Loading...
05-24-1964 - Regular Meeting - MinutesI f MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA May 25, 1964 • The regular meeting of the City Council was called to order by Mayor Snyder at 7:40 P.M. in the West Covina City Hall. Councilman Heath led the Pledge of Allegiance. The invocation was given by Rev. Robert Bergman of Our Savior Lutheran Church. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Snyder, Councilmen Krieger, Heath Others Present: Mr. George Aiassa, City Manager Mrs, Lela Preston, Deputy City Clerk Mr. Harry C. Williams, City Attorney (from 7:50 P.M.) Mr. John Q. Adams, Public Services Director Mr, Harold Joseph, Planning Director (from 8:00 P.M.) Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols YOUTH BENEFIT WEEK Councilman Heath: I think it would be fitting if • the Council would pay respects to the son of one of.our Councilman who has left us within the past few days, (So done). Mayor Snyder: I have a proclamation to make next week as Youth Benefit Week. This is done in memoriam for Dale Nichols and the family has asked that the funds contributed to the Dale Nichols Memorial Fund should go to the Teen -Kan -Teen Foundation in memoriam for him. If there are no objections, I will so proclaim. (There were none.) So proclaimed. PRESENTATION OF GAVEL Mayor Snyder: It is now my pleasure to present to the man who served on the Council for some eight years and as Mayor of this City for two years, this gavel. I would like to ask Claude Barnes to step. up here with us. (Presented gavel to Mr. Barnes); Mr. Claude Barnes: Thank you very much. This gavel is most gratifying to me and I will long remember all of the wonderful people that I met here in the City Council. Thank you very much, Doctor, and my thanks to the rest of the Council, r C, Ca 5/25/64 • APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 21, 1964 April 27, 1964 ) May 4, 1964 ) May 119* 1964 ) Page Two Held over, Approved as presented as follows: Councilman Krieger: We do not have a quorum of the Council present that sat at the meeting of April 21, 1964, Those should be held over, Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and - carried, that the Minutes of April 271 1964, May 4, 1964, and May 11, 1964 be approved as presented, I CITY CLERK'S REPORTS PRECISE PLAN NO, 293 LOCATION: North side of San ACCEPT STREET IMPROVEMENTS Bernardino Road, east Paul W, Thorsen of Azusa Canyon Road, APPROVED Accept street improvements • and authorize release of Pacific Employers Insurance Co, bond No, 01-B-88779 in the amount of $2,100,00, Staff recommends approval, • Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger,and carried, to accept street improvements in Precise Plan No,293 and authorize.release of Pacific Employers Insurance Company bond No, 01-B-88779 in the amount of $2,100,00. METES 6 BOUNDS SUBDIVISION NO, 135-204 LOCATION: .North Garvey Avenue, REQUEST TO EXTEND TIME TO east of Mockingbird FILE -FINAL MAP. Lane., Mrs, Hel-tn Raymond APPROVED Review request - Engineer's report - instruct City Engineer as to procedure, Staff recommends approval, City Manager, Mr; Aiassa: (Read report re this ratter,) Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, to extend the time to file the.final map in Metes and Bounds. Subdivision No, 135-204 from February,ll, 1964 to February 11, 1965 subject to such:Gonditions as may exist at this time. isRESOLUTION NO, 2929 ADOPTED The Deputy 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" (Bing T, Wong and Boy J. Wong) -2- • 0 C, C, 5/25/64 RESOLUTION NO, 2929 - Continued Mayor Snyder: Page Three Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Krieger,,: Heath, Mayor Snyder Noes: None Absents Councilmen Jett, Nichols Said resolution was given No. 2929, (Mr, Williams entered the chambers at 7:50 P,M.) RESOLUTION NO, 2930 ADOPTED Mayor Snyder: The Deputy 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" (PP 1579 Covina Valley Unified School District - Vincent School Site) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the' body of the resolution.. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said resolution'be adopted. Motion passed on'roll call as follows. - Ayes: Councilmen Krieger, Heath, Mayor Snyder Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols Said resolution was given No, 2930, RESOLUTION N0, 2931 ADOPTED Mayor Snyder: The Deputy 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" (Zone Variance No, 1949 Covina Valley Unified School District - Sunkist School Site) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, -3- r • C. C, 5/25/64 Page Four RESOLUTION NO, 2931 - Continued Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, that said resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Krieger, Heath, Mayor Snyder Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols Said resolution was given No, 2931, RESOLUTION NO, 2932 ADOPTED Mayor Snyder: The Deputy 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" (Zone Variance No, 167 - Covina Valley Unified School District - Grovecenter School Site) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, that said resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call- as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Krieger, Heath, Mayor Snyder Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols Said resolution was given No, 2932, RESOLUTION N0, 2933 ADOPTED Mayor Snyder: The Deputy 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" (Precise Plan No, 339 - Covina Valley Unified School District - South Hills High School Site) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. 0 Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, that said resolution be adopted,' Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Krieger, Heath, Mayor Snyder Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols Said resolution was given No, 2933, -4- r • r� • • Co Co 5/25/64 CITY CLERK'S REPORTS - Continued RESOLUTION NO, 2934 ADOPTED Mayor Snyder: Page Five The Deputy 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" (Precise Plan No. 339, Covina Valley Unified School District - South Hills High School Site) Hearing no objections; we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Krieger, Heath, Mayor Snyder Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols Said resolution was given No, 2.934, 1. RESOLUTION NO, 2935 ADOPTED Mayor Snyder: The Deputy City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA .. ADOPTING AND SUBMITTING A BUDGET FOR EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS ALLOCATED FROM THE STATE HIGHWAY FUNDS TO CITIES" Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by ,Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Krieger, Heath, Mayor Snyder Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols Said resolution was given No. 2935, RESOLUTION.NO, 2936 ADOPTED Mayor Snyder: The Deputy City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA GRANTING ITS CONSENT TO THE ANNEXATION OF A CERTAIN PORTION OF SAID CITY TO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO, 21 OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY" Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, -5- C, C, 5/25/64 Page Six RESOLUTION NO, 2936 - Continued • Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Krieger, Heath, Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols Said resolution was given No, 2936, REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT NO, 41 LOCATION: Northeast of Center Tract Nos, 27665, 27666 6 27416 Street and Valley, Pickering Enterprises APPROVED Request for approval of Reimbursement Agreement No, 41 for sanitary sewers, Staff recommends acceptance, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, to enter into the Reimbursement Agreement No, 41 in Tract Nos, 27665, 27666 and 27416, LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 64-66 LOCATION.: South of San Bernardino STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS freeway, west of Lark Ellen Avenue Review preliminary report of City Engineer, Accept report and adopt resolution authorizing City Engineer to proceed with preparation of final plans and'specifications. Staff recommends acceptance and adoption of resolution, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, to accept the report of the City Engineer and adopt the resolution authorizing the Engineer to prepare the final plans and specifications for Lighting District 64-66, RESOLUTION NO, 2937 ADOPTED The Deputy City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY.COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ORDERING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM, PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ESTIMATE AND REPORT FOR LIGHTING DISTRICT NO, 64-B6 PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 149 PART ONE OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS. CODE, STREET LIGHTING ACT OF 1919 AS AMENDED FOR THE INSTALLATION, FURNISHING OF ELECTRIC CURRENT AND FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF CERTAIN LIGHTING FIXTURES AND APPLIANCES IN•.SAID CITY.FOR A:FIXED PERIOD OF MONTHS ENDING JUNE 309 1966" sm • • C, C, 5/25/64 RESOLUTION N0, 2937 - Continued Mayor Snyder: Page Seven Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Krieger$ seconded by Councilman Heath$ that said resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call as follows; Ayes: Councilmen Krieger, Heath$ Mayor Barnes Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols Said resolution was given No, 2937, (Mr, Joseph entered the chambers at 8:00 P,M,) HEARINGS ZONE CHANGE NOa 278 LOCATION: Northeast corner of C, C, Cheesebrough Holt and Grande DENIED between Holt and'San Bernardino Freeway, Request to reclassify from Zone R-A to Zone C-1 and R-3 or. R-4'denied by Planning Commission Resolution No, 1513, Appealed by applicant on: December 26, 1964, and at applicant's request hearing held over to May 11, 1964, Hearing continued to May 25, 1964, Deputy City Clerk, Mrs, Preston: (Read Planning Commission Resolution No, 1513,) Mayor Snyder: This is the time and place for the public hearing, IN FAVOR Mr, Graham Ritchie I represent several applicants, 1117 Wilshire Boulevard Mr, Cheesebrough, Mr, and Mrs, Los Angeles Hobbs, Mr, and Mrs, Morris,,and Mr, Kuny, Together, they make up the ownership of the parcel. It is bounded on one side by the San Bernardino Freeway and on another, its full width, with Grand and by Holt Avenue on the south, On the east is a proposed new school site,, It finds itself in the unique position of having traffic going by it on Holt Avenue which is really in effect an off -ramp of the freeway, on Grand Avenue, which is underpass for the freeway, and the top part fronts on the San Bernardino Freeway, Because of the unique terrain. of the property it does present unique problems to a developer, the major problem being that although it abuts the San Bernardino Freeway on the north it drops down to the south end of the property where it comes to the level of Holt Avenue, This is not a gentle slope by any means and it makes it extremely difficult to develop the property the way it is presently zoned. At the southerly end of the property it is traversed by the Kellogg Drain, The existing zoning on the property is R-1 209000, It is at the present time being occupied by three or four private homes, The property owners have gotten together -7- • is 41 C, C, 5/25/64 ZONE CHANGE NO, 278 - Continued Page Eight and because they feel this is the gateway to a residential area rather than in the middle of one it is felt that they should have relief from the existing zoning on the property. With this kind of traffic pattern and being located this close to the freeway, the building of R-1 20,000 houses is not economically feasible. The problems of solving the drain problem and the fact the property drops sharply would require the marketing of a house that would be so far out of range for market- ability for this area that it doesn't seem feasible to the present owners and they would like to do something with the property and they don't feel it can be done under R-1 20,000 zoning, They make appli- cation for C-1, R-4 and R-3, At the time they did that they didn't include specifically the request for R-2. They wanted the highest and best use the Council and the Planning Commission would find reasonable for the property and made some suggestions but didn't bind themselves for those suggestions, What they suggested to the Planning Commission was that the property fronting on Holts particularly starting at the corner of Grand, would lend itself to some type of commercial develop- ment providing neighborhood services at the edge or beginning of a residential area, They felt that portion of the property severed. by the Kellogg Drain was not conceivably able to be developed as residential and they felt that portion of the property could deserve consideration for commercial, Behind the Kellogg Drain toward the. freeway they felt the property would best be served by some type of unified multiple development and they aren't particularly committed to high rise or anything; they just felt that if they can develop some kind of reasonable multiple development they could get the financing to:make it possible to plan the area and develop the land. They are prepared to'develop it within whatever kind of multiple zoning the Council should see fit to grant them. In the Planning -Commission resolution they point out that in denying this application the Planning Commission does not foreclose the possibility of some less restrictive residential on some part of the property. However, until an amended application is committed for low density multiple they denied the application. I had been advised that the City was making some kind of a traffic study of Grand Avenue and although I didn't know whether or not it would have any impact on this property I felt it would be wise to wait until the results of that property study were available and we took the matter off calendar and requested it to be set after the study was completed, The study has not been completed, Actually, the most it could ever do is indicate some interference on the west side of this Droperty by some expansion or change in the use of Grand Avenue but the basic use of the property will never change, We are faced with a piece of property here which isn't today as it was a few years ago, It has deteriorated in value as single family because of the fact that the freeway has become more and more active, because Grand Avenue has been put there and is extremely busy, because Holt Avenue carries more traffic. We are bounded by three streets carrying a tremendous amount of traffic in the City, The other three corners on Grand and Holt are vacant, I feel some type of commercial development could be considered for Holt and some type of multiple development, at least R-2, and possibly R-3 at least at the top portion. of the property; that this would be a reasonable solution for the property, I think the Council should give consideration as to where a line - should be drawn and how much relief this property.should be given, -8- C, C, 5/25/64 Page Nine ZONE CHANGE NO, 278 - Continued • Mr, C, C. Cheesebrough We are inside the traffic 3424 East Garvey pattern of an off -ramp, We - West Covina are within a traffic circle, I believe one of the statements made by Mayor Snyder during his campaign was he said along the freeway was where the multiple development should be, This property borders the freeway. There was a study made sometime ago that the population center of the San Gabriel Valley is at Vincent. In 1970 that same population center will be moving east to Citrus, Therefore9 I think there is no time like the present to upgrade this particular property, IN OPPOSITION Mr, Hal Marron I would like to know exactly 3142 East Virginia where the drain.on the property West Covina is? Mr, Joseph: (So indicated on map,) It is in the lower quarter of the property. Mr, George McCormick Four gentlemen have been asked 421 Manington Place by the East Hills Home Owners West Covina Association to appear opposing • the rezoning of the Cheesebrough property, We would specifically • like to point out that this is the second time the Council has been asked to rule on this particular piece of property, Secondly, this is not in the General Plan for multiple, The higher density they are asking for is located in many other places in our City and has yet to be developed, We believe this is the typical example of vested interests requesting spot zoning within our City, Mr, Melvin Krauss, We believe West Covina should 321 South Charvers Avenue be kept a City of homes and West Covina not a City of gas stations and apartment houses, In the Times it says that the object of zoning restrictions is to protect the rights of each individual to light, air, open space, and a man -made -environment for all, We have no objections to commercial and high rise zoning in certain parts of the City, There are already too many gas stations in this particular area of the City and we feel there is no need for other liquor stores, small businesses and such things in, this part of our City,' Therefore, we urge you to turn down this request, Mr, Burkman We live on the corner of Mesa 3005 Mesa Drive and Barranca. We are on the West Covina main traffic pattern to Mount Sac and we get a lot of traffic, We feel still this is very desirable residential property, We don't feel as though our property value has been run down and I can't see much difference between the traffic pattern and the similarity between the Cheesebrough property and our own as regards to traffic, Secondly, there are many other areas both in our City and in other cities where the traffic pattern is fairly heavy and where the residential qualities still remain very high, Regarding the waters this particular area is already short of water, The lines that have been laid in there by the Valencia Water Companyg and the original purpose -9� Ca Co 5/25/64 ZONE CHANGE NO, 278 - Continued Page Ten • of these lines and the supply available to this area is for single family, The zoning along the freeway such as the James property or the commercial zoning up along Eastland are already putting a heavy load on the availability of water. This area cannot stand multiple zoning or commercial zoning which will use considerably more water than single family usage, Mr, Hal Marron As you are aware, the density we are speaking of in this area even though we are talking of lesser densities of children per apartment dwelling I believe it was developed that something like 1,2 children per apartment unit while in the balance of the area in the single family residential we have something like 2,5 to 3 children per residential unit. The point we are trying to make here is that this extremely high density where it is presently zoned for two units to the acres and we are talking to some place around 30 to 40 if we get into R-3 or R-4, would make high density and we are quite concerned that it will overtax our schools which were designed and located for the purposes of actually setting out in these areas the area of land we need in order to handle the present zoning, We are quite concerned because of the possibility of double sessions for our children that this extremely high density and the added load it will put on our schools, in addition our other facilities, • The other thing I am concerned • about is when they talk about this being a unique they talk about the cross fall, I that piece of property, the would say generally hilliness of this area considering the development of that as you go further south is minor in todays engineering practices and could be easily overcome, I believe we could grant some relief, smaller lots, perhaps, but I don't think we should go to this higher zone of.10 units to the acre, That is extremely too high,, Mr, George McCormick: As far as the proximity to the freeway, I would like to point out we have several miles of R-1 houses immediately adjacent to the freeway. The development of smaller parcels of C-1 zoning merely detracts from the smaller specialty shops that tend to develop in our large shopping centers if allowed to, We'feel this is an undesirable place to have anything but R-1 development, The grade which has been mentioned is�very condusive to the development of the very exclusive split-level homes which require a minimum of grading and engineering work, We feel this is an ideal and suitable place for single fancily dwellings. I would like all of those opposed to this:'.zoning to please stand to show our opposition, (So indicated,) Deputy City Clerk, Mrs, Preston: I have a letter from Robert H, Stone addressed to the 41 City Council in opposition to this zone change, (Read said letter,) I have another letter addressed to the City Council from Mr, and Mrs, Elmer McCallister in opposition to this matter, -10- • • • • 41. Cle Ca 5/25/64 ZONE CHANGE NO, 278 - Continued Page Eleven Mr, Cc C, Cheesebroughe I would like to take exception to the statement about the water, At the meeting of the Valencia Heights Water Company serving that particular area they are using less than 75% of their capacity today, They have one well that is completely shut down,. The water company originally did not put the mains into the area to serve single family residential; they put them in to serve groves, When we submitted this appli- cation we had to present a 300-foot radius map and all those people have to be notified, What particular reason is that? Are those people more concerned than anybody else, would you say? City Attorney, Mr, Williams: This is designed to especially notify those closest concerned, Mr, C, C, Cheesebrough: You would say they were mostly concerned within the 300-foot radius? City Attorney, Mr, Williams: That is the average presumption in giving this notice,, There could be geographical situations where it would be otherwise., Mr, C, C, Cheesebroughe I would like to call your attention to the fact that in all the protests tonight there was just the one letter from the McCallisters, the only people objecting within the 300-foot radius. The people most vitally effected are not objecting, Mr, Graham Ritchie: The people who are down here although they are interested property owners, they represent.a group of people with an organized philosophy of how to develop an area, and are entitled to their view and entitled to come down here and present it, but there is nobody that we are aware of who is here and protesting who is close enough to this property to be directly effected by.it, If they were concerned about it, they would -have been here or would have made their complaints known to the Council,. In all'fairness, I think you can only judge this property by going out there and looking at it. It does present a unique problem, There are practical economic problems, You have an isolated parcel that does justify.being considered by itself. You would not buy an expensive 40, 50 thousand dollar home in such a busy area when you could have just as nice a home in a much quieter area, I don°t think cutting it up into smaller residential lots is going to solve anything for anybody, I do feel that some kind of planned multiple development on a parcel located geographically as this is is not incompatable with what is around it, gives the property owner the degree of relief he is entitled to, He isn't going to be able to build expensive homes on it, He is entitled to the type of:zoning that will enable.him to build something on it, I have heard no one who has said they will be personally effected or personally injured by this type of zoning, There being no further public testimony, the hearing was cloged, -Il- Co C,, 5/25/64 ZONE CHANGE NO, 278 o Continued • Mayor Snyder-, was quoting me campaign about representation and although I multiple along of what I said. Page Twelve The accuracy of the statement in the paper depends on who may have made some statement in my the freeway, this is not a fair Councilman Krieger-, A statement made at the League of California Cities this last weekend comes to mind, This speaker said the function of a Councilman is to satisfy the irritated without irritating the satisfied,, As we hear these various land use matters before the Council it certainly brings that particular description of our function to mind. In fairness to the resolution of the Planning Commission, I think the Council should take in mind the statement that in denying the applicant that the Planning Com- mission did not foreclose the possibility of some less restrictive residential zoning on some part of the property,, In any event, we should take cognizance of the fact that they did not foreclose nor did they pass on,, In fairness, I think we should take this into consideration,, When we are asked to draw these lines the question always comes to mind as where you draw the lines that have some consistency to them,, We have before us a proposal for rezoning and I have heard precious little on this subject • of C®l,, Mr,, Ritchie is quite right when he states we can consider more restrictive zoning,, At this juncture I would not have the beginnings of an idea in the developmental phase of this property how to consider more restrictive zoning,, The proposals before us tonight have to do with C-1, R-3 and R-4, and although the Council may consider more restrictive zoning we do not have much evidence to proceed on unless we are to treat the property as a unit. My own inclination is to deny the zone change inasmuch as I do not believe consistent with the Planning Commission that this.is appropriate land use in this particular area. I believe this Council is continually being asked to draw lines but the lines we are being asked to draw are subjective in nature in terms of the point of view of the appli- cant,, I would tend to hope that the Council would keep in mind the entire balance of the City on any of these zone changes, zone questions, what is for the benefit of the City,, Councilman Heath-, It wasn't long ago that we had a hearing before us on the multiple zoning on the Ruppert property which was directly in the center of residential areas,, I voted against that at that time because I felt the multiple dwellings should be kept out of the residential area. I still feel that it should be,, However, in this case, this is removed from the residential areas in my estimation,, This piece of property is a problem piece of property; it has a large drain across the southerly part of it,, I think you will find that there is a tremendous ravine along the easterly side,, I don't think Mr,, Cheesebrough realizes or has had an engineer on the property to tell him what a problem he has because when he starts putting in drains for this he is going to find out the amount of money it will cost,, The previous Council instituted the R®2 zone specifically for problem pieces or property, problem properties that would be at many places throughout the City,, If you look at the Minutes you will find that this is how it is stated, that this R®2 will be reserved for these problem properties to allow a man to develop his -12- n C,, C,, 5/25/64 ZONE CHANGE NO,, 278 m Continued Page Thirteen property when he has a handicap,, I believe this property would satisfy a variance on the basis of its handicap. As far as the water is concerned, I have heard nothing from the Fire Department stating there is not enough water and I think this would be in a report if there was,, As far as the increase in the load on the schools is concerned, we had a meeting with the Covina School District,, If you look at the record you will find that they have bought additional sites with the expectations of some more multiple dwellings in this area,, I believe they are prepared to take care of this increase in dwellings,, I do feel that the commercial is out of line If it once starts, you will never stop it,, I feel going to R®4 is quite possibly out of line,, I feel that if you read the Minutes of the Planning Commission and attended the hearing before the Commission you would find they were searching for a way to grant Rm2 on this property but were mislead from an attorney who was not familiar with our ordinance. In reading the resolution of the Planning Commission you will see that they attempted to zone this Rm2'as a recommendation to us,, On the basis of this and what I have said before, I think we could justify R-2 on this property,, I do not think we could justify R®4 on it and definitely we cannot justify commercial,, Mayor Snyder-, Can the Council grant anything except what is asked for in this application? City Attorney, Mr,, Williams,, Yes,, You can grant any totally included zone in one of the zones asked for,, For example, if the R-3 includes every use permitted in R®2 then Rm2 is an included zone,, You can give less than asked for but not more than asked for,, Mayor Snyder. - Planning Director, Mr,, Joseph-, Is there a Planning staff report on this area, particularly this property? There was a report some time back,, Mayor Snyder-, I would agree with the opponents that this is against the General Plan,, It would tend to set the pattern of changing the whole character of this area if we were to grant anything in excess of R-2,, I would also agree that R®2 might be feasible on at least a portion of this property,, However, to outline which should be R®2 tonight and which should be R®1 would be difficult,, I don't see how we could do this without the applicant's help and the staff's help in outlining the areas,, I think further things which speak against higher density is the amount of services we are able to offer in this area, including water, schools, streets, parks, et cetera,, It is obvious we are rather devoid in all these services to even service the R®1 and how could we service Rm3 or Rm4? 'It has also been demonstrated that you can build high quality residential next tomajor highways and even freeways,, There has definitely been no community or neighborhood need shown for commercial and the applicant is pursuing this very m13® LJ C, Co 5/25/64 ZONE CHANGE NO, 278 m Continued Page Fourteen cautiously because he was unable to develop any need,, It seems to me you have to show the same need for high density multiple,, You have -.. to show a community and neighborhood need as well as an economic need, I don°t think that has been shown, I would go along with denying it tonight because I could see putting R®2 on part of it but I don't see how we can sit here tonight and outline which part since we have no testimony saying which part,, Councilman Heath-, Would it be appropriate to hold this until there is a precise plan approved? Councilman Krieger-, With reference to that matter, I always assume a zoning quesiton should be .judged on its merits and not on the basis of a precise plan, The City Attorney has commented in times past that a precise plan is evidentiary only, City Attorney, Mr,, Williams-, Yes, Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Mayor Snyder, and carried, that Zone Change No, 278 be denied,, (Councilman Heath voted "No",) ZONE CHANGE N0,, 283 LOCATION-, Leslie Sugar Azusa side) Avenue (west between Rowland DELETED and Workman Avenues, Request to reclassify from Zone.C-1 and Rml to Rm3 denied by Planning Commission Resolution No, 1525, Appealed by applicant on January 22, 1964, with the request for hearing to be scheduled on May 25, 1964,, Letter received from Graham.A,, Ritchie, attorney for applicant, stating that applicant withdraws his appeal in this case, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, to accept the letter of withdrawal for Zone Change No, 293, ZONE CHANGE NO, 284 Fern Merry, et al, APPROVED (Rm3) LOCATION-, Glendora Avenue between Service and St, Christopher, Request to reclassify from Zone R®A to Zone R-P denied by Planning Commission Resolution No, 1575, Called up by Council on April 27, 1964, Deputy City Clerk, Mrs, Preston-, Mayor Snyder-, 'IN FAVOR Mr,, Francis-J, Garvey 281 East Workman Avenue Covina (Read Planning Commission Resolution No, 1575,) This is the time and place for the public hearing, I represent the applicants in this matter, As you may have noted from the Planning Com- mission resolution, this case m14® C,, Co 5/25/64 ZONE CHANGE NO,, 284 - Continued Page Fifteen • was not denied upon its merits but upon the rather specious reason • that a study of Glendora Avenue was under consideration and it would not be in the best interests of the City to consider an individual zoning change,, This is not an application for an individual zone change; this is a request made pursuant to a request of this body for those persons who have had a potential zoning upon their property since 1955 to firm that zoning or lose it. To grant anything other than the potential zoning seems to be a denying of that already existing.and since this is City initiated it seems that the burden should be upon the City to establish why the zoning which was there potentially for period of eight years ought not to be confirmed rather than the other way® It seems to me a backwards way of doing things to issue what in terms of the law courts an order to show cause that which you do have unless you can comein and show why you should retain This property is located along Glendora immediately south of St,, Christopher's Church,, It comprises nearly eight acres and is just a little north of the westerly extension of Service Avenue,, At the corner of Service and Glendora is commercial zoning and the commercial zoning is approved for a two or three-story office building and the ground has recently been cleared so the building can go ahead,, We are directly across from this on the diagonal and next to the church. Across the street is a 15-acre R-3 zone, the • Towne House development,, We have to the north of it an area in brown which I believe is commercial but which bears R-3 designation on the General Plan,, Immediately above it we have a solid commercial extension which is an extension of the main central business district of the City and by looking at Cameron Avenue development and Glendora to make a triangle we see this area constitutes the most logical expansion of multiple, commercial, or heavier than single family residential use as the City grows,, The criteria for multiple zoning is, as laid down in your General Plana sketchy,, Neither the Council nor the Planning Commission nor the technical staff has as yet devised a "ten commandments" whereby you recognize a piece of ground to have one label or another. It is a little difficult to look at a piece of property and say it should be one thing or another,, Past history gave this R-P zoning,, We have adequate traffic arteries, We have adequate room to develop internal streets if this was developed as a single piece of property in a multiple family use. We have the amenities which are so desirable,, We have churches and schools in relatively easy access to the property,, We have major commercial 'up here,, We have a hospital within relatively easy access of the property. We have a large neighborhood Von's development nearby and coming further south we have additional heavy commercial,, We may be a little deficient in recreational facilities but this is a problem that the City has not as yet solved in terms of what to provide where. I will paraphrase your D,,M,,J,,M,, report who in their study of South Glendora Avenue reocmmended this for at least R-3 zoning and in addition to that in discussing the school situation pointed out that the average passage of school children through the school system with all of the units which they proposed along this street would not seriously overburden the school system in the area because the accretion of school children would be less than three per.year if I understood that report correctly,, -15- r1 LJ C, C, 5/25/64 ZONE CHANGE NO, 284 - Continued Page Sixteen We do not have a precise plan because we are here at the request of the City to ask that the zoning already given be affirmed, It is requested that you firm up the zoning. so the owners of the property, whose taxes during the past eight years have increased from $550 a year to over $29100 a year because of the zoning it carries, have a marketable facility commensurate with the tax value which you have given to it. The street would not be overly burdened by a development on this property. Glendora has already been proposed to be widened. We can't say that traffic should be a reason for denying that which you already have given, We cannot say that the facilities necessary to support it are not there because as we can see from the map there are schools, adequate shopping and there are places for business. We have hospitals, doctors' offices and attorneys' offices. We have churches, We have all of the criteria mentioned in the General Plan, We are asking for R-P but the Council in its wisdom since it requested us to firm this up has also seen fit to change the category of its ordinances, R-P now no longer is what R-P was at the time this general request was made by the Council, We have a compartmentation or a division of R-P now into the residential multiple and into the professional category. The precise wording of this application is for R-P because R-P is • the potential label which it carried but as included uses in that I believe we are entitled to either professional office or high density multiple, High density multiple would be the R-4 classification which I think is a lesser included use than the old R-Po The Planning Commission has denied this but not denied it upon the basis of any finding of fact which relate the criteria established in the General Plan, They have denied it solely because they would not like to rezone piecemeal and yet, gentlemen, that is exactly what they are going to have to do because if you have read the proceedings of the first hearing at Wescove School you find that you have nothing except objections from the people whose property is proposed to be rezoned and I am sure each one is going to insist upon a separate considera- tion of his property, In effect, when you attempt to take a total street rezoning without relating it to the entire City to see what effect it has you are. going to create an unnatural bulge. It is not unreasonable to say that this piece of property should be considered on the basis of the case which is before you tonight and not be tied in with other cases in one large package where it would not, unless you intended to hold six months of continuous hearings to- balance out every equity of every individual contained in that general study to determine what zoning should be placed upon it and to look at all contending interests, I suggest by the action of the City Council eight years ago you have quadrupled the taxes on this property and the --City of West Covina has benefited from the extent that'the City has a tax rate which is included in that, . The history of this was that to firm up the potential all one had to do was to present a precise plan and the zoning was firmed up, This meets all of the criteria, sketchy as they may be, as provided in the General Plan with respect to this type of zoning, The present zone study by D,M,J,M, recommends at least a R-3 development for this property, -16- Co Co 5/25/64 ZONE CHANGE NO, 284 - Continued • lished a valid I request that the property, IN OPPOSITION case for multiple zoning the City Council so firm Page Seventeen I submit that we have estab- of this property at this time, up the existing zoning upon Mr, Chuck Dowding I am chairman of the West 1605 South Belmont Covina Home Owners Federation, West Covina We have some criteria we would like you to consider in this - matter, There is R-1 adjacent to this property and across the street, If we are going to try to protect the existing uses it would seem to me anything less restrictive than R-2 on this particular piece of property would be out of the question. Further, in connection with property adjacent to major highways, it points out in the General Plan -that the function of the highway is to carry the traffic and it is not good City planning normally to introduce more traffic. If you have shielded R-1 against a major highway you have the ideal setup as far as the flow of traffic is concerned. As far as the reference to the D,M,J,M0 report and their projection of what this pidce of property • developed in high density would do or -might reflect, I would make plain that their inference is invalid and has no basis, This is • regarding the schools, The General Plan originally had this all for single family, This would be in opposition with the General Plan, I think it is unfortunate that we are forced to consider this matter tonight before we have had an opportunity to consider all the development along here, In summary, if we are going to keep a balance in multiple as opposed to single family development we have to look at these multiple proposals very carefully and see we are not going to unbalance the scales. We already exceed the recommendation for multiple developments in the General Plan at the 669000 population level and at this time we are only at the 61,000 population level, REBUTTAL Mr, Francis.J, Garvey: We have here a buffer -- Service Avenue and Glendora Avenue, The Supreme Court of California has from time to time said that streets constitute an adequate buffer for zoning. Against the two houses which project against this property across Glendora, the two separate R-1 parcels, we have this large span of existing multiple which is already in being. We have a street running back here, Service, which can protect the residential and we have one row of single family homes on St, Malo which might be effected but I believe the Planning Commission has developed buffering techniques which will provide for this if developed as a single unit an adequate place which would give protection to this, If you were to cut this into R-1 you could get quite a few houses which would generate traffic, With respect to traffic, the traffic he wants to protect is mostly generated outside of West Covina, -17- 0 • • i co CA 5/28/64 Page Eighteen zONE CHANGE NO, 284 m Continued t When you place a classification of zoning on it you write into the general ordinance that there would be certain setbacks and these setbacks as a matter of general law are deemed to be adequate, If note they should be changed generally and not specifically, Setbacks along here would also constitute buffering which would protect these, I believe I read it somewhere that there is presently existing in West Covina and the surrounding communities a tendency in multiples to flow up, In other words, families that had the smaller units are looking for better units but still looking for rental units, Over the past three or four years I know of three families moving out of West Covina into Glendora having sold large homes and now living in expensive apartments in Glendora because they could not find the type of apartment they wanted in West Covina, I am only indicating trend. I think the more we look the more we will see that there is a growing desire for multiple use, Not everybody wants it, Not everybody wants single family, either, To support the growing commercial district you have you are going to find them looking for places which are not as expensive or difficult to maintain. I think you will continue to find a pressure for multiple, It may be that theoretically desireable place to have multiple families would be in the middle of a large ranch totally segregated from single family residential or from traffic but I am afraid that if you were to examine the City of Los Angeles or Pasadena or any other major city, San Francisco, certainly, you will find that the bulk of multiple is located on your more heavily travelled arteries and I don't think this historic pattern is going to be reversed because people wanting single family homes are still going to look to the side streets'and.back streets rather than the main arteries, I request that you firm up the zoning which has been on this property since 1955, There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed, Councilman Krieger: As I understand the:zone change application before us is to R-P, is it not? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: It is to R®P or any more restrictive zone. The application is for R-P, City Attorney, Mr, Williams: It would be possible to zone this from anything from R-1 up to and including R-P and all the R zones are included and are considered to be more restrictive than R-P, Mayor Snyder: City Attorney, Mr, Williams: or any more restricted zoning, The R-P referred to the old R®P which we split really includes either way, It really doesn't make any difference, It says to R-P m18® Ca C. 5/25/64 Page Nineteen ZONE CHANGE NO, 284 - Continued • Councilman Krieger: It is my recollection that in the zoning was asked to be firmed up each and it of these matters where concerned Glendora Avenue that the Planning Commission based on the preparation and the expenditure, consideration, hearings on this D,M,J.M, report have held the matters over. What is the request made in this particular instance? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: That is not quite correct, The Planning staff brought up the idea we should perhaps hold it over, The Planning Com- mission rather than holding it over has been denying these appli- cations in lieu of an overall rezoning which they themselves have instituted on Glendora Avenue, The individual cases have not been held over as there is presently pending before the Planning Com-' mission hearings on zones on South Glendora, Councilman Krieger: Would you explain to me something of the history of this firming up of potential zones? City Attorney, Mr, Williams: In 1954 or 1955 when the zoning ordinance was drawn and originally adopted, on certain parcels of property there wasa circle • drawn and although the parcel was zoned according to one of the zones in the ordinance, within this circle was the designation of another zone, The ordinance had a provision in it that said that this property can be rezoned from the zoning presently zoned to the one shown within the circle by the filing and approval of a precise plan, No more circles were ever drawn from the time of the first zoning map. This device has not been used since, For a period of about two years after the adoption of the ordinance I believe it was customary by filing the request to consider that the new zoning would automatically be zoning but that has not been true since 1956 since I have been here. There is no such method of rezoning under State law and it violates the State law to change from one zone to another by filing a precise plan, The State law tells you how you rezone, There was never an R-A potential R-P zone, There is no such zone, Councilman Krieger: Would you disagree with the applicant's attorney's conclusion that the onus is then.on the Council in this instance? City Attorney, Mr, Williams: Yes, I disagree with the statement that this was ever an R-P zone, It wasn't ever an R-P zone Mayor Snyder: Wouldn't it in the minds of the public be reasonable to expect that although this R-P zoning did not.constitute legal right to obtain it it did constitute in effect a general plan; that since the City did not take a.further step and remove the potential zoning from the map until recently isn't it reasonable to.expect that the people to a certain extent felt that this constituted what in effect was a general plan or an indication that it.might go this way? City Attorney# Mr, Williams: Not only was it reasonable to expect it, the' ordinance affirmatively said so, -19- Co C. 5/25/64 ZONE CHANGE NO, 284 - Continued Page Twenty • Councilman Heath: I think we should also bring before Councilman Krieger that about six or eight months ago the City Council decided to remove these potential zones and came up with a conclusion that if the people who owned these properties would file with the City by a certain date that the City would initiate the procedures for rezoning this property and it was the indication at that time that these properties would be handled the same way that previous properties of potential zoning was handled and that was that if they wanted to firm up their potential zoning all they had to do was apply and put in a precise plan or at least apply, When the previous Council wanted to get rid of these potential zones they asked the people to apply, the City would initiate it, and I think a good many of them thought and were led to believe that this zoning would be finalized, City Attorney, Mr, Williams-. In the last seven years that I know of no potential zone has been firmed up except by the application for a change of zone in the fashion that any other request for zone change has been presented, Mayor Snyder: In my mind, I felt it was reasonable for these people • to expect that the potential zoning carried at least the weight that the General plan carried in saying what should be on the property. It was the City's fault that this had not been removed long before that, The new Council just two weeks ago adopted a policy of not holding applications over for more favorable climate for the applicant, I think it has to work both ways, We cannot hold the application over because the applicant might have a less favorable climate, If we are going to be fair in this policy it has to work both ways, I think this is before us and we have to discuss it in the light of existing conditions, Councilman Heath: I think R-4 is stretching it a little too far for this property, l think the R-3 would be more reasonable, Move that Zone Change No, 284 be approved as to a R-3 zone, Mayor Snyder: I think in counter distinction to what Mr, Garvey says.in a growing trend to multiple, the recent election in West Covina showed a growing trend away from multiple, It would not be realistic to take this 100%, Obviously there are certain areas that could go nothing but R-3, I still feel that the'.potential zoning allowed to remain on here carries the same weight as the General Plan, I think this request has to be evaluated on the basis of existing factors, The existing factors are commercial to the south, multiple across the street and the multiple to the north, There are major streets on two sides, I think we expect too much of the D,M,J,M, report if we expect a master plan out.of it. I will oppose a master plan as any solution for the D,M.,J,M, report, I think'in looking at it that although this possibly could be R-1. I don't think it is good R-1. I think it is doubtful that it would develop as R-1, I don't think also that multiple is divergent from the General Plan. here, The General Plan shows multiple bordering this and has been stated time and time .again the General Plan is not definite as to boundary which means by expansion of the brown would include this -20- C.; C, 5/25/64 . ZONE CHANGE NO, 284 - Continued Page Twenty -One • area, The potential carried the wj�lght of a general plan, it seems to me, This is not the type of property if you were to consider R-2 instead of R-3 for which the R-2 ordinance was developed,, It is near commercial; it is near the downtown area and in considering multiple, I can't find a better parcel that fits all the criteria for multiple than this does,, This does hot mean I agree with multiple further down Glendora, even some that is existing. I don°t see how in the light of existing facts we could deny this request. I will second the motion,, Councilman Krieger- In opposition to the motion, I am struck particularly by the incongruity of the situation where we have on the one hand a General Plan on which the people are supposed to rely and potentials upon which they are supposed to rely; we have a study we go to a great City expense to get, we go through the process of holding open and public hearings where people come down to express their views on this very subject matter; on one hand we have this report characterized and on the other hand we hear we can't use it; we hear the Planning Commission reasoning is spurious and on the other hand certain comments extracted from the Planning Commission report, I would like to see some consistencies, some rationales some reason applied to these things and not proceed in all directions at the same time, I must look at this property in just that way if we are holding public hearings on a report at this very time, That was a study of this very area, of the very questions that are before this Council at this time, That is the basis of my objection, Mayor Snyder- I do not think this is in- consistent with the General Plan, Action on Councilman Heath's motion- Motion passed on roll call as follows- Ayes- Councilman Heath, Mayor Snyder Noes- Councilman Krieger Absent- Councilmen Jett, Nichols ZONE CHANGE NO, 299 Ben and Martha Hepner APPROVED LOCATION- 2340 East Garvey between Meadow Road and Mockingbird Lane, Request to reclassify form Zone R-A to Zone R-3 approved,by Planning Commission Resolution No,, 1588, Deputy City Clerk, Mrs, Preston- Mayor Snyder - (Read Planning Commission Resolution No, 1588,) This is the time and place for the public hearing, J -21- 1�1 0 C� Co Ca 5/25/64 Page Twenty -Two ZONE CHANGE NO,, 299 - Continued IN FAVOR Mr, Ben Hepner This is a City initiated hearing. 2340 East Garvey I am confronted with this West Covina problem: There is R-3 zoning on either side of me extending somewhat deeper than my propertyo This property has drainage rights out through Rml property to the rear,, I have in reserve draining rights out there,, Having subdivided this property, they bought this property understanding there wog to be R-3 zoning in this location. I will be happy to answer any questions you might haven There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed,, Councilman Krieger: Mr. Hepner, has there been any change in your plans since you appeared before the Planning Commission on May 6 with reference to the development of that property? Mr, Ben Hepnerg I have no plans for developing it at the present.time. When I do bring in a precise plan it will be subject to your approval. Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that Zone Chagne No. 299 be approved as to R-3,, ZONE CHANGE NOo 300 Jerry and Dorothy Croaff APPROVED LOCATION: 1925 Pacific Avenue between Garvey and Pacific Lane. Request to reclassify from Zone R-A to Zone R®3 approved by Planning Commission Resolution No,,, 1589, Deputy City Clerk, Mrs,, Preston: (Read Planning Commission Resolution No, 1589,,) Mayor Snyder: IN FAVOR This is the time and place for the public hearing. Mr, Jerry Croaff, We built out here 25 years ago 1925 Pacific Avenue and this was zoned potential West Covina C-1. The Planning Commission recommended we be granted R-3. We hope you will go along with their decision. There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed. Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that'Zone Change No. 300 be approved as to R-3. -22- r� • • C., C, 5/25/64 HEARINGS ® Continued VARIANCE NO, 499 South Shore Company APPROVED Page.Twenty®Three LOCATION: 1803 ® 1837 Badillo between Orange and Morris Avenues; Request for non -conforming sign in C®I zone approved by Planning Commission Resolution No,' 1595, Appealed by applicant on May 89 1964. Deputy City Clerk, Mrs. Preston: Mayor Snyder: IN FAVOR (Read Planning Commission Resolution No. 1595.) This is the time and place for the public hearing, Mr. Howard Marks Our firm is the owner of the Vice President property at the corner of South Shore Company Badillo and Orange, The 633 Shadow Place public hearing and the matter Los Angeles in which the Planning Commission held their hearing was closed before the deliberations of the Commission took place, We were not permitted to make further comment after the deliberations started so our only recourse is to bring the matter to you, We don't oppose in principle some of the considerations that several Commissioner's brought forward on this but we don't feel they considered the facts in this particular case sufficiently in arriving at their final decision. There is past history to this center and things being done there now. Our company applied for a variance to erect a sign for the purpose of creating identification for this center, The center consists of a good sized markets six retail stores and service station, The owners of the retail establishments approached us to create identification to use in their advertising, The original signs we believe conform to the first three of the conditions out forth in the resolution,, In making our request we added one particular individual business as A separate sign and since that was ruled out in Condition No. 4 we are quite willing to accept that, I have a new sketch eliminating the individual sign and also eliminating the word "market'. We are willing to change it to "Esko Center" for identification purposes, In the matter of any special privileges, we checked other siges in West Covina and what we are asking is not unusual, The market building has a sign which is perpendicular to Orange and the.Owl Drug Store has a vertical perpendicular sign to Badillo, Both of these signs were erected. almost nine years ago. The place we propose to put this identifieation.sign is right at this triangle (indicating) to we will not lose parking spaces and we will conform to the precise plan, It would give us identification on Badillo, Orange we don't think any sign should be closer to Orange because there is residential on the other side,of the street, On the other side of Badillo is C-2, There were no remarks in opposition when we presented our request to the Planning,Commisson. On the matter of whether or not it is a special privileges I have some photographs of centers to submit to you, (Presented photographs and explained same,) -23® i C,, C, 5/25/64 VARIANCE NO, 499 - Continued Page Twenty -Four The crux of the problem relates to Condition 4, We are willing to delete the Liquor Barrel identifi- cation but on -the matter of removing the'Owl Drug Store sign and the original sign which is part of the market building, we do not agree with this, The Owl sign is about 55 feet back from Badillo. It isn't apparent to any residential property in any direction for about 700 feet, We are asking that Condition No, 4 of the Planning Commission Resolution No, 1595 be withdrawn, that we be permitted to erect a shopping center sign with or without this special identification and without the requirement of eliminating the perpendicular signs which have been in existence for over eight years and are not located so as to be objectionable to any residential property,, We don't think we are asking anything that grants us a special privilege or which isn't in existence in at least one or two neighborhood shopping centers, Mr, Darrel Skinner.- I own the Owl Drug Store, The sign you propose to take down cost me $49750, I can't understand how you can now make a barter to take down my sign to put up another sign, We know every center has to have identification, I send out 5,000 circulars every month, There isn't a month that goes by that I have people call me asking where we are located, This particular center draws people out of Baldwin Park, Covina, Irwindale, which in my way of thinking can only help you and the businessmen in the center, We have to have identification, You wouldn't ask J, C, Penny to take down their sign for the sake of the Plaza Center. Mr, James E, Graves Prior to presenting this Sign Contractor for a variance application, .the Planning Department suggested we make a survey of several of the shopping centers in the area as to what would be acceptable to the Planning Commission and we came up with a general outline that approximately 170 square feet of sign identifying the shopping center itself with the possibility of a directory board underneath would probably be acceptable to the Planning Commission, On that basis, we went ahead and designed that and it was submitted for a variance application, At the Planning Commission meeting the Planning Department actually did recommend it with a couple of variations, that the overall height and the possibility that the smaller sign underneath be removed® I don't think this would be granting any special privilege and I think this should be approved, There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed, Councilman Krieger.- I was present at the Planning Commission during the time of the hearing and I somehow felt that the comments that Mr, Marks has given us the benefit of were taken into consideration by the Planning Commission, As I understood the factors influencing the conditions on this, they had to do with perpendicular signs. The question is whether or not there is a special privilege to be created in this instance, If I may, I would like to direct a question that I had at that hearing to the Planning Director and that refers to the Commission's policy of approving such shopping center signs but limiting such approval on certain conditions, Are the conditions referred to in the report those conditions having to do with not more than one identifying sign per center in a perpendicular form? -24- • • C, C, 5/25/64 Page Twenty -Five 'VARIANCE NO, 499 - Continued Planning Director, Mr, Joseph- Yes, Councilman Krieger: In reviewing the evidence the proponent has brought to us this evening, I somehow find lack in that material for a perpendicular sign, It is not my recollection that the Planning Commission took exception to it, Mayor Snyder: center identification sign hac store is presently existing, rejuvenated by Esko coming in, fication sign is in order, I It seems to me this might be different if the shopping come first but certainly the drug The shopping center has certainly been Certainly a shopping center identi- think if the situation had been reversed regarding the drug store sign that it might not be allowed but I don't quite see how it is fair when you look at the fact that there are shopping centers in -the City which have both an identi- fication sign plus perpendicular signs within the shopping center, Councilman Krieger: The only additional comment I would like to make is the fact that the Planning Commission appears to live continuously with this sign problem in our City and it is my understanding whether or not they are taking responsibility for action of the past Planning Commissions or not, is to implement a Somewhat standard policy in these matters throughout the City and I -think they are seriously concerned with, and I share this concern, with an abundance of signs within our City of this nature particularly within shopping centers such as this, If this constitutes not a special privilege then there are innumerable instances in the past and I am sure in the future in front of the Planning Commission where this criteria will break down, Based on the comments and consideration given to this matter before the Planning Commission and the evidence before us tonight, it would still be my point of view that it is a special privilege, Mayor Snyder- I personally think the circum- stances here have met'the conditions of a variance, I agree with you, however, that the problem of administering the sign ordinance has been very difficult. It has been difficult to draw an ordinance that was enforceable throughout the City, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Mayor Snyder, and carried, that Variance No, 499 be approved subject to Planning Commission Conditions Nos, 1 through 3 and that Condition No,,4 be that the sign shall conform to the plan presented to the City Council on May 25,, 1964; that the Council feels that to remove the other signs would create a hardship, (Councilman Krieger voted "No",) SUNDAY CLOSING OF BARBER SHOPS Deputy City Clerk, Mrs, Preston, Petitions of barbers opposing and approving, Consideration by Council, (Read opinion of Attorney General Mosk regarding this matter,) -25- • I Co C, 5/25/64 SUNDAY CLOSING OF BARBER SHOPS - Continued Mayor Snyder: IN FAVOR (Repealing ordinance) Page Twenty -Six This is the time and place for the public hearing. Mr. Richard Carlson I submitted the letter from the 1448 West Puente Avenue Attorney General and .that the West Covina brief consensus of his opinion was that the remarks made to the degree of sanitation in the barber shops that there is no sanitation governing shops on Sunday is covered by him. He said that this was covered by the State Board of Barber Examiners and any statement that would say these shops were unsanitary on. Sunday while being open the other days, that this would be implying that the State Board of Barber Examiners are not doing their job. As the Attorney General states, the city councils in the different townships need not worry about the general health of the public in their cities because due to the fact that he has full confidence in the State Board of Barber Examiners in the State of California. .- Mr. Nobel Jones I wrote the original letter 133 West Badillo regarding the legality of our West Covina closing, I would like to state that I am for closing.,Sunday and Monday State-wide but I don't like to be discriminated against. My barber shop is two blocks from a Baldwin Park and Covina barber shop which are open seven days a week 'and I merely wrote the letter asking that I be allowed to compete with these barber shops, I think the closing of the barber shops in one small locality is against any State or Federal Constitutional law, IN FAVOR (Retaining ordinance) Mr. Ken Goller I maintain that the letter from 668 South Sunset Stanley Mosk's office is an West Covina opinion and it certainly isn't. a ruling.., I feel we have many many ordinances on the City books that if the Attorney, General.was asked his opinion, they might be illegal but if they are for the good of the people and the protection of the public health and welfare then I think these hearings are valid, I would.lik.e to give each member of the Council a summation of the brief of the Santa Fe hearings, Our contention is that these barber shops opening on Sunday operate very loosely; they know there will not be any inspectors in. We are governed partially by the Bureau of Business and -Professional Standards. We don't prefer to call ourselves professional men; we think we, -have a trade,, I have a letter written to.the Los Angeles Barbers Associations requested by a Mr. Hugh H, Carter, regarding their telephone conversation regarding barber inspectors working on Sunday. They have been informed that barber inspectors do not work on Sunday. This letter is from James Decanos, Secretary of the State Board of Barber Examiners;. These are the people governing us, I have Mr, Nobel Jones' petition. He has 16 signatures on it; three of them are not in West Covina, Mr, Richard Carlson lists four barbers here and I have been. in his shop and I have never seen more than three licenses displayed, This gives them 14 signatures, I have a petition with 33 signatures. -26- • 0 C, C. 5/25/64 Page Twenty -Seven 'SUNDAY CLOSING OF BARBER SHOPS - Continued As to the legality, in Ganley vs, Clay, this was heard by.the Supreme Court in 1935. This is almost 30 years ago and this law was strictly a Sunday closing law. There was no basis for no health and sanitation whatever, I am referring to the Lynch Meat Case where the butchers in Oakland, the City Council passed an ordinance closing'buteher shops. This was carried to the Supreme Court and it is my estimation that the court ruled there that the City had the right to pass ordinances restricting the openings and closings of their places as long as it did not violate any existing State law, We feel we are not pre-empted by the State as far as the health and sanitation of any individual city goes, When we came before the Council a few years ago and asked for this ordinance we went out on our own and on Sunday shops we found violations, where apprentices were working without the supervision of a journeyman; we found shops where barbers were working without licenses, We know that most of these shops that are open Sunday will work two or three barbers through the week and as many as six and eight on Sundays. They have to come from somewhere, Our State Board is trying to compensate, trying to-do something to change the situation; they have just passed a ruling that now all barbers will display a picture adjacent to the license, We found barbers working on dead men's licences, people that were dead, We feel that on Sunday there are many unlicensed barbers, men who shouldn't have a licensee We feel that someof these Sunday shops, and I know of cases where they are dope addicts, I ask you to consider very carefully about this matter and uphold our position, There being no further public testimony, the hearing was.closed. �rrsir.r�rr�� Councilman Heath: I have been through one of these barber "mills" on a Sunday and. it was an event for me, both from the sanitation aspect and the fact that I got clipped, I can't blaine the barbers for trying to uphold their profession and make it a quality business, I do know that some of these facts are true where they are bringing in people from outside on Sunday and railroading people through as fast as they can get them in and out of a chair, I think this isn't conducive to making the people respect the profession, Mayor Snyder: With all due respects to both sides of this controversy, I do feel that the Sunday closing law as applied to barbers only is unconstitutional, I do recognize the problems regarding Sunday opening but it seems to me the best approach to this would be through your State Barber Board and perhaps they had better put some people on Sunday because I honestly feel, although I am sympathetic with your purpose, that the best way to approach this is within your own organization and within your own State board, I think we made a mistake when we passed this ordinance., I think we are putting ourselves.way out by passing an ordinance like this. We have no other ordinance like this regarding any other profession dr business within the City and I don't see how we can logically apply such an ordinance to just one group, If the City Attorney has any comments to make on.the legal briefs submitted here, I wish you would do so now, -27- C. C, 5/25/64 Page Twenty -Eight 'SUNDAY CLOSING OF BARBER SHOPS - Continued City Attorney, Mr, Williams: I think the matter is still debatable. I doubt if there is any legitimate debate on this subject that if the purpose of closing has nothing to do with peace, health and safety and is only for the observance of the sabbath it would not be upheld, But, if. you have a feeling that this ordinance has a bearing on the public peace, health, safety and general welfare and is within the police power of the City then I think that the condition of law is inconclusive, The Attorney General certainly indicates that in his opinion it would not be a valid ordinance because the State has occupied the field, The Superior Court in Santa Fe Springs did not think so, I understand there has been another;Superior Court decision since this decision which upheld the validity of such an ordinance, The Supreme Court and District Courts of this State Within the last couple of years have been extremely prone to hold in favor of the occupation of the field by the State and to hold this, that an ordinance may conflict with State law although there is no direct conflict, that if the State has intended to.prescribe all the relations that shall apply and this was the Carol Lane case, then a city cannot impose any more even though they are not in direct conflict with those the State has imposed, I think it is more or less a toss-up, If I had to choose my guess would be that the appellate courts would say that the ordinance was invalid, Councilman Heath;. I think if we feel the health and welfare of the City is being neglected that we have a right to step in, Mayor Snyder; You are putting an undue burden on the City, The State Board should require their inspectors to work on Sunday, This seems to me to remove any threat to the health, safety -and welfare within reasonable limits, Councilman Krieger; If this was before us for the first time I might think differently about it, Inasmuch as we do have this ordinance on our books I would be in favor of retaining it, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger' and carried, to take no further action at this time regarding the ordinance re barber shops closing on Sunday,, DETERMINATION OF SAFETY OF STRUCTURE LOCATED IN THE 3400 BLOCK ON VIRGINIA AVENUE, WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA City Manager, Mr, Aiassa; You have all.received copies of our report on this, (Read said report,) -28- • • UNSAFE BUILDING - Continued: Page Twenty -Nine Report from William Fowler, Chief Building Inspector, dated May 22, 1964 as follows: "Attached are copies of Police Department, Fire Department, and Building Department reports on the subject property. Also a resume of the actions of this Department to abate or repair the property and structure as per the City of West Covina Ordinance. This department has followed the procedures chart, and has made the required inspections and notified the owners of the City Council action.in setting a hearing for 5-25-64. The City Council shall at this hearing determine if the hazard exists, and if the structure shall be repaired or demolished, and time limit to accomplish the City Council action be set.." Mr. Francis J. Garvey 281 East Workman Covina City Attorney, Mr. Williams: Mr. Francis J. Garvey: City Attorney, Mr. Williams: Mayor Snyder: I assume I have the right to cross examine any adverse witnesses since this is a public hearing. I presume you are representing somebody in interest. I am representing the owners of the property. I think you have right for cross examination. As a matter of procedure, when the public testimony occurs, who goes first and who has the right of rebuttal? City Attorney, Mr. Williams: There is nothing described in law. I think ordinarily you listen to the Building Inspector as to what are the alleged deficiencies and defects in this building. There should be an opportunity, I presume, to cross examination if Mr. Garvey feels disposed to and them, of course, Mr. Building Inspector can cross examine Mr. Garvey. The owner may be heard as to why these defects are not code violations that need remedy. You then determine whether under Section 203 of the Building Code this is what is called an unsafe building. If it is, you have the power to have it abated. The abatement is in the discretion of the_owner as to whether he demolished the building or repairs it. Mayor Snyder: Could we now have the report from Mr. Fowler? Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: We do not consider this building as structurally unsound except for one portion of -the building which, in my opinion, is structurally unsound, which is a room off the living room area. It was built structurally un- sound and has since in a period of years become quite sagging and is in bad condition. I said in my report that the building is substandard and dilapidated. Due to the vandalism, more than anything else, it has be- come dilapidated. It constitutes a major hazard, I have listed fire and health more than anything else, fire especially. It is an area of some six acres. This is very tinder -dry with a lot of dead vegetation over- grown and the weeds in the pasture area are roughly waist -high in spots. All the major plumbing fixtures have been broken out. This is by vanda- lism, I am sure. The electrical system is completely gone. They have torn apart the electrical panels, stolen the fixtures. Those are the parts we condidered to make this a substandard structure. I sent each Councilman on the 22nd a copy of the police report on the number of appre- hensions and the fire department report. I believe this is all I have to say. I would be happy to answer an�9questions. UNSAFE BUILDING - Continued: Mayor Snyder: Mr. Francis J. Garvey: Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: Mr. Francis J. Garvey: Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: Mr. Francis J. Garvey: Page Thirty. Mr-. Garvey, you have the right of cross examination at this time. Thank you. I would like to ask Mr. Fowler. -some questions: Have you inspected the building yourself? Yes. What type of construction is it? I would assume wood frame stucco. Was the stucco in such condition -that you could see through it in any place? Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: I would say it is in good shape; the exterior of the building is in good shape with the exception of the fact that all the windows and some of the casings have been removed or torn out. Mr. Francis J. Garvey: In your report you say that the general condition is bad. By that you mean that the windows are broken. out and some plumbing fixtures are missing? Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: Yes. I think the pictures will bear this out. There are large • walk-in ice boxes with.the doors askew and torn apart. Mr. Francis J. Garvey: Isn't that walk-in refrigerator, it is a large refrigerator against the wall, an old type butcher's case or something you would find in the supermarket? Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: Mr. Francis J. Garvey: Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: Mr. Francis J. Garvey: Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: Mr. Francis J. Garvey: Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: 0 Mr. Francis J. Garvey: Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: I don't know. It is not a structural part of the building. Removal of that might repair that particular item? It might. That in itself is not a menace in terms of structure? No. It may be an eyesore but it is not a structural problem and not a fire hazard? Well, - - You did not include a weed abatement procedure under the ordinance with respect to weed abatement, did you? No; that doesn't come up under our department. -30- • 11 C, C. 5/25/64 UNSAFE BUILDING HEARING - Continued Mr, Francis J. Garvey: Page Thirty -One In the file is there anything with respect to weed abatement? Councilman Heath:` Isn't there a City-wide. program on weed abatement and haven't we declared lately that there is a fire menace wherever there are weeds? City Attorney, Mr, Williams: I don't know if this was posted or not. If it wasn't, let's post it, Mr, Francis J, Garvey: Did you inspect the electrical wiring, Mr, Fowler? Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler: You can't inspect something you can't see. All you see are ends of wires sticking out of the holes; fixtures removed.; et cetera, Mr, Francis J. Garvey: Does your department have the original building plans on this? Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler: There weren't any plans in existence on this, Mr, Francis J, Garvey: Do you know whether or not the interior .of this may be conduit or B, or some other approved wiring method at the present time, only the determination that the fixtures have been.removed; is that correct? Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler: Mr, Francis J. Garvey: Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler: Yes, Is the electricity itself connected from themain power plant? It is disconnected, Mr, Francis J. Garvey: In its present condition the wiring does not constitute a fire hazard as it presently exists, is that right? Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler: Mr, Francis J. Garvey: Building Inspector, Mr; Fowler: Mr, Francis J, Garvey: Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler: That's correct, You say that the sink is vented and trapped but the condition is bad. How many sinks are there in the house? I don't know; they are all over the place. Are all of them in bad condition? All of them are in bad condition sanitarywise, -31- i` • 11 • n C, C, 5/25/64 UNSAFE BUILDING HEARING - Continued Mr, Francis J, Garvey: Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler: Mr, Francis J, Garvey: Building Inspector, Mr,' Fowler: ,Page Thirty -Two They need washing and cleaning out? Yes and a lot are broken and laying on the floor, Is this.structure being occupied by any persons at the present time? No, °`Mr, Francis J. Garvey: In itself at this point this is not a menace as to health, It might be the reason for denying a certificate of occupancy but the condition of the sinks only makes it reasonably unfit for sanitation? Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler: Mr, Francis J. Garvey: Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler: unsanitary reasons, chipped and broken, Mr, Francis J, Garvey: Yes, The tubs -- what tubs are in bad condition? If I did say that it would be for the very same reason, for It says under "Other" "vented trap and condition bad". What is included in "Other"? Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler: This would be all of your kitchen sinks, your garbage disposals, your lavatories, broken off at the walls, et cetera, Mr, Francis J, Garvey: In other words, there is need for some plumbing repairs? Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler: Considerably, Mr, Francis J. Garvey: You did not plumb those or run a rod through them to test the condition, waste lines, "material unknown", "condition unknown"? ` Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler: We have no way of knowing, Mr, Francis J, Garvey: You say the sewerage disposal has a septic tank and cesspool. You say it is unsanitary, Why is it unsanitary? Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler: I couldn't very well be sure of that, . Mr, Francis J, Garvey: You make a recommendation for destruction, Why? So far all you have indicated is that there are lighting fixtures missing and plumbing needing repairing and the glass needing to be done over and the structure itself is sound and the roof is good. Why should the building be demolished? -32- C. C. 5/25/64 Page Thirty -Three UNSAFE BUILDING HEARING - Continued Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler; The general building is the - type which I would say could be at this time repaired at a great expense, or it could be demolished. My recommendation should have been repair or demolish. Mr. Francis J.. Garvey: You are proceeding under Ordinance No, 854? Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: Yes. Mr, Francis J. Garvey: Is that an effective ordinance in the City of West Covina at this time? I notice it is dated May 119 1964, City Attorney, Mr. Williams: We are not proceeding under that ordinance, We are proceeding under Section 203 of the Building Code. Mr, Francis J. Garvey: City Attorney, Mr,, Williams: This is the latest amendment? We are proceeding without the amendment. Mr. Francis J. Garvey: Under Section 203 of the Building Code what constitutes an unsafe -condition? How is it defined? Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: The Building Code doesn't make this definition of what is a term of unsafe. City Attorney, Mr. Williams: I don't think that is proper to ask Mr. Fowler. If you want to read the Building Code, read it. Mr. Francis J. Garvey: As a professional building inspector we assume you are qualified and work under the framework of the ordinance and have cognizance of the terms of those ordinances.. Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: Right. Mr, Francis J. Garvey: Taking into account the knowledge of the Uniform Building Code as enforced in West Covina, what elements in that code did you apply in order to determine if this was an unsafe building? Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: Visual examination and pictures. You yourself made the remark that there was one room you wouldn't walk in.. You just stuck your head in it. Mr. Francis J. Garvey: This happened to be.:the room which you recommended for demolition, specifically, that access bar?' Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: Yes, -33- C, C, 5/25/64 Page Thirty -Four UNSAFE BUILDING HEARING - Continued 0 Mr, Francis J, Garvey. In the house itself other than its.possible exposure to vandalism, is there any particular fire hazard per se? Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler: In the house itself? I would say very much so. If you will,notice there is considerable writing done on the walls and this writing wasn't done with a.crayon or a spray can of paint; this was done by candle, They take a candle and hold'it to the ceiling and the smoke from the flame they would write their names on the ceiling with candles so I would say this is a fire hazard. This is on wood, Mr, Francis J, Garvey. There is no evidence that any part of it caught fire? Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler. Not this time, Mr, Francis J, Garvey. There are no candles about the premises were there? Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler. I didn't look, • Mr, Francis J, Garvey. You say there was no writing the on walls except with this, • Did you see on the patio wall the names "Woody and Linda", "Skip Paula", "Ralph "Kim"? and and Judy" With what were they written? Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler; There were writings on the wall and that was crayon and spray cans, There was writing all over the walls but the ones I particularly mentioned, I gave you a particular answer for a fire hazarda Mr, Francis J, Garvey. Wasn't the use of candles which are not a pertinent part of the premises? If I held a candle.to this building and started to write on the building, there would be the same fire hazard, Building Inspector, Mr, Fowler; It would be the application of the flame which might have sufficient heat to ignite the wood, Councilman Heath. This is very educational, but what is the point you are trying. to get across? What is it you would like to have, Mr, Garvey? Mr, Francis J, Garvey; .:I would like to have this order to show cause abated, I am not certain that as yet this has been proved to be in an unsafe condition merely because the windows are out, City Attorney, Mr, Williams Does the owner intend to leave it the way it is? Mr, Francis J, Garvey: We haven't come to that, We will put.the owner on in a minute, You have an official I know is compete,nt and I have a great respect for his work but the question is whether or not in making -34 11 • • • C. Ca 5/25/64 Page Thirty -Five UNSAFE BUILDING HEARING - Continued this inspection he or persons under him have taken into agdount'.the actual condition and arrived at a conclusion that any reasonable person would say that the building was unsafe so as to bear a recommendation for demolition. Councilman Heath: I think that we should assure Mr. Garvey that we are willing to work with his client in every way we can and if his client would specify what he would like to do I think we can come to a conclusion. Mr, Francis J. Garvey: What my client would like to do would be to have the Police Department catch some of the vandals that have been destroying his property and prosecute them and continue to keep a watch to prevent further vandalism. City Attorney, Mr. Williams: Mr. Francis J. Garvey: Councilman Krieger: Mr,, Francis J. Garvey: He wants to leave the building the way it is) He will answer that when'we get a chance to respond. If cross. examination is legitimate, let's stick to legitimate cross examination. Mr. Fowler, does the roof seem to be in good condition? Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: Yes, I would say fairly well. It is'Spanish tile. You can't tell,, There are parts of the structure that are not visible. Mr. Francis J. Garvey: tu •lding Inspector, Mr,, Fowler: The interior walls are plastered? J Some. Some are wood panel. - Mr, Francis J. Garvey: Generally, does the building other than the things which you have described meet the standards of the. Building Code? Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: I am sure they did at the time. I wouldn't say they meet our Building Code standards now. Mr. Francis J. Garvey: As an existing building subject to possibility of repair, it is not in such a dilapidated condition in its present form to constitute a menace to health.and safety,without occupants? In its present condition it is not in such condition of itself to constitute a menace to health and safety without occupants? Building Inspector, Mro Fowler: Mayor Snyder: I don't understand the question. Would it be healthy for anybody to habitate it under its present condition? Building Inspector, Mro Fowler: -35- Absolutely not. C. C. 5/25/64 UNSAFE BUILDING HEARING - Continued Page Thirty -Six Mr. Williams: I think it may be helpful if the Council knew what is trying to be proved or disapproved. Section 203 of the Building Code states what buildings may be abated. All buildings or structures which are struc- turally unsafe or not provided with adequate maintenance or which consti- tute a fire hazard or are otherwise dangerous'to human life or which in relation to existing use constitute a hazard to safety or welfare or health by reason of inadequate maintenance, delapidated, obsolescence or abandon- ment as specified in this code or any other effective ordinance or for the Purpose of this section unsafe buildings. We are trying to determine whether this is an unsafe building. Mr. Francis J. Garvey: Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: Mr. Francis J. Garvey: Does this building, per se -- how close is this building per se to any other building not on its own grounds? I'd guess the closest point would be a couple hundred feet, anyhow. I think that is all. Mayor Snyder: Would you say that in your opinion this building falls under at least two of those items that Mr. Williams mentioned, delapidation and fire hazard? Building Inspector, Mr. Fowler: • City Manger, Mr. Aiassa: I would say it falls under delapida- tion and abandonment. It.would fall in there very definitely. (Read report re this matter from the Police Department dated 3/23/64 as follows: "Referring to your request concerning the number of complaints received on the house known as the 'Ruppert Property', located at 3306 Virginia Ave., we have referred to our Station Logs and found that since December 1, 1963 we have had 29 complaints of various kinds about this place. There have been numerous juven- iles brought to the station and eventually turned over to their parents. As you can see by the attached pictures, there has been a great amount of vandalism at this house. It is a difficult problem for the police as there is no way to patrol this house. It is more than 100 yards from Virginia Ave., and the gate is locked. The vandals are entering the property from the east side by way of Charvers Ave. The back property line of the houses on the west side of Charvers falls sharply into a small ravine, which makes it impossible to get a car through that way. We cannot tell if these kids are there un- less we get a call to the location. This property is an attractive nuisance. The young vandals refer to it as the "Haunted House", and they have played havoc with what used to be a very nice residence. I would like to recommend that this house be boarded up, burned, or lived in. If the front gate were open it would' help us get up to it in order to patrol, but this then would allow thieves in trucks to go up and haul some of the stuff away." Mayor Snyder: Does the owner wish to say anything? -36- C. C. 5/25/64 Page Thirty -Seven UNSAFE BUILDING HEARING - Continued Mr. George Adams We are the owners of the property. • Gemite Company Our original plan for developing this Montebello property was for a higher density than the R-1. We were turned down on our zoning application. We decided that the only alternate action we had was to sell the property because we do not develop R-1 property.as such. We immediately put the property up for sale. We have mailed out over 300 mailings to R-1 developers and real estate people who might be interested in purchasing the property as R-1 single family residential for subdivi- sion. When we bought the property approximately two years ago the house had been lived in very recently by the Ruppert family.and was in excellant condition. We did not remove any of the lighting fixtures or remove or damage any of the fixtures. We are in a quandry as to how to maintain the property short of having an armed guard on the property. If we repaired it it would deteriorate through vandalism in a very short time. All of this vandalism has occurred in the last 18 months. We have made two sep- arate efforts, the last in November, 1963, whereby we went in with a crew of four men and worked for two days to clean up all the damage in and around the house. The actual value of the home as it is now or the replacement cost of that home, which is in excellent condition structurally, would be between thirty-five and forty -thousand dollars. The cost of repairing it would be between twenty and twenty-two thousand dollars. There is a solid value in the existing building and now for us to recover economically on the project, we do want to sell it as a single family residence and gain as much value there for the existing building as . we possibly can. City Attorney, Mr. Williams: If you feel it is an unsafe building you should direct a resolution be drawn. so declaring and indicating the length of time you will give to the abate- ment. You cannot specify whether it is to be torn down or repaired. That choice is to the owner. If they do not abate within the length of time declared, the City can go in with its own forces, abate,it, and put the cost on the tax bill. Councilman Heath: Mr. Adams, if I understand you cor- rectly, what you are waiting for is to sell this piece of property and you don't want to put any more money into it? Mr. George Adams: That's correct. If we are to put money into it, I don't see any way we can do any fixings up as it were. It would be a short time before it would be completely vandalized again. This happens to be an unusal situation by. virture of its location and the fact that there is a lot of shrubbery around there. Mayor Snyder: Has there been any consideration of giving the Police Department a key to the lock so they could at least get in there? Mr. George Adams: We would be happy to do that. Mr. Fowler mentioned that to me in his 41 last correspondence. We have put up "No Trespassing"signs three different times and nailed them in a manner we thought would be impossible to tear off. Where the house is located, boarding it up I don't think would do any good. City Attorney, Mr. Williams: This has been done in other cases where we have had abatements like this. If you think it is valuable and don't want it destroyed, put somebody in it; let somebody live in it. That is my opinion. Mr. George Adams: We have done everything we can to protect our property. -37- C. C. 5/25/64 UNSAFE BUILDING HEARING - Continued City Attorney; Mr. 0 Mr. . George :Adams: 0 Mr. Williams: E Page Thirty -Eight Williams: Have you put somebody on it? We not only asked for police protec- tion, we have letters written to the Council. You want the City•to take care of it? Mr. George Adams: You are making a personal issue on this matter. Mayor Snyder: Mr. Williams is right. Secondly, the City cannot put 24-hour police protec- tion on this and it is not reasonable to expect us to. If there is no further public testi- mony, I will declare the hearing closed. Councilman Krieger: With reference to the property loca- ted at 3400 Virginia Avenue, City of West Covina, I move that the City Attorney be directed to prepare an appropriate resolution pursuant to the Uniform Building Code, 1961 edition, Section 203-A declaring that the property in question is a hazard to the public welfare by reason of inadequate maintenance, delapidation and aban- donment and that the property be abated within a period of ninety (90) days from the date of the adoption of the resolution. Councilman Heath: In saying to the owner that he has to either repair it or tear it down, is that what the motion means? City Attorney, Mr. Williams: Yes. Councilman Heath: It gives him a choice? City Attorney, Mr. Williams: To remove the condition. Councilman Heath: On the other hand, if he removes any dangerous condition from the building such as falling off doors, et cetera, and gives the key to the Police Department, does he have this alternate, too? Mr. Williams: If he could remove the features that make it unsafe or a detri- ment to the public welfare or to the public health and safety, that would be true. It can be abandoned as long as there is no feature of health hazard, unsafeness, or detriment to the public welfare. Mayor Snyder: There is an alternate and that is to repair just enough of it to allow somebody to live in it. Further running down would not be as likely to occur if this happened. I am not saying repair the whole thing but would this not also be an alternative? City Attorney, Mr. Williams: It could be. Councilman Heath: He doesn't want to put any more money in it and, on the other hand, he doesn't want to tear it down. City Attorney, Mr. Williams: I don't care to argue the case. He is in a rough spot because he put himself there. ago C, C, 5/25/64 Page Thirty -Nine UNSAFE BUILDING HEARING - Continued L� _0 Mr, Francis J, Garvey: If a permanent resident were put there in a trailer and the immediate nuisance as indicated by Mr. Fowler cleaned up so there would be a permanent watchman there, would it still be necessary to put this house back into first-class condition before it was sold? • is City Attorney, Mr, Williams: It doesn't have to be in first- class condition if you remove the unsafe conditions. It would be proper if they have a proposal to submit, submit it after the resolution has been adopted, You don't want to decide it here. It would have to go to the Building Inspector, It is a matter as to whether or not there is an abatement, Mayor Snyder: It would be reasona.ble to.'submit that as an alternative. Action on Councilman Krieger's motion: Seconded by Councilman Heath, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Krieger, Heath, Mayor Snyder Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION OF MAY 6 AND 20, 1964 Variance No, 498 Precise'Plan No, 46 (3) Sun Fran Approved Variance -No.- 505 First Baptist Church Approved Variance No, 503 Pickering Enterprises Approved 41 ''RECREATION AND PARKS JOINT MEETING City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: Commission on May 27, 1964 at eight later date for Mr, Montgomery, So indicated by Mrs, Preston, Comments as follows: These matters were called up by Councilman Krieger,.,, This matter was called up by Councilman Heath, This matter was called up by Councilman Krieger We have a joint meeting with the Recreation and Parks o'clock, We are setting up a -39- • Is I C. C. 5/25/64 Page Forty JOINT MEETING (RECREATION,AND PARKS COMMISSION) - Continued Mayor Snyder: That is the second hearing night for D.M.J.M. and Mr. Krieger has to attend that meeting and Mr. Nichols and Mr. Jett will still be gone, How about Thursday night? Councilman Krieger: Mayor Snyder: City Manager, Mr. Aiassa: Mayor Snyder: also a Recreation and Parks meeting. Councilman Heath: GENERAL MATTERS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS LETTER FROM WEST COVINA MINISTERIAL ASSOCIATION REQUESTING ESTABLISHMENT OF A HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION Deputy City Clerk' Mrs,, Preston: I have an East San Gabriel Valley Planning Committee meeting. Try them for June 4; that is a Thursday. I'll try to set it up for that date. There is a Mayor's meeting tomorrow night and there is Can you go for me? I think so. I believe you all have copies of this letter. Councilman Heath: I think this is a good suggestion to a solution to some of the problems we are having. I would like to ask the City Attorney a few questions. I believe that the plan or the request is that the Council appoint a commission to act as a unit to smooth over or to work on integration. If this committee was organized or instituted by the City$ would it have any police power in the form of subpoena or would it have any power of making determinations that could be followed or would have to be followed? Is this anything more than an arbitrary board? Would the people appearing before this commission appear only arbitrarily or could they be summoned? City Attorney, Mr. Williams: I think that such a committee would be investigatory and advisory and conciliatory only. It doesn't occur to me that the committee could have any governmental powers but would have the powers of investigation, recommendation, concilliation. Councilman Heath: Suppose that a problem came up in the City and this commission -40- C, C, 5/25/64 Page Forty -One HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION - Continued wanted to bring two together to talk this over people g r and see if they could come to an understandings would there be any power of subpoena? City Attorneys Mre Williams. I don't think so. I don't think you could create a committee that would have any power of force either to compel attendance or adherence to its recommendation; Mayor Snyder: There are several sample ordinances suggested to us in the League of California.Cities bulletin regarding Human Relation Commissions, how they are set ups et cetera. This would have to be decided after deliberations on the best way of setting up this ordinance, I think the main purpose of such a commission would be i to air many of the rumors that are going around town and to �- Z investigate such rumors, to educate the public as to the problem. The best solution to this problem is to air the problem and it isn't being aired at the present time; it is being shoved aside or covered upo I believe there is somebody here from the Ministerial Association who would like to speak on this matter, Councilman Heath: Would a commission of this • type be overlapping or interfering with the Council of Human Relations which I believe • has been working and I feel has been doing a pretty good job? Would it be an overlaps a replacement, or could we have this Human Relations Council carry this program? Mayor Snyder: I think the one thing such a commission would do that the Human relations Council cannot do is it would have more official statureo I think it could also have a power to recommend that certain State agencies or Federal agencies who do have power of subpoena be called in if they felt they were not getting the cooperation that they could expect out of law-abiding citizens. If the Council does not objects I would like to hear from Mr. Bergman at this time speaking to this question, Rev; Robert Bergman. The letter essentially is self-explanatory. The background I am sure the Council has some knowledge of the factors involved,, There are two parts to the letter. One is that the investigation which these booklets you have would give you some background informations set this into motion, and then resolve to set up a Human Relations Commission, On the matter of the Human Relations Councils this is a grass roots or citizens movement which has its own intent, The City can set up a commission and this would be its entity, I think there is need and it would be very helpful for this City to be on record and to establish such lines of communi- cation so that things which might come to attention which now have to go through some of the ministers or leaders of the community and then on an informal basis try to channel these could come to a responsible groups not that others aren't responsible, but in the sense that they are responsible to someone specifics the City Council$ and then preventative and helpful measures be taken to offset any. possibility or if we do get into an explosive situations to quell it, There are several patterns to be followed and there is probably more information that what you have at hand as to what is to be done, . 03 -41- • • C, Ca 5/25/64 Page Forty -Two HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION - Continued Councilman Heath: If this Council appointed a commission, what could this commission do that the Human Relations Council could not do? If the Council appointed a commission, what could that commission do that the ministerial group could not do? I think you people are well qualified to smooth this thing out and I think you have done a remarkable thing on it, Mayor Snyders This problem needs not only somebody interested in working at it but also somebody who at the policy making level who indicates the policy making level that they are concerned about this problem and establishment of such a commission would show all parties involved that this Council and this City is concerned about this problem and is willing to do within our power and leadership ability whatever we can to help solve it, The first thing where I think we have failed is to consistently say we don't have such a problem here and I think although it hasn't been brought out in this letter or the statement by Mr, Bergman, I have come in contact with several problems which indicate to me that if we do not have it here now we have a very dangerous potential problem, We have already had one cross burning; we have a great area of conflict in one area of our town, and I think to go further and say that this problem does not exist, we are hiding our head in the sand, I think in the past we might not necessarily be criticized too much for the attitude we took because I myself was not aware the problem was as severe as it was and I also felt that this was the kind of thing that took the capability of an Abraham Lincoln to solve and feeling that our capabilities were a little less than that it was much easier to not do anything and I think we are in a position where we have to do something and if we don't we might find State and Federal agencies in here doing it and we might prevent that by doing something now. I think there is no doubt that the situation is no longer minor if you wish to investigate all that is going on, Councilman Heath: I had n far, I there should be a commission, I think we all problem, The question now is where does this and I think that it would be more appropriate ministerial level because I think those people is respected much more than City government, o idea it had gone this think we all agree agree there is a commission come from coming at the have an approach that Mayor Snyder: I have been doing a lot of thinking about under what authority we could act and I didn't recall until I took the oath of office that we take an oath to uphold the Constitution and it seems to me that in upholding the Constitution we have not only the right to act but the duty to act not so much to act in the conflict between black and white but there is some indication here that there is an injustice being done to a certain portion of our population and it seems to me that our duty under our oath is to at least expose that injustice and I think that is the greatest damage you can do to the kind of conflict that is arising here, expose it, and that is exactly what such a commission would do, -42- C, C, 5/25/64 Page'Forty-Three HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION - Continued Councilman Krieger: In returning from the League of California Cities this last weekend I was particularly impressed with the fact that this is not a unique situation confronting our City Council, Each of the city councils throughout the State of California are confronting this particular situation, We are being called upon to exercise some leadership, some initiative, some imagination in this field. The late President Kennedy called a mayors' conference as I remember not so many years ago and challenged the mayors to take a more affirmative positive stand in this particular field of human endeavor and human rights, So, I think with respect to whether responsibility is ours from the highest level of government I believe it has been passed on to us to take an active and aggressive position in these matters. Whether or not we have the legal right to is in an opinion of the Attorney General which I noted in the League's material that says that the cities and counties are authorized to establish and create local agencies with purely advisory functions frequently known as human relation commissions for the purpose of advising local agencies on the problems involving inter -group relations, I believe turning to the activities of some of our sister cities in the State we find that there have been ordinances and resolutions of other city councils in this particular field, I am particularly impressed with the action of the City of Oakersfield in this particular matter. It established an inter -group relations board and looking at the comments of their mayor as to the history of this, it was not a matter of unanimity; it was a question of dJ.scuss:i_on and give and take but the first action of the Council was.to appoint a special committee on human.relations for the purpose of formulating a proposed resolution for.the creation of such a commission. I think that might be the most appropriate step at this point, for this Council to appoint a Human Relations Committee to look to the drafting and submission of an appropriate resolution in coordination with the City Attorney to accomplish some -of the tasks which are called out so well in the resolution of Bakersfield, do take the initiative we will lose it will fall into the scope of activities will not do justice to the purpose and program. I think it is incumbant upon positive position, Mayor Snyder: I suggest that unless we by forfeit, and perhaps it within our community that to the intent of this whole the Council to take a I would like to see us go furthers in setting up this commission, Setting up this commission, that it is the policy of this commission to, acting under our oath to uphold the Constitution, we will not tolerate, we will frown upon any attempts by any group to repress other minority 'groups; that as a matter of policy the City Council of West Covina beld.eves that.the Constitution grants equal rights to everybody and the rights should not be abridged in effect, Secondly, I think as a City Council that hires and fires, we should state we will not tolerate dis- crimination in matters of hiring.Men shall be hired on the basis of merit only, not color or religion, et cetera. I am sure we follow that right now but it should be restated as a matter of policy. I would like to see a motion to authorize the appointment of a Human Relations Commission and to direct the City Attorney to investigate or recommend ordinances under which a commission could operate. He could work with the appointed commission in drawing up such an ordinance, and ,Z4 -43- • C. C, 5/25/64 Page Forty -Four HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION - Continued Councilman Krieger: Move that the Mayor appoint A special committee from the Council on human relations to consult with and to prepare in conjunction with the City Attorney an,appropriate resolution setting up a Human Relations Commission setting forth specifically the duties and responsibilities of such a Commission and that this resolution be prepared and returned to the next regular meeting of this Council, Councilman Heath: I think to establish a commission by the Council, which would be ordinary citizens without police power, I think we,would be wasting time, I think it could be done much more effectively at the ministerial level and I would like to propose that we send a request to the Ministerial Association and ask them if they would accept such.a responsibility, Mayor Snyder: Councilman Heath: Mayor Snyder: We have a motion on the floor. In light of my feelings, I can't second the motion. I will second the motion. Action on Councilman Krieger's motion: Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilman Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Krieger, Mayor Snyder Jett, Nichols Mayor Snyder: At this time I would appoint myself and Mr. Krieger to discuss this matter with the City Attorney, I would like to propose that this be drawn up with the full Council, make an affirmative policy statement regarding the position of this City on these matters, I think to say that this can be repressed forever is not realistic. The time to prevent the big catastrophy is while it is still a small problem. I believe the airing of these problems will do much more to solve them than anything and that is about the most that such a commission can do. I don't think anybody should fear such an action, I think there may be difficulties in carrying it out but that in the end it is going to work for the good of the whole City and the community at large, CITY ATTORNEY ORDINANCE NO, 856 The City .Attorney presented: ADOPTED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA TO INCREASE THE FEE FOR THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE" -44- 11 C. C, 5/25/64 ORDINANCE NO, 856 - Continued Page Forty -Five Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. Motion by Councilman Heath, Seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said ordinance be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Krieger, Heath, Mayor Snyder Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols Said ordinance was given No, 856, ORDINANCE NO, 857 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO CHANGE THE NAME OF THE RESIDENTIAL - PROFESSIONAL TO THE RESTRICTED - PROFESSIONAL ZONE" Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said ordinance be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Krieger, Heath, Mayor Snyder Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols Said ordinance was given No, 857, ORDINANCE NO, 858 ADOPTED The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO REZONE CERTAIN PREMISES" (ZC 2959 Sherman) Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said ordinance be adopted,. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Krieger, Heath, Mayor Snyder Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols Said ordinance was given No, 858, -45- 6 Co C, 5/25/64 CITY ATTORNEY - Continued ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION Page Forty -Six The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING SECTION 2117 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO VOTING BY THE CITY COUNCILMEN" Motion by Councilman Heathy seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, that said ordinance be Introduced, ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO REZONE CERTAIN PREMISES" (ZC 296, Sindell 6 Kreedman) Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, that said ordinance be introduced, ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING SECTION 2332 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE COMPENSATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION" Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman -Krieger, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, that said ordinance be introduced, ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE ADDITION THERETO OF A SECTION 2322,1 RELATING TO THZ COMPENSATION OF THE RECREATION AND PARKS COMMISSION" Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance, -46- • �7 C. C, 5/25/64 Page Forty -Seven ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION - Continued Motion.by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, that said ordinance be introduced, ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE ADDITION THERETO OF A SECTION 2403,1 RELATING TO THE COM- PENSATION OF THE PERSONNEL BOARD" Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, that said ordinance be introduced, RESOLUTION NO, 2938 ADOPTED Mayor Snyder: The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN N0, 3929 REVISION 1" (Sindell 8 Kreedman) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of, the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Mayor Snyder, that said resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilman Heath9 Mayor Snyder Noes: Councilman Krieger Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols Said resolution was given No, 2938, RESOLUTION N0, 2939 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA DENYING A REQUEST FOR. A CHANGE OF ZONE" (ZC 2989 Wilson 8 Fuesler) Mayor Snyder: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, -47- • I Ca C. 5/25/64 RESOLUTION NO. 2939 - Continued Page Forty -Eight Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Mayor Snyder, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes„ Councilman Krieger, Mayor Snyder Noesg Councilman Heath Absentv Councilmen Jett, Nichols Said resolution was given No,.2939, FOREST LAWN CASE. City Attorney, Mr, Williams: I have prepared an appeal and it is ready to file in the Forest Lawn case, Mr. Yaunt called and indicated that he was perfectly willing to stipulate, to set aside this second judgment that has been signed and to'simply hold the matter without a judgment in the Superior Court until we see if we can arrive at a settlement, Mr, Blalock' representing Forest Lawn would not agree to a stipulation setting aside the judgment so we have no recourse but to appeal, Our time to appeal is sixty days from April 2, which leaves very little time. It is my purpose to file this tomorrow if you have no objections, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, that the City Attorney be instructed to file the notice of appeal on the Forest Lawn case, on the 114 acres, CITY CLERK TEMPORARY USE PERMIT APPLICATION OF ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION, POST 1679 FOR THREE FIREWORKS STANDS Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, that permission be given to the Royal Canadian Legion, Post.167, for three fireworks stands subject to staff approval and subject further to the deposit of $75,00, TEMPORARY USE PERMIT APPLICATION OF HUDGENS CARPET AND HOME FURNISHINGS, 1001 SOUTH GLENDORA AVENUE, FOR MERRY-GO-ROUND, PONY AND CART, AND TWO CLOWNS, JUNE 6 AND 79 1964 NO PROCEEDS Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: I think this is a violation of the zoning ordinance, Temporary uses may be approved finding first of all that..the request is for a shopping center and if it is for a shopping center then the City Council has the authority to grant this, Hudgens is one store in the shopping center, You can get into trouble if you let one store have outdoor rides, • • I C, Co 5/25/64 TEMPORARY USE PERMIT REQUEST (HUDGENS) ®Continued Mayor Snyder: Councilman Krieger: City Attorney, Mr, Williams: Page Forty -Nine I think it was probably just an error in procedure. Could we grant it subject to Von's joining in the application? I think so. Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried,.that the temporary use permit request of Hudgens Carpet and Home Furnishings for a merry-go-round, pony and cart, and two clowns for June 6 and 7, 1964 be -granted subject to the condition that Von's Market join in the application,. VEHICLE SAFETY CHECK WEEK Deputy City Clerk, Mrs, Preston: Mayor Snyder: JUNE IS DAIRY MONTH Mayor Snyder.: This is for the weeks of May 24 to June 6, 1964. If there are no objections, I will so proclaim, (There were none,) So proclaimed, If there are no objections, I will so proclaim, (There were none,) So proclaimed, PROPOSED SOUTHERLY ANNEXATION DISTRICT N0, 66 TO THE CITY OF GLENDORA DELETION OF LESS THAN 5% OF THE LAND USE Deputy City Clerk, Mrs, Preston: NOTICE OF HEARINGS BEFORE THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION This is for your information, Deputy City Clerk, Mrs, Preston: I have three notices. We received a notice from the local Agency Formation Commission of these notices, Northerly Annexation No, 61 and 62 to the City of Covina, Councilman Heath: Shouldn't the Planning Director get a copy of these and know what they are? -49- 9 • C. C. 5/25/64 'PENDING ANNEXATIONS - Continued City Manager; Mr. Aiassa: Page Fifty The Planning Department and Commission are notified of anything on our perimeter. Mayor Snyder: Since they are important enough to tell us about, I think the Planning Department should get all of them. Obviously they won't have any comment on them. As a matter of procedure, I would just as soon delete all those except those affecting us. Deputy City Clerk, Mrs, Preston: The County consolidated Fire Protection District and County Lighting and Maintenance District No, 18669,their petition No. 3224, This is for your information, WATER PROBLEM Deputy City Clerk, Mrs, Preston: I have a request from Robert Ebiner, President$ Municipal Voters League, addressed to the City Council regarding the water problem. (Read said letter.) Councilman Krieger: There was the initial forma- tion of a citizens committee some months back with Councilman Jett and Mr. A.iassa sitting in. .They met at,C,offee Dan's, if I remember correctly. I suggest that this is a matter currently before the Council and we might better devote ourselves immediately to the problem on a Council level before we activate any citizens committees with reference to that. Mayor Snyder: I would agree. I suggest we reply to this letter asking them to submit names for possible future committee members to -choose from. Acknowledge the letter to that effect. CHAMBER CONTRACT Mr,, John Gardner: I am president of the West Covina Chamber of Commerce. We are pleased to submit a contract for our services. The contract this year is a little different than it has been in the past although it is made up actually in two contracts; one, to implement the other. We have our standard service agreement which is almost identical to what we have had in the past in the amount of $11,500 and supplementing that we have the headquarter city contract in the amount of $7,500, I am here to answer any questions you may have in regard to our contract, M1111M U C, C. 5/25/64 CHAMBER CONTRACT - Continued Mayor Snyder.* City Attorney, Mr,, Williams-. Page Fifty -One Has the City Attorney and the City Manager reviewed this contract? I have read the contracts; Councilman Krieger: You appointed Councilman Nichols and myself to meet with the Chamber representatives on this matter and in the company of Councilman Nichols I met with President Gardner, Treasurer Carr and Chris Tambe of the Chamber at a luncheon meeting at which time we did a preliminary review of the budget with particular emphasis on the difference between the budgetary requirements for the year 63-63 and the requirements for 64-65 and discussing in some length the item having to do with the headquarter city which was originally submitted in one contract form and one budget request of $19,OOO, At our request the Chamber broke these contracts down into two separate contracts, one referring to their normal budgetary require- ments and the second having to do solely and exclusively with the headquarter city concepts The final document submitted to the Council is the result of that luncheon and a subsequent luncheon, These meetings gave us the opportunity to review at some length the differences in the budgetary request between fiscal year 63-64 and 64-65 as well as to elicit more information from the Chamber on the contract having to do with the headquarter city .. concepts I would suggest to the Council that in dealing with the headquarter city concept we are in a preliminary stage as is the Chamber and in all probability firm and fair committments cannot be made in advance on certain of these allocations inasmuch as the program is at its inception. However, as a member of the committee, although I do not speak for Councilman Nichols, I am satisfied that the Chamber has used their best efforts to present to us a budget that is both practical and feasible; they are taking into consideration both their items of income and expense. I have the sense rather than the facts to suggest that the headquarter city budget is likewise merited. This is a matter particularly that is going to require continuing review not only by the Council but by the Chamber,, There is the necessity for quarterly reports in the headquarter city budget as well as in their regular budget and I think the Council can, by virtue of these agreements, be made fully aware and continually aware of the program of the Chamber in both of these activities,, It would therefore be my recommendation as one member of the committee that the.budgetary request of $11$00, which is $1,500 more than the budget Authori- zation of last year, be approved upon the consideration that the expenses of the Chamber during the ensuing fiscal year are anticipated and I believe justifiably so to be greater than they were during the last fiscal year by reason of some internal changes. With respect to the headquarter city budget, I believe an authorization of $7,500 is justified during the preliminary stages of this program and will give the Council a better idea at budget time next year as to whether or not this is a satisfactory implimentation of the program as the Council conceived it and also by virtue of the quarterly reports to be submitted to the Council,, Co C, 5/25/64 Page Fifty -Two CHAMBER CONTRACT- Continued The only other comments that I had has to do with our budgetary sessions, I am only concerned iwith the fact that these budgets are being taken into consideration or will be taken into consideration as well during the budgetary sessions of the Council for fiscal year 64-65, Mayor Snyder: In the past we have approved a Chamber budget in advance of our budget session? City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: That is hard to answer. You are supposed to have your budget hearings within the next two or three weeks, I think if it is the decision of the Council that budgetary requirements of the entire City are going to be a focal point,..that you should review the entire proposed budget first. Mayor Snyder: Could we not indicate that in principle we agree with this budget and if we can fit it into our overall budget we would most likely approve the entire budget? The headquarter city concept as a joint project of the City and the Chamber? Councilman Heath: I think it behooves us to make sure this is in the Is budget, I think we should make the commitment' tonight so we will dfinitely put this money aside in the budget, Is Mayor Snyder: I have no objection to that if the rest of the Council agrees, I am only saying you have to fit every item to the whole budget, Councilman Heath, I think this should have priority, City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: Councilman Krieger: Do we have a written budget or contract on the $7,500, a written proposal? Yes, City.Attorney, Mr, Williams: I think the -most important thing in it is the money. I have some slight objections to some of this, It is unconstitu- tional to commit next year's budget in this fiscal year, Councilman Heath: Can v�e authorize the signing of the contract? City Attorney, Mr, Williams: I don't see any objections. You can sign a lease for an ensuing year under the theory that a lease does not incur the indebtedness until you have had the use of the property and then you pay for it. Although it doesn't specifically say so, this agreement doesn't incur the obligation to make these payments until you have received the services, As to the first one, if'we are down so low we can't make that quarterly payment out of the 63-64 funds, I would be surprised, -52- C, C, 5/25/64 Page Fifty -Three CHAMBER CONTRACT - Continued n LJ Councilman Krieger: Under the circumstances 0 indicated by the City Attorney, it may be more appropriate to propose a motion to table this until the time of the budget considerations; I believe each member of the Council this evening has stated their position regarding this matter, Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Mayor Snyder, and carried, that the matter of the Chamber contract be tabled until the budget considerations of the Council for the fiscal year 1964-65,- CITY MANAGER REPORTS GASOLINE REQUIREMENTS FOR 1964-65 City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: We need authorization to continue this gas purchase through the County, (Read report,) Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and . carried, to authorize the City Manager and the City Finance Officer to commit the City's gasoline requirements as we did last year to the Los Angeles County Purchasing Agent, WATER PROBLEM City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: You have an invitation from the Suburban Water Company for a joint meeting. I have not acknowledged any of the letters, Mayor Snyder: I would like to see the letter acknowledged and say we possibly in'the future would like to have this joint meeting; that our present business right now prevents an immediate meeting, Councilman Krieger: I think it would be'more advisable to have our meeting with Mr, Montgomery take place b6fore our meeting with Suburban, City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: YOUNT ANNEXATION Councilman Krieger: does involve a pending litigation, at this time .to defer this,. Mayor Snyder: I will take care of this. There is a report in each Councilman's jacket, This It may be more appropriate I think it should be deferred to a personnel session in the near future, -53- C. Co ' 5/25/64 Page Fifty -Four YOUNT ANNEXATION - Continued • City Attorney, Mr, Williams: You can discuss this with the City Attorney because the attorney -client privilege supercedes the Brown Act, Mayor Snyder; We will hold this for a personnel session, RENTAL OF XEROX FOR POLICE DEPARTMENT REPORT City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: We would like to rent a Xerox machine, The work in the Police Department is of sufficient magnitude that we would like to rent one for a year to see how it works out. This would be a rental and I would like to keep statistical -records on the use of this,. We have a master setup where we can centralize the duplicating operations in the new building of -future City where we have access -to everybody. Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that the City Manager be authorized to enter into a lease • agreement with Xerox for the leasing of a 1,14 Xerox machine for the use of the Police Department, PERSONNEL PLANNING DEPARTMENT ASSOCIATE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ASSISTANT City Manager, Mr, Aiassa. I have an arrangement to propose. We have been trying to get a Planning Associate and a. Planning Assistant, The Planning Associate is the assistant to the Director and the range is 26 and the starting salary is 692 to 842. The Planning Assistant is range 24, $627 to $753. We have come up with one Planning Assistant but we have not been able to formulate a decision on the Planning Associate because there are about a dozen other cities looking for the same key position. We had a new recommendation to the Planning Commission and I would like to recommend the possibility of having two Planning Assistants and -leave the Planning Associate's position open and not filling it until we have full approval from my office and the Planning Commission and the City Council, In the meantime we will provide the Planning Depart- ment with two men and create three positions for Assistants and they ,can compete for the Planning Department Associate position. We can eventually eliminate one of these positions because it will be an internal promotion. This inodification has to be -done by resolution. RESOLUTION NO, 2940 The City Manager presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING RESOLUTION NO, 1277 RELATING TO CLASSES' -54; • E� C. C. 5/25/64 RESOLUTION NO, 2940 - Continued Mayor Snyder: Page Fifty -Five Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Mayor Snyder, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilman Krieger, Mayor Snyder Noes: Councilman Heath Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols Said resolution was given No, 2940, CHAMBER CONTRACT (Continued) Mr, John Gardner: Would the Council authorize the Mayor to sign this contract come July 1st? We have a particular problem in the Chamber and that is in the headquarter city concept we have been expending money since the first of this year which does put us in a very rough situation financially which we are trying to overcome. Last year the contract wasn't signed until the latter part of August which under this particular arrangement we would have to halt the work of about 60 volunteer workers in the Chamber because we don't have the funds to carry it on, Mayor Snyder: City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: Councilman Krieger: You are asking that we authorize signing it as of July lst? We are executing a contract for next year's money. The request as it is presented I don't believe would raise any legal difficulties. Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Mayor Snyder, and carried, to'reconsider the previous motion to table this matter, Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that the Mayor be authorized to execute on July 1, 19649 two agreements with the West Covina Chamber of Commerce submitted to the West Covina City Council on May 25, 1964 for budgetary appropriations for $11,500 and $7,500 in substantially the form submitted, Mr, John Gardner: Thank you, It is the intention of the Chamber to give you more of a comprehensive report. We will show you what you got for your money, -55- • • C. C. 5/26/64 'CITY MANAGER REPORTS - Continued PAYMENT FOR APPRAISALS Harrison Baker, Jr, (Japanese property - $19000) (Del Norte Park additions - $850) Page Fifty -Six Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger. to authorize the payment to Harrison Baker, Jr. of $1,000 for his appraisal on the Japanese property and $850 for his appraisal of the Del Norte Park additions, ;making a total of $1,850.00. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes; Councilmen Krieger, Heath, Mayor Snyder Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols SATURDAY HOLIDAYS ACTION Personnel Board Report City Manager, Mr. Aiassae (Read report re this matter.) Normally we would have half of the crew off on one Friday and half of the crew on the next Friday and the public safety would have their equivelent on their vacation. If you close the whole City Hall, I feel this might lead to a problem. Mayor Snyder: City Manager, Mr. Aiassa° Why not kef-') the full staff here and add it to their vacation time? You will need extra personnel if you carry it over for any seng;;h of time. Motion by Councilman Heath. seconded by Mayor Snyder, and carried, that when the holiday falls on Saturday that half of the staff has the previous day off and the other half has the following Monday off, and the public safety employees get an extra day on their vacation, and this is for Memorial Day and the 4th of July for the year 1964. (Councilman Krieger voted "No".) CITY TREASURER Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, to accept the Treasurer's report for April, 1964, and place it on file. -56- CJ • • t C. Ca 5/25/64 MAYOR'S REPORTS CHAMBER MEETINGS Page Fifty -Seven Mayor Sndyer: The Chamber has asked we appoint a delegate to each general meeting in the executive sessions, I thought it would work best if we appointed somebody on a three-month rotating basis. This is for liaisom, Councilman Heath: Mayor Snyder: TEEN-KAN-TEEN I think it is a good idea, If there are no objections, I will appoint Mr. Heath for the first three months, Mayor Snyder: I have a request from the Teen - Kan -Teen for a joint meeting with the City Council and the Parks and Recreation Commission, Councilman Krieger: I think that is a good idea, Mayor Snyder: We could suggest they be given a portion of the session the night we have the meeting with the arks and Recreation Commission, Councilman Heath: Mayor Snyder: DEMANDS That is a good idea. I will take care of that. Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, to approve demands totalling $343,174.56 as lis-ced on demand sheets B164, C386 through C389, This total includes time deposits of $25,000 and fund transfers of $20389729,00, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Krieger, Heath, Mayor Snyder Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Jett, Nichols LA PUENTE WATER COMPANY STOCK SALE City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: The La Puente Water Company is in the process Of buying and selling stock. I would like to have authorization to see if we can pick up some extra stock in this company because today I had a meeting with Camille's sister and there seems to be something going on there, The La Puente Cooperative has five wells and if we are going into the water business this might be the one we want to take over, -57- C. C. 5/25/64 Page Fifty -Eight LA PUENTE WATER COMPANY ® Corftinued Motion by Councilman Heath' seconded�by Councilman Krieger, and carried, that the City Manager be instructed to report back to the Council how much he can buy this stock for and how many shares are available. There being no further business, Motion by Councilman Heath,.seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, that this meeting be adjourned to next Monday night, June 1, 1964 at eight o'clock. The meeting was adjourned at 2:15 A.M. • ATTEST: • - CITY CLERK APPROVED MAYOR