Loading...
05-26-1965 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA9 CALIFORNIA MAY 269 1965 • The adjourned regular meeting of the City Council was called to order by Mayor Nichols at 7.-40 P.M. in the West Covina City Hallo Councilman Heath led the Pledge of Allegianceo 'RO'LL; CALL. Present.- Mayor Nichols, Councilmen Snyder, Krieger, Heath Others Present.- Mr. George Aiassa, City Manager Mrso Lela Preston, Deputy City Clerk Mr. Herman R,, Fast,,Public Services Director Mr,, Harold Joseph, Planning Director Absent.- Councilman Jett Mr. Robert Flotten, City Clerk 6 Admino Assistant Mr. Harry Co Williams, City Attorney FREEWAY STUDY Public Hearing • Mayor Nichols.- The purpose of this meeting is a public hearing on the proposed modifications of the freeway system in West Covina,, There will be a public hearing and an opportunity for public participation and testi- mony in this matter,, First we will hear the staff report,, Planning Director, Mr,, Joseph.- We gave notification to all people who spoke at the Planning Com- mission meeting, those who appeared publicly, everyone who signed petitions presented to the Planning Commission, plus people who live on Sunkist Avenue, people who resided within 1000 feet north and 1000 feet south along Lark Ellen and Hollenbeck who wanted to receive notice at the Planning Commission and these people were renotified by the City Clerk's Office for tonight's meeting,, (Presented maps and read the Planning Commission resolution re this matter and recommendations therein.) There was a letter dated May 269 1965 which was given to me and has been given to the Mayor, Mayor Nichols: We have a copy of a letter from Joel Thompson, 1230 Hidden Valley Drive, West Covina, who urges the Council in its deliberations • to retain the off ramp on the south side of the freeway at Hollenbeck Avenue,, Let the Minutes show this letter has been received and this position of Mr, Joel Thompson has been entered in the record,, This is the time and the place for the public hearing on the proposed freeway widening in this City,, -1® C,, C,, ' 5/26/65 FREEWAY STUDY Continued Page Two • Mr,, Robert O'Malley At the time we were.here during 247 North Lark Ellen the Planning Commission recom- West Covina mendations and meetings we brought in various testimony from various individuals with petitions,, We also had an additional petition which was signed which we did not present at the last meeting feeling that we would be getting a favorable vote. Therefore, we do protest any overpasses on Lark Ellen due to a detrimental effect on the property. That is a collector street for four schools,, There are four churches on that street,, It would create a tremendous hazard, noise, and I, for one, won't put up with it,, That is my feeling,, I think that is the feeling of about 200 other property owners in that immediate.. .neighborhood,, We would recommend that no overpass be even considered and that is according to the Planning Commission recommendations,, As far as the closing of the ramps, we would recommend that very highly,, We think it is an advantage not only to the neighborhood but an advantage to the freeway traffic because it lessens entrances or exits and you have less chance of any tie-up or accident,, Mr,, Paul Lockhart I am the owner of the Covina 1637 Garvey Blvd,, Motel on Garvey,, I would like West Covina to protest the design of the Cameron realignment and the closing of the Orange off ramp. In the first place I feel that the . new alignment there is a very expensive thing for the State to get into,, We have three motels on the service road. Much of our business comes off of the San Bernardino Freeway,, We would be adversely.affected by such an alignment.. There are 14 or 15 other businesses along there that have quite a little to do with the freeway and people coming into the area,, The State obviously.has.an off.ramp at Orange and Pacific and we would like to have it stay rather than going into that very expensive design that you see on the property,, I am not real sure that our protest before the Planning Commission was received. I personally didn't get any notice concerning the meeting tonight,, Mr,, John Gardner At the Planning Commission hearings .1100 West Garvey Blvd,, I spoke in behalf of.the Traffic West Covina Committee for the Plaza Merchants Association,, I would like just for a moment to point out where we concur with the recommendations of the Planning Commission,, We would like to strongly note in their recommendation we very definitely approve of,, One is the off ramp on the east side of Cameron,, We think this is essential to service the central business district and the off ramp at Sunset on the north side of the freeway,, This is a very definite essentially needed. off ramp to service the central business district,, Rather than say nothing,at this time even though it concurs with the Planning.:Com® mission's.recommendation, we would like to make note.of this,simply because this would be out of..the norm as far as the State Highway Department is concerned and we feel very stronly that every effort • should be made on the part of the City of West Covina to be sure these are retained so they adequately service our central business.district which is so vital to the whole income of this City,, Mr,, Donald Duncan I represent 98% of the residents 242 North Sunkist on Sunkist. I have a petition West Covina here from the residents that in the event the above project is authorized we, the undersigned, hereby .wish to go on.record as having entered a'protest and as having made the following request, -2- C,, C,, ` 5f 26f 65 Page Three 'FREEWAY STUDY Continued Sidewalks,, That at no cost to the property owners,, Curbs at no cost to the property owners,, In consideration of our belief that the opening of Sunkist Avenue to Pacific Avenue can in no way benefit the residents of this area and in fact we have a contrary belief that our property will be depreciated by such actions, we have the following request that the property affected be rezoned to accomodate multiple dwellings,, We feel this would compensate us for the loss and we anticipate a loss in this action,, Mr,, Harry Carpenter I want to emphasize the Lark 1.21 South Lark Ellen Ellen overpass that was suggested West Covina and that we are opposing,, I accepted Mr,, O'Malley's recom® ntendatirn that that was a residential area affected both south and north back from the freeway quite a ways and up to the freeway. There will be trouble there with unnecessary hazards of traffic if an overpass goes in and won't serve any purpose at all because the people can take Azusa or Vincent to get from one side of the freeway to the other. While it is true that the alignment of the service road will serve a great service other than what it is right now, the inadequacy of protection of homes east of Lark Ellen Avenue and also west of Lark Ellen Avenue to Glendora, they are not protected from the hazard of this traffic and noise from the freeway. When that goes through we are going to have additional heavy trucks and it has been noted in • the Los Angeles Herald that the State plans when the eight lanes are completed to divert heavy traffic from Valley to San Bernardino through a route along the San Bernardino Freeway which means the ad- jacent home owners will get a lot more noise there,, At the last meeting I requested that the overpass be maintained for the elders and the children,, It has been recommended to eliminate it but I would ask the Council to reconsider that for the elderly people in our community and the children. There will be lives lost when they start to go from the Lark Ellen area across that freeway by going down to Azusa or up to Vincent,, We are all looking forward to the day when we will request the Planning Commission and the Council as a buffer line because the new buildings will be built with accoustics, whether professional or commercial buildings. Those residents right now with the addition of the heavy traffic the State intends to divert from Valley over onto the San Bernardino Freeway, when those eight lanes are done we will have a hazard of traffic here,, Mr,, Walter A,, Molberg This Lark Ellen overpass will 219 North Lark Ellen necessitate the removal of 18 West Covina homes,, On Lark Ellen north of the freeway we have eight homes; five of them would have to be removed,, There is no driveway to the rear due to the fact there is a blacktop alley in the back. Every- one of those homes is worth $120,000 and up,, Why take out 18 homes for a bridge that is not necessary? I am absolutely against the overpass,, There.being no further public testimony, the hearin was closed,, Councilman Heath- I have some comments to make on the plan in general,, On and off ramps.in our City or any city are hard to get and when there are ones given up you don't get them back,, We have a plan before us where it shows that we have eliminated a number of off ramps and I am not clear in my own mind what we are gaining by giving up these off ramps,, Giving up an off ramp can only mean one thing and that is -3- • C,, C,, 5/26/65 TREEWAY.'STUDY - Continued Page Four that the traffic must then travel to the next nearest off ramp and in doing so puts a heavier load on the City streets, creates more traffic hazards and danger to our children,, I think the more accesses onto the freeway or off the freeway are better for our City streets and better for our safety. I can't see what we are gaining by giving up the off ramps we have now. As to the other ramps which we have shown before us here I feel that there is much missing. I don't think there is anyone who can debate the issue that the best way to handle traffic is to keep it moving and never stop it. This would be the ideal situation where we could continually keep the traffic moving and blend it into one another and away from one another,, In looking at these plans we have before us here all I can see on that entire plan are stops and left turns and I can't see where that is any sensible design of traffic handling at all. If we change these ramps at this time they will be changed for a long time,, We don't change ramps and redesign them every day; they are going to be with us for a long time and whatever an objection may be to changing these designs to a full flow -design I think is over shadowed by the fact that if we are going to do the design of these ramps let's do them right in the first place following all concepts of good traffic handling and even if it does costa little more remember it is going to be in for a long time,, As far as the individual ramps are concerned, if you would keep in mind as you look at each one of • these and we discuss each one individually where we have the stopage of traffic for a stop sign, signal, left turn, et cetera, you are not producing good traffic flow,, Councilman Snyder: I have a question of a general nature,, In adopting this design or the recommendations of the Planning Commission did you start with the State's suggestion or did you start with the Victor Gruen report or what? Public Services Director Mr,, Fast-. We utilized the eneral roced 9 g p ure that the State has at present, the policies that they have,, We utilized the Victor Gruen Report and certainly we had our own additional conclusions as well as in addition to the testimony given at the various public hearings before the Planning Commission,, Councilman Snyder: I would agree with Mr. Heath that we shouldn't give up these off and on ramps unless we were getting full four -quadrant interchanges and upgrading of these other interchanges, which we are not,, We are getting much less than the Victor Gruen report recommends at all these interchanges. I think the fact that they don't is important,, In many respects these don't even resemble the Victor Gruen report,, I think they are inadequate if you look over a 20@year period,, • Councilman Heath; May I re-emphasize the fact that in all good design of traffic is in a continuous flow and is never stopped. Unless this is the concept that we will accept at this time I think that this fact should be established right or wrong before we start in, that the continuous flow is the best way of handling traffic,, If we establish that as a non -fact and accept it then I think when we look at these designs we can tell whether they are a good design or not,, -4- • • C,, Co 5/26/65 FREEWAY STUDY ® Continued Page Five Mayor Nichols; We will proceed to the first item shown on the report of April 22 which would be Lark Ellen Avenue and Hollenbeck Street,, Councilman Krieger: Instead of following the report in that manner I would suggest we turn to the recommendations on Page 6 and take them in the order indicated there, Mayor Nichols:: All right,, The first one is the Cameron/Orange Interchange,, Councilman Snyder: I think for several reasons this interchange on the north side is inadequate,, Mr,, Heath has pointed out it doesn't do anything for the man going east from the south. He has to make a left-hand turn to go east on the freeway. The cloverleaf is put in the northeast quadrant through apartments that are already built where as Victor Gruen suggested it be put there through the west, through an area that is not built up. Also, the Victor Gruen report would solve the problem of Sunset Avenue, would not direct traffic down there,, It also would retain the off ramp at Orange Avenue and in the southeast quadrant if you are going to retain the off ramp then I don't see where to turn to return to the on ramp at that position to allow traffic going east without making a left turn,, I don't like this plan,, I think it is inadequate and does not solve the Long-range problem,, Councilman Heath: I agree,, I don't think this interchange is conducive to good traffic handling and is much worse than what we have at the present time,, Councilman Krieger: In the recommendation it is indi- cated that the future ramp be constructed concurrently with the freeway widening,, If I understand that future ramp, it is to provide for eastbound traffic from traffic going north on the freeway, is that tune? Going north on Cameron? Public Services Director, Mr,, Fast: Plate 1 was not recommended by the. Planning Commission,, It did have an on ramp with free right-hand movement around behind the hospital in the event that were to be retained and it would eliminate the possibility of having the second off ramp going onto the service area,, Councilman Krieger: The recommendation of the staff to the Planning Commission, as I understand it, was to have that ramp,'is'it not? • Public Services Director, Mr,, Fast: The additional report followed the concept that the State had which would be to entirely surround the interchange around the two streets involved, the freeway itself and Cameron with nothing else involved,, In regard to the Planning Commission's desire to providt direct access on Service to the Civic Center as well as the business district on the second off ramp, the choice and advantages insofar as traffic flow to the east, traffic count, et cetera, there was not that radical a change and we felt from the standpoint of left turns ea.stbound from traffic countwise would be quite low and this left -turn movement would not be adverse, especially when balanced against the advantages of the second off ramp,, m5® Co Co 5/26/65 FREEWAY STUDY - Continued Page Six • Mayor Nichols: It would be awkward to have people going eastbound desire to get off on Cameron and turn north on Cameron and you would be having opposing left turns side by side,, Public Services Director, Mr,, Fast: Councilman Krieger: This would only be a right-hand turn coming off of Cameron. You would come off the other ramp to go north. The plate we have is not truly accurate,, Public Services Director, Mr,, Fast: That is part of the total report to the Planning Commission and was not the part that was recommended,, Their recommendation is Plate 2 not Plate 1,, 9 Councilman Snyder: Planning Director, Mr,, Joseph: • Councilman Snyder: Public Services Director, Mr,, Fast: What objection did the State have to the plan recommended by the Victor Gruen report? There are apartments being built right there,, too. This solves the problem of having to open up Sunset Avenue,, The Victor Gruen report required additional widening of the overpass bridges, too,, Traffic Engineer, Mr,, Larson: The basic objection was the mixing of freeway traffic with the frontage road traffic,, The State recommends very strongly having the ramps intersect the cross street, the street that has an under - crossing or overcrossing,, Councilman Heath: I am trying to think in my own mind where there is an inter- change along this freeway and I am thinking now starting down in .Alhambra of Atlantic Avenue, Garfield, Del Mar, et cetera, where they have traffic which actually stops as we have designed at this point. I think you will find all those interchanges which were put in quite some time ago have complete circles where the traffic blends in, no left turns, and I thought left turns were antiquated by now but we are going back to them here,, This ramp at Cameron and the one at Sunset is going to serve our Civic Center, library, and courts,, We have advertised over the entire East San Gabriel. Valley and further that we need more courts here,, We want this to be the headquarter city and the reason we should have them is they are very accessible • from the freeway,, These two interchanges at Sunset and Orange/ Pacific are the ones going to serve our heavily used Civic Center and they should be of a design that makes it conducive to handling of traffic and I don't think that left-hand turns in any design are advisable. Councilman Snyder: I think also we are fooling ourselves if we think we can get what we can now and hope to get more later,, I think this is going to be our last chance to get adequate interchanges,, I could accept that M C. C,, ' 5/26165 FREEWAY STUDY - Continued Page Seven. • design on the north if they put another cloverleaf on the left. I feel we should go for the maximum and hope to get -the majority of it,, Mayor Nichols: Orange Avenue/Pacific Avenue Interchangeo It is -recommended --- - that this be eliminated, Councilman Snyder: I feel that that could be retained and should be retained. If that is not retained then the Sunset Avenue should be retained but I feel it would be better to retain the Orange Avenue Interchange and eliminate the Sunset Avenue off ramp. The Victor Gruen report also strongly advised the continuation of the north frontage road and to retain the north Orange Avenue off ramp and eliminate the Sunset ramp would give greater importance to the north frontage road and make it more accessible east or west whereas now it is bottlenecked and little used. Councilman Krieger: Don't you run into this mixer problem we keep hearing about if you do what you just suggested? Councilman Snyder: I think it is something we are going to have to accept as the • least harmful to get what Mr. Heath has pointed out, all right turns and a free flowo Councilman Krieger: I understood his comments were primarily directed at the time they were mentioned at the Cameron situation and I raised the point if you follow your suggestion to its logical conclusion with Orange and Cameron being as close as they are, aren't you.going to run into a problem of on -coming and exiting traffic? Councilman Snyder: the side that would tend to making a full cloverleaf you don't want to redesign this. That is true but I think they could add a collector lane on minimize that problem,, I think without are going to have that problem,, I I feel what has been done is inadequate. Councilman Heath: I would agree with that. I think the off ramp at Sunset should be maintained. I would like to see an on ramp at Sunset but I don't know how you can do it. I would not be in favor of shutting off Sunset at all. Councilman Snyder: I think you should retain Sunset if you don't retain -Orange. If you retain Orange I feel Sunset could be eliminated and'the frontage road connected through,, • Councilman Heath: When I was saying I did not like the Orange ramp I was talking about the north.and south of the freeway because they both have left turns. I though we had then finished the discussion on.the Orange/ Pacific ramps,, Oro C,, ' 5/26/65 'FREEWAY STUDY - Continued Page Eight • Mayor Nichols: We will move to item 3, the Sunset off ramp, that it be retained and that further consideration be given to its elimination at an appropriate future timeo Councilman Snyder. - Councilman Heath: I have already spoken on that,, 3o have I,, Mayor Nichols: Item 4; that the north frontage road be terminated at Walnut - haven Avenue by means of a "knuckle" type intersection, Councilman Snyder: This depends on what happens on the Sunset Avenue off ramp. If it is not retained then Sunset Avenue frontage road should connect through to the frontage road on the west. Councilman Heath: I have no objection to that, Mayor Nichols: Item 5; that the preliminary design shown in Plan 2 be approved for the r --- _ Vincent Avenue interchange. • Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: That is a typographical error, It should be Plan No, 3. Councilman Snyder: This I feel is grossly inadequate,, It does not provide again two quadrants on the north and I think if any street is going to need it this is the one that will need it, It has an on ramp going west,, It does not have for traffic going south,, They still have to make a left-hand turn across a very busy street, east traffic going south, Councilman Heath: I would agree with that. I think this is very.inadequate. I think it is ,the most important interchange in the entire City, Again we have left turns and we also have a difference in grade and a. very sharp drop from the grade of the freeway to the grade down at Vincent Avenue because iit is an underpass. I feel in this case here that by the elimination of that frontage road to the west of, -Vincent Avenue, by that elimination you could put in a full cloverleaf at this point which would give some real good use and I don't think this is adequate at also Councilman Krieger: The design seems to be comparable to what the recommendation is at Cameron,, Apparently both your comments go to the same point at Vincent as they were made at Cameron, is that the idea? • Councilman Snyder: That is the idea. If you had to choose between the two, this one is more important than the one at Cameron, Mayor Nichols: Item 6; that the Glendora Avenue pedestrian overcrossing be eliminated, sm • 0 C, C, 5126/65 FREEWAY STUDY - Continued Page Nine Councilman Snyder: I 'quite frankly have rarely ever seen a pedestrian on this over - crossing; however, I am told there are more people using it than we think and I understand at the present time there is a count being made of the amount of people using it. I understand the State particularly wants this pedestrian overpassing removed because it will be expensive to rebuild. I feel a count should be made and they should justify the purposes of their removal before they do it because it may be that this is more used than we think,, Councilman. Krieger- Don°t we have a count in this March 19th report on this crossing? Their count discloses 75 pedestrians crossing during the 12-hour period of. 6:00 A,M, to. 6:00 P.M. on a school day, Mayor Nichols: My reaction would be that we have been talking consistently of looking to the future and I don't feel that we can any more determine the merits of a pedestrian overcrossing based upon its current count than we can the design for Vincent Avenue based on the current count. We are projecting to the future, As our Civic Center area becomes more dense, that being the sole and only pedestrian overcrossing, might be a very nice feature to have in our City later on, Councilman Snyder: Councilman Krieger: at Lark Ellen would provide a access between the north and midway between Vincent Avenue Councilman Snyder: I think we should think long before we remove this, Continuing on with the report, it states that an overcrossing more desirable location for pedestrian south of the City since Lark Ellen is and Azusa Avenue undercrossings, Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: People don't walk from the north to the south half of the City;.they walk to the shopping center. As far as we know, no school children.have to cross going to school, Councilman Snyder: Originally my memory recalls it was put in at the request of the old shopping center when the freeway went through, Councilman Krieger: The situation basically is one where if the overcrossing was. taken out they would have to either go under the freeway at Vincent or go down to Azusa Avenue and the alternative you have suggested is to reinstall an overcrossing at Lark Ellen,, I am back to the question of justification versus expense and where a thing becomes too expensive or where the justification is such to warrant the expense is a pretty nebulous question in my mind, Councilman Snyder: Who don't we do it this way: The State probably has some standards on justification and we could say we would prefer to retain it and if they want to remove it they can justify it by their expense statements, sm C, Co 5126/65 Page Ten FREEWAY STUDY - Continued • Councilman Heath: I find myself hard-pressed to justify the expense I feel it would take to install this overcrossing for the benefit we would get from it, I don't see where the use of 75 people a day justifies what I am estimating it will cost to extend this overpass or move it to a different locations Councilman Snyder: I tend to agree with you, I don't think we should fight for it but I don -It think we should voluntarily give it up, Councilman Krieger: What comparable situations do we have on the freeway going west with overpasses? I know one specifically by a school and that is under- standable, Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: I believe the policy has been they are located adjacent to schools or a large manufacturing plant where they might do it from the standpoint of that sort of demand, We don't know of anything comparable to this, Mayor Nichols: Item 7 is the recommendation that the Lark Ellen Avenue . Interchange be eliminated and the north and south frontage roads be realigned, Councilman Heath: I can't see the reason for elimination at all. I can't see what we are gaining by eliminating it, All I can see is that it would be to our disadvantage to eliminate this, Councilman Krieger: Apparently one of the bases for the recommendation is to improve the realignment of the north and south frontage roads, is that right?' Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: That is the additional benefit from it. The basis for it is that the State would like on all new freeways their off ramps a mile apart and I think they should on the future ones, Councilman Heath: The fact remains now that we have those off ramps here. Why give them up? I would like to say this in all practical sense. I don't think there is a member on this Council or there is a person sitting in this audience that if they were going to go from Azusa to Citrus would follow that frontage road even it it was straight because they would go on the ramp off of Azusa and come off at Citrus, Nobody can tell me by the straightening of that frontage • road that people will use it, They are not; they are going to get on the freeway, Councilman Snyder: The other point is they have a valid argument for off and on ramps every mile and this would be fine here if we were having adequate interchanges but we don't .have full interchanges here, -10- • 11 5126165 'FREEWAY STUDY Continued Page Eleven Councilman Krieger: My point remains one of inquiry as to balancing the considerations and the advantages to us. If we get into a situation where you are going to be taking a position with the State that you want full clover - leafs you may also be placing yourself in a position with the State where they will say "That is quite true, gentlemen, but we also have our policies with respect to the proximity of these on and off ramps, Now, what are your attitudes about that?" Councilman Snyder: I don't think we should use the term "cloverleaf"; full four quadrants is what I mean, Councilman Heaths I think the State would realize the elimination of these off ramps are going to be more costly to them than to leave them the way they are, Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: We are talking in terms of widening the freeway to four lanes both sides and the present alignment for the off ramps would be entirely inadequate, the deceleration leng: - would be inadequate, additional right-of-way would probably have to be bought and the frontage road realigned to make room for those very off and on ramps so costly, I don't think I could say one would be considerably more than the other, Councilman Heath: I doubt whether the widening of the freeway eight feet is going to shorten those off ramps to that extent. The distance from here to Dr. Snyder, the widening of the freeway that wide and shortening the off ramp by that much distance is going to require them to provide new roads, new turns, et cetera, Councilman Krieger: may not be done in light think it might be a very State to determine what considerations, Councilman Snyder: It is conjectural and speculative on our part as to what may or of the various intersections that we have, I interesting subject of exploration with the their attitudes are in certain of these Here is where we should ask for the most and hope to get half of it, Mayor Nichols: Item 8 is the recommendation that the Hollenbeck Street Interchange be eliminated and the north and south frontage roads be realigned. Many of the statements that have been offered in relation to the elimi- nation of the other off ramps would apply in philosophy to this one, Are there any additional comments by the Council at this time? If not, let's move on to Item 9, the recommendation that the south frontage road between Orange Avenue and Sunset Avenue be widened a minimum of seven feet either at the time of the freeway widening or at the time of the new Civic Center development, whichever occurs first, CP C ' 5126/65 Page Twelve FREEWAY STUDY - Continued • Councilman Snyder: I don't think there is any argument or discussion on this. I think we are in agreement with this recommendation. Mayor Nichols: Item 10; that the south frontage toad between Sunset Avenue and Batelaan Avenue be reconstructed as shown in Plan 4 at the time of the freeway widening, Councilman Snyder: I think this is important and, again I don't think there would be much argument with this, Councilman Heath: I would agree, Mayor Nichols: Item 11; that drainage facilites in 'Vincent Avenue and Sunset Avenue be extended to the north side of the freeway and that the raised grades of these streets be eliminated, Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: We have two humps on the north side of the freeway on these streets to prevent the run off from the north to flow down into the interchange, With the extension of the drainage facilities that . bypass the underpass we can eliminate the hump and have a decent sight distance there, Mayor Nichols: Item 12; that the State Division of Highways is to be strongly urg9d that a positive and detailed landscaping program be.initiated along the freeway edges, particularly where single family homes abut or are close to the freeway. This..follows a previous.Planning Department report dated March 24, 1965, Councilman Krieger: Suppose the State Division of Highways accepts this recommenda- tion for a positive and detailed landscaping program? Who is responsible for it after it is installed? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: To maintain it? It is the State right-of-way and they have to maintain it, Councilman Heath: They;do it in El Monte and other spots along the freeway, Councilman Krieger: Aren't we having some problems with.this landscaping maintenance presently in this City? • City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: The underpasses wherever there is are relinquished to the City it will. a public street and once they be the City's responsibility, Councilman Krieger: How about along the freeway edges? City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: If it is on the.freeway right- of-way it is the responsibility of the State, -12- .Co Co '.512616S Page Thirteen. 'FREEWAY 'STUDY 'Continued . Councilman Heath: I think you will find in El Monte near the Garvey turnoff there is quite a bit of landscaping and on down further through the City of El Monte there is landscaping and this is maintained by a crater truck owned by the. State. We now have landscaping on the banks of all of these underpasses which are maintained by the State. I think they do a pretty good job ofmaintenance. Councilman Snyder: I think further it should be and it is pretty much all over the State they should maintain landscaping along the freeways. This gives jobs to many people and -it makes sense to make the freeways attractive. Councilman Krieger: I only bring'up the point as a matter of concern that we promote not only the initiation of a landscaping program but the maintenance of it so it'doesn't rest upon our Park Department with the necessary additional men and equipment that would be required to maintain it. Mayor Nichols: It would appear that there is unanimnity among the Councilmen in respect to Items 9, 109 11 and 12 and that probably Items 1 through • 8, would involve a considerable amount of additional study and evaluation before any further action could be taken. Councilman Snyder: It doesn't take a traffic expert, and I don't claim to be a traffic expert, but it doesn't take a traffic expert to see that it is.inadequate. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, to adopt Items 9, 109 11, and 12; further that the wording in Item 12 be changed to specify that the State is to maintain this landscaping. Councilman Heath* Move -that we adopt Items 3 and 4. Councilman Snyder. I am not against the adoption of those but I think we should wait to adopt it until we see what we do with the others. Councilman Krieger: I would concur with that. I think recommendations 1 through 8 require further attention and along this line I would encourage the staff to arrange a field trip for the''Councii to these various locations so we can review these recommendations with the proposals. Mayor Nichols: Mr. Heath's motion dies for lack of a second. • Motion by.Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, that with respect to Items 1 through 8 that the staff arrange a field trip for the Council to.review in the field these recommendations. Councilman Snyder: Mr. Aiassa, would it be possible for the Council and the Planning Commission to meet with somebody from the Division of Highways? m13® C, C, 5/26/65 Page Fourteen FREEWAY STUDY - Continued • City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: I think it would be more advisable if we have an agreement among ourselves before we meet with the State so we don't bounce all over the place, Action on Councilman Krieger's motion: Motion carried unanimously, Councilman Krieger: I would like to recommend that an invitation be extended to the members of the Planning Commission to accompany the Council and the staff on that field trip in,deferance to their consideration on this, Councilman Heath: Move to disapprove Items 7 and 8 at this.time, Councilman Snyder: Again I don't think we should do this until we consider all the items as a package, I might agree with you in the end but right now I don't see any advantage in doing this, Councilman Krieger: I would necessarily agree because this whole system as • I appreciate it is interrelated and I tend to think that our recom- mendations and our positions with respect to the entire freeway system as outlined in Items 1 through 8 should maintain a certain amount of consistency, Mayor Nichols: The motion dies for lack of a second. Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that the recommendations for Items l through 8 be tabled for future consideration and action, Councilman Heath: Mr, Fast, are you acquainted with the minimum distance the State will permit for a mixing chamber? Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: WATER PROBLEM 400 feet on the mixing chambers, Councilman Krieger: The Local Agency Formation Commission heard the annexation application thiss morning of the Upper San Gabriel Municipal Water District for annexation election in the City of West Covina and by unanimous vote the Formation Commission granted.permission to hold such an election despite the opposition of the Cities of Azusa, Alhambra, and representatives of the San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District, -14 - Co Co 5i26165 Page Fifteen iThere being no further business, Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that this meeting be adjourned to-. . Monday, June 7, 1965 at 7030 PoMo This meeting adjourned at 9;20 PoM'o ATTEST: r. CITY CLERK APPROVED MAYOR -l5-