Loading...
07-26-1965 - Regular Meeting - Minutes.s 0 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA July 26, 1965 The regular meeting of the City Council was called to order by Mayor Nichols at-7:45 P.M. in the West Covina City Hall. --Councilman Jett led the Pledge of Allegiance. The invocation was given by Rev, Robert Bergman of Our Savior Lutheran Church of West Covina, ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Nichols, Councilman.Jett.,. Snyder (from 8:45 P.M.), Heath Others Present: Mr. George Aiassa, City Manager Mr. Robert Flotten, City Clerk & Admin. Assistant Mr, Harry C. Williams, City Attorney Mr., Herman R. Fast, Public Services Director Mr. Harold'Joseph, Planning Director Absent: Councilman Krieger SPECIAL PRESENTATION Mayor Nichols: Officer Evans, would you step forward please? I have a presen- tation to make to Officer Evans of the West Covina Police Department, Ladies and gentlemen, many of you will recall having read in the newspaper some weeks ago where a youth who had committed a number of crimes in the City and was in the process of moving across this community armed with a gun was apprehended by one of our police officers. The youth drew a gun and pointed it at the of- ficer in a vacant field and the officer, keeping his head remaining calm under a very dangerous and trying situation, was able to prevail upon this very disturbed young man to drop the weapon and surrender himself. There was a case of justice being achieved and a very dangerous man apprehended without bloodshed to anyone. Officer Evans is with us to- night and the Council would like to present to him a resolution of appreciation for the kind of service that a community can be proud of in a law enforcement officer risking his life truly to save the life of another and bringing additional safety to our community. It gives me great pleasure to present to you, Officer, this reso- lution for your outstanding police work in West Covina, Officer Evans: -1- Thank you very much. • O Co Co 7/26/65 APPROVAL OF MINUTES June 28, 1965 - Held over as follows: Page Two Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the approval of the Minutes of June 28, 1965 be held over to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Council, 'CITY CLERKS REPORTS PROJECT NO, C-139 STREET IMPROVEMENTS CHANGE OF LIMITS APPROVED LOCATION: North Lark Ellen Avenue between San Bernardino Freeway and Puente Avenue, Engineer's report, Authorize extension'of project limits to include a portion of Puente Avenue as requested by State Division of Highways. Staff recommends approval, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the City a Council approve'a change in the limits of Pr4oject'C-139- to''1nclude,.Puente Avenue -between Lark Ellen Avenue and a point approx- imately 750.feet westerly thereof, as requested by the State Division of Highways. PROJECT NO, TS-6442 APPROVE PLANS 6 SPECIFICATIONS TRAFFIC SIGNALS APPROVED LOCATION: Sunset and Puente, Azusa and Vine, Azusa and Merced, Azusa Canyon Road and San Bernardino Road, Vincent and Puente, and Vincent and Workman, and Vine and Glendora left turn control, Review Engineer's report, Approve plans and specifications for budgeted item, Staff recommends approval and authorization, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, to approve the plans and specifications for budgeted item Project No, TS-6442, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the staff be authorized to proceed with Project No, TS-6442, -2- C. C. 7/26/65 CITY CLERK'S REPORTS ®`Continued PROJECT NOo TS-6439 TRAFFIC SIGNAL AGREEMENT NO. 1843 WITH STATE DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS Page Three LOCATION: Sunset Avenue at North Garvey Avenue Frontage Road. APPROVED Review Engineer's report. Authorize Mayor and City Clerk to execute participation agreement with State Division of Highways. Staff recommends authorization, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, to authorize the: _Mayor and City Clerk to execute, on `behalf of the ' City -- of West.Covina. the participationagreement on Project No. TS-64399"traf- fic signal agreement No, 1843, with the State Division of Highways. PROJECT 84029 LINE B LOCATION: Proposed drain between 1964 STORM DRAIN BOND ISSUE Azusa Avenue at Walnut PROJECT - PETITION FOR RE- Creek Wash and Vine LOCATION OF VINE CREEK DRAIN Avenue east of .- HELD OVER Hollenbeck Street. Review petition and Engineer's report. Instruct staff as to Council decision. • Councilman Heath: I believe before any action is taken it would be the prerogative of the,Mayor.,Ias to where to put it on the agenda. Mayor Nichols: I think it would be advisable to schedule this item after the hearing items. City Attorney, Mr. Williams: It is the Council's prerogative to set your own calendar and agenda. Mayor Nichols: It would be the feeling of the chair that as a courtesy to the individuals who are present and who have an interest in this item that the Council hear it at this time and follow it by the scheduled hearings. City Clerk, Mr. Flotten: We have a memorandum regarding this matter dated July 23, 1965 from R. E. Pontow, City Engineer. (Read said memorandum.) Public Services Director, Mr. Fast: (Maps and diagrams were presented and Mr. Fast gave a brief summary of this matter.) • Councilman Heath:. Mr. Fast, a.point of hydraulics, the intersection of Montezuma Way and Vine, I believe the elevation is quite a bit higher than the location of the drain further to the east. Would that mean you would have to go down 25 or 30 feet to get around the corner? Public Services Director, Mr. Fast: You would have to have a con- siderable cut right at that corner, yes. -3- C.lco 7126165 Page'Four 'CITY 'CLERK'S REPORTS Continued • Councilman Heath. How does the Flood Control expect to put so many bends in that drain if they followed the natural drain? Public Services Directors Mr. Fast. I don't know. We know that it has quite a twisting path to it and it will be somewhat like that. Councilman Heath. If that is not the exact location of the drain and should we straighten out that drain, aren't we going to do a lot more damage than what we see on the surface? Public Services Director, Mr. Fast. The engineers doing the design have detailed surface of the area. This does miss as many of the specimen trees as possible and does stay at the flow line of the channel as much as possible.. Councilman Heath: up to maybe 50o higher due to the the straight course of the street. To avoid individual trees, et cetera, it would run the cost irregularities than if it went in Public Services Director, Mr. Fast. I don't know that a cost estimate • has been made to compare. A cost estimate has been prepared from here to here (indicating) using both routes and it comes out about the same, Councilman Heath. I question the plausibility of being able to construct this using trucks, trenchers, et cetera, within a 50®foot right-of-way which means they will have to start at one end of the drain and go up the irregular course with that heavy equipment. This seems to be a little unreasonable. Councilman Jett-, I had the opportunity of visiting this area this morning. I was very much surprised at the development that has taken place in that area. The people have gone to an extra expense to beautify the Wash. There -will be some beautiful trees that will be.destroyed if we go forward with the program in the Wash Truly,.I think it will cost a little more money but we have spent a lot of money preserving and moving trees. We have quite a few home owners in this area that will have their properties cut up and portions of it will be taken away from them. I don't think they would ever be able to relandscape these properties. I wonder if it would cost us as much as we have estimated if we went down Cameron and retained the wash and those trees in their present state. I would certainly recommend that the Council give serious consideration to this alternative before we make a final • decision. Mayor Nichols: I think the Council would enter- tain comments from those present who desire to speak on this matter at this time. -4- C. C. ' 7P26/'65 Page Five 'PROJECT 8402 Continued • Mrs. Catherine Lewis Our property backs up on the 824 South Dancove Drive Wash. This has become a health West Covina hazard to the entire. City. Even though the Council seems to have made up their mind about this I think your first consideration is to clean this area. out instead of considering a selfish few. We have mosquitoes there. Children have been molested in this wilderness. The people behind us built a pool and threw the extra cement down into the Wash. Only 10% have beautifie& the Wash9 the other 90% have not improved this at all. Mrs. Irene Huelot I would like to bring out the 909 Navarro mosquito thing. This is an West Covina attractive nuisance. The property owners have to carry extra insurance because of it. I believe if you will check with the. Health Department they have frequent complaints about the mosquitoes. At the intersection of Cameron and Hollenbeck there is always a small amount of drainage water. This is always true practically all the way up.to Vine. Because of the fact this.is down there there is always the possibility of transients lurking in a place of this area which is undeveloped. There are people in that area facing. Alaska on the drain side who are going to have to do extensive shoring and put up retaining walls. You are still going to have drainage there with your big pipe in the street. From Hollenbeck and Cameron on up to Vine I believe you would actually inprove property values9 eliminate a nuisance, if you used the ditch. Mrs. Betty Yunohos _ I agree with the lady who just 2313 Alaska Street spoke. West Covina Mr. Bill Ross In deference to the .City. Council 2420 Layton Way our group has elected me as the West Covina spokesman for our views. There will in fact still be a certain amount of normal drainage in the channel. There will remain a ditch to allow for the local drainage and therefore the mosquito problem as such will not be completely solved. Many of us have spent thousands and thousands of dollars in the improvement and the beautification of that section of land. The fact that there are trees there that children " play in will always remain. We have prepared petitions containing roughly 684 subscribers to our feelings regarding the Wash and its natural beauty and what it lends to the total beauty of the City of West Covina. We request that you give these people every opportunity to express themselves in this petition. (Presented said petitions to the City Clerk.) It is our belief that the natural beauty existing here once destroyed can never be replaced. I don't think that there is any possible way that trucks and equipment can come in and not . totally destroy that we the citizens of West Covina and residents on that Wash have spent thousands of dollars to construct and watch grow. We realize there is a mosquito problem but I believe that is a problem that can be conquered through proper mosquito abatement control and we will have it whether we have the wash or not because we will have water down there at all times. As far as insurance, I pay insurance on our property, and I have an insurance man who has advised me that the statement made that insurance rates are higher is absolutely incorrect and this can be checked with the insurance companies in the vicinity. (Presented.photographs and explained same.) -5- C. ,C. " 712616S 'PROJECT '840-2 =; Continued Page 'Six • Mr. Don Livefort My property abuts the Wash in 2319 Alaska Street the rear. We have heard several West Covina statements as to what trees would be destroyed and what damage would.be done. I think there should be specifics what property would suffer damage', which trees would be destroyed, and which would not be destroyed, as far as they have been able to determine. As far as I have been able to hear we have conjecture. As far as I personally am concerned, I feel the advantages of having the route through the. Wash outweigh the disadvantages. I have been told that the trees that would be removed would.be compensated for, replaced by similar trees. How many of these large trees would actually suffer? I would like to know. 'It is true that all of these trees m- if it is true that all of these trees would be destroyed I would tend to reverse my decision. If it is not true, and I don't think it is from what I can see, I stand by my feeling at the moment that we would gain -- more than we would lose. I am speaking of the area east of Hollenbeck. Mr. Gilbert F. Kemp I am immediately to the south of 734 South Donnabeth the Wash across the church lot. West Covina I am speaking to the area between Azusa and Hollenbeck. We have friends who live immediately south of Cameron who had a boy kept out of school approximately one week'through playing in the Wash and • coming into contact with poison oak,or ivy. The other point is termites. I hope putting the drain in through the Wash will eradicate some trash or something that is presently harboring termites. I have collected 'them and have been told by an expert they were indeed termites. Mr. Doug Stern I bought my property ten years 2436 Thackery ago for the purpose of building. West Covina I was fully aware of the fact there was a wash and it was my obligation to keep it clean, to accept it and keep it up so it wasn't a nuisance. Our bank isn't caving in but if it were I would feel it is my responsibility since it is my property. Regardless whether the Wash is changed as has been pointed out or whether it goes down the surface streets, there will still be a flow of water there and it will be -our obligation to keep that area clean. I feel it is up to the property owner. We do have mosquitoes. I feel we will always have them there. I don't want the back 20, 30 feet of my property taken away. I want it the way it is. It is natural; pretty; we enjoy it. Mr. Vince Kater I am speaking only for the area 2327 Alaska Street of the drain from Hollenbeck to West Covina Vine. We also tried to circulate petitions and did so. We have • approximately 130 names of people living in the immediate area bordering the Wash or bordering Alaska Street which are the two areas being effected by the drain. (Submitted said petition to the City Clerk.) It seems as though two of our Councilmen have already formed impressions regarding this matter. Seeing that there are .two other Councilmen not here we would request that we be given an opportunity of perhaps enjoying their presence. I would like very much to have them here before any final decision is made. We feel very strongly about putting the drain in the.natural place. so Co C. " 7126/65 Page Seven 'PROJECT 8402 Continued • Before I bought my property I asked what would happen to the ditch in the back of the property and I was informed that within five years it would be filled in. That statement would be correct if the drain was left where it is supposed to go. The people of Los Angeles County and the people of West Covina -- did vote to have that drain put in the natural Wash as it exists today. We have an improved street; there is nothing wrong with our street. We have a hole in our backyard; it is not an improved piece of property. You will destroy and rebuild an improved piece of property and leave an unimproved piece of property as it exists todayo This doesn't make a great deal of sense to me,, I would have to agree with some of the people here tonight that they take beautiful care of their drain, I only wish everybody else°s looked so good,, For every person that takes care of that ditch there will be ten people who will not. Councilman Heath; I don't know that I intimated which way I was thinking, I was asking purely points of information,, Furthermore, I have been invited to meetings in this area to review this Wash with the expectation that these people would tell me their side of the story. I did not go to any meeting. I went through that Wash on my own without anyone talking to me and there is yet to be someone approaching me on this. I have not been influenced in any way nor • have I made a decision at this point. Mr. Donald Ming For the benefit of the gentleman 712 Terriann who just spoke, I would like to West Covina read a letter from the Los Angeles County Flood Control District addressed to me.' It is dated December 12, 1963: "This is in reply to your letter of October 29, 1963 pointing out adjacent property owners® objections to the construction of a storm drain in a natural water course beginning at the intersection of Citrus and Vine Avenues and continuing northwesterly to its outlet into Walnut Creek in the City of West Covina. This office was asked by the Board of Supervisors earlier this year to prepare a report outlining the local storm drain needs throughout the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, Pursuant to this request the City of West Covina as well as other -incorporated cities within the limits of the District was requested to provide this office with data concerning the local storm drain facilities required to correct the local drain deficiencies. Since the construction of a cover conduit at the location in question was included in the City of West Covina°s reply to the District request and your letter of October 29, 1963 was also directed to the City of West Covina, we have discussed this matter with the representa- tives of that office. It is our understanding that the alignment as proposed in the City°s report is preliminary and'the feasibility of alternate alignments is being considered. As the location in priority of any future drains in this area will be established by the City • of West Covina it is suggested you contact that office for additional information regarding this matter." This is signed by M. E. Salisbury, Chief Engineer, by Homer D. Hall, Division Engineer. The voters of Los Angeles voted for bonds for Flood Control and this project was originated and recommended by the City of West Covina. -7 Co Co 7/26/65 Page Eight PROJECT 8402 m Continued • Mayor Nichols: We thank all of you for your - comments and communications,, Councilman Heath: I am a firm believer that we should preserve as much beauty as we can in the Cityo I am also a firm believer that we should put any drains that we possibly can in the street because this eliminates easements and unusable areas. I agree with the facts as stated that the drain was in the back of their lots when they bought the property and possibly some of the people have come to the City to ask if.it was ever going to be filled in,, I hardly feel that anybody would have bought that property if they objected to the drain. As far as the area is concerned,'there is an ordinance requiring people to keep this drain cleaned which can be easily enforced,, There has been occasions where our Fire Department has sprayed the area for poison oak, mosquitoes, et cetera, and there is still a program where they will continue to service this area. I must take exceptions to these petitions, both petitions --'those in favor and those opposed because they carry signatures from people as far away from us as Arcadia, Charter Oak, et cetera,, I don't know why people in that area get involved in our problems I think these problems are,our problems and pertain directly to the people involved,, Evidently this is a controversial issue and I think it should be held over . for a full Council. I think the only solution is for the City to take an actual count of the people.directly effected and let the majority rule and if the majority rule wants to keep that drain as it is, I think this is no more than the way our government was founded in the beginning,, If the majority wants it put out in the street then let's put the thing out in the street,, These people adjacent to this drain are the people who are going to have to live with it; the people most effected,, I would take their opinions and let the majority rule and then make a decision after that,, I can't see with the evidence we have before us here how we can make a decision at this time,, Councilman Jett: I would somewhat go along with what Councilman Heath has said,, However, I think this Wash has been here for many years,, I have heard comments about termites and that is true,, I think the Walnut trees attract them The mosquitoes have always caused concern. This is on an abatement program that can be entered into and I am sure they can"be eliminated,, They can certainly be controled and minimized. I have one question I would like to have answered by the staff. There was a question of voting on this particular issue. Was there ever a vote upon the location of this particular storm drain or was there just a general vote'on the County Flood Control bond issue? City Manager, Mr. Aiassa: We prepared a schematic study. This drain was included in the • schematic study. The actual.precise location was rather vague because we didn't know the amount of money voted by the bond issue,, We gave you a lump sum. Each of these projects was allotted a fixed amount of money (Councilman Snyder entered the chambers at 8:45 P.M,,) C,, Co ' 7126165 Page Nine PROJECT 8402 - Continued • Councilman Jett: I think it would be a very good idea in view of all this interest that this be held over and that we have an opportunity to get some further information regarding, the trees, the locations, how many would have to be removed, et cetera,, I would go along with Councilman Heath's suggestion,, Mayor Nichols: If all things were equal I would personally feel that the person who wanted to maintain the status quo of his property relative to a project of this sort would have a little better arguing point -than the person who desired to'improve his property as a result of a project of this.sort because the project'is not calculated to improve property; it is calculated to serve the community,, I think we have several considerations that ar,e overriding,.vpes that have not been answered here this evening and that perhaps our staff cannot yet answer,, Speaking for myself I would need to seek answers to these problems,, We have been told that preliminary estimates are that it would, .cost approximately $1009000 more on the westerly leg of this' drain to bring it down the street.. That is a staggering amount of money and if in my mind I had absolute assurance from the most competent authorities available that it would in truth cost the taxpayers $100,000 more to go down the street then I think in my mind that would be the overriding consideration but I do not know that in truth yet and in detail,, • I think on the easterly leg of this where costs are approximately the same,,where we have people who both desire the drain in the street and people who desire the drain in the Wash, where the economic aspect and the civic aspect from the standpoint of general welfare is not effected then probably the judgement would be by what the.majority of the people effected by that would ultimately prevail. I would hesitate to take an arbitrary decision based on the fact that someone was better represented at the meeting, I would seek to ask our staff to embark.upon a more -.precise study of the costs of running these drains on the street versus the Wash, seeking specific and detailed help where necessary, more precise information on what dislocation and disruption would be necessary in the Wash areas,, I don't think I could make a firm decision tonight without that additional information,, Councilman Heath: I think we need more than that,, As I tried to point out before, I am not the least bit interested in what a man in Arcadia thinks about where this drain should go,, I am not too concerned about someone who lives four or five blocks away,, I think we have a problem here which effects directly certain individuals and I think the decision should be made by those individuals. In addition to the information you want I would like to have an indication from the people directly effected and let that come back to us,, Mayor Nichols: On the southerly leg, how would you determine the people as being directly concerned? Councilman Heath: Anybody adjacent to the Wash. Every piece of property touching this Wash, those are the people who should be contacted,, Councilman Snyder: Is any of this property along the Wash owned by the Flood Control or the City? . sm • I� U C. Co 7/2,6165 PROJECT 8402 - Continued City Manager, Mr. Aiassa: It is privately owned. Page Ten Councilman Snyder: If it will cost $1009000 more to put it in the street, it seems to me that extra cost is coming from all the people in the City and if there could be some joint use of this as park area or semi-public use as a park area since in effect all of the people of the City are paying for the extra cost of preserving that as.a Wilderness area -- Councilman Heathy Do you have in mind thatpossibly if this concrete drain be covered over and that this right-of-way above the drain should be open to the public? Councilman Snyder: seems at least they should have directly involved. The people fences across the wash. You couldn't do that without permission of the people. It joint use.o.f part of it, the people involved should have joint.use; no Councilman Jett: I wonder if during this attempt to get these opinions along the Wash if we could also get an indication of the size of each individual parcel. Most of those parcels along the Wash are oversized. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that this matter, Project 8402, Line B. be held over with instructions to the staff to supply the Council with any pertinent information concerning trees and shrubs and also an indication from the property owners directly involved as to their choice to the route -of this channel. CITRUS VALLEY JEWISH TEMPLE CENTER LOCATION: 941 North Sunset,, REQUEST FOR SERVICE Held over from 7/12/65; referred to staff for report. Councilman Heath: I don't see that there is much we can do at this time. When this area was annexed there was no provision made at that time that we would require sidewalks or other improvements. We took it upon ourselves to go through with the annexation so presumably we were prepared to take over the building and inspection, which we have done. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the City staff be instructed to contact the Citrus Valley Jewish Temple Center and explain to them the statements that are within • the Engineer's report dated July 22, 1965, and express to them that we are unable to do anything concerning the service they asked for. • • • C. Co 7/26/65 CITY CLERK®S REPORTS - Continued RESOLUTION NO,, 3209 ADOPTED Mayor Nichols: Page Eleven The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA GRANTING CONSENT TO THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY WITHIN SAID CITY TO SANITARY DISTRICT NO. 22 WITHIN LOS ANGELES COUNTY" Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: Councilman Krieger Said resolution was given No. 3209,, RESOLUTION N0,, 3210 ADOPTED Mayor Nichols: The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A CERTAIN WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING THE RECORDATION THEREOF" (PP 4439 Temple Sholom of East San Gabriel Valley) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: Councilman Krieger Said resolution was given No. 3210. SCHEDULED MATTERS HEARINGS LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO,, LAD65-67 - PROTEST HEARING LOCATION: South of San Bernardino Freeway, east of Lark Ellen Avenue to City limits. Protest hearing to the proposed improvements and as for street light installation, service and maintenance as provided in City Council Resolution No. 3188. -11- 0 U C. C,, ' 7f 26I65 Page Twelve LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO,, LAD65-67 Continued Mayor Nichols: Mr. City Clerk, do you have the affidavits of publication and posting? City Clerk, Mr,, Flotten: Yes, I have,, Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that the affidavits of publication and posting be received and placed on file. Mayor Nichols: City Clerk, Mr. Flotten: Szx, 717 South Hillward, Cecilia E,, Morgan, 714 Hillward, Eleanor and Hector Larni, 708 Hillward, Mr,, City Clerk, have you received any protests or objections to this improvement? Yes, I have. We have a letter dated Julv 239.1965 from Ingrid and Jack Gates, 723 Hillward;91:Georgia L,, Windheimer, 705 South Hillward in opposition,, (Read said letter.) We have another letter dated July 21, 1965 signed by Fred F. and Bessie Dahling, in opposition to this matter. (Read said letter.) We have a letter dated July 23, 1965 in opposition to this matter from Mr. and Mrs. S. E. Lafler. (Read said letter.) I have been handed another letter dated July 19, 1965 signed by 0. H. Brogden, 2723 East Larkwood in opposition to this lighting district,, (Read said letter.) I have a letter dated July 17, 1965 signed by Mr,, Miles Go Miller and Mrs,, Marie M,, Miller, 2639 Larkwood in opposition to this matter. (Read said letter.) Mayor Nichols: I would like to place in the record the following information in connection with this proposed improvements 11,350 cards were sent to property owners who would be effected by this improvement with a request that an indication of the property owners feeling be returned to the City,,, Of 1,350 cards sent, 10179 cards were not returned,, The cards returned totalled 171,, Of the 171 cards returned, 103 expressed their favor of the installation of the lighting system and 68 expressed their opposition to such installation,, This is the time and the place for the public hearing and the taking of testimony relating to this matter. Mrs,, Ed. Lafler The one point I wanted to remind 2715 East Larkwood you is our utility poles are now West Covina in the rear and all power comes from there.. If we have the street lighting this means we add wires to the front,, Regarding the cards sent out and received, I wonder whether any of these cards from Larkwood Street returned a "Yes" vote. My fear is that even though you might feel that our street does not need lights that it might be included within this big district. Is there any possibility that you can keep them off of one street even though it goes yes for everything else? ®12® r-] C. Co 7/26/65 Page Thirteen LIGHTING ASSESSMENT,DISTRICT NO. LAD65-67 ® Continued Mr. Miles Miller My letter was read tonight. The 2639 Larkwood little booklet we received from West Covina the'City, I have a couple of questions. Was this prepared by the City itself? Was it prepared by a utility company? In this book on Question No. 5, it reads-. "After the street lights have been installed, the cost figure for each lot will be.determined and the amount will appear on your tax bill,," However, in the paragraph preceding this, No. 49 it states- "Each residential lot will pay about $17.25 for the first two years plus $9.00 for maintenance." Then we come around to the extra add on. Is this to be construed this will be handled the same as your assessment? After the street lights are in then are we assessed each lot according to the cost of the installation? I attended a meeting here at West Covina about eight years ago. -We wanted to live in a residential area that was suburban. We don't want street lights. We don't feel they are needed. We don't feel our area lends itself to street lights. We again enter our protest. Mr. Bill Carlysle I. too, received your little 439 East Portner booklet and card. Mine didn't West Covina come in because I thought I • would come here tonight and speak on the matter. I live on a street that would like to be treated differently. We took a poll of our street. We got 99% replies. I would like to turn in a petition representing signatures from property owners on the blocks of Portner. We like the rural atmosphere. We feel we have a street that if we thought the safety and well being of the other residences in our City were effected we would bear this but most of us feel that we have lots on this street because they are rural, because they are basically the type we liked when we bought them and because the electric lines are in the back and because we do not have wires running down the street. We would like to keep the wires off our street. This petition is worded from the majority of the people at least that we would like to,not be made a part of this district. Some people would like to see lighting on our street. I have letters here from some people on our street. I will give these letters to you. They object to the design, placement, wiring of the system proposed, and especially if we are going to be assessed to pay for the cost of the installation_. We feel we should have some say whether or not we have lights°, and if we do have to have them, where they will be located. There are 24 on our street; 20 are in opposition to this proposal; I have letters from the four others. (Gave said petition and letters to the City Clerk.) Mr. Joe Bloom You have the proponents and 229 South Myrtlewood Street opposition and rebuttal in a normal . West Covina hearing. If we ask questions now do we have the opportunity to speak again after your staff answers those questions? Mayor Nichols- There are two types of hearings. The type of.hearing you are referring to is a hearing relative to a zone change matter or a variance application. This hearing is a protest hearing in which the residents of the community are entitled under law to express their feelings on a proposed civic improvement to the Council8 after which they.have no constituted right of rebuttal. -13- C. Co 7/26/6S Page Fourteen LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NOo LAD65®67 - Continued • Mr. Joe Bloom: What is the cost per kilowatt hour per lamp? On what date was this rate authorized by the Public Utility Commission of the State of California? Mr. Patrick Rosetti: The energy costs on a 4p000 lumin is $3o65 per montho 49000 lumin is what you have in a residential areao On the mercury vapor, this is $4,,40 per month per lighto We have the 109000 lumin mercury vapor, $5050, and the 209000 which you see along the highway is $7.35,, The current rate is charged throughout the entire State of California,, I don't know when it was authorized but they have been using this now for five or four years,, . Mr. Joe Bloom: I believe there have been some revisals in their rates,, I .- hope this rate will be adjusted to comply with the later revisions,, What is the cost submitted for the use of gas for street lighting? Did the Gas Company bid on this? Mayor Nichols: I have no knowledge of gas light installationo Mr. Joe Bloom: I really can't determine what • absolute need there would be for street lightingo In the booklet it says the rate is about $17025 for the first two yearso Does this mean $17.25 the first year and $17o25 the second year or $17,,25 for the total of two years? Mr. Patrick Rosetti: It would be for two years. Once the installation charges are in it goes purely to energy and maintenance. Mr. Joe Bloom: On the basis of the information and the fact it does have a lack of aesthetic value, I would like to ask if there was a hearing on this matter before the Planning Commission. Mayor Nichols: You are having your hearing now and the law does not require a hearing before the Planning Commission,, Mro Joe Bloom: I would like to offer my opposition to this street lighting and I think you might be doing a disservice to some of the areas in the community if you don't consider the entire community as individual segments. We don't know if we will have the yellow lights or the bright lights. Unless these matters are verified for a specific location and each lamp is posted to what kilowatt it will have, I . would like to protest. Mr. Raymond Haydens I am one of the few indicated as 2612 East Larkwood being in favor of the lights. West Covina:-, I favor them because I think they are inevitable. I think the City should consider underground wiring. I would very.strongly urge the City to ask the staff to check the possibility of underground wiring if the light standards are inevitable. m14® • C C. C,, ' 7126/65 Page Fifteen LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO,, LAD65-67 m Continued I® Mr. John Burk I have one question. In 141 South Turner Avenue reference to the $9.00 per year West Covina for maintenance, if we are to be assessed with a sewer line that.. goes. in.and that is the end of the line with reference to maintenance, but with this what assurance do we have that the cost will not -increase year,by year as cost of maintenance may go up, et cetera? Would we. have any guarantee'a's. residents of these streets that this price will not continue to4increase year after year?* Mr,,Patrick Rosetti: The programs are usually when an entire city is used as a district and we put it on a five-year program but whenever certain sections of the City will go into a onev two-year program, every so often the. Edison Company gets a rate increase and usually they will go along for quite a period of time and then they will pick up about a 25% increase,, That is why you cannot make these districts for ten, twenty, thirty years and just keep levying them off each year,, As the cost increases for the energy and the maintenance it will be reflected in the amount of money you have to pay. There is no avoiding that,, Mr,, John Burk. - Is this $9.00 a year for the next five years? Mro Patrick Rosetti.- This will be for two years,, Mr,, John Burk.- Would the overhead wiring or underground wiring m® has any consideration been taken about sidewalks? Would sidewalks be allowable or would you have a problem with putting the sidewalks over the power lines if you put them underground? I would like to recommend that we go underground to keep the streets as neat as possible,, There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed,, Councilman Heath,, Do you have an indication of how much more it would cost to put these.lines in by going underground? Mr,, Patrick Rosetti: Usually we recommend in this type of proceedings that we stay within a minimum charge. Wherever we can use a wood pole the lighting installation doesn't cost the City a thing except energy and maintenance. If we get underground wiring, whether it is residential or commercial, we recommend that you are going to get involved in a higher expenditure. We recommend that they get a petition and get the signatures and if they get 70o to 80% of the people in the area who are willing to go for this kind of expenditure then you can consider putting it underground,, Councilman Heath: Suppose a certain street voiced their protest in a good majority that they did not want overhead wiring, that there is a possibility for them to go into a district of their own and install underground wires and that the cost instead of being.$17,,50 per year for two years would be approximately $125,,00 to $150.00 for a ten-year period? ®15m • 19 0 Co C. ' 7126165 Page. -Sixteen 'LIGHTING AS-SESSMENT 'DISTRICT NOro' -LAD6,5'®6'7, Continued Mr,, Patrick Rosettio That is just installation,, You still have to come under this program for energy and maintenance,, It is $17.50 for the first year and $17.50 for the second year. It is $35.00 all together,, When we put in steel poles now, when you put your underground lighting in there is a different factor there,, If you go into underground wiring your poles are going to be spaced a lot closer together because you are putting in a permanent installation Whenever you put underground wiring in you must put the permanent installation and the.best.you can get at the time. The other systems are always cost wise. You take what the area has, what it has developed. This system we have here is not going to be permanent,, You are going to add to this,, Councilman Jett: I do realize the cost is tre- mendously more for underground,, You mentioned in some areas they could protest out. Were you saying that'if you have a majority protested to the lights but if they have to be brought in they want the underground installation, where they have a signature with this percentage in a given area, does this mean that this could protest that area out of this program and in the event it did and they elected later to come in and put underground installa- tion then could they do this and by assuming the cost of the additional expense and still participate in the regular program? Mr,, Patrick Rosettio and the protests as against an island. You consider the Mayor Nichols: The law' states that you must consider the district as a whole the entire number,, You can't consider whole project. Can this one exclude a street if..it desires from an assessment district? Mr. Patrick Rosettio For practical reasons, I suppose would have to be brought in anyway,, you could but eventually it Councilman Snyder: I'understand your feelings about the underground wiring. I feel the indications are the cost is too excessive at this time,, This can always be added at a later time,, Mayor Nichols: I have felt as a general thing up districts that are too large that for some time that we do set to lend their weight to g given areas don't have a chance g protest and although I feel very strongly and very sincerely that if the people on Portner do not light their streets and the entire rest of the City is lighted that you will regret it one way or the other before very long and wish you had street lights on your streets. None the less, I think we still live in a nation of self-determination and when 950 of the people on that street don.'t like lights I feel I would like to approve the entire district and delete Portner,, Mr,, Patrick Rosettio If they want underground wiring, However, if they don't et the petitiothey can proceed after this,, g n for the required area for underground wiring, then you have nothing,, Mayor Nichols: They say they don't want lights,, -16- C , ' C o ' 712-61-6 5 :LIC'HTING..,A=S:SMENT..DI:STRICT Co'ntinued Page_.:S.everiteen • Councilman Snyder: Is the total lighting assessment assessable to lots? In sewers your main lines are assessable among everybody in the front footage, Is there a similar situation in lighting? Mr, Patrick Rosetti:? They still have to come into a district because they have to contribute to the lighting benefits they enjoy in travelling on other streets getting to their streets, Mayor Nichols: I think that is a fair statement, Certainly if there is a pro rata share of lighting the rest oftheCity and the main streets.. they should Pay it, Councilman Snyder: Realizing they still have to pay a certain charge, is their decision still the same that they don't want lights? Councilman Heath:. If they don't have lights they still have to pay for the maintenance on the rest of the lights in the City? Mr, Patrick Rosetti: Yes, from benefits which they enjoy. Councilman Jett: Don't we at this time pay a charge on the overall light system of the City like our main streets? Mr, Patrick Rosetti: Yes, If you left an area out now and didn't put lights in, when the next program came through you would have to put the entire area in. Wherever you are leaving them out they are benefitting within the area. Where you are putting lights all around it -- Mayor Nichols: Say we did vote to exclude Portner Street and say a year from now they changed their mind, What process would they have to go through then to get street lights? Mr, Patrick Rosetti: We have to have another proceeding; another study; another design; another hearing. If we include them now with a minimum levy and they decided later they want lights, they don't have to go through all these things. We would have to find out within about a weeks' time what the areas are that want to put into a special zone, The Engineering Department could do that, • Councilman Heath: I feel that we have now grown to a population of 659000 and I think we have to consider ourselves as a city. This rural atmosphere, I am sorry to say, is leaving us. However, there is no one who dislikes telephone poles more than I do, In summary, I would say that I think we have to face the inevitable; that before long there has to be street lighting. If you say they can put this. system in now and all it means is that at a later date the scrapping of a single strand of wire from pole to pole, this is the only way we can go otherwise we will have isolated islands here and there all over the City and this would not make for lighting of a city, -17- C. C. 7/26/65 Page Eighteen LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO., 'LAD6'5m67 -Continued Councilman Snyder:Move that the protest be over- ruled with the exception that Portner S,treet,be included in the district but further included in a .special district which will not be`lighted at that time, Portner Street from Lark Ellen to Vine; also, Dancove, the section south of Cameron. Mayor Nichols: Does the Dancove protest represent the majority of people on that street? Councilman Jett:' With reference to our policing program, I am sure you are all very much aware of our recent reports. Is there any way we could ask the staff or could they tell the increase in our policing program in the unlighted areas in relation to the lighted areas? Councilman Snyder: The police report every month spreads the City into sections. My motion is not to exclude them from the district but to give them lights, Portner, that,.section east of Lark Ellen and around Leaf Avenue and Vine, and Dancove, the dead-end street south of Cameron. Mr,, Patrick Rosetti: I would say this is an unusual • procedure and unorthodox. We might go along with a cul-de-sac street such as this. If you are getting on a main street and you want to take a section out of the middle, we don't recommend it. Portner is a street that goes through. Councilman Jett: This doesn't make sense to me that we take one section out of the entire City. 'I think if we are going to light the City we had better light it. Mr. Patrick Rosetti: In the cost of installation, it is spread over an area. If you exclude an area like this and later on you go in and put the poles in ®- Mayor Nichols: It is obvious even if the -chair seconded the motion, it would not pass. Councilman Snyder's motion dies for lack of a second. Motion by Councilman'Snyder, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the protests to Lighting Assessment District No. LAD65-67 be overruled. (Mayor Nichols voted "No".) RESOLUTION NO. 3211 ADOPTED • The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA CONFIRMING THE REPORT OF THE CITY ENGINEER DATED MARCH 8, 1965 PREPARED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE STREET LIGHTING ACT OF 1919 AND REFERRED TO IN RESOLUTION OF INTENTION N0,, 3188 OF SAID COUNCIL AND THE PLANNING AND SPECIFICATIONS, ESTIMATE AND DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT C. Co 7126/65 RESOLUTION NO. 3211 - Continued Mayor Nichols: Page Nineteen CONTAINED IN SAID REPORT ORDERING THE WORK AND LEVYING THE ASSESSMENT FOR SERVICE NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN AND ILLUMINATE BY ELECTRIC ENERGY THE STREET LIGHTS WITHIN SAID CITY FOR A PERIOD OF MONTHS ENDING JUNE 309 1967" Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution,, Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, that said resolution be approved. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Heath Noes: Mayor Nichols Absent: Councilman Krieger Said resolution was given No. 3211. • WEED AND RUBBISH ABATEMENT LOCATION: Entire City ASSESSMENT - 1965 HEARING OF PROTESTS Accept report of City Engineer. Confirmation of 1965 Assessment Roll for Weed and Rubbish Abatement pursuant to City Council Resolution No,, 3112. Mayor Nichols: City Clerk, Mr. Flotten: Mr. City Clerk, will you please read the City Engineer's report at this time? This memorandum is dated July 22, 1965. (Read said memorandum.) Mayor Nichols: This is the time and the place for the hearing of protests or objections to the City Engineer's report dated July 22, 1965, affidavit of posting required by law? City Clerk, Mr. Flotten: Mr. City Clerk, do you have the Yes, I do. Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that these affidavits be received and placed on file. • Mayor. Nichols: Mr,, City Clerk, have you received any written protests or objections to the abatement or potential assessments relative to this matter? City Clerk, Mr. Flotten: Mayor Nichols: I have received no objections. This is the time for public testimony. _19- • • C� Co C, ' 7126165 Page Twenty WEED AND RUBBISH ABATEMENT ASSESSMENT'(1965) Continued Mr, Joe Bloom: Does this include City property as well? City Manager, Mr. Aiassa: No, The City is taken care of by our own crews, There being no further public testimony, the hearing was 'closed, Councilman Jett: You stated discing and edging, What do you mean.by "edging"? Public Services Directors Mr, Fast: This is a piece of .equipment that goes around the edge of the property, Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that the 1965 Weed and Rubbish Abatement Assessment report of the'City Engineer be confirmed as submitted and order transmittal of same to the County Assessor, ZONE CHANGE NO, 343 LOCATION: South side of Cameron Walsh-Forkert Civil Engineers between Orange. -and APPROVED Toluca Avenues, Request to reclassify from Zone R®3 to Zone R®P approved by Planning Commission Resolution No, 1799, City Clerk, Mr, Flotten: The notice of this public hearing appeared in the West Covina Tribune on July 15, 1965 and 23 notices were mailed to property owners in the area, (Read Planning Commission'Resolution No, 1799,) Mayor Nichols: This is the time and place for the public hearing, Mr, Ted Walsh I represent the applicants on 127 North Lang this zone case, The property is West Covina presently being used for a parking lot. We spent many months looking for a location for a new office building, We felt this area was a good spot for high-class.R®P development, We feel this area will give us adequate parking and we intend to build a concrete masonry building comperable to the area, If this is in the civic center we agree we don't want to wait for the process of the area to be included in the civic center but we will build according to the civic center requirements. There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed. Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, that Zone Change No, 343 be approved. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: Councilman Krieger -20- • • C, Co 7/26165 HEARINGS - Continued ZONE CHANGE NO, 346 El Dorado Motor Inn Co. APPROVED Page Twenty -One LOCATION: West of Shamwood and east of Azusa between Workman and Garvey,_ Request to reclassify from Zone R-A to Zone R-3 approved by Planning Commission Resolution No, 1800. City Clerk, Mr, Flotten: Notice of this public hearing appeared in the West Covina Tribune on July 15, 1965 and 28 notices were mailed to property owners in the area on July 14, 1965, (Read Planning Commission Resolution No, 1800,) Mayor Nichols: This is the time and place for the public hearing, Mr, Don Settles I represent the El Dorado Motor 140 North Azusa Inn Company, We are in full West Covina agreement with the recommendations of the Planning Commission, There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, that Zone ChangeNoo 346 be approved. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: Councilman Krieger, VARIANCE N0, 563 LOCATION: 3223 East Garvey between Holiday Inns of America Grand and Barranca, APPROVED Request for non -conforming signs in Zone C-2 approved by Planning Commission Resolution No, 1801, City Clerk, Mr, Flotten: Notice of this public hearing appeared in the West Covina Tribune on July 15, 1965 and 7 notices mailed to property owners in the area, (Read Planning Commission Resolution No, 1801,) Mayor Nichols: This is the time and place for the public hearing, IN FAVOR • Mr, James Carney Our requests are a free-standing 4000 West Chapman pole sign consisting of 1,768 Orange square feet, two script letter wall signs constituting a total of 810 square feet and one restaurant wall sign of 47 square feet giving us a total of 2,626 square feet, The Holiday Inn is a five - story structure with a restaurant, coffee shop and cocktail lounge. The height.is 53 feet 3 inches from the ground level to the top of the structure, (Gave various comparisons to other motels in the area,) We believe we should be given this variance, (Read Section 9222,2 of the West Covina Municipal Code,) -21- n LJ • • C. C. ' 7126/65 VARI';ANCE.NO 563 Continued. Page Twenty -Two There is no other five -story structure in the City of West Covina. The topographical layout of this particular plot is constituted quite differently from anything in. West Covina. It is literally in a hole, so to speak. The relation- ship to the freeway is that when you come off of Kellogg Hill you could go past the place before you knew what you passed. The neighboring user, the Carousel, has no objection to our sign. Their concern is we donee obstruct their sign. We own approximately three acres. I don't believe any motel in the West Covina area can speak of having three acres. The Carousel also suffers from this particular topo- graphical situation and you gave them a variance. The sign and the dimensions of the sign must be proportional to the building. We don't feel precedent would be set in this area if this variance was granted. You don't have another five -story reinforced concrete, 53®feet high, 140 units, 306 linear feet wide building in the City. We request 29626 square feet of signage. If you have any questions, I will be happy to answer them. I'N OPPOSITION Mr. Ronald Federer 2804 East Garvey West Covina certain sign variance that limited reason why any additional propert any more consideration than those date. There are reasons for these are well founded. y I represent the Caravan Inn. The Caravan Inn in addition to the other motor hotels in the area has had to put up with a us to 400 square feet. I see no coming into the area should have of us who have been in the area to sign ordinances and I think they There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed. Councilman Jett: How do you assign this footage? Planning Director, Mr. Joseph: The Planning Commission did not limit the applicant. They told them they could have 1224 square feet and they could use it whatever way they saw fit. Councilman Snyder: I concur with the Planning Com- mission's findings in total. I think certainly that these signs could be redesigned and come up with an attractive sign that,woul'd'be suit.aoleo Councilman Heath: of the 1224 feet. I think it will foot sign out on the freeway. Is Mr. James Carney: If we permit three signs on a building this uses up 903 feet look funny to have a 300 square this free-standing sign standard? Yes. It is used at about 970 of our locations. m22® Co C. ' 7126165 Page Twenty -Three VARIANCE NO,, 563 _ Continued • Councilman Snyder: They may be standard signs in other cities but the other cities are apparently more lenient in their signs and the other_motels could have signs of the proportion. We can't design your sign tonight but I would say I couldn't see why you couldn't design a sign within 1224 square feet.. The Planning Commission has been more than lenient in granting you two sides of the building. Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Jett, that Variance No. 563 be approved subject to the conditions as outlined in the Planning Commission Resolution No. 1801,, Councilman Heath: If you take the three signs on the side of the building it leaves him 300 square feet to put on the street. This has to be split in half to give two sides so you are giving him a 150msquare®foot sign along the street. I feel that businesses in our City have been _ hindered and have been hurt by the restriction of this sign ordinance. I think it is entirely too strict. I would like to compare this to the sign in the area, the Carousel, which is a larger sign, and I think the difference between 1860 square feet of the Carousel sign against 1200 square feet for -this building, I think it is entirely out of proportion. • Action on Councilman Snyder's motion.- Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Mayor Nichols Noes: Councilman Heath Absent.- _{, , Councilman Krieger VARIANCE N0,, 556 LOCATION: 2820 East Garvey between Farmers Insurance Barranca and Citrus. APPROVED Request to allow a non -conforming identification sign in Zone C®2 denied by Planning Commission Resolution No. 1786. Called up by Council on June 14, 1965. Hearing closed on July 12th and held over to this date for decision due to tie vote. Mayor Nichols: Councilman Jett, have you had an opportunity to familiarize yourself with Variance No. 556? The City Attorney ruled at the last meeting if you were to study this matter you could participate in the discussion and the vote this evening. Councilman Jett: I would like the record to show that I read the Minutes which • included the minutes of this case. In addition to that, I took the time to come down here and listen to the tape so I have, I feel, probably as good a contact with the program as I could. I also took the time to go down and take a look at the property. Based on my opinion of the arguments for and against and based on my opinion of looking at the property, I couldn't help but feel they had met the requirements for a variance and in this case I would be in favor of the application as it was presented. -23- IM C, C, ' 7126t65 Page Twenty -Four 'VARIANCE NO, 556 - Continued • Councilman Snyder: I had reservations regarding this.variance at the last meeting but understanding now how the paint store sign was arrived at then I could see in this case where this applicant has shown all the conditions for a variance. Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Heath, that Variance No. 556 be approved as requested for a sign of 55 square feet to be placed on the front of the building in addition to their present signs. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett,, Snyder, Heath, Mayor Nichols Xoes: None Absent: Councilman Krieger PRECISE PLAN N0. 458 (R) LOCATION: 533 South Glendora Donald George between Christopher and APPROVED Walnut Creek Parkway. Request before Review Board of approval of precise plan for restaurant approved by Review Board. Appealed by Planning Commission. • City Clerk, Mr. Flotten: (Read memorandum dated July 23, 1965 from the Planning Commission to the City Council regarding this matter.) Mayor Nichols: This is the time and place for the public hearing. Mr. Donald George I agree with the findings of the 533 South Glendora Planning Commission that Condition West Covina No. 8 of the precise plan be modified so it can be worked out to the requirements of the Engineering Department. There being no further public testimony, the hearing was closed. Councilman Heath: Planning Director, Mr. Joseph: Councilman Heath: Coming out of that property is there a traffic light? That is signalized. Could that green light have an arrow pointing in either direction instead of the light? Councilman Jett: I think the Traffic Committee should make a study of this situation. Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that the matter of the traffic light controlling the intersection at Donald George's property and the possibility of an arrow there be referred to the Traffic Committee for their consideration and report back to the City Council. -24.- rN Co `C, ' 7126165 Page Twenty -Five 'PRECISE 'PLAN NO, 4 88 CRY Continued • Motion by Councilman Snyder,_ seconded by Councilman Jett, that Precise Plan of Design No, 458;be approved subject to the conditions of the Review Board except that'Condition No, 8 be amended as read, Motion passed on roll call as follows. Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: Councilman Krieger RESOLUTION NO, 3212 APPROVED Mayor Nichols: The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN N0, 458­(R)'11. (George) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, that said resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call as follows: • Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: Councilman -Krieger Said resolution was given No, 3212, AMENDMENT NO, 69 Consider amending section of the City Initiated Municipal Code relating to yard HELD OVER requirements, Approval recom- mended by,Planning Commission Resolution No, 1785, Section.A (yard requirements) held over to this date from July 12th, Mayor Nichols: This matter is to be held over to our meeting of the 9th. We are going to have a study session on the part not yet approved, PLANNING COMMISSION .METES 6 BOUNDS SUBD, NO, 135-225 (1) LOCATION: North side of Los Teril., Inc, Cerillos Drive, west • HELD OVER of La Serena Drive, Review. Planning Department report, 1,435 Acres - 2 Lots - Area District IV, Approved by Planning Commission on July 21, 1965, City Clerk, Mr, Flotten: (Read Planning Commission recom- mended conditions if application approved,) -25- ...0 • Co C. 7/26/65 Page Twenty -Six 'METES & BOUNDS SUBDIVISION N.O. 135-2-25, REVISION 1 Continued Councilman Heath: Planning Director, Mr. Joseph: This is a 16-foot driveway for the -full length? Yes. Councilman Jett: I have a question about the Fire Department requirements. They would have to run a hose a minimum of 300 feet to fight a fire back there. Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: I can®t answer that. The Fire Department has reviewed this plan. City Clerk, Mr. Flotten: The next item is the final. map on the same tentative. Can we hold that over if we hold over the metes and bounds? City Attorney, Mr. Williams: Yes. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, that Metes and Bounds Subdivision No,, 135-225, Revision 1, be held over to the adjourned meeting on August 2, 1965 requesting a clarification from the Fire Department on how they would run hoses into the back of the property in question to fight a fire; secondly clarification on how the lower lot is going to drain. ` RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL MAP Metes 6 Bounds 135-225 (1) HELD OVER Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, that this matter be held over to the adjourned meeting on August 2, 1965,, METES 6 BOUNDS SUBD. N0. 135-227 (1) LOCATION: East side of Citrus Jess N. Swanson north of Vanderhoof. APPROVED Review Planning Department report. Approve tentative of Metes and Bounds 135-227, Revision 1. 4.46 Acres 3 Lots - Area District III. Approved by Planning Commission on July 21, 1965. City Clerk, Mr. Flotten: (Read Planning Commission recom- mended conditions if application approved.) • Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that. Metes and Bounds Subdivision No. 135-227, Revision 1, be approved subject to the conditions of the Planning Commission. -26- • • C. C. 7/26/65 'PLANNING COMMISSION Continued Page Twenty -Seven RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL MAP LOCATION: East side of Citrus, AND ACCEPTING BOND north of Vanderhoof Metes 6 Bounds 135-227 (1) Jess N. Swanson Approve final map of Metes and. HELD OVER Bounds Subdivision No, 135-227, Revision 1, and accept Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company bond. in the amount of $3,750 for street improvements. City Attorney, Mr, Williams: Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: Mr, Bill Lane: Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: There was a requirement of a payment for the share of a hydrant, The resolution says just for street improvements. All the bonds have been posted, We complied with everything we have been asked for, We have two bonds totalling $5,950,00, Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that this matter be held over to the adjourned meeting on August 2, 1965, METES & BOUNDS SUBD, 90, 135-240 El Dorado Motor Inn Co, APPROVED 4,40 Acres - 2 Lots.- Area District I, on July 219 1965, City Clerk, Mr, Flotten: LOCATION: West of Shamwood, east of Azusa between Workman and Garvey, Approved by Planning Commission (Read Planning Commission recom- mended conditions if application approved.) Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the Metes and Bounds No, 135-240 be approved subject to the conditions of the Planning Commission, REVIEW PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION OF JULY 219 1965 So indicated by Mr, Flotten, -27- • 0 • Co_ 'C. 712616.5 CITY ATTORNEY ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION ZoneChange 345 Warshauer & Hotchkiss Page Twerity-Eight The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMEND- ING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO REZONE CERTAIN PREMISES" (ZC 3459 Warshauer 8 Hotchkiss) Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, that said ordinance be introduced, (Mayor Nichols abstained.) ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION Zone Change 344, City Initiated (Skelton Property) Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded to waive further reading of the body The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMEND- ING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO REZONE CERTAIN PREMISES" (ZC 3449 City Initiated) Skelton Property, by Councilman Snyder, and carried, of the ordinance. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, that said ordinance be introduced. (Mayor Nichols voted "No".) ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION Proposed Amendment No. 69 In Part The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMEND- ING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARKING OF VEHICLES" (Proposed Amendment No. 69 in part) Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. Councilman Snyder: ORDINANCE NO. 928 Transient Occupancy ADOPTED I will introduce the ordinance. The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMEND- ING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING TO ARTICLE VI THEREOF A NEW CHAPTER TO BE DESIGNATED CHAPTER 4 RELATING TO A TAX UPON THE PRIVILEGE OF TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY" Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. ME a • C,, Co 7/26/65 ORDINANCE NO. 928 - Continued Page Twenty -Nine Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, that said ordinance be adopted, Councilman Jett: Action on Councilman Snyder's motion: follows: I have read this matter in the Minutes and feel qualified to vote. Motion passed on roll call as Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: Councilman Krieger Said ordinance was given No,, 928,, RESOLUTION NO, 3213 South Covina Water Service ADOPTED Mayor. Nichols: The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA GRANTING UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT NO. 102 AND APPROVING PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN NO,, 453" (South Covina Water Service) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: Councilman Krieger Said resolution was given No, 3213. RESOLUTION NO. 3214 The City Attorney presented: Galster "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING DEED OF GIFT AND AMEND- MENT OF FORMER DEED" (Galster) Mayor Nichols: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: Councilman Krieger Said resolution was given No,, 3214. -29- • • C, C. ' 7/26/65 'CITY ATTORNEY - Continued HOME SAVINGS Page Thirty Councilman Jett: With reference to the Home Savings and Loan, the last action taken on the dump sites I have some questions about, I have read the Minutes and I have obtained the files on the original resolution on the unclassified use permit, There are some very - pertinent questions that in my mind have not been resolved here, In view of the stand that'I originally took on this, I wondered if there was something we could do to call this back before the Council for review or for the possibility of'maybe rescinding the action of the resolution adopted or'amend it in such a way to correct what I think are errors, City Attorney, Mr, Williams: After a resolution is adopted on a variance or an unclassified use permit, that ends that particular zoning proceeding. You can't now rescind that resolution and adopt a different one but you can initiate proceedings'to make further amendments, Councilman Jett: Councilman Snyder: Councilman Heath: City Attorney, Mr, Williams: Councilman Snyder: Councilman Jett: City Attorney, Mr, Williams: granted, you can't change the rules, Councilman Heath:. If I remember correctly we were to be paid by weight, our City fee, It has never been decided, Now we can go by volume, You can impose a business. -license fee on any basis you want, I would still like a review of that final cover of two feet. I would like to see this brought back up. Once the man starts relying on what the City Council has They have had four pieces of equipment in there grading and digging, Councilman Snyder: Move that the staff be instructed to proceed in determination of the fee schedule for the dump operation as specified under Article 20 of Unclassified Use Permit No, 71, Councilman Jett: Action on Councilman Snyder's motion: Apparently we can't reopen this but I will second the motion to begin the fee study, Motion carried unanimously, -30- Co C. 7126l65 Page Thirty -One RECREATION & PARKS None 'GENERAL MATTERS WRI`TTEN COMMUNICATIONS. LETTER FROM JUNIOR CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Community Development,Survey.. Councilman Snyder; Who developed the specific questions you are going to ask? Mr. Joseph Stenton: We did. Some of it came off of the survey form included in the booklet from National and we deleted what was unnecessary and added a few things we thought were pertinent. Councilman Snyder:, There is only one question I have regarding this type of survey. If you send out 29500 survey forms and if you get a return of, say, 200, there has to be a certain amount that is statistically valid, • I notice in these types of surveys they haven't been applying this. Unless it is above a certain number your survey is not valid. Mayor Nichols: I think this has a tremendous potential for community service. I have read and studied it and I think the basis for doing it may give us some insights we have not had before. I would hope this might even prove helpful to the Chamber of Commerce in its.economic base study. Councilman Snyder: Unless they get a return of so results should be published. many then I don't think the I will attempt to find out how figure the percentage. you Councilman Heath: Would you object to working with the Chamber of Commerce on this if the money was appropriated through the Chamber? Mr, Joseph Stenton: We would be glad to work with the Chamber. Councilman Snyder: I would like to see one question added: "What do you think of the traffic circulation?" Councilman Heath: I think that is a good question. Mayor Nichols: The City Manager suggested it might be helpful in the initial stages to refer this to the staff and the Chamber of Commerce for comments and recommendations any they might add before we took final action. -31- �r. • • C. C, 7/26/65 Page Thirty -Two LETTER FROM JUNIOR CHAMBER OF COMMERCE - Continued Mr, Joseph Stanton: We want to start the program in September allowing a few months to correlate the results after we get them so you would possibly have your results before the elections in November, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, that this matter be referred to the staff and the Chamber of Commerce for their comment and consideration in a report back to the City Council, Mayor Nichols: for taking this kind of interest great lengths they already have the Council. I am sure we will this type of poll. We would like to commend the Junior Chamber of Commerce in the community and going to the. gone to to present this proposal to ultimately react very favorably to Councilman Heath: My intention by that motion was that eventually this program is approved that it is done under the supervision of the Senior Chamber of Commerce because we can not have so many different organizations working on a similar project, Not necessarily super- vision, working in cooperation with the Senior Chamber of Commerce, ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None CITY MANAGER REPORTS TRASH AND GARBAGE CONTRACT AMENDMENT Councilman Heath: I understood that this was supposed to be reviewed in one year instead of two years and Mr, Nichols, I believe, made the motion. I thought we were supposed to have a clean-up week where we put out stuff on the curb and he picks up everything along with the regular pick-up. This is one week a year where everything in the yard goes out on the curb and it is picked up. I don't get that from the second page because I see there is a cost for a chair, a water tank, and a charge for the clean-up week rates, Mayor Nichols: The original contract came up as I understand it the matter of the extra pick-up items was not included and that was subsequently added in the amendment and the contractor strenuously objected to carrying the types of items listed there gratis and there was some negotiation back and forth and a compromise figure was reached on the amendment and that is why it is coming back to the Council, City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: We will discuss this more fully at the adjourned meeting of the 2nd, -32- E Ca C. 7/26/65 CITY CLERK CLAIM OF JOHN ELMER KRUSE Page Thirty -Three Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that the claim of John Elmer Kruse be denied and referred to the insurance carrier, A.B.C. APPLICATION The Tropical The Men "U" The Water Wheel Inn No protest recommended, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, that no protest be made to the A.B.C. applications of The Tropicale, The Men "U", and The Water Wheel Inn, "CITY TREASURER Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried to accept the Treasurer's report for the month of June, 1965 and place it on file, MAYOR'S REPORTS TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT TO THE AUDIT COMMITTEE Mayor Nichols; I would ask the Council to appoint an memer ofAudit Committee in order that he can join with metingsigning thethe warrants, Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Mayor Nichols, and carried, that Councilman Robert N. Heath be appointed an acting member of the Audit Committee. DEMANDS Motion by Mayor Nichols, seconded by Councilman Snyder, to approve demands totalling $1299888.84 as listed on demand sheets C468 through C471. Also payroll register of $1769468.44 which is a fund transfer, Motion passed on roll call as follows; Ayes Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent; Councilman Krieger -33- r r' i Ce Co ',7/26/65 COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS CITRUS AVENUE Page Thirty -Four Councilman Heath: I have a question for the City staff, Can we get that trench taken out of Citrus Avenue south of Cameron? Public Services Director, Mr. Fast: The County Sanitation District has that and they keep begging. off on the basis of the strike, Last Friday we had a tour of it and have specifically requested'it to be kept clean. We will keep at them, Mayor Nichols: City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: FLASHING SIGN Councilman Heath: That is an in and out delicatessan, City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: INDEPENDENT CITIES CONVENTION I would suggest putting gravel in there for the time being. We will take care of this. You have a flashing sign going - in at the Capri Shopping Center, I think Mr. Stanford is taking care of that. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder. -that Councilman Jett be authorized to go to Palm Springs and represent the City in the Independent Cities Convention to the extent of $100.00. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Snyder, Noes: None Absent: Councilman'Krieger Abstained: CouncilmanJett Heath, Mayor Nichols There being no further business, Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, that this meeting be adjourned to August 2, 1965 at 7:30 P.M. The meeting adjourned at 1:00 A.M, ATTEST: APPROVED) MAYOR CITY CLERK -34-