09-23-1963 - Regular Meeting - Minutes0
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA
SEPTEMBER 23, 1963
The regular meeting of the City Council was called to order by Mayor
:.Barnes at 7.45 P.M. in the [Best Covina City Hall, Councilman Snyder
pled the Pledge of Allegiance, The Rev, DeWitt Brady of the Congre-
gational Church of the Good Shepherd gave the invocation.
ROLL CALL
Present. Mayor Barnes, Councilmen Jett, Heath, Snyder
Others Present. Mr, George Aiassa, City Manager
Mr, Robert Flotten, City Clerk
Mr, Harry C. Williams, City Attorney
Mr, Thomas J. Dosh, Public Services Director
Mr, Harold Joseph, Planning Director
Absent. Councilman Towner
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
August 5, 1963 - Approved as presented as follows:,
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
that the Minutes of August 5, 1963, be approved as presented.
August 19, 1963 - Held for final approval. Discussion as follows.
Councilman Heath.
City Clerk, Mr, Flotten:
Councilman Heath:
City Clerk, Mr, Flotten:
Are these the Minutes where we
discussed the fire station?
Yes, beginning at the bottom of
Page 3,
Mr. City Clerk, does this contain
all of the statements on the
tape?
I don't believe so. I believe
it does contain all the statements
that are pertinent,
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
that the Minutes of August 19, 1963, be held over until all the
information concerning the fire station that is on the tape is
inserted in these Minutes,
CITY CLERK'S REPORTS
TRACT NO, 25765 LOCATION. North of Cameron Avenue,
ACCEPT STREET IMPROVEMENTS east of Barranca Street,
Fontana Enterprises
APPROVED Accept street and storm drain and
sanitary sewer improvements.
-1-
v
C. C. 9/23/63
TRACT NO. 25765 Continued
Page Two
Authorize release of General Insurance Co, of. America bond No. 485717
in the amount of $61,600.00 subject to receipt of $850.00 bond or cash
deposit for incompleted driveway approach. Staff recommends acceptance
and release of bond,
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
to accept the street improvements in Tract No. 25765 and authorize
release of the General Insurance Company of America Bond No. 485717
in the amount of $615600.00 subject to receipt of $850.00 bond or cash
deposit for incompleted driveway approaches.
PROJECT C-167
ACCEPT STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Herz American
APPROVED
Casualty Co, performance bond in
Notice of Completion procedure,
release of bond,
LOCATION: Northeast corner of
Walnut and Merced,
Accept street improvements and
authorize release of Maryland
the amount of $2.2,978.00 subject to
Staff recommends acceptance and
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
to accept the street improvements in Project C-167 and authorize
. release of the Maryland Casualty Company Performance Bond in the
amount of $22,978,00 subject to the Notice of Completion procedure.
PRECISE PLAN NO, 128 LOCATION: Northwest corner of
ACCEPT STREET IMPROVEMENTS California Street and
Jack I� Dubrove Walnut Creek Parkway,
APPROVED
Accept street improvements and
authorize release of Pacific Employers Insurance Co bond No, 01-70076
in the amount of $141500.00. Staff recommends acceptance and release
of bond,
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
to accept the street improvements in Precise Plan No, 128 and authorize
release of Pacific Employers Insurance Company Bond No, 01-70076 in
the amount of $149500.00.
PROJECT C-201 LOCATION: Willow Lane - west of
APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS Willow Avenue.
STREET IMPROVEMENT
APPROVED Approve plans and specifications
for street improvement. Authorize
• City Engineer to call for bids subject to R.O,W, clearance. (Budgeted
participation project: property owners $7442.00, City $6,000,00,)
Staff recommends approval and authorization to call for bids,
Councilman Heath:
Public Services Director, Mr. Dosh:
Have we received all the quit --
claim deeds?
Not yet, This will be held for
bid until the deeds.are received,
IWM
C, Co 9/23/63 Page Three
PROJECT C-201 - Continued
• Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
to approve the plans and specifications on Project C-201 and authorize
the City Engineer to call for bids after we received deeds on all
property,to be dedicated,
•
•
RESOLUTION NO, 2741
ADOPTED
Mayor Barnes:
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
BY HAROLD L. LANE AND EDNA L.
LAME ON SEPTEMBER 18, 19635 FOR
STREET AND HIGHWAY PURPOSES TO
BE KNOWN AS WILLOW LANE)
Hearing no objections, we will
waive further reading of the
body of the resolution.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, that said
resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Towner
Said resolution was given No, 2741,
RESOLUTION NO. 2742
ADOPTED
Mayor Barnes:
The City Clerk presented:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPT-
ING A CERTAIN WRITTEN INSTRUMENT
AND DIRECTING THE RECORDATION
THEREOF" ( EXECUTED BY _ HARO.LD _L. LANE
AND EDNA L. LANE ON SEPTEMBER 18,
19635 FOR STREET AND HIGHWAY
PURPOSES TO BE KNOWN AS WILL014
LANE)
Hearing no objections, we will
waive further reading of the
body of the resolution,
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that said
resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Towner
Said resolution was given No, 2742,
-3-
U
•
•
C. C. 9/23/63
CITY CLERK'S REPORTS - Continued
RESOLUTIONI NO, 2743
ADOPTED
Mayor Barnes:
Page Four
The City Clerk presented:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA
APPROVING THE FINAL SUBDIVISION
MAP OF METES AND BOUNDS SUBDIVISION
NO. 135-2151 AND ACCEPTING AN
AGREEMENT BY THE SUBDIVIDER" (King)
Hearing no objections, we'will
waive further reading of the body
of the resolution.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, that said
resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Towner
Said resolution was given No. 2743.
RESOLUTION N0, 2744
ADOPTED
Mayor Barnes:
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"(Van Syckle)
(Metes 9 Bounds Subdivision
No. 135-215)
Hearing no objections, we will
waive further reading of the
body of the resolution.
City Attorney, Mr. Williams: I think if you act on both of
these and after you have acted,
direct that the grant deed be recorded before the final map is signed
and it will be all right.
Public Services Director, Mr. Dosh: The Van Syckles have given us a grant
deed for.frontage '..on the. whole parcel
Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, that said
resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Towner
Said resolution was given No. 2744.
Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried,
that the grant deed for Subdivision 135-215 be recorded before the
final map is signed.
s.M
•
n
U
•
Co Ca 9/23/63
SCHEDULED MATTERS
HEARINGS
VARIANCE NO. 433
Aneas Corporation
DENIED
Page Five
LOCATION: Northeast corner of
Francisquito and Sunset,
Request for reduction in lot sizes,
front, side and rear yard setbacks, distances between buildings, ground
coverage per lot greater than is allowed in R-3b and reduction in lot,
dimensions, approved by Planning Commission Resolution No. 1422.
Called up by Council on September 3, 1963.
►I
VARIANCE NO, 456
Aneas Corporation
DENIED
structures in Zone R-2 approved by
No. 1445a Called up by Council on
AND
ZONE CHANGE NO, 259
Aneas Corporation
APPROVED
LOCATION: Northeast corner of
Francisquito and Sunset,
Request to permit two story
Planning Commission Resolution
September 3, 1963.
LOCATION: Northeast corner of
Francisquito and Sunset
between Sunset and
Broadmooro
Request to reclassify from Zone R-A to Zones R-3b, C-1 or C-2, denied
by Planning Commission Resolution No. 1400a Appealed by applicant on
May 6, 1963, Held over from May 27, 1963 to July 8tho Hearing closed
on July 8, 1963 (no further public testimony) and referre7 to rlanning
Commission for action and report to the Council on the Variances,
Precise Plan, Unclassified Use Permit, and the Tract. Held over from
September 10, 1963 to this date.
AND
PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN NO, 366 LOCATION: Northeast corner of
Aneas Corporation Francisquito and Sunset
APPROVED (Gas Station only) between Sunset and
DENIED (Remainder of. plan) Broadmooro
Request for approval of condominium development granted by Planning
Commission Resolution No. 1443o Appealed by Mra Hollingsworth on
August 26, 1963. Held over from September 10, 1963 to this date.
Hearing closed September 10, 1963 (no further public testimony).
AND
UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT NO, 78 LOCATION: Northeast corner of
Aneas Corporation Francisquito and Sunset
APPROVED between Sunset and
Broadmooro
Request for Service Station in Zone C-1 denied by Planning Commission
Resolution No. 1441. Appealed by applicant on August 26, 1963.
HearinL! closed on September 10, 1963 and held over for decision to this
date-, No further public testimony.)
-5-
11
Ca Co 9/23/63 Page Six
AND
TENTATIVE MAP TRACT NO. 28388 LOCATION-. Northeast corner of
Aneas Corporation Francisquito and
DENIED Sunset between Sunset
and Broadmoor.
Area District II (8.22 Acres) 99 lots. Approved by Planning Com-
mission on September 11, 1963.
City Attorney, Mr. Williams-.
is only capable of
other items except
would be proper to
I think the first
variances and the
testimony on,
These things go hand in hand.
The variances fit,the precise plan
approval with the variances, You have heard all
these two variances and the tract map. I think it
hear these and then decide on all of them later.
thing to do is hear all of them and these two
tract map are the only things you have not heard
Mayor Barnes; This is the time and place for
the public hearing on Variance
No. 443, Variance No. 456 and Tract Map No. 28388.
IN FAVOR
Mr. Francis J. Garvey I represent the Aneas Corporation.
Attorney With respect to Variance No. 443,
281 East Workman Avenue this merely is a request for a
Covina reduction in lot sizes in front
and side yard and rear yard set-
backs, distances between buildings, and ground coverage in order to get
a garden type apartment, cluster housing. In order to achieve group
housing under single rooves we reduce the actual area of the pad
and convey by deed and place in common area, you cannot conform to
the variance requirements set up for a standard R-1 lot subdivision.
This is that the necessary reductions be made to conform to the
precise plan which you have already heard.
With respect to Variance No. 456,
this is a request to permit two story structures in zone R-2. This
plan presents .18 lots which are one story structures along Broadmoor.
The balance are two story structures. Under the present zoning, two
story structures are not permitted in a P.-2 zone without a variance.
The tentative map has been
approved subject to certain other approvals by the Planning Commission.
It represents pictorally the lots that would be conveyed. There
are 95 lots; there will be one common lot running through.
• Mr. David Scott, Mr. Feldman,
and several representatives from Shell Oil Company are here in case
you should have any questions with respect to their design.
IN OPPOSITION
Mr.
Chuck Dowding
I would like to make
a special
1605
South Belmont
request regarding the
order of my
West
Covina
testimony. I would like
to speak
on the variances and
I would like
Dorothy
King to speak on
the tract map and I will speak on
the tract
map
later.
Co C. 9/23/63
ANEAS CORPORATION - Continued
Page Seven
• I would like to have a showing
of hands of the people present here opposing this Aneas Corporation.
(So indicated.) (Read the following sections from the Municipal Code -
Part 22, Section 9222; Section 9222.1; Section 9222.2.)
I would like clarification from
the City Attorney of his definition of "vicinity".
City Attorney, Mr. Williams- I don't know of any scientific
definition. I think it simply
refers to the general area surrounding this property. It is lawful
to have different uses in a vicinity but it is not lawful to have a
different level of uses in the same zone.
Mr. Chuck Dowding- Since the Council has not passed
on the zoning, all these
classifications are germane to the discussion. This variance would
destroy the basic character of R 1 single family homes. Considering
the variance with respect to restricted R-2 zoning this fails to meet
the requirements here. Considering the variance with respect to
standard R-2 zoning, the condominium type of ownership here presents
special problems. We have very strong feelings against this type of
ownership because of the lack of police or positive control. This
control is important when you push too many people so close together
without any adequate provision for recreation. We maintain this
fails all the tests set up by the Municipal Code for a variance here.
We feel this will be detrimental to the public welfare. We would
like to suggest that a condominium is not a magic enough word to
permit breaking all the requirements set up to protect property rights
in our zoning ordinances.
Relative to the two story
zoning ordinance with respect to R-1, it is not compatable with the
neighborhood because the neighborhood is all single story. With
respect to R-2, we feel it is compatable to this subject to the
setbacks to protect the neighborhing R-1 homes.
Mrs. Dorothy King In reference to the tentative
1612 South Belmont tract map, we have made very
West Covina powerful objections which should
be considered by the City Council.
The street widths and percentage of ground coverage shown in this
tract map would not pass minimum requirements in Orange County. The
tract map indicates no recreational facilities compared with the great
variety of swimming pools, et cetera, to be found in most condominiums
elsewhere. The tract map is not compatable with the surrounding
private homes. Others besides the home owners have opposed this
development. The Master Plan is against it. Police Chief Sill has
voiced objections. The Planning Staff and the Planning Commission
turned it down unanimously. The only people for it as far as we
• know are the representatives of the Aneas Corporation. The home owners
of West Covina do not whsh to live in a congested City. Many of them
are willing to drive a great distance to work every day simply because
they want their families to enjoy the atmosphere of a well -planned
residential community. The home owners of the area are willing to
go along with the Master Plan and the opinion of the Planning Staff
and the Planning Commission in recommending that this plan be developed
in low density residential.
-7-
Ca C. 9/23/63
ANEAS CORPORATION ® Continued
Page Eight
Mr. Chuck Dowding- In reference to the tentative
tract map, we are faced with the
discussion of a tract map incompatable with the present zoning.
(Presented pamphlet of Aneas development in Santa Barbara and explained
same.) The standards set forth in the Golita tract are commendable;
the standards implied in this tract are deplorable.
I scaled off the length of the
20mfoot private driveways in this proposed tract. The distance is
just over one-half mile. We are also concerned about the City street
cleaning service following up on the private trash collection and
other major downpours in the area. Will there be any City street
cleaning automatically provided for this private area?
Mayor Barnes -
I don't believe so. This is a
private area.
Mr. Chuck Dowding- (Read memo from Police Chief Sill
re this matter.) At a recent
public hearing held in West Covina the City Planning Department pointed
out that the population of West Covina in the past year has risen from
53,000 to approximately 63,000, The local principal of the school
is concerned over any future crowding that might result. High density
dwelling units proposed in this tract will make the problem worse.
• REBUTTAL
Mr. Francis J. Garvey- We are here to present this case
on the merits and we have tried
to present it on the merits. When we talk about a variance, the Code
does provide for four specific things. When the City Council fai.lr- to
provide by general law for the flexibility that is now being employed by
builders and developers in the use of land and the zoning cannot be
changed fast enough to keep up with it, we sometimes ask that the
variance requirements be stretched somewhat in order to meet modern
methods. In the same vicinity we already have approved garden types.
Condominium is a method of holding title in multiple dwelling.
The variances are necessary because there is nothing, with the exception
of the Towne House development, which exactly matches this. If a lot
size does not measure up to the size in the particular district, you
need a variance. Here you definitely need a variance as to lot size
because the lot size will only match the basic ground it will convey.
When we ask for a variance in lot sizes we have to provide a means of
communicating with those lots. Each one of these units will have from
three to five structures within them. The minimum size will be 1,050
feet.
Some things are desirable; others
are necessary. There are apartment buildings in this City which have
swimming pools which lose tenants because of the proximity of the
• pools to their entrances. If it is reasonable to impose this type of
r.ecr.eation area here then it is reasonable to require every other
multiple area in the City to have certain specified recreation areas.
One is equally as valid as the other.
I think on the basis of the
precedent established in the Towne House for these variances that we
have justified the variances before you and if we have justified the
variances then the tract map is merely an exact configuration of the
variances so we ask approval of the tract map and we ask approval of
the matters you heard last week.
C. C. 9/23/63 Page Nine
ANEAS CORPORATION - Continued
• Mr. David Scott The plan on the board has been
1601 West Redondo Beach Boulevard very carefully and directively
Gardena worked out with the staff of the
City and I feel it is a
personal slam on the City Staff as well as our own qualified firm to say
this is an inadequate design, In this development we have retained
a pleasing atmosphere of homes. The traffic flow is excellent and
there is not one place in this development where a fire truck would
have trouble. The Engineering Staff has made requirements which we
have complied with regarding the congestion and circulation
prblems in this development.
Mr. F. Feldman I wish to indicate that the lender
16901 South Western that we are going to use is a
Gardena privately financed lender. The
lender on this project is very
particular and looks over all possible borrowers of his money with
great care. If these particular units are not taken care of -- he
uses a term -- "The people shall not commit waste" which means they
cannot do anything to these houses that will creat anything other than
ordinary wear and tear. I submit that the lender and the developers
are going to make this a show place and this is being ignored
throughout all these considerations.
• There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed.
(Mr. Flotten Read Planning Commission Resolution Trios. 1442 and 1445.
Mr. Flotten read the recommended Planning Commission conditions on
the tract map. Mr. Joseph read the report from the Planning
Department, dated September 23, 1963, re this matter.)
City Attorney, Mr. G4illiams: I think if the zone change is
denied you save yourselves the
necessity of acting on anything else. Perhaps you should take the
zone change first.
Councilman Snyder- Before we discuss this, we have
a letter from Councilman Towner
on this subject. Could we have this read into the Minutes? (Mr.
Flotten read the memo directed to the Honorable City Council from
Councilman Frank M. Towner, re Aneas Corporation Development, and
dated September 20, 1963. It is as follows:)
"I regret that my duties with
the California Industrial Accident Commission require me to be
in San Francisco today and I will thereby miss this meeting.
However, I urge your serious consideration of my statements
regarding the precise plan.
"1. The precise plan should
• provide for a residential use of the entire parcel and exclude
the service station and other heavier use.
"2. The residential use could
be acceptable as multiple dwellings or condominiums but only if
streets are adequate, recreation and open spaces provided, the
number of dwellings reduced and the character of the develop-
ment made compatable with adjacent homes.
-9-
Ca Co 9/23/63
ANEAS CORPORATION - Continued
Page Ten
• 113, To grant the uses and
precise plan as requested by the developer would confer unjust
benefits on him and be seriously detrimental to the people of
West Covina."
Councilman Snyder- In the plot plan if you averaged
out these .lot sizes, that would
include each lot's share of the common property, what would be their
average square footage?
Planning Director, Mr, Joseph- About 3,400 square feet. That
includes parking spaces.
Councilman Snyder- In looking through here, I can't
find the Fire Chief's report on
the precise plan -- if he felt the precise plan, including the street
widths, was adequate for him to provide fire protection.
City Manager, Mr. Aiassa- I have that.
City Clerk, Mr. Flotten- (Read said report.)
Councilman Heath- I have looked over these Minutes
and read and re -read them. Can
we have one of the opponents tell me about three or four reasons,
• other than the fact that you don't want it, why this is not a good
development here?
Mr. Chuck Dowding- The people who made our Master
Plan recommended that this
particular peice of property remain low density dwellings Secondly,
we are very proud of the area; the property values are from $18,000
to $25,000 and the maintenance on these properties is outstanding.
Councilman Heath -
I am referring now to the R-2,
not the service station,
Mr, Chuck Dowding- I would like Mr. Joseph to
comment on R-1 developments
adjacent to major and secondary highways. This property is surrounded
on three sides by prime residential property and you are proposing
a high density use in this area which has been set aside in the Master
Plan for low density development for very good planning reasons,
Mr, Tremble There are 96 families who will be
1610 Broadmoor Avenue living in this area and we all
West Covina moved into this area because it
is not overcrowded,
Councilman Heath- There was a statement made by
• one of the gentlemen that he had
contacted reputable builders and they felt they could develop this as
Rml any day of the week. I would like to ask that gentlemen if he
knows the value that was put on this land at the time these studies
were made,
Mr, Bob Hollingsworth The appraised value for tax reasons
1222 Randall Way was $22,500 for this parcel of
West Covina property, In some part of 1958
Aneas Corporation paid in the
SUM
Co C. 9/23/63
ANEAS CORPORATION - Continued
Page Eleven
•neighborhood of $82,000 for this property and possibly with other
than R-1 zoning it may be valued at a greater amount than what it
would be if it was zoned R-l.
Mayor Barnes -
the property or what they are going
we are to consider is whether or not
planning for the City,
I don't think we should be con-
cerned with what Aneas paid for
to sell it for. The only thing
it is good zoning and precise
Councilman Heath! The man made a statement and for
me to better understand, I needed
more information. This same statement was made to me outside of a
meeting and the statement was emphatic that this could be developed
R-1 and the basis was that because it could be developed R-1 there
should be no other use for it. They used an evaluation of $8,000 an
acre at which this property sold for five years ago. I contacted
the man who sold this five years ago, Mr. Bob Stone. He said he
sold the land in 1958 and said it could not possibly be developed in
R-1 at this time.
Councilman Jett- These 20-foot streets concern
me from a fire protection angle.
These are going to be closely built units and they are going to be
two story. In the event of a fire in one of these two story buildings,
trying to get the fire truck in and down those alleys, I am afraid
this is a pretty sharp curve. Personally, I think the alley should be
a little bit wider. These alleys are our only means of ingress and
egress into this development because these units face onto a court.
Regardless of what anybody else says, people are going to park in
those alleys.
Councilman Snyder- I certainly think that the
opponents of this plan have
reasonable fears and reasonable objections and this is attested to by
the fact that they are turning out here in such great number. I think
they have been promised protection in buying their homes by the
General Plan which was passed by a majority of the Council. I think
the growth pattern in [,lest Covina and the unofficial or unwritten
motto "City of Beautiful Homes" hasn't been refuted and they have
reasonable requests in seeing that anything developed here is in
keeping with the City of Homes. I think the growth pattern in this
area dictated R-1 and the General Plan agrees with this. Now these
people are faced with a closely packed minimum standard type of develop-
ment and it is no wonder they are objecting.
I don't think that the cost of
the land is germane to this argument. It is not the Council's fault
what these people paid for this land; it is not our fault that they
were misguided to pay too much if that is what they did. It is not
•our duty to bail them out. I think the real question here is this
City is going to be faced with requests for multiple family zoning on
all the remaining empty property in this City. Until such time as
we get ordinances where we can demand a quality of multiple zoning
which is in keeping with the quality of our R-1, I think we should not
grant that zoning until we feel that we have the convictions and the
will to demand the type of multiple zoning that is commensurate with
the R-1 in the City and I don't feel that this particular precise plan
presented here is commensurate with the. R-1 in the area. I think it
will downgrade the area.
-11-
C. Ca 9/23/63
ANEAS CORPORATION - Continued
Councilman Snyder - Continued:
Page Twelve
• It seems to me there are some
unanswered questions regarding the zoning on this property; the matter
of a park site was brought up. The General Plans points out we are in
dire need of a park site in this area. The Parks and Recreation Com-
mission give us support that they feel this would be a good park site.
It is admitted that at the present time the Council does not have any
money for a park site but we know that money is not necessarily im-
possible to find if there is a definite need. It is a fact of life
that we have to acquire these open spaces as park sites before they
are used up or we will never get park sites. It has been stated that
possibly there are other places that this park site could be put but
nobody, including myself or anyone on the Council or the Staff has
been able to come up with a recommendation for an alternate park site
as compared to this one. Then I think there is a question of how do
you reconcile the fact that this is R-2 with a 9400 square foot density
surrounding this and this was given R-2, I understand, because this
was the most in keeping with R-1 and felt to be the least intrusive,
less objectionable to those people surrounding but then we are putting
in 3400 square foot lot sizes. This does not seem to me too logical.
Also, it has been shown and there is a staff study on this that this
could be developed R-1. It is certainly surrounded on three sides by
R-1. I think the people have reasonable objections and again, I
think that this multiple family here as well as the gas station, are
definitely intrusions into an R-1 neighborhood. I think the densities
• asked for by this developer are certainly alien to this neighborhood
and will burden the street pattern that has been designed for this
neighborhood. It is not in accordance with the Master Plan.
However, if the Council does see
fit to grant the zoning, I want to make comments on the precise plan
and I agree with Mr. Jett in that I don't feel the 20-.foot alleys are
adequate. You are not going to be able to control the parking.
People are going to park there. This is going to hamper circulation.
It will hamper fire protection. The circulation pattern is poor and
the 20-foot streets make it even poorer. I am against this precise
plan on that basis. I feel that the density is too great when you
consider the fact that they were being given R-2 to make this most
like R-1 and then we increase the density by this much and we are
sort of defeating our purpose of giving them the R-2. We might as
well have given them R-3 in the first place.
I do feel that the developer could
have shown some faith to the City and show that he did intend to build
a good development by supplying a recreation area of some kind, not
necessarily a swimming pool.
I want to answer letters
received and articles in the paper. It seems to the opponents that
your pleas fall on deaf ears and no matter what you say the Council
•will vote how they please. I don't feel this is true. I do feel
that this Council, whether we agree with you or not, has studied this
over many weeks and they are voting their conscience and I don't think
any Councilman should ever have to v mote or consider an issue under a
threat of recall. It is your legal right but I don't think it is
right to threaten. I think you prejudice your case when you threaten
to recall a Councilman when he doesn't vote the way you want him to.
I think where you failed in this is in voting. You do have a right
of referendum if you think the Council has been misguided or mis-
judged a case but as far as I am concerned, I agree with Mayor Barnes
that this will be considered on its merits in our best judgment.
-12-
C, Ca 9/23/63 Page Thirteen
ANEAS CORPORATION - Continued
Councilman Heath: I think this precise plan has
numerous shortcomings. I have
all the respect in the world for Chief Sill and his ability but when he
starts to debate the issue of the number of parking spaces with our
Planning Director, I think he is a little bit out of line. There was
a statement supposedly made by Mr. Joseph and I doubt that he said
this, where the population of this City has grown from 53,000 to 63,000
in one year. Mr. Joseph knows our City better than that and I question
sincerely if he ever made that statement,
As far as apartment houses are
concerned, R-2 or R-3, there have been studies made, As far as this
comment made by Mr. Dowding that the people north of the freeway are
watching and people east of the City are watching, it is still the
same old threat in a different dress and I think for anyone to threaten
Council is very poor judgment, if not poor etiquette. In five and
a half years on this Council, I have never seen the likes of threat and
intimidation and poor etiquette and what have you that this Council
hs been subjected to, There are certain procedures that you have
recourse to in accordance with law and to use the distasteful action
of threat, I think is absolutely low and I will say it again,
distasteful, I will vole my conscience on any issue that comes before
here whether there are threats or not. I have in the past and I will
continue to do so, and I will vote for what I think is right for the
• community,
As far as this particular piece
of property is concerned, I have no connection with this piece of
property; I don't know who owns it; the only representatives of this
property that I know of is Mr, Feldman, Mr, Scott and Mr, Garvey,
I feel I would be doing an injustice to this City to vote for this to
be developed as R-1 because in my own mind I don't think it could
end up with anything but dingbats where all the money would go into
the property and not into the houses. I feel I would be doing an
injustice and I know these people won't agree with me at this time
because their minds are set, but I feel it would be doing an injustice
to try to hold this to R-1,
As far as the precise plan, I
am not in agreement with it, I think changes have to be made,
Councilman Jett: I hope -this Council never gets
in the position where they will
allow themselves to make their decision based upon fear of what their
constituents might do in the way of a recall, This Council has to
make a decision based upon information given to it. They are charged
with the responsibility of building a City that everyone can be proud
of. I recognize we have to have apartments, whether or not you like
them, Sunset Boulevard is a major street, It is a street designed
on the Master Plan of Highways and has been for years as a major
• highway, Francisquito is a secondary boulevard. These are areas,
I think, that should carry your higher usages, this is where they
should be located. A corner that is going to carry this kind of
traffic is the corner where the car servicing business should be
located; As far as detracting from the value or devaluating the
property surrounding this project, I do not believe that this would
cause the value to go down on any of these residences. I think there
are areas in the precise plan that, in my opinion, could certainly be
improved and I am sure the developer can come up with something a little
bit more compatable and more acceptable. I don't think I would be in
-13-
Co C, 9/23/63
ANEAS CORPORATION - Continued
Page Fourteen
• a position to vote on this precise plan tonight because there are
things I am not satisfied with. As far as the zoning is concerned, I
think we may have made the right decision as far as the zoning is
concerned on this property,
Mayor Barnes; I have received many letters
opposing this project. Regarding
the zoning and the precise plan, I made a statement at the last meeting
about the Aneas Corporation development in Santa Barbara. I felt it
was a good development. I know these men can do very good development,
I think these gentlemen have tried to do a good job in Santa Barbara
in developing something nice for the people because it not only has
a golf course, it has a beautiful recreation center with a s, iing
pool, shuffle board, et cetera. I think this is important to this
type of development. Also, they have put all of their two story
buildings around the golf course and around the fringes where it would
not bother anyone else,
As far as the zoning is concerned,
I feel this property can be developed as .R-2 if it is done correctly.
As far as the unclassified use permit is concerned, I feel we have
much to consider here in that we are getting a much higher class .
station. Also, we have to consider the fact that we have a station
directly across the street from it. Further, this station is not
•close to any of these homes. I think if it is developed right, the
zoning .is good,, The precise plan I disagree with. I know these
gentlemen can do much better,
Councilman Snyder: We are pretty well in accord that
the precise plan is bad. That
should point out to the Council how difficult it is going to be
that until our multiple zoning ordinances are revamped and rewritten,
it is going to be difficult to get quality development nn multiple
zoned areas and therefore, I again say that the whole philosophy here
goes much further than this zoning case itself. I think we have to
rewrite our ordinances so we can get quality mule ple family type
developments and therefore we should not rezone any more multiple
family until we are in that position,
Councilman Nett. A few years back there were park
sites in this area submitted to
this Council. This Council turned those park sites down because they
said if they built those parks down in that area that the people living
out in the County area and in La Puente would get the benefits of the
park; that the citizens of 54est Covina were providing and maintaining
them and as a result these areas were turned down,
Councilman Heath: I think you can go further and
realize that there have been three
bond issues before the people of the City to buy parks and improve
•parks and on three occasions they have been knocked down, one of them
as little as two years ago,
Councilman Snyder.. The fact remains that there is a
need for a park site in this
area. It behooves us to save what open space we have,
-14-
Ca C. 9/23/63 Page Fifteen
ANFAS CORPORATION - Continued
• Councilman Jett: I don't think it is the responsi-
bility of the Council to try -to
save the vacant areas of the City for park sites. If we needed a park
site and had the money to buy it, that's another thing. If we
attempted to hold this property for a park site we are in effect taking
this property under condemnation,
City Attorney, Mr. Williams: You can't withhold the proper
zone in order to defeat the value
and take it eventually for a City purpose.
Councilman Jett: One of the leaders of this
movement in this fight spent
several hours in my home discussing this very problem. I asked this
gentleman if lie would be willing to serve on our Planning Commission.
Someone has -to sit on the Planning Commission and the Council to make
these decisions. This gentleman said he didn't have the time and
couldn't serve. However, I said, "Is there anybody else that you
could recommend?" We were looking for people for the Planning Com-
mission and we needed them. I merely point this out to show you
that out of 60,000 people, who is going to make these decisions?
Motion by Councilman Beath, seconded by Councilman Jett, that Zone
Change No. 259 be approved for the northeast corner of Fr.ancisquito
• and Sunset between Sunset and Broadmoor; that it be rezoned to
R-2 for the portion shown as R-2 on the tract map; that C-1 be
granted on the cviiier; and that the parcel shown as professional use
be zoned R-P. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes. Councilmen Jett, Heath, Mayor Barnes
Noes: Councilman Snyder
Absent: Councilman Towner
Mr. Francis J. Garvey: Since the Council's feelings are
so clear that this is not a good
precise plan, if you would re -refer it to the Planning Commission for
further study we will present an amended plan.
Mayor Barnes: I feel it should be denied and a
new precise plan submitted and
new Bearings before the Planning Commission.
City Attorney, Hr. Williams: I think so, too.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
that Unclassified Use Permit No. 78 be approved. (Councilman Snyder
voted "Ho".)
• Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
that only that section of Precise Plan of Design Noo 366 relating
to the gas station be approved subject to the recommendations of the
Planning Commission, and that all the rest of the precise plan be
denied.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
that Variance No. 443, Variance No. 456 and Tract Map No. 28388 be
denied.
-15-
C, C, 9/23/63 Page Sixteen
HEARINGS - Continued
• ZONE CHANG-17 NO, 266 LOCATION: San Bernardino Freeway
Arthur James between Holt Avenue and
HELD OVER eastern City limits.
Request to reclassify from Zone R-A to Zone R-3 or R-4 denied by
Planning Commission Resolution No, 1444. Appealed by applicant on
August 26, 1963, Held over to September 23, 1963, at Council's
request and with applicant's approval,
Mayor Barnes: This is the time and place .for the
public hearing on Zone Change No. 266,
IN FAVOR
Mr, Francis Jo Garvey I am representing the applicant,
281 East Workman Avenue The first part of our case will
Covina be handled by Mr, James,
Hr, Arthur L. James (Presented folders to the Council
186 North Canon Drive and explained contents therein.)
Beverly Hills On a 12-unit basis under R-2, the
cost per apartment unit will
run $65300 approximately per apartment. It is equal to that in
Beverly Hills, but not in West Covina or surrounding areas. On the
• basis of R-4, the land cost and off -site improvements is $2,400.
There is an additional cost of $50,000 alone for water rights. That
is for the use of the water by the district.
According to the Architectural
Forum, there are less children in apartments per capita or per area
than in homes, In essence, it would lower the revenue cost of
schools. This property abuts the Covina Ranch, It is undeveloped
and we do riot know what is going on there.
We are requesting R-4 under a
density of 400 of the coverage. If you are going to have high grade
apartments, this is the area. to have them. According to the Security
First National Analysis Department, West Covina calls for a high
grade of apartments due to the fact that they are 8th in income bracket
and it. does call for it in the area I am proposing, West Covina has
no real high grade apartments, West Covina has 71% white collar and
professional ;workers and we have no high grade apartments for these
people. (Presented aerial photograph and explained same,)
The Planning Department and the
Planning Commission concur that this property cannot go R-1; that
it should go to multiple housing. No one can build apartments and
have land costs and off -site improvements of $6,400 a unit which does
not include a $509000 charge just to allow us to have water,
• Mr. Samuel Wacht (Presented rendering and explained
1850 Westwood Boulevard same.) A parcel like this would
Los Angeles very readily lend itself to a
project wherein some sensitive
design could be employed and with your recreational areas and proper
contouring of the land, I think it would be an asset to the community,
Mr. Francis Jo Garvey: This is an application for R-4
zoning, The Planning Commission
was inclined to include R-2 as being our target. We cannot talk about
the R-4 and the General Plan because obviously R-4 was but a gleam in
-16-
C, Co 9/23/63 Page Seventeen
ZONE CHANGE NO, 266 m Continued
Mr. Garvey Continued:
the planners eye at that time. Even though economics are not a
basic reason for changing a zone, nevertheless, they have a certain
effect on what is possible, At this stage of the game we get into
economics no matter what you talk about, Can this be used for single
family? Yes, I think it probably could, [kJould it be economically
feasible to do so? I don't believe it would because you have two
significant factors which infringe upon this particular piece of
property and that is on one side you have the influence of the
freeway, Secondly, we do have the Covina Valley Ranch and the
possibility that we will some day have an acropolis adjacent to a
cemetery, The influence of cemeteries upon single family residences
seem to be somewhat adverse. Under your Rm4 situation, you have not
the density factor which we have been talking about in the existing
ordinances but you are going to a concept of percentage of land
coverage which means you can go up in terms of your land coverage,
disregard your density factor and by going up perhaps provide a more
attractive setting for those persons who would occupy on a
multiple basis. We also have the very high quality residential in the
highlaiids overlooking this and obviously a development such as this
should be controlled by precise plan so as not to have a deleterious
effect on that existing residential. Also, this is at the eastern
City limits and city limits make a good place from which to start a
new type of zone,
• Insofar as any piece of land
meeting the criteria set forth in the General Plan, this piece of
property falls into those various criteria. There are disadvantages.
There are disadvantages in the topography itself but this can be
overcome and it is no more difficult to place apartments on ridges or
rolling land and take advantage of the rolling contours than it is to
place single famil,v residences there. If it is correct that it would
cost $50,000 to bring water into this area, it is a valid economic
argument that considering the number of R-1 homes in there and if the
same price tag applied to Rml, it would be a little difficult,
However, I don't think the price would be the same,
In conclusion, the Rm3 pattern
in this area is not necessarily incomputable inasmuch as on the other
side of the freeway on Grand we have the Riviera Cooperative apartments
going in and the existing apartments on the west side of Grand north
of the freeway,
We request that you re -consider
the decision of the Planning Commission and that you find that this
merits a zoning higher than the single family residential and that it
falls into the multiple class and we submit that in terms of the contours
of the property it is adjacent to the freeway and the other adjacent
factors, that the new R-4 would be most appropriate because of its
relationship of land usage in terms of coverage rather than population
densities,
• Mr, Arthur L. James: Due to topography of this particular
site, this is a rather difficult
site but a very enjoyable site due to the architectural work that can
be done here, In order to build on 400 of the land, in most cases
you have to go to three stories. In order to go three stories, no
lender will allow you to put an apartment house of three stories
without an elevator, By putting an elevator in your cost goes up and
when your cost goes up, you build a better building or you don't
rent them, Glendora will not rent high grade apartments from $150 to
-17-
Co C. 9/23/63 Page Eighteen
ZONE CHANGE NO. 266 - Continued
$300. There is only one particular area and that is in the highland
area that you can, if you wish, rent apartments for that amount. This
is according to the Security First National Research, according to
the L. A. Times and according to Economics Research downtown. This
is what you need in West Covina and this is the particular area it
should go in if it does go in.
IN OPPOSITION
Mr. David Parker I am the closest parcel to the
19967 Lorencita Drive development. (Read article from
Los Angeles County the Daily Tribune, September 9,
1963 edition re quotation of
Mr. Joseph re multiple dwellings.) The school was programmed for that
location long before the high density apartment zoning application
was under consideration which means that the school was needed for
the exisiing zoning and existing homes and now when you put in high
density apartments you had better start looking for another school
site because you will need it. It doesn't make sense to go into your
best residential zone and then come right along next to it and go into
a R-3. R-4 or even a R-2 zone. You don't have any compatable zoning.
My barn and horses are along these apartments. Most of us purchased
out in this area because it was as it exists. Once you open up this
area, it will break the whole section up. There isn't an apartment
•setup near here; this is all residential and in my opinion, it is the
best residential area in the County. They say along the freeway you
can't have R-1 because it is too noisy but you can have your best
apartments in the City there. I don't follow the reasoning. It
doesn't seem compatable.. As you open this area up and part of this
zone runs into Lorencita, what is to stop the property owners on
Lorencita for requesting a zoning also? The same is going to apply
to the property of Forest Lawn. If mr. Yount subdivides 500 acres
adjacent to Lorencita, and if we set a pattern of high density, we
are going to have quite a high density problem in that area. I
think all of this has to be considered. This is opening up a whole
area to zoning and changing a whole historical pattern. Mr. Yount
said he will use Lorencita for his development and if we put apartments
on there, Lorencita cant carry that amount of traffic. I think the
reasonableness of the land use application depends to a great deal on
the surrounding area. I think that the Planning Commission was
trying to take this into consideration. They discussed the new R.-2
type of zoning. I don't think that is necessarily compatable but
it might be a solution. They turned this application down on the
basis of Rml The Valencia Heights Water Company came in and said
they wouldn't be able to supply water to this area. I don't know
whether or not thathas been rectified. I am at a loss to determine why
the best area, the Covina Highlands, has to be the only area for a
high density, high rise apartment unit. The best land use is the
current land use and it should be continued and developed along that
line.
Mr. Ted Walsh I am speaking not only as a
3909 Lorencita Drive resident in proximity of this
West Covina zone change application but
also in my connection with the
City during the last 12 years. I know quite a bit about land and land
use and this is possibly the boldest and most daring zoning appli-
cation I have ever witnessed. They are asking for the highest density
you can possibly get in the best residential area in the whole East
San Gabriel Valley. I agree with Mr. Parker that this will completely
change the complexion of this whole area if we start zoning this in
Co Ca 9/23/63 Page Nineteen
ZONE CHANGE NO, 266 - Continued
Mr. Walsh - Continued;
• the high density used Inside of a few years you will have applications
going westerly clear down to Barranca Street and it will be hardly .fair
to deny those people the same rights if you grant this application in
zone change, This land will possibly have to be zoned for something
other than what it is because it can't be used for single family
dwellings and I don't see how the applicant can feel that 40 families
per acre can live there any better than one family can, It is a very
noisy hill, If you get within 200 feet of that freeway in the evening,
it is a very undesirable place for 300 apartments, If you are going
to get 40 units per acre in here you are going to get a cheap
development because I don't think anybody would attempt to try to put
high class rentals in this particular spot,
Mr. Parker touched upon the water
situation, We are a mutual water company and this presents a problem,
This is the best window to West Covina that you have. This is a
beautiful approach to West Covina, I don't feel we should start
putting apartment houses right on this window of your City. There is
still. plenty of land available in the City of West Covina and in the
adjacent areas that can be used for multiple dwellings. I think this
takes more study and report for this area. I don't think we should act
too hurriedly on granting this zone change on the highest density
on the books today,
Dr, Clampett I have lived here for 15 years,
310 Monte Verde I feel this is probably our
nicest residential area and I
don't like to see apartments backing up against my land. I have
about 700 feet going up against that land in the back. I don't
see how they could possibly put apartments here unless they sound-
proof these buildings,
Mr, Charles Newdigate:: I am representing the Covina
Unified School District, I am
not a proponent or an opponent, Mr. James pointed out that you do not
get children from apartments. Iie quoted, I think, from the Architectural
Forum, We recently ran a survey and in the area from Azusa Avenue to
Grand Avenue and from the San Bernardino Freeway to San Bernardino
Road and this is a tangible figure that we got from the apartment
owners and managers in that area alone. There are now from the
multiple dwelling units from that area ,45 children coming from each
apartments. With the existing zoning in that area as a potential
of 8600 and some children in that immediate area. We recently acquired
a site on the Forest Lawn property, The acquisition of this site
was in the normal pursuit of our site acquisition program which we
must justify to the State Department of Education, the State Department
of Finance by stacks of justification documents, We also have a
site under acquisition in Lots 9 and 10 of the area, We also have two
other sites under acquisition in this immediate vicinity. The
acquisition of these sites is predicated upon our allowable projection
•and based on the undeveloped area in the vicinity and not based on
any multiple dwelling. From the development such as Mr. James
proposes here, if they go R-4, this would be approximately 765
dwelling units. It is conceivable we would get enough children from
these units to more than fill one school. I think these are things
you gentlemen should consider in this zone change.
After the children are there and
the schools are built to house these children, the question of the
assessed valuation of the multiple dwelling as opposed to single
-19-
•
Ca C, 9/23/63
ZONE CHANGE NO, 266 - Continued
Mr. Newdigate - Continued:
Page Twenty
family dwelling units, the density we get from the multiple and from
single family, and the tax base that will,come from such a development
as far as the operation of our schools are concerned, once the schools
are built we still have the running cost and this comes from our local
tax base,
REBUTTAL
Mr. Arthur L. James, When we first checked economically
for a feasibility study for Towne
House Apartments we did not have to check a vacancy factor because
there were no town house type apartments. "le don't have to check a
vacancy factor with a high grade apartment because you don't have any.
In reference to Mr. Parker's statement about landuse, we have an area
called Brentwood. They have apartments abutting homes of fi1..�0A000
to a quarter of a million dollars. These people aren't complaining or
arguing. The land hasn't depreciated at all. Along the Sepulveda
Freeway there are high grade apartments within 150 feet of the freeway
and that is a heavily travelled vehiculared freeway and they have
high grade apartments and they are getting high grade rents.
Mr. Samuel Wachto [without having any zoning9 I
c.�
can't conceive of any developer
spending a great deal of money in designing plans for a project that
may not materialize. Regarding the concern about a vacancy factor, it
is my opinion that the developer and perhaps the lender should be as
concerned, if not more so, than anyone else. The remark about casting
a burden on the existing facilities, if 700 people were to occupy
this project I would presume they would be tax payers and perhaps
with this additional revenue we could acquire a park and perhaps
another school site. They would be paying their share.
Mr. Walsh made a comment about the
noisy hill and he seemed to be concerned for the tenants of this
prospective development and I can't visualize how people in six figure
homes don't hear the noise and people in our apartments would. If
they have been managing to live with this noisy hill all these years,
I think a few apartment house tenants would manage and in addition
to that, we are discounting the other possibility where a single family
home owner possibly would not be in a position to spend a great deal
of money for some type of sound baffle. My guess is that a developer
on a project of this magnitude might alleviate the problem for the
tenants. I think we will design apartments and a good recreational
project with attractive buildings and it would be the best window
to best Covina and I don't think it is fair for anyone to presume that
we are going to have dingbats or anything else.
There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed.
City Clerk, Tor. Flotten: (Read Planning Commission Re-
solution No. 1444.)
Mayor Barnes: We have received a report from
the Planning Department re this
matter. I would also like to take a trip to the site and see what
problems might occur here.
Councilman Snyder: I think if we do rezone this we
are making a definite change and
it will effect the surrounding area. I think it behooves us to study
this long and hard. I would like to read and consider this report of
-20-
•
•
C. Co 9/23/63
ZONE CHANGE NO. 266. Continued
Councilman Snyder - Continued:
Page Twenty -One
Mr. Joseph. I have looked at the area, I would like to look at it
again, I am not ready to make a decision tonight,
Councilman Jett:
Mr. Newdigate; based on .45
children per unit, this would
be something over 18,000 units.
Mr. Charles Newdigate: This is taking into consideration
all the single family dwelling
units in that area now and the multiple,
Councilman Jett. What is the cost per student?
Mr. Charles Newdigate: I believe it runs around $400 and
that is per student per year.
Councilman Snyder: There was a study made in Stanford,
Connecticut, which showed that
apartments produce a cost revenue of $33.40 annually for each unit
surveyed. Are you familiar with this study?
Mr. Charles Newdigate: No.
Councilman Snyder: What they are saying is apartment
units pay their way but homes do
not as far as school tax.
Mr. Charles Newdigate: I am not sure of the assessed
valuations that would be received
from apartment dwellings as opposed to the assessed valuation that
would be received from single family dwellings. This is taking into
consideration the density that we would get from multiple family
dwellings as opposed to the single family dwellings in any one given
area for -acreage.
Councilman Heath: Parcel 9 and 10 is around a
15-acre site and the K-6 on
the Covina Ranch is approximately 10 acres and you say there are two
other sites contemplated in the area. To the north, south, .west
and east of this there is pretty well established 40,000 square foot
lots or one acre lots which means that maybe 2.5 children per family.
If each school has 300 students, in those four schools possibly taking
11200 students into consideration, I doubt if there is that many children
within travelling distance of these schools. Is there something in
this area about high density development that we don't know about?
Mr. Charles Newdigate: If you don't know about it I'm sure
we don't. South of the San
Bernardino Freeway there is approximately a little over one thousand
acres of undeveloped land in that area now. This is within our district.
All of our site acquisitions are based on the projection figures that
the State Department of Education allows us to project on. Using these
figures we are acquiring these sites right now based on that premise.
The elementary schools in that area now have been very badly over-
loaded for the last two years and Barranca School has been overloaded
nearly three years.
Councilman Heath: I can't fathom in my own mind four
schools within a radius of a
half mile in the middle of a low density area unless there is some
WISE
Ca Co 9/23/63
ZONE CHANGE NO. 266 - Continued
Page Twenty -Two
•high density figured in there. If there was any high density figured,
this is what I was trying to find out,
Mr, Charles Newdigate. The State allows us to project
five years on our acquisition
program, It takes us a year at least to buy a site and almost another
year to get a school on that site. If we waited until such time that
the kids were standing across the street before we went to buy the
property, we would be on double session. We are anticipating in this
particular area at least a reasonable breakdown of the existing zoning
in there.
Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
that Zone Change No, 266 be held over to the next regularly scheduled
meeting to give the Council time to study their decision.
UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT N0, 79 LOCATION. Southwest corner of
Harker Development Corp, Glendora and Cameron,
"HELD OVER
and Request for approval of a gasoline
PRECISE PLAN NO, 346 (Rev, 1) service station in Zone C-1 and
Harker Development Corp, for the approval of a precise plan
• HELD OVER for gasoline service station,
denied by Planning Commission
Resolutions No, 1451 and 1452. Appealed by applicant on September 6,
1963,
Councilman Heath- On this case there has been many
hours of cussing and discussing
and I don°t know that anybody ]mows where we stand, In fact, I don't
think the City Attorney knows where we stand. About a week ago, I sat
down with Mr, Williams and we both agreed that it is a problem, Mr.
Williams came up with a good solution to trying to solve this because
if we don't this is going to be something we will never be able to
control, Mr, Williams, would you explain this problem?
City Attorney, Mr, Williams- This is an instance where you
will remember that C-1 zoning
was approved to be effective when Precise Plan No, 346 was effective
and the purpose being to compel the applicants to live up to that which
they promised in a somewhat rash moment, to get zoning, that this would
all be developed as one single development. The precise plan likewise
contains a statement that it will only be effective when all of the
owners of all of the property within the area have signed their
acceptance of and approval of the precise plan which was approved and
the precise plan expressly stated that all of the parking shown on the
precise plan would be used in common for the benefit of all, I
believe there were nine separate ownerships involved. It was also, I
• believe, a strong part of the Council's thinking in doing this that they
wanted to get the street work before any of the improvements went in,
You didn't want to get just a dedication of a section of the street and
the rest of it never dedicated or improved, In any event, a single
precise plan was approved subject to these conditions. Substantially,
the same day we received here at the City Hall two things. One of them
was a statement purportedly signed by all of the owners within this
precise plan that they would abide by the precise plan and accepted it
and the other was an application for a service station precise plan
which is diametrically opposed to and inconsistent to the thing they
just signed and said they would adhere to. If they adhered to the
-22-
CO Co 9/23/63
HARKER DEVELOPMENT - Continued
Page Twenty -Three
• original precise plan, the owners of the other parcels have an interest
in this parcel, I think, myself, the thing that has been created here
is absolutely impossible. It just isn't going to be developed. This
is 219 only on a greater scale. You can't have one precise plan and
nine owners, Short of them selling to one owner, they can't even
develop their own property under one precise plan, I don't think they
can, I think it is just a case that this property is in an intolerable
situation and that something has to be done and if the purpose is to
zone it C-1 then zone it C-1. If you wish to put a condition that
all of the street be dedicated and improved or its improvement guaranteed
by a bond, I think this may be possible of attainment, because I
think in order to obtain the zoning that each of the nine owners may
do this but to go beyond that and expect that one precise plan is
going to be developed by nine separate people at one t.i..me and .for a
unified purpose to my way of thinking is absolutely out of the
question, I think you are either going to have to forget about
rezoning it or go ahead and rezone it, get your street improvements
and loop; at precise plans as they come in,
Mayor Barnes: As I recall, the reason this
was done was to get the street
improvements and that this should be developed properly, that the
building i-aould be one continuous building and have adequate parking
and everyone would participate, Is there anV way that iae can develop
Isindividually this same precise plan but each property owner has a
separate part to develop but conform to the precise plan? Can we
do this?
City Attorney, Mr, Williams: I don't think you can, If these
people had all gotten together
immediately and joined in a present unified development, this might
have worked, I suppose they made some effort to do this but obviously
it failed, You can't compel the development of this precise plan.
Even if a person signs the acceptances that doesn't say that they
are going to build this precise plan. If we record the statement of
acceptance it might be a deterrent. Sooner or later it is going to
force them all to come in and ask you to undo the thing we are trying
to do, We want a title record showing who the present owner is on
each of these nine parcels. We want a statement signed by that person
and notarized and we will then record it and put an encumbrance
against each of these parcels. If we do, I think we are going to
kill them,
Councilman Heath: I think a lot of people have
gone along on the assumption
and the indication that they felt they had commercial zoning. We were
trying to guarantee we were going to get street improvements, Let
us get a notarized statement from each property owner stating that he
will dedicate and put in the improvements at the time of development
and as soon as we get this from all the property owners then we can go
• back to the ordinance and change the ordinance to strike out that
part "subject to a precise plan" and this is the only way, the quickest
way and the surest way of getting a mess straightened out,
Mayor Barnes: Would you be willing to hold this
over?
Mr, C. LaFaive I appreciate the problem and we
10600 Katella Avenue are agreeable to holding it over.
Anaheim We are buying the property from
-23-
C. Co 9/23/63 Page Twenty -Four
HARKER DEVELOPMENT - Continued
+�- two of the property owners involved in the original precise plan,
We have a very definite time problem with regard to our escrow. We
only ask this be handled as quickly as possible.
Mr, Ray Kilz
546 South Glendora Avenue
West Covina
Mr, Van Horn
1234 West Cameron
West Covina
Councilman Jett -
It would be satisfactory to
hold it over,
It would be fine with me.
One of the main things is that
we get this street developed in
here.
Councilman Heath- Move that Unclassified Use Permit
No, 79 and Precise Plan of Design
No, 346, Revision 1, be held over for four weeks.
City Attorney, Mro Williams: If you declare that it is the
sense of the Council and they can
rely on it that you will make this zoning firm provided we get the
dedications, I haven't any idea about what we need in the way of
guarantees of improvement, I presume the Engineering Department would
handle this as it generally does. When we get a deed or whatever
security would be normally required to guarantee its improvement as
and when it develops, I think all we need then is such a conveyance
by these present owners and we had better have, I think, inasmuch as
we have a statement that they all agree to this precise plan, a
statement that we may disregard this precise plan signed by them,
Councilman Snyder- I think you made a mistake in
including this man in because
obviously he is across Cameron and can't enter into a joint parking
agreement,
Councilman Heath:
Action on .Councilman Heath's motion-
carried.
I'll amend my motion that these
matters be held over for two
weeks instead of four.
Seconded by Councilman Jett, and
Councilman Heath: If the majority of the Council
wants this to be C-1, we are
going to have to have the City Attorney amend the present ordinance
to strike out the words "subject to , , ," and we are going to have
to have a reading, a second reading and a 30-day run before it
becomes effective, To speed this up, and we still have control
at the second reading, I move that the City Attorney be instructed
to revise this ordinance, to strike out the words "subject to the
effectiveness of a precise plan" and have it ready for us for our first
reading at our next meeting and we will hold the second reading until
we get the signatures from these people who are interested,
Councilman Jett:
Councilman Snyder:.
Second the motion,
The conditions are on the precise
plan,
-24-
Ca Ca 9/23/63 Page Twenty -Six
HARKER DEVELOPMENT - Continued
Mr. Williams - Continued;
• the whole precise plan and if you want the C-1, it isn't any different
from any other C-1. I think the whole mistake is the concept that it
is any different .from any other C-1 anywhere else in the City, I don't
think you have the power to force these nine people into a joint
development and that is what the purport of this precise plan is.
You are confronted with the issue right now. Have you made them joint or
are you going to let one out? If you let one out, what are you going
to do with the others? You have already destroyed their right to the
parking on this property.
I think we should get the street
dedications and guarantee7- of some sort that they will be improved,
I think in addition to that and while you are getting them to sign the
street dedications, you need a statement from each of the present owners
of these nine parcels of property that they agree to the abandonment
of this precise plan. If it is abandoned you don't have to disapprove
it because each one of there if they all agree that it may be abandoned
can then get another one, The thing that concerns me is the City
having made them all merge their properties now we take an action -that
unmerges them, If it isn't against one of the nine consent, I am
concerned with it. I think all nine of them have to agree. to scrap
this precise plan,
Mr, Ray Kilz. I own the corner property,
40
Everybody along Glendora Avenue,
I feel, would dedicate the improvements but I knocq two or three
property owners on Service who have no intention now of doing anything,
In other words, no matter what we did, we would still be stymied
because one individual because of the street improvements can hold
everything up,
City Attorney, Mr, Williams: We were only going; to have them
dedicate that his part of the
street would be improved when he develops, They would each sign that
they waive anything that this precise plan gives them in anybody
elses property. I suggest all of you agree to abandon this precise
plan. I think you have created something you can't live with but
I am not going to prepare your papers for you. I think you have to
have a request from all of the people who signed for this change.
Action on Councilman Heath's motion to hold over, seconded by Councilman
Jett. Motion carried
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
that it is the intent of the Council to abandon this Precise Plan
No, 346 and pass this ordinance which the Council has asked be drawn
when these things occur. When the property needed for the streets
is dedicated and security given that the streets will be improved
when the property adjacent has been developed; and when all of the
present owners of the property in this precise plan agree to a
• statement that Precise Plan No, 346 is cancelled,
-26-
C, Ca 9/23/63 Page Twenty -Seven
HEARINGS - Continued
• VARIANCE NO, 455 LOCATION: 1018 West Garvey Avenue
Reliable Savings 6 Loan Assoc, between California and
APPROVED Garvey
Request for approval of one non -conforming sign on front of store
building in Zone C-2 (subject to conditions) approved by Planning
Commission Resolution No, 1450, Called up by Council on September 3,
1963,
•
•
City Clerk, Mr, Flotten: (Read Planning Commission Resolu-
tion No, 1450 re this matter,)
Mayor Barnes: This is the time and place for
the public hearing,
IN FAVOR
Mr, Orville J. Bizzard I am the managing officer of
741 Donna Beth Avenue Reliable Savings, The request
West Covina made for a sign was brought on by
the fact that we found that once
customers were in the shopping center, due to the smallness of our
frontage they found it difficult to find us. There are two other
financial institutions located in the West Covina Plaza and they have
signs both above the building and on the front of the building. The
fact that we have only a 20-foot frontage in the shopping center is
because there was absolutely no other space available in the shopping
center at the time the Association was getting prepared to open, If
there had been 40 or 60 feet available the Association would have been
most happy to pay the additional rent to have this additional area,
Due to the fact we have this small front footage which is the basis
upon which the size of the sign you are allowed is based, we are
being discriminated against as a financial institution in our attempt
to give equal opportunity to the public to find us in the West Covina
Plaza, We are asking equal opportunity regardless of the front footage
of our office space, to let the public know where we are and avail
themselves of our financial services,
Mr, Richard Cauderman
1243 Bell Green
La Puente
to other signs in the same group of
this type is an advertising sign but
am prepared to answer any questions
?Mayor Barnes:
Planning Director, Mr, Joseph:
I represent the sign manufacturer,
(Presented rendering and explained
same,) We are asking for a sign
on the front of the building similar
buildings. I don't think a sign of
more an identification sign. I
that you might have,
k4hat is the length of this sign?
12 and a half feet and 7 feet high.
It is 87 1/2 square feet,
There being no further public testimony, the hearing Baas closed,
Councilman Jett:
I would like the record to show
that I am a very, very small
stockholder in Reliable Savings and Loan. I think it is quite generally
known how I feel about our sign ordinance in relation to things of
this nature, I can't help but think that when we have an organization
like Reliable Savings and Loan in our community operated by local
businessmen who are making an effort to develop this into a regional
-27-
C. Co 9/23/63 Page Twenty -Eight
VARIANCE NO. 455 - Continued
Councilman Jett -- Continued:
• financial institution I can't help but feel that we should encourage
them in every way possible when something of this nature isn't going
to be any detriment to anyone else in the area, I don't understand
any reasoning that would require an institution like this to remove a
sign that probably cost as much as this sign. I think they are
entitled to have identification on the front where anyone driving in
the parking area can look toward the building and see where it is
located, In my opinion, this is a reasonable request,
Councilman Snyder: Regardless of your feeling regard-
ing the sign ordinance, I think
to pass a variance you have to have a solid reason, The Planning
Commission is not necessarily asking them to remove the sign; they
are saying that the ordinance says they are only allowed one of these
and in their decision they are merely following the ordinance and it
seems to me for a variance you have to have one of four reasons and
to indiscriminately grant a variance like this without a good reason
you are going to lead to a breakdown of not only the whole sign
ordinance but of all our ordinances in generally. Certainly, if you
don't believe in this type of restriction we ought to amend the the
ordinance. I don't think we should continue to give signs by variance
except where they have proven cause for variance and I don't feel they
have proven cause for a variance here. I feel if we were to grant
this people would feel that this City Council had participated in a
•shocking act of favoritism and I cannot go along with any change from
what the Planning Commission recommended,
Councilman Jett: I can recall when Broadway
Department Store came into the
City, the Planning Commission allowed them three signs, This, I am
sure, the Council felt was unreasonable because the Council approved
seven signs for the Broadway, The Planning Commission denied the
Broadway Store the right to use the identification of the General Tire
in their sign; the Council granted this, Mitzi's came in for a request
for a variance, having difficulty. At this time, the Council decided
that our sign ordinance was too restrictive. We instructed the
Planning Commission to study the sign ordinance with a view to
revising this and this is all a matter of record. Asa result of
this, they did not study the sign ordinance but sent it on to the
Chamber of Commerce requesting a report from the Chamber of Commerce,
We still haven't this report back to us on the sign ordinance. I
think the interpretation of a request for a variance, to me, means
varying from the ordinance. You do this because the people cannot
enjoy the use of their property and as a result they come in and ask
you for a variance to allow them to do this,
Councilman Snyder:
through a town
couldn't tell
• and I know our
effective and
Mayor Barnes:
where
a sign
system
makes a
to the length of this
have'this type sign,..
this.soems to be the
I sometimes wonder if we are not
too restrictive but then I drive
it is entirely cluttered up with signs and you
like this from any of the others along the block
is best because I think this"is much more
nicer looking town.
In a sign of this type do you
feel it would be out of proportion
building? The other'buildings'and the banks also
The other buildings have identification signs and
only blank spot._
ME
C. C. 9/23/63
VARIANCE NO, 455 - Continued
Page Twenty -Nine
• Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: At the last City Council meeting
the reason they granted the sign
on the roof was to bring this in line percentagewise with the other
financial institutions in the area. For the 20-foot store front, if
this were granted, they would have 257 1/2 square foot of sign area.
Whether or not it would fit in proportionately with the building is
one of aesthetics and becomes very ticklish. The staff requested that
in addition to the sign on the building they be permitted a sign on
the front but it be the 40-square foot allowable by ordinance so
they would have an allowable sign on front and a variance for the sign
in the air to meet competition,
Councilman Snyder: I would be agreeable to a 40 square
foot identification sign there,
•
•
Councilman Jett: Has this sign been made?
Mr, Richard Cauderman: Yes,
Councilman Jett: This sign was made and it was
being put up and somebody phoned
the City and told the City that the sign was going up and the City sent
somebody down and stopped it, That is why I asked if it was already
made,
Councilman Snyder:
Mr, Richard Cauderman:
You have had proceedings before
the City before, You certainly
knew a permit was required,
didn't you?
Yes, sir,
Councilman Snyder: They knew•a permit was required,
Obviously they did it thinking
they could get away with it, This leads me further to say that we
should not grant it w ten they proceed in this manner,
Mayor Barnes:
Would a 40 square foot sign be
satisfactory with your organization?
Mr., Orville J. Bizzard: From our standpoint, the main
thing is that we need identi-
fication on the front of the building. We had hoped that this sign
would be allowed. However, the main thing is to get identification on
the front of the building. The way the front of the building is now,
it really doesn't look right because it is blank. A 40 square foot
sign would be satisfactory if this is the most we could obtain,
Councilman Heath:
Scotty Lees, Julia's, and Florsheim.
Planning Director, Mr, Joseph:
I would be interested in knowing
the size of the signs for
We would have to scale them,
Mr, Phil Wax: In my back sign I have 50 square
feet. The front sign was up
before any of your ordinances went in;
-29-
C, C, 9/23/63
VARIANCE NO, 455 - Continued
Page Thirty
• Councilman Jett: Move that Variance No, 455 be
approved subject to all conditions
of the Planning Commission except the condition that the sign on top
of the building be removed,
Councilman Heath:
feel that there should be
10 square feet difference
of the sign already made,
It looks as if this sign next
door on the Florsheim is better
than 50 square feet, I don't
too large a sign on the _front but if it is
between what I would like to see and the size
I would go for the extra 10 feet,
Mr, Richard Cauderman: As far as conforming to the 40
square feet, I think the letters
in themselves could be made to conform to the 40 square feet by the
removal of the background which means we would have to paint the wall
in a contrasting color to bring the lettering out, We are talking
about addinc7 a metal area to contrast the lettering that we wish to
apply or painting the wall itself in the same manner, The letters
could be made to conform to the 40 square feet,
Councilman Heath: I will second Councilman Jett's
motion,
•Action on Councilman Jett's motion: No action, Councilmen Jett and
Heath voted "Aye" and Councilman Snyder and Mayor Barnes voted "No".
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried,
that Variance No, 455 be approved, that Reliable Savings be permitted
to have a sign on the front of their building with an aeea of 40 square
feet and that the sign above the building be allowed to remain, and
further subject to all other conditions of the Planning Commission,
ZONE CHANGE NO, 267 LOCATION: Extreme dead end of
Edward and Gladys LaBerge Citrus Street,
DISMISSED
Request to reclassify from
Zone R-1 to Zone R-2 denied by Planning Commission Resolution No,1456,
Appealed by applicant on September 3, 1963,
Mr, Edward LaBerge In view of the opposition by our
20510 San Jose Drive neighbors, c,�e request that we can
withdraw this at this time and
no prejudice. I would like a
study of the area where Mr. Joseph's staff studies the multiple units
as a whole,
Mayor Barnes: We can withdraw it but not
• "without prejudice",
Mr, Edward LaBerge: The Planning Director didn't give
us any study at all,
Mayor Barnes: When you submit for another plan
you can ask for a study at that
time. This isn't important that we study this area at this time,
-30-
C. C. 9/23/63 Page Thirty -One
ZONE CHANGE NO. 267 - Continued
• Councilman Snyder:
There is an implied accusation
that the Planning Commission did
not study this and I can't believe that the Planning Commission would
have an action without study and
I can't allow this implication to stand
in the Minutes without clarification.
I would like to ask Mr. Joseph
if this is true?
Planning Director, 111r. Joseph:
I was on vacation when this case
came up,
Mr, Edward LaBerge:
I'll apply later. There was an
implication that I made,
Planning Director, Mr. Joseph:
I am going to presume, and I do
believe that the Planning
Commission studies every action before they make a _recommendation.
Mr. Edward LaBerge:
Mr. Radig said there was no
study and they were denying it.
Planning Director, Mr. Joseph:
I can't believe that.
Mayor Barnes:
When you reapply, a study will
be made of the area.
•
Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried,
that Zone Change No. 267 be dismissed at the applicant's request.
ZONE CHANGE NO, 271
LOCATION: Sunset Avenue between
A. Bernard Muth
Merced and Durness.
HELD OVER
Request to reclassify P.-A zoned
property to Zone R-P approved by
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1457,
Appealed by Mrs. 0, M, Britt on September
5, 1963, as to 165 .feet.
City Clerk, Mr, Flotten:
(Read Planning Commission
Resolution No. 1457 re this matter,)
Mayor Barnes:
This is the time and place for
the public hearing,
IN FAVOR
Mr. Hugh Halderman I am the engineer for the apply
Santa Ana cant, Our original application
requested that the R.-P be
extended along the center line of the extension of Ituni Street. There
were two proposals made by the Planning Commission on this. I submit
there is a third proposal which would be satisfactory to the City,
to my client, and to the neighborhood, which would be to simply vacate
the portion of Ituni Street which stubs off past the one tier of lots.
When the subdivision was presented to the City, the stub street was
objected to by the developer and by Mrs. Britt and it was placed there
after considerable argument. At that time, the Planning Director or
the City Engineer advised Mrs. Britt that should she build a block
wall across the dead end of this street that she would be protecting
her interests in holding this property for higher use in the future,
I submit that the vacation of this street is practical since there is
only one property owner effected who lives on the south side and his
-31-
C. C. 9/23/63
ZONE CHANGE NO, 271 - Continued
Page Thirty -Two
• frontage could be then along the new side line of the street; that the
street serves no practical purpose as it will not be extended to Sunset
and it is not needed in this development. Secondly, with respect to
R-P zoning against residential, this condition will occur at some
place no matter hoc: we zone this parcel. In favor of this application,
this area is marked on your master plan as R-P; it is a computable
use with the hospital, It would be more compatable should the entire
parcel from the presently zoned portion southerly to Ituni and
including Mrs. Britt's remaining ownership which is the small yellow
portion south of Ituni should also ultimately be zoned to the R-P
zone to give a continuous block of sufficient size to permit an
adequate development of a professional center. Mrs. Britt is here
and I believe she will tell you that she is agreeable to rezoning
the balance of her property to this zone. I believe a reclassification
of this to R-P would honor previous committments made by previous
administrations to Mrs. Britt with respect to her property, The R-P
zone requires the submission of a precise plan and by this require-
ment they could be assured that proper professional was offered to the
adjacent residential areas on the south and on the east, If' the
Planning Commission's recommendation is followed, it will create
eight residential lots that are impossible economically,
Mrs, Olive M. Britt: On the south side of Ituni,_on
this 160 feet by 300, that has
• my home and another home. I have a large, old barn, a garage, a
tool house and a residence there. That comprises at least 200 feet of
that 300 feet, There would be no room to put houses and who would
want to live there? Even if houses came on the north side there would
be nothing on the south side.
There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed,
Councilman Jett: The Planning Commission has just
heard a case across the street
from this, It seems the piece of property across the street has been
patterned by this pattern here. It might be something worthwhile
for the Council to look into, The Planning Commission recommended
that the property across the street from Mrs. Britt's property
follow the same pattern and hold R-1 up as far as this R-1. The
people were applying for P-3. I think if Mrs. Britt's property was
laid out so that the R-P went down to where she wanted it, the zoning
across the street would be compatable and in line with what the
developer was requesting and could be justified, I think the piece
of property to the west of Sunset is being zoned based on Mrs. Britt's
and I wonder if both of them shouldn't be studied,
Councilman Snyder:
. Councilman Jett:
to them to leave that block wall up
and I -think this property could be
it could by going around through a
there,
Mayor Barnes:
I would like to look at this area.
I am not ready to make a decision
on this tonight,
I think those people are in there.
I think it would be an advantage
because there are children there
developed better from Sunset than
group of cul-de-sacs to get in
I think we should study this a
little more,
-32-
C. C. 9/23/63 Page Thirty -Three
ZONE CHANGE NO. 271 - Continued
• Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: The Engineering Department isn't
in favor of the stub street.
Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman IIeath, and carried,
that Zone Change No. 271 be held over to the next regular meeting for
study,
Mr, Hugh Halderman: Is there a possibility that the
public hearing will be re -opened
at the next meeting?
Mayor Barnes: No, The hearing has been closed,
PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO. 60 Request to amend the West Covina
City Initiated Municipal Code section to replace
HELD OVER those uses which are not now
permitted in the new R-2, R-3 and
R-4 zones, approved by Planning Commission Resolution No. 1436. City
Attorney recommends that this amendment may only be considered valid if
City Council approves Amendment No, 59. Held over from July 22 to
August 5, and from August 5 to this date,
•Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
that Proposed Amendment No. 60 be held over to the next regular
meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION
METES & BOUNDS SUBDIVISION NO. 135-213 LOCATION: East of Citrus Street
W. Bo Renwick between Lark Hill Drive
HELD OVER and Spring Meadow.
1.102 Acres - 2 Lots - Area District III, Approved by Planning Com-
mission on September 11, 1963.
Mayor Barnes: This is the time and place for
the public hearing.
There being no public testimony, the hearing was closed,
Councilman Jett: I would like to -take a look at
this. I would like to see it
held over, I have had a number of calls that have been against this
and I promised them that I would take a look at it, They said the
topography of this piece of property i,7ouldn't do for a good develop-
ment or a lot split and they are very unhappy.
Mayor Barnes: Do you have any objections to
this being held over?
Mr. W. B. Renwick: No, We have over 200 feet of
frontage and that is what they
took into consideration, We are not cutting down the frontage. We
have 187 feet on Lark Hill, I am going to build on both of them. I
don't think the people are worried about what we are going to put
in there. The upper lot will be the one I will live on,
-33-
C. C. 9/23/63 Page Thirty -Four
METES.& BOUNDS SUBDIVISION NO. 135-213 Continued
• Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried,
that Metes and Bounds Subdivision No. 135-213 be held over to the
next regular meeting with the applicant's permission.
•
•
CITY CLERK'S REPORTS (CONTINUED)
RESOLUTION NO. 2745
ADOPTED
Mayor Barnes:
The City Clerk presented:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA
ACCEPTING A CERTAIN WRITTEN IN-
STRUMENT AND DIRECTING THE
RECORDATION THEREOF" (Delaye)
Hearing no objections, we will
waive further reading of the
body of the resolution.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that said
resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Towner
Said resolution was given No. 2745.
REVIEW PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
OF SEPTEMBER 11, 1963
MOBIL OIL
So indicated by Mr. Flotten.
Councilman Heath: I would like to request that Mobil
Oil comes up before us purely for
the reason of the past action of the Council concerning this piece of
property. This project is a real worthwhile project to have in the
City and I sure would like to see it here; however, since I sit on
the Planning Commission and know of the Council's past action on this
piece of property, I feel it is my responsibility to bring it up.
However, there is no reason to hold it up if the Council is satisfied
with the traffic situation. I brought it up because I .felt it was
my duty as coordinator to advise the Council on the development on
this site.
Mayor Barnes:
Councilman Heath:
Let's not bring this up.
think it's necessary.
All right.
I don't
-34-
•
n
U
•
CO Co 9/23/63
CITY ATTORNEY
RESOLUTION N0, 2746
ADOPTED
Mayor Barnes:
Page Thirty -Five
The City Attorney presented:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA
AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF CERTAIN
PROPERTY AND THE EXECUTION OF A
GRANT DEED" (Hanifan-Bowker)
Hearing no objections, we will
waive further reading of the
body of the resolution,
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that said
resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Towner
Said resolution was given No, 2746.
ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION
The City ACtorney presented:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA
AMENDING THE WEST COVI14A MUNICIPAL
CODE SO AS TO REZONE CERTAIN
PREMISES" (ZC 268, United Brethren
Church)
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance.
Motion by CouncilmaQ Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried,
that said ordinance be introduced.
RESOLUTION N0, 2747
ADOPTED
Mayor Barnes:
The City Attorney presented:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA FINDING
AND DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC
INTEREST, CONVENIENCE AND
NECESSITY REQUIRE THE ACQUISITION
OF CERTAIN PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE
FOR SANITARY. SEWER PURPOSES"(Reynolds)
Hearing no objections, we will
waive further reading of the
body of the resolution.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, that said
resolution be adopted, ?Notion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Towner
Said resolution was given No, 2747,
-35-
Co C, 9/23/63
CITY ATTORNEY - Continued
• LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA
CITIES CONFERANCE
City Attorney, Mr, Williams:
Page Thirty -Six
I need authorization to attend for
some modest reimbursement of
expenses,
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, that the
City Attorney be authorized to travel to San Francisco to the League
of California Cities Conferance and that the expenses are to be shared
with the City of Azusa. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Towner
CITY CLERK
LETTER FROM METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT TO
BOARD OF DIRECTORS, UPPER SAN GABRIEL VALLEY
MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT REGARDING HISTORICAL
• FORMULA, (Council has copies,)
City Clerk, Mr, Flotten:
APPLICATION FOR ALCOIiOLIC BEVERAGE
ON SALE BEER LICENSE OF IRVING BURTON
KASOW AT 231 SOUTH GLENDORA AVENUE
Mayor Barnes:
HALLOWEEN PARTIES
This is for your information,
The Council has no objections,
City Clerk, Mr, Flotten: We have an application from the
Pioneer P.T.A. for a halloween
party on October 19 from 11:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
that the Pioneer P.T.A. be permitted to have a halloween party on
October 19, 1963 from 11:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M.,subject to the usual
inspection.
• City Clerk, Mr, Flotten:
We have the same type of appli-
cation from the Del Norte P.T.A.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried,
that permission be granted to the Del Norte P.T.A. for a'halloween
party,, subject to the usual inspection.
-36-
r
C. C. 9/23/63
CITY CLERK - Continued
• WHITE CANE DAYS
Page Thirty -Seven
City Clerk, Mr. Flotten: We have a request from the
Lion's Club for the Mayor to
declare October 4 and 5 as White Cane Days,
Mayor Barnes: If there are no objections, I will
so proclaim.
(There were none,)
I so proclaim.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
that the Lion's Club be given permission to conduct their White Cane
Solicitation on October 4 and 5.
FOREST LAWN
City Clerk, Mr. Flotten: Tomorrow morning at 9:30, there
will be a discussion of the Forest
•Lawn application at the Regional Planning Commission. This is for
your information,
RESOLUTION FOR MR. RADIG
City Clerk, 14r. Flotten: Mr. William Radig has quit our
City and has gone back to school,
Mayor Barnes: I think we should draft a
resolution.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that the
City Clerk prepare a resolution commending Mr. William Radig for the
services he has given to the City and wish him good luck in his
schooling. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Towner
CITY TREASURER
• Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried,
that the Treasurer's report for August be accepted and filed,
Me]IAM
C. C. 9/23/63'
DEMANDS
Page Thirty -Eight
Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, to approve
demands totalling $1911189,19 as listed on demand sheets C33S through
C337 and B137. This total includes bank transfers of $1409000.00.
Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Jett,
Noes: None
Absent: Councilman Towner
BIBLE MISSIONARY
Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes
Mr, Chris Tambe: The Bible Missionary have been
soliciting funds and they have
been found to be a fraudulent organization. We would like you to
revoke their license. I understand our City Clerk's Office issued
a license to them several months ago. They operate on and off. Thev
come in and literally coerce people into donating funds which are
supposedly to be used to buy bibles for underprivileged people around
the world. The truth of the matter is that 94% of the funds collected
go into the pockets of the people collecting the money,
Councilman death: I would like Mr. T-,Iilliams to
look into this, When I was at
the Covina Chamber of Commerce meeting they made a study and found it
to be fraudulent but they felt they were treading on dangerous ground
if they made any move on this line because of discrimination.
City Clerk, Mr, Flotten: We issued them a charity permit.
We had a little trouble with
them last year,
City Attorney, Mr, Williams: The answer is if it is contended
they are fraudulent they will have
to be given notice of intention to revoke their license and a hearing
set,
Councilman Heath: The Covina group shied away from
them on the advice of some attorney
that they were working on dangerous ground.
City Attorney, Mr, Williams:
Mr. Chris Tambe:
Check it with the Los Angeles
Bureau of Public Services,
Social Service,
I haven't yet,
City Attorney, Mr, Williams: If they are revoked or not listed
• in Los Angeles I would think we
can take them on, But if you do, you have to give them a notice and
an opportunity to be heard and it means that someone would have to
present the case against them,
Councilman Snyder: I don't think the public is that
gullible that if we had a valid
complaint from the Better Business Bureau that there would be a few
who would accuse us of discrimination. I don't think we should back
away from this, .
C. C. 9/23/63 Page Thirty -Nine
'BIBLE MISSIONARY - Continued
• Councilman Snyder: Move that Bible Missionary be
given notice that we are going
to consider the revocation of their license on the ground of fraud; that
the City Clerk notify them that.we will hold a public hearing on this
matter on the 14th of October,
Mr. Chris Tambe :
City Manager, Mr, Aiassa:
Councilman Snyder:
Mr. Chris Tambe :
MR, JOSEPH'S SCHOOLING
I will inquire of the Better.
Business Bureau for evidence.
I think the Chamber should
investigate,
Before we take action on this
motion, would you investigate
this for us?
Yes.
Councilman Heath: There is a personnel problem we
considered and I would like to
ask the Council to reconsider concerning Mr. Joseph, We discussed
the possibility of Mr. Joseph going to school during working hours,
Looking into this further, I find out this is for the duration of
one semester. It will take one day a week but it is for one semester
and the rest of the time he should be able to get on evening classes,
I feel that Mr. Joseph will stay with us upon the realization that he
has just purchased a house in the City. I think it might be an
asset to us if we permit him to attend this class one morning a week
for one semester,
Councilman Snyder: I was for this in the first
place. Somebody stated that
the City of Covina has allowed this for some of their employees,
City Clerk, Mr, Flotten:
Yes, they do,
Councilman Snyder: Certainly if he is willing to take
it away from his vacation time or
make it up any other way, I am for it, .
Councilman Heath:
The fact that it is only one
semester I think maybe we ought
to take another shot at it,
Mayor Barnes: Are you willing to make this
• time up?
Planning Director, Mr, Joseph:
Councilman Jett:
Mayor Barnes:
Yes,
I haven't changed my opinion of
it, I still stand by my original
decision.
I am afraid of setting a precedent,
-39-
C, Ca 9/23/63 Page Forty
MR. JOSEPH'S SCHOOLING - Continued
• Councilman Snyder: I think you have to judge each
individual case.
Councilman Heath: You sent Chief Sill back east.
I think we can do this with
discretion. He is going to make up this time. He is a department head.
I wouldn't recommend this for anyone other than department heads,
Councilman Snyder: I think we are being picayunish
in not giving it, Practically
all industry does it to the extent where they even pay their way,
Mayor Barnes: I mi7ht reconsider. I think Mr,*
Joseph could make -it up in other ways.
I46tion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried,
that Harold Joseph be given permission to go -to school one day a week
for two and one-half hours, (Councilman Jett voted "No",)
CALIFORNIA HIGIWAY PATROL
Councilman Jett: Is the Council aware that the
California Highway Patrol down
here closes at five o'clock?
Mayor Barnes: No
Mr, Chris Tambe: They changed that last week.
All offices of the Highway Patrol
close at five o'clock. They claim the reason is to put more units in
the field,
Councilman Jett: I wonder if they shouldn't have
someone down there to answer the
telephone calls for accidents and such,
Councilman Heath:
City Manager, Mro Aiassa:
MOUNT SAC
-Mayor Barnes:
I think this is something we
should check up on,
I'll take care of it,
Does Lt. Laughlin teach at
Mount Sac?
• City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: He is taking Monday as his day
off. He is teaching one class.
He also does night teaching free for the auxiliary,putting in four to
six hours a week for auxiliary teaching,
-40-
�_ " t, r
C. C. 9/23/63 Page Forty -One
PRIORITY LIST OF PLANNING COMMISSION
Councilman Heath: I was at the Planning Commission
meeting last week and they
instructed the Planning Director to make up a list of items that must
come before them and they will assign priority to this list, I asked
the Chairman at that time if the Council could have a copy of this
list before they decided on the priorities and it was the Chairman
speaking for the Commission and he said no, that they would assign
the priorities first and we could have a copy of that. I pointed out
there might be things on there the Council would like to ask for in
a different priority and what they would set up and he sort of
overruled me himself. I therefore asked our City Manager to give us
a list of all of the items which are pending before the Planning
Commission and we have that list. I think we should look through it
before Wednesday night and if there is anything we want first that
we should advise the City Manager so he can pass the word along. I
hope Mr. Joseph and Mr. Aiassa don't get in the middle on this because
this was purely my request for this list, I think I received poor
cooperation on the level of the Planning Commission, We will talk
about that some other time.
There being no further business, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded
•by Councilman Snyder, and carried, that this meeting be adjourned
to next Monday, September 30, 1963, at eight o'clock, The meeting
was adjourned at 3:00 A.M"
ATTEST:
0
CITY CLERK
APPROVED C If lr, �V 6
MAYOR
-41-