Loading...
01-24-1966 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF -WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA January 24, 1966 The regular meeting of the City Council was called to order by Mayor Nichols at 7:35 P.M. ih the West Covina City Hall. Councilman Jett led the Pledge of Allegiance. The invocation was given by The Rev. John Reid of the Community Presbyterian Church. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Nichols, Councilmen Jett, Snyder (from 7:40 P.M.) Krieger, 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 APPROVAL OF MINUTES December 13, 1965 - Approved as submitted as follows: Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, • that the Minutes of December 13, 1965, be approved as submitted. December 27, 1965 - Approved as corrected as follows: Councilman Jett: On Page 17 down at the bottom it says, "That sign that went up there, the party is going into a specialized business and he needs some way of identifying himself plus the fact that he only has one interest. The word "interest" should be changed to "entrance". Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the Minutes of December 27, 1965, be approved as corrected. January 3, 1966 - Approved as corrected as follows: Councilman Krieger: I would offer two corrections. The first appears on Page 6 in a statement attributed to me on the Leeds, Hill & Jewett report. The first para- graph approximately the middle of that paragraph the sentence reads, I am pleased that the responsibility has been on me." The state- ment as I recollet it was, ". I am pleased that that responsibility has been met." On Page 9 of the Minutes in a statement • attributed to me with reference to the Leeds, Hill & Jewett report the third full paragraph reads, "If you look on Table 2 there is one of the eight companies listed here that hasa standard rate within. this City that agreed within each other rates schedule." It should be, "If you look on Table 2 there is not one of the eight companies listed here that has a standard rate within the City that agree with each others rate schedule." -1- 10 • C, Co 1/24/66 APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Continued Page Two Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, that the Minutes of January 3, 1966 be approved as corrected. CITY CLEWS REPORTS PROJECT MP-6S34 ACCEPT OFF STREET PARKING AREA IMPROVEMENTS ,Sully -Miller Contracting Co,, LOCATION; ;lest Covina Center, off Garvey Avenue between Vincent and Glendora. APPROVED Accept parking improvements and authorize release of Industrial Indemnity Company Bond No, YS028324 in the amount of $3,657,58,_ Staff recommends acceptance, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, to accept the off-street parking area improvements in Project MP-6534 and authorize release of Industrial Indemnity Company Bond No, YS028324 in the amount of $3,657,58, PROJECTS SP-6611 AND SD-6611 APPROVE PLANS 6 SPECIFICATIONS STREET IMPROVEMENT AND STORM DRAIN APPROVED LOCATION: Workman Avenue, Lark Ellen to Homerest, Approve plans and specifications, Authorize City Engineer to call for bids. Budgeted item, Councilman Krieger: I notice the estimated cost of the project is $65,000 and the present funding available is $55,819, or approximately $9,000 less than what is estimated, Does the staff presently have specific funds in mind that would be available to satisfy the rest of this project? Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: Our experience has been on these flood control projects that these have been running considerably.over the final low bid and we feel quite sure that this is going to come in, If not, there will be a plan to take some additional flood control funds which are not yet assigned, This flood control fund is assigned to this project specifically, Councilman Krieger: that they are usually higher than there some philosophy behind this? I have noticed that continuously in these estimates by the engineer some of the bids we receive, Is Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: Generally speaking on estimates both private industry and apparently municipally, our attempt is to try to get a budget estimate established somewhere within the mid range of the quotations. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, to approve plans and specifications for street improvement and storm drain in Projects SP-6611 and SD-6611 and authorize the City Engineer to proceed with the call ing of bids, -2- a' C, C, 1/24/66 Page Three CITY CLERK'S REPORTS _ Continued PROJECT C-103 LO)CATION: West side of Sunset from APPROVE PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS Vine to Cameron, STREET IMPROVEMENTS APPROVED Authorize Engineer to proceed with Project C-103 on basis of financing shown in the revised report, Held over from January 10, 1966 to this meeting, (Councilman Snyder entered the chambers at 7:40 P,M,) Councilman Heath: The recommendation by the staff states that the Council establish a split of cost for this project, I feel and have felt for quite some time that the school district has a budget and I think the City of West Covina has a budget and too many times the school district has said they can't take it out of their budget, take it out of ours, We have paid for many improvements every time it came to a school district, I feel that the improvements in front of a school are as much of a responsibility to them as it is to any other property owner in the City, I think any expense like this should be taken out of their budget just as if it were someone else in the Citv, I would feel that the lowering of this water line would be a responsibility of the school district, that the City should be willing to pay for very little; that the school district should pay for the curbs and gutters and the lowering • of the line and that the City pick up all the rest of the cost. My recommendation is that this be the way the project be split,. Councilman Jett: I feel that the school district should accept their portion of the responsibility of improving this street as much as the rest of us, Councilman Krieger: I think the staff's recommendation is that the Council. do just that, establish a policy upon which they can negotiate with the school district having to do with this, but the proposal of the school district staff, and it is only a recommendation,. is a fairly uneven split as far as the City is concerned, As I understand the total cost regardless of allocation, we are talking of approximately $10,300, is that correct? City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: Yes, Councilman Krieger; It would be my feeling with respect to this matter if we were talking about a split, we ought to be splitting in dollars and cents, and take the projected cost total for this project and take a stand that we would share equally with the..school district in this project, Councilman Jett: Maybe this is an area where the representative to the school • district could go before the Board and discuss this, Councilman Heath: If the Council so orders me I would relay my feeling or if you would care, the feeling of the majority of the Council to the Board meeting, Move that the Council's policy on Project C-103 be that they determine that the cost of lowering the water line and the cost of curbs and gutters and sidewalks be the -3- C. C, 1/24/66 Page Four PROJECT C-103 - Continued responsibility of the school district and that the rest of the expense be borne by the City; that should the Board not agree to this proposal .that the improvements be put in up to the water line and leave the movement of the water line to some other date, Councilman Jett: We would only improve up to the edge of the water line? Councilman Heath: Just in front of the school, Councilman Jett: That water line is so close to the surface I am afraid you would get in trouble if you did this, I feel the water line should be lowered, I believe if submitted to the Board you would have a good chance in getting their cooperation and I hate to establish a policy in eliminating something as essential to the City as that development, Councilman Krieger: What is the feasibility of this type of approach? City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: I think the 'Council should realize this water line is ancient and is held together by soil, I believe a recommendation of the staff would • be if we do a partial improvement we do it up to the school property and not disturb anything west of it because I think anything we do there will aggravate that water situation, Councilman Jett: I will second the motion, We can always change this if necessary, Mayor Nichols: I will abstain from voting in this matter due to the possible conflict of interest relative of my'position as an employee of the school district involved in this present action before the Council, Councilman Jett: In the event prior to the start of work we were unable to get cooperation on this, could we come back with it? City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: Action on Councilman Heath's motion: follows: Councilman Jett: Councilman Snyder: • City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: Councilman Krieger: Councilman Heath: Mayor Nichols: We will come back on the 14th of February, Motion passed on roll call as Aye, Aye, You should direct our staff to work with their staff, No, Aye, I abstain, -4- • C, C, 1/24166 CITY CLERK,,, REPORTS - Continu„Qd TRACT NO, 23292 EXTEND TIME TO Home Savings APPROVED FILE FINAL MAP 8 Loan Assoc, one year to February 8, 1967, Held Councilman Heath: Page Five LOCATION: Easterly of Pass and Covina Road at Amar Road, Extend time to file final,map of Tract No, 23292 for a period of over from January 10, 1966 meeting, Can this approval be subject to any modification in code up to that time? City Attorney, Mr, Williams: The State code says you may grant an extension for one year which means they have the same privileges, rights, immunities, and obligations during the ensuing year as they had during the past year. If what you enact would have applied had you acted before the year expired and they filed their final, it would still apply. If it would not, it would not apply, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, to extend time to file final map of Trract No, 23292 for a period of one year to February 8, 1967, • RESOLUTION NO, 3299 ADOPTED Final Subdivision Map Tract No. 25305 Mayor Nichols: The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING THE FINAL SUBDIVISION MAP OF TRACT N0, 25305, ACCEPTING AN AGREEMENT BY THE SUBDIVIDER, AND A SURETY BOND TO SECURE THE SAME Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 3299, o RESOLUTION NO, 3300 ADOPTED • Truman Place Mayor Nichols: The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA DEDICATING CERTAIN CITY OWNED PROPERTY TO PUBLIC STREET PURPOSES" (Truman Place) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, -5- 0 • C Ca 1/24/66 Page Six RESOLUTION N0, 3300 - Continued Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 3300, RESOLUTION N0, 3301 ADOPTED Greenville Avenue Mayor Nichols: The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA DEDICATING CERTAIN CITY OWNED PROPERTY TO PUBLIC STREET PURPOSES AND ACCEPTING SAME AS A PUBLIC STREET" (Greenville Drive) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 3301, RESOLUTION NO, 3302 ADOPTED Truman Place Mayor Nichols: The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA DEDICATING CERTAIN CITY OWNED PROPERTY TO PUBLIC STREET PURPOSES AND ACCEPTING SAME AS A PUBLIC STREET" (Truman Place) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded.by Councilman Heath, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols • Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 3302, r" Co Co 1/24166 'SCHEDULED MATTERS • "HEARINGS VARIANCE NO, 572 Calprop Investments, Inc. DENIED and Page Seven LOCATION: 725 North Azusa Avenue between Puente Avenue and Grovecenter Street, PRECISE PLAN N0, 479 Request to vary the size of units, Calprop Investments, Inc, density, off-street parking, front DENIED yard setbacks and required stairways in Zone R-4 (proposed), approved by Planning Commission Resolution No, 1859; request for approval of precise plan of design for apartment house project in Zone R-4 (proposed) approved by Planning Commission Resolution No, 1860, Called up by Council on December 13, 1965, Held over from January 10, 1966, to January 24, 19669 with hearing closed, See staff report, (Maps were presented and Mr. Joseph gave a brief summary of this matter,) Councilman Krieger: Is there anything in the report, Mr. Williams, which would cause us to give the applicant any opportunity to make any statement? City Attorney, Mr, Williams: I doubt it, I think it was simply . a report of past fact that would favor neither one side nor the other. I don't think it is argumentative, Councilman Krieger: develops the Mayer situation, Planning Commission level? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: Mr, Joseph, I am specifically concerned,with the report as it These variances were all granted at the That's right, Councilman Krieger: As I understand the variances that the Planning Commission granted, there were no variances requested nor granted with respect to density, is that true? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: That's correct, Councilman Krieger: By the nature of your report with respect to the Kreedman property there was the variance only directed to the setback? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph:' That's right, Councilman Krieger: With respect to the variance given by the Planning Commission as to .dwelling unit size, I understand that perhaps 30% of the units were below code as far as size is concerned in the Mayer development? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: Councilman Krieger: It is about 38%, As I understand the variance requested here we actually have 100% requested below code, is that right? -7- C. C, 1/24/66 I Page Eight VARIANCE NO, 572 6 PRECISEPLAN NO, 47$ Continued I • Planning Director, Mr. Joseph- Yes. • 0 Councilman Krieger- With respect to the density per acre, we are being asked to grant a variance here and in this regard somebody will have to help me, the total units would be 63 on the precise plan but there was a state- ment, as I remember, by the applicant in his presentation that this has been reconsidered to reduce it to 50 units? i I Planning Director, Mr. Joseph- That's correct- However, we have not had any communication prior to this meeting about this. Mr. Victor Zaccolin President Calprop Investments, Inc. Councilman Krieger: Planning Director, Mr, Joseph. Councilman Krieger - Planning Director, Mr. Joseph - I would be willing to have the approval condition it to only 50 units. The density we have in R-4 is 45 units? Yes. On the acreage in this application you wouldn't need a variance with respect to density? Yes. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, that Variance No. 572 and Precise Plan of. Design No. 479 be approved subject to the recommendations of the Planning Commission with the further condition that this project be limited to 50 units and therefore there is no need of the variance as to the density. Mayor Nichols- I feel there has been ample prece- dent shown for the allowing of this size of unit in the R-4 zone but I have a fundamental objection to the development and that is really my basic objection and that is the amount of parking that is proposed for this on a one-to-one basis. There is no precedent for that type of situation and I cannot help but believe that a one-to-one parking situation will only add unnecessary congestion to the area. Councilman Snyder; If you are to interpret the requirements for a showing of a variance in this manner, in effect this is in another part of the City from the variance you are using as an example, if you are to interpret all variance applications in the future in that manner, you would, in effect, rewrite the R-4 ordinance. It doesn't seem to me that the fact that this other one is allowed this when it is on the other side of the City and has no bearing on this application. Councilman Krieger- We have, as I understand it, within the City three specific R-4s, two granted and one in process. I was concerned about this precedent matter having to do with size of units because specifically the required showing for a variance states that the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights proposed by the other property in the same vicinity and zone. I think your comment takes concern with the vicinity and I was concerned n • C C, 1/24/66 VARIANCE NO, 572 9 PRECISE PLAN NO, 479 - Continued with zone, The Mayer cas in the size of units. Th be established in voting ever established this or but in the discussion I b comments and observations ments for a,variance, I Commission level and that primarily concerned with the comments at our last existing multiple units s setback asked for in this that if we analyze pieces we are emasculating our z question, The real quest action of the Council or Page Nine would show there was a variance granted Ls is one of the qualifications that must >n this matter. I don't think the applicant :he other requirements as far as the variance :lieve there has been elicited a number of having to do with each of the four require- aas troubled in this matter at the Planning is exactly why I called it up, I was :he setback requirements but the report and ,egular meeting confirmed the fact that the Zaring the same block have the same front yard application, With respect to this argument of property in various areas of the City )ping ordinance, I don't think is the real Lon is is there a precedent at allby the :he Planning Commission in the area of the variance requested, At least as far as the reduction of the size of units are concerned, in my mind there is precedent, The difference apparently is in the percentage of a variance granted to the Mayer situation as compared to the one requested here, I don't think that the parking situation that the Mayor has commented on is as critical as the question of the percentage of variance requested in all of the units, I am most concerned with that particular aspect of it, Councilman Heath: than a one-to-one parking ratio, Mr, Victor Zaccolin: Councilman Heath - I believe if this is reduced to 50 units that it would be better It would be one to one and a quarter, It is not clear to me on this point of a variance. You have a law which says you are allowed a certain number of units per acre, Then you have a variance procedure which says that in order to qualify for a variance you must show that this man is going to be given the same privilege as someone before, If you don't have the first person to exceed the limits of density, how are you ever going to grant a variance on the basis of a variance? In.other words, the first fellow is going to have to get beyond the maximum number of units permitted, How does he get up there? If he has to prove that someone else has been given something and he should share in the same right, you are never going to have the first person exceed the number of units per acre, How can you ever exercise a variance? Mayor Nichols- This would be the ideal of zoning that no one ever come in for a variance, Action on Councilman Heath's motion- Motion failed on roll call as follows- Ayes- Councilmen Jett, Heath Noes- Councilmen Snyder, Krieger, Mayor Nichols Absent- None Co Co 1/24/66 Page Ten VARIANCE NO,, 572 8 PRECISE PLAN NO,, 479 ® Continued • Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that Variance No,, 572 be denied on the grounds that a showing has not been made, Motion passed on roll call as follows - Ayes: Councilmen Snyder, Krieger, Mayor Nichols Noes: Councilmen Jett, Beath Absent: None Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that Precise Plan of Design No,, 479 be denied,, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Snyder, Krieger, Mayor Nichols Noes: Councilmen Jett, Heath Absent: None Mr,, Victor Zaccolino Could I ask that the rezoning of this property be heard at this time? The owner of the property concurs with me that we should request the withdrawal of the zoning request from R®P to R®4,, Mayor Nichols: It is the concensus of the Council that this matter be taken care of at this time,, • ORDINANCE The City Attorney presented: DENIED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Zone Change 358 OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMEND.:- Calprop ING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO REZONE CERTAIN PREMISES" (ZC 358, Calprop) Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, to waive further reacting of the body of the ordinance,, Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Jett, that said ordinance be adopted,, Motion failed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilman_Krieger Noes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Heath, Mayor Nichols Absent: None Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the City Attorney be directed to draw a resolution denying Zone Change No,, 358, Calprop Investments, Inc,, -10- Co Co 1/24/66 HEARINGS m Continued • VARIANCE NO, 573 Edward LaBerge DENIED Page Eleven LOCATION: 1803 Danes Drive between Pioneer and Eckerman, and Request to allow an accessory PRECISE PLAN NO, 4139 REV, 1 building in the required rear yard Edward LaBerge in Zone RmP denied by Planning DENIED Commission Resolution No, 1855; request for approval of precise plan to add storage shed in Zone RmP denied by Resolution No, 1856, Appealed by applicant on December 3, 1965, Held over from December 27, 1965 to January 10, 1966, and then to January 24, 19669 with hearing held open, Mayor Nichols: Mr, Edward LaBerge: 2247 East Evergreen West Covina This is the time and place for the public hearing, It is impossible to move the building, Unless I get this approval without the Fire Department conditions, I don't want it. There being no further public testimony, the public portion of the hearing was closed, • Councilman Jett: Move that Variance No, 573 and Precise Plan No, 4139 Revision 1, be approved subject to the conditions of the Planning Department, (Mr, Fast drew sketches on the board and explained same,) Councilman Jett: I think I have always found Suburban's costs high, I think this is unreasonable, $750 for a fire hydrant, and I think this man is being penalized and I think the rest are going to be penalized because it doesn't cost that much to put in a fire hydrant, Mayor Nichols: The wording of the motion is the difference between what he has already contributed and what the cost of the fire hydrant is? Councilman Jett: Based on his fair share, Mayor Nichols: Of course, City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: All you have to do in that motion is say whatever the fair share of that hydrant is going to be, Councilman Heath: Mr, Jett, you understand now that if they cannot cut this $750 that Mr, LaBerge is going to be required to pay the full $200 and his statement before was that if he had to pay the $200 for the fire hydrant he would rather not have his variance granted, He will have other improvements on the property also, If you make a motion saying he will be responsible for whatever price is established as his fair share, you are not giving the man what he wants, -11- • • 0 C, C, 1/24/66 Page Twelve VARIANCE NO, 573 6 PRECISE PLAN NO, 4132 REVISION 1 - Continued Councilman Jett., Mayor Nichols: Mr, Edward LaBerge: This would be his fair share not to exceed $375, or an additional $75, He doesn't want to pay any extra money, $75 makes a little more sense, Councilman Jett: I will withdraw my previous motion. Move that Variance No, 573 and Precise Plan No, 413, Revision 1, be approved subject to the conditions of the Planning Department with the exception of the fire hydrant and that the applicant be required to pay his fair share not to exceed an additional $75 over what he has on deposit, Councilman Heath: Suppose we can't get this for the additional $75? City Attorney, Mr, Williams., That is all he would have to pay under this motion, You would have to wait until more of the property owners came in and get the balance or the City would have to pay it, Councilman Heath: I will second the motion, Councilman Krieger: What are the conditions of the Planning Department? Are these the conditions of the memo of January 10, 1966? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: That would be the staff's recom- mendations as to conditions, The Planning Commission turned down the request, Councilman Jett: Those are the conditions I had in mind when I made my motion, Action on Councilman Jett's motion: Motion failed on roll call as follows: Councilman Jett: Aye, Councilman Snyder: Does this move the shed? Mayor Nichols: Yes, Councilman Jett: For a point of clarification, I didn't understand that he had to move the shed, Councilman Heath: You should have the recommendations of the staff of January loth read, (Said conditions read by Mr, Joseph,) Councilman Heath: I will withdraw my second, Councilman Jett: I will withdraw my motion, -12- C,, C, 1/24/66 Page Thirteen VARIANCE NO. 573 6 PRECISE PLAN NO,, 4132 REVISION 1 ® Continued . Councilman Snyder: Move that Variance No, 573 and Precise Plan No,, 413, Revision 1, be approved subject to the conditions as set forth in the Planning Department memorandum of January 10, 1966 with the same exception of 5(a) that the limit of $75 additional on the fire hydrant,, Mayor Nichols: Motion dies for lack of a second, Councilman Jett: Why would we want to make him move the shed? What would that accomplish,, Move that Variance No, 573 and Precise Plan No, 413, Revision 1, be approved subject to the conditions of the Planning Department report of January 10, 1966, with the exception that the building remain in its present position; that the applicant be required to pay his fair share of the fire hydrant not to exceed $75, Councilman Heath: Your intent is good but these conditions state that this man must supply the City with a grading and drainage plan on a fully improved piece of property,, You are asking him to do something at an approximate cost of $300. • Mayor Nichols: If you will note the current staff report, Page 2, it states the existing drainage and grading plan is satisfactory and should have minor alterations where shed is removed,, City Attorney, Mr,, Williams: If this motion carried without removal that condition would be eliminated,, Mayor Nichols: All the other conditions are stated as being taken care of. Action on Councilman Jett's motion: Seconded by Councilman Heath,, Motion failed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Heath Noes: Councilmen Snyder, Krieger, Mayor Nichols Absent: None Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Mayor Nichols, that Variance No,, 573 and Precise Plan No,, 513, Revision 1, be approved subject to all conditions of the Planning Department,, Motion failed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilman Snyder, Mayor Nichols • Noes: Councilmen Jett, Krieger, Heath Absent: None Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that Variance No,, 573 and Precise Plan No,, 4139 Revision 1, be denied,, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: Councilman Jett Absent: None ®13® C',, Co 1[24/66 HEARINGS m Continued Page Fourteen S PROTEST HEARING LOCATION: Southwest corner of STREET VACATION OF A Service and Carmencita, PORTION OF SERVICE AVENUE Hearing of protests or objections set for January 24, 19669 by Resolution No, 3292, adopted December 27, 1965, U • Councilman Krieger, We have a staff report on this dated December 16th over the signature of our City Engineer, (Read portion of said report,,) Now we are told apparently one of the utilities feels that it is necessary,, Was the report inaccurate, incomplete, or just un- necessarily misleading? City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: I believe Suburban Water Company finally realized this was going to be.vacated and brought the matter to our attention,, Public Services Director% Mr, Fast, The report of the 17th indicated and we still indicate that the right-of-way for street and highway purposes is unnecessary and we still intend to vacate. However, the staff did send out notices of intention to vacate to the public utilities. It wasn't until last week that we heard from Suburban Water and in regard to corrective action we will now name a date certain so that we will have a limitation for protest for not establishing their easement. We are still in favor of vacating, Councilman Krieger, The report is only incomplete, I would suggest in the future when the staff gives us a report of this type that they be fully explanatory in which the utilities have taken a position, not taken a position or not made a response,, This certainly indicates that the utilities were polled and the response from the utility companies were received and in this instance I find that Suburban just never made a response and the statement is incomplete, Councilman Jett: I think we should start over again and reserve the water easement,, Mayor Nichols: This was a hearing matter at the last regular Council meeting, By what action or authority was this matter set for public hearing to this date? City Attorney, Mr, Williams: It wasn't on the last regular meeting. It was set for this time, Mayor Nichols: This is the time and place for the public hearing, Have there been any written protests received relative to this vacation? City Clerk, Mr, Flotten: No protests either written or oral, -14- • • C, Co 1/24/66 Page Fifteen STREET VACATION OF A PORTION OF SERVICE AVENUE HEARING,_,,- Continued Mayor Nichols - City Attorney, Mr, Williams: Is there anyone present desiring to give testimonv either for or against this matter? We have to have affirmative testimonv, Public Services Director, Mr,, Fast: In the opinion of the staff this is not needed either now or in the future for street and highway purposes, It is the recom- mendation of the staff that a water easement be reserved, City Attorney, Mr, Williams: Adopt a new resolution of intention setting a new date of hearing which would be February 28, 1966, There being no further public testimony, the portion of the public hearing was closed, Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that the vacation of a portion of Service Avenue be disapproved, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: None RESOLUTION NO, 3303 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Service Avenue vacation OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE A PORTION OF SERVICE AVENUE 60 FEET WIDE SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS AND ACCEPTION OF CERTAIN RIGHTS AND EASEMENTS" (Hearing date 2/28/66) Mayor Nichols: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 3303, -is- CQ C, 1/24/66 • PLANNING COMMISSION SOUTHERLY ANNEXATION NOo 193 Held over from 1/10/66 Councilman Jett: Page Sixteen I took the time to go down and visit this area and I would like to see us turn this down, Councilman Heath: I have the same opinion. I toured that area and I was quite disturbed with the amount of vacancies and the condition of the developments in the area, I would not be in favor of this annexation, Councilman Krieger: I would like comments on the staff report of January 21 over Mr, Joseph's signature, On Page 2 I think Councilman raised the question in the report in response to the question, "There is no specific price range for residential houses that can be established for determining an economic annexation," The last sentence says, "The staff is determined Annexation 193 would provide sufficient tax base to support all municipal services," Haven't you established some type of a price range for residential houses in making such a determination? • Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: We have not, On Page 1 there is an indication of the governmental expenditures that would have to be appropriated to serve any particular area in the City and you have the separate section regarding revenues, We have stated that there can be some very expensive areas that do not pay their way, We have stated there are some other areas with lower priced homes that can pay their way, We feel 193 would pay its way if it were annexed to this City, No specific price range for residential housing can be established, This is true, Councilman Krieger: Let's talk specifically about 193, What is the cost revenue ratio in this annexation? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: I don't have that specific information available. The staff in the Planning Department pulled out the data collected for Study Area 16 as it relates to 193 and the information supplied to me was that it would be a proper annexation economically, In terms of dollars and cents, I do not have that breakdown with me this evening, Councilman Krieger: That is the trouble I found with the original report and to the answer to the specific question, It would be helpful not only in this annexation but in future annexation reports that rather than • get a conclusion we get this cost revenue ratio if that is the conclusion of the staff from a revenue standpoint that it is justified, I am sort of curious from the comments that have been made tonight as well as the Comments stated two weeks ago what are the validity of these figures that apparently have been arrived at somewhere within this staff as to the cost revenue ratio in this annexation, -16- • 11 • C, C, 1/24/66 Page Seventeen SOUTHERLY ANNEXATION NO, 193 - Continued Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: ^n extraction was made by staff in the office of that part of Study Area 16 in the annexation study relative to these roughly ninety odd acres and the total picture of the study area is noted in the report, The report also states that the entire area would not be feasible for annexation. I don't have the specific data although the total cost figures, the cost of annexing this area in terms of municipal demands and the revenue expected is included in the large report specifically with 193, I don't have the data other than the staff's word as to their findings in this matter, Councilman Heath-, I don't see how you can arrive at a money value on any one of these items here unless you know the number of residents in the area, Planning Director, Mr, Joseph- We have the number of residents roughly, Councilman Heath-. Let's take the taxes, the property tax. You must have it by now, The sales tax if you arrive at a sales tax derived from that you must have a figure on the homes or on the commercial. You have to base all your figures on a residence and therefore if you have your revenues based on residents you have your expenditures based on residents, Planning Director, Mr, Joseph-. That's correct, Councilman Heath-,. You should be able to balance one against the other and come out with a cost of different valued houses where you can tell where you are going to break even, If I understand your statement correctly, these houses are fairly low in sales value, Planning Director, Mr, Joseph-. About $14,500, Councilman Heath-. They don't go much lower than that and still be a house, In other words, what we are saying is any annexation or any district will pay for itself and I don't believe that is the case, Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: No, We didn't say that, We stated to you that you just can't pick a specific price house and say because it is so much in market value therefore an area will pay for itself, We are suggesting to you that the matter of evaluating costs and revenues in an annexa- tion area is very complex and relates to much more than the cost of the structure itself or the market value of the structure itself, Councilman Heath-. portion to the market value, Planning Director, Mr, Joseph-. Your revenue from that piece of property is a direct prom As far as taxes on that property but there are more to it than just taxes, Mr, Heath, In the report submitted by the staff on the 21st we noted that you have taxes, licenses, permits, fines, forfeitures, et cetera, We found that area known as the West Covina Highlands and those homes are very expensive homes, but we have noted in that annexation, which was No, 177, that that area would be so expensive ®17m • • • C, C, 1/"24/'66 Page Eighteen 'S'O,UTHERLY ANNEXATION N0, 193 - Continued for the area to absorb because of the deficiency in public improve- ments that regardless of the price of homes this would not be a satisfactory annexation economically speaking to the City, Councilman Heath: Under the annexation you would plan to bring all the streets up to the City standards and this did run it out of the picture, Planning Director, Mr, Joseph, We would have to assume someone would have.to pay for these improvements, Councilman Krieger° Then you have a point of dis- qualification, Is it impossible to draw a point of departure at least on the fair market value of the property itself and then get into a more finite definition of when property even at that valuation is disqualified if certain factors are absent or are present? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: We have determined that you just cannot take a market price for a house and from that determine whether or not an area would be feasible economically, It is impossible to do this, There are so many other important factors that enter into a discussion in terms of all the public services, all the engineering and fire and police servicing that would be required, all the various types of revenues that would be returned to the City, You just can't pick one area and say just because a house costs so much therefore a conclusion is inevitable,' Councilman Snyder: That makes sense to me because again some areas where your houses are much smaller lots and you have less street frontage to service them, All these things enter into it, Each area is an individual thing, it would seem to me, Councilman Krieger-, This 193 is in your Study Area 16 in the report we received tonight, As I understand the situation, this Study Area 16 is your problem area of all your study area, Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: We found the amount that would be charged to the City for Providing municipal services for the entire area would not be met by the revenues in Area 16, Councilman Krieger: Notwithstanding this fact extrapolating a small area out, it is the conclusion of the staff that this isolated area within the Study Area 16 would provide as a conclusion the current ratio? Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: That's correct, and unfortunately we have to go on this word. I could probably bring back to you at your next meeting a precise breakdown on this figure but we have had the staff in the Planning Department look at this, Mr. Gatch prepared this report and it was his feeling and his advice to you that this area would pay for itself, Councilman Snyder: At the present time there are no City streets whe-re.we have direct access to this property, is that correct? ;.. C, Co 1/24/66 Page Nineteen SOUTHERLY ANNEXATION NO, 193 -'Continued • Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: At the present time there is not. This point was brought up at the Planning Commission meetings There are streets leading off from Valley that would have to serve this property, The only area immediately abutting is the Home Savings and Loan property to the north. is • Councilman Snyder: If you use the figures on Pages 191 and 192 and you assume this is not the least producing revenue of this area, these figures seem to be a little better than what is shown here. I think as a judgment factor you would have to say that this does pav for itself, Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: The streets in 193 meet City standards in terms of improve- ments, curbs, gutters, and pavement, The cost of capital improvements there would be negligible, Councilman Jett: If this property was annexed to the City it would be a liability in my opinion, As far as our Police Department coming through this area9 there is only one street that enters into that area and they would have to go over to Laseda Street in order to get into the area, I can't see.why the City of West Covina would be interested in an area -- when we talk about the City of Beautiful Homes, we are certainly not getting into beautiful homes down in that area, Some of the properties I looked at there with three, four cars torn apart in the driveways, dirt and no lawns, areas where the curb and gutters are not in, These are responsibilites of the City if they come in. I can't understand why the City would want to annex something of this nature, Councilman Snyder: It is practically an island, It is going to have to go somewhere sometime, Councilman Krieger: The question that came to my mind most readily regards the geographical location of this area, Without regard to the type of homes they have perhaps can best be answered by some of the older members of the Council, When the Pickering area was annexed it was obvious, of course, that this stood out as an appendage to the City, Was there some consideration given to the realignment of the southerly border so as to bring in the neighboring areas to more firmly attach this Pickering area to the City? Councilman Heath: Yes, It goes back about eight years, At that time the Pickering Tract was raw land, There was a cemetery zoned on that property as a condition of annexation because the cemetery was supposed to be very lucrative to the City, That was one of the conditions of annexation. There was also a feeling on the part of some members of the Council that there was a window needed on Valley Boulevard for what might be some industry where there would be revenue provided to the City from this industry, I think if you look back through the Minutes you will find these two purposes in mind, both revenue producing. However, with the City of Industry directly across the railroad tracks there was no inducement for industry to come into this area and the cemetery has long since gone away in preference to residential homes, That is the reason for picking up that property facing Valley -Boulevard. I don't think there was any intent to expand ;on that balloon, m19- Co Co ' 1/24/66 Page Twenty SOUTHERLY ANNEXATION NO, 193 - Continued • Mayor Nichols: I feel differently about this. We are dealing in terms of human beings, we are dealing in an area contiguous to the City of West Covina, Ultimately if it is allowed to be left an orphan, if it is allowed to deteriorate, it is bound to have an effect on our Citv, I don't think we can divorce ourselves from things on our border, I think we have a human responsibility as well as one that says we are making money or not, I truly would not feel personally justified in placing an additional financial burden on the existing City of West Covina to annex any given area, but our staff states to us that their more careful studies indicate this area would not be such a burden and in that light I am personally willing to accept the staff recommendation, Councilman Snyder; I would tend to agree with you, I think this some day will have to come to the City of West Covina and I think it will be of benefit to the people there now and benefit to the City that it is better to annex it now rather than later providing the people are still willing after all that has been said here tonight, Councilman Krieger; ratio more particularly, I think • situation, There isn't enough in so far to either justify or refute favor of holding this over, I would still be in favor of looking into this cost revenue the financing is the key to this any of the information given to us the conclusion, I would be in Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that Southerly Annexation No, 193 be held over to the next regular meeting of the Council with staff requested to provide additional information to provide figures to the Council on the cost revenue ratio of this annexation, Voice; We thought this would be of mutual benefit to the City of West. Covina and the residents for this area to be annexed, This area we talk about is 311 homes, The revenue in taxes is about $356.00 per home, The area is completedly curbed and guttered, There are no incomplete streets, The City of West Covina now serves us with police protection through the reason they have to patrol Giano School, CITY MANAGER REPORTS DUMP SITE AGREEMENT FEES AND CHARGES • Mayor Nichols; The Chair was approached during the recess by the proponents relative to this item, He requests the Council's consideration to move this item to the present time on the agenda. This seems to meet with the concurrence of the Council, City Manager, Mr, Aiassa; (Gave brief summary of this matter,) evzols C, Co 1/24/66 Page Twenty -One DUMP SITE AGREEMENT, FEES AND CHARGES - Continued Councilman Heath: All you need tonight is an approval or disapproval of the staff report, I have read this over and I think I would be in favor of accepting the staff's recommendation on this Unclassified Use Permit No, 71, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Snyder, to accept the recommendation of the staff on Unclassified Use Permit No, 71 as to fees as outlined in their memo of January 19, 1966, Councilman Krieger, This.is something I would prefer to see the Council discuss at greater length, I am particularly concerned with this business license aspect, I am concerned with Page 8 indicating that Irwindale charges $500 plus 30 of the gross and San Dimas charges 4% of the gross, That using 2% of the gross merely for purposes of computation would indicate over the life of this facility $24,000 as the revenue to the City from this operation and I think particularly this aspect of it having to do with business license fee deserves more study and consideration by the Council rather than a flat fee, Councilman Heath: I think the staff has explained it fairly well in the report, Councilman Krieger: The staff made the statement and then gave no offsetting explana- tions as to how much would be anticipated in those charges, Action on Councilman Heath's motion: Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Snyder, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: Councilmen Jett, Krieger Absent: None PLANNING COMMISSION (CONTINUED) PICKERING PARK 6 GALSTER PARK IMPROVEMENTS Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that the report be accepted and that the matter be held over to the Council meeting of Februarly 149 1966 as per request, PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT OF CHAMBER OF COMMERCE STREET IMPROVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS • Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried that this matter be held over to the meeting of February 14, 1966 9 as per the request of the Planning Commission, -21- 0 C`_ C. 1/24/66 PLANNING COMMISSION - Continued REVIEW PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION OF JANUARY 18, 1966 EASTERLY ANNEXATION N0, 194 City Attorney, Mr. Williams: Agency. The resolution adopted the action that should be taken description be submitted to the Page Twenty -Two So indicated by Mr. Flotten. No items called up by Council. You need a boundary description drawn and submitted to the Local was for an inhabited annexation and is to direct that the boundary Local Agency Formation Commission. Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that a map be submitted and application be made to the Local Agency Formation Commission re Easterly Annexation No. 194 as recommended by the City Attorney. 'R'ECREATION 8 PARKS COMMISSION MEETING City Manager, Mr. Aiassao DUMP SITE AGREEMENT, FEES AND CHARGES (CONTINUED) There is a meeting on the 25th. You have a council representative. Councilman Krieger: I call attention to Page 8 of the report, Item 32. I would suggest that the City Attorney look into that. GENERAL MATTERS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None ®22_ 9 C, C, 1/24/66 CITY ATTORNEY ORDINANCE NO, 955 ADOPTED Zone Change No. 359 Evans Page Twenty -Three 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 359, Evans) Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that said ordinance be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows - Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes- None Absent- None Said ordinance was given No. 955. ORDINANCE NO, 956 • ADOPTED Amend Section 6236 The City Attorney presented- "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMEND- ING SECTION 6236 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE SPECIFYING CERTAIN BUSINESSES WHICH REQUIRE A PERMIT BEFORE A BUSINESS LICENSE MAY BE ISSUED" Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said ordinance be adopted.. Motion passed on roll call as.follows- Ayes- Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes- None Absent- None Said ordinance was given No. 956. ORDINANCE NO, 957_ The City Attorney presented- ADOPTED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL General Plan OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA RELATING TO THE ADOPTION, • IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE OF A GENERAL PLAN" Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance, Motion;by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that said ordinance be adopted, -23- • Co C, 1/24/66 ,ORDINANCE NOe 957 - Continued Page Twenty -Four Mayor Nichols: I have given relfection to the matter. The intent seems to be a valid one, I understand it a little more clearly and I would with- draw my objections to it, Action on Councilman Krieger's motion: Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: None Said ordinance was given No, 957, ORDINANCE N0, 958 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Council salaries OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMEND- ING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE SALARIES FOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL COMMENCING APRIL, 1966 IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW" Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, to waive further reading of the body of the ordinance, Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, that said ordinance be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: Councilman Jett Absent: None Said ordinance was given No, 958, City Attorney, Mr, Williams: write to the Governor and ask him that will relate to this. The League has suggested if you are not in accord with this to to place on special call the item Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and that the staff be directed to prepare a letter over the Mayor's signature to the Governor of the State of California evidencing desire of the City Council for a special call in this matter to redraft and revise legislation to make it optional rather than mandatory and that the legislation provide that any ordinance corrective of this salary situation may take effect immediately, City Attorney, Mr, Williams: City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: carried, the I would suggest sending a copy of that to the League of California Cities, I will take care -of that, -24 • i C, Co 1/24/66 CITY ATTORNEY,- Continued ORDINANCE HELD OVER Junk and salvage Page Twenty -Five The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF JUNK AND SALVAGE" Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that this matter be held over to the meeting of February 28, 1966. ORDINANCE The City Attorney presented: HELD OVER "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Rubbish OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMEND- ING A CERTAIN PROVISION OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO RUBBISH" Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that said ordinance be held over to the meeting of February 28, 1966" RESOLUTION NO,, 3304 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Variance No. 577 OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA Wood GRANTING A VARIANCE" (V577, Wood) Mayor Nichols: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Mayor Nichols Noes: Councilman Heath Absent: None Said resolution was given No. 3304, RESOLUTION N0. 3305 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Variance 578 OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA Mayer DENYING A VARIANCE" (V 578, Mayer) Mayor Nichols: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Snyder, Krieger, Mayor Nichols Noes: Councilmen Jett, Heath Absent: None Said resolution was given No. 3305. =25® Co Cp 1/24/66 CITY ATTORNEY - Continued • RESOLUTION NO, 3306 ADOPTED Unclassified Use Permit No. 107 Precise Plan 481 Japanese Community Center Mayor Nichols: i • Page Twenty -Six The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA GRANTING UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT NO. 107 AND APPROVING PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN NO, 481" (Japanese Community Center) Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes° Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No. 3306, RESOLUTION N0, 3307 ADOPTED Overhead utility -lines Mayor Nichols: The City Attorney presented; "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA URGING THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES TO SUPPORT LEGISLATION INCREASING CITY CONTROL OVER THE LOCATION AND TYPE OF TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION LINES, TELEPHONE, TELEVISION, AND OTHER OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES WITHIN CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY" Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Heaths Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No. 3307. MAYOR'S REPORTS PERSONNEL BOARD Mayor Nichols: The Personnel Board replacement is going to be discussed because of the moving from the City of one of their members. This item should come before the Council on a study session. -26- • 0 Co Co 1/24/66 CITY CLERK PLAZA REQUEST Page Twenty -Seven City Clerk, Mr. Flotten: This is a request for permission to conduct an auction and a drawing in the Plaza on the 27th, The committee referred this to the City Council because there are some things on it that is not within the committee's province to approve, The request for entertainment acts is okay, Also on the application is the request for permission to conduct a drawing for a door prize and TV set, The Police Department member of the committee told us that this drawing would be a raffle and is therefore illegal in the Police Department's opinion and could not be approved because it is against the law.. The auction is for merchandise that has been donated for this particular doings down there and the Council could approve this auction but the raffle is out, Mayor Nichols: The gentlemen have received approval of the location of the Plaza, Does it meet with thepermission of the Council that this item is considered at this time? It is the concensus of the Council that we will discuss this matter at this time, Councilman Heath: Do you concur that this selling of chances like this is a raffle and illegal? City Attorney, Mr, Williams: If there is any charge I think it is illegal, If there is no charge, a required donation,.and that is a charge, then it is legal, If it is anybody goes into the place and gets a chance or anybody asks for it and they draw and give something away and you are not required to pay anything or buy anything, it is my understanding it is not illegal, Councilman Heath: They pet donations all over the place, City Attorney, Mr, Williams: If it is voluntary, They have to give the ticket to anyone if they give a donation or not, That is not illegal, Mayor Nichols: We have a recommendation fromthe Police Department that the request as it is made would not be legal in their opinion, Do any of you gentlemen present want to state what the effect of this recommendation is upon your proposed activity over there? Mr, Leonard Gleckman I hope the City Council is aware 1015 Lolita of the proceeds as to where they West. Covina are going. As you know, this gentleman who is going to receive the proceeds from any money received was injured inya hit- and-run accident in the City of West Covina and he is without funds, He was born and raised in West Covina and he is now paralyzed from the chest down, His friends and the organizations he belonged to are endeavoring to raise enough money to do whatever we can to help him in some annex, educate him to some type of trade and whatever funds we can raise, We in no way want to do anything that is illegal, This was not our intent or our purpose, There are no expenses -27- C, Co 1/24/66 PLAZA REQUEST e Continued Page Twenty -Eight incurred that will be covered by the money, All the money in total will go to this man, We are asking for donations and there will be a door prize drawing but this is primarily to get as much money as we can from people who are not familiar with this particular situation, If in any way the City Council can help us such as recommend to us that the raffle may not be held, but that we could give away pencils with every ticket, whatever, the idea is you ask what effect. If we go without the drawing it will be a tremendous loss to this individual, We are asking for the City of West Covina's cooperation and for their help and recommendation in order for us to continue to raise this money, Councilman Heath: Could they sell a pencil for fifty cents and throw in a chance? The tickets say, "Donation, SWI. Councilman Krieger: This individual you are talking about, this is the John Smith Fund that is in the report? Mr, Leonard Gleckman: That is correct, City Attorney, Mr, Williams: If you are having entertainment all day and you ask for a donation • to those who come to the entertainment, you can give a ticket to every one who comes but you must give it whether they give a donation or not, Then they are not paying for a raffle and you give a door prize or whatever you call it, You might recall that the theaters used to do this, You had to buy a ticket to the theater and if you did you got a free chance, This was stopped by the State law but they can still whether or not you go to the theater if you come to a certain place you get a ticket, Mr, Leonard Gleckman: Could we sell them a pencil for fifty cents? City Attorney, Mr, Williams: I would have to agree with the Police Department, You don't sell pencils for fifty cents, Councilman Snyder: Churches and everybody else are always doing this and everybody knows it is a donation, Has -this been illegal all this time? City Attorney, Mr, Williams: I know, There is a certain type of institution, such as churches, and I think they are the prime offender, but they are just allowed to get away with it because of what they are, Councilman Krieger: Can we approach it on the basis • that the entertainment they are providing is what they are charging the fifty cents for and the ticket merely goes along as an additional bonus for paying for the entertain- ment? City Attorney, Mr, Williams: In the case of the theaters it was held illegal, I think the Police Department again would say that it is illegal, IME a• co C, 1/24/66 PLAZA REQUEST - Continued Page Twenty -Nine • Councilman Snyder: If somebody demands a ticket without paying any money, can they just not drop their stubs in the box? Mr, Leonard Gleckman: We would be willing to give them a ticket, We are not saying to these people if they don't give us fifty cents they can't have a ticket, Councilman Jett: Mr, Leonard Gleckman: What if we approved the auction and the entertainment, and forget this raffle? Can't we sell tickets to the entertainment for fiftv cents? City Attorney, Mr, Williams: That takes Council approval, You can approve the entertainment and the selling to tickets for fifty cents, Mr, Leonard Gleckman: We would eo request, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Commissioner Jett, and carried, that the request be granted, CITY MANAGER REPORTS (CONTINUED) FREEWAY RECOMMENDATIONS FROM JOINT MEETING WITH DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: It was the consensus opinion of the meeting with the representatives that we bring this matter up at this time and that some direction be taken by the Council to forward our recommendations to the State Division of Highways, Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Jett, that the staff recommendations be accepted by the Council; to be forwarded to the State Division of Highways for their comments, Councilman Krieger: There was only one other Councilman present at the Planning Commission meeting last Wednesday when I addressed the Planning Commission on this subject matter. I did it specifically stepping out of the role as the Council's representative to the Planning Commission and specifically stating that the remarks that I was making were not intended as a form of advocacy of the proposition that I discussed with them and I further conditioned my remarks along the • basis that I wasn't quite sure that any of the comments that I would make to them would be feasible, possible, practical, economical, or within the realm of achievement but even within those limitations I felt it was time to speak out on this subject matter and the reason I did before the Planning Commission was they are a duly constituted commission of ours in this area; we have asked them to look into this situation; we met with the State a week ago Monday, I knew this matter was going to come up on our agenda tonight, and I wanted the opportunity to express to them what I am going to express to the Council on this subject matter, Again,, I state I am not doing this in the form of —29— C, CQ 1/24/66 Page Thirty FREEWAY RECOMMENDATIONS FROM JOINT MEETING WITH STATE - Continued m� • coming out and saying this is the solution but I will try to restate the comments in abrievated form for the entire Council, and they go along the following lines; I believe the situation that we have in the City is not going to be alleviated by the approval or tentative approval and submission to the State and then to the Federal Government Bureau of Roads to improve the interchanges in this City,, I think our basic problem in this City is not one of north/south traffic but one of east/west traffic,, I don't believe any amount of improvement on the number of interchanges that we have within this City is going to alleviate the east/west internal problem,, It is merely going to condition and facilitate traffic in a north/south direction,, In my opinion, the approach that. we are taking to the San Bernardino Freeway is a logical inconsistency,, The purpose of the freeway is not being a main street for the City of West Covina but a freeway pure and simple,, Unfortunately but factually everything that has gone up along the freeway has-been with the idea in mind that this is a main street and it isn't and it is never going to be and I don't think as much conscientious planning as we put into interchanges is ever going to create a main street out of it,, If we were to have every proposal that we want for the inter- changes that we have been discussing accepted by the State and by the Federal people, whether it be in the single quadrant, the double, the cloverleaf, I think we are going to find ourselves with the same internal headaches as far as our internal street system is that we have now and perhaps in certain instances they might even be aggre® vated,, I make these remarks not because I think there has been any lack of motivation or desire on the Planning Commission, the staff, the Gruen people, or the present or the past Council to face up to the problem,, I think each of these bodies and each of the members of these bodies have in turn applied themselves to this problem with as much intelligence and foresight as they could bring to bear on it but what bothers me and I am sure it bothers most of us is the fact that we are going to be irrevocably committed to a system going through our City that is not going to be changed from this point on and that this City not just within our tenture of office or the successors of ours, but for an indefinite future time committed to this type of a system going through our City,, - I don't look at the San Bernardino Freeway only as a burden but I consider it a blessing to this community,, I think it has facilitated the growth of this community,, I think without it we would not be where we presently are but that doesn't change the fact I believe we can accomodate it to our immediate needs, • uses, and purposes as well as our future needs and purposes,, The more I get into this subject whether I am talking individually or before the Planning Commission now I see the tendency tonight before the Council to sound like an advocate again and you will just have to believe me when I say I am not bringing it up for any other purpose than in the hopes that we may be able to look at this thing not from scratch mm that's silly, but whether or not we have some basic alternatives, philosophical alternatives to what the Victor Gruen people and our staff have proposed to us and one of the alternatives that I throw out to you, and you may just want to throw it out in -30G Co Co 1/24/66 Page Thirty -One FREEWAY RECOMMENDATIONS FROM JOINT MEETING WITH STATE - Continued turn because it is, admittedly, radical conclusion to this problem, and that is to eliminate as many of the ramps as possible on the San Bernardino Freeway going through the City of West Covina,, When I talk about eliminating as many as possible, I go as far as to suggest to you that if this were seriously considered we ought to seriously consider three ramps and three ramps only and that would be a new one at Service and Pacific, the present one at Azusa, and the present one at Barranca, and all other ramps would have to go,, I am not including within my discussion Grand and Holt,, I don °t think at the present time that is the serious problem that the other internal ramps have along the San Bernardino Freeway,, I am not suggesting we discard from our consideration Grand and Holt because this represents one area for planning that isn't already a fact,, But what I am asking you to consider and consider only without precluding any discussion of it or consideration of it is whether or not it might not be possible to give our City a main street, something we don't presently have, and by that I mean if we were just to take Service and Pacific coming, from the west and only Barranca coming from the East and the only other interchange between those two being Azusa, that gives us about a mile and a half stretch between those two, which is somewhat analogous to the State"s experience in other areas and then put in with the State"s assistance, because as I understand their displacement obligation is to the frontage road, but put in a main street, four lanes in width on the north and south side of the freeway from Service and Pacific to Azusa and from Azusa to Barranca, and service not only the facilities that we presently have but will certainly most assuredly in the future continue to develop along that freeway with something we don't presently have and that is a City main street, Now, every other alternative I have that I have heard proposed to this .from the Gruen report on down has involved at least what is in my mind a hodgepodge and a patch- work of internal east/west streets and I include the proposal to go through an alleyway by widening it into a street,, These are the substances of my remarks made to the Planning Commission the other night,, Councilman Snyder: I personally think that this is a courageous approach and one that should be really thought out and I would be willing to withdraw my motion and hold this over to a study session because with such an approach you are, in effect, adopting the main street that we need so badly east and west along these businesses and certainly with a wide main street to be seen from the freeway people are going east and west, if they miss the turn-off at Pacific would turn off at Azusa and come back along that main street,, However, admittedly, this is radical,, Councilman Jett: I think if we are going to go along with the recommendation of what our consultant says -- also, I got the opinion from the State Highway Department the other day that as far as the State is concerned they would discourage to the fullest extent any attempt to put a frontage road or a main street directly adjacent to a freeway. They point out they felt that any main street should be at least two blocks away from the freeway and this would go right back to those areas in which you.would have your off ramps, -31- C, CJ 1/24/66 Page Thirty -Two FREEWAY RECOMMENDATIONS FROM JOINT MEETING WITH STATE - Continued Councilman Krieger- Until we had that meeting with the State, which I think was valuable, these pieces never quite fit into place in my mind as to what these people would say, In making notes at that meeting, then in going over the notes after the meeting, I was specifically struck with their fascination with the San Diego Freeway as it goes through the San Fernando Valley,analogizing it to a situation that is entirely different to the San Fernando Valley, but in those people's minds I think there is a certain stereotyping going on and perhaps this is understandable by virtue of the job they do day in and day out, but there they had their junctions at one and a half miles, I don't believe they anticipate or would expect, nor have they really reacted to something where a City would come into them and sav we are prepared to give up ramps, It is always the reverse with the State,, I think first of all they would probably be caught off base and would not know how to react to the situation,, I think most of their remarks were directed to the situation they have here never expecting the City getting off the defensive and getting on the offensive and then giving us the internal system that we really need and that the freeway when it was implemented, it almost precluded any possibility of existing,, Councilman Snvder: I have another alternative that I think might be possible and that would involve keeping the interchange at Vincent, keep the off ramps and that would' be one-way street on the south going east and one -way street on the north going west,, However, you would have to have a crossing of Vincent,, Mayor Nichols: Let me pull something,, I think there is great possible merit in what you say,, I still don't see any harm at all in sending along these drawings for the State Division of Highways to take a look at them,, I don't think we have sent them to them as our ultimate recommendation,, Wh_v don't we send them along and at the same time request staff to initiate very preliminary discussions on --_- Councilman Jett: When I prepared a plan about two years ago I prepared a plan almost identical to what Councilman Krieger is talking about,, I , think this plan really has merit,, They turned down my plan cold,, ' I think this generated more actual down-to=earth thinking at the Planning Commission that anything I have heard presented to them,, Every member of the Planning Commission answered this; reacted,, Councilman Heath: You think what Councilman Krieger has said has merit? However, I think the first thing we must do is determine what are we trying to do,, In analyzing this I think there are two definite problems here,, One, we have to realize that our sales tax is supporting most of our City • expenditures,, We call ourselves the headquarter city and therefore I feel we are not just catering to the people in the immediate area 'but catering to people all over the Valley to come to our City,, If we are catering to everyone in the Valley we should make east access from the freeway into our business centers and into our service centers and approve this type of design,, We have another problem I think which is entirely different and that is a correction of our inter -city streets where the people living in the City can get into the shopping centers, I think you have two definite, distinct problems, and I don't feel eliminating the off ramps is the solution. I think what we have done to the Vincent Avenue Interchange has hurt both the Plaza and the West wives co Co 1/24/66 Page Thirty -Three FREEWAY RECOMMENDATIONS FROM JOINT MEETING WITH STATE m Continued Covina Center, and if you eliminate it, I think you will kill it completely and this is what we run our City on, this sales tax, If you make it hard to get into this area, you will lose sales tax to other cities where it is not hard to get into, I feel this Council should establish first what their principles are and what they want to achieve, traffic off of the freeway into the shopping center., traffic off of the freeway into the residential area, or send the traffic right through the City,, Then, convey this information to the Highway Department,, The motion on the floor now says to accept this report and forward the report to the Highway Department,, I don't think we should accept this report. I think it should be sent to the Highway Department as something that has come before us that is not acceptable and when you send this to the Highway Department tell them exactly what we want to achieve mainly and let them come back with something,, Councilman Snyder, I will withdraw my motion,, Councilman Jett: I will withdraw my second,, . Councilman Snyder: If we were to go ahead and send this without official acceptance and then at the same time direct the staff to come up with drawings according to Mr,, Krieger's recommendations, couldn't we send both of them to the State for their review? City Manager, Mr,, Aiassa: The State will not review them unless the Council has first accepted them because they feel if the Council hasn't accepted them there is no use looking at them,, Councilman Snyder: Can we accept both plans and send them both? City Manager, Mr,, Aiassa: You could submit one as your first proposal and the other as your second and state the reason the second one is submitted,, Councilman Heath: The Highway Department will not look at these unless they are accepted by the Council,, My interpretation of accepting means to say that this is all right with us and I don't think they are,, We ought to delay this,, I think we should let our staff work with the Highway Department to come back with other proposals,, City Manager, Mr,, Aiassa: • If this main street theory was the majority opinion, we should explore it with the State because the Bureau of Roads to follow their policy and theory want to remove interchanges,, The Council is going to be faced with a very serious dilemma,, Your best alternate would be to first determine what you want to achieve first, serve the community traffic, or do you want to develop a circulation pattern within the City,, -33- • • • Co Co 1/24/66 Page Thirty -Four FREEWAY RECOMMENDATIONS FROM JOINT MEETING WITH STATE - Continued Councilman Krieger: I don't see the inconsistencv in these philosophies. Don't refer to it as my plan because it is not a plane I am not a traffic engineer. All I am trying to do is to sit here and look at this as a layman and looking at it as a layman I raise this question. Again, speaking as a layman, I don't understand the inconsistency in putting in a four -lane main street on the north and the south side of the freeway as being, detrimental in the slightest to the businesses that are along this freeway. It seems to me that assists a traffic flow to these businesses and doesn't deter it. Councilman Snyder: You wouldn't put lane main street have adequate connection, free flow connection to these from the three interchanges you have. in the four - unless you main streets City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: If you go for the three inter- changes instead of the others, the State may be in a better position to ask for more money for these three interchanges and get bigger and better interchanges. Councilman Krieger: That goes without saving. That is what I am talking about as far as going on the offensive because this plays to their weakest hand. Their weakest hand in this situation has to do with the number of interchanges here and I think we would be at least looking at it from the standpoint of these meetings, I think if we came up to them and showed them a way that they would never come to us with of getting out of this dilemma and still achieve our purpose, we might be that much further ahead. Councilman Jett: According to the traffic count at each of these intersections if we directed all this traffic to the three outlets, what is this going to do to those streets? Councilman Krieger: If you took the eight we now have and said we want to concentrate on three and we want a main street tying these together. I think s this.presents a lot of room for their imagination to fit this into an internal street system. If you have eight intersections, some of them as close as a quarter mile apart, there is no basis for any tie-in, there is no feeder line coming into these and there wouldn't be under any of these proposals. If we spread them out, there is a lot of openings then. City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: You can schedule a meeting for the 7th for this item and any other study items. Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, that this matter be held over to February 7, 1966 for staff report. -34- C, C, 1/24/66 CITY MANAGER REPORTS - Continued • RESOLUTION NO, 3308 ADOPTED Property in Civic Center • Mayor Nichols: Page Thirty -Five The City Manager presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA REQUESTING THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO INITIATE ACTION FOR THE EXCHANGE OF CERTAIN PROPERTY IN THE CIVIC CENTER" Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 3308, CARAVAN INN PARKING Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, that this matter be held over to the meeting of February 14, RETIREMENT PROPOSAL City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: (Gave brief summary of this matter,) Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that this matter be held over to the meeting of February 14, 1966, PARKWAY LANDSCAPING Motion by Councilman Jett, seocnded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, that this matter be held over to the meeting of February 7, 1966, UNCURBED-UNGUTTERED PROGRAM LOCATION: 924 South Meeker, east 1911 ACT SHORT FORM side, between Merced PROJECT SP-6623 and Garvey Avenues, City Attorney, Mr, Williams: There is a chapter in the 1911 Act which is titled 7 of the Streetsi and Highways Code which states when more than 500 of the curbs or gutters or sidewalks in any block which is defined as one side of a street has been installed, the City may order the installation of. the remainder, If the property owners do not within the time prescribed by law make the improvements, the City makes the installation and charges it to the property owner what the cost was and it goes on their tax bill, It is not spread over a period of years, -35- • • Co C, 1/24/66 PROJECT SP-6623 (1911 ACT SHORT FORM) - Continued Mayor Nichols: Page Thirty -Six I couldn't go along with that. Councilman Krieger: I thought there was something in the report that indicates the property owner may project it over a period of time, Public Services Director, Mr, Fast: RESOLUTION NO, 3309 ADOPTED Improvements Lot 20, Tract 11502 Mayor Nichols: It will be $210 for the City and about $235 for the participant, The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA DIRECTING THE STREET SUPERINTENDENT TO GIVE NOTICE TO CONSTRUCT CURB, GUTTER, DRIVEWAY APPROACH AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 5870 ET SEQ, OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ON THE EAST SIDE OF MEEKER AVENUE BETWEEN MERCED AVENUE AND GARVEY AVENUE ALONG THE FRONT OF LOT 209 TRACT 11502" Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Mayor Nichols Noes: Councilman Heath Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 3309, RESOLUTION N0, 3310 ADOPTED Improvements Lot 49 Tract 12505 Mayor Nichols: The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA DIRECTING THE STREET SUPERINTENDENT TO GIVE NOTICE TO CONSTRUCT CURB, GUTTER, DRIVEWAY APPROACH AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 5870 ET SEQ, OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ON THE WEST SIDE OF SUNSET AVENUE BETWEEN DELVALE STREET AND FRANCISQUITO AVENUE ALONG THE FRONT OF LOT 499 TRACT NO 12505" Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, -36- CJ • • Ca Ca 1/24/66 RESOLUTION NO, 3310 - Continued Page Thirty -Seven Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that said resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Mayor Nichols Noes: Councilman Heath Absent: None Said resolution was given No, 3310, REQUEST FOR_ASSISTANCE TO ABATE BLACKBERRY BUSH NUISANCE Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that this matter be held over to the meeting of February 79 1966, REAL ESTATE "FOR SALE" SIGNS Councilman Heath: City Attorney, Mr, Williams: Is there a possibility of making a reciprocity agreement with other cities? I have seen it done, Councilman Heath: Where we have it with a number of cities? If. the other city does not charge, we don't charge their people? City Attorney, Mr. Williams: I have seen this done by a n and it is done quite effectively, umber of cities administratively Councilman Snyder: It should be done for contractors and other types of businesses also Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, that the City staff be instructed to adopt a policy here of reciprocity and that the staff be given authorization to approach these cities and see if they will be mutually agreeable to this type of contract; and that this matter be brought back at the earliest possible convenience. (Councilman Snyder voted "No",) Motion by Councilman Snyderg seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that staff investigate reciprocity with regard to business licenses as applied to small contractors, salesmen, bread truckset cetera, (Mayor Nichols voted "No",) , City Attorney, Mr, Williams: The question is simply put, I would think on real estate it can be done, I think the rest of it is out of the question, Councilman Snyder: The law should be corrected, 5191yt C, C, 1/24/66 Page Thirty -Eight CITY MANAGER REPORTS - Continued • REALIGNMENT OF ORANGE AVENUE STORM DRAIN BECAUSE OF SERVICE/PACIFIC INTERCHANGE Councilman Jett: I think this is reasonable,, I think the City should go along with it. Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Snyder, and carried, that the staff be authorized to sign the agreement holding the State Freeway from any additional expense in the event Orange is used as an off ramp in the alignment of the sewers as recommended in the report of January 20, 1966,, HUNTINGTON BEACH FREEWAY REPORT Mayor Nichols: The Council is being requested to determine whether or not we want to hold hearings on the Huntington Beach Freeway Report, City Manager, Mr,, Aiassa: The Planning Commission wants a statement of policy as to the propriety of setting public hearings on the subject,, (Read report • re this matter,) Mayor Nichols: This is such a remote situation that all we will do is cause unnecessary controversy without being able to decide or recommend anything,, It is just another case of us going out on the block and having our people come in and raise Cain when we can't do anything about.it anyway,, Councilman Jett: I belong to the Pomona Freeway Association and this has been lightly touched on down there,, I have gone into the freeway problem at quite some length, This is something we are confronted with now, this Huntington Beach Freeway, and we are going to have to make a determination or recommendation of one of three corridors which we would recommend that this freeway go in in the City of West Covina,, If we don't do this now, the State is in the process of acquiring right-of-way and determining where this is going to be located right now, With this in mind, whatever recommendation we do come up with is going to have to have some effect or bearing on where it could come through La Puente and where it would intersect as it enters the City of West Covina,, In the event it was killed, there would be no problem,, If it does come through, we had better get on our horses and make a recommendation as to which one of these corridors and designate them,, • City Manager, Mr,, Aiassa: Before the Council gives any directives back to the Planning Commission, I would like to have the Council direct me to make a contact with the State Division of Highways handling this particular section and find out exactly what they would see or would be helpful in the entire over-all picture,, They may suggest it might be helpful that we do have hearings, particularly on the report prepared by the Planning Department, Then we could come back and if they would say don't do that, we will hold back on public hearings on the local level, -38- Co C. 1/24/66 HUNTINGTON BEACH FREEWAY REPORT - Continued Councilman Jett: Page Thirty -Nine Could you do this and have it for our next meeting? City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: I'll trv, Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the City Manager be so instructed, and that he bring this matter back at the Meeting of February 14, 19660 RESOLUTION NO, 3311 The City Manager presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Fraser property, OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A CERTAIN WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING THE RECORDATION THEREOF" (Fraser property) Mayor Nichols: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the resolution, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No. 3311, CITY CLERK (CONTINUED) RESOLUTION NO, 3312 The City Clerk presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA County services REQUESTING THE BOARD OF Election SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO PERMIT THE REGISTRAR OF VOTERS OF SAID COUNTY TO RENDER SPECIFIED SERVICES TO THE CITY OF WEST COVINA RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON APRIL 12,_ 1966" 0 • • Ca Co 1/24/66 'RESOLUTION N0. 3312 - Continued Page Forty Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that said resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: None Said resolution was given No. 3312. ABC APPLICATION OF SAN BERNARDINO OPERATION CORP., DBA STOP-N-GO MARKET AT 1413 WEST PUENTE AVENUE Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that the Council do not protest this application. ABC APPLICATION OF M & C ROARING TWENTIES AT 2713 EAST VALLEY BLVD. (Protest recommended by Police Department) Councilman Heath: I thought we were licensing the business but here again we are licensing the owner. It is true that in a short length of time he has been picked up for drunk driving; however, the Chief of Police can justify the reasoning that because of this man's history of con- victions for insobriety in a short period of time indicates we might have a police problem if he is allowed to operate this proposed tavern, I can't understand the reasoning. Councilman Snyder: Doesn't the ABC regarding the owner of the license make these same investigations? City Manager, Mr. Aiassa: Yes. You will just institute a hearing and the opportunity the ABC will have is to recheck this matter. Motion by Councilman Jett, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, to accept the Chiefs report and protest this application; that the Chief of Police be authorized to protest this application. (Councilman Heath voted "No".) CITY TREASURER Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, that the City Treasurer's report for the month of December, 1965 be accepted and placed on file. -40- • C� C Co 1/24/66 MAYOR' S REPORTS' ('CONTINUED) COUNCIL COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS THROUGH APRIL, 1966 Mayor Nichols: PERSONNEL BOARD REPLACEMENT (Continued) Page Forty -One The appointments are in your folders,, Mayor Nichols: May we plan to give some considera- tion on the meeting of the 7th to the replacement for the Personnel Board member who will be leaving effective February 18th? Motion by Councilman Krieger, seconded by Councilman Heath, and carried, that this matter be placed on the agenda for the meeting of February 7,, COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS None CITY CLERK (CONTINUED) WEST COVINA BEAUTIFUL City Clerk, Mr,, Flotten: We have this letter from West Covina Beautiful asking for permission to have their dance on February 5, 1966,, Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Jett, and carried, that approval be granted DEMANDS Motion by Councilman Krieger9 seconded by Councilman Heath, to approve demands totalling $3949544.22 as listed on demand sheets C480 through C483, and payroll register,, $1009406,,66 is fund transfers and $150,000 in time deposits,, Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Jett, Snyder, Krieger, Heath, Mayor Nichols Noes: None Absent: None -41- C. Co C. 1/24/66 'C'OUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS (CONTINUED) WATER WELL PURCHASE Page Forty -Two Councilman Heath: I would like to ask the City Manager a question.. We were in a personnel session a while back where we were discussing the purchase of a water well. At that time the staff asked what the sellerl.s opinion was on price. I believe you told us at that time you didn't know. I understand you have had herein the City Hall for four months a registered appraisal on that water well. City Manager, Mr. Aiassa: No. We had an appraisal on the well on Azusa Avenue,, Councilman Heath: Mr. Fast, do _you have it? Public Services Director, Mr.. Fast: As I recall, the City Manager requested us to get an estimate from our appraiser what he would charge for such an appraisal. Councilman Heath: There was supposed to be an appraisal from Suburban Water • quoting a price. It came from Camille's office. City Manager, Mr. Aiassa: I have never seen it. Councilman Heath: He says it is here. He said Mr. Fast had it. Furthermore, I understand there is a fifty-year or twenty -five-year contract, at least a long-term contract for that well to supply water to the Cortez Park and the contract cannot be changed and at the present time the reason they want to get rid of the well is because they are not making money because in accordance with this long-term contract they are supplying water now at 500 of the going rate. TELEGRAM TO CITY HALL Councilman Jett: I have a telegram here received by one of the members of one of our commissions and this was just brought to my attention. I think this is something that should be brought to the attention of the Council and I think we should have a report on it. This is a telegram that was sent to one of the members of our Human Relations Commission which was sent to the City Hall and the telegram was returned to Western Union stating that the man wasn't known, nor is his address at the City Hall. This telegram I have here is to Mr. and Mrs. Richard Michael Eddy, 1228 Auburn, West Covina, California: "Your telegram of August 20, night letter, to William Beem, City Council, City of West Covina, West Covina, California, is undelivered for the following reason: Addressee is unknown by the City Hall." City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: I will check this out. Councilman Jett: I would like a..repor.t on this.. -42- C, Ca 1/24/66 Page Forty -Three COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS ® Continued • PICKERING TRACT FIRE STATION Councilman Jett- This deed we have received for the fire station down in the Pickering Tract, as I understand it, and I have been told that this deed was received by us about two and a half years ago, I understand there was an attempt made to record the deed at that time and it was brought back that there was a lien against it and it was not recorded. It has just been brought back now since its recent trouble. Why was something like this let go? City Manager, Mr,,.Aiassa- Mr, Pickering made the gift and .he assurred us and he still assures us that he wants to give this as a clear piece of property and he likes to have about sixty days to do it, Councilman Jett: I would hope that this would happen but the thing that I wonder about and question is why this was held over for eighteen, nineteen months and not brought back to the attention of the Council, City Clerk, Mr, Flotten- We attempted to record that thing four different times and we got it back on each occasion and we sent it over to Pickering and it would be there for a couple of months and then we tried to deal with Mr. Pickering through Mr,, Klein, who was working for us, Shortly thereafter we tried to deal.with Mr,, Klein who now works for Mr. Pickering, and now it is back with Mr. Aiassa and we are trying to clear it up, City Manager, Mr, Aiassa- GRAND AVENUE Councilman Jett: We will keep you informed on this, What is the status of Grand Avenue? Have you had any contact with the County as to what is being done? City Manager, Mr. Aiassa- We have a meeting set up with the County Road Commissioner Templin and he said he will give us an answer in about two weeks. We will try to get a report out to you, SIGN ORDINANCE Councilman Jett: Inasmuch as I made the motion to have the Planning Commission reconsider the sign ordinance, my motion was that the Planning Commission review the entire sign ordinance,,- We received in our mail a report from the Planning Director to the Planning Commission enumerating what he was recommending or I assumed it is what he recommended, Each one of those items was not an attempt to try to work out something, in my opinion, It sounds to me like it is the Planning Director attempting to make this more restrictive and more tough instead of trying to eliminate some of these things mm -43- �7_ • • C, C, 1/24/66 SIGN ORDINAXCL - Continued Page Forty -Four Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: What are you referring to? Councilman Jett: The letter you sent us telling the Planning Commission the Council has recommended they study the sign ordinance, Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: That has been on the Planning Commission agenda for two months under a study and held over by the Planning Commission, Two meetings ago they directed me to set this for public hearing, This took place prior to the discussion at the City Council to look at the entire sign ordinance, Immediately thereafter I came back to the Planning Commission.and reported to them what the City Council had said, put it in writing, we are adding to the priority list the request of the Council, We will bring it up to the Planning Commission again in terms of the time allottment, the matters concerning the sign changes that you made reference to, Councilman Jett: I would hope that the Planning Commission would consider the entire sign ordinance, The Council gets blamed for all these things. I. would like to see the sign ordinance reviewed and take all the variances that have been applied for and see what area we have been so restrictive that it has required these requests for variances and see what we can work out.so we don't have all these requests coming, up for variances, Councilman Krieger: Mr, Joseph, in reporting to the Planning Commission the Council action, which is a regular item on each Planning Commission agenda, at the last Planning Commission meeting what your motion was and what the vote of the Council was directing the Planning Commission to look into this entire sign ordinance, I think what you refer to in the memo from the staff was with reference to another aspect of the problem which predated your motion, Mr. Jett, and then there is still another thing hanging fire, which is this flag, bunting and banner thing, It is just a question of confusion as to what he was referring to, Councilman Jett: With reference to the meeting that you appointed Councilman Snyder and myself to meet with two members of the Planning Commission, we did meet and I would like to say that is one of the best committee meetings that I have attended since I have been on the Council. There was a good discussion and as a result of it we came up with some unanimous opinions. We came out of that meeting with good ideas. I want to compliment Councilman Snyder because I think he came up with a real good idea but it certainly worked out well, One was banners, pennants, decorating pennants without wording will be permitted with the exception of seasonal or holiday greetings, (Gave brief summary of this matter,) It was recommended these pennants be used for special promotional sales events, grand openings, and public events. This is pretty much the recommendation we came up with, This is going back to the Planning Commission, -44- Ca Co 1/24/66 Page Forty -Five There being no further business, Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Krieger, and carried, that this meeting be adjourned at 11:55 P.Mo to January 31, 1966 at 7:30.P.Mo ATTEST: • CITY CLERK APPROVED 966 MAYOR -45-