Loading...
04-22-1968 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA APRIL 22, 1968. • The regular meeting of the City Council was called to order by Mayor Gleckman at 7: 30 p.m. , at the West Covina City Hall. The Pledge of Pllegiance was led by Councilman Nichols. The invocation was given by the Reverend Lee Thomas, South Hills Baptist Church. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Gleckman, Councilmen Chappell, Nichols, Gillum, Lloyd. Also Present: George Aiassa, City Manager H. R. Fast, Public Services Director George Wakefield, City Attorney Lela Preston, City Clerk George Zimmerman, Ass't. City Engineer Owen Menard, Planning Director Leonard. Eliot, Controller Donald Russell, Administrative Assistant Ray Windsor, Administrative Assistant Louis Winters, Vice-Pres., - W.C.C.E.A. • APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 15, 1968 - Approved as corrected: Mayor Gleckman: On Page 5, fourth line, last paragraph the word is "ourselves. " And on Page 13, middle of the page, a state- ment attributable to me, the word "impossible" should be "possible. " Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Gillum,, and carried, that the minutes of April 15, 1968, be approved as corrected. April 16, 1968 - Approved as corrected: Mayor Gleckman; On Page 4, a statement I made should read "and their family are here tonight. " And the statement "my sister - Mrs. Carl Berkus, " should follow prior to "and then last but not least..... " And on Page 5, please add to the end of my message - "for this I thank Harvey... " add "and Dr. Snyder. " Also on Page 5, further down on the page, in a statement made by me, please remove the one "no. " Councilman Chappell: My name is misspelled, the correct spelling is with,two sit. Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Gillum, and carried, that the minutes of April 16, 1968, be approved as corrected. - 1 - REG. CX. 4-22-68 Page Two • El :7 CITY CLERK'S REPORTS PROJECT SP-68007-1 STREET IMPROVEMENTS and SPRINKLER .INSTALLATION CROWELL & LARSON LOCATION: Glendora Avenue, Walnut Creek Parkway to S. Garvey Avenue Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Gillum, and carried, that City Council accept street improvements and sprinkler installation, and authorize the release of The Western Casualty and. Surety Company performance bond No. 3524OPin the amount of $9, 937.71. 77f ------ LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. LAD 67-71 LOIS I. SHAFE LOCATION: 1539 East Portner Street Motion by Councilman. Nichols, seconded by Councilman Gillum, that Council approve refund in the amount of $10.07 to Lois I. Shafe for overpayment of assessment from Street Lighting District Account No. 141-568. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Chappell, NOES: None ABSENT: None LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. LAD 67-71 STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS Nichols, Gillum, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman LOCATION: Area within Annexation 192 and area of Giano School at Gemini and Giano Streets (excluding area within County Lighting Maintenance District No. 1866.) Councilman Gillum: Mr. Mayor - I would like to state at this time that I will abstain from any discussion regarding this or the next item on the agenda. One reason, I live within this area; and secondly, I am associated with a Company whose product could be used in this area, and therefore I feel I should abstain from discussion and voting on Item 3-A. Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, that City Council accept the Engineer's report. AYES: 4 NOES; None ABSTAIN: 1 ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO. 3777 ADOPTED -2- The City Clerk presented:. "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE. AN ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM, PLANS, SPECI- FICATIONS, ESTIMATE, AND REPORT FOR LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. LAD 67-71 PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF : . DEFINITION 14, PART 1, STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE, STREET LIGHTING ACT OF 1919, AS AMENDED FOR THE INSTALLATION, FURNISHING OF ELECTRIC CURRENT AND FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Three CITY CLERK'S REPORTS - RESOLUTION NO. 3777 Continued 'CERTAIN LIGHTING FIXTURES AND APPLIANCES IN SAID CITY FOR A PERIOD OF MONTHS ENDING JUNE 30, 1971. " Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objections, waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman. Chappell, that the City Council adopt said Resolution. Councilman Nichols: I would like to have placed in the record the fact that the City staff has surveyed the property owners within Annexa- tion Area 192 and that of 114 property owners who were sur- veyed 51% did respond and -;:of that 51%, 56% indicated they would desire street lighting, therefore in my judgment, the Council in taking this action tonight to set this in motion is following in its best judgment what appears to be..he``consensus_of. opinion in that area. Mayor Gleckman: Any other discussion? I have a question. Mr. Aiassa, is Mr. Rossetti here? Mr. Aiassa: Yes. Mayor Gleckman: Mr.. Rossetti do you have a copy of the post card or informa- tion that was sent out to the property owner? Patrick Rossetti, I do not have a copy. L. J. Thompson Assessment Engineer Manhattan Beach,. Calif. Mayor Gleckman: I have a copy Mr.. Rossetti. Mr. Aiassa,`.wero_the affirma- tive:axiswers .dome in writing or by a phone call? (Answer: By a post card.) Thank you. .I have no further questions. . Is there any further discussion? If not, roll call. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Chappell,. Nichols, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSTAIN: Councilman Gillum ABSENT: None 1968 HIGHWAY' NEEDS REPORT LOCATION: All streets throughout the REQUIRED BY SECTION 2156 OF STREETS City of West Covina. AND HIGHWAY CODE • RESOLUTION NO. 3778 The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, APPROVING THE 1968 NEEDS REPORT. " Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objections, waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. - 3 - PEG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Four Ll 0 is CITY CLERK'S REPORTS - RESOLUTION NO. 3778 - Continued Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Gillum, that the City Council adopt said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Chappell, Nichols, Gillum, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO. 3779 The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, ACCEPTING A CERTAIN WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING THE RECORDATION THEREOF. " Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objections, waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Nichols, that the City Council adopt said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Chappell, Nichols, Gillum, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO. 3780 The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, ACCEPTING A CERTAIN WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING THE RECORDATION THEREOF. " Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objections, waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Nichols, that the City Council adopt said Resolution. Motirn carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Chappell, Nichols, Gillum, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None ORDINANCE- INTRODUCTION The City Clerk presented: "'AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, ADDING CHAPTER 9 TO ARTICLE 6 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE PROVIDING FOR THE GRANTING OF FRANCHISES FOR COMMUNITY ANTENNA TELEVISION SYSTEMS, PROVIDING TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE OPERATION OF SUCH COMMUNITY ANTENNA TELEVISION SYSTEMS AND PRESCRIBING FEES THEREFOR. Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objections, waive further reading of the body of said Ordinance. REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Five CITY CLERK'S REPORTS - ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION - Continued Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded. by Councilman (Chappell, that said Ordinance be introduced. Councilman Nichols: Question, Mr.. Mayor, of the City Attorney. Is this • Ordinance being suggested, pretty much a standard Ordinance being used in all League of California Cities? Mr. Wakefield: Yes sir. The draft of the Ordinance has been revised to fit the West Covina Municipal Code and it includes some terms and conditions different than the model Ordinance but they were designed to fit the recommendations of the League. (Explained.) Councilman Nichols: Where did the Franchise rate come from? Mr. Wakefield: The Franchise rate was the recommendation of the City Engineer. Councilman Gillum: As I understand it this is under the PUC because it is being serviced through the telephone facilities? Mr. Wakefield: No sir, the Antenna Television System operator may use under a License Agreement with the Telephone Company , the telephone company poles as the means of installing the system, but the Franchise must be granted by the City Council and it is dealt with as a license because of the fact the Telephone Company has a statutory • Franchise and they didn't want to confuse the two. The license would be granted by the City to the Television Antenna System operator under this Ordinance just as if it were:a Franchise. It is called a license simply because the Telephone Company was concerned about confusion, but it is basically a Franchise. Councilman Gillum: I Are they governed by the PUC? Mr. Wakefield: No sir. They are governed entirely by this Ordinance. They would have a license under this Ordinance instead of a Franchise, but the terms and conditions would be exactly the same. The reference in the Ordinance to the regulation by the PUC refers to a utility company which itself is regulated by the PUC. Mayor Gleckman: Any fort her discussion? Motion has been made and seconded to introduce. All those in favor say "Aye"? Oppposed? None. Let the record show that the Ordinance is introduced. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION OF APRIL 17, 1968 Mr. Menard: The action sheet of the Planning Commission for the meeting • of April 17 was distributed to the City Obuncil. I will be happy to answer questions or clarify any of the matters. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Gleckman, and carried, that City Council receive and file Planning Commission action of April 17, 1968. Mayor Gleckman: You have as informational, the North Azusa Avenue Plan - City Initiated, set for hearing May 13, 1968, as approved LbA Planning Commission meeting of April 3,. 1968. Is there any comments amongst the City Council regarding that action? - 5 - REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Six PLANNING COMMISSION - Continued Councilman Gillum: There have been some comments in the papers, and.I hope the paper will pick this up and make it known to the public that the hearing is set for May 13, 1968. 0--------- WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 1. POLY VUE '68 MAY 10 to 11, 1968 Cal Poly's Annual Open House Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Nichols, and carried, that the matter of Poly Vue '68 be referred to staff for their action. 2. REQUEST OF 8 PROPERTY OWNERS FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE APPROVAL.OF NORTH AZUSA AVENUE PLAN Motion by Councilman. Nichols, seconded by Councilman Gillum, and carried, that Council direct the Mayor to respond to those who have written the letter, to the effect that the matter will be heard by the City Council at the Public Hearing on May 13, 1968. • 3. COUNTY RELINQUISHMENT OF JURISDICTION GRAND AVENUE Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Gillum, and carried, that City Council receive and file the Board of Supervisors memo dated April 17, 1968. CITY ATTORNEY ORDINANCE. INTRODUCTION The City.Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, AMENDING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO REZONE CERTAIN PREMISES (Zone Change No. 387 - City Initiated.) " Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Mayor Gleckman, and carried, that Council waive further reading of the body of said Ordinance. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Nichols, and carried, that Council introduce said Ordinance. • ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, AMEND- ING SECTION 6378 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO MINORS IN BILLIARD ROOMS. " Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Nichols, and carried, that Council waive further reading of the body of said Ordinance. REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Seven CITY ATTORNEY - ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION - Continued Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Nichols, that City Council introduce said Ordinance. Councilman Lloyd: I am a little concerned as to the necessity of this type of activity which will allow minors in Billiard Rooms. It leaves some doubt in my mind as towhether really this is a strong program as far as youth is concerned. (Councilman Nichols and Mayor Gleckman explained the background of this particular Ordinance for the benefit of the new two Councilmen.) Mayor Gleckman: Further discussion? All in favor so indicate? 4 Ayes. Opposed? 1 (Councilman Lloyd.) Motion carries. ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, AMEND- ING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH MAXIMUM SPEED LIMITS ON GRAND AVENUE. " Motion by Councilman Gillum,,,,, seconded by Councilman Nichols, and carried, that Council waive further reading of the body, of said Ordinance. • Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Nichols, and carried, that Council introduce said Ordinance. SCHEDULED MATTERS BIDS PURCHASE OF STREET SWEEPER The City Clerk stated three bids -were received and opened on April 17, 1968. Bids were reviewed and found to be valid and in conformance with the requirements of the specifications. The bids -were -as follows: Item #1 Item #2 Item #3 A. M. DONAHEA* & SON (Sweeper) (Radio) ( Trade -In) Elgin Model white wing 375 $10, 152 .00 $ 887.00 $ 750.00 10% bid bond DEARTH MACHINERY CO. Wayne 1-973 $ 11, 892.00 $ 880.50 $1, 343.00 10% Bid bond KEMP YORKE EQUIPMENT CO. . Mobil #1-TE-3, Model -RG56 $13, 537.00 $ 925.00 $2, 178.58 10% bid bond The• recommendation is to authorize a Purchase Order in the amount of $10, 840.95 to the low bidder - A.M. Donaher & Son for the purchase of Elgin Model white wing 375 street sweeper, plus tax. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, that the City Council authorize a purchase order in the amount of $10, 840.95 to be issued to the low bidder - A. M. Donaher & Son for the purchase of a Elgin Model white wing 375 street sweeper. -7- REG. C. C. 4-22-66 Page Eight SCHEDULED MATTERS - PURCHASE OF STREET SWEEPER - Continued COUNCIL DISCUSSION. Councilman Nichols: I received a communication on the table here from evidently one of the bidders and the nature of the communication is such as to allege the bid is being awarded to a firm that did not meet bid specifications. Obviously I have not had anytime to go into this matter at all, nor do I believe the staff would be prepared to comment at this time on these statements. I don't know how many of you received a copy of this, it was handed to me when I came in. This would leave me in a position of uncertainty at this moment, and I would tend to feel if it won't prejudice the matter at all, that it should be held over to our next adjourned meeting on the 29th, to give staff a chance to analyze this material and respond to the Council. Mayor Gleckman: Mr. Wakefield —what isour legal position regarding this? Mr. Wakefield: The award of the purchase order may be continued. As you opened the bids, a recommendation has been made, and the Council has the power to continue the matter until you are satisfied that you want to go ahead and make the award. Mayor Gleckman: Thank you. Mr..Aiassa? Mr.. Aiassa: I don't know what matter Mr.. Nichols is referring to. We have not received it staff -wise. Is this from a bidder? • Councilman Nichols: Yes - I believe it isa representative of the Dearth Machinery Company - or a representative in some fashion of Wayne - it makes statements in here that in three or four significant areas, that one piece of equipment absolutely does not meet the bid specifications. I think we ought to take the time and a little more leisure to look at it. It makes a lot of very interesting comments in here that I just as soon not go into right now but I would like to take week to look at it. Mr. Aia s sa : The only thing I would like to say is that staff has reviewed the detailed specs - Mr. Fast, and Mr. Wolff, Street Superintendent and also the City Attorney, and after reviewing they find that the low bidder has met the requirements of the bid.. Now, there could be - how would we say —afterthoughts, from the next successful bidder, and we go through this pretty regular, and unless there are due requirements that the pro- ponent of these so-called statements has facts beyond a question, the staff has reviewed and they feel that the low bidder is a responsible bidder and will meet the requirements. Mr. Fast would you like to add anything? Mr. Fast: No. Mayor Gleckman: In all fairness to the low bidder and to the party supplying this information, if the party supplying this information would care to address the chair at this time and make the comments for the record, I would so grant with permission of the rest of the Council? (No objections by Council.) Robert Ferran Gentlemen, specifications are usually written on a historical Dearth Machinery Co. basis in order to be able to profit from the experience from 1230 Leonard Avenue what you have purchased in the past. These specifications Pasadena, California are quite explicit in various points and in this particular instance one of the things involved has to do with parts availability . The -actual award being given as such shows there has not been an adequate investigation . An adequate investigation would have revealed that the low bidder does not comply with many of the paragraphs. An adequate investigation would have permitted REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Nine SCHEDULED MATTERS - PURCHASE OF STREET SWEEPER - Continued the Department to operate the street sweeper, in order to evaluate its street sweeping performance. An adequate investigation would have revealed that the low bidder is a stripped down model, a sweeper which will not do the work as adequately as the sweeper you are presently trading in. . An adequate investigation would have revealed that the Cities that buy this particular model sweeper usually buy another make sweeper the next time they have a bid. I only call this to your attention because of the fact the bid opening was on Wednesday, the report from the Department had to be in the office by Friday noon and it just didn't give them time for an adequate investigation, so consequently I can understand why they came to the conclusion they did. You have waited over a year to buy a new sweeper, it certainly wouldn't hurt to check this a little closer, I think it would be of value to the City to do this and it certainly would protect the citizens and in this day where we have diminishing tax dollars it would certainly give -value to the City. Mayor Gleckman: Thank you. In all deference to the comments made, do we have a representative here from A.. M. Donaher & Son? R. W. Donaher We have a bid bond in and as we stated in our A. M. Donaher & Son cover letter we are in full compliance with the Southern California specifications. There are no deviations or Distributors for the Elgin Sweeper exceptions of any kind. We have an adequate warehouse in South Gate, and as a matter of fact, interestingly enough one of the requirements to obtain a distributorship for Elgin is that we have between $45, 000 and $50, 000 in spare parts in our warehouse at all time and which we do have and have had since 1952 when I succeeded my father in this • business. We not only meet the specifications but in many instances I think we are exceeding it. For instance you are asking for a 3 yard hopper capacity and we are giving you 3-1/2. You are asking for 230 gallons of water and we are giving you 250. I believe you are asking for a 40.ampaltdrna:ba and we are giving you a 55 amp. So it isn't a question of meeting the specifications, we meet them and in some particulars we exceed the specifications. There is full compliance as we attest in putting up our bond in our bond statement. Mayor Gleckman: Thank you. You have heard some of the testimony here this evening - Councilman Nichols, do you still feel we should hold this matter over? Councilman Nichols: Well in just ' browsing over this, which you all do not have, it says "pick up broom shall have two forward speeds and a reverse speed as part of the specs." and it states in here the one awarded does not have that, etc. etc. There are a number of areas mentioned. It is not a great issue to me except we have someone coming in and saying the bid does not meet the specifications and someone else says it does, and we are an elected body to spend the taxpayer's dollars are prudently as we can and it just seems to mea week would make no difference -at all and we ought to give the staff 'time to look at this statement and respond back to Council. Mayor Gleckman: Mr. Wakefield, I have,a question. Mr. Donaher spoke of a bid band. If the allegation that this does not meet our specifications and we accept and make the award this evening, and then the delivered machinery does not meet specification does that forfeit his bond and void the contract? Mr.. Wakefield: No, the bond would be liable for any damage the City may suffer as,a result of the acceptance of the machinery in the absence of the fact that it does not meet specifications, but it would not void the transaction. The bid bowl is to insure that the party will supply the -equipment he is. offering at the price he bid. �t REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Ten SCHEDULED MATTERS - PURCHASE OF STREET SWEEPER - Continued Councilman Nichols: Mr. Aia-ssa - have any of our staff people used this particular machine? Operated it,, driven it or tried it out in anyway? Mr., Aiassa: I would have to ask them, but I have tried the equipment in two other cities, and if the price had been right wewould have ended up by buying an Elgin, but the pricewas on a competitive basis and I ended buying an inferior sweeper because the Elgin was priced out of the bracket we,were buying in. Now this Elgin is not a new -come -lately. . Elgin has been .on the market as long as any other competitive sweeper. We had the same fuss on a Mobil. Councilman Nichols: I remember that. Mr Aiassa: We spent many hours on that. The same outfit came up with the same pitch and same comments Now the staff did talk with the individuals representing the other bids and we feel and in fairness to the difference, of some $110.0 < that the low bidder should be given the award. Hemet the requirements,as outlined and that is all that is necessary. Mayor Gleckman: Thank you. Any other comments? Councilman Gillum: Mr., Aiassa who reviews the bids with regards to the specifications laid down? Mr Aia s sa : Actually two people, Mr. Fa st. a nd Mr. Wolff. Councilman Gillum: Mr. Fast - are you satisfied that our low bidder meets the specifications? Mr. Fast: Yes, it is so stated in thereport to you. Councilman Gillum: Mr. Wolff, have you ;reviewed the bids and the specifications with regard to the street sweeper? Morris Wolff Yes I have. Street Superintendent City of West Covina Councilman Gillum: Does the low bidder meet the specifications as far as the street sweeper is concerned ? Mr. Wolff: Yes he does. Councilman Lloyd: Mr.. Wolff - are you satisfied with the operation of the E lgin White Wing model ? In other words with your operators operating this equipment would they be satisfied? is Mr.. Wolff: Yes they -would. Mayor Gleckman: Any further discussion? We have,a motion.on the floor, roll call please? Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Chappell, Nichols, Gillum, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None - 10 - REG. C. C. 4-22-68 Page Eleven HEARINGS AMENDMENT NO. 88 Request to amend the Municipal Code by the CITY INITIATED creation and addition of Section 9227 'approved by Planning Commission Resolution No. 2039. (Mr. Menard, Planning Director, verbally summarized Section 9227 approved by Planning Commission Resolution No. 2039.) Mayor Gleckman: Madam City Clerk have we received the affidavit of publication? Lela Preston, City Clerk: I have the affidavit of publication. It was published April 11, 1968, in the West Covina Tribune. There were no mail notices required. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that Council receive and file affidavit of publication. THIS JS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENT NO. 88 CITY INITIATED. IN FAVOR None. IN OPPOSITION None. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. COUNCIL DISCUSSION. Councilman Gillum: Mr. Wakefield on Page 9 of this Resolution under H 9. First of all let me state I support this action but I am wondering if we can enforce it. . Where it states "drive in and drive thru .re.staurants or any combination thereof ....... Are we into an area of restricting, are we within our rights to restrict as far as distance and type of business if it falls within this zone? Mr. Wakefield: This was a problem discussed at the Planning Commission and what we attempted to do here is control the use to the degree that access can be provided adequately to meet the needs of the particular kind of enterprise that proposes to locate on a particular piece of property. In my opinion the restriction is valid and it can be enforced.. It is a new step and goes farther than anything that presently exists in the West Covina zones but because of the nature of the use and the necessity for adequate access, I think as it relates to a particular kind of busines it can be enforced. Councilman Gillum: In other words what you are saying, and as Mr.. Menard . stated, we `have to allow for traffic flow and things of this type, but these two parts are tied together. One supports this as far as not allowing closer than 1000 etc. Mr. Wakefield: Yes that is the purpose of the limitation. Councilman Gillum: I hope it works. Councilman Nichols: I have a number of observations. As I understand the Ordinance -as it is created it will allow a number of uses that are presently C-2 uses into an area that currently and presently, one area in particular North Azun Avenue, is basically a C-1 area and. the REG- C.C. 4-22-68 Page Twelve AMENDMENT NO. 88 - Continued S-C zone will in fact be a blending of various zones in- that a number of C-2 uses will now be allowed. The structure of priority of the Ordinance in terms of density lists C-1., then S-C, and then C-2, C-3, etc. , so in effect it will be moving some C-2 uses in the S-C zone. Now it seems to me that this is being justified on the basis that higher development standards will prevent any of the more detrimental results that we historically think of when we try to blend auto repair garages with a ladies dress shop, etc. I think we are in a very delicately risky -area in that any slight breakdown in the standards in terms of variance in the future, I think will result in absolutely what Councilman Gillum is talking about. My basic concern here is not in the concept of this ordinance as it has been drafted and recommended to us but in the review by staff and subsequently the Planning Commission, of the types of uses that could be developed in this area within the framework of this Ordinance.. As an example, in the Ordinance there,are certain points that very clearly show the effort to bring beauty and quiet to an area; the facilities where loading is to occur, as an example. The requirements for that activity is that it bean interior activity away from the street, enclosed from public view. This is very commendable, yet if we go back to the uses and look at the uses that are proposed for acceptance into this area, there are a number of these uses that I cannot see,any physical way that a development could occur and comply with the Ordinance. As an example on Page 9 we have listed Auto washes which have been one of our biq bugaboos in terms of noise and confusion. I have never seen a car wash developed yet that was totally enclosed in such a way that no sound can get out. And I can visualize the people coming in and saying "you say we can have a car wash in here but we can't possibly build a structure that will conform with the Ordinance" - :so I wonder only if the review of the permitted uses has been precise enough and careful enough so that those uses proposed for authorization here will not be inherently in conflict with the intent of this Ordinance. I believe some of these uses will be and I would tend not to support the Ordinance until we looked back again over these uses recommended as being acceptable to the S-C zone. Councilman Lloyd: Just from what I can read in the Ordinance it looks like this covers,a necessary item and I don't feel it is so all encompassing that it will be restrictive. By that I mean in trying to define the limitations that you will limit yourself out of growing dynamic businesses. . I think- this will aid actually. Councilman Gillum: Mr.. Nichols brought up a good point and now I am wondering about it. Again I don't want to start something here that the first time they come in we have to put a Variance on a wash rack or in this one area that pertains to loading or unloading. For instance -a shoe store, I know one shoe store that takes it in the back door and sells it out the front door and that is not an enclosed delivery area. Mr.. Wakefield, when we get into these areas that specifies such as a loading area, in your opinion what approach could the Council take on some of these? It would be almost impossible to have an enclosed loading area. Many of these people receive their merchandise through parcel post or United Parcel - - do we end up giving a Variance in that one instance? Mr. Wakefield: I think it has to be pointed out that this is a completely new zone. It has no property within the City that is in this zone and no property will be in the zone until it is rezoned and placed in this particular zone, so essentially what you are talking about are new uses, so the control comes from the initial development within the rezoned area and to that extent: I think it: is possible to enforce and establish the controls. If this were a reworking of an existing zone and you were adding new restrictions to existing areas where there were established businesses you would end up with nonconforming businesses or you would have to grant variances, but here generally it has been discussed in the context of the -development plan that the staff prepared for Azusa Avenue no portion of that area" has been included in this zone and will not be until - 12 - REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Thirteen AMENDMENT NO. 88 Continued after Council action rezones areas to be included. So to•that extent I think it is feasible to control the uses. I think there is a problem with respect to the types of uses permitted within this zone. If there are any the Council feels may not be •appropriate because once the property is put into the zone then it can be used for any of the uses that are authorized within the zone, subject of course to the develop- ment standards and to the limitations of the ordinances in the zone itself. Councilman Gillum: Well I am trying to pursue what Councilman Nichols said - - another one comes to my mind, for instance an auto agency. When they receive a carload of automobiles that is a delivery and I don't think they could build an enclosed facility large enough to accept that. So in a sense they could have pan area to receive all their other merchandise but when it comes to that one item, which is the main item in their business, they are going to have to break the law or we are going to have to make some type of relief. Mr.. Menard, could you make a comment along this line? Do you know what I am trying to pin down? Mr. Menardo Yes, I think so. As in the administration of any law, one has to be reasonable as he applies it, and it is quite obvious there is a great deal of difference between a delivery of a lot of cans of noisy type things early in the morning to a supermarket than delivery of a parcel post package to a store during the daytime. . Perhaps the language is too all inclusive in Item N on Page 4, and could be slightly modified to alleviate this situation. I can't help but think that discretion has to be used on almost all of this and we use it every day at staff level in regard to the controls placed upon facilities. I think the wording in Item N might be changed to read 'to indicate perhaps "appropriate loading or unloading facilities shall be limited where needed or required ....... might serve to take care of this. . Obviously, I don't need such facilities if somebody is delivering a box of marshmallows. Councilman Gillum: I think the part that concerns me is where it says "all loading and unloading facilities shall be located at such a depth..... " I think some leeway is needed in these areas that are faced with different problems as far as merchandise is concerned. Mr. Menarde May I make a suggestion? I have found, in an ordinance where you put in such items "as required or appropriate" it is well to place it in the responsibility of someone, so if we were to add "or to the satisfaction of the Planning Director" this would place the responsibility. Councilman Gillum: Very good. Mayor Gleckman: I think the S-C zoning is a long time needed zone in the City of West Covina. . It is very hard to be all inclusive in our zoning in order to effectively administer the particular requirements and still achieve within our City the different usages that could go in thereon some of the main commercial streets within our City. I think that Councilman Nichols had an excellent point in pointing out some of the usages that are represented in this S-C zone. That would be just about impossible to build within this zoning such as the auto laundry, but we don't know what the future will bring as to facilities available to this community and I think where these usages are put in this zoning in order to be all inclusive that if they cannot build these things in the S-C usage even though the usage is there I don't think we have to worry about it. I under- stand the point - since the usage is there that would tend to make someone apply and come in an ask for a variance, but I think this could be even with usages that are not there or certain conditions that they would like to have that this particular zoning controls. - 13 - REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Fourteen AMENDMENT NO. 88 - Continued My feeling would be to get the S-C zone in on the books, give us something to work with, and then we could amend any particular problems that we feel are not justified. I don't look for any auto car washes to come in that quickly under this S-C zoning and my main thought would be to give us this additional necessary S-C zone that could dobe used in the best manner to give us the highest and best use within our commercial area. �J 0 Councilman Nichols: That is a valid point. Councilman Lloyd: Mr. Mayor - I would recommend changing the wording to read as follows in paragraph N on page 4 under the heading of Loading Facilities: "All loading or unloading facilities shall reasonably be located at such depth within a completely enclosed building as to reasonably contain and restrict the emission of noises, etc..... " I think the word "reasonably" takes in the judgment factor which Mr. Menard was talking about. Mayor Gleckman: And if you just add to that "shall be administered by staff" I think we could leave it to their judgment. . I think their original intent was to control this but not to be facetious. Would we have any problem in amending that Mr. Wakefield? Mr.. Wakefield: No. Mayor Gleckman: Do you have a resolution prepared that we could adopt? Mr. Wakefield: I have a form of ordinance prepared that could be introduced. It does not take in the change under council discussion but it can be included. Mayor Gleckman: I would like a motion accepting or denying Amendment No. 88. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, that the City Council approve Amendment No. 88 - City Initiated. Mayor Gleckman: Mr. Wakefield - would we include in that motion, if accepted by the originator and the second, that an ordinance be prepared by the City Attorney? Mr. Wakefield: Yes. Mayor Gleckman: Would you accept that Mr.. Gillum and Mr.. Lloyd? (Accepted by Councilman Gillum and Councilman Lloyd.) Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen. Chappell, Nichols, Gillum, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT None Mayor Gleckman: Motion carries to approve Amendment No. 88 - City Initiated .and to further instruct the City Attorney to prepare for introduction an ordinance which is to include the change as suggested here this evening. (THE CHAIR CALLED FORA 10 MINUTE RECESS. COUNCIL RECONVENED AT .9: 02 P.M.) - 14 - REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Fifteen ZONE CHANGE NO. 391 - C.. J. WITTMAN and R. PAUL ROBB LOCATION: Northwest corner of Glendora and Service Avenues. REQUEST to reclassify from Zones R-3 and R-1 to C-2 approved by Planning Commission Resolution No. 2034. • Mayor Gleckman: Madam City Clerk do you have the affidavit of publication? Lela Preston: Yes it was published in the West Covina Tribune and 62 notices were mailed to all the names. on the property owners list. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that Council receive and file. THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ZONE CHANGE NO. 391. (Mr. Menard, Planning Director read the Planning Commission Resolution.No., 2034 in full. Briefly outlined the zoning that presently exists on the property and its location was shown with the use of a map, also that of surrounding area.) PUBLIC HEARING IN FAVOR James A. Poore, Attorney I am the attorney for the party seeking the zone change. 610 So. Broadway We agree with Mr.. Menard's report and I will be happy to • Los Angeles answer any questions. As you know this is a proposed location for a Chevrolet Agency dealership. I have the prospective dealers here,also a representative from Chevrolet in the event there are any questions Thank you. . IN OPPOSITION None. THERE BEING NO FURTHER PUBLIC TESTIMONY, THE. PUBLIC HEARING PORTION IS CLOSED. COUNCIL DISCUSSION. Councilman. Nichols: I.would like to direct a question to Mr. Menard, What do you envision_as the use of the remaining 120' x 143' of R-1 land to the rear of this property after it is zoned commercial? Mr. Menard: It is our understanding, as represented at the Planning Commission meeting,. that all of the property is. anticipated for construction for an automobile agency and the storage facilities, if I am not mistaken, are anticipated to be located, under the plan, in that general area. Councilman. Nichols: Then I must have misunderstood. . The R-1 portion in the rear as well as the R-3 portion is in total the proposed area? Mr. Menard: This is correct. The existing underlying area is in R1 and R-3 the application as a xei4uirement by the Planning Commission is the entire 7.88 acres. Councilman Nichols: That was the area of discussion at the Planning Commission. The possibility of reducing the amount of that portion which is the present R-3 ? Mr. Menard: This is correct. 15 - REG, C.C. 4-22-68 Page Sixteen ZONE CHANGE NO. 391 - Continued Councilman Lloyd: Mr. Nichols, were you referring to the residential property that faces on St. Malo Street? • Councilman Nichols: Yes. . I happened to have been the Council representative when this came before the Planning Commission and if I recall correctly, there was some question raised as to the C-2 zoning being granted completely to the R-1 line on the existing single family residences and the applicant, . at that time, stipulated that the amount of land needed for the zoning was minimally exclusive of the entire area marked off here and the Planning Commission debated this at some length before passing its recommendation along to us, and I was a little confused thinking that the Planning Commission recommendation had restricted that rear portion adjacent to the existing single family neighborhood, but in retrospect was reminded they did not. Councilman Gillum: Mr. Menard - as I understand the discussion now we are to consider the complete vacant property of 7 some acres. Is this correct? Mr. Menard: Yes. This is the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Councilman Gillum: I was present at the time this property received its present - zoning and the R-1 at that time was stuck on the parcel as a buffer, which I think was a mistake at that time, but now as I understand it we have a request to change the zoning to allow an auto agency and I have some concern, in this area especially next to a parochial school. If my memory serves me correctly the past council was concerned about putting commercial near a -school and now we are being asked to put it next to a school.. I am wondering if anyone contacted the church and the parochial school, as far as this being of some concern to them Mr. Menard: The church was notified as required by law. The staff has received no written communications nor received any verbal telephone conversations from the parochial school or from the church. They were not present at the Planning Commission level. We must assume if they are opposed they have not seen fit to make such opposition public. The only communications we have is from a Mr.,and Mrs..J. Zemets indicating that: they were in favor of the proposed zoning as long as it was a equality:_ development and they are the people that are there residing at this location. We have communcations from some 8 or 10 people that reside across on Glendora, who indicated they would like to see commercial zoning on their property and requested that the Planning Commission rezone their property at the same time for Commercial. The Planning Commission informed them as to the legalities of this and suggested that rezoning of their property would have to be duly applied for by themselves. These are the only communications received. Councilman Gillum: Presently how much commercial C-1, C-2 is located on Glendora Avenue that is undeveloped? Mr. Menard: There is one rather large undeveloped parcel that is C-1 zone that consists of about 4-1/2 acres and then the location under discussion - is the only large parcel. There are.a total of 18.5 acres of commercial zoning in the area that has been generally shown on this map .and. of these 18.5 acres there are 6 vacant acres, 5 of which are in the one rather large parcel located here and the remainder is generally ideiielo ed. O.xcept<for.�:rather'small parcels totalling 1 acre, Councilman Gillum: There was a detailed study made of North Azusa Avenue on which we are having a hearing on May 13th. Correct me if I am wrong - was this initiated by Council? - 16 - REG'. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Seventeen ZONE CHANGE, NO o .91 - Continued Mr. Menard- No, the North Azusa Study was requested of the -Planning Commission by the Planning staff in regards to a significant zone change on. North Azusa and the Planning Commission on this particular item; - after concluding this item and making their recommendation, directed staff to make a similar study on Glendora Avenue from Cameron to Walnut Creek on the north, so this is under, study and has been for several weeks by the Planning staff. Councilman Gillum- Why I bring this up is that apparently the people on the eastern side of Glendora now feel they would like some type of relief as far as zoning is concerned and believe me, I want to see commercial type of development come into our City, but I am again concerned about all this hodge-podge. I am sure there is some concern on property owners along the street: not knowing where they are going to stand. I am wondering if it- wouldn't be wise to extend this study that is completed on North Azusa into this area. I would feel better about it if we had some definite plan or direction on Glendora-, because I think it is important that we do make a move in that direction, but I am also concerned in this area of hopping and skipping and jumping up and down the street Mr. Menard: This is a very typical pattern that regret-fully,Acis exist and will invariably exist on streets that were developed at one time for residential and then a transistion is occurring. The real problem that the Planning Department has run into in regard to the Glendora Avenue Study from Cameron north to Walnut Creek is that particular area of single family dwellings to the east. This is probably going to take up the most part of the study time allocated for this because it is a particularly unique problem. Residential lots that have residential depth and what will it transist into, or how could single family be made compatible there? We hope to have some good solid recommendations for an appropriate land use for that strip of residential homes along there, but I can't anticipate that it will be an immediate kind.of thing. If typical of transistion, it will probably beat least 5 and probably more appropriately 10 to 15 years before this can be developed from one land use to another. We are probably going to have some hodge-podge uses for a number of years in these areas. Councilman Gillum. Is there a reason -why you state we are going to have this bodge-podge is there no way that we can make an effort at this time to stop this hodge-podge and at least get some direction? Mr. Menard- I would hope the direction will be forthcoming in the first segment of the South Glendora Study which we are into now by 3 or 4 weeks. The Commission indicated they were not concerned withpushing it out: as rapidly as the North Azusa Study, but wanted it back in front of them in 3 or 4 months. The staff feels they have a responsibility to direct the future development in this area in the same way, we would hope that our study will guide North Azusa Avenue. Councilman Gillum- I have a question of Mr.. Poore. First let me say to you and the applicant that I am glad to see that West Covina is large enough for dealership but I am deeply concerned with this area, because I have lived here for 1.5 years, and by the way the reason I am on this Council today is because an automobile dealer tried to come in a few years ago and was denied. May I ask you why a Precise Plan has not been shown? Many times when there is a nequest for a zone change we also have a Precise Plan filed. May I ask why there is not a Precise Plan? Mr.. Poore. I don't think there is any particular reason why one was not filed. or forthcoming. The problem we have is that Chevrolet ha s given - 17 - REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Eighteen ,.ox& C11A1q69 .391 - Continued a deadline to begin construction otherwise the franchise will not be here. As indicated before -there-was considerable discussion before the -Planning Commission concerning the rear portion which is zoned R-1- but our problem is time . As I indicated to the Commission at that time we have to begin construction on or before June 1. I don't know any particular reason that a .. Precise Plan was not filed, and obviously we do not have ore prepared to file today. Councilman Gillum- If you have to start construction by June 1 youwill have to go through the same procedure with the Precise Plan and you are going to be pressed for time even if Council approved this tonight. I am not doubting Chevrolet or your intentions or anyone's but I have seen the Council give zoning in the past and then there it sets and the next thing it goes sky high and I am just deeply concerned in this area. Mr. Poore- Of course being an attorney I understand your concern, I have seen it happen too. However, I do represent the parties that will own the dealership. They are both employed by Chevrolet right now and they have been working on the matter as rapidly as "they can considering the time element. Now Chevrolet conducted considerable research to determine where to locate this dealership and their pi.n when put on the map was right precisely where this property is without any particular attention being given to the property, but it was right where they feel they need a Chevrolet dealership. It will be a million dollar facility. is Councilman Gillum- I am sure of that, but I have concerns in that area. One is the school and the other is the hop, skip and jump. Mr. Poore: I talked to Father Bramble at the school and he had no objection to it at all. His only comment was could some of the parking area be available to the church on Sunday, and if there is vacancy they will obviously have it. Mayor Gleckman: You talk about a deadline of June 1. What would happen if Chevrolet couldn't start building by" June 1? Mr. Poore. I don't know, I don't represent Chevrolet. Mayor Gleckman: Alright - the -reason I say that Mr. Poore is that under no circumstances even if this were granted tonight you couldn't get a building permit prior to June 27th, regardless of what would be done by this Council this evening. Mr. Poore: I don't know, I am just telling you what the agreement is between the two parties. Mayor Gleckman- Thank you. In regards to the zoning and in all deference to Councilman Gillum's remarks, the zoning has nothing to do with the Precise Plan. The zoning is granted on the basis • of is the property properly placed that this Council feels C-2 zoning should go in there? There is no guarantee that we will have a Chevrolet Agency ever- built on the property, even though I have no doubt that it is possible that it will be. But at the same_"time; we can't receive nor can we expect a guarantee that such a facility will be built on this facility if C-2 is granted. The zoning is given to the property and not to a particular use. And that is my No. 1. concern at this time. There was a recommendation to the Planning Commission by the Planning Department with the same reservations and -one of the main reasons why this S-C zoning was introduced at that particular time, not basically for a Chevrolet Agency, but for any - what you might consider, problem pieces of property. I do take deference to the report by Mr, Menard, RED. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Nineteen 7-.VHfi Cl A1V,-,6 A NO. :191. - Continued I do not consider the corner of Service Avenue and Glendora anyway assimilated with the corner of Glendora and. Cameron because if we would ever get the amount of traffic that we have on Cameron down Service Avenue then I would stand to be corrected. The basis on which the C-2 zoning was given in the example shown by the Planning Department was because of the high density of Glendora and Cameron and the idea that the past Council felt that that was the proper place for C-2 zoning whether it be'Harry Hill Volkswagon or many many other uses that can go into C-2. I also have to take into consideration the R-1 property directly to the south. If C-2zoning is put on this entire particular parcel there is no doubt in my mind that R-1 squeezed in between two parcels of C-2 and C-1 on one side of it would not only be accepted by this Council for coming in for a higher type of zoning, but I don't know where it would stop, and I would like to ask the Planning Department if there has been any consideration as to what is going to happen with, all theland from Cameron - that is Glendora to Cameron and California all the way down to Walnut Creek Parkway because if we put in this type of high usage zoning with no controls I seewherewe would be opening Pandora's Box not only on R-1 on Service Avenue but on St. Malo's situation backing up to it. I also have to consider the different usages that could go into the C-2 zoning and what effect it would have in close association with the church and the school and if it is a Chevrolet Agency I am Also concerned with the activity that would go on on a Sunday. Knowing that the automobile agencies have their highest activity in normal operation on. Sunday. .It is possible that the weekdays would do it, but I think Sunday would be a good family day to shop for cars. I in no way want to discourage Chevrolet from coming into this area but on the basis that the Planning Commission. recommended C-4.a:nd,-Mr".,.Poore's testimony of •a June 1 deadline, it tends to give me the idea by his own admission that they must start building on June 1 that even if we granted it, it could not be started prior to June 27th and therefore it may never bean automobile agency and once we label it with C-2.that usage stays on that property. I do believe the recommendation of the Planning Department such as a S-G zoning possibility going into this area where we could control in some shape or form the type of development that would go in there, is the better thought.. Also I am concerned with the parish and the school because it .is most unfortunate that in notification we do notify the property and in this particular instance I would say St. Christopher's may have a thousand or two thousand families that would be affected by any change next to St. Christopher's and if Father Bramble is the only one that has been notified and the people in that parish have not been notified, I can see the ramifications that would come to this City Council. My thoughts would be for the block study started by the Planning Department to be completed with their recommendation to the Planning Commission and then to us as to whether even S-C zoning would be appropriate in that area. TYatis my feeling. Councilman Nichols. Mr. Mayor - we have done so much yelling and screaming around this town about wanting to bring business into this City and increase sales taxc ~ revenue and practically everybody that sought a seat on this Council made this huge pledge about bending over backwards to try and get business into this. City and when Harry Hill Volkswagon came in and asked for C-2 zoning right down the street, none of these points were raised and suddenly C-2.was compatible; and I don't think Service'Avenue and Cameron -Avenue really have • anything. at all to do with it because the orientation of these businesses is basically Glendora.. Avenue and whether Service Avenue is relatively Slightly travelled and Cameron is relatively heavily travelled, we are still talking about the development of Glendora Avenue.. I would.normally be personally quite concerned about this type of development backing up to R-1 property, but all of these people were given notices of this and the church was given notice and Father Bramble. is after all the head of the church, and we not only did not receive any negative statements by any of the adjacent property owners, which.is a rarity, but we have actually received a positive statement from one of them. Yes, it is conceivable in my mind that this facility may never be built but it also happens to be totally within the power of this Council to call up a piece- of property at anytime and rezone it. . If this Council should determine - 19 - REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Twenty IZ-01VG' c,yg1446r AM i ' NO..A91 - Continued in 3 months that it has in fact made an error in.placing C-2 zoning on this land it can be city initiated and changed right back to R-1 or A or anything we see: fit in doing. I feel there is always some element of risk in any type of operation of this sort. The applicants have promised to work cooperatively with the Planning Department and •state that they will conform to all requirements of the S-C zone, even though it doesn't exist here in this development. It will be a million dollar development and will be completely in the interest of the City. I have all of the reservations expressed here but I think it is time the Council get on with the job of doing what we said we would do and try and ena> urage quality and high type developments to come into this City and vote this .zoning in and encourage Chevrolet Agency to come into this City. Mayor Gleckman: Could I just ask you Councilman Nichols, where you get the information that they have agreed to comply with the conditions of the S-C zone? Councilman Nichols: I am sorry I have had the benefit of the Planning Commission hearing which influences some of my thinking and you gentlemen have not and that is very unfortunate and I didn't mean to come up with some statement that is a secret from you. The applicants themselves have stated to the Planning Commission and the Planning Director at the general meeting that they would gladly comply with all the requirements of the S-C zone even though it may not be enforced in that area Is this not correct Mr. Menard? Mr. Menard: This is correct and one other expanding statement is that • staff does have direction to come back and initiate S-C when that zone becomes effective if it becomes effective. So the Commission has given some thought to this S-C zoning on this particular location. Mayor Gleckman: Any other comments? Motion by Councilman Nichols that Planning Commission Resolution.No.. 2034 and ..Zone Change Application No. 191 be approved by City Council. Seconded by Councilman Chappell. Motion failed.on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Chappell, Nichols NOES: Councilmen. Gillum,, Lloyd,. Mayor Gleckman ABSENT: None Motion by Councilman. Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, that Zone Change No. 391 and Resolution 2034 by the Planning Commission, be denied. . Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen. Gillum,. Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: Councilmen Nichols, Chappell ABSENT: None • ----------- CITY ATTORNEY - Continued RESOLUTION NO. 3781 The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, DENYING A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE. (Variance No. 619 - Wallichs Music City, Inc.) Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Mayor Gleckman, and carried, that Council waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. - 20 - REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Twenty-one CITYATTORNEY - RESOLUTION NO. 3781 - Continued Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, that City Council adopt said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: • AYES: Councilmen -Chappell, Nichols, Gillum, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None Mr.. -Wakefield:.;. Mr. Mayor,. the next prepared Resolution has a blank spot in for the purpose of permitting the City Council to designate an alternate member for the Mayor, to serve on the District Governing Board, County Sanitation. Districts 15, 21 and 22. The Mayor automatically serves as the city's representative on these Sanitation District Governing Boards, but the City Council may designate by resolution an alternate to sit for the Mayor in his absence or. his inability to act. The purpose of this resolution.is to designate such a member. The blank should be filled in by nomination approval by the Council. Mayor Gleckman: I would nominate Councilman Gillum to serve in that alternate position. Are there any other nominations? If not, all those in favor of the nomination of Councilman. Gillum to serve as the alternate, will so indicate? (All were in favor.) Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 3782 • ADOPTED The City Attorney presented: " A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, DESIGNATING AN ALTERNATE TO THE DISTRICT GOVERNING BOARD'S COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS 15-21 AND 22. " Motion by Councilman Gillum, secoridbd by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that Council waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by Councilman. Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, that City Council adopt said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as -follows: AYES: Councilmen Chappell, Nichols, Gillum,. Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None LEGAL CLARIFICATION OF DEFINITION OF PART-TIME EMPLOYEE Mr.. Wakefield: At your last meeting of the City Council I understand there was some discussion about what seemed to be an ambiguity about a Resolution submitted to define a part-time employee. If I may I will briefly summarize. (Explained to Council.) RESOLUTION NO. 3783 The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, DEFINING PART-TIME POSITIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF OASDI PURPOSES." Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, that Council waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. - 21 REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Twenty-two CITY'ATTORNEY - LEGAL CLARIFICATION OF DEFINITION OF PART-TIME EMPLOYEE Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, that the City Council adopt said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES- Councilmen. Chappell, Nichols, Gillum, Lloyd, Mayor. Gleckman NOES- None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO. 3784 The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AD CPTED OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, SUPPORTING ASSEMBLY BILL 425 RELATING TO PRE- EMPTION. " Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman. Nichols, and carried, that Council waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, that City;Council adopt said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Nichols, Gillum, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT- None ABSTAIN: Councilman Chappell • :0RDINANCE:.I14TRODUCTION. ;.- . ; .i _: TheL.City -Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE. OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, AMENDING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE , CRE_ r/Nl' A/✓D REGULATIA14 USE- Of pROIo� -,-y /i✓ 5&RG .//E- COMM9Rc1�G 70idb rs-C za/8) Mayor Gleckman. Hearing no objection, waive further reading of the body of the Ordinance. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that Council introduce said.Ordinance. CITY MANAGER BARRANCA AVENUE —ACCEPTANCE OF APPRAISAL REPORT Mr. Aiassa: There is a staff report which outlines the arrangement the City would like to proceed on including Barranca Avenue. • Mayor Gleckman: Mr.. City Attorney, in any shape, way or form - is this an executive matter having to do with dollars and cents that may not be at this particular time to the best interests of the City of West Covina to discuss this - dollar amounts? Mr. Wakefield. I think this is something that can be discussed openly. (Mr,. Aiassa read staff report and explained that this is similar to what was done on Lark Ellen, and will allow a little freedom to actually avoid going into actual condemnation trial.) - 22 - REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Twenty-three CITY MANAGER - BARRANCA AVENUE APPRAISAL REPORT Continued Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, that the City Council approve the appraisal reports for right-of-way acquisition as submitted by Harrison R. Baker & Associates in their report entitled, "Appraisal Report, South Barranca Street Widening, Parcels 8, 9,. 12, 26, and 27. " Councilman. Nichols: I must be deeply forgetful but I don't remember receiving the Appraisal Report on this property, when did that come through to the Council? Mr.. Aiassa. We have kept the report in staff because of the legal aspects of the acquisition. The Council is entitled to see it at anytime, if they wish. Councilman Nichols- Relative to the precise dollar figures, Mr. Wakefield are appraisals of property where it may become a matter of adjudication at a later date, the proper subject for open council discussion? Mr. Wakefield: The precise dollar amount of the individual property is not a matter of appropriate public disucssion at this time, that is true. All I thought we were asking here was the approval and receipt of the appraisal reports as a basis for further negotiations. Councilman Nichols- Would it be appropriate for the Council to request an • .Executive Session so the Council could review the Appraisal Report? Mr. Wakefield- Yes. Councilman. Nichols: T wouldl'like ,to. re:que.st..such: a: ses siori.if the Council would agree so I could see the report. Nlayor Gleckman- We have a motion on the floor Councilman Nichols, if the party making the motion will withdraw the motion and the second will accept then we would be in line for you to make a motion for an Executive Session. Motion withdrawn by Councilman Gillum, and Councilman Lloyd. Motion by Councilman Nichols that the Council adjourn briefly to look over the Appraisal Report on South Barranca Avenue. Seconded by Councilman Lloyd and carried. All were in favor. COUNCIL ADJOURNED AT 9. 50 P.M. FOR AN EXECUTIVE SESSION. COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 9- 55 P. M. Motion by Councilman Gillum that the City Council approve the Appraisal prices • for the right-of-way acquisition as submitted by Harrison R. Baker & Associates in their report entitled, "Appraisal Report, South Barranca Street Widening, Parcels 8, 9,. 12, 26, and 27. " Seconded by Councilman Lloyd. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES- Councilmen Chappell, Nichols, Gillum, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES. None ABSENT. None - 23 - REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Twenty-four CITY MANAGER - BARRANCA AVENUE - Continued Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Chappell, that Council approve the limit: adjustment for the right-of-way acquisition. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows-, AYES. Councilmen Chappell, NOES. None ABSENT. None ANNEXATION NO. 210 PROPOSAL Nichols, Gillum, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman Mr. Aia s sa. The Council has the report and Mr. Menard is here to answer any questions. (Briefly summarized .) Mr. Menard do you have anything you wish to add? Mr. Menard. No - I think the report covered it. . It is a small annexation and has 100% approval by the individual that owns the land. If LAFCO approves we would like to bring this in without a Public Hearing . Motion made by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Gillum, that Council. direct staff to go forward with Annexation 210 proposal. Motion carried. All were in favor. . ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None CITY MANAGER Continued WILLIAMS, COOK & MOCINE STATEMENT FOR MARCH, 1968 Motion by Councilman. Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, that the statement from Williams, Cook & Mocine for March, 1968, in the amount of $354.00 for professional. services be approved. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows. AYES. Councilmen Chappell, Nichols, Gillum, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES. None ABSENT. None LETTER FROM EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION RE. PARTICIPATION IN STATE AUDIT COSTS Mr. Aiassa. As you know it .is a requirement that Social Security do an audit of our City records - the accounts of the employees. They have given us a figure of $1000 to $1200 for this audit. "Council referred the matter to staff to discuss with the Employees' Association a means for the payment of this audit. You have in your hands a letter from the Employees' Association dated April 15, 1968, where in they have offered to pay $100. of this expense. (Mr..Aiassa read letter in.full.) COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilman Gillum. I am serving as "Chadrman of this Committee to investigate thoroughly the consideration of withdrawing from Social Security. This amount 24f money for the audit was discussed REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Twenty-five STATE AUDIT COSTS - Continued by the Board, and it was felt that the Employees' Association should make a contribution to help defray the expense, . At the time of the discussion we were talking in the neighborhood of $300 or $400 and now we are faced with the cost of possibly $1200. My only comment on this is that this program was brought to the City by the Employees' Association and initiated by the employees. This letter 16 would indicate to me that the Employees' Association is not really concerned about investigating this and I think their responsibility in this area of the initial cost is far greater than $100. 1 am sure the City will do everything in its power to find out if this is the proper way for the employees to go - whether they should stay in or withdraw. I do feel that: since it was initiated by the Employees' Association that they should bear., a greater responsibility financially for the cost of this audit and I would like to suggest that we turn this back to staff and the Committee and see if possibly the Association would like to reconsider their contribution to the program, if not, I would be hard pressed as a Councilman to spend City funds on something initiated by the Employees' Association. (Councilman. Lloyd asked for more information regarding the $1200. figure under discussion. Councilman Gillum summarized the matter.) Councilman Nichols. Well, I certainly understand Mr. Gillum's feelings on the matter. I think, however, that the sources of revenue of the Employees' Association are extremely limited and a $100. contribution is relatively significant in terms of their overall funds. I would rather suspect that if the Council proceeded to exert a certain amount of leverage in this regard with the Employees' Association that they would undoubtedly come up with some additional funds, but then at the time the annual award dinner came we would find that the Employees' Association was broke and needed an additional $200 or $300 dollars and in the final analysis we would be back where we started. I look at it a little different than Councilman Gillum. I think the employees have requested the Council to look into this area and we authorized it and once the Council makes a commitment to move in that area if the costs exceed those originally anticipated I think it is a legitimate charge against the general fund of the City. Although again I would say I am certainly in sympathy with the (way Councilman Gillum feels. . I would be inclined to accept the $100 contribution and utilize additional funds available for payment of the bill Cou.ncilman.Gi.11um. Mr.. Nichols, during conversation with the representatives of the Employees' Association, it was discussed that they felt so strongly in this area of participation that they were considering giving up some of their social functions because the people supporting this effort feel it is to the benefit of most of the people and they had discussed the possibility of foregoing some social function, because they felt they should participate in this. Councilman Nichols.- Would you be amenable to holding this over for an adjourned meeting and inviting their representatives to be present and to give their viewpoints on this? . Councilman Gillum. Not at all. In fact I contacted them and asked if they wouldn't like to withdraw their letter and reconsider.:. this. But I understand Mr. Bateman is in the hospital. . I would be more than happy to hold this over. This is just the first expense. We have another audit, and also an actuary comes in.. So we are talking of a considerable amount of money before we are through with this program. I think one of the things the Employees' Association is concerned about is are we going to come back to them each time. Well I don't think we will, but I do think they should show in this area particularly at. the start that they are that concerned about: it because it was their program, they initiated it. (Discussion regarding date for meeting) - 25 REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Twenty-six • U OR STATE AUDIT COSTS - Continued Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that Council hold this item over for the April 29th meeting and request a representative of the Employees' Association to be present. CIVIC CENTER SITE DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT - PRELIMINARY APPROVAL Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, that Council hold this item over to April 29th. MOTEL USE AS APARTMENTS REPORT Councilman Nichols: The report to the Council concludes by saying - "it is obvious that this is a complex problem and will require legal interpretation as to whether or not the Council can abate these types of uses...." - whether or not it is desirable, is still another question. . It is saying a great deal in just a few words. The report generally contains everything in it that I had sought with just one exception and that is the staff member that did the research used as a figure 20%. . He reports that some 6 of the 12 motels surveyed derived more than 20% of their revenue from occupants considered to be non -transient.. I think the only thing missing is how far over 20%. . I would request the staff to circulate to the Council, if it is possible, the relative percentage of permanent occupancy that maybe in these furious motels. Obviously if 6 of them have 20 or 22% it doesn't appear to be of major . concern, but if 6 of them have 80% in motels living their regularly, I think we have a concern. So I think we can't finally conclude this matter unless we have that information. Mayor Gleckmano Can we get this informatim by the 29th - Mr.. Aiassa? Mr. Aiassao Well there is a little problem as to digging into these records I would rather have the.fnformation, if possible, by the first meeting in May - May 13th? So moved by Councilman. Gillum, seconded by Councilman Nichols, and carried. RESOLUTION RE. REGIONAL PARK Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman. Chappell, and carried, that this item be carried over to the April 29th meeting. CITY CLERK ABC APPLICATION Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Gillum, and carried, there be No Protest -on ABC application for on -sale beer, Lee Dugas, dba Mr. Lee's Swing'n Affair, 328 South Glendora Avenue. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Gillum, and carried, that Council receive and file City Treasurer's report of March, 1968. - 26 - REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Twenty-seven MAYOR'S REPORTS PROCLAMATION Mayor Gleckman: I have a request for a proclamation — National Home Improvement Month, May, 1968.. If we have no objections, the Mayor will so proclaim. No objections, so proclaimed. COUNCIL COMMITTEE :.APPOINTMENTS Mayor Gleckman made the following appointments for the period of May,. June, July, August, 1968: Planning Commission - Representative Councilman. Lloyd, Alternate Councilman Chappell; Recreation & Park Commission - Representative Councilman Chappell, Alternate Councilman Lloyd; Personnel Board - Representative Councilman. Nichols, Alternate Councilman Gillum; Human Relations Commission - Representative Councilman Gillum,. Alternate Councilman Nichols; Chamber of Commerce - Representative Mayor Gleckman, Alternate Councilman Gillum; West Covina School Board - Representative Councilman Gillum, Alternate Councilman Chappell. Annual Appointments: East San Gabriel Valley Planning Committee - Representative Councilman, Lloyd, Alternate Councilman Chappell; SLAG-TASC -Representative Mayor Gleckman, Alternate Councilman. Lloyd; League of California Cities (Executive Board) Representative Mayor Gleckman, Alternate Councilman Chappell; Rapid Transit - Representative Councilman Gillum, Alternate Councilman Nichols; Civil Defense Planning Board - George Aiassa; Sanitation District Board - Representative Mayor Gleckman, Alternate Councilman Gillum; Regional Library Council - Representa- tive Councilman Chappell, Alternate Mayor Gleckman; Independent Cities - Representative Councilman. Nichols, Alternate Councilman Gillum; USGVMWD - Representative. Councilman.. Nichols, Alternate Councilman Lloyd. (Councilman Chappell advised he could not attend the Recreation & Park Commission meeting, and alternate Councilman Lloyd stated he would not be able to attend. Mayor Gleckman asked for staff representation with a report back to Council.) COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Councilman Nichols: Mr. Aiassa - a letter was prepared recently for my signature relative to my suggestion of possible appointees to the Rapid Transit District and my name was suggested as One who might be willing to sign it. I am not now the representative on the Rapid Transit District and it perhaps would be more appropriate if we asked Councilman Gillum to sign. (No objection by Councilman. Gillum.) Mayor Gleckman: I have two things I would like to bring up. First of all it is a statement of policy of this City Council and that has to do with our press relations, It will be the policy at the prerogative of the Mayor by consent of his fellow colleagues that there will be an open door to any of the City Council at any particular time that the press is able to get �-,hold of any of them until such time as the present City Council feels this privilege has been abused or misquoted. That goes for the City staff - Mr. Aiassa. You are in charge of any liberties that you would like to have taken by your staff with the press on any story you would like released. Your responsibility, of course, will be to the City Council. 27 REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Twenty-eight CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Gleckman-. The other thing is that I would like to suggest to this City Council that we give some thought to setting up some type of position either within the personnel realm of the City • Manager in the manner in which a photographer or somebody experienced in the line of photography, to .set up some type of archive for the City of West Covina. I think we are growing to the point where it is the proper time to include this, so that the press or any other agency that would be seeking out pictures or other news stories of the past would have some place to go and hot have to worry about rpaeting;a.pa ticular:'deadline or passing up the stories or news releases of this City because such a thing does not exist. If there are any ideas amongst: the Council I would appreciate if you would bring them up at the adjourned meeting of April 29th. We could then have some council discussion on this and direct the staff at that particular time. DEMANDS Mayor Gleckman: Demands in the past have been assigned to Mayor Pro Tem Gillum and myself and this being an annual appointment I will appoint Mayor Pro Tem Gillum and Councilman Nichols to sign from here on until such time as we feel Councilmen Chappell and Councilman. Lloyd are familiar with these -------- Councilman Nichols- Mr, Mayor - a thought I had a while back, in terms with our, Commissions. Our Commission members work very hard and I have always felt that we have little enough opportunity to discuss with them their general problems in a relatively informal setting. . Just a chance periodically to meet with them.. I wonder how the rest of the Council would feel. about a situation where at least once every several months we might be able to meet at the dinner hour with each Commission in advance of our Council meeting, for instance where we might on a rotating basis maybe every 3 or 4 months - we could schedule a "Bob's Big Boy" type of lunch in the City Manager's office and invite that Commission to come in and have a little supper with us and discuss their feelings and problems. I think they might appreciate the opportunity to meet with us and we would have the opportunity to let them know that we do appreciate the many months of service they give to the City.. The suggestion I have would be if the Council concurs that the Mayor might l000k over our Commissions and come up with such a program. Mayor Gleckman. This is one of the programs that I have for introduction to this Council, but I was waiting until July 1 -if there should be any new members to the Commissions. After that all the Commissions will be full for at least one year, rather than holding these meetings prior to the appointments we might make.. So this is scheduled for this coming year, DEMANDS Motion by Councilman. Gillum, seconded by Councilman Nichols, that Council approve demands totalling $ 695, 869. 02 listed on Demand Sheets B382 and C557 through C559 and payroll reimbursement sheets. This total. includes $250, 000 in time certificate deposits. REG. C.C. 4-22-68 Page Twenty-nine DEMANDS - Continued Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: • AYES: Councilmen Chappell, Nichols, Gillum, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT:. None There being no further business at this time, Motion made by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman. Lloyd, and carried, that Council adjourn atWL-30 p.m., to April 29th,. 1968, at 7: 30 p.m. 0 ATTEST: CITY CLERK • APPROVED / % zf MAYOR - 29 -