Loading...
10-29-1962 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA October 29, 1962 The regular meeting of the City Council was called to order at 7:40 P.M. by Mayor Barnes in the West Covina City Hall. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Jett with the invocation being given by Rev. Lauren Egdahl, Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Barnes, Councilmen Jett, Towner, Heath, Snyder (until 1:30 A. M.) Others Present: Mr. George Aiassa, City Manager (until 10:35 P.M.) Mr. Robert Flotten, City Clerk Mr. Harry C. WillYams, City Attorney Mrs. Fern Sayers -Merry, City Treasurer Mr. Thomas Dosh, Public Services Director Mr. Harold Joseph, Planning Director Mr. Gerald Weeks, Administrative Analyst (from 10:20 P.M.) APPROVAL OF MINUTES September 24, 1962 Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that the Minutes of September 24, 1962 be approved as submitted. 9) October 1, 1962 Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, and carried, that the Minutes of October 1, 1962, be approved as submitted. October 8, 1962 Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, and carried, that the Minutes of October 8, 1962 be approved as submitted. CITY CLERK'S REPORTS RESOLUTION NO. 2486 The City Clerk presented: Sanitary Sewer District A111-61-1 "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO IMPROVE WILLOW AVENUE, MORRIS AVENUE AND OTHER STREETS AND RIGHTS OF WAY BY THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM IN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK, AND UNINCORPORATED AREA OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, DETERMINING THAT BONDS SHALL BE ISSUED TO REPRESENT THE COST THEREFOR, DECLARING THE WORK TO BE OF MORE THAN LOCAL OR ORDINARY PUBLIC BENEFIT, AND THAT THE EXPENSE THEREOF SHALL BE ASSESSED UPON A DISTRICT A111-61-1 AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2452`.' Mayor Barnes: Hearing no objections, we will. waive further reading of the body of the resolution. -1- • • Cl C. C. 10-29-62 Page Two RESOLUTION NO. 2486 - Continued Mayor Barnes: Mr. Aiassa, I checked on this today and there is approximately $135,000.00 difference in the first estimate and this particular estimate and I would like to ask Mr. Rosetti to fill the Council in on how this came about. I also understand that there is a great deal of shoring to be done and if there is a possibility to letting" this contract subject to shoring I think it would be a great deal of help. Mr. Dosh: The reason shoring is put in there is for the protection of the -people who do the work. The contractor will use his judgement when he cuts the street up whether or not he will shore. We say the project is subject to shoring and he has to comply to safety conditions. Mayor Barnes: Is there a possibility in letting a contract that if they have to shore, a certain amount would be added; if they did not have to shore that it would be another amount, or do you have to let a contract on the basis of however it is written up? Mr. Williams: Mr. Rosetti: Mr. Williams: Mr. Rosetti: In contracts other than 1911 Act con- tracts, I think you could have this flexible element. I am not positive, I believe in an 1911 Act it has to be a fixed amount. I want to research it legally to see if the contract can be let out that way. I think probably so, but I am not certain. At the next meeting when we have the hearing, I will have this researched and will have the answer for you. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Towner, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No. 2486. TRACT NO. 26966 Accept Street and Sanitary Sewer Improvements Marshall and McNutt APPROVED LOCATION: Northeast corner of Azusa Avenue and Cameron Avenue Accept street and sanitary sewer improvements. Authorize release of Glens Falls Insurance Company bond in the amount of $52,000.00. Inspec- tor's final report and signed Certi- ficate of Completion on file. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, and carried, to accept street and sanitary sewer improvements in Tract No. 26966 and to authorize the release of Glens Falls Insurance Company bond in the amount of $52,000.00. -2- • C. C. 10-29-62 TRACT NO. 24648 Accept Street Improvements E. B. Snoddy Corporation APPROVED LOCATION: Northeast ton Avenue Avenue. Page Three corner of Yale - and Puente Accept street improvements and auth- orize release of Fidelity and Casualty Company bond No. S1277235 in the amount of $4,500,00. Inspector's final report and signed Certificate of Comple- tion on file. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, to accept street improvements in Tract No. 24648 and authorize release of Fidelity and Casualty Company bond No. S1277235 in the amount of $4,500.00. PRECISE PLAN NO. 303 LOCATION: West Side of Azusa Can - Accept Sidewalk Improvements you Road, north of San Munson Sporting Goods, Company, Inc. Bernardino Road. APPROVED Accept sidewalk improvements and authorize release of cash deposit in the amount of $300.00. Inspec- tor's final report filed. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, to accept sidewalk improvements in Precise Plan of Design No. 303 and authorize release of cash deposit in the amount of $300.00. • TRACT NO. 26890 LOCATION: South of Hollencrest Drive. Extend time to File Final Map W. E. Hardy Request to extend time to file final APPROVED map of Tract No. 26890. Staff recom- mends extension of one year to October 30, 1963. Mr. Flotten, City Clerk, read letter dated October 2, 1962 directed to Mr. Joseph re this matter and signed by W. E. Hardy. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, and carried, to extend time to file final map on Tract No. 26890 subject to all the conditions attached to the original tentative map plus any changes in the ordinance that may have been made since that time. PROJECT:NO. SS-19 LOCATION: Carvol Avenue Approve Plans and Specifications APPROVED Approved plans and specifications for sewer construction and author- ize City Engineer to call for bids on an informal basis. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, to approve the plans and specifications of Project SS-19 and authorize the City Engineer to call for informal bids and transfer additional funds to Account No. 151-B from the General Fund in order to transfer this. -3- Ll 0 C. C. 10-29-62 CITY CLERK'S REPORTS - Continued RESOLUTION NO. 2487 ADOPTED Page Four The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A CERTAIN WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING THE RECORDATION THEREOF" Executed by the Trustees for the Clara Baldwin Stocker Home for Women, dated September 22, 1962, for street and highway purposes to be known as Valinda Avenue. Mayor Barnes: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Councilman Towner: Does this grant deed conform to the latest alignment? Mr. Aiassa: Yes. Councilman Heath: If we are going to accept this, we should accept it in whole, not in part. Mr. Dosh: This is the new alignment for the Valinda extension. The northwest corner hasn't changed; it remains the same for the most part. This conforms to the new alignment. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Towner, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes. Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No. 2487. SCHEDULED MATTERS CIVIL DEFENSE AIR RAID Bids'opened in the office of the SIRENS INSTALLATION City Clerk, as advertised, on October 18, 1962. The bids received are as follows: Delta Electric Company G & B Electric Company Bid includes furnishing of six supporting poles Mr. Flotten: Mr, Williams: Mr. Flotten: Councilman Heath: $ 1,000.00 bid bond $ 4,875.00 10% bid bond 9,600.00 It is recommended that the installa- tion contract be awarded to the Delta Electric Company. You have to have bids on the poles. The poles were bid by Pacific South- west Pipe Company. Is that bid on the poles still good? -4- is • Ca C. 10-29-62 Page Five CIVIL DEFENSE AIR RAID SIRENS INSTALLATION - Continued Mr. Aiassa: Yes, Councilman Towner: I thought we just had an informal quote as a price on the poles but not a bide Mr. Williams: G & B Electric included the poles and Delta did not include the poles. If you award it to Delta, you would have to advertise for the poles. Mrs. Cleo Boschoff: According to Federal, procedures,'we were to go to bid in two separate directions. We bid for sirens only because no siren equipment company can or will install. We bid also for installation only without poles because we are to furnish or pur- chase directly our own poles because they must meet Federal requirements. We have presented you with bids for sirens, installation and a quote, which is current as of October 2, on the poles. You must come'to a decision tonight or you will lose your Federal matching funds on that. .Councilman Towner: Can we accept the bids on the sirens and the installation and authorize for the bids on the poles all tonight? Mr. Williams: I don't know because it would depend on the terms of the notice and the bids, Mr. Dosh: Does the Federal Government require us to take bids for poles? Mrs. Cleo Boschoff: No, they do not. Councilman Towner: Let's set this off until later in the evening so Mr. Williams can look at the bide Mr. Williams: There is a possible exception where this is an emergency and I thought this might relate to civil defense. In checking the Code, I find Section 37906 provides as follows: (Read said section). Regardless of any technical deficiencies, if you adopt such a resolution, you can then proceed without compliance so it doesn't matter whether it is complied with or not. I have here a resolution and if you can, in good faith, find that the things I have said are your findings, this will do it. RESOLUTION NO. 2490 Civil Defense Emergency ADOPTED The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA FINDING THAT IT IS NECESSARY TO DO EMERGENCY WORK TO PREPARE FOR NATIONAL OR LOCAL DEFENSE AND DECLARING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY DEMAND THE IM- MEDIATE EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC MONEY FOR THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF A CIVIL DEFENSE SIREN WARNING SYSTEM TO SAFEGUARD LIFE, HEALTH AND PROPERTY" Mr, Williams read the proposed resolution in its entirety, -5- C. C. 10-29-62 Page Six RESOLUTION NO. 2490 - Continued: Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Towner, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No. 2490. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, that the bid for the Air Raid Sirens be awarded to the Graybar Electric Company in the sum of $10,929.15 and that the bid bond be returned to the unsuccessful bidder. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Towner, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, that the bid for the installation of the air raid sirens according.to plans and speci- fications be awarded to Delta Electric Company in the total sum of $4,875.00 and that the bid bond be returned to the unsuccessful bidder. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Towner, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None • Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, that the City Manager be authorized to purchase the necessary poles for the civil defense sirens without formal bids not to exceed the approved amount of the Federal Government in the amount of $1,800.00. HEARINGS VARIANCE NO. 368 and LOCATION: Service Avenue between PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN NO. 299 Sunset Avenue and Rich - Roger Roelle land Avenue. APPROVED Request to permit reduction of required number of parking spaces in Zone C-2, and for adoption of Precise Plan of Design, denied by Planning Commission Resolutions No, 1160 and 1161, respectively. Appealed by applicant on February 19, 1962. Hearing held on March 12, 1962, and closed, and re- ferred to Planning Commission for reports Report of Planning Commission dated May 2, 1962, read at Council meeting of May 28th, after applicant requested matter be held over from May 14tha Applicant not present. Held over to June llth, and from June llth to July 23rd; and from July 23rd to September llth, and held over to September 24th, at request of appli- cant, and again to October 8, 1962, and to October 29, 1962, at applicant's request Mayor Barnes: area and I believe this is what he Councilman Heath: We asked Mr. Roelle to try to get to- gether with the Planning Department and do a better plan on the parking was supposed to bring back tonight. I believe you're right. The hearing was closed, but we were asking Mr. Roelle to work out a parking plan and that is what is before us now, not part of the hearing. -6- C. Co 10-29-62 Page Seven VARIANCE NO. 368 - P. P. NO. 299 - Continued: Councilman Towner: As I recall, there was no opposition that appeared at the hearing. Mr. Roger Roelle: The question is whether or not this property should be treated as the property on the adjoining side. We are asking for the same lines all the way through, the samo'landscaping design which is required to fill the block out and the same parking lay- out through the entire block. I don't agree with putting a curb across the back of this property. Councilman Towner: Could we have the conditions and the recommendations of the Planning Com- mission, if any? Mr. Flotten read the conditions of the Planning Department. Councilman Towner: Does this precise plan differ from the one presented to the Planning Com- mission, and if so, in what respect? Mr. Joseph: I think this is the precise plan shown to the Planning Commission that they rejected because of insufficient parking. Councilman Heath: Mr, Roelle, do you take exception to any of these qualifications here? • Mr. Roger Roelle: No, the only question I have with the Planning Commission is these concrete bulkheads and the way the landscaping is to be installed. I intend to put the planter to match Barker Brothers as far as design is concerned, but I don't think I should be required to put in all that concrete to put a planter in.... Councilman Heath: I agree. Councilman Towner: I think we want uniformity in this area and these things were recommended by our civic center architects and everyone should comply to the same things However, if one developer goes overboard and puts in something beyond what is required, I don't think the others should be required to do that, Councilman Heath: I agree with Councilman Towner that the aesthetics and the contour above ground should all match, but I am de- bating his putting a section eighteen inches deep and eight or ten inches wide in the ground to support a small curba Mayor Barnes: I think some adjustment can be made with Mr. Roelle so that the expense isn't this great. The aesthetics can be conformed to and I believe Mr. Roelle agrees to the tree planting, but he feels that this is too much. Councilman Snyder: What is the required parking by or- dinance in this area? -7- C. C. 10-29-62 VARIANCE NO. 368 - P. P. No. 299 - Continued: Page Eight Mr. Joseph: This is what is required by present code: 94 for the office, 177 for'the commercial, or 271. Under the'devel- opment over here, they had 136 or about half of that, based on the 300-600 rather than the 150-300. If you took the net figure, he would require 68 for the office, 125 for the commercial or 183. If you apply the same prin- ciple as what he has over here, it comes out to 92. Councilman Snyder: precise plan was passed upon years under the variance to the west, he the west. Councilman Heath: Mr. Joseph: figure, you would require, under the by taking the net come up with what I think if we grant this variance we have given quite a bit in reduction of parking. I don't think this particular ago; the one to the west was and even is 40 parking spaces under the one to I don't believe that this is right; I believe he is within there. With the gross figure, he would need 271. If you use the same criteria here as you used there on the gross come up with 136. If you take the net figure, you would present code, 183 and if you further cut that in half figure and the standard you took across the way, you the study plan shows of 92 parking spaces. Councilman Towner: I recall in 1954 we had quite a battle over the parking in the old West Covina Center. At that time, I was firm in my . belief that they should provide adequate parking in back in order to retain any character at all in that development. Now, the people in the West Covina Center are asking us to bail them out. Here again we are going through the same situation where astonishingly enough the people are signing their own death warrants with this kind of development in the prime area of the City by putting in choice buildings and cutting them off without adequate parking. Councilman Heath: Do you feel that the West Covina Cen- ter has fallen down because of insuf- ficient parking? Councilman Towner: That is the primary problem in the back. We have code requirements on parking. They have been increased and improved because study shows it is necessary to maintain life in these developments. I don't think we should take this prize property in the heart of the City and so drastically cut it back that it has no chance for proper development. Councilman Heath: I think the Council knows how I feel about the parking ratio. I think .this ratio is'causing the developer to be penalized and throwing a lot of money into parking where it isn't needed. Last meeting we told Mr. Roelle we would give him • the same consideration that we gave next door. Councilman Towner: That is not true. There is a building next door, the Savings and Loan, which has more than the required amount of parking and there is no reason why he shouldn't comply with that. WE Ca Co 10 -29-62 Page Nine VARIANCE NO, 368 - Po Po No. 299 Continued: Councilman Jett: The Council has been forcing their opinions on the developer and they are opinions that the developer is unable . to live with. I have spent considerable time studying this. I feel they should receive a certain amount of credit for parking at the curb. This is something that is not taken into consideration here at all. In my opinion, this certainly justifies approval of the variance and I am in favor of it Councilman Snyder: It is true that this has been held over and held over, but it has been held over at Mr. Roel.le's request and not ours, Councilman Towner: As far as the other requirements of the Planning Commission are concerned, I don't think there is too much differ- ence of opinion between Mr. Roelle and the Council and the Commission. The only question is how much parking he has to put in and I think we ought to nail it down to that. I think that cutting the parking down to 92 from a code requirement of 271 is unjustified, I don't think the variance request has shown that this is necessary or proper under these circumstances. I might go with some adjustment on the parking, but not to this extent. Councilman Heath: I feel if we have given a certain con- sideration to someone next door that this man is entitled to the same con- sideration. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, that Variance No. 368 and Precise Plan of Design No. 299 be approved subject to the conditions of the Planning Department and that the landscaping, both front and rear, be a continuation of the landscaping to the west and that the aesthetic appearance be maintained in said landscaping and permission be granted to use a lighter construction than called for in the Barker Brothers Plan and to conform with Precise Plan Exhibit No. A with 92 parking spaces. Councilman Snyder: I would like clarification on who is to determine what is aesthetic. I don't think the Planning Department should be a police force. We have a special officer who sees that the ordinances and the rules are carried out. This is not a matter of en- forcement, this is a matter of judgement. Mr. Aiassao Mr, Roelle, do you agree to conform as nearly as possible aesthetically? Mr. Roger Roelle: I'll agree to that, Mr. Williams: Does this apply to both of the Roelle properties? There is one between the one before us tonight and Barker Brothers. • Councilman Jett: I believe he has agreed to substan- tially conform, Im s L� i Co C. 10-29-62 VARIANCE NO. 368-P, Po No. 299 - Continued: Page Ten Mr, Williams: There isn't any official action of the City that indicates "what'he'may or must do concerning the one-to'the west and this could either be for or against Mr. Roelle, but if it is the same thing at least it would be the same degree of conformity on both parcels. Mr. Roger Roell:e: I agree to have it all conform with Barker Brothers as to the size of the blocks that they want and aesthetically, but the size of the boxes and the cutouts, so on down the line, I have no quarrel with that. Action on Councilman Heath's motion. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilman Jett, Heath, Mayor Barnes Noes: Councilmen Towner, Snyder Absent: None VARIANCE NO. 402 LOCATION: 967 South Glendora Avenue, Robert and Mary Etta Broadwell between Barbara Street and DENIED Vine Street. Request to permit retail stores, service offices, etc., with rear yard supply storage and warehouse usage incidental to the business conducted in the fronting stores and offices in Zone C-1, denied by Planning Com- mission Resolution No. 1261. Appealed by applicant on September 27, 1962o Mayor Barnes: This is the time and place for the public hearing. Mr. Robert Broadwell I request you ignore the decision of 25 Campana Flores Drive the Planning Commission on the grounds West Covina the hearing procedure was illegal, the decisions capricous and based on in- valid considerations. Although this was advertised to be a public hearing, I was denied the right to be heard and my testimony of record was denied the right to be used, and introduced. This hearing was first held on September 5. At :that time, there were only three members of the Planning Commission present so the meeting was con- tinued for the announced purpose that the other members of the Commission might hear the testimony. This was advertised September 19 as a public hearing and following the meeting, the Planning Commission..mailed me an affidavit or statement stating that the Planning Commission, upon giving notice, did, on September 19, conduct a duly advertised hearing to consider the application. At this presumed public hearing, I was present with my witnesses and experts, the meeting was opened by Mr. Joseph stating to the Commission that I was here if the Commission wished to ask me any questions. When I attempted to go into my presentation, I was stopped on the grounds':that it was not in the question. Following the question period, I attempted to make my presentation but I was told the hearing was closed. At this meeting, the two members were present who had not previously heard my testimony or evidence concerning this matter. Mr. Joseph offered to read the testimony which I had prepared and sub- mitted to his office and this was denied. Councilman Heath: I think if these statements are true, we certainly should look into it and if he has been abused in any way that this should be sent back to the Planning Commission with instructions to have a hearing. -10- 11 i Ca Co 10-29-62 VARIANCE NO, 402 - Continued Page Eleven Councilman Towner: It seems to me, even assuming what Mr. Broadwell says is true, he has the opportunity tonight to have a full hearing before the Council and present his entire evidence and re- ceive'.a decision from use If he has no objection to going back to the Planning Commission for a hearing, I would go along with it. Mr. Robert Broadwell: I feel that would be a waste of my time. Councilman Heath: I feel if the Planning Commission through error or misunderstanding has not heard your case and made a recom- mendation to the Council, I don't think it is right for the Council to hear testimony and make a decision on it without the Planning Commission having the advantage of hearing your testimony. Councilman Snyder: legally and this cannot be left on Can we have a report from the staff I think we have left on the record here a statement that the Planning Commission has acted, he says, il- the record without being clarified° on this? Mr, Joseph: Mr. Broadwell came before the Planning Commission on the first date and the legal procedure was held to, notices were mailed out, et cetera, and there was a hearing held at the Planning Commission meeting. As I recall, they declined to act at that meeting and they held it over to allow the other people to review the matter. They gave due notice at the next meeting that they were going to continue the matter from the first meeting. At the next meeting, the Chairman asked if the people who were previously present if they had a chance to read the record and they answered in the affirmative and so they acted. As far as what Mr.<'Broadwell said, I think the hearing was closed at the first meeting. If the hearing was not closed, then they continued the hearing. If it was closed, they just continued the matter. There was a duly ad- vertised hearing at the first meeting and he gave his testimony there. Mayor Barnes: Councilman Heath: Mr. Robert Broadwell: Mayor Barnes: This is not out of order because the other two who were absent could read the Minutes and get the benefit of your testimony. I think it was probably legal. Were ,you given ample time at the first hearing to give testimony? Yes. That is all that is necessary, Would you care to continue? Mr. Robert Broadwell: Yes. This particular property has no business frontage, It doesn't enjoy the same privilege as other properties that have frontage either on a street or a parking lot. This is a com- pletely hidden corner back in the back used by trucks servicing Von's Mar- ket and is not visible from the street. I would propose to have small ser- vice stores which would front on the eastern alley. The only advantage these shops would have is that they are the type of business that need some additional storage incidental to the business. This location obviously is unsuitable for the normal type of retail store. The storage would not be seen by the parking lot and around this we would propose a six-foot plywood -11- �J Co Co 10-29-62 Page Twelve VARIANCE NO, 402 - Continued Mr. Robert Broadwell - Continued: wall facing the alley sides. I feel this would last five to seven years' before the area develops sufficiently to put in some other type of usage. There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed. Councilman Towner: Mr. Joseph: Councilman Towner: Mr. Joseph: Mayor Barnes: What is on the westerly property line here? This is R-A zoning back here. A little bit further to the south the City Council has granted R-3 zoning. This is still zoned R-A immediately behind the prop- erty. The, houses mostly front Cali' forniao Is there a proposed street going back there? R0 I would like to hear the conditions. Mr. Flotten, City Clerk, read Planning Commission Resolution No. 1261. Councilman Towner: I am wondering if Von's Market has inside storage; I believe they do. Mr. Joseph: Yes, In the C-1, the storage must be fully enclosed. Councilman Towner: While I am.sym pathetic to Mr. Broadwell's problem in developing this, I think it is primarily a problem of access more than anything else and I have some doubt as to whether this no present public frontage on the property is sufficient justification for a variance. Frankly, I don't think he has established the grounds for a variance, I think it is a close question as to whether he stands in a different spot because of the lack of public frontage. Councilman Snyder: I don't think he has shown sufficient cause for a variance as far as outside storage is concerned. I think he should have his storage inside. Councilman Heath: I think there are businesses that do require outside storage in many cases but I think they should be put in a place where they do not interfere with the surrounding residences. I feel we should maintain this ordinance except in the manufacturing zone. Mayor Barnes: I think the concensus is that we not .relinquish our position on uncovered storage in our C-1 zone. The Council feels this would set a precedent and it would not be good for the area. I would not, under any circumstances, want a plywood fence. Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Towner, and carried, that Variance No. 402 be denied. -12- • 0 Co C. 10-29-62 ZONE CHANGE NO. 228 Larry Sade, et al HELD OVER Page Thirteen LOCATION: Glendora Avenue, between Christopher Street and Merced Avenue. Request to reclassify from zone R-A and R-1 to zone C-1 denied by Plan- ning Commission Resolution No. 1263. Appealed by applicant on October 2, 19620 Mayor Barnes: This is the time and place for the public hearing. Mr. Graham Ritchie, Attorney I represent all of the applicants. 1015 Wilshire Boulevard There are 17 applicants who own 9 Los Angeles parcels. This is a depth of 290.feet and they feel this area is deteriora- ting as a R-A and R-1 area. Mr. Gerald Weeks entered the chambers at 10:20 P.Mo Mr. Graham Ritchie: The logical development available for this kind of area would be some type of commercial -professional de- velopment. The people I represent would like to develop office and com- mercial developments. They are going to have to have some kind of a zone change. We feel this is probably the best solution. It is consistent with the action the Council took on the Weaver property. The people I represent have all agreed to deed to the City the necessary street widening and to provide the necessary curbs and gutters,, The person who has the property on Cameron states he will dedicate the necessary tight of way for the ultimate extension of Cameron. There are nine applicants trying to do something together with their property. There is a chance, if these people can get this type of zoning at one time, they can develop the pro- perty together and give you some type of large commercial development that would be of value to the City. If each one has to solve his own problem piecemeal, one by one, you are not going to get the same opportun- ity to develop a large parcel of land in one development. Mr. Robert Harrison I am a resident there. I believe the 715 South Glendora Avenue traffic has made this unsuitable for West Covina a home. The real hazard is coming down Glendora and trying to turn into our property. Traffic is bad because of the narrowness of the street in front of our home and it is a nuisance in the area. The correction of this problem, in my estimation, if the zoning is granted, is the widening of streets and curbs would help every- one concerned. With the proper C-1 zoning, it would increase the revenue to the City. Up to this meeting, we have had no complaints from any of the adjacent property owners, any of the people who live around us or any- one in the City that I have discussed the problem tith. Most of the neigh- bors feel that it has to come, Mr, Bob Blood 703 South Glendora Avenue West Covina my front door. Any action that you problem will be deeply appreciated. I have two unique problems. It is my driveway everyone turns in when they come around Service. Secondly, all of the street maps show that Glendora is widened, the curb will be 14 feet from do to help this group to alleviate the -13- r1 U Co Co 10-29-62 ZONE CHANGE NO, 228 - Continued Mr. Larry Sade 130 South Croft Los Angeles to develop it as one big parcel. the area. We will do a nice job into consideration and grant us Page Fourteen I am a developer. I am one of the group asking for this zone change° We have no opposition at all from any of the neighbors in reference to"this rezoning. We know it is a good plan It will help the,.area and will upgrade of developing if you let use Take this our request. There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed. Mr. Flotten read Planning Commission Resolution No. 1263 and stated that there were 63 notices mailed to people living in the area and the adver- tisement of this public hearing appeared in the West Covina Tribune on October 18, 1962. Mr. Aiassa left the chambers at 10:30 P.M. Councilman Towner: The Planning Department has indicated to us that the Commission was preparing a report on South Glendora. What is the status of that report? Mr. Joseph: The report will be completed by your study session on the 31sto All the maps, charts and illustrations are completed. We are now summarizing some arithmetic. Councilman Heath: I believe that this body has requested that this study be done by a profes- sional. Councilman Snyder: There was a prior request directing the Planning staff to do this and they had this almost completed when the other directive came through. Councilman Heath: The only reason I bring it up is not that I am questioning the competency of the Planning Commission, but I am in favor of having this done by a professional so there would be no ques- tion about the quality of it and I think the Planning Commission have their own ideas of what should go along this street. I would like to see an impartial outside developer come in and do this plan, Councilman Snyder: It is my understanding and I am sure that there is a directive from the City Council directing the Planning staff to make a study on South Glendora, The directive may have come from the Planning Commission. At the time we discussed having a pro- fessional consultant, but we.have not yet chosen a professional consul- tant. I don't think they went ahead on their own. I'm sure there was a directive and I would like that clarified. -14- Co C o 10--29-62 Page Fifteen ZONE CHANGE NO. 228 - Continued Councilman Towner: I think we have this study session coming up with the Planning Commission on the 31st and I think we can clarify our thinking on South Glendora at that time. I am of the opinion that this • matter should be held over until we do have that thinking. I think it is very commendable that these property owners have joined together in a joint effort to work out their problems. This is certainly very helpful. Secondly, I think there was a misconception as to what was done on the Weaver property. We did not grant C-1 on the Weaver property; it was a limited R-P use and the limit was to office use only, no commercial use. I think something compatible to the Weaver property would be in order here. I have very strong reservations as to granting commercial on this long strip of property along Glendora. I think we should protect the existing zoning before we stretch it out and grant more. Councilman Snyder: It isn't as simple as it looks on the face. I think the plan has merit but I would like to see the alternatives. I am not necessarily against the C-1, Councilman Heath: I am thoroughly convinced that it shouldn't be R-1 along Glendora Avenue. Whether it will be commercial or R-P, that is something else. We are having a joint meeting with the Planning Commission on the 31sta Perhaps we should hold this off until we can discuss this. Councilman Jett: I concur with what has been said to- night. I think everybody recognizes the problem on Glendora. Just what the uses will eventually develop in this area, it is difficult to pro- ject. I hesitate to say C-1 zoning is what we want on all of this be- cause this might not all develop as C-1 property. -I think we want to give this real thought and real good talking before we act on it because we do want to let everybody develop their property to the fullest extent and to the highest use. I feel we should hold it over. Mayor Barnes: I think it is the concensus that it is most important to have our joint meeting with the Planning Commission and discuss this particular area prior to any decision on it this evening. It is my hope that if this is recommended, that this could be one nice development in one large precise plan so we don't have individual small shops. Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Towner, and carried, that Zone Change No. 228 be held over until the next regular meeting. ZONE CHANGE NO, 233 LOCATION: 1732 South Azusa Avenue, APPROVED between Azusa Avenue and and south extension of Hollen- VARIANCE NO, 404 beck Street. DENIED Brutoco Development Company Request to reclassify from zone A1-10,000 and Al-5 to R-1, R-3, R-P, C-l. and P-B approved by Planning Commission Resolu- tion No. R-1265o Request for construction of several multiple residential buildings which exceed mazimum height limit denied by Planning Commission Resolution No. R-1266o Variance No. 404 appealed by applicant on October 11, 1962. Mayor Barnes: This is the time and place for the public hearing. -15- Ca Co 10-29-62 Page Sixteen ZONE CHANGE NO. 233-VARIANCE NO. 404 - Continued Mr. Louis Brutocao Mr, John Larson who made the presenta- 266 South Glendora Avenue tion before the Planning Commission West Covina could not be here tonight. (Explained map on board.) It is our intention to maintain a high class development com- patable with the area. We have attempted to use the natural topography of the land. This is an over-all plan developed in accordance with the General Plan now in existence. It is a good plan and cannot hurt any values to any of the home owners in the area. We request the approval for the over-all development. It is my understanding that with the granting of the zoning, we must conform to precise plan recommendations and it will be necessary for us to appear before the Planning Commission for all sub- divisions, Mr. Ted Walsh (Explained map placed on the board.) 127 North Lang This is a general plan to show the West Covina position of these various zones. We have good circulation planned here. The exact locations of the streets will be presented when we present a tenta- tive map. Mr. Rolufson I have been associated with Mr. Gal- CoPaAo ster for many years. Over the years, 2095 Farview Lane Mr. Galster has had many opportuni- West Covina ties to dispose of this property and it wan°t until Mr. Brutocao appeared . on the scene and satisfied Mr. and Mrs. Gals.tei°that he would follow through with a plan which Mr. Galster preferred, one which would retain the park -like area and be a credit to the City of West Covina, that Mr. Galster decided to develop. I would like to mention first of all, the Los Angeles Bureau of Municipal. Re- search has made many studies in the East San Gabriel Valley. There are a number of facts which they bring out in this and it is authoritative and I think very pertinent to this problem here. (Cited from booklet.) You recognize the need for high-rise and I understand you are planning a high-rise ordinance. I feel that this subdivision is one answer, not complete of course, to this great problem in West Covina of the diminishing lot inventory and the low density. This subdivision Mr. Brutoco has worked out in cooperation with Mr, Galster, I.think, answers another prob- lem for this City and that is a matter of that park, On adoption of this plan, the City will be deeded a 30-acre park. Mrs. Helen Gore We own.a piece of property zoned R-4 1445 East Dexter and I have made studies of multiple Covina luxury apartments, I have talked to over 100 people along these lines a- bout moving into such an apartment if it were available and I got over 40 signatures in just a matter of a few days and I have hundreds of names of people who would be interested .in such a development. Along with these multiple apartments goes a certain location. I think this development as proposed by Mr. Brutocao would be is an asset to the community. Mr. William Bray, Architect 962 North LaCienega Blvd. Los Angeles center to show that it retains surrounded by residential and My primary purpose is to explain briefly what we are trying to accom- plish architectually for the benefit of the community. This rendering is a proposed treatment for the shopping a residential character because it will.be apartment projects. (Presented rendering -16- C. Co 10-29-62 Page Seventeen ZONE CHANGE NO. 233 - VARIANCE NO. 404 - Continued Mr. William Bray - Continued: to be placed on board.) The facility that this will be offered to • those in the area I think should be considered. It is a convenience. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have. Mr. Henry Genter I have a short letter from Leonard 10880 East Shamwood M. Rivkin of 13340 Hollencrest Drive, West Covina. (Read letter stating that there is no objection to this annexation.) I have another letter from Sam V. Cipiano, 2029 Cameo Vista Drive supporting this project, I have another letter from Jack and Rita Palasono, 2034 Cameo Vista Drive, West Covina, supporting this project. IN OPPOSITION Mr. H. Lusardi I represent the South Hills Estates 2016 East Michelle Association. We are home owners in the area directly north of the pro- posed development. I wish to regis- ter to the Council some of the facts presented to the Commission. We submitted names of over 700 residents in the immediate area who were opposed to this proposal and some 40 direct letters to the Planning Commission. We don't believe that there is a justified need for addi- tional shopping facilities in West Covina, let alone in this particular area. We don't believe that there is a need for a desire for high-rise luxury -type apartments in West Covina, particularly adjacent to an es- tablished single family residential area. It was our understanding at • the last Planning Commission meeting that the entire R-1 area was pro- posed as Area District III, I don't know how Area District II -A has been presented on this map at the present time. The wilderness park is doubt- ful in our minds that it will be an asset to the City. We believe there is quite a bit of liability that will go along with this park in added police protection, the floating of bond issues or some means of finan- cing the development of this park, We strenously object to the street proposal in that we feel it will be detrimental to the area directly north and a traffic hazard to the many residents and their children through which all this traffic must go, We understand the desire of the City to incorporate this site within it boundaries. We are depending on your planning and development to develop this community to the benefit of all concerned. We ask that you give consideration to our problem, namely, the circulation of traffic from this large development through our tract to the north. We ask that you do not act on this proposal to- night and we urge that you recommend the formulation of a study session with residents of the area and the developers to work out an equitable solution to this street problem. We propose something along these lines for the street pattern. Using the natural barrier of the hills as a sep- aration which has been designated between Area Districts III and II -A for a street plan. Do not run the streets over the hill. Use that na- tural barrier to keep streets north and south to the north of the ridge and use streets east and west to the south of the ridge. Since schools have been brought up as a major point running north and south to get children to the new school that is proposed, we propose that perhaps in • place of the park zone that a school site be proposed somewhere in this 190 acres. The high-rise apartments will not be out of view; the buil- dings will be visible. -17- i C. Co 10-29-62 Page Eighteen ZONE CHANGE NO. 233 - VARIANCE NO. 404 - Continued: Mr. Nelson The Planning Commission came up with 1312 Auburn Drive the idea of taking the park and put - West Covina ting in the C-1 zoning, I submit that this is spot zoning. I question cer- tainly the spot zoning and I question further the strip zoning and I call to your attention the rendering of the shopping center, which is beautiful; however, under our particular set up, zoning is based on C-1 zoning, not on the basis of a rendering or a drawing which is submitted to the Council or the Commission. Once the zoning is changed to C-1, the minimum requirements of C-1 is all that they have to meet. As a total plan, I must concede it is a well -organ- ized plan, but the question is, is it a good plan for West Covina? Mr. Harold Greenberg 2116 Casa Linda Drive West Covina Mr. Joseph: Mr. Harald Greenberg: Mr. Joseph: The Planning Commission only accepted R-1 and C-1 zones; they did not accept R-3o I would like clarification on that. There is an ambiguity in the agenda, The Planning Commission recommended approval of the R-1, with two Area Districts, the C-1 and the P-B. They denied the R-3 and the R-Po I think this meeting should be post- poned on this basis and recommended back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration. The Planning Commission did not recom- mend this but the applicant appealed that which the Planning Commission de- nied. Mr. Harold Greenberg: This R-3 will not be up to the stan- dards of the residential area. I have a booklet here on what to look for when buying a house. It says to notice the traffic flow, whether it is around or through the neighborhood. I have here an article from the Wall Street Journal which points out the kinds of companies that are coming out into this area. This type of company is going to warrant salary type people. These are people who will need the nicer homes and will not want apartments to cluster the area. Mr. Herbert Landisman The first article of the Constitution 2126 Casa Linda Drive states the people shall have the right West Covina to petition for redress of grievances. By some member on this Council it was stated that our effort in obtaining some 700 names on this petition is essentially worthless. We think this zoning plan is bad. We haven't had a single objection of ours on this plan answered. There are 700 people against this plan and essentially they have been told they receive no redress of their grievances at all. As soon as you introduce all these high density uses into a residential area, no matter how you plan the streets, you are going to increase the traffic through these areas. People don't like to live in an area that has high density traffic. We think these apartments and high-rise are very objectionable because they overlook us and destroy our privacy. This makes the area less desirable to live in. This plan calls for ad- ditional R-3 zoning with cheap apartments. Why introduce those apartments into such a fine residential area? I don't believe there has been a need shown for the high rise. I hope you feel that at least we should 'have a meeting with you where we can talk with you face to face and perhaps we, can feel that we are having our grievances redressed. -18- C. Ce 10-29-62 Page Nineteen ZONE CHANGE NO. 233 - VARIANCE NO. 404 - Continued Mr. Nolan Dial My only point in speaking is to point 2029 Casa Linda Drive out that there are other people like West Covina myself who feel very strongly about this proposal and who in the future will be looking at the action of this Council not only on this plan here but on subsequent plans. There are many hundreds ofpeople who would like to get up here and talk but we are letting a few people do this job and not dragging this on and on. Why don't we stay with the R-1 development which was shown to us when we bought our lots? REBUTTAL Mr. Louis Brutocaoo We have listened to many comments by the people in the area and I still state that the people in the area are not opposed to our plan. There are 700 signatures, but I do question whether or not they are verified. Many came to the Chamber meeting and at the meeting everyone had their turn to speak. After the plan was pre- sented, the people realized what we were trying to doe These people are worrying about protecting their homes north of this property and that is our worry, too; we are trying to protect those values. Your General Plan shows that we need the amount of commercial in that area that we have. We feel this is a good plan and ask that you give us your favorable con- sideration, Mr. Rolufsono The gentlemen in opposition emphasized three major points. They repeatedly • state to you that they have 700 signa- tures in opposition. I can't help but wonder and I am quite sure that those 700 people have not had an opportunity to inspect that plane I question the authenticity of those 700 signatures. The second thing they emphasize is this matter of traffic. We can't deny this growth. Your police department, your fire department and your Planning Commission have gone into this plan and studied it and this plan was drawn with the traffic problem in mind. Even if this plan is rejected and something else goes in, there will still be traffic. Also, they are emphasizing the ugliness of high-rise apartments. They will not be seen as much as they would have you believe. Mr. Galster and Mr. Brutocao are men of financial responsibility. On this C-1, it has been intimated that this C-1 property will not be what we represent. Neither of these people are the kind that will put up frame stucco 20-foot storerooms. You can be assured that they will follow through on this plan. There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed. Councilman Heath: Concerning this petition with 700 names on it, I presume that that was referred to some remark that I made. This gentleman was not present when I made that remark. The comment I at the time was that on any zoning within the City there is a line drawn 300-foot radius outside of the property and the people inside of this are given legal notice. If it is the County, it is a 500-foot radius. If there is a petition, these people's words are weighed quite heavily. . If there is a petition with 700 names on it it doesn't carry too much weight unless it is in the form of a petition for referendum or with some objective in mind of. initiative. I also brought out the point at that time and made a similar statement and the people who heard the re- mark agreed, that you could take a petition that had anything on it and you could take it downtown and have more people sign it who didn't know what they were signing. Co Co 10-29-62 Page Twenty ZONE CHANGE NO. 233 - VARIANCE NO. 404 - Continued Councilman Towner: I think Mr. Heath would agree that certainly the Council is interested in what the petitio�riers have to say and we are not interested in so much their numbers as the validity of their logic and their reasons for what they state. I think they have presented here' a number of reasons and a number of questions that are going to be weighed in the balance and considered in connection with this development. I think, first of all, that I have some unanswered questions and there is no evidence on these subjects. One of them is the question raised by the protestants as to what effect this might have on the school system and whether or not additional school sites might be needed. Mr. Joseph. This has been checked with the school system. We always notify the school district in which the development w3.11 take place. In this instance, I personally discussed this with Mr. East- man of the West Covina Unified School District and he indicated to me that the Hollencrest School was designed to take care of the people who would be moving in this general area so the school children are going to go to the Hollencrest School, The School District has a master plan on the location of schools and Hollencrest is located for this purpose. Councilman Jett. The thing that I have been concerned about is how these residents feel who are living in the area because I,think they are certainly entitled to every possible consideration that we can give them. I also feel that the people who have the vacant property are entitled to develop the land. I am not sure just what the final develop- ment will be in here but I think that this is something we have to resolve before we,go much farther with this. We are going to have to provide major streets in and through this area to get to that area that lies south and east of this for these developments, For these people we have created a regional shopping area within,this district. We know that those people are going to want to get into this area. We need also to provide streets for policing, for fire protection, for ambulance service, for the children going to and from school. I think this is something we should talk about and I feel before we close this hearing these things should be discussed. The hearing should not have been closed. I think we should have a meeting with the proponents and the opponents. I think everybody should be given an opportunity to be heard. Councilman Snyder. Mr. Brutocao, are you asking that the variance application be held off? Mr. Louis Brutocao° Yes, either that the variance be granted with the R-3 zoning subject to the recommendations that were made by the Planning Commission at the last meeting or that we hold in abeyance the same as the Planning Commission did do and that was to hold in abey- ance the high-rise and the R-3 and the R-P until their study is made this coming month, but to grant us the zoning on the C-1, the R-1 and the P-B so we can proceed with our development. Councilman Snyder. Mr. Lusardi, how many dues paying mem- bers do you have in the South Hills Estates Association? Mr. Lusardi. At present, 47. -20- Ca Ca 10-29-62 Page Twenty -One ZONE CHANGE NO, 233 - VARIANCE NO, 404 - Continued Councilman Heath: I think what is before us tonight is not a tentative map and we should keep that in mind. What we have be- fore us now is the zoning and we should look at this picture over here and try to determine whether those zones in that approximate area is a good arrangement, whether the R-1 has been protected and if it would work to the highest and best use in that location. I think we have to keep in mind that there will have to be a tentative map filed showing the streets and I think at that time it behooves us to see that these people are protected as far as routing traffic through their area. All we have before us now is the zoning in a general location. I served on the Annexation Committee here for the City for a number of years. As far back as two years ago I have visited Mr. Galster, long before Mr.' Brutocao came along, with the hopes that he would annex this area into the City. On two occasions, I have been waiting to talk to Mr. Galster and I have seen developers come out of his office and those were not the kind of developers that Mr. Galster wanted. I am ".br.ini g - this out to point out that I think Mr. Galster has tried to be very, very selective in who he had developed this property because he wanted to develop it just right. Mayor Barnes: test thing that could sight to see that this type of a park. Someone in the audience said that they didn't think the park would be an asset to the City. I think this is the grea- happen to a city and I am happy someone has the fore - could be done. You could all benefit from this Councilman Snyder: I think the statement that they don't know whether we need a 30-acre park sort of makes me doubt the credibility of the witness. In regards to the need of this annexation, it is true that this is a city of homes and many of us moved here because we thought it was a city of homes. We are surrounded by cities and we are fast be- coming the metropolitan center of this valley. I think we have to have high' rise apartments in time and I think the time is rapidly coming. By their very nature,. they don't go into cheap neighborhoods. This entire plan fits perfectly with our General Plano I think this is one of the finest annexations West Covina has ever made. I am willing to adopt the zoning as proposed. Councilman Towner: I would like to comment that the appli- cants here are local people whose repu- tation is established as far as their past accomplishments and their quality developments and standards are concerned. I am satisfied that if they say they are going to do a cer- tain thing that they will do it. I think the park site certainly is one of the most pleasing aspects of this whole proposal, I can't think of anything better for the families of West Covina than a wilderness park of this size. As far as the General Plan is concerned, it does indicate that this is a logical location for a wilderness park. The R-1 proposed is as good or better as far as lot sizes are concerned as already exis- ting lots,in the area to the north and I think clearly R-1 is in order. I think At the time the actual maps come in the question of traffic cir- culation can be gone into on a more thorough basis, As far as the C-1 • is concerned, I think it, too, is logical next to the substation and in accordance with the plan proposed or suggested by the applicants. There is no other commercial area in the immediate vicinity to service the homes that are there and will go in there in the future. I think what they ask for in C is justified under the circumstances here. I do have some reservations about the high-rise apartments and I think that the time will come, and maybe it is here now, that there is going to be a real demand for high-rise apartments in desirable locations. I would -21- 0 • Co Ca 10-29-62 Page Twenty -Two ZONE CHANGE NO. 233 - VARIANCE NO. 404 - Continued Councilman Towner - Continued: agree.with the Planning Commission suggestion that this be not granted on the high rise. It is a variance request in the first place and.I don't think there is any justification on the variance. If the devel- oper so desires, he might bring it in at a later date on a zone change request. Councilman Heath: ref ile? They are ready in about tw that section of it Mr. Williams: Is there any way of concerning the high that the applicant making a study now on high rise an 0 or three weeks. Is there any way without having to file again? date provided that the substantially the same that you could do that on the R-P zone if you Councilman Snyder: Mr. Joseph: Councilman Towner: Mr, Williams: Councilman Heath: Mr, Joseph: holding this open rise and R-3 so does not have to d it should be we can hold over You could hold over any action, just take no action on that portion of it and reserve it for decision at a later zoning that you come up with at a later date is as shown that is requested here. I have in mind on R-3o I think you would have some difficulty are thinking of making a C-R zone or something. Why was the R-P held over? They were not sure if they wanted to put an intense use there towards the single family and they were talking about a C-P zone which we are coming up with on November Ztho I think another reason to hold the R-P over is under that zoning R-3 development is allowed and I think this comes under the same package and needs study, You could hold it over but I don't think you could grant C-Po If the purpose of holding it over is to con- vert it'to C-P, you will have difficulty because C-P want applied for. The Planning Commission has held action on the R-P, the R-3 and the high rise variance? No, they denied it. Mayor Barnes: Is there any way we can hold these items if not approved tonight to a set date for decision at that time? In other words, giving us time to see our ordinances and judge them and discuss them. We would just act on a portion of the zoning and hold the rest over. Mr, Williams: I don't know. I am inclined to think that it would be necessary to refile on the part that you don't act on by the time of annexation because this hearing and this petition are for present annexation and zoning. If it is not granted as to any part of the area, the area will come in under a different portion of the code as County zoning or whatever the code says. -22- • C o C < 10-29-62 Page Twenty -Three ZONE CHANGE NO, 233 - VARIANCE NO, 404 - Continued Councilman Jett: I recall in Eastland when there was zoning placed on that property prior to annexation and there was a lawsuit started as a result. What position are we in if we zone this prior to annexation? Mr. Williams: If you zone it prior to annexation, it doesn't change the zone the prop- erty is in the County. If we never annexed it, the action of the City is purely academic. You do have the power to state what zone it will be in when it is annexed and that is the purpose of this hearing tonight. There has been no decision that I know of in California on this prezoning but there has been a recognition of prezoning to this effect, in that practically all cities and their ordinances in the old days used to state that all property annexed came in as R-lo I don't have any doubt that a court will uphold prezoning where you have heard the facts and you declare in advance what the proper zone for it to come in the city. Councilman Towner; The R-P, high rise and R-3 is now Al-5 acres and if we don't grant the zone on it now it would come in with the County zoning of Al-5 acres. Councilman Snyder; I see no objection to the R-Pe Councilman Jett: It would be behind the hill so it wouldn't be too visible from the R-lo Mr. Joseph; The Planning Commission felt that that much R-3 would be justified if there was a particular kind of use but not just a blanket R-3 on that much land. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that Variance No. 404 be denied. Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, that Zone Change No. 233 be approved as recommended by the Planning Commission except that the area designated R-P be zoned R-P and except that the area designated as R-3 be zone R-3 in reference to the westerly area designated as R-3-1 and that the area designated as R-3-2 be left agri- cultural. Motion passed on roll call as follows; Ayes; Councilmen Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes; Councilman Towner Absent; None Councilman Towner; I disagree with the portion of the motion dealing with R-P and R-3, CITY MANAGER ORDINANCE Councilman Jett; information, can talk to this information and I am Manager's Ordinance with ging it. I am convinced we have to do something about our City Manager Ordinance so that an individual Councilman can get department heads and employees in order to get convinced that we have got to review our City these things in mind and with a view to chan- -23- E C • 0 C o C e 10-29-62 CITY MANAGER ORDINANCE - Continued Mayor Barnes: Councilman Jett:. Mayor Barnes: Councilman Heath: Councilman Jett: Councilman Snyder: Mayor Barnes: SOUTHERLY ANNEXATION NO, 174 HEARING OF PROTESTS Page Twenty -Four This should be brought up at a per- sonnel session. I think the City Managers Ordinance is a public interest to all the people of West Covina. Yes, but I think it is also in regards to one man. There is one point that I would like to review in it. Maybe this should be brought up in a special session. Perhaps that is where we should start. I think this might be chaos. I think it is part of our procedure that we act as a majority and not individually. I think the indication is that we do have a special session for this, pos- sibly with Mr. Aiassao Hearing of protests set for this date by Resolution No. 2453 adopted by the City -Council on September 11, 1962. Mr. Flotten: We have the report from the Registrar of Voters Office that there are no registered voters in the area. The total assessed valuation is $7,150.00. We have received no protests, either oral or written, Mayor Barnes: Is there anyone in the audience in- terested in Annexation No. 174? (There were none.) I will declare the hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 2488 The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA FINDING AND DECLAR- ING THAT.A MAJORITY PROTEST HAS NOT BEEN MADE AGAINST SOUTHERLY ANNEXATION NO. 174" Mayor Barnes: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Towner, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No. 2488. -24- Co C. 10-29-62 ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION Page Twenty -Five The City Attorney presented. "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING THE ANNEXATION TO INCORPORATING IN AND MAKING A PART OF THE SAID CITY OF WEST COVINA, CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRITORY OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS AND CONTIGUOUS THERETO KNOWN AS SOUTH- ERLY ANNEXATION NO, 174" Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that said ordinance be introduced. NORTHERLY ANNEXATION NO. 176 Hearing of protests set for.this date HEARING OF PROTESTS by Resolution No. 2447 adopted by the City Council on September 11, 1962. Mr. Flotten: We have the report from the Registrar of Voters Office that there are no registered voters in the area. The assessed valuation of the land is $28,530 and the assessed value use of the property is $148,590, the total is $177,120. There are no pro- tests, either written or oral. Mayor Barnes. RESOLUTION NO. 2489 ADOPTED Mayor Barnes: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to protest Northerly Annexa- tion No. 176? (There were none.) I will declare the hearing closed. The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA FINDING AND DECLARING THAT A MAJORITY PROTEST HAS NOT BEEN MADE AGAINST NORTHERLY ANNEXATION NO. 176" Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes. Councilman Jett, Towner, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No. 2489, • ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented: It AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING THE ANNEX- ATION TO INCORPORATING IN AND MAKING A PART OF SAID CITY OF WEST COVINA CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRITORY OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS AND CONTIGUOUS THERETO KNOWN AS NORTHERLY ANNEXATION NO, 176" -25- i Co C. 10-29-62 Page Twenty Six ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION - Continued Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that said ordinance not be read. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, • that said ordinance be introduced, PLANNING COMMISSION TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT NO. 27632 LOCATION: Northeast corner of William A. Wilson Glendora Avenue and APPROVED Merced Avenue. 1.25 Acres - R-A District II proposed for single family dwellings. Mr. Flotten read the conditions to be placed on the tentative map if it is approved. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, to approve Tentative Map of Tract No. 27632 subject to the conditions of the Planning Commission. Councilman Snyder left the chambers at 1:30 A.M. CITY ATTORNEY ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF WEST COVINA MUNICI- PAL CODE RELATING TO PRECISE PLANS OF DESIGN" Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that said ordinance be introduced. LAWSUIT Mr, Williams: We have been served with a summons by Kiddie Rides, Inc. who contend they have been erroneously assessed and have paid excessive taxes to the City. We are entitled to defense by the County Counsel in this matter and I have, subject to your appro- val, already written tb.the County Counsel authorizing him to represent the City. All it takes is a request and authorization. There is no action needed unless you disapprove of what I have already done. Mayor Barnes: All right. • REVIEW PLANNING COMMISSION Read by Mr, Flotten ACTION OF OCTOBER 17, 1962 Councilman Heath: I think we should call up Variance No. 408 for the sign for Alpha Beta. Mr, Flotten: We'will set this..for;hearing on Novem- ber 26, 1962. -26 - e C. C. 10-29-62 Page Twenty -Seven AUCTION Mr. Flotten; This -man wants to auction off the equipment in Luigi's Pizza House on November 6 at 10:30 A.M. • Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried; that the authorization be granted for the auction at 243 South Glendora of Luigi's Pizza House on November 6, 1962 at 10:30 A.M. subject to staff approval. TEMPORARY USE PERMIT ...... Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded APPLICATION OF MAY COMPANY by Councilman Towner, and carried, that May Company be given permission for Santa Claus in the Arcade from November 21 to December 25, 1962, subject to staff approval. PROPOSED SOUTHERLY ANNEXA- TION DISTRICT NO. 21 TO THE CITY OF COVINA Mr. Flotten° DEMANDS This is just for your information. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, to approve demands totalling $208,597.07 as listed on demand sheets C-268 through 270, B-113 and Trust 267. This total includes fund transfers of $157,080.82 and bank transfers of $112.98. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Towner, Heath,'Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: Councilman Snyder There being no further business, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, and carried, that this meeting be adjourned until 8:30 P.M. on November 5, 1962. The meeting was adjourned at 1:40 A.M. ATTEST: • City Clerk APPROVED yor -27-