regular meeting, Councilman Towner-, If it is continued it will be held open for both parties to present testimony on the plan presented, Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Brown and carried, that the hearing on Zone Change No. 157 and Precise Plan of Design No. 218 be continued to next.regular meeting. DISTRICT A°11-58-2 Hearing of protests or objections to Sanitary Sewer District the confirmation of assessments to cover installation of sanitary sewers in the Ardilla Avenue and Ituni Street Sewer District, Set for hearing this date in the "Notice of Filing Assessment and Diagram" dated April 1, 1960. Mayor Heath - Street and other streets. relative to this hearing? n$a l l ing?' City Clerk Flotten- Mayor Heath - This .is the time and place for hearing of protests or objections against the assessment for improvements of Ituni Mr. City Clerk, do you have those affidavits Affidavits of publication, posting and We have the affidavits. I will entertain a motion to receive and file the affidavits. Motion by Councilman Towner,'seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried, that the Affidavits of publication, posting and mailing be received and filed for the record, Mayor Heath-. City Clerk Flotten- * Mayor Heath-, Mr. City Clerk, have you received any written protests or objections against the assessment, improvement as construc- ted, or the proceedings? We have received none. Is there anyone in the audience who desires to speak on this matter? Since we have no written or oral, protests or objections, the hearing is declared closed. 0 C. C, 4-25-60 RESOLUTION NO, 1817 Confirming assessment for improvements (District A11.1-58-2) ADOPTED Mayor Heath. Page Twenty -Seven The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS OF ITUNI STREET SEWER DISTRICT AND OTHER STREETS IN THE CITY OF WEST.COVINA" Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the Resolution. Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Brown, that said Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes. Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath Noes. None Absent. None Said Resolution was given No. 1817 PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO. 37 A proposal to amend Section 1405 of City Initiated Ordinance 325 (Zoning Ordinance) re: APPROVED "Translating Potential Classifications to Permissible User' to require Precise Plan of Design. Approval recommended by Planning Commission Resolution No. 881 on March 16, 1960. Held over from meeting of April 11, 1960. Councilman Brown. The old Council, for some time, has dis- cussed certain zoning of too much and not enough but by the time we had gotten into it there was an election coming up and I believe that was one of the first orders for the new Council, to get this zoning study off the ground as to what zoning we were long on and what zoning we were short one I have no objection to this proposal but I feel the zoning study should be expedited as quickly as possible. Mr. Aiassa. Potential zoning was to be reviewed in relation to firming up of that zoning or alleviating the potential, whichever was felt to be desirable. We are ready to submit this matter of poten- tial .zoning from the point of view of the whole City any time you are ready to set it up as a project. Councilman Barnes: I feel that perhaps the two new Council- men would like to review this and study it and if we are going to have a study session Monday night I think they should have the chance to review it so as to get an idea of what we are talking about. Perhaps we could hold this item over. Councilman Brown. We have operated with this being ambigu- ous the last four years. Mr. Aiassa. That is true, but it is consistently putting us in a spot because of this ambiguousness and if we do have changes we do not like to try to explain it because of the way it reads. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried, that Pr®posed Amendment No. 37, City Initiated, be approved as recom- mended by the Planning -Commission. C. Co 4-25-60 CITY CLERK'S REPORTS CONTINUED RESOLUTION NO. 1818 Open `l foot lot for street and highway purposes (Thelborn Street) ADOPTED Page Twenty -Eight The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST,COVINA ACCEPTING FOR STREET AND HIGHWAY PURPOSES CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY HERETOFORE GRANTED AND CONVEYED TO SAID CITY" LOCATION.- West end of Thelborn Street in Tract No. 21159 Mayor Heath.- Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the Resolution. Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Brown, that said Resolution be adopted.. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes.- Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath Noes: None Absent.- None Said Resolution was given No. 1818 PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDED PRECISE PLAN NO, 161 Proposal for park site acquisition -of property northwest of proposed hospital site (Queen of the Valley Hospital) Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Towner and carried, that this matter be referred to the City Manager for report+and study, TENTATIVE MAP OF LOCATION.- Northeast corner of Barranca TRACT NO. 25765 Street and Cameron -Avenue. Teril & Company 8.7 Acres - 18 Lots No action necessary in that the zone change application, No. 160, relating to this property, had been previously denied. CITY MANAGER REPORTS RESOLUTION NO. 1819 The City Manager presented and read.- Approving report on "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE "Summary of Road and CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING SUMMARY Street Deficiencies" OF ROAD DEFICIENCIES DATED JULY 1, 1960" ADOPTED Required by Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 62, and this Resolution of Council requested by Division of Highways. Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that said •Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes,. Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath Noes.- None Absent.- None Said Resolution was given No. 1819 Co C, 4-25-60 CITY MANAGER REPORTS - continued Page Twenty -Nine DEPOSIT OF MONIES RELATIVE Amount of $46,200.00 TO PURCHASE -OF LAND. BY COUNTY FOR LIBRARY SITE Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by • Councilman Towner and carried, that'th6 amount of $46,200.00 received from land purchased by County for library site be placed in Capital Outlay, BRIDGE APPRAISAL RIGHT -OF- You have received copies of report by WAY AUTHORIZATION Mr. Cox. This is pertaining to the - right -of -way necessary for bridges and also Vincent Avenue Bridge alignment, There are several, parcels along the whole strip and a superficial study made indicates there are 10 to 12 separate ownerships involved from Citrus on the east to Merced and Orange on:the presto To do a complete appraisal there are seven separate market areas requiring investigation. It may go to condemnation and there you need a definite appraisal. The low appraisal rate is indicated at $2,750.00 and the high rate at $3,500.00. Councilman Barnes-, I would like to take a look at this in study session. Mr, Aiassa-, The deadlines are coming real fast -and we have to provide these rights -of -way and easements if asked for them. Councilman Brown-, I think $100.00 per day is a cheap appraisal cost. Mr. Aiassa-, I told Mr. Cox to give me the high figure and we may have to go to condem- nation. Mr. Cox is quite familiar with these matters and has done most of our appraisal work, otherwise I think the figure might be higher. We wanted to try to get someone with experience in this area. Councilman Brown° Does this.include the large sewer district? Mr, Aiassa: No, this is on bridge and inlet drain- age structures and street approaches. It is quite a project. This is an_ estimate within range and limits which he will figure.t Before a cost commit on approaches is recommended we ask for an estimate; usually estimates are ligher than actual. I would recommend engaging Mr. Cox on the basis his work -does not exceed $2,750.00 and that he log time spent on appraisal statements and prepare necessary data for account.. and condemnation requirements. If it goes to condemnation it goes to $100.00 a day. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Brown,t'that this bridge appraisal right-of-way authorization be given in accordance with the City Manager's recommendations. Motion passed on"roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath Noes: None Absent: None Ca Co 4-25-60 P. A. SYSTEM FOR COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mayor Heath. - Councilman Snyder: you might stipulate they put Mr. Aiassa: Mayor Heath: Councilman Snyder: Mayor Heath: Mr. Aiassa: Page Thirty We have a firm bid from Radio Products Sales and it is within our budget, $950.00. Is there any way it can go in on atrial system" You hear rustle of papers, etc, .I installed one at the Presbyterian - Church and it is very easy to get rid --of the rustling of papers, etc.: Possibly in rubber mounts. We can draft a contract and demand full satisfaction before payment. I think they should be tested before purchase. What testing? Acoustics; location of speakers, etc. They put them in temporary structures and test them before making permanent mountings. Motion by Councilman Towner,' seconded by`Council man Brown, 'that authorization be given for the acquisition of the public address system for the Council Chambers as indicated by the City Manager, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath Noes: None Absent: None INSURANCE COVERAGE The City Clerk is bonded for $2,500.00 and we would like to raise the bond up to $25,OOO.00. This will be a blanket coverage, the additional premium is a small item, and will reduce the over-all cost of individual policies. The City Clerk and every employee of the City has a bond of $2,500.00 covering them. This does not insure the person but the position so there is no need to change the policy in case of person changing their position. We also want auto property damage and general property damage limts to be increased from $25,000.00 to $100,000.00. This is another important item that should be raised because property and auto damage coull1 be many things and recent court judgments have been high.. However, .if Council would desire to delay this subject to getting a cost breakdown on this, we will order the insurance carrier to get a breakdown on the fees. We have to consider this entire insurance policy as to whether Council wants to go on informal bids. Certain insurance policies are no risk but property damage and public liability are high. We also must have an insurance carrier that gives us good service, and this should be considered. Councilman Brown: We tried bidding this some years ago and we received bids that were way over and decided to negotiate, Co Co 4-25-60 Page Thirty=One INSURANCE COVERAGE continued Mr, Aiassa. City can write specifications 'if "it-., goes to bid and insurance carriers bid only on that submitted by the City. We should increase bond for City Clerk, Deputy City Clerk and Deputy City Treasurer. They are handling more money. Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Snyder and carried, that bonds be increased relative to those positions indicated by the City Manager. .Motiori.by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried, that there be an increase of.auto property damage and general property damage insurance from $25,000.00 to $100,000.00. DISPOSITION OF We have a firm bid for cash for-$168000000, OLD POLICE STATION There is another proposal subject to lot split to accomodate.building. I would like to get an expression from Council as to what they would like to do. What is complicating the problem is that the building is in Fire - Zone II and it doesn't meet requirements under any occupation or exten- sion improvements, Councilman Barnes. I've read all the bids and do not like any one of ,them, Mayor Heath. What we would like to have would be ready cash for this. Mr. Aiassa. We have advertised and posted this thing and we might take some of these that look like cash bids and have them resubmit a new bid. Would we require another publication and notice for that? Mr. Newello Yes. Mr. Aiassa; The $16,000.00 is cash, Councilman Towner. Would it be possible to take one of these bids not on a cash basis and give the bidder the opportunity to finance it and give us the cash? Mr, Aiassa. You are dealing with public property and it must be done by public bid. You did auction off a house and did quite well at it and received maximum price. City Clerk Flotten. It wasn't City owned, This was a pri- vately owned house that was auctioned off at an excellent price. Mr. Aiassa. The only bad thing on someof the pro- posals submitted is that you get to be the agent for these individuals. They know the land and what the property is and should come in and buy it or turn it down. Co Co 4-25-60 Page Thirty -Two DISPOSITION OF OLD POLICE STATION - cpntinued Mayor Heath, Take this up at study session. Mr. Flotten: The problem we have is that this is C-1 zone and under Fire Zone II and very few things can go in there as it is now. Plaster walls are required inside and stucco outside under the Fire zoning and C-1a It was consensus this be taken under a study session, TRACT NO. 14013 I have a letter dated April 21,-1960 Sideline setback addressed to the City Clerk relative to a 5 foot sideline setback on the 6th lot and 13th lot of a tract west of Lark Ellen Avenue, south side of Herring Street. The new ordinance calls for 7- foot setback. Possibly there is nothing to do herp'jbut file a variance with the Planning Commission. There are only these two lots not built on and all the rest have the 5 foot sideyard setback, Public Service Director Dosh: These are in Area II and now need a 7 foot sideyard setback, but before this ruling, all the rest were permitted the 5 foot setbacks. Councilman Towner-, We could indicate it requires a variance action and that we can't do this inform- ally and the people should be notified to take the proper action. It w4s consensus the City Clerk be instructed to notify the applicant of the proper steps that must be taken in relation to this`mattero HUMANE SERVICE To be discussed at study session. RESOLUTION NO. 1820 The City Manager presented and read: Urging award of contract "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE relative to Grand Avenue CITY OF WEST COVINA URGING THE DEPARTMENT ADOPTED OF PUBLIC WORKS DI'VISION'.OF(HIGHWAYS, TO AWARD.AT" THE' 'EARLI9ST-.`POSSIPLE` DATEA CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF GRAND AVENUE FROM ROWLAND AVENUE TO HOLT AVENUE, TOGETHER WITH THE NECESSARY FREEWAY SEPARATION AND RAMPS" Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Brown, that said Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath Noes: None Absent: None Said Resolution was given No. 1820 C. Co 4-25-60 CITY ATTORNEY INTRODUCTION Ordinance amending Ordinance No, 325 pertaining to • filing fees Mayor Heath: Page Thirty -Three Mr. Newell presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL .OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 325 PERTAINING TO FILING FEES IN ZONING MATTERS Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the Ordinance. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried, that said Ordinance be introduced and given its first reading. Mayor Heath voted "No" INTRODUCTION Mr. Newell presented: Ordinance amending Section "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 410 relating to insurance CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING SECTION 410 required for an excavation OF ORDINANCE NO, 506 RELATING TO INSUR- permit ANCE REQUIRED FOR AN EXCAVATION PERMIT Mayor Heath: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the Ordinance. Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Brown and carried, that the Ordinancelbe introduced and given its first reading. INTRODUCTION Mr. Newell presented: Ordinance rezoning "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF certain property THE CITY OF WEST COVINA REZONING -CERTAIN (James W. Hathcock) PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SUNSET AND SERVICE AVENUES" (James-W. Hathcock) Mayor Heath: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body'of the Ordinance. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried, that the Ordinance be introduced and given its first reading. INTRODUCTION Mr. Newell presented: Ordinannce rezoning certain "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF property (A. Jett, et al.) THE CITY OF WEST COVINA REZONING"CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEASTERLY SIDE OF SERVICE AVENUE BETWEEN SUNSET AVENUE AND PROPOSED CENTER STREET" (A. Jett, et al,) • Mayor Heath: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the Ordinance. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Towner and carried, that the Ordinance be introduced and given its first reading. Co C. 4-25-60 Page Thirty -Four INTRODUCTION. City Manager presented; and. --read:.. Ordinance consenting to '"AN ORDINANCE.OF THE CITY :COUNCIL. OF establishment -of -portion THE CITY OF WEST COVINA'.::GONSENTING TO of -Grand Avenue as ESTABLISHMENT OF POR.TION-WGRRAND AVENUE County Highway AS A COUNTY.HIGHWAYO Mdti6h by Councilman Browny seconded by Councilman Barnes ia%id' carried, that the Ordinance be introduced and given its.first reiadingo CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO, 1821 The City Clerk presented;:'...;:~` Commending Dale Pittenger "A RESOLUTION OF.•THE.'CITY'CaUNCIL OF THE for services rendered CITY OF WEST QOVINA COMMENDING DALE ADOPTED PITTENGER FOR HIS SERVICk6 RENDERED TO THE C I TY".. Mayor Heath.- Hearing no objections, we`will waive further reading of the'.body.of the Resolution. Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman..Brown, that said Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows. - Ayes: Councilmen Browny Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath Noes: None Absent: None Said Resolution was given No. 1821 RESOLUTION NO. 1822 The City Clerk presented: Commending Vernon R. "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL.OF. Mottinger for services THE CITY OF WEST COVINA COMMENDING rendered VERNON R. MOTTINGER FOR HIS; SERVICES ADOPTED RENDERED TO THE CITY't Mayor Heath: Hearing no objections, we...-w . ,waive further reading of the. body'' of the., Resolutions Motion by Councilman Browny seconded by Councilman Barn,es;-�thatI"said Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as f;ol.lows: Ayes: Councilmen Noes: None Absent: None Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder, MaYor,Heath Said Resolution was given No. REQUEST FOR SALE OF POPPYS BY VETERANS • OF FOREIGN WARS APPROVED C7 C. C. 4-25-60 Page Thirty -Five CITY CLERK - continued REMOVAL OR BURNING OF Permission from Brutoco & Company, -_as BUILDING AT 1250 WEST granted in writing to -them by Mr. -'and Mrs. GARVEY AVENUE George Wo Dashiell,-holders'bf First APPROVED Trust Deed on this propertyo1 Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried, that permission be granted to Fire.Department for removal -or burning - of buildings at I.250 W. Garvey Avenue, as indicated by Brutoco & Company relative to this property. NOTIFICATION FROM COUNTY Proposed Annexation No, 227 to City of BOUNDARY COMMISSION E1 Monte Proposed Annexation No, 59 to the City of Industry. No objections. PROCLAMATIONS Mayor Heath proclaimed the following: Youth Fitness Week - May 1 to May 7, 1960 Hire a Veteran Week - May 8 to May 14, 1960 Burglary Prevention Week - May 1 to May 7, 1960 REQUESTS TO DISPLAY The City Clerk indicated that 'al: AND SELL FIREWORKS cations have been received from three organizations in the City, all of which had made previous applications: West Covina Post #790 of the American Legion, Jewish War Veterans Post No. 1776, and Veterans of Foreign Wars, Post #8620. Another application had been received from the Canadian Legion who'are, at present, meeting in the Legion Hall at 301 No Azusa Avenue'< Councilman Barnes: Is.this a recognized chartered organi- zation?` City Clerk Flotten: No, they are not'. Policy is they must be chartered, have a permanent meeting place in West Covina, post a $25.00 deposit for stand clean-up, limited to three stands for each organiza- tion with stands not to be put up before one week before July 4th and cleaned up one week after July 4tho Mayor Heath: Why not put this in the Ordinance? Mr. Aiassa: Why not do it by resolution? Mayor Heath: Get into the resolution who is eligible and who isn't. Mr, Flotten: The City Attorney suggested we set this up as a policy for this year and when codification of our ordinances is finished we can recommend to Council it be made an amendment to our ordinance. Mr. Aiassa: We should also indicate no applications will be considered after a certain date to be included with recommendations. Co Co 4-25-60 Page Thirty -Six FIREWORKS - continued Councilman Brown. They need approval from -State Fire Marshall at least 60 days prior to any sale. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried, that the policy regarding fireworks be adopted and in'addition"that no applications shall be accepted after the first regular Council meeting of May. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by,Councilman Barnes and -carried, that the applications for display and sale of fireworks as -requested by the three organizations, in the locations indicated', be permitted to operate provided they meet with all the.requirements of Police and Fire departments and that the Veterans of Foreign Wars location on State Street (and frontage road) be set up so there will be no parking on the loop (only on State Street itself) and the City. Clerk be in- - structed to send a written communication to each of the organizations as to policy. OFF SALE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE AND TRANSFER OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE Eo Jo and Eddies 405 So California Avenue Transfer-, Covina Enterprises, Inc. 1456 W. Puente Avenue No objections to be made 12/1�3 PRECISE PLAN NOo WS Councilman Towner. I do not think we can take action to expunge from the record what is already indicated, and if it is desired to do so they need to take the proper action to have it removed and it should he considered with any new application. Councilman Brown. If a subdivision map is approved it is automatically off and if they add any- thing else (but a subdivision) on there they would have to take proper action to remove requirements. I do not believe any action is necessary here. Mr. Gilbert. I discussed this with Mr. Dosh relative to the subdivision and we want to comply with the conditigns of Resolution No-1585 which is for the development of the R-1 lots. However, in'order to avoid bonding the entire property under the total subdivision filed we would like to arrange to develop a Metes and Bounds Subdivision on these`four (R-1) lots as well as the other four lots on the other end and proceed on that basis. Mr. Aiassa. You only want to post bonds for the R-l? Mr. Gilbert. Yes, because that is the condition of R-lo Post bonds for Larkwood Street and the other two R-ls to develop refers to that at the end of.the R-3so Councilman Barnes; You want to start the original deal all over again and post bonds for lots on the west and develop those and on lots 17 and 18 and develop those now, and then go to R-3 project?. Mr. Gilberto That is the only way we can do it. C. Co 4-25-60 PRECISE PLAN NO. 223 - continued Councilman Brown-, Mr. Gilbert-, Mayor Heath-, Mr. Gilberto Councilman Browns. Page Thirty -Seven What he is asking to do'is a bond just to put the street in front of six houses. We will bond street improvements to guarantee them coming.in. For the whole district? No, because we are not putting in the whole area at the present time. I can possibly see it on Larkwood Street. Mr. Gilbert-, Lots 17 and 18 would have two houses and 15 and 16 would be ready for-R-3, but if we bonded the entire thing it would be i acres but we are not ready to go ahead on this. Mayor Heath-, Is.this all improvements around the cul-de-sac and then'where.there'is 17 and 18 You would put'improvements in front of those? Mr. Gilbert-, Yes, completely, and the street almost goes to the existing end. Mr. Aiassa-, If he goes ahead and finishes R-1 on Larkwood, which is a self-contained street, that might possibly be done. On Fernwood, however, all he would do is complete 50% of the street of Fernwood and Mobeck actually leaving a portion of the street down. The bad' feature is there is only a half street to the school parking lot and if that is widened there is no turn around.. On Larkwood there would be a full turnaround. Councilman Brown-, R-1 doesn't come down far enough. Mr. Gilbert. We go to school street so we'are connect- ing existing street. I Councilman Browns To get that in would relieve congestion. Mayor Heaths Take it past R-1 property. Mr. Gilberts We have two R-3 pieces which will be almost to the existing end of pavement now. Councilman Barnes, You said about Lots 15 and 16 in front. Mr. Gilbert-, Those are the two, R-3 lots just mentioned. Councilman Towner-, What is the present condition on the subdivision? • Mr, Aiassa, There is nothing there at all. He is trying to see if Council would be amiable if he came up with this request. Councilman Towner-, You have an application pending before the Planning Commission to change the recreation area to Metes and Bounds residential, lots? .Have you filed application to do.that? C. C,o 4-25-60 PRECISE PLAN NO. 223 - continued Mr. Gilberto No. Page Thirty -Eight Councilman Towner: File your application and request -'to • bond only a portion of it and it can be presented with your application, Mr. Gilbert: Assuming I came into the City Engineer with a Metes and Bounds subdivision -'to get property developed, could I proceed on that application subsequent to any other? Mr. Aiassa: How many lots are you dividing under a Metes and Bounds description? Mr. Gilbert: Six. Mr. Aiassa: I believe that would be violating the State subdivision provisions. Councilman Barnes: Larkwood has no provisions so he can develop that. Mr. Aiassa: He could start R-1 prior to recreation. Councilman gown: He doesn't want to post the bonds, Councilman Towner: Could we have bond requirements if he wanted to improve Larkwood portion only? Public -Service Director Dosh: Is it possible to record a 9 lot subdi- vision? Mr. Newell: You can have several subdivisions if it is not more than 4 lots. If there would be different filings that would comply with State act. It was consensus that Mr. Gilbert meet with the City Manager and City Attorney about this matter. SALE OF OLD POLICE Mr, Lucrelli of Lucrelli Real Estate PROPERTY spoke in relation to the old police building property and its purchase. He indicated he wanted to place sale of camping equipment in there. Mr. Aiassa: Mr, Lucrelli: Mr. Aiassa: Mayor Heath: Can you give us a cash offer? $22,000.00. If you want any other use than C-1 then you must go through Planning Commission and variance and City Council, Can he use it for what he indicates he wants to? Mr. Aiassa: No, that is a C-3 use. 0 C. Co 4-25-60 SALE OF OLD POLICE PROPERTY - continued Page Thirty -Nine Mr. Lucrelli: This is a realty group and we Jere planning to paint it and improve it -as needed and use it for books and place' camping and sports equipment, skis, boats, etc., outside. The inside is strictly for office use and the outside is for camping equipment. Mr. Joseph: He can't have this camping equipment out- doors in C-lo It was consensus that Mr. Lucrelli take this matter up with the City Manager. MAYORS REPORTS In reference to the cases of Weisel and Snell it was indicated by Mr. Newell it would be proper for the new Councilmen to review the - Minutes relative to these matters which would make them eligible to vote upon them when they again come back to Council, JOINT MEETING OF Joint meeting with Planning -Commission on COUNCIL AND PLANNING Wednesday, April 27, 1960, at 7030 Pe Me COMMISSION Councilman•Brown indicated he would-be unable to attend but the remainder of Council would do so. TESTIMONIAL DINNER Attendance was discussed relative to FOR ROD CAMERON this dinner and it was indicated by Councilman Towner that any member of Council who desired to do so should attend, but only as individuals and not representing the City in any way. Councilman Brown indicated he was going to attend and Councilman Towner again reiterated it should be only as an individual and not as a rep- resentative of the City. Mayor Heath questioned that if the City Manager was sent would Council- man Towner object, and the answer by Councilman Towner was in the affirm-.. ativeo Councilman Snyder stated that if this discussion on the dinner, which was evidently related to the help Mr. Cameron had given to the.City in the past, was a matter of suggesting the City pay for some to attend, he, too, would question as to this being done as the Chamber of Commerce is permitted no "politicking". APPOINTMENT OF COUNCIL Mayor Heath appointed the following as REPRESENTATIVES representatives of Council: ' RECREATION & PARKS COMMISSION - Councilman Snyder with Councilman Barnes as alternate' - '3 months • LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES - Councilman Towner with Councilman Brown as alternate - 1 year EAST SAN GABRIEL VALLEY PLANNING COMMITTEE PERSONNEL BOARD - Councilman Brown with Councilman Barnes as alternate - 1 year - Councilman Snyder - 3 months 0 C. C. 4-25-60 APPOINTMENT OF COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES m continued UPPER SAN GABRIEL WATER ASSOCIATION PLANNING COMMISSION SANITATION DISTRICT Page Forty Councilman Barnes with- Councilman Towner as alternate _ I y� Councilman Brown _ 3 months ® Mayor, Heath with Councilman Barnes as alternate MRS. VAN DAME Mayor Heath, you did a good job tonight, but I wasn't satisfied when I -heard where Councilman Brown was going to sit, After seeing him perform tonight I agree he is in the right place. Why_aren°t there more police stationed at these meetings?' The officer should also be told he should not only keep an eye in here but also keep any crowd out in the hall quiet. Mr. Aiassa indicated there were two policemen present this evening. What about the trash containers in front of the old plaza? Mr. Aiassa: They are being repainted. Mrs. Van Dame., When you appoint a planner, do not appoint someone with real estate connec- tions, he should be under no obligations to anyone. We have had experience like that and it doesn't work. Whilel was in one of the restaurants in the old plaza I looked at one of the places over there, Mil.ni°s Inn, and it is too dark. I under- stand there are other such places in the City and it isn't good. ANNEXATION 158 Mayor Heath: Annexation 158 is in liti- gation. We, I believe, have collected taxes on that area. If we should lose this case in court do we have to return the taxes, and if so, shouldn't they put those in a special. account? Councilman Brown., It would be returned to the County and not property owners. Mr. Aiassa: Mr. Williams has indicated this is a part of the City of West Covina until it is out of it. Councilman Brown: They have had services rendered for their taxes, from the City. Mr. Aiassa: I can review this with Mr. Williams. • APPOINTMENT OF Mayor Heath indicated there would be a PLANNING COMMISSIONER personnel session next Monday night to pick the planner to fill the vacancy on the Planning Commission. It was con- sensus that the various candidates be personally presented from the time of 7:30 P. M. on in the City Manager's office w;th an interview of 10 minutes for each individual presented. C. Co 4-25-60 Page Forty -One PLANNING COMMISSIONER - continued Mrs. Van Dame stated that.letters had been sent to Council asking its members to read it and possibly give preference to someone in the' real estate business, and it was her opinion that it shouldn't be, DEMANDS APPROVED Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Towner,'that -- Demands in the amount of $68,559.42, as shown on Demand Sheets C-194 through C-198, be approved; this total to include fund transfers in the amount of $46,155.63. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath Noes: None Absent: None Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried, that the meeting be adjourned at 12:55 A. M. ATTEST: W/ City Clerk APPROVED Mayor