06-14-1962 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA
June 14, 1962
ROLL. �AL7L- _.
• Present- Mayor Barnes, Councilmen Heath, Jett, Snyder, Towner
Others Present., City Manager, George Aiassa
City Clerk, .Robert Flotten
Public Works Director, Thomas Dosh
Acting Building Inspector, William Fowler
RALPH'S-ZODY'S ELEVATION PROBLEM
Mr, George Aiassa....directed the City Clerk to read the report developed by
the Engineering Department. The report is as follows.,
"The following report relative to the Ralph's-Zody's grading plan
for Precise Plan No. 266 has been prepared pursuant to City
Council instructions The City Council requested this informa-
tion at their meeting held June 11, 1962, after listening :to protests
from certain residents in the area relative to the grading on site
A personal inspection on the site by Mr. Pontow, Mr. Lathrop,
Mr. Fowler, and the writer, was conducted on June 12, 1962,
to observe the situation firsthand,
• PLANTING, BLOCKWALLS & GRADING
"In reviewing the grading plan, as approved by the Engineering
and Building Departments, we find that the site is being develop-
ed along the westerly property line to drain in both northerly
and southerly directions. The high point in the grading on this
property line is halfway between Puente Avenue and the southerly
property line. The grading plan therefore indicates that the fill
adjacent to R-1 property ranges from 0 feet at Puente Avenue to
5 feet at the high point 300 feet south to 2 1/2 feet at the south-
westerly corner of the property. The treatment of the 10-foot
side planting strip, requres as a condition for approving the pre-
cise plan, and the construction of a 6-foot high block wall, has had
special consideration by the developers over and above what was
actually anticipated in the conditions approving the precise plan.
'.'.The architect for the development was delegated to work with
the individual property owners to determine their particular prefer-
ence and several aternate plans were prepared for their considera-
tion.
"The City staff, including Mr. Joseph and Mr. Lathrop, also con-
ferred with both the property owners and the architect in arriving
at a mutually acceptable solution to the planting strip and wall.
"After several group meetings, the property owners present expressed
unanimous agreement on the treatment of this area, which is Plan
B curr.ently under construction; i, e. , a 4-foot high block retaining
wall to be constructed along the property line with the exception
of thy: corner lot on Eileen -and Puente, compacted fill to the design
Adj .
C. C. 6-14-62 Page Two
RALPH"S-ZODY'S - .-Continued
• elevations and protective screen plar�ing,, and at a point 10 feet
east of property line, a 6 foot high block wall is to be constructed.
"Two other alternatives presented to the property owners were.
111. The construction on property line of a concrete
wall 6 feet higher than the finished ground elev-
ations :established on the Ralph's-Zody's site,
which would result in a wall ranging from 6 feet
to 11 feet in height backing up to the R-1 property.
112. The construction of a 6 foot high rretaining wall on
property line and another 6 foot high wall 10 feet
off property line on finishedground elevation with
the planting screen provided--hetw.een the two walls.
"Any one or all of the three alternates suggested to the prop-erty
owners comply with the conditions for approving the precise plan
and would be found acceptable from the engineering and planning
point of view, although the final design is we believe most accept-
abl e .
. DRAINAGE
"The Ralph's-Zody's site encompasse-s-som'e 10 acres in area.
This -land, in its undeveloped state, drained entirely in a south-
westerly direction, sheeting across the R 11 -properties on Eileen
Avenue and the school site to the south.
In. Lconsult.ing with,th:e`,City Engineer, it was resolved that some of
the property would be permitted to drain into Puente Airenue and
thence to Lark Ellen Avenue and the balance of the proper.ty;- would,
of necessity, have to drain across the school property in an improved
storm drain easement to Pioneer Drive and ultimately to Lark Ellen
Avenue.
"By this type of engineering, the property owners downstream from
this development have been afforded the maximum possible relief
from storm drainage that could possible be. realized. Legally, the
property can drain entirely to the southwesterly corner and be con-
ducted through a system of storm drains down to Pioneer Drive and
ultimately to Lark Ellen Avenue. We would like to point out that
it is the unfortunate circumstance that brings this development into
• the City, after the R-1 property downstream has already been developed.
If Ralph's and Zody's were first and the R-1 developed later,
there would have been no question as to the direction of,'.drain-
age, how it would be handled, and who would have to receive
it.
_2_
ADJ. CC. 6-14-62
RALPH1.,S'-"ZODY''S- Gontinu�ed
Page Three
• B-UIliD,1NG CONST-RU.CTION
"It is important, in developing a large shopping area such
__-ems this.,,-_that_�_floor elevations of all shops be kept on or
about the :'same el.evat5.on. The developers chose to estab-
lish a floor elevation at the northeasterly corner of Ralph's
above tire- form-er---ground -el.evation-. - Since there is 5 feet of
fall from that location to the southwesterly corner of Zody°s
we realize 7 feet of fill at that point. It logically follows
that the site immediately surrounding the building must then
be graded to meet the established building elevations as
closely as possible to provide for vehicular and pedestrian
traffic, esthetics, and drainage. Even in establishing the
floor elevation at 477.25 feet, it is still 2 feet lower than
the curb elevation at Puente and Azusa,
10In reviewing the Ralph's -Zody°s site, the Safeway Shopping
Center site on Puente, Sunset and Yaleton and the Vincent
Avenue School- sites- were -also reviewed as abasis for compari-
son. The rear of the Safeway site was actually graded below
adjacent ground elevations. There was no landscaping treat-
ment required --adjacent- to.- R-1 property, and a 6-foot high
• block wall was required on property line.,. Since the site was
excavated, the block wall on the Safeway site actually varies
from 6 to 10 feet in height, providing for a minimum 6-foot
high wall at the rear of R-1 property. On the westerly side
of the Vincent Avenue School landscaping was required between
the school and the R-1 property, but no block wall was required.
The landscaping appears to be entirely inadequate, inasmuch as
it consists of low, scrubby bushes that provide absolutely no
screening effect.
1BOn the basis of the two comparisons referred to above, it is
our opinion that the Ralph's-Zody°s development has provided
the maximum possible protection economically feasible for the
R-1 property on Eileen Avenue with all considerations in mind,
such as drainage, grading, screen planting, ornamental block
wall, et-c
"We believe that property landscaping in the 10-foot area in
conjunction with the wall placement presently under construc-
tion, will render a desirable solution to the property and
that the site grading plan is the most practical means of
developing the site while providing protection for adjacent
R-1 property. This includes the esthetics of the development
�. as well,"
Mr. Dosh reported on the drainage that must be away from Azusa Avenue
according to the State unless the drainage was there previously. Some was
diverted to Puente Avenue thenc to Lark Ellen and south.
-3-
ADJ. CC. 6-14-62
RALFH'S-ZODY°S - `Continued
• Councilman Heath:
•
Mr. Dosh:
Councilman Heath:
Page Four
If the natural flow is southwest, why
could we not mare a larger drain pipe?
This drains into a ditch in the 10-foot
easement along the Pioneer School property,
It would accumulate and run into a ,pi.p.e .
that could not hold it.
Councilman Towner: We obviously are not engineers and should
leave the drainage problem to experts sub-
ject to city specifications,
Councilman Heath: Drainage is most important and is in-
adequate on Eileen to the school property.
Mayor Barnes: Can the school drain handle the water?
Mr. Aiassa: When the ditch was installed, (they
preferred a ditch) which sometimes over-
flows to the school grounds with no dam-
age. This will adjust to the new problem.
Mayor Barnes. Would.we have tn___hixild ,the Ralph°s-Zody°s
property the way we did?
Mr. Dosh: Explained by drawing a diagram on the
board showing the elevations and land
fall, and the elevation chosen for the
pad. The property received a 2-foot fill at the northeast corner to the
curb elevation and a 7-foot 10-inch fill at the southwest corner.
Mr. Aiassa, Mr. Joseph, Mr. Fowler and the architect, Mr. McClelland
discussed this at a meeting.
Mayor Barnes: Mr. EMcClelland, would you explain the
selection of Plan 1°B" and the wall as
it affects each individual property.
(7 homes affected)
Councilman Towner:
Are there any specific objections?
Audience Voice: When I saw the backfill, it was like
dropping a bomb. It changed the pic-
ture from a 6-foot wall to an 11-foot
wall .
Councilman Towner: Let Ralph°s-Zody°s deed a 10-foot strip
to the owners to develop according to
their likes.
-4-
•
ADJ. CC 6-44-62 Page Five
RALPH'S ZO-DY° s' - Continued- -
M�. McClelland-. The wall is no objection, it is the height
of the building.
Mrs. Kimball-. I can look out over my back fence to the
parking lot, see the trucks going in and
out. The pad is way above ._my lot level.
I live in the house on the corner of Eileen
and Puente.
There followed much discussion on the point. at which to start figuring the
height of the building.
Council man Towner-.
We are
required
to conform to the ordi-
nance.
We must
drain the property and
keep the building
as love as possible.
The engineers have worked
out the best
solution.
If, the building is over-
h.eig.lt.,._ we. should adjust.
It seems we
cannot do
anything now about ele-
vations.
Mr. Kritchevsky-. It seem we had to choose from a number
of evils. After the initial discussion, we
met with the Planning Commission which
ended in complete confusion. Building up of the land was not necessary
for drain.
Mayor Barnes.- The Council did not realize there was a
problem until, this complaint. There
may be something the owners would like
the builder to do regarding trees, etc. Nothing can be done about the
grade level.
Councilman Heath-. I concur with Councilman Towner regard-
ing the deed to . owners .
Councilman Snyder-. I wonder about the fill, grades are decep-
tive, and I did not realize the fall of the
land, All the water could not drain to
the school and the building heights is within legal rights
Councilman Jett-. No one anticipated this problem and the
engineers probably did the best job pos-
sible. There will be runoff and this '
problem must be solved by the engineers. If the owners got together,
something must have been agreed on.
. Mayor Barnes-. I feel and I believe Council feels that
the building is in the only possible
location, and we tried to keep control
of the water, landscaping, walls, etc. The building seems to be the
main objection and if they only had 6-foot walls they could see the
buildings.
-5-
ADJ. C.C. 6-14-62
RALP���.S,�E?�D�'�aS._.- .~Contnu•ed
Page Six
Mrs. Kimball., Regarding the wall, we had no say ex-
cept to choose either a 6-foot or 11-
foot wall, They were going to decide
for us. Mr. Lathrop said we had nothing to say about it, we had to
take Plan "A" or "B18 or else.
Councilman Towner., The problem is drainage, the building
can be torn down if wrong,
Mrs. Our whole objection is the backfill to
raise the building,
Councilman Heath., Has the staff ever reviewed the White
Front development? The building is
lower than the street, We cannot
close our eyes to the fact that we and the staff have been negligent.
Mayor Barnes., We should get an interpretation from
the City Attorney for the 18-feet above
the ajoining R-10
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner and carried,
that the City Attorney be requested to define and explain the interpreta-
• Lion of_itam No. 4 _o,f the general notes appearing on the Precise Plan of
the Ralph's-Zody°s property. Point of reference being the definition of
the building height.
Councilman Snyder voted No.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner and carried,
to instruct the City Attorney to clarify and define the stipulations in the
Code regarding heights of buildings in all zones.
Councilman Snyder voted No.
Mayor Barnes- So far as grading -is .concerned, we have
done everything possible- Do any of the
property owners have any suggestions
regarding the shrubbery, plantings, etc.
Mrs. Kimball., Will the wall in the rear of my property
b e'Built up?
Mayor Barnes., When engineering department sees the
contour lines, they could tell the
is
Council who could act accordingly.
Councilman Heath., The staff should review the West Covina
Music School, White Front, and Shakey°s
Pizza properties, We have also approved
M.
Adj. C. Co 6-14-62 Page Seven
_,...__._ ...w.. BAUBH S":-,ZC?_`=Y S ...-----Co-ntinured
• property south of this. This could be real trouble and should be looked
into. Eastland has underground drainage system.
Mr, McClelland: The project has progressed. Can we
stop the job? How long will it take to
get the attorney°s interpretation?
Mr, Aiassa: Tomorrow,
Mayor Barnes: We have done everything possible.
Sorry we can't do more.
Councilman Heath: Need clarification -- since elevation
remains, developer will be responsible
for closed drain across the school pro-
perty to the street.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, and carried
to adjourn to the Personnel session.
V
50