Loading...
01-20-1969 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR :MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA JANUARY 20, 1969, •, The adjourned regular meeting of the City Council was called to order at 7:37 Po Me , by Mayor Leonard S. Gleckman in the Council Chambers at West Covina City Hall. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Chappell. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen Chappell, Nichols, Gillum, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman. Also Present: Planning Commission: Chairman Adams; Commissioners Davis, Jackson, Mottinger. Absent, Commissioner Mayfield Also Present: George Aiassa, City Manager H. R. Fast, Public Service Director Owen Menard, Planning Director George Zimmerman, Assistant City Engineer Ray Windsor, Administrative Assistant Lela Preston., City Clerk 1. COMMUNITY -COMMERCIAL ZONE (Summarized) • (Ma.yor. Gleckman announced this was a joint session of the Planning Commission and City Council regarding the Community -Commercial Zone) Mayor Gleckman: Mr. Menard - wasn't this one of the reports we asked, if possible, to set up on a comparison basis as to the changes. to be made with the present zoning, so we could pinpoint the proposed changes? Mr. Menard: It may have been but if it was , it was a misunderstanding on my part; I evidently didn't understand it that way. Mayor Gleckman: Speaking for the Council, as well as myself., we would appreciate if from now on when we have such type of discussions that a comparison report be submitted, Do you have any added comments to make to the report? Mr. Menard: The written report was submitted previously and since this subject has come up I have asked the Planning staff to not only complete the analysis given to Council, but attempt to find out verbally what the attitude of our Ordinance had on those people coming into the Planning Department. It is true we have received complaints from people, perhaps from those that have complained about this in every other city they have done busi- ness with.. The quality developer has indicated to us that time is money to them and we are now moving things thru in a far more expeditious manner under the new ordinance than before and they have, therefore, indicated some degree of satisfaction particularly with the unclassified use permit section we have revised. Of. the C-1, C-2 and C-3 ordinances the only effective one at present is the C-1, and it has not really hrad a trial period yet, The Om P has had a trial period of 6 or 8 months and I think has been successful. S-C has been successful , This would be the only expanding remarks beyond the report that was turned in, - I - ADJ. C..C. 1-20-69 Page Two COMMUNITY -COMMERCIAL ZONE STUDY - Continued Councilman, Gillum.: Mr. Menard, you -state you have had complaints directed at certain things within, our zoning requirements, was there anyone that actually there was more complaints on than others? I am curious to know in what areas they are most objecting to? • Mr. Menard: Generally speaking the part of the ordinance that receives most comment immediately is the landscaping require- ments, We indicate 810 should be l.andsc ,A d,,,-__Everyone is taken. aback with,this :percentage. And their immediate comment is Los Angeles is 3 - 470, Covina only 2%, and Pomona 4%, etc. , and we have to point out;that th.! y are stating only the -percentage without the parking lot and we include all. (Explain- ed in. detail. ) Once they are aware of all of this the indication is that this is a fairly good and flexible way of treating this particular land use regulation, Yet I would have to say the bulk of complaints have to do with landscaping. Some people simply donn't think they should put back on God's green earth what God put here to begin ,,Wlth. Councilman Gillum: That rather than cost of the land per square foot they are using or the fact they have to put in sprinklers? Mr. Menard: Maintenance. Very few complaints regarding the landscaping itself. Just maintenance. Mayor Gleckman: I notice that our 8% landscaping actually only compares with 'Montclair and there is still quite a differential. • Mr. Menard: -Once again we specify 8% of the entire site and as you go through the chart - Arcadia 376 of the lot plus the street frontage; the same way in Claremont.,pl.us 276 of the parking lot in Covina and no credit for patios or these kinds of things. Our -876 was a determi"natfon. of looking at other cities landscaping requirements, typical site development patterns within quality developments in this City and other cities. They boiled down, when you took all these kinds of areas, to somewhere between 7 - 876. The Planning Commission settled on 8% and one of the reasons was based on Broadway - Desmond's. Generally speaking this is what they were .looking for. This is where the 876 came from in the Ordinance itself, Mayor Gleckman: I would like to say that 8% is great - I think it would give us the type of developments we would like to have, only when you use Broadway - Desmond's, May Company or any of those, you are talking about a development that is 3 or 4 years old and now you are planning for the future 5 or 10 years. Cost of land has gone up considerably, building costs are up considerably, landscaping costs are up, etc. , .I am not against it: but I am back to one of the points mentioned by Councilman Nichols previously - he would hate to hoist us out of the market pricewise. I just would think that the idea of sticking to that 810 might hurt, but I don't know. Mr. Menard, . I would answer that in two ways. I would have to agree • if a development standard is getting to the point where it is deterring 'good,ihonest development in the City then that must be changed - if there is a need, 810 was a figure that wa-s- picked out and tried for a time and from the quality developer we have had no complaints. Mr. Wakefield and I have worked out a waiver to eliminate the arduous task of going through the zone variance on each, little standard they might want to change, (Mentioned examples) And these people didn't meet 810 and asked for a waiver and were granted it without extra charge, No problems in granting waivers where it is justified. It is a simple procedure to reduce a development standard if there is a need to reduce it and the zone speaks to the issue of why for the - 2 - ADJ. .C.C. .1-20-69 Page Three COMMUNITY - COMMERCIAL ZONE STUDY - Continued criteria to reduce. Mayor Gleckman: I wonder if the Planning Commission has given any thought to the idea of criteria for zoning and criteria for development within -are -as, For example, we have -area 1- . 2-3-4-5 as far as lot -sizes for residential. Was there any thought given, in discussion about criteria for development standards in our City? (Explained in detail) Chairman Adams: We- are somewhat unu-sual in having these area districts. I know of no other jurisdiction having this. They have zones and lot sizes.. In reviewing our Neighborhood -Commercial -we hopefully came up with that criteria in that particular zone that would be compatible in any residential area. It was not geared to fit into any of the area districts we know of but again, would fit into any residential- area and we continued that on into our Community -Commercial -and now our. -Regional -Commercial planning. My observa- Lions on the question of being too restrictive or unrealistic is based on experience in travelling around and reading literature of the better. developments. I find these developers are doing things which could not be required in any ordinance - the quality of architectural buildings; the landscaping, far in �ekccess of anything we are talking about .here; such things as air conditioned -malls - - they .are doing these things because it is a competitive business and they are going in for the long haul, .They are making a substantial investment and ho-pe to be in that neighborhood and doing business for many years. I think anything we can do to attract that type of development is s ometh.ing-- well --worthwhile . I don't think we are at all out of line , The -se co-sts can certainly be reflected in -dollars - what it takes to install and maintain an area land- scaped. These are not excessive costs, • -At our previous meeting we expre-s-sed concern over the price of land in our -area. I would think if we want to do something to attract the kind of industry -we want and if they are faced with unreasonable costs, one-way this could be offset and it would be a much bigger item- than the cost of plItting in a wall in a landscaped area and may come in on --streets where there are some improvements needed. Perhaps the City could pay the cost for offsite improvements. This in itself would be a much bigger item than what we are requiring of the developer in landscaping, And, of course, we all realize that time is money, so anything we can. do to make it easier for someone to come inand proce-s s their plans again can set off a big major item of landscaping if they can get their plans thru and get going ahead on their development as rapidly as po-ssible , These are the kinds of things we can do to help business. Most of these things we have had but scattered throughout our .ordinances and resolutions, and so it was a matter of getting these things together and determining what we actual.ly wanted, I felt we gave this matter very careful consideration. Those would be my thoughts on this, Councilman Lloyd- I have the exhilirating experience in' my business of goring to Anaheim and around the Disneyland area, and I think one need only to go and see what has been accomplished in the way of signs and size of signs - you need only go down the street around . Disneyland, which is practically a world famed area and I felt that they have done themselves harm. -I believe this is an example for us to observe - the damage that can be done. It is my considered opinion after that observation that we are inde-6d heading in the right direction. I think what we have is infinitely better than what they have down, there, regardless of Disneyland. My next question. with regards .to the 87e, which,I tend to endorse because I think a green belt is truly of import to our business community as well as our everyday living, - do you feel this will have to be reduced? Or do you think we will have to increase this in the future? Mr, 'Menard - you seemed to be rather defensive about the 8%? - 3 .- A DJ. C.C. 1-20-69 Page Four COMMUNITY -COMMERCIAL STUDY - Continued Mr.. Menard: Typically -I ,am defensive because of the fact we have had to learn at the staff level how to present this 810 figure, because it is so much higher than other cities. (Explained) Generally speaking we end up in. pretty good shape -when talking to the quality developer. I would not anticipate that 810 should be decreased at this moment and looking into the future I don't think there would be any real necessity of increasing for some period of time. We are being emulated in some cities at present. Our sign ordinance, worked on so arduously by the Chamber of Commerce, is being emulated in. other cities, so I would hope what we are doing now -will last for some period of time, (Mentioned several instances in West Covina that do have the 876 .landscaping) Councilman Chappell: Where other than the churches do we have development now that have been built with this 810 such as busine-sses, shopping centers, etc. , so I can go and look around and see what they actually look like. Mr. Menard:., There are none: typically completed at this--ti-me , The development at Walnut Creek and Vincent will meet and express that concept; two or three developments on Azusa on which precise plans have been approved and are approaching the time of con- struction portray this. It is a very -recent thing. As far -as an idea - the Broadway is probably the best example of that percentage of landscaping and its appearance upon maturity as related to an overall site., Councilman Chappell:. Perhap-s as these things develop -we should have color. • photographs taken and when people come in show them how such landscaping requirements develop.. Commissioner Mottinger: An excellent suggestion, Chair -man -Adams: One of the thoughts was to have these on slides and make the slides available to --groups or organi,-zati.o:ns that might want to see it. This might be a timely time to do it, Councilman Chappell: -Well -we are trying to sell something-- -a slide r-eally isn't necessary, I don't think, but color photographs will. do it - in getting the point across to the developers. Councilman Lloyd: Mr. , . Menard in your --opinion have we lost any significant developers as a result of this r.equirement<?, Mr. Menard: No, I don`t believe we have lost any -significant or small developers because of our standards. Those people who owned land or purchased and came in and requested an approval. of a precise plan - we have had no one storm out of the office and say - I can't afford to build in West Covina, (Elaborated on this point,) Admittedly many are not constructed yet and this is fairly true of the development field, It may be years before they are finally done. Councilman Lloyd. If there was a deterrant - what would you say is the most noticeable? Mr, Menard: The major complaint against Planning Department, Planning Commissions and City Councils - once again, is time, The fact .that I bought my Land - .I am paying a high interest rate .- and now suddenly I find out it will take me 6 weeks to get a precise plan approved, or if vmning is required before it is effective 3 months, etc. these are the things the uninitiated developer complains about. The initiated developer - 4 - A DJ. C.C. 1-20-69 Page Five COMMERCIAL -COMMUNITY STUDY - Continued knows all these things and has contemplated far :in advance Councilman Lloyd; -Would you --say that the greatest deter.rant perhaps is the initial cost of land? Mr. Menard: I have heard a great number of complaint-s about the listed price of land in West Covina- - there is no doubt about this. Councilman Gillum:. When a developer comes in and -knows -exactly-what his requirements are e ' .-prforr to my being elected to this office I contacted people in the community and their main concern in development-wa-s the fact they had to continually come back to the Planning Depar.tment;, so I -would hate to see disturbed what we have right now even as far as percentage. Now -when people come out of the --Planning Department they know exactly•what-to do and these --people were very critical of -our. Plannin-g Department and Commission in the past. I agree with Mr. Menard these people at least know what the standards are now and I would hate to see us attractt only hot dog s.tan df .we lower Lthe-standards to someone that cannot afford any additional. landscaping requirements because they wouldn't survive here anyway. Mayor Gleckman; What are the Counci.l's feelings then regarding the recommendations with regard to C-S zoning and the criteria for such zoning? Councilman Chappell: One further comment = one time we talked about pamphlets or brochures that would be handed out by our Planning • Department regarding all requirements, procedure, etc. , how far along are we? Mr, Menard: Its in the final editing - -probably within the next week or SO it will be ready. As far as --asking regarding zoning they pick that up in the City Clerk's office or the Planning Department office. The brochures you are talking about is the explana- tion to be handed -out at the counter, (Explained) Councilman Nichols: I think -Mr. Adams comments were the rno-st convincing and I am going -along with what obviously .is the consensus and support this. But I do have a que sti.on —` - if our standards are not too tight, if when people come in. and they get ready and -want to build something in the City and we don't handicap in anyway, will someone then tell me why we are getting such a :tremendous rash of people cori-iing in during the last 6 months or so indicating a plan,; to build something and announcing definitely they are going to come into the City - which is the last word I hear and then whamo I see a For Sale sign on the property. Is this due to the financing? Have these people been in after gra:tAing zoning or don't you see them again either? Can you respond to this area? Mr.. Menard: In a couple of instances the precise plan has been approved and it has been a continuing process of finally working out • the ultimate conclusion. of the plan. I anticipate the construction on an auto agency that will commence in the.very near future, but in regards to other plans I haven!t see them since the City Council meeting, I brought this up at a East San Gabriel Valley Subcom.m-i.ttee meeting and they said that evidently the individual. brings in quite obviously expensive plans and then evidently doesri't get the financing and that's the last you hear of it. I am not sure I know the reason, I do know it is impossible at the staff level to know whether an individual is going to devlop. I also know West Covina is in a very good situation when you come to that kind of thing because we do have a precise plan for it at this time that goes with the property - so the guy sells the property to somebody else, he can't build anything other than what the precise plan specifies and the plan that is approved and -5- A DJ. C. C. 1-20-69 COMMUNITY - COMMERCIAL STUDY - Continued Page Six on file in this Cit.ywill have to be met whether met: by Mr. Smith or Mr. Jones. Councilman Nichols: I any not clear on that at all. -A specific case - it -wasn't too long -ago that a -party-came before Council and indicated they wanted to build .a -service station on -Azusa and the • Freeway and it required zoning. The zoning was -.-granted and now you drive down and see a For -,,.Sale sign -on. that-- property. Nov if -a precise plan -is on that land and a certain zoning is granted that if John, Jones buys that --land he can come -and put up any- other type of building allowed by the zoning on that land - he doesn't have to build on that precise plan? Mr. Menard: This is correct - he doe-sn'..t have to build to that precise plan but he can't build anything until after he gets the PI_anning Commission approval to build another. Councilman.Nichols- Maybe there-i-s a problem of communication. -.What I am tr ying to say -- you -sit up here on th-i-s Council -and see this - parade of people asking for certain uses --we grant the uses and-we-a-ssu-me we are then turning that individual over -to worming with our staff on the various requirements but we don't hear anymore about it and we don't know what ha-s--happened. Mr. Menard; Thi-s is his prerogative - whether he wants to continue with the idea or throw it out. Councilman Nicholas: As far as you know it has nothing to -do -with coming in and • finding out the requirements are too restrictive-, etc. ? Mr. Menard, I don't believe I could answer that question with any real. validity. It -may be the fact that when he goes into get financing that he finds out it will. be more expensive to develop so maybe he thinks he can make a nice profit by selling and getting out. Commissioner Davis: Mr. Adams and I have this experience regularly and have discussed it, I would guess that -perhaps 257o and some years 5076 of the ,projects on which we work never go -to completion, . One of the major steps is getting the zoning and then the financing on it. This is just what we are seeing and they don't follow with the real big jump. Chairman Adams: It is true that we draw' many more tentative plans than final plans. First he has some ball park estimates but once he knows what he has to-do he starts preparing plans and getting cost figures and .this is the big item which slows down or actually stops development. Once he gets really going and has his money committed to him that is when we don't want to slow him down. We know when a man is really serious about proceeding and if we can hurry up the process then we are making a friend. Commis.si.oner Mottinger: This -situation has existed for many years. I don't think there is any change as far as "no shows" are concerned. • I was thinking that it might be pertinentandgive us some insight .if a contact was made after a period of time and find out why. If it is financing then we know it is no fault of the City. There can, be something hidden here. This is the thing we all fear and maybe it is becoming a work block to development. Councilman Nichols: I think a phone call is a very good suggestion. Mayor Gleckman: How about a 6 months review - Mr . Menard - on all zoning approved by Council where there was .an intent expressed to develop, with a report back to Council. (Council & Commission Discussion) - 6 - ADJ. C_Co 1-20-69 Page Seven COMMUNITY - COMMERCIAL STUDY ­ Continued -Mayor Gleckman: -Any further comments by Council or Commission? If not, and if there is no objection by Council I would like to ask if any member in the audience has any comments? Phil Wax, .President What I would like to see is the City adopt like on non - Chamber of Commerce conforming signs, an ordinance on nonconforming land - West Covina scaping This has been a vicious circle for many years between the Chamber, of Commerce and staff in trying to .make the landlords cooperate. I don't know how to acco�rnplish it but I believe it requires looking into. Mayor Gleckman: I do think it is a good thought but I don't know legally if we can get involved in that area, _Mr Menard: This was a point brought up recently and we talked to the City Attorney and asked how an old development that wants to expand might be brought under the new standards And this is about the only way you can put teeth into these things is requiring him at that time to upgrade, Mayor Gleckman: Maybe we could get a recommendation of some sort out of a workshop committee of the Chamber. of Commerce as far as they are concerned, working through our Planning Director, the Commission and then the Council, I would like to state that I feel in the last 6 - 7 months this • Commission has done an excellent ,job so far superior to anything done in the previous year I tHnk primarily the role of a Planning Commission versus the role of a City Councilman is quite different rather than being similar, The interpretation of ordinances and enforcement of ordinances are done strictly on your decisions; the Planning Commission plans for 5 - 10 years in the future, and the City Council is dealing with people living here now and the Planning Commission is dealing with people that may live here 5 - 10 years from now. We expect from you gentlemen, recommendations which we have received, as to which way the City is to progress. If there is any pressure to be brought it should be q.n. the political entity and not on the appointed entity . Councilman Nichols: One further point of inquiry - Mr , Menard, how many meetings have you had on the Orange -Merced? Mr; Menard: One Planning Commission meeting and several meetings of citizens in the Planning Department office, plus one meeting in a person's family room attended by 47 people, Councilman Nichols: Has the question come up by the people living adjacent to those deep lots on Orange Avenue as to why the plan doesn't call for apartment zoning on their lots as well? A woman called me at school voicing the fact that her lot was not included, • Mr. Menard: The Planning staff atterxipted ,, by :actually.W—dEking...._the area to begin with, to determine when they .felt a single family residential area might be prime for transition into another land use. There are some areas along there of such an age and quality of., maintenance that it can't be anticipated there will be a great pressure for change from single family residence to something else for 5 - 7 or 10 years, In addition the staff compared improvement value to land value and when you had a typical 4 to 1 ratio you can assume there will be no transition. In those particular areas the farther east you came along Orange the higher quality residences and the less chance of a transition in 5 to 10 years. - 7 - ADJ. C.C. 1-20-69 Page Eight COMMUNITY -COMMERCIAL STUDY -- Continued A specific plan such as this can't go beyond a planning period of 5 to 6 years. If an area looked like it would not transit within 5 to 7 years we did not indicate it as being prime :for a different zoning. Councilman Nichols: I was referring to a specific area in the recommendation • along Orange Avenue - there were 4 or 5 lots recommended and they were flanked by other lessor lots, not so recommended. Evidently a lady living in one of the shallower lots abutting one of the deeper lots was quite agitated that this recommendation was coming out and she was being excluded, Mr. Menard: It is simply because some of the lots are 250 and right alongside are typical single family residential lots. Mayor Gleckman: I would like to express my appreciation and thanks for the attendance of the Planning Commission tonight at this study discussion and compliment them on the amount of time they have put in on their ,job in the last several months. THE CHAIR DECLARED A RECESS AT 8:45.; P.M. COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 8:57 P. M. 2, SKELTON PROPERTY ZONING Mr. .Aiassa: -I would like to repeat - the property we have for public sale as we have done in the past. You have given me a price commitment, all I need is approval from Council.to • proceed and advertise the property .for sale. We have a minimum price on it and I would like to leave the price the same. There was 22, 900 sq ft and we started out with a price of $2 00 and we ended up at $1 35 per sq. ft. The frontage is plus or minus 228'.. Councilman Nichols: At $1. 35 a sq £t;. I believe it is going to set awhile. Mayor Gleckman: Mr Aiassa do you feel we can get $1. 35 or are we spinning our wheels? Mr. - Aiassa: We can always come down. Councilman Nichols: I think we might be better to drop the minimum and ask for bids and see what happens, Councilman Lloyd: Mr. Aiassa - do you feel it will sell at $1,35 per sq. ft. ? Mr. Aiassa: I think we will have some offers. Councilman Nichols: Well my only comment would be if it doesn't sell then can we try it again without a minimum on it and see how • close we come? Mr , Aiassa: Yes. Mayor Gleckman: Mr, Aiassa - you don't need a motion by Council, you may go ahead. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Councilman Chappell: I would only announce to the Council that in attending the School Board meeting the Assistant Superintendent -has 8 A DJ. C.C. 1-20-69 COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS - Continued Page Nine put in his resignation and they, are looking for a new Assistant Superintendent - in case we know of anyone that might want to apply. • Councilman Gillum: Mr, Zha;ppell and I flew away last week on the helicopter demonstration and on the short time I spent I was very well impressed. I think it is somethng I would like to see this City look into. I talked with Councilman Yaeger and he feels it is an area that should be looked into. Five cities are considering using the Sheriffs service. The other evening we approved a contract for Galster Park and one of the citizens reminded us since we are spending this type of money we should consider some type of protection for the park. Well we went over Galster Park in the helicopter from 500' you could -survey all of the park, all of the city of West Covina and the adjoirring areas. I was very impressed and believe we should consider it further. Councilman Chappell: That trip certainly did a little something for me in that respect. There are two areas we can go - we can go in with the City of Covina, or get our own, or talk with the Sheriff's Department and get in with their plan, In passing the school we could see everything, there was no place for anyone to hide. It is certainly something that should be looked into a bit further, Councilman Lloyd: I hate to say that I am very much enamored with this type of approach. I am sorry to say I wasn't able to be on the helicopter flight, but I don't believe there is any question of the advantages of this type of approach in law enforcement and • emergency situations... In .many of the foreward looking dynamic programs that we as the Council have to look into, I for one, would like to see this one looked into and be a part of such a program. Councilman Nichols: The only opportunity I have had to learn anything about Skyline is through .the Sheriff's Department material which of course would tend to be rather favorable towards the program. It is not going to be too long before we are going to be faced with another budget and I would venture the staff is already starting on their preliminary discussions for next year's budget. If we are going to give any thought at all to this I feel we=:.should take action this evening in directing the staff to move in two directions - 1: the joint City's program; 2: A contract program with the Sheriff's Department. I believe we could have representatives here to explain the program, etc. , cost, etc. , - so perhaps the staff would be in a position to recommend to Council a course of action for consideration in next year's budget. Mayor Gleckman: Also the Police Chief should give us a recommendation. I think, Mr. Aiassa, if at all possible, Iwould like to have the staff by Council direction look into this matter and set up some type of program of introductiQn to this Council - hear the presentation and then at that particular time set up a Committee for checking into it further, MAYOR'S REPORTS Mayor Gleckman: I hope all of you have received notice of the West Covina Beautiful Birthday Dance - Saturday February 8th at the Elk's Lodge, (Explained) Also, our City Clerk has notified me that the relicensing of Scientology comes up and I would like to request that the Council request the City Clerk to pass on the responsibility to this Council for the relicensing of Scientology, - 9 - .ADJ. C.C. 1-20-69 MAYOR's REPORTS - Continued Page Ten They have already been granted a license but by January 31 they have to reapply for a renewal of the license, and I would like to hear their side of the story. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, that the application for the Scientology license renewal be referred to the City Council by the City Clerk, COUNCIL DECLARED AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PERSONNEL MATTERS AT 9:05 P. M. RECONVENED AT 9:30 P.M. Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that there being no further business the meeting adjourn at 9:3D p.m. • ATTEST: CITY CLERK 11 APPROVED '�L'G m' /� -/f MAYOR - 10 -