Loading...
12-23-1963 - Regular Meeting - Minutesr1 L-A 0 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIMNIA DECEMBER 231, 1963 the regular meeting of the City Council was called to order by Mayor Barnes at 7.-45 P,M, in the West Covina City Hallo Councilman Heath led the Pledge of Allegiance. The invocation was given by Dr, Conrad Koozman of the Christ Lutheran Church, ROLL CALL Present.- Mayor Barnes, Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder (from 7.-50 P,M,) Others Presents Mr, George Aiassa, City Manager Mr, Robert Flotten, City Clerk & Administrative Mr, Harry Co Williams, City Attorney Mr, Thomas J, Dosh, Public Services Director Mr, Harold Joseph, Planning Director (from 8s00 APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 4, 1963 o Approved as submitted as follows- Assi.-Jtafit P,M,) Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the Minutes of November 4, 1963 be approved as presented. November 12, 1963 Approved as submitted as follows: Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that the Minutes of November 12,'1963, be approved as submitted, November 18, 1963 m Approved as submitted as follows - Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that the Minutes of November 18, 1963 be approved as submitted, November 25, 1963 a Approved as submitted as follows- Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the Minutes of November 25, 1963 be approved as presented, CITY CLERK'S REPORTS RESOLUTION N0, 2810 ADOPTED Mayor Barnes - The City Clerk presented. - "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING A BOND TO GUARANTEE THE COST OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS AND THE TIME OF COMPLETION IN PRECISE PLAN NO,, 36011 Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, -1- Co Ca 12/23/63 Page Two RESOLUTION NO, 2810 ® Continued Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, that said resolution be adopted Motion passed on roll call as follows° Ayes° Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heath, Mayor Barnes Noes.- None Absent.- Councilman Snyder Said resolution was given No, 2810. RESOLUTION NO, 2811 The City Clerk presented - ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING A BOND TO GUARANTEE THE COST OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS AND THE TIME OF COMPLETION IN PRECISE PLAN NO, 387 IN SAID CITY" Mayor Barnes.- Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jetts that said • resolution be adopted, Moiion passed on roll call as follows.- Ayes; Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heath, Mayor Barnes Noes.- None Absent.- Councilman Snyder Said resolution was given No, 2811, RESOLUTION NO, 2812 The City Clerk presented.- ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A CERTAIN WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING THE RECORDATION THEREOF" (West Covina ScbDol District •- Puente Ave.) Mayor Barnes.- 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 Towner, Jett, Heath, Mayor Barnes Noes,- None Absent.- Councilman Snyder Said resolution was given No, 2812, -2- :, a 0 • 0 C,, Ca 12/23/63 CITY CLERKS REPORTS ® Continued RESOLUTION NO,, 2813 ADOPTED Mayor Barnes,. Page Three 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" (W.C.School District Eldred Ave.) 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 Towner, Jett, Heath, Mayor Barnes Noes-, None Absent-, Councilman Snyder Said resolution was given No,, 2813,, RESOLUTION NO,, 2814 ADOPTED Mayor Barnes,. The City Clerk presented,. "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING FOR STREET AND HIGHWAY PURPOSES CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY HERETOFORE GRANTED AND CONVEYED TO SAID CITY" (Eldred Avenue) 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 Towner, Noes, None Absent,. Councilman Snyder Jett, Heath, Mayor Barnes Said resolution was given No,, 2814. (Councilman Snyder entered the chambers at 7-,50 PM,) RESOLUTION NO,, 2815 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" (West Covina School District m Mine Avenue) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution,, -3- • E C, C, 12/23/63 RESOLUTION NO, 2815 ® Continued Page Four Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, that said resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes. Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 2815, RESOLUTION NO, 2816 ADOPTED Mayor Barnes: The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING FOR STREET AND HIGHWAY PURPOSES CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY HERETOFORE GRANTED AND CONVEYED TO SAID CITY" (Vine Avenue) 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 Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes. None Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 2816, RESOLUTION NO, 2817 The City Clerk presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A CERTAIN WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING THE RECORDATION THEREOF" (West Covina School District m Bainbridge Ave.) Mayor Barnes: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Towner-, that said resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes. Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 2817, -4- .r • 0 • Co Co 12/23/63 CITY CLERK'S REPORTS ® Continued RESOLUTION NO, 2818 ADOPTED Mayor Barnes: Page Five 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" (West Covina School District m Alwood St.) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, that said resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes-, Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 2818, RESOLUTION NO, 2819 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" (West Covina District - Storm Drain) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, that said resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call as follows.- Ayes.- Councilmen Towner, Noes: None Absent: None Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Said resolution was given No, 2819, RESOLUTION NO, 2820 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` (West Covina School District - Dawley Ave.) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, School m5® L� L� CO Co 12/23/63 Page Six RESOLUTION NO,, 2820 ® Continued Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows, Ayes, Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes, None Absent, None Said resolution was given No. 2820, RESOLUTION NO, 2821 ADOPTED Mayor Barnes, The City Clerk presented, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCPETING FOR STREET AND HIGHWAY PURPOSES CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY HERETOFORE GRANTED AND CONVEYED TO SAID CITY" (Mobeck St.) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolutiono Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows, Ayes, Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes, None Absent, None Said resolution was given No. 2821,, RESOLUTION NO, 2822 ADOPTED Mayor Barnes, The City Clerk presented, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING FOR STREET AND HIGHWAY PURPOSES CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY HERETOFORE GRANTED AND COVEYED TO SAID CITY" (Dawley Ave. and Mobeck Street) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows, Ayes, Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes •Noes, None Absent, None Said resolution is given No,, 2822. (Mr. Joseph entered the chambers at 8,00 P,M.) • C,, Ca 12/23/63 SCHEDULED MATTERS HEARINGS Page Seven ZONE CHANGE NO,, 280 LOCATION- 3400 block of Virginia Gemiteg Inco between Mesa and Charvers APPROVED (Rml) and Request to reclassify from Zone VARIANCE NO,, 470 R-A to R-1 approved by Planning Gemite, Inc,, Commission Resolution No,, 1496; DENIED appealed by applicant as to and Planning Commission decision on PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN NO. 389 November 22, 1963, Request to Gemite, Inc. permit necessary variances to DENIED allow for a multiple housing condominium and for approval for modification of precise plan condition regarding required walls and landscapingg approved by Planning Commission Resolutions No. 1501 and 1502,, City Clerk, Mr,, Flotten- (Read Planning Commission Resolu- tions No. 1496, 1501 and 1502,,) Mayor Barnes- This is the time and place for the public hearing,, IN FAVOR Mr,, Francis J,, Garvey I am the attorney for the appli- 281 East Workman Avenue cant I would like to present Covina Mr,, George Adams, one of the officials of Gemite, and I would like to ask him two questions,, First, Mr,, Adams, if this project in total should be approved, including the zoning, the variances, and the precise plan, are you prepared to go ahead and build this as shown? Mr,, George Adams - Mr,, Francis J. Garvey - Mr,, George Adams - Yes,, You do have the financing available? Yes, we have the financing available,, Mr,, Francis J. Garvey- If the project were to be started on any given day, about how long would it be before it was completed from the time of starting construction? 18 Mr,, George Adams: Approximately nine months to complete this project from start of construction,, Mr,, Francis J,, Garvey- This is an application specifically designed for and pointed out under your new R®2 zone,, The plan calls for approximately 48 units on a five -acre tract or less than ten units per acre,, (Stepped to map and gave brief description of the location of the property and the surrounding areas,,) -7- Ca Co 12/23/63 Page Eight GEMITE - Continued • This precise plan divides this property into two sections. By reference to the architectural drawings which will be discussed by the architect, you will see the type of development we are proposing, This is not a single family unit but it is a cluster house development designed after a Spanish village which will start at ground level with no openings from Virginia Avenue and will gradually proceed up the hill with one rooftop complimenting the other, The R-2 zone as it presently is on the books was not conceived or brought into being at the time the General Plan was under study, Therefore, the R®2 zone must be recognized as something that the Council has brought forth since that time and must make its own determination where it must goo The ordinance itself does not contain the guide line necessary in order to tie this in, Regarding the variance, the variances requested come from a present defect in the ordinance with respect to any type of cluster housing In order to put this type of development on the property and sell it oo you will sell a pad which is less than the standard size R-1 subdivision lot s® you will also have attached houses and this will take variances. Ultimately the owners of these individual units get a grant deed • to the pad which they occupy covered by their personal building plus a deed to an undivided fractional interest in the balance of the property, The variances requested are not incompatable with this type of zone in that they have been granted elsewhere. We are dealing with a hillside property, It rises 35 feet in the course of the acreage owned by the applicant, To impose upon it a R®2 zone with a precise plan which will be compatable with the surrounding neighborhood is to give effect to what the Council has indicated it has in mind for the residential areas of West Covina and these plans are presented to you to be developed, I wish to introduce Mr, Whitney R, Smith of Smith and Williams, He is the architect of this project, Mr, Whiteney Smith Planners looking to the physical Smith & Williams environment realize this variety South Pasadena must be considered, Your ordinance requires two parking spaces per dwelling unit, one and a quarter covered, We have this on this plan, We have ample street parking. We have consulted about the delivery spaces and we have ample turnaround space, We do not intend to change the terrain of this property, We intend to retain all of the terrain just as it stands, This might not be possible if we went into a R-1 development, There are no homes higher than two stories and generally these are located to add variety and interest to the skyline. We have made the units with a minimum of 1,200 square feet each, All have at least two bedrooms; some have three, Each has its own outdoor courtyard. We feel that living in this type of unit might be more pleasurable for many people than to operate a Rml residence, Each house has a carport at the unit. I think there should be some way that when particularly good plans come before you that it would be possible to adopt these and make use of honestly sincere developers who wish to do something to improve the general environment of the City, C. C, 12/23/63 GEMITE - Continued Your R-2 coverage of the property and we have limited You have not required a minimum parcel size parcel size to one acre We have a 25-foot Many of our units have more than 25 feet Page Nine ordinance allows 300 ourselves to 22,60, and we have limited our setback on all sides, We feel there are advantages to this scheme over R-1 development, one is the minimum of driveways, We have less coverage than allowed under R=l, Under R=1 you can build within 5 feet of the side yard and within one foot with auxiliary buildings, We are staying 25 feet from the side yards for any and all structures, Density is hard to talk about because I think people talk about units per acre. We are talking about less than ten units per acre, There are other densities, such as population, the number of people, or the number of cars, We know from experience in the other condominiums that have been sold that with the restrictions that will be placed on this property, that an average of two people per unit will probably be about right as compared to the families in R-1 being much larger, It is difficult to see how this project will be detrimental to the neighbors because we have the approval of the Engineering Department even though there were questions brought up by residents; we have gone into all the matters of all the services, We have had approval of the Traffic Engineer who stated that there is absolutely no traffic hazard involved at all, We have the approval of the Fire Department, I think it will correct a fire and vandalism factor which the property has right now, We are going to place a valuable piece of property back on the tax roll, We will have less loads on the schools,, the biggest tax requirement, We honestly believe we will have an architectural and landscaped prize winner which all of you can point to with pride, (Presented the Council with prochures describing the project in detail.;,) IN OPPOSITION Mr, Chris Justi We feel that Rml is the best 3133 Sunset Hill Drive usage_of the land. We have a West Covina number of speakers to emphasize that point, Mr, Manington The property next to it is owned 3157 Sunset Hill Drive by Saunders of approximately 4 West Covina acres which, I think, they will ask to have R®2 placed on it, Next to that are very high classed homes. This is surrounded by fine homes on all sides. This is a distinct spot that they ask for rezoning, If we permit these people to get a R-2 zoning then somebody with smaller acreage is entitled to it in any residential •district, I think they have a fine plan but I don't think they have chosen the right place for that; plan, Am — Mrs, Manington 3157 Sunset Hill Drive West Covina Covina, The people here condominium homes put on in the very heart of this The homes in this area are no less than 29500 square feet in size, This is one of the most beautiful _°esidential districts in West are unanimous in their disapproval of having this property, This property is situated prime residential area, I have some -9- C, C, 12/23/63 Page Ten GEMITE Continued • petitions which have over 200 names opposing this change, Mr, and Mrs, Jackson told me to tell you they and their organization are opposed to this development in this area. Shirley and Tom Gillum will be late but they wanted to say they are completely opposed to this rezoning. (Presented petitions to the City Clerk.) Dr, Rubinstein We recognize the need for new 414 Manington Place industry to come in to make this West Covina a better City, We recognize the need for these to keep up the standards which have been precedent until now. We also recognize the fact that we have a moral obligation to the citizens both past and present, We recognize the fact that we are the citizens remain- ing in the area, We recognize many of the interests we have heard tonight are financial and monetary in origin, Mr, Richard Hallory At the meeting last Monday night 429 Manington Place I was interested in the fact that West Covina three ordinances were brought up for the ,Tames aroperty, In the arguments for the higher zoning some of the strongest points were made as providing a buffer zone between a commercial property and a residential, If we are trying to provide a buffer zone in our area I would like to know what we are buffering, I am confused at the approach to multiple zoning in obviously an Rml area and I go on record as being very strongly opposed to a change in the zoning, Mr, George McCormick They have never given any 421 Manington Place specific facts as to how many West Covina people they would have, exactly what kind of deed restrictions they will have in their property and they have been vague about the entire zone and all of the attendant variations of it that they have requested. They are going to increase the density in this specific area about a factor of three. This is going to be served by a 40®foot roadway, These people -are going to have to use many of the other cross roads, especially most of them will use the freeway. At the intersection of Barranca and the freeway service road you will find that this backs up onto the freeway and in many cases the cars are backed up further than Citrus, If this is allowed there is absolutely no reason why the adjoining property cannot also be rezoned this way, There are several pieces of property closer to the freeway which have similar possibilities, This area could increase- in density by a factor of ten if this precedent is allowed, There are children walking to school in this area. There are no sidewalks on Sunset Hill Drive where these children are walking, They are a company which has come to our valley; they are interested in developing what I would consider a blight in our particular section of the City and then they expect us to accept them with open arms, They have shown no interest in our City other than an interest that an ordinary speculator would have, Mrs, Cleo Sneed This is contingent to the property 30 Campana Flores in question. This particular West Covina piece of land is shaped like a bowl. The whole rim of Campana Flores has the bowl dropping behind. The sound effects are grand coming across there, When I consider 40 families over there using the one swimming pool and the clubhouse proposed to be built con- tingent to the swimming pool, I don't think the neighbors of that area are ever going to have any peace, _10® C. C, 12/23/63 Page Eleven GEMITE m Continued is Mr,, Harold Jackson I have no objection to their 3117 Sunset Hill Drive precise plan as it stands. It West Covina is inconceivable to me that it would help in any way our area; it would certainly hinder. There are no sidewalks at all. They say there will be two per apartment; this is what they hope, I have a feeling there will be many more, I just can't believe that this would be anything we want in the City of West Covina; not only in our area but anywhere in West Covina, Dr, Crouse This property is just like a bowl. 321 South Charvers Avenue The noise is quite a problem West Covina when there is a small amount of people there and I can be sure when there are large numbers of people there it will be deafening at times, The noise will be a problem, Dr, Hull I am far from the area in question, 603 North Lacenta Avenue I have met in the houses of these West Covina people at a meeting; I have heard the discussion here; I am sure this is not the type of development that I envision for West Covina living over on the other side of the freeway. I oppose the develop- ment. Mr, R. H, Stone I am the gentleman who developed 813 South Magnolia Charvers Heights adjoining the West Covina property on the east. This is a nice precise plan for a R®2 condominium but this is not the right location,, not in the Charvers Heights area of fifty to sixty -thousand -dollar homes. The people in this area purchased their homes on the basis of R-1 zoning and they expect the City Council and the Planning Commission to uphold the zoning. They checked the Master Plan before they bought houses. The Ruppert property can be developed into 15 lots. The land is costing them approximately a little under $6,,000 a raw .lot; $49000 improvements is $10,000. The lots in Charvers Heights cost me over $10,000 and I developed it in R-1. Mr, Howard Erickson I represent the opponents. The Attorney Planning Commission has speci- 104 South Glendora Avenue fically recommended that this be West Covina R-1. It is my understanding that the RG2 zone still has a reading which perhaps will come up tonight, The.Planning Commission refers to it as not having been approved as yet. Some of our most expensive homes in West Covina are developed on hilly land. I think. our zoning map,so indicates. Mr. Garvey stated that the General Plan does not show R®2, This may be true but the General Plan does show low density for this area; it shows nothing in the nature of a medium •density as proposed in this plan,. I think we should stick to our General Plan, These 192009 19400®square®foot homes are going into an area where the people have at least 29100 feet in their houses, some of them more. They say they will probably have two people in these units. They have two bedroom and three bedroom apartments. They can't control the amount of people who will live here, They have lots of garages; they must expect to have lots of cars and I am sure they will have. This would not be compatable with a R®1 development, The fact that they state this will bring more taxes, this is not the basis upon which we zone -hings, If this is not good for the City, it ®11® Co Ca 12/23/63 Page Twelve GEMITE - Continued • won't make any difference if there are more taxes, There is no proof that you will get more taxes from these apartments than you will get from high-class single family residences. The Planning Commission at all times when they approved the precise plan and the variance did not approve this in theory, They stated that single family residential is appropriate; that it will be detrimental to the single family residences in the area. They went ahead and approved the variance and the precise plan merely so you gentlemen, shouia you decide to rezone it, would have this already done, I .know they were very careful and very concerned that they weren't approving this in this area. I hope you will keep that in mind. In each of these resolutions they stated that they had not changed their mind. The crux of this matter is that they are attempting to place here a 1,250 to 1,,4006square-foot house right in the heart of single family expensive residences with 2,100 minimum square feet, The General Plan says low density for this area, This should not be zoned R®2. This is not the area for a condominium; this is the area for R®1, Dr, John F, Koonith I am not in favor nf this develop® 3323 Toni Drive ment, We purchased a home in the West Covina Charvers Heights area, We did so knowing we were purchasing in a R®1 area, We consulted with the Master Plan because we knew there was some areas to be developed, We were assured that this was the plan for the area and Rm2 or a shade less than R-29 anything other than Rml in this particular area I am not in favor of it, Mr, Gene Kritchevsky 616 North Eileen West Covina introduced was facing away from rather resentful, I am not sure of the proceedings, As we sa.t down and the evidence was presented ®- evidence to which the audience was supposed to answer evidence that was the audience which I thought was what that makes of the legality I would like to register a general protest against a general and progressive dehumanization of the City by this continual planned progress and progressive planning which we are eternally inundated. City Attorney, Mr, Williams? This room is not capable of accomodating this number of people. The presentation is'to the Council, not to the audience, and there is no obligation to have the exhibit shown to the audience, Mr, Charles Zug These gentlemen presented nice 3307 East Virginia Avenue facts and figures and there is a West' -Covina proper place for them in the City, • I don't think the Planning Com- mission and the City Council had in mind when they were talking about d.fferent changes in R-2 and Rm3 to set them out in the middle of tiny residential area. They haven't proved that these lots can't be subdivided into single family residences as is 99% of the area around them, If this is allowed it will set a precedent and there will be nothing stopping them dropping this kind"of zoning into any resi- dential area in the City regardless of the area district, I request that you turn this matter down, -.12 • • • C, Ca 12/23/63 GEMITE - Continued Mr, W, Co Sneed 30-Campana Flores Drive West Covina same zone because I have three acres Mrs, Horace Pear 3315 East Virginia Avenue West Covina REBUTTAL Page Thirteen If you gentlemen think that this should be given an apartment zone I have already indicated to Mr. Joseph that I would like the just to the south of this property, I am opposed to this development, This is a low density area, Mr, Francis J, Garveyo I think in zeneral the quality of the oppositicnwhile high in erudition is low in factual matter, Mr, Manington tells you you shouldn't approve it because there is a gentleman next door and he may ask for Rm2, Mr, Sneed came in toward the end and put his chips in the pot and said he might want three ages of R-2. The subject matter before the Council at the present time is a specific piece of property with a specific precise plan. It has been designed in accordance with an ordinance designed and enacted by the City Council for a specific purpose, I feel this meets the purpose because this was carefully drawn within the framework of that ordinance as pre- pared by the City of West Covina, If this does not meet the test of that ordinance in this location then,, gentlemen,, you have no location in the City of West Covina that does meet the test and you might as well repeal the ordinance, Dr. Rubenstein talked about a moral obligation but it was not quite clear what his objection to this project was other than he did not like it, Mr., Richard Howard from Manington Place said .R®2 is not a buffer zone, Manington comes southerly and Charvers Avenue is quite away over here, I cannot see possibly how a property on Manington Place could be effected by a development of a property on Virginia Avenue with a Sunset Hill connection, Mr, McCormick wants to know the number of people in the deed restriction, This is going to be offered for sale, It will have deed restrictions and we intend to put a minimum age limit of 16 to 18 years of people residing in the property, The deed restrictions have not been prepared because this involves legal draftsmanship which cannot be accomplished until you know what you have to work with, If you listened to the conditions of the Planning Commission you will find. that conditions were imposed upon us to provide sidewalks along Virginia Avenue where,, to my knowledge,, none presently exist and along that portion of Sunset Hill Drive which we are to put in. If you have toured Sunset Hill coming in an easterly direction from Barranca there are no sidewalks there at the present time and if the gentleman who objected to this project because there are no sidewalks along that part of Sunset Hill Drive,, that is the portion west of the Saunders property and disconnected from that,, I suggest that they get a petition to have themselves especially assessed and the City can then provide them with the sidewalks that they want, Their lack of sidewalks is no argument against this property which will have sidewalks, m13® C, C, 12/23/63 GEMITE ® Continued Page Fourteen • Mrs, Sneed says she gets bowl sound effects, If this is true, she is dealing with the nature of the terrain which will continue to be that way, If we were to put 15 or 16 single family residences in there there would still be the same type of volume of noise that you would get from other people living there, Her objection would be equally as valid with respect to single family as it would be to this type of multiple family density, Mr. Jackson had no sidewalks down his way, To him I say the same thing as I did before regarding their sidewalk problem, Dr. Crouse said he got noise on Charvers Avenue, I suggest he complain to one of the other opposing witnesses because Mr, Stone built those houses there and with his knowledge of the noise factor he should have foreseen this and provided adequate buffering, Dr, Hull is obviously out of the area, He did not present any concrete evidence other than his personal opinion, Mr, Stone is, I think, an admirable • developer; a gentleman who has provided many things for the City of West Covina, This project is also in competition with some of his projects, Our homes will have a price tag of around $35g000 per unit. That is $35,000 for 1,200 square feet compared to $60,000 for 2,500 square feet; we are providing a superior yardstick by that one yardstick, Mr. Erickson pointed out something about traffic density. I would say that there would be two garages here is an indication of the quality of income necessary to live here. I think we all recognize this is pretty much a two -car community, As I understand it, the assessor takes his valuation of the land and the improvements and divides them by four and applies them the tax rate. If you assume a $35,000 package here, divide that by four and multiply it by the 93� tax rate and compare that with three $50,000 homes at the same tax rate using the same factors, you will find out that revenue on this development would give you a greater amount of revenue to the City than single family homes, We don't have one single fact in opposition to this, No one told you why this zone couldn't be applied here except they say the General Plan does not show it, • The General Plan did not consider this type of Rm2 in.any place, Mr, Roy Stickler I am a staff appraiser of Los 3535 Via Sandalero Angeles Federal Savings, Prior Montelbello to that I was an appraiser with the tax office, I see no detri- ment to the value of the surrounding property, Gemite is planning to build according to all restrictions, As I see it there will be no decrease in value, I have appraised several similar types of units in other parts of Los Angeles County and the value of the -14- C, C, 12/23/63 GEMITE - Continued Page Fifteen •land when the condominium goes in increases twofold at least and I would say the value of the land adjacent to it increases in value at least a quarter. I think it would be something to add to the area. Mr, Whitney Smith: This land is not leased; it is owned by the Gemite Corporation and there is no intention of holding the land as leased land, This R-2 was developed so it could be applied as a floating zone to various types of densities and various types of areas, I hope we can do it because I would enjoy bringing this type of construction to your City, Mr, Francis J, Garvey: We will be happy to answer any questions you have concerning this matter, There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed, Councilman Snyder: In the arguments for the intent of the new R-2 it states the intent was to create a restrictive multiple family zoning with high standards of development which could be located near single family uses on difficult pieces of property without fear that the increased •density would harm the established single family use, Mr, Joseph, do you feel that this definition of a difficult piece of property applies to this particular piece of land? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: We had a meeting in my office with Mr. Walsh, the engineer, and it has been determined that the area is capable of being sub- divided into 15 lots meeting the area district, We even went into a discussion the way the lots could be clustered in a new fashion so you would not wind up with a typical subdivision, I cant comment on how much it would cost to develop it as a single family project, I will suggest that the problem of cutting Sunset Hill Drive through which we think is important, whether or not the grades will permit this kind of development, we think it could be developed as single family but we don't know what the costs involved would be, Councilman Snyder: It has been stated that the intent of the R-2 was to be used in R-1 areas with low density on difficult pieces of property; in other words, the question is does this fall within the definition of a difficult piece of property, Public Services Director, Mr, Dosh: In this area it is more difficult for the remaining areas and that is why it is being developed last. It is a. difficult problem. There is a difference in grade; difference in terrain; more dirt to move, •Mr, Stone mentioned $4,000 a lot; I think it would go higher than that. I know in our hillside developments the developers spend a lot more money so that $10,000 going into a lot is not extreme, Councilman Jett: I went over this piece of property, To the portion I think would be south there is a depressed area and my concern was what has been done to solve the problem of the sewer in this area for drainage, -15- C, Ca 12/23/63 GEMITE m Continued Page Sixteen Public Services Director, Mr, Dosh; The sewer problem is being resolved in our design, Whether this is developed R®2 or Rml the developer will have to solve the drainage problem, He will have to do it; that is all there is to it, Councilman Jett; Will you take into consideration the people on Campana Flores Drive? Public Services Director Mr, Dosh: They don't have a drainage problem, these people, We have grade prWe have a sewer problem with oblems as far as sanitary sewers but not storm drains, I don't believe this is a drainage problem. I think the ultimate requirement of the new developer what he puts in there will solve the problem, Councilman Snyder: Regarding Mr, Sneed's and Mr. Saunders' problem, is the terrain of that property such that could also be considered difficult property in this definition? Public Services Director Mr, Dosha It could be, Councilman Towner: I think we should dispose of the request where there is not too 40 much of a difference of opinion s_ the variance, I think the variances are appropriate for condominium development, Whether or not the variance is granted would depend on the basic underlying zone change, On the precise plan, I think this is the kind of thing we had in mind when we set up zone Rc2, As far as the way the thing will look and develop, I think the architect here has made use of the natural terrain and trees and pacing of the homes and setbacks and so on which are very attractively done in accordance with the reputation of the architect and I think here, again, I would have no quarrel with this proposal, This brings us to the basic question as to whether or not this particular piece of property should be rezoned from R-1 to R®2, At the time we framed the R®2 zoning ordinance it was in accordance with an over-all change in our multiple family residential requirements in the City and the effort was to give the developers something a little more concrete that they could work with so that they know where they stand and that the Planning Commission and the City Council and the staff would know where they stood, It was left undetermined at that time with connection with the change the policy questions which are basically now being worked out on concrete facts, The policy question being what did we mean when we said a "difficult'• piece of property. It was my concept in discussing the Rm2 zoning as we now have it in the City of West Covina we have what is called a floating zone which •goes on property difficult because of terrain, surrounding uses, proximity of nuisance factors which make it undesirable as R®1 or so uneconomical to be unreasonable to develop it as R-1 or other reasons such as shielding from a freeway or shielding from a school site or shielding from a major traffic artery with commercial and other uses on it, Here you can take a Rm2 concept and provide the setbacks and landscaping and these cluster houses and do things that I think will make it adaptable to those circumstances, -16- C, Co 12/23/63 GEMITE 6 Continued Page Seventeen Considering that as a basic policy, I think you come down to whether this particular Ruppert property falls within this definition of "difficult". While there is some slight difficulty on the terrain, I think we would all have to agree that the overwhelming evidence is that there is what is known as a gradual slope, the kind that is adaptable to R-1 development; that it can be done economically; that there are now surrounding uses that in no way inhibit development of this property for R®1; that it is not proximate to any nuisance factors that I know of; that there are existing R-1 homes on all four sides although some of it is not totally developed, I think under these circumstances that I would have to conclude, and it grieves me to turn down this plan, but I would have to conclude that this is not the place for it, Councilman Snyder.- Perhaps the proponents in stating their case did not mention much on the fact on what made this a difficult piece of property to them and I feel that the burden of proof falls upon them to show this is a difficult piece of property and secondly, as the ordinance states, show evidence that the public welfare would be promoted thereby by putting such zoning on this property, Do you have any evidence to submit as to why you feel this is a difficult peece of property and cannot be developed R-l? Mr, Whitney Smith.- We think it can be better developed the way we have shown it, It can be developed into 51 lots and I don't think it is difficult to an extreme. We just like this better, We know in developing any type of terrain you should consider the terrain itself, This is what upsets the architects and City Planners to such a great extent, We would like not to remove any earth, not to move major portions of earth and not to bring any new earth in. We like the site the way it is and I doubt if'it can be left in its natural state the way it is and developed Rml but I think it can be left in its natural state and developed as we have shown it, Councilman Snyder: I have some feeling that this may fall within the definition of a difficult piece of property but I have not got enough information to arrive at a decision on that tonight and I personally would like to hold this until I have looked at the property, Councilman Heath.- I would like to compliment the proponents for a beautiful plan, I think it is one of the most outstanding plans I have ever seen and I think Mr, Garvey has made a presentation like he has never made before, The only question I have on this is this.- Even though this is a beautiful plan, it no doubt would be a terrific asset to the City, I don't think this is the location for it, If this is granted and I sure would like to have this in the City, if it is granted • you can't stop expansion on it, Being in real estate I have already been approached by two people for the property adjacent to it for the same things Rm2, This means you will end up with much more multiple dwelling than we would want, I don't think we can afford this, I would not be able to vote in favor of this zoning, Councilman Jett.- On the R-2 ordinance, it was approved because it was a zoning that was being established for the purpose of placing on a piece of problem property this type of zone. In my opinion there C, C, 12/23/63 GEMITE m Continued Page Eighteen • certainly are some problems on this property. However, whether they are of such a magnitude they would justify this R-2 development is, in my opinion, questionable, However, I look at some of these things probably in a different light, I think multiple dwellings belong more in an area where there is heavier traffic and there are more problems than what you would find here where they are related more to the terrain and topography than anything else. There is no question in my mind but that this is a beautiful development. I would like to see something like this in the City, I think Council- man Towner expressed everything that was good about it, I think this R-2 was a special zoning set up, This is in an area that is not on any busy street, I don't know what might happen to Sunset Hill Drive in the way of a traffic flow; I don't think it could become a through street or a heavily travelled street, There are certainly some beautiful homes surrounding the property, However, I don't think that this development would detract from these homes, I hesitate to start putting something like this out in an area of this nature, I think I would have to think quite a while before I could go along with something like this at this time, Mayor Barnes: I compliment Mr. Smith on his architectural design. I think •there are places in the City where we could use such a design but in this particular area surrounded by Rml homes I don't think is the place. This is strictly a high-class Rml development in this area, I think we would be amiss if we developed an apartment or condominium in this area because already Mr. Sneed has indicated he would ask for zoning if this came in and I am sure Mr. Saunders would like to be treated likewise with his adjacent property, I wouldn't be for this type of zoning in this area, Councilman Towner' I hope that as a result of our discussion here and the pre- sentation made to us that we are able now to sit down and set out some guide lines on the use of this new R-2 zoning, I can understand Dr, Snyder's reluctance here, Councilman Snyder: The thing is to be fair under the ordinance,. This developer certainly has a right to ask for this and the burden regarding the zoning, the precise plan aside, is to show that this is a difficult piece of property and I don't think he realized that in presenting his case, I think I have been satisfied by my questions that they probably cannot show that this would not fall within the category of a difficult piece of property, I don't think it is the precise plan that made me reluctant but -I want to add my voice to those who commented on it, It is a beautiful plan. It shows a great deal of attention to detail and care for the property and I hope you find • a place to put it somewhere in the City, I think the fact that the neighboring property might come in and ask for the same thing should not have anything to do with our decision, This property might have a problem; their's might not. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that Zone Change No, 280 be granted as R®1, a". C, C, 12/23/63 GEMITE ® Continued Page Nineteen • Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that Zone Variance No, 470 and Precise Plan of Design No, 389 be denied, i. VARIANCE N0, 473 LOCATION; 342, 344 and 346 North Don Casler Azusa between Rowland APPROVED and Workman, Request to permit a non -conforming sign in Zone C®1 approved by Planning Commission on December 4, 1963, Resolution No. 1505, Appealed by applicant on December 6, 19630 Mayor Barnes- This is the time and place for the public hearing, IN FAVOR Mr, Donald Casler The restrictions placed upon us 1733 Alaska Street were identical to those placed on West Covina Mr, LaBerge°s property. We have a Cml zoning which is higher than LaBergeas R-P, There is a 10-foot setback for LaBerge°s property and 70 feet for mine. The number of stores to be identified by the 75 square feet of sign area approved for LaBerge were three stores and I will have five. The maximum sign space allowed by the sign ordinance in zone R-P is 75 square feet and in Zone C-1 it is 200 square feet, I have $20000 worth of signs on my building, My problem is I can't see the logic or the good business sense in taking down this much value in signs when actually used the signs are worthless, I would like to be able to leave the signs existing now, The building I will be constructing on Thelborn on the same lot, there is nothing wasted there, I do need something to denote the businesses back there, Originally I asked for 240 square feet of sign area. I have been able to cut it down to where I would still be able to see the signs to 24 square feet per sign, five signs, which would be 120 square feet, If you would approve leaving the signs that are there and restrict me for putting any signs on the new building in back, that is fine with me,. There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed, Councilman Heath- I would like to hold this hearing open. I think our sign ordinance is way too restrictive. I have a number of questions. I would like to view the area, I would like to find out why we would take the signs off the front of his building and allow all the rest of the buildings along the area to have signs on the front. I would also like to clarify in my own mind what consists of an area of a sign, •With the permission of the applicant I would like to hold this over and review it and look at the site, Mayor Barnes- Mr, Joseph, what is the square footage allowed in C®1 per business on the front of the building? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph- Two for one up to 200 square feet maximum placed parallel with the building, m19- C, C, 12/23/63 Page Twenty VARIANCE NO, 473 - Continued . Mayor Barnes: i Are there any areas in the City where all of the signs now placed on the buildings in a C-1 area conform? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: Mayor Barnes: Planning Director, Mr, Joseph. - Mayor Barnes: Planning Director, Mr, Joseph2 Mayor Barnes: I believe they do for the most part, Do- we"-`h'Ave °other C-1 areas that have this type of sign and still have the signs on the building? Yes, we do, Is this property all C-l? Yes, It looks to me like we could resolve this question tonight, Mr, Donald Casler: If I was allowed the 24 square feet per sign this would be the gross because it would have to be right together but I intend on having at least three inches clearance inbetween the signs because otherwise they would look like one big blob. I am talking about actual sign space, Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: The Planning Commission's resolu- tion I think was explicit on this. They counted the usable area for the 75 square feet. They did not count any air between, Councilman Snyder: Is the ordinance or code clear on whether you count air area or not? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph:Yes. In the last several years the Planning Commission has made a fairly liberal interpretation of this, Councilman Snyder: Is the sign area more in C-1 than in R- P? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: The way of computing it is identical; it is still two for one, In the R-P zone it happens to have a maximum of 75 square feet and in the C-1 zone it is 200 square feet, Councilman Towner: buildings, Are they C-1 zoned? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: Councilman Towner: Councilman Jett: The Varney Center has a free standing sign and signs on the Yes, How many stores does he have in his center? I think he has about six but he plans more, -20- • • C� C, C, 12/23/63 VARIANCE NO, 473 ® Continued Page Twenty -One Councilman Heath.- I still think there are a lot questions I would have to have answered before I can vote honestly and be fair with this man and I don°t think I can do it until I see the site, I think it should held over for two weeks. During that time we can get all the statistics we want. Councilman Snyder. - Councilman Towner. - Azusa Avenue, The Varney property to the front of their stores,, of I don't see that there are any questions that can't be handled by the staff. Apparently there are detached perpendicular signs along North has an attached parallel signs be Planning Director, Mr. Joseph.- The Planning Commission has been adopting the policy that when you have a shopping center they have been adopting these detached signs. They determined in Varney�s that three hundred and something square feet on a street with that number of stores would constitute a shopping center. Councilman Jett. - sign. This sets back quite a way. anything. I think this is not an unreasonable - request to have an identifying I don°t see where it would hurt Councilman Towner.- Mr, LaBerge was given considera- tion because of his particular problems and Mr, Varney had certain problems and he was given considera- tion, I think the particular problem Mr. Casler has is that he has about the same number of stores as Varney but he goes around a corner and sets back so he can't be seen readily on Azusa Avenue, I think he sets somewhere inbetween LaBerge and Varney. If he will be satisfied with a smaller sign as he indicated I think he would have just grounds for a variance and leave only those signs presently in existance on the building, Mr, Donald Casler.- That would be just fine. Councilman Heath.- You would not put a sign on the building on Thelborn? Mr, Donald Casler.- The rear part of my property is only 95 feet away from residential property. It would probably be better for the neighbors to leave the sign off of Thelborn because it may infringe on the property rights of the people on LaBreda. There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed. Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that Variance No. 473 be approved subject to the conditions of the Planning Commission deleting Condition No. 5; that the total square footage of the sign shall be limited to 120 square feet; further that this is in lieu of any other new signs in connection with the building, -21- C, C, 12/23/63 HEARINGS -_ Continued • PROPOSED AMENDMENTS NO, 59 AND 60 Page Twenty -Two Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that Proposed Amendment No, 59 and Proposed Amendment No,, 60 be moved back in the agenda and the Council. now go to oral communications, Mrs,, Natalie Gomper 1214 West Devers West Covina ORAL COMMUNICATIONS RUMFORD ACT (Presented evidence to the City Clerk re Proposed Amendment No, 59. to be heard later.) Mayor Barnes.- We received a letter that there were three gentlemen who wished to speak this evening, I would like to limit this to 15 minutes for each side,, There will be no rebuttal on this, City Clerk, Mr,, Flotten.- (Read letter dated December 17, 1963 addressed to the Council •re the Rumford Act and signed by Keith F. Shirey, Housing Committee Community Human Relations Council of West Covina and La Puente,) Mr, Immanuel Feldman.- I am the president of the West Covina Coordinating Council, I will speak on behalf of the Federation of Community Coordinating Councils as well, I have a letter sent to me dated December 99 1963 re this matter„ What is the Rumford Fair Housing Act'? It is a law against discrimination in housing, It forbids such discrimination in the sale, rental, lease or financing of housing under certain conditions and establishes methods of preventing and remedying violations. The law was needed that minority groups have been excluded from many of the residential areas, The Rumford Act encourages disbursal of minority groups throughout the general population, There are similar laws in many other states, The landlord or owner is free to establish any policies or specifications that he wants,, Who supports the Rumford Act? The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors; the San Francisco Board of Realtors; Southern California Council of Churches; the La Mirada Ministeral Association; Los Angeles County Commission on Human Relations; the Richmond, California City Council; the City Council of Berkley; the Palo Alto Board of Realtors; the San Francisco Junior Chamber of Commerce; the Bar Association of Mountain View and Sunnyvale; the California Committee for Fair Practice; and many more, We urge you to add your moral support in a resolution sup- porting the Rumford Act which, in effect, is tied to the greatest moral crises that is facing the nation today, Mr, Albert Jordan 1623 East Francisquito West Covina for this opportunity to appear Relations Council of La Puente I am a citizen of West Covina,, I'am the representative from the Human Relations Council of West Covina, I am deeply appreciative before you on behalf of the Human and West Covina, I am honored to -22- C. Ca 12/23/63 RUMFORD ACT - Continued Page Twenty -Three speak to you on a subject of current interest and concern,, the 1963 California Fair Housing Law or the Rumford Act, sometimes referred to as Assembly Bill 1240. I appeal to you to resolve to support the Rumford Act along with the government of our State,, many State legislators and the County Board of Supervisors, Your support will implement the American dream of the promise of justice, equality,, and pursuit of happiness. Todav in the housing markets there are over three million California citizens that suffer some significant degree of discrimination because of their ethnic,, religion or national background. Your endorsement of fair housing will support and substantiate the belief of some of the citizenry of this progressive community who believe this is a•City with a fair look and respect for all people to live with dignity in a community of their choice. All people with the ability to pay are entitled to the equal opportunity to rent or buy a home, We hope this community shall exist for free men regardless of race,, color, or creed and not for a selected few. If the Rumford Act is given a fair trial it would be a break -through for minority group members who never lose faith in the ultimate decency of the American people. Mr. Ralph Michaels I am a minister of the Community 1629 East Verness Avenue Presbyterian Church and I am . West Covina here to represent the West Covina Ministerial Association. Because we believe that the realtors° initiative petitions are dangerously misleading and do injustice to the integrity of the group sponsoring them and because our nation has long held human rights over property rights and if successful they would freeze segregation into the State Constitution,, therefore the West Covina Ministerial Association wishes to voice its believe (1) that no person can be completely free and no person can be morally sound if he attempts to gain a position of privilege at the expense of his fellow man; (2) that this initiative action insofar as it pits race against race is contrary to the spirit of the Bible and an offense against God. Mr,, Bill Lane; I am the president elect of the We have two speakers this evening,,Covina Valley Board of Realtors. Mr. Phil Yaeger What kind of person is he? He 2245 Walnut Creek Parkway wants to run his own business; he West Covina wants to choose his own doctor; he wants to make his own bargain; he wants to buy his own insurance; he wants to provide for his own old age; he wants to make his own contracts; he wants to select his own charities; he wants to educate his children as he wishes; he • wants to select his own friends; he wants to provide for his own education; he wants to grow by his own efforts and he wants to profitfrom his own mistakes; he wants to be a man of good will; he wants to take part in the competition of ideas. What kind of a '' person is he? He is an American who believes and understands the Declaration of Independence. Don't you wonder why some of our fellow Americans are trying so hard to destroy the kind of life that has made us the envy of every other people on earth? In California =23= Ca C,, 12/23/63 RUMFORD ACT ® Continued Page Twenty -Four Mour representatives in Sacramento have put into law legislation entitled the Rumford Act. This is the law of our State,, It was passed under extreme political. pressure that included even the sight of demonstrators that at one time blocked the doors to the Senate Chamber,, The Rumford Act imposes penalties on property owners who refuse to sell, rent, or lease to individuals for reasons of race, creed, color, or national origin,, The police power is removed from the courts,, A Fair Employement Practice Commission is appointed by the government,, While the alleged discrimination is being investigated, you can be stopped from renting or selling to anyone else by a Superior Court Freeze Order,, If the Commission decides that there was discrimination it can order you to rent or sell to the plaintiff,, It can order you to pay as fine $500 if you do not comply,, A most interesting point of this law other than those just stated is that the $500 fine is awarded to the complaining party as damages,, These are the essential parts of the law. As law-abiding citizens we must comply with this law even though the result provides a lever of discrimination in the hands of those who have complained the most about being discriminated against,, Under the law the defendant is not assumed innocent until proven guilty; immediate action is taken against him as if he were guilty,, In most cases the battle is won by the plaintiff because he has entered a written complaint, whether justified or not. The alleged violator is coerced into submission through blackmail even though innocent,, Its result is class •legislation creating specific privileges for chosen groups,, It destroys private property rights for others,, It forces a property owner to deal against his will,, As realtors we believe that the public should be made aware of the repercussions of this law,, We do not wish to interpret all of the details of this Act,, Our purpose is only to educate. As realtors we wish to live within the bounds of all laws desired by the citizens of this State,, However, the California Real Estate Association and member realtors, the California.Home Builders and California Apartment Owners Association believe that the citizens of California should have the privilege to decide by democratic vote whether or not they wish restrictions placed upon the sale, rental, or lease of their property,, We believe that the citizens should have the right to decide upon whether they want a government of men ruling by ambition and emotion or whether they want a government of law to be applied through the courts,, The California Real Estate Association therefore has prepared an initiative proposal which will allow the issue to be brought to popular vote. Petitions are available and your signatures along with other California citizens will allow it to be brought to the people for vote. You and I. along with other free -thinking Americans, must always guard our rights if we are to remain free. Our purpose is not to tell you how to vote but to give you the right to independently decide on such important legislation,, We are not fighting for discrimination; we strongly believe in the equal rights of people but that right includes the right of free Americans to choose,, We, as realtors, are taking a protective stand so that this government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from this earth,, Rev, David C,, Brown; I am Secretary of the American 10714 Victory Boulevard Council of Christian Churches, North Hollywood I am Pastor of the Bible Presbyterian Church, North Hollywood,, I am here tonight to support my views in opposition to the Rumford Act, We take this position for several reasons. First is we believe in -24- C, Ca 12/23/63 Page Twenty -Five RUMFORD ACT - Continued . the democratic processes of government which includes the right of iniative and referendum. We believe the people have a right to vote and that they should be allowed to vote on this issue. Perhaps basic in our position is that of the moral law of God, I believe the Ten Commandments, I believe the Bible. I would like to take exception to some of the statements made by my opponent, that human rights are above property rights, The right of the individual to own property is a human right and is basic to all other human rights and we cannot say that human rights, therefore, are above property rights,, Further, I believe that the Rumford Act is a dangerous step toward a police state. In the Act the words "police power" are used, We believe it is a violation of the principle of freedom of religion, What is the solution? The solution to combating these social injustices that have been spoken of tonight are not in legislation; it is in preaching the Bible and the gospel of Jesus Christ and changing the heart of man and, therefore, allowing him to love his neighbor, This is the answer and the solution, The Rumford Act limits the right of a property owner to select on the basis of religion and I submit to you that this is a violation of freedom of religion and that the owner of a property should have the right before God to rent only to those of his religion if he so chose,, It is my opinion that this act is contrary to the spirit of the Bible and it is an offense to God, • Mayor Barnes: In this Bill, under Chapter 5, would it be legal for this City Council to enter into any...decision of this type or a resolution as asked for by these gentlemen in either case, one way or the other? When you get into State jurisdiction and something that has already passed by the State and there is a referendum, I hesitate to do this because I don°t think the City has any jurisdiction at all, City Attorney, Mr, Williams: The section you have referred to is a section that states that the State Legislature has preempted this field which means it is no longer of concern to the cities of the State, Legally, I would say you would be violating a law if you adopted a resolution or took a position on this, The law is this firm, However, a City is pre- cluded from spending any public money of the City for or against a measure which is pre-empted by the State and is not of municipal concern, This is not a municipal affair, Undoubtedly there are many meritorious bills introduced in the Legislature and many that are not meritorious and there is no doubt in my mind that there are many bills introduced in the Congress of the United States which are meritorious and many which are not, but it isn°t the elected duty of you people to determine which of the bills introduced are deserving of support and which are not unless they relate directly to municipal affairs and this does not relate to municipal affairs and the State Legislature has expressly declared that it does not, • This is Chapter 5, Section 35743, Councilman Jett: I think we have heard both sides of this story, I would like to thank them for coming in and giving their views, Councilman Snyder: This refusal to act is not that we are refuting that which you are fighting for; we are not taking any stand at all. I think it is -25- Co C, 12/23/63 Page Twenty -Six RUMFORD ACT - Continued a grievous thing that nice people that are on both sides of this problem should be split over a problem like this, I hope in the debate to come that you will attempt to remain objective and not develop any personal animosities, Councilman Towner: I think we have had a good, although briefs presentation by both sides, There appears to be some confusion as to just what is going on here, There is no referendum; there is an initiative, The Real Estate Association is proposing and supporting an initiative which will change the State Constitution, The Rumford Act is State Legislation passed by the State Legislature, I think when people consider these matters they should consider whether or not they want the initiative that they propose and they want it in the Constitution, I haven°t read that and I would like to have a copy of that. Secondly, the City of West Covina has in the past and with my support and encouragement and of the other members of the Council and will continue in the future to encourage cooperation by community agencies such as the Ministerial Association and the Real Estate Board where these problems of discrimination or race relations come up, we have had a good experience in the past, I think if these people remain objective about it that we will have good experiences in the future, CITY CLERKS REPORTS RESOLUTION N0, 2823 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" (Bassett Glendora Ave.) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Jett, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 2823, -26- • r� U C, C,. 12/23/63 Page Twenty -Seven CITY CLERK'S REPORTS m Continued PROJECT C-60-1 LOCATION- Glendora and Vincent from APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS Christopher Street STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND northerly to Walnut Creek TRAFFIC SIGNALS Wash, APPROVED Approve plans and specifications for Project C®20-1, Authorize City Engineer to call for bids, Estimate $409001,83, Budgeted items under State Gas Tax and Traffic Safety Funds, Staff recommends approval and authorization subject to State Division of Highways approval of plans and specifications, (A map was presented and Mr, Dosh gave a brief explanation of the matter,) Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, to approve the plans and specifications on Project C-60-1 and authorize the City Engineer to call for bids subject to the State Division of Highways approval of the plans and specifications, PROJECT C-162 ACCEPT STREET IMPROVEMENTS Louis Lopez and William Radkovich, Contractors LOCATION° Barranca and Cameron at South Hills High School site, APPROVED Accept street improvements and authorize release of Ohio Casualty and Insurance Co, performance bond No, 1090196 in the amount of $369009.22 (Louis Lopez, Principal); authorize release of General Insurance Co, of America performance bond No, 472277 in the amount of $2,000,00 (Wm, Radkovich, Principal), Inspector's final report on file. Staff recommends acceptance and release of bond. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, and carried, to accept street improvements in Project C-162 and authorize the release of the Ohio Casualty and Insurance Company Performance Bond No, 1090196 in the amount of $36,009.22 (Louis Lopez, Principal); and authorize the release of General Insurance Company of America Performance Bond No, 472277 in the amount of $2,000.00 (William Radkovich, Principal), TRACT NO, 27665 LOCATION: North of Valley Boulevard ACCEPT STREET, SANITARY SEWER, at Morganfield Avenue, AND STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS William M, Pickering Accept street, sanitary sewer and APPROVED storm drain improvements, Authorize release of Security Insurance Co, bonds as follows° No, 57/4187/0036/63 in the amount of $121,000.00 m Sanitary Sewers, No, 57/4187/0037/63 in the amount of $214,000.00 - Excavation and grading, No, 57/4187/0038/63 in the amount of $215,000.00 - Street improvements, Subject to receipt of a substitute bond in amount of $5,000,00 for minor clean-up, repairs, and construction of storm drain headwall, Inspector's final report on file, Staff recommends acceptance and release of bond on receipt of substitute bond, -27- i n U is C, C, 12/23/63 TRACT NO, 27665 W Continued Page Twenty -Eight Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, to accept street, sanitary sewer, and storm drain improvements in Tract No, 27665; that upon the receipt of a substitute bond in the amount of $59000.00 for minor clean-up, repairs, and construction of storm drain headwall the following Security Insurance Company bonds be released: No,, 57/4187/0036/63 in the amount of $121,000.00 ® Sanitary Sewers; No,, 5'7/4187/0037/63 in the amount of $214,000,00 ® Excavation and grading; and No, 57/4187/0038/63 in the amount of $215,000.00 ® Street improve- ments, PRECISE PLAN NO, 377 6 PROJECT SoPo6415 LOCATION.- Southwest corner of ACCEPT STREET AND STORM DRAIN Glendora and Walnut IMPROVEMENTS Creek Parkway. Citrus National Bank Crowell 6 Larson Accept street and storm drain APPROVED improvements and authorize release of Aetna Insurance Co,, performance bond No. S-509914 in the amount of $8,000,00. Inspectors final report on file. Staff.recommends acceptance and release of bond. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded to accept the street and strom drain Design No, 377 and Project S.P.6415 Aetna Insurance Company Performance of $89000.00. PRECISE PLAN NO. 332 ACCEPT SIDEWALK AND DRIVEWAY IMPROVEMENTS by Councilman Jett, and carried, improvements in Precise Plan of and authorize the release of Bond No,, S-50Y914 in the amount LOCATION.- West side of Sunset north of Badillo. David Hull Accept sidewalk and driveway APPROVED improvements.- Authorize release of Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. bond No, 33 S-55914 in the amount of $500.00. Inspectors final report on file, Staff recommends acceptance and release of bond. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, to accept the sidewalk and driveway imrpovements in Precise Plan of Design No. 322 and authorize release of Aetna Casualty and Surety Company Bond No. 33 S-55914 in the amount of $5.00.00. PROPOSED 1964 WEED AND RUBBISH ABATEMENT PROGRAM Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, to accept the weed and rubbish abatement program proposed by the City Engineer and authorize the City Staff to proceed for bids. ME C. C. 12/23/63 CITY ATTORNEY • ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION Page Twenty -Nine The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMEND- ING THE PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING CHAPTER OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE R-3 ZONE" City Attorney, Mr. Williams- There should be a motion that for six months it will be your'policy to initiate on your own motion in those cases where a hardship would be made because of the change. Councilman Towner: This hardship would appear by the applicant giving us some kind of request? City Attorney, Mr. Williams: I think the applicant will still have to carry the burden of proof in a hearing,, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, that it be •the policy of this Council that in a case where it is indicated there is a hardship being imposed on a property owner where previously he had high density and by the inclusion of this new R-3 he has been cut down to 25 units this constitutes a hardship and the City will initiate the rezoning but he will still have to prove or justify the rezoning,, Planning Director, Mr. Joseph: You have a grandfather clause in this ordinance,, The time limit has been set at six months. Councilman Towner: Your statement that it is a hard- ship just by reason of the change, I donBt think that that alone establishes hardship. City Attorney, Mr. Williams: If it turned out that the property on each side of him had been built to 20 units I would say there was no hardhip even though he formerly had a zone that could have gone to 40. You're going to take into consideration all the facts, not just the fact that he had the previous zone. Councilman Heath: I will withdraw my motion and make a new one. Councilman Jett: I will withdraw my second,, IMotion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that it be the policy of this Council that the City shall initiate upon the request of the property owner a zone change where the property owner previously had a high density zoning but by the inclusion of the new R-3 he has been cut down to 25 units instead of the 40 units allowed under the previous R-3. (Councilman Snyder voted "No".) -29- 0 • C, Co 12/23/63 Page Thirty ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION - Continued Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Towner, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance, Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that said ordinance be introduced. HEARINGS PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO, 59 Request to amend the West Covina City Initiated Municipal Code as to those sections .DELETED relating to the amending of residential zone classifications R-2 and R-3, Held over from November 12, 1963, City Attorney, Mr, Williams: This item should be deleted, Mayor Barnes: Let the Minutes show we have seen the pictures presented by Mrs, Gomper, This item will be deleted, 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, to September 23, to October 14, to November 12, to this date. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, that Proposed Amendment No, 60 be held over to the second meeting in January of 1964, PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF SLIGHT MODIFICATION NO, 20 City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: This is mainly for your information, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, to approve Slight Modification No, 20, RECREATION 6 PARKS None -30- 0 • • C. Ca 12/23/63 CITY ATTORNEY ® Continued ORDINANCE N0. 836 ADOPTED Page Thirty -One The City Attorney presented: "PAN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMEND- ING SECTION 9222.9 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO TIME FOR APPEAL FROM DECISIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION" Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Jett, that said ordinance be introduced. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None Said ordinance was given No. 836. ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMEND- ING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO REZONE CERTAIN PREMISES" (ZC 277, Empire Financial Corp. Rm2) Councilman Heath: I mentioned to the Council last meeting that I thought they were putting restrictions on builders to a point where they are going to drive them out of the City. In talking about this R-2 to some developers, there are very very limited places where this can be used because of the fact that it doesn't pay. About the only place you can use this Rm2 is maybe in a redevelopment program in the west end of the City. On this peice of property I know that it can't be developed economically if you restrict this to ten units. The precise plan they had called for 14.5 units. The way the Rm2 used to be was 15 units. In this particular project you're talking 20 more units on a five -acre piece. I would like to give this a second thought and review this to see if we can't change the number of units or adopt their precise plan because it was a good precise plan. City Attorney, Mr. Williams: If this ordinance goes through it becomes R®2. You could amend the Rm2 now to change the number of units allowed peracre9 the R-2 Ordinance. Or, they could take the R-2 and ask for a variance and keep the precise plan open until the variance is acted on, the variance for the number of units permitted per acre. Councilman Heath: The vote at the hearing was an indication to you on how to draw up the ordinance, that was not the final action. They asked for R®3. We can grant R®3 without another public hearing in lieu of this? City Attorney, Mr. Williams: Yes. That would give them 25 units per acre. -31- C, C, 12/23/63 ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION - Continued Page Thirty -Two • Councilman Heath: Can we grant R-3 to be effective when a precise plan is approved showing not more than 15 units per acre? City Attorney, Mr, Williams: You can but it is meaningless because they don't have to develop that precise plan. Councilman Snyder: Regarding this property, I think they did have a good precise plan, I didn't vote for R-3 because I think that is too dense but I don't think that the R-2 particularly fits the intent of the R-2 in that area, I would not object to your having 14 units under the precise plan they filed if we can find a way to do it under the ordinance, Mayor Barnes: I didn't like the two stories, Councilman Snyder: The new precise plan met all the requirements of the R-2 except density, Councilman Towner: This seems to me the kind of thing that throws a development into a turmoil, I had thought we were on a program that was going • to settle it down so a developer could look at the ordinance and see what he is entitled to and look at the Council and see they were going to stick to it. If we do that then the developers will know what they can expect here. Now, you have encouraged speculation; you encourage overspending for land by indicating to developers that if they tried hard enough they can get a change, Councilman Heath: I don't think that is necessarily true, Councilman Snyder: There is nothing obnoxious about u this plan with the 14 density, I don t think by allowing it you're defeating the purpose of the R-2 ordinance because they meet all the requirements otherwise, Councilman Towner: Why shouldn't they meet that requirement, too? The only argument that they should not meet it is that it is worth more to them to do it the other way; it is economically more feasible and yet we have testimony by a successful developer of R-2 type develop- ments, City Attorney, Mr, Williams: If you draw an ordinance too strict you're not going to force developers into compliance, All you°re going to do is force a flood of requests for variances, It seems to me the basic thing to be • decided is what is the right number that is sufficiently strict to achieve your development but not so strict that everybody who wants to develop in that zone is going to have to ask for a variance, When this ordinance was drawn at ten units, R-3 was drawn at 20 units, R-2 was half -way to R-3. You have changed R-3 to 25 units, If you are going to split the R-2 in the same fashion between R-1 and R-3 which is exactly the way you did it, the way it was originally drawn, if you split it would now be 12 1/2, -32- C, Ca 12/23/63 Page Thirty -Three ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION - Continued • Councilman Snyder; I think the 25 was put in there as a compromise because we couldn't get a vote on the 20 units per acre, C� Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Towner, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance, Councilman Heath-, I'll introduce the ordinance, Councilman Jett-, Let the record show that I abstained from the discussion in this matter, City Attorney, Mr, Williams-, This ordinance could not become effective until the first week in February or so, If you filed for a variance now it could be in effect as soon as you could get the R-3 ordinance into effect, ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented-, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMEND- ING SECTIONS 9219,14 AND 9219.15 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS" Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, that said ordinance be introduced, ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented-, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINAA REPEALING ORDINANCE NO, 820 AND SECTION 9202,2,15 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE" Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, that said ordinance be introduced, (Councilmen Jett and Heath voted "No",) -33- C, Co 12/23/63 CITY ATTORNEY-- Continued • RESOLUTION NO, 2824 ADOPTED 0 • Mayor Barnes.- Page Thirty -Four The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA DENYING A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE AND PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN" (Sugar) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, that said resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 2824, RESOLUTION NO, 2825 ADOPTED Mayor Barnes: The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA CHANGING THE NAME OF ROOT STREET TO PUENTE AVENUE" 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 Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 2825, RESOLUTION NO, 2826 ADOPTED Mayor Barnes: The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA CHANGING THE NAME OF RAMONA BOULEVARD TO SAN BERNARDINO ROAD" 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 Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 2826, —34— • 0 • Ca Ca 12/23/63 CITY ATTORNEY ® Continued RESOLUTION Mayor Barnes: RESOLUTION NO,, 2827 ADOPTED Mayor Barnes, Page Thirty -Five The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA CHANGING THE NAME OF CENTER STREET FROM VALLEY BOULEVARD FROM ITS NORTHERLY TERMINATION THEREOF TO SENTOUS AVENUE" We will. hold this until we get clearance from the County. The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECOMMENDING LEGISLATION WHICH WOULD PERMIT SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO PAY EXPENSES INCURRED FOR SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD PROTECTION" 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 Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No,, 2827. ZONE CHANGE NO,, 266 James Councilman Heath: We have a letter from Francis J. Garvey concerning the procedure on Zone Change No. 266, the James property,, (Mr. Flotten read said letter,,) (Mr,, Flotten read a letter from Mr,, Arthur James re this matter,,) City Attorney, Mr,, Williams: It seems Mr,, James has complained about your considering something since the event,, You are not bound to change the zone by the vote you tc%ck at the conclusion of the hearing and no court will make you change it,, The included zone of Rm2, which is an included use in R-3 until the new R®3 ordinance that was just introduced and which goes into effect,, I think the question is not a technical one,, It simply is.do you want the Rm3 or not,, Mr,, Francis Jo Garvey: After I had written that letter there came to my desk the Weekly Law Digest and in the case of Johnson vs,, the Council of Santa Cruz it was expressly held that the mere fact that the Council changes its mind for reason known to itself after it has adopted the resolution but before it acts on the ordinance is not binding,, -35- n LJ C, C, 12/23/63 ZONE CHANGE NO, 266 (JAMES) - Continued Page Thirty -Six Councilman Snyder: Regarding the offer of dedication, do we have any proof that Mr, James can legally make this offer? Does he own the land and is this binding forever on this property? Councilman Heath: That is subject to getting the zoning, City Attorney, Mr, Williams: It isn't legally forcible but I think you can depend upon it. You can't make a promise in exchange for zoning. Since there is no consideration for the promise it is not legally enforcible, Councilman Snyder: One of my stated reasons was going from R-4 to R-2 the street pattern was not adequate to handle the density in that area, It seems to me this is a way of solving the problem of widening the street, City Attorney, Mr, Williams: You could state the zone change would be effective if and when the street is such and such a width and improved or whatever the condition is, • Councilman Snyder: I am convinced that we are going to have to have a major highway off of the freeway connecting with the Covina Ranch eventually and this is one of the only spots that such a highway can go and this is one way of getting it, I can see no real objection to R-3 here, City Attorney, Mr, Williams: You have passed the ordinance zoning the James property R-2 and you have passed the amendment of the R-2 zone, The James property on the 8th of January will be R-2 and it will be under the new restrictions of the R-2. They can file over again and bring up the widening of the street business but this present procedure is over as far as I'm concerned, Councilman Towner: Councilman Heath; Councilman Snyder: It seems to me we acted on the best information known to us at the time. There is nothing in this letter from Mr. Garvey for us that we can act on? I think we should have a public hearing. This is new evidence, Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the letters from Mr, Francis J. Garvey and Mr, Arthur L. James re Zone Change No, 266 be placed on file, LEGAL CLAIM City Attorney, Mr, Williams: We have a claim for $61,95 from a Mr, Allen Bornstein who says his daughter slipped on loose gravel in the street in front of 825 Delsaro, He wants out -of -the -pocket expenses, -36- Co Co 12/23/63 LEGAL CLAIM - Continued • Motion by that this carrier,, Page Thirty -Seven Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, claim by Mr,, Allen Bornstein be referred to the insurance COMPLAINT - LEWIS WILLIAM McCREARY City Attorney, Mr,, Williams-. We have a Complaint served 12/23/63, Lewis William McCrear•y,,alleging aninjury in the Little League, suing for $25,000 damages,, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that this complaint by Mr,, Lewis William McCrearybe referred to the insurance carrier,, CHAMBER BUSINESS WESTERN MISSIONARY ARMY City Attorney, Mr,, Williams-. This is regarding the Western Missionary Army,, It was .brought up several weeks ago by Mr. Tambe and it was dropped to see what happened,, It seems the activities have not entirely diminished,, I •think the City Clerk should have a protection against issuing it and I would suggest based upon the information contained in this letter you adopt a motion instructing the City Clerk not to issue a new application for 1964 and if an application is made that it be referred to the City Council,, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the City Clerk be instructed not to.issue a new. -application for 1964 for the Western Missionary Army; that if an application is made that it be referred to the City Council,, CITY CLERK RECREATION & PARKS COMMISSION City Clerk, Mr,, Flotten: We have a request for permission to attend the Recreation and Parks Society on February 23 through 26 and to acquire one room at the hotel for Commissioners" use while attending said conference,, City Manager, Mr,, Aiassa-. This is'budgeted,, They will commute but they would like a room, is Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Heath, that the Recreation and Parks Commission be authorized to make the expenditure outlined above. Motion passed on roll call as follows-. Ayes-. Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None -37- n U • Co Ca 12/23/63 CITY CLERK ® Continued RALPH'S ® ZODY'S Page Thirty -Eight City Clerk, Mr,, Flotten-, I have a letter signed by McNeal, Kritchevsky and Balcoff regarding the conditions existing at Ralph's Grocery Store,, (Read said letter.) Councilman Snyder: This should be referred to the staff for corrective measure,, Councilman Heath-, I have been up in this area. We had a fence put up on the boundary line between Ralph's and Zody's which has been partly effective. They have knocked it down,, The problem is even more than this. It was the intent of the Council to provide that there be no trucks on the west side of the building,, I think thse people nave been decent citizens. These people were beaten in a referendum and yet they came back with a cooperative spirit,, These people have lived with these trucks underneath their windows and I think we should stand by our intentions at this time and be fair with these people,, I think they have been plenty fair with us. Mayor Barnes-, I agree,, I think we had better do something about this administratively,, Councilman Snyder-, Obviously something needs to be done but obviously the police or Bun 2annot year in and year out go up there all the time to see if there is a violation. We have to find another solution to making Zody's and Ralph's comply,, Ithink the staff should come up with a recommendation to give a final solution to this problem so it doesn't happen any more. Councilman Heath-, I think it is up to the Council to do it,, Councilman Snyder-, If we can arrive at an alternate, fine, but maybe the staff has an idea so let's both work on the problem,, City Manager, Mr. Aiassa-, I think we can give you an answer if the council will back us up, I can have it for you on the 30th and in the meantime we will patrol it a little bit,, Mr. Gene Kritchevskys The last time I was here prior to the time the fence was put up I pointed out the fence would be put where they did put it instead of the point just south of the loading dock which would have taken into account the intent of the Council as far as stopping the usage just south of the loading dock for the use of turning around and backing up the trailers and general unloading of trucks. Also it might be of interest to point out that Saturday I came home at 11:15 in the morning and I heard a familiar sound. In the space of five minutes I could hear two trucks going through. ' City Manager, Mr,, .Aiassa-, should have been made initially. This is still private property and I think the binding and control C, C, 12/23/63 RALPH'S m ZODY'S - Continued 1* Mayor Barnes: REQUEST OF MARCH OF DIMES TO CONDUCT ANNUAL SOLICITATION IN JANUARY, 1964 Page Thirty -Nine We will take this up on the 30th, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, and carried, that permission be granted to the March of Dimes to conduct their annual solicitation in January of 1964, APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO SOLICIT AND COLLECT HOUSEHOLD DISCARDS, OF RETARDED CHILDREN'S ASSOCIATION OF SAN GABRIEL VALLEY Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that permission be granted to the Retarded Children's Association of San Gabriel Valley to solicit and collect household discards, • ANNUITY AMENDMENT OCCIDENTAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY City Clerk, Mr, Flotten: (Read letter re this matter. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, and carried, that this matter be referred to the City Manager. RESOLUTION N0, 2828 ADOPTED Mayor Barnes: The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA SUPPORTING HOLIDAY SAFETY PROGRAM OF THE GREATER LOS ANGELES CHAPTER OF THE NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL" Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Towner, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 2828, ®39® • • • Ca C, 12/23/63 CITY MANAGER REPORTS MARTIN OIL COMPANY SIGN Page Forty (A map was presented and Mr, Joseph gave a brief summary of the matter,) Councilman Heath: The policy of prohibiting signs over public right of way was made after this gas station was installed, after the sign was installed, Planning Director, Mr. Joseph-. The policy has been in effect at the Planning Commission level for quite some time and they have been doing this whenever a person has come in for a sign variance; a condition has been don't hang the sign over the public right of way,, In October of 1963 the Planning Commission formalized by resolution their specific policy concerning service stations,, Councilman Snyder-. Doesn't our franchise with the telephone company give them exclusive right to the right of way above our right of way? City Attorney, Mr,, Williams - Councilman Snyder - Councilman Jett: Not exclusive; it is non-exclusive. It seems clear that it is not a good policy to allow signs over hanging your public right of way, What is wrong with a sign extending over? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph-. I think a sign extending over the right of way adjacent to a totally single family street and sticking its nose across the street is not right. I think appearance -wise, it is not very satisfactory, This is my personal opinion,, Councilman Jett: Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: Mr,, Houston-. What is it based on? Based upon experience of aesthetic considerations of the community,, It was instructed that it did not overhang the property. How we fixed it was our problem,, Councilman Heath-. It was suggested that this be rotated 90 degrees so the standard would be parallel with the street. If you rotate your standard so the standard goes north you put the sign over the concrete driveway,, What happens if you swing the standard so it goes south? Does it still go over City property? Mr, Houston; I don't think so but we would still have to turn the sign, I don't think it would still be over the right of way. No one ever. advised us that we shouldn't put that sign where it is now, We are not here asking for any special favors, All we want is an equal break with the others, -40- C, Co 12/23/63 MARTIN OIL COMPANY SIGN m Continued Councilman Heath: Page Forty -One Can we rotate the standard 90 degrees to the south? Councilman Snyder: I believe you were shown because the precise plan showed only a location which in reading the precise plan looked like it did not overhang but in reading the precise plan we could not know that the sign made a curve over it. What showed on the precise plan did not overhang the public right of way, Mayor Barnes: Councilman Snyder: Just because we have had mistakes there is no reason we should make more, I think those should be abated as they come up for changes, Councilman Jett: I can't see anything wrong with the sign the way it is, I think we would be prejudiced if we went ahead here and made these people conform, I cnink it would be making a hardship on them that we haven't required other companies to do, Councilman Snyder: I think we are not making an •exception of them; the policy had been set up previously. I don't think it is too difficult a job for them to comply. I feel it is very wrong to have signs over- hanging public right of way any more than necessary, Councilman Heath: I figure if it was easy to rotate the sign that this is what should be done; however, there is indication that they are going to have to go in and move their electrical work, move their concrete footing, Councilman Jett: I know the studs won't fit, I looked at that, Councilman Heath: If it could be easily moved I would say let's make them move it but if you're going into a major development, I think you're requiring the man to do something where other people are enjoying the same condition, Councilman Towner: We have had the ordinance since 1961 and since that time we have enforced it, I think whether you agree or disagree on aesthetic considerations you certainly would have to agree on safety considera- tions that we don't want them overhanging the public right of way, Mayor Barnes: I think if these people have to icomply that the one since the ordinance was enacted has to comply, too, Councilman Jett: If we compel this company to conform, what about the other people? -41- C, C, 12/23/63 Page Forty -Two MARTIN OIL COMPANY SIGN - Continued • City Attorney, Mr, Williams: If they were legal when they went in the only way you could make them conform is to put an amortization period on. You can't permit these people by a vote you take here, The only thing you can do is have an application to amend the variance because the variance has an express provision, the sign shall not overhang the right of way. You can't do anything about. -it tonight, They are in violation of the law until they file for an amendment and get it changed, Mayor Barnes: I don't think anything can be done if it is a condition of the variance, They have to comply, Mr, Houston: We have up until the 20th to know whether or not we have to move that sign, We gave them a notice to conform and set the conforming date a couple of days after this because we thought we might be able to change it, Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: We can extend the notice of conformance for 20 days from this date, 0 COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Councilman Towner: I have a letter from the South Hills Country Club which they call attention to the proposal pending before the County Planning Commission on development of the property south of the back nine on the Country Club, It is about 90 acres of property in there, There is a zone change request coming up December 31 and they requested support on opposing the zone change because it allows about three house sites per acre, I don't recommend that we oppose it if it conforms to what we have done but I think we should check our own action, particularly on the Hardy property,` and find out what we have done and if they are different, bringing it to the County Regional Planning Commission's attention, Councilman Heath: City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: up on Francisquito and Lark Ellen, your file, The case is No, 4646, We have a case coming up before the County Planning Commission You all have copies of that in Mayor Barnes: I think the Planning Commission • opposed it, Councilman Jett: The Planning Commission by sending a letter is now usurping policy from the Council. They are supposed to recommend to the Council, not to everybody in the country, Councilman Snyder: In most cases there isn't time, -4 2- C, C, 12/23/63 Page Forty -Three COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ® Continued 48 Mayor Barnes: On the bottom of their letter they say "This is not the Council action and does not express their feelings", City Attorney, Mr, Williams: They also have such administrative powers as you delegate to them, Councilman Towner: Our policy is they can write in response to the information from the Regional Planning Commission as long as they indicated this is a Planning Commission communication and not a Council communication and we were to be advised and given copies of the letters, They have followed that policy. If we want to do differently, we have to take further --action. Mayor Barnes: I think that we can always over- ride their action, Councilman Snyder: As long as they continue to include that it is the opinion of the Planning Commission I donit see anything wrong with it, • WATER PROBLEM City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: We had a preliminary meeting with James Mitzi who is one of the agents for the local planning group and Ernest Lee is going to meet with me tomorrow at ten and Mr. Jett and they are going to try to answer one provision of the questionnaire and then it is ready for filing. We have a time factor here because for the Boundary Commission to review it it will take two to three weeks and then it is returned to this agency. Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that Mr. Jett and the City Manager be authorized to make the presentation to the local annexation agency explaining our reasons for the proposal, (Councilman Snyder voted "No",) PALM VIEW PARK City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: Part of the Palm View Park, we prom sed the Church of Christ to pay them $2,625,00 by January 1, 1964, A warrant is being proposed so technically you could approve it, I want to bring it to your attention to authorize me to pay this, • Motion by Councilman Heath, seco,,,;ided by Councilman Jett., that the City Manager be authorized to pay $2,625.00 to the Church of Christ, Motion passed on roll call as fellows: Ayes: Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: None -43- .. �o Co Co 12/23/63 Page Forty -Four PALM VIEW PARK m Continued • City Manager, Mro Aiassa- We promised an option with Mr. McCall for $1193i4o We have to pay $1,OOO.00 by January 1 and another thousand on June 1st and pay him 6% intrest and Mro Kay figures it is a lot better for us to go ahead and, Ay the option, ,111 Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Towner, that the City Manager be authorized to consumatd this deal with Mr,, McCall for $119374000� Motion passed on roll call as follows- Ayes.- Councilmen Towner, JettQ Heath, Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes- None Absent- None TRAFFIC COMMITTEE City Manager, Mr,, Aiassa- I am going to give the Council the Traffic Committee Minutes for November 20 so you can have it for the next meeting. 0 DEMANDS Motion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Jett, to approve demands totalling $271,145.29 as listed on demand sheets B143, C355 and C356o This total includes fund transfers of $1489916006 and bank transfers of $1,350.50, Motion passed on roll call as follows- Ayes- Councilmen Towner, Jett, Heathy Snyder, Mayor Barnes Noes- None Absent, None There being no further business, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that this meeting be adjourned to December 30, 1963 at 8-00 P.M. The meeting was adjourned at 2-15 A.Ma 0 ATTEST - CITY CLERK APPROVED MAYOR -44-