The URL can be used to link to this page

07-28-1969 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA July 28, 1969 The regular meeting of the City Council was called to order at 7:30 P.,M, *y Mayor Leonard.S. Gleckman, in the West Covina City Hall. Flags were posted by Boy Scout Troup,Noo 468 of the City of West Covina, and the Pledge of Allegiance was led by Scoutmaster Leroy Masters. The Invocation was given by the Reverend Charles Re Simmons, of the United Methodist Church of West Covina, Scoutmaster Masters introduced the members of troop No. 468, and Mayor Gleckman thanked the boys for their services at this meeting. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Gleckman; Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd. Absent: None Others Present: George Aiassa, City Manager Lela Preston, City Clerk George Wakefield;, City Attorney H.R. Fast, Putlic Services 'Director George Zimmerman, Ass°ta City Engineer Michel Bedaux, Ass'ta Planning Director Lewis Ma Winter', Adm. Engineer JOPPROVAL OF MINUTES June 23, 1969 Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by ,Mayor Gleckman, and carried, that the minutes of June 23, 19699 be -approved as submitted. PRESENTATION OF ETCHING On behalf of the citizens of Fulda, Germany, FROM FULDA, GERMANY BY and Doctor Alfred D,regger s MdL, Lord Mayor of that Mrs. Suzie Paci,fico city, Mrs. Pacifi,co presented the City of 3227 Quinnell Drive West Covina with an etching which she had West Covina, brought back from.Fuldao She thanked the members of the Council and the people of West Covina for their interest in the Mardi Gras program of Fulda, as expressed by a plaque presented to that city by Mrs. Pacifico on behalf of West Covina. Mayor Gleckman accepted the etching with thanks from the Council and the citizens of this city. ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVING City Clerk advised that bids were received MATERIAL (Bid No. 70-01) in the office of the City Clerk at 10:00 A.M. on Wednesday, July 23, 1969. Requests for quotations were mailed to six vendors. Publication was made July 10, and July 17, in the West Covina Tribune. There were three valid bid proposals: Griffith Company $3.84 per ton f.o.b. plant Industrial Asphalt Inca $3.90 per ton f.o.b. plant Sully Miller Con- tracting Co. $3.90 per ton foo,bo plant Reno C.C. 7/28/69 page two ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVING Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by MATERIAL (Bid No. 70-01) Councilman Chappell, and carried, that the award be given to the Griffith Company based on their low unit bid of. $3.84 per ton, f.o.b. plant. PUBLIC WORKS ITEMS MW PRECISE PLAN NO. 464 LOCATION: Glendora Avenue at ACCEPT STREET IMPROVE- Robindale Street MENTS - WILLIAM MINKOFF STATE DEPT. OF EMPLOY- Motion by Councilman.Ni.chols, seconded by MENT. Councilman Chappell, and carried, to accept these street improvements and authorize release of Faithful Performance Bond in the amount of. $9, 000. . PRECISE PLAN NO. 554 LOCATION: East side of Azusa FOODMAKER, INC. Avenue, 600 ft. south of Amar Road. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Nichols, and carried, to accept street improvements, sidewalks and driveways, and authorize release of, Planet Insurance Company Bond for Faithful Performance in the amount of, $800 0 PROJECT NO. SP-6626 ACCEPT STREET AND STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS SALATA, INC. Motion by •Councilman Chappell, and carried, to provements, sidewalks and driveways, Insurance Company of America Bond No. PROJECT NO, SP-6626 STREET IMPROVEMENTS - 1911 ACT (SHORT FORM) LOCATION: Virginia Avenue between Barranca Street and .Grand Avenue. Councilman Nichols,seconded by accept street and storm drain im- and authorize release of General 623486 in the amount of.$73,4420050 LOCATION: Virginia Avenue, Barranca Street to,Grand .Avenue Motion by Councilman.Nichols, seconded by. Councilman Chappell, and carried, to accept and file the Engineer's Report. RESOLUTION N0,4016 The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA CONFIRMING THE REPORT OF THE STREET ADOPTED SUPERINTENDENT RELATIVE TO THE COST OF WORK DONE PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO, 3942, VIRGINIA .AVENUE., BARRANCA STREET TO GRAND AVENUE." Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objection, we/will waive further reading of the body of,said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Chappell, to adopt said Resolution. Motion passed on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENTS None PROJECT'NO. SP-69007 LOCATION: Azusa Avenue, between AID TO CITIES FUNDS Francisquito Avenue and GAS TAX MONEY Cortez Street. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Mayor Engineer's report. Gleckman, and carried, to accept and file the -2- Rene C.C. 7/28/69 page three PUBLIC WORKS ITEMS (font°do) PROJECT NO. SP-69007 RESOLUTION NOo 4017 The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION'OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF ADOPTED SUPERVISORS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, TO PERMIT THE USE OF CERTAIN GASOLINE TAX MONEY ALLOCATED AS COUNTY AID TOWARDS THE IMPROVEMENT OF AZUSA AVENUE DESCRIBED BELOW, BY THE CON- STRUCTION OF ASPHALTIC PAVEMENT ON AGGREGATE BASE AND APPURTENANT WORK Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objection, we will waive further reading of the body of said Resolution Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Nichols, to adopt said Resolution. Motion passed on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None "FIVE YEAR PROGRAM Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by OF PUBLIC WORKS Councilman Chappell, and carried,to accept and FOURTH EDITION file the Engineer's Report. •Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Nichols to accept the "Five Year Program.of Public Works" as a guide to Public Works Construction Program from.July, 1969 to July 1974, and for budgeting of 1969-70 projects. Motion passed on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd., Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None SIGN ENCROACHMENT LOCATION: 1450 Service Avenue PERMIT - SANBORN West Covina THEATRES Councilman Chappell: There were some required insurance forms to report on. Mr. Wakefield: I have examined the insurance policy and endorsement which names the City of West Covina as a co-insured, and holds the City of West Covina harmless of any damage. It is adequate and in regular form., .Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Nichols 'to approve Encroachment Permit#5, subject to the approval of the required insurance forms which the City Attorney alluded to. Councilman Lloyd Mr. Mayor, let the record show that I am for Mr. Sanborn. abstaining because I have done some work Motion passed on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilman Gillum, Nichols, Chappell Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None Abstain: Councilman Lloyd -3- Rego C.C. 7/28/69 Page four PUBLIC WORKS ITEMS (Cont'd„) SIGN ENCROACHMENT Later in the meeting, Councilman Chappell PERMIT - SANBORN asked that.his vote on this encroachment THEATRES permit be changed to Abstention because of a business matter he had with Mr. Sanborn. The roll call vote would now read as follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum,, Nichols, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Councilmen Lloyd, Chappell Mayor Gleckman: The hour of 8:00 o'clock not having arrived, we will skip over to item.C, Planning .Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW ACTION OF Upon clarification of certain items in the JULY 16, 1969 Planning Commission action to be taken up by the Council later, motion was made by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, to accept and file the Summary of Actions taken by the Planning Commission at its regular meeting of July 16, 1969. APPROVAL OF THE RELOCA- Mayor Gleckman: Mr. Bedaux, do you have TION OF THE GLENDORA anything to add to your report? • AVENUE OVERCROSSING TO TOLAND AVENUE AS Mr. Bedaux: No, Mr. Mayor, unless you want me RECOMMENDED BY THE to read the Resolution which was adopted by PLANNING COMMISSION the Planning Commission. RESOLUTION NO. 2174 Mayor Gleckman: No, Mr. Bedaux, we all have that in front of use Mayor Gleckman: Is there any discussion? Councilman Lloyd: Why don't you lead off,.Mayor,. I would be interested in your comments on the overpass. Mr. Aiassa: Any questions of the Council should be directed to Mr. Zimmerman. Mayor Gleckman: What are we doing, Mr. Zimmerman? We are moving the present overcrossing due to the widening.of. the Freeway. How far East or West? Mr. Zimmerman: Yes, Mr. Mayor, the pedestrian overcrossing is called for approximately opposite the end of Glendora Avenue in the Freeway agreement, and this calls for a removal approximately 400 feet westerly of its present location, to a point westerly of the Amigos restaurant, directly in front of. the West Covina Center, As we attempted to show on the board, the •northerly end of, the overpass on the north side of the Freeway is almost exactly in the center of the Service area for pedestrians. The Service area is bounded on the west by Vincent, on the east by Lark Ellen, and on the north generally by Workman, People using it can come down Toland directly to the Freeway, cross to the south side and be very near the center of the business district. The overpass is planned to cross the south Frontage Road and land people actually on the south side of the south Frontage Road„ The north Frontage road is not to be reinstated in that area. There would be no streets of any kind to cross as a grade crossing. Mayor Gleckman: Thank you very much, Mr. Zimmerman. Does the Council have any questions? -4- Rego C.C. 7/28/69 Page Five PLANNING COMMISSION (Cont ' d o ) Councilman Lloyd: Mr. Zimmerman, is this the overcrossing where we had a daily count of 90 some people? Mr. Zimmerman: That is correct, Mr. Lloyd, there was a report made to the Planning.Commission indicating the number of pedestrians using the overcrossing. Councilman Lloyd: Is it the Staff's opinion that this is the maximum usage? Mr. Zimmerman: We did not make a study of this, since it was shown on the Freeway agreement,.however, the new overpass will serve a slightly larger area on the north side, and it will likely take in more people. Councilman Lloyd: Is the overpass materially changed in its location from where it was? Mr. Zimmerman: It is moved about 500 feet westerly. It still serves approximately the same number of people. Councilman Lloyd: This brings to mind whether this is,indeed, the best place to put this overpass. I was faintly of a hope that it might be moved further west. I looked, vaguely again, Mr. Zimmerman, at the possibility of, putting an overcrossing where it would serve the Department of Motor Vehicles. _The question which is left in my mind is does this overpass really serve the greatest amount of people. I realize that the cost involved is not a consideration at this time because the State will replace that at no cost to the City. Is that right? Mr. Zimmerman: Yes, it will be part of. the State Highway contract, furnished with their funds, Councilman Lloyd: On the other hand, the people of this community and other communities throughout the State will indeed pay for this. I don't know what the actual construction costs are but I think that a usage of 90 some people isn't heavy enough o o . I think some consideration should be given to placing it somewhere else. Mayor Gleckman: Do any other members of the Council wish to comment on the relocation of this overpass? Councilman Nichols: Other than that the overpass was originally in the plans and the State intended to keep it, I have never been involved in any discussion about it, but my personal opinion would probably.be that if we get the type of improvements with north/south access we are looking for, the most economical step would probably be,to throw the darn thing away. I doubt very much if enough people use the overpass or would continue to use it in the future to warrant the expense of putting it in there, particularly if we get the access to Lark Ellen.Avenue that we plan to have. If the State feels it should be there, I would accept it in terms of its location per se, • Mayor Gleckman: I am wondering, Mr. Zimmerman, when we are recommending this overpass to go 500 feet west, how much consideration was given as to the blocking of the signs in the commercial area. W1 r,� it is at the present time, it gives access to the people on the north /o"he Freeway to the Glendora Avenue service shops. If you move it 500 feet west, what you are really doing is asking those same people from the east to walk an additional 500 feet up and 500 feet back if they are going along Glendora Avenue. I am curious as to what the reasoning was in moving it 500 feet west. -5- Rego C.C. 7/28/69 Page six • r� U • PLANNING COMMISSION (Cont `d.o ) Mr. Zimmerman: In answer to your first question, Mr. Mayor, regarding signs, we did check with Amigos Restaurant and a couple of other business people in the area, and they indicated no objection to this location as regards to visibility, etc. The purpose in moving it over was to get it in the center of the service area, both as far as getting it closer to the center of the businesses on the southerly side of the Freeway, and being closer to the service area where the people would come from on'the northerly side of the Freeway. Councilman Chappell: If you move it 500 feet west, are you going to stop it on the same side of, the street that it stops on now? Mr. Zimmerman: No, Mr. Chappell, the proposal is.that it would span the southerly Frontage road, so that the landing would be on the south side of the Frontage road, whereas the present one has a landing —on the north side of the. Frontage road. Councilman Chappell: Mostly,the ones I have observed using this overpass are children of school age, moving their bicycles over it. It might be that with 100 a day using.it over a 12 hour span it might be a very important area. It is worth looking into. Do we have to decide on it today? Mayor Gleckman: It is on the...Agenda for approval. of the re- location. If the Council would like to hold off'until we get some further details from the people who are using...it, we could do so. Councilman Nichols: It seems to me that this is an extremely routine and non -controversial type of action. I assume from the comments made by Councilman Lloyd and yourself, that someone has made a beef as to where this overpass is to be located. Has someone con- tacted either one of you? Councilman Lloyd: Not so, Mr. Nichols, it was just something that occurred to me. I had a conversation with Mr. Zimmerman regarding this. This thing will cost a lot of dough, and I was just wondering if this thing was giving that.kind of service to this city. It is one of those governmental things that costs a lot of money, nobody really wants, but we all do it because nobody wants to say "no Perhaps this matter doesn't merit this kind of consideration, but this probably costs in excess of $20,OOO. What would say, Mr. Zimmerman? Mr. Zimmerman: I believe the cost was $87,OOO, Councilman Lloyd: That's a lot of money o 0 0 $87,000 e o e just so somebody might amble across the Freeway. I think it is a fair question to ask. Is somebody getting his money's worth? I would like to see a study on this. Councilman Nichols: I agree wholeheartedly, Councilman Lloyd. The question raised in my own mind is not whether it should be a few hundred feet east or west, but whether the type of use that it has had, and what is predicted, warrant the expenditure of taxpayers' money to do it. This is the first time in the four or five years we have been discussing Freeway widening that anyone has brought the relocation of this crossing to the Council. I think perhaps it is way overdue that we did look at this aspect. Mayor Gleckman: I have not been confronted by anybody with regard to this, but I felt, as did Councilman Lloyd,that on any matter that comes to us to make a decision we should investigate all avenues, if for no other reason than to have the answers that may come up at a later date. It did come up in litigation with the State as to what they would do, how they would'do.it, whether they Rego C.C. 7/28/69 Page Seven • • PLANNING COMMISSION (Cont'do) Mayor Gleckman: would widen it, enlarge it, move it etc., so I agree with Councilman Lloyd, I think this is a matter which should be discussed fully and not treated as a routine matter. Perhaps it is possible to eliminate it and have the city get credit for the $87,000 to be put,maybe,into our West "Covina Parkway. Mr. Zimmerman: I believe the statement that was presented to the Planning Commission was to`the effect that the overcrossing would be put in with -the State Division of Highway funds, or it would not be put in. In that case, there would be no furry expended along that line, so the $87,000 is not a credit that the city could draw on for.some other use. Mayor Gleckman: There may certain political advantages to the city that could be used. I certainly wouldn't want to give it up just because somebody said so. I appreciate your informing us, Mr. Zimmerman, as to the alternatives given to the Planning Commission regarding this matter. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that this matter be referred back to Staff for further study, PUBLIC HEARINGS Mayor Gleckman: The hour of 8 o'clock having arrived, let us turn back to the item of Public Hearings. ZONE CHANGE NO. 423 LOCATION: An irregularly shaped Jo REED.GATTMANN.AND parcel located at the A.W..MITCHELL northwesterly corner of Garvey Avenue and Fairway Lane. REQUEST: Approval of a change of zone from R-3 (Medium Density Multiple Family Residential) to R-3(Regional-Commercial). Planning Commission Resolution No. 2157 recommends approval of C-2 (General -Commercial). Mr. Bedaux, Assistant Planning Director, read Planning Commission,Resolu- tion No. 2157 in full,'and referred to the displayed map for further explanation of location of property. THE CHAIR DECLARED THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ZONE CHANGE No. 423, Mayor Gleckman: There being no one in the audience who wishes to speak in favor of, or in opposition to, Zone Change .423, we declare this Public Hearing closed. COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilman Nichols endeavors to clear up ownership of certain areas displayed on map with Mr. Bedauxo Councilman Nichols: Where was the land located where a change was given for A service station? Mr. Bedaux: That was on the east side of Fairway Lane at the corner, where Fairway Lane now intersects with Grand Avenue, -7- Rego C.C. 7/28/69 Page eight PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont' d a ) Councilman Nichols: Are we talking about the parcel shown as fronting on Garvey, the,1ight_pat.ch? Mr. Bedaux: Yes Councilman Nichols: And you're saying that that patch is under different ownership than the C-2 land to the east of Fairway Lane granted for service station use? Mr. Bedaux; Yes, it is. Councilman.Nichols: Aren't the same two owners requesting this zoning that requested that zoning.? Mr. Bedaux: No, I believe that zone change application was for a Mr. Mellman and Union Oil Company. Councilman Nichols: Union Oil Company rarely buys the land in advance of use. - Are the two gentlemen who are applying for this Zone Change the owners of all of that land that is now painted brown on the chart? Mr. Bedaux: Not to my knowledge, Mro.Nicholso No sir. Councilman Nichols: If there is someone present who has the answer to the question I have raised, and staff isn't able to, I would be most happy to have that answer provided. . A.W. Mitchell 4507-1/2 Sepulveda Blvd. Sherman Oaks Councilman Nichols the Council. Mr. Mitchell was sworn in -by the City Clerk. Do you have a knowledge of the ownership of this area. If so, -would you clarify it for Mr. Mitchell: We are the owners of the white area which is surrounded by the brown area on the map. This is a little over an acre. We do not have any interest,nor have we had any interest,in the pink or magenta -colored area that they spoke of for Union Oil Station. Councilman`Nichols: You have not had any interest in the parcel to the east of Fairway Lane, southerly of the Magenta area? Mr. . Mitchell: No sir, we do not, and have not had. Mayor Gleckman: Mr. Mitchell, I have a question. How about the land directly to the north? Mr. Mitchell: The portion which is still brown? That is occupied at the present time by an apartment . house. Mayor Gleckman: I know sir, but do you have any ownership? Mr. Mitchell: No sir, we do not. Mayor Gleckman: I think if we start talking about zoning this particular piece of property commercial, we are going to have to look for the property to the east coming in for commercial zoning. With that in mind, I think what we are talking about is recommending a complete commercial area here if we start with this particular piece of property. Rego C.C. 7/28/69 Page nine PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont'do) Councilman Nichols: There is no question in my commercial use immediately Freeway and the Frontage Road is not a proper use. I for Commercial Zoning for those properties fronting on . Road is in proper order. I think the request of these commercial zoning is entirely appropriate. mind that oriented to the think a request the Frontage gentlemen for Mayor Gleckman: Another concern I would bring to the Council is whether the C-2 zoning in this particular area with the adjoining land would be the best commercial zoning, or the S-C zoning where it would have to be accompanied by a Precise Plan so that we would know what was going into the area. Whatever is built in the C-2 zone is definitely going to have an effect on the adjoining pro- perty. Councilman Lloyd: I concur. I believe I was the only person who was against the C-2 zoning which is currently planned for the Union Oil Station. However, I think our Staff, should give some consideration (and I don't mean to hold up Mr. Mitchell) to what they would recommend as a reasonable approach planningwise in this area. It is evident that the owners are ready to do something, and I think at that point the methodology would be up to the Staff, but they might contact the people and see what they are going to do with it, and make a recommendation to Council. We can then be properly briefed and forewarned as to what may happen in this area.. I.do, however, concur that anything next to a Freeway, and particularly since this is bounded on the West by Holiday Inn and the commercial development now taking place there, that some consideration should be given. I concur, Mr. Mayor, with you, and I would much rather see the Area zoned S-C • versus C-2, because I would like to be able to take a look at a Precise Plan Councilman Chappell: Mr. Mayor, can we find out why S-C wasn't considered originally from Staff viewpoint? Mr. Wakefield: Perhaps I can answer this question, at least in part. You will note that the original application filed with the Planning -Commission was for regional- commercial zoning for this particular property. It is my understanding that the proposed General.plan recommends this area for regional use. However, our present Regional Ordinance has in mind a minimum of 30 acres before the zoning is appropriate. So, under the circumstances, the Planning Commission apparently.felt that the C-2 zoning was the most appropriate consistent with recommendations in the proposed General Plano Councilman Gillum: Mr. Zimmerman, there is a proposed interchange under the Freeway at Grand Avenue is there not? Mr. Zimmerman: That is correct. Councilman Gillum: How will this affect that complete section between Walnut Creek Wash and Grand Avenue. • Mr. Zimmerman: Mr. Gillum, most of the brown area shown south of the magenta area will be used for the loops of theinterchange. The Frontage Road will connect into Fairway Lane approximately at the north edge of the area proposed for Zone change. As I recall, some of this parcel would be used for the Fairway Lane relocati.onp at Garvey Avenue. Councilman Gillum: In other words, Fairway Lane would be the only surface street connecting Grand Avenue and Garvey? ME 0 Rego C.C. 7/28/69 Page ten 0 • PUBLIC HEARINGS (font ' d . ) Mr. Zimmerman: Yes, Mr. Gillum, it is actually under con- struction now at the Grand.Avenue intersection in connection with the Union Oil Station, so that it will be, when com- p,leted,a through road usable in the final sense. Councilman Gillum: Then there will be nothing after the inter- change is put in to the east of this property? Mr. Zimmerman: The loops will be east of everything.° Councilman Nichols: It seems to me that the S-C zone was developed in order to provide for the development standards that the Council and the Staff felt were necessary where there were problems of adjacent zoning that were not of the same density. For instance, where we could allow an automobile dealership to develop on Glendora Avenue and yet could control the service areas and other aspects, so that it would not be detrimental to lighter commercial or single family areas adjacent. So far, we have been able to use the S.-C zone quite effectively in that respect. Here, it would seem to me to be a classic case of zoning that would not need a similar type of treatment. That is, the C-2 usages are very similar to those allowed under the S-C zone but the restrictions aren't quite the same. If you would look at this particular parcel and see the buffering that is involved, that is, there is nothing adjacent to it; it would seem to me that the Council would be on good ground by granting the C-2 usage rather than the S-C type. Mayor Gleckman: Any further discussion? Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Gillum, to approve the Zone Change Application No. 423. Motion passed on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilman Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None PRECISE PLAN No. 568 LOCATION: Northwest corner of STEAK CORRAL, INC. Azusa and Rowland (B.F. SMITH) Avenues ZONE CHANGE NO, 419 REQUEST: Approval of a change B.F. SMITH of zone from R-3 (Multiple Family) and N-C (Neighborhood -Commercial) to S-C (Service -Commercial. Recommended by Planning Commission Resolution No. 2148. Held over from June 9, 1969, to this date; and approval of Precise Plan of Design for a Restaurant. Recommended by Planning Commission No. 2167. Mr. Bedaux: The Planning Commission did not wish to alter its .recommendation, so it is back before you the same way as the first time. The Planning Commission has considered a Precise Plan of Design as follows: (Mr. Bedaux read: Precise Plan application). THE CHAIR DECLARED THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON PRECISE PLAN NO. 568 AND ZONE CHANGE NO. 419. Warren Kellogg Mr. Kellogg was sworn in by the City Clerk. 1245 E. Walnut Avenue Pasadena Mr. Mayor,, Councilmen, and Staff, my client is in accord with your previous request to cut down the application for zone change to the actual area covered by Study Plan A. The Steak Corral plans on removing the existing service station and developing a family Steak House on the property. The restaurant will seat between -10- Reg. C.C. 7/28/69 Page eleven PUBLIC HEARINGS (Contd.) Warren Kellogg(Cont'do) 200 and 240 patrons, and we,hope you will look favorably on our application. THERE BEING'NO ONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISHED TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS ZONE CHANGE, THE CHAIR DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED;.o.''=:_'- COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilman Gillum: Mr. Bedaux, how far back from Azusa".Avenue is this property? Mr. Bedaux: The depth of the Precise Plan i's approximately 239 feet from Azusa Avenue west; Councilman Gillum: How deep is the total vacant property? Mr. Bedaux: 325 feet. Councilman Gillum: We end up with approximately 86 feet from the back of the development to the back of the property. I think we are creating a piece of property that could develop into somewhat of a problem area. I am wondering what the request will be from the applicant in the future for the remaining 86 feet. May I ask a question of the applicant? This property is owned by one person? Mr. Kellogg: Yes sir. Councilman Gillum:. Have they indicated to you what they may want to-do with the "remaining '86' feet -on the •back of this property? Mr. Kellogg: There.is an excellent possibility that it will be used for parking in conjunction Ath the Steak Corral Restaurant; or for parking and an access road into the property for a commercial shopping center. This is what the appli- cants' I endeavoring to develop o 0 o a commercial shopping center along the site. They have asked Steak Corral if, in the future, they do develop a shopping center, they can work out joint parking and the Steak Corral has said they will go along with this.. Councilman.Nichols: Did I understand the applicant correctly when he said that the applicant is. withdrawing Zone change request on all except that portion of the total parcel covered by the Precise Plan? Mr. Kellogg: Yes sir. Councilman Nichols: My recollection was that the Council's only concern was the matter of the Zone Change without any proposed use at all. In that.this is a change to S-C, which is in keeping with the controls the Council would like to impose in that it apparently is an up -grading of that particular area to a higher type of use, I would think that this would be in keeping with our higher desires on the Council, Mr. Wakefield, how will we define our granting of the Zone Change to that smaller portion? Mr. Wakefield: I would recommend that the motion.be that the property desighated in purple on the map be rezoned from R-3 (Multiple -family -residential) to S-C (Service Commer- cial), and that the balance of the application for change of Zone be denied. Discussion and clarification of the exact Zone change involved. Mayor Gleckman: Mr. City Attorney, if we are talking about a specific area being zoned S-C, does it make any difference what the previous zoning was? -11- Rego C.C. 7/28/69 Page twelve • i PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont Id.) Mr. Wakefield: No, sire Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Gillum, that Precise Plan No. 568 be approved; and that the property designated in purple on Exhibit A, west of Azusa Avenue 158 feet North/South direction, 239 feet, East/West Direction, at.the corner of Rowland and Azusa Avenues, be rezoned from its present combination of N-C and R-3 to S-C, and that the balance of the application for change of zone in Zone Change No. 419 be denied. AYES: Councilmen Gillum, .NOES: None ABSENT: None 1969 WEED AND RUBBISH ABATEMENT. -ASSESSMENT - HEARING OF PROTESTS Motion passed on roll call.vot'e as follows: Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman ments for 1969 Weed and Rubbish tions No. 3834 and No. 3967. LOCATION: Throughout the City Review Engineer's reports Hearing of protests to the proposed assess - Abatement pursuant to City Council Resolu- THE. CHAIR -DECLARED THAT THIS IS THE TIME.AND PLACE FOR THE..HEARING'OF_.. PROTESTS OR OBJECTIONS TO THE STREET SUPERINTENDENT'S REPORT DATED JULY 23, 1969 AS SPECIFIED IN THE GOVERNMENT CODE..OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA CHAPTER 13, ARTICLE 2, SECTIONS 39574 THROUGH 39576.5, LEVYING THE ASSESS- MENT FOR THE WEED.AND..RUBBIS.H ABATEMENT FOR 1969. Mayor Gleckman: Madam City Clerk, will you read the Engineer's report please? City Clerk reads report. Total amount of. Proposals A and B as reflected,in the report total $21,565.81 THE CHAIR DECLARED THAT THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING PROTESTS AND/OR OBJECTIONS TO THE STREET SUPERINTENDENT'S REPORT DATED JULY 239 1969, AS REGARDS THE ABATING OF WEEDS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THE LEVYING OF ASSESSMENT ON SAID PROPERTY. Mayor Gleckman: Madam City Clerk, do you have the affidavit of posting as required by law? City Clerk: I dos Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Nichols,and-carried, to"receive arid' file the Affidavit of Posting.' Mayor Gleckman: Madam City Clerk,, have you received any written potential Assessment? protests or objections to the said Abatement or City Clerk: No, I have not. Mayor Gleckman: Does anyone present have any verbal protests or objections, or any questions relative to this matter? If so, would you please state your name and address, and the property you represent. There appear to be no objections. CHAIR DECLARES THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. Mayor Gleckman: Madam City Clerk, do you have a Resolution of findings relative to this hearing? -12- Reg. C.C. 7/28/69 Page thirteen RESOLUTION No. 4018 CONFIRMING THE REPORT OF THE STREET SUPERINTENDENT DATED JULY 23, 1969, MADE .ADOPTED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE GOVERN- MENT CODE, CHAPTER 13, ARTICLE 2, SECTIONS 39574 THROUGH 39576.5, LEVYING THE.ASSESS- MENT FOR THE WEED AND RUBBISH ABATEMENT FOR 1969. Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the Resolution. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Nichols,to adopt said Resolution. Motion passed on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilman Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, L1oyd,..Mayor Gleckman. NOES: None ABSENT: None THE CHAIR DECLARED A.FIVE MINUTE RECESS AT 8:45 P..M. COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 8:58 P.M. REVISED SOUTH GLENDORA._ LOCATION: Both sides of Glendora AVENUE..PLAN -_AREA I Avenue from Walnut Creek CITY INITIATED Parkway south to Cameron Avenue. REQUEST: Consideration of a plan which has analyzed the existing land use, circulation, and zoning pattern and makes recommendations regarding the future patterns of this area. Referred back to the Planning Commission for review on.November 18, 1968 Recommended by Planning Commission Resolution No. 2160. Mr. Bedaux: Reads Planning Commission Resolution and recommendation and explains map on wall. THE CHAIR DECLARED THAT THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON REVISED SOUTH GLENDORA AVENUE PLAN - AREA I - CITY INITIATED, Harry .Sobeloff City Clerk swears in Mr. Sobeloff. 1007 E. State Street West Covina I'd like a clarification about this free right turn. What is it about. Mayor Gleckman: We will try to get you all the answers to your questions, but we don't want to open it up to a cross'conversation between staff and audience. Mr. Sobeloff: I'm not opposed, and I'm not for; I'm.just trying to find out what they are going to do. .Mayor-Gleckman: Mr. Bedaux, will you explain what you are doing with regard to this free right hand turn, whether you are eliminating it, leaving it in or just what? Mr. Bedaux: The free right hand turn at Cameron and Glendora has been eliminated through the installation of a traffic light. Before, one could move off to the right, now we have to wait for the light. Mayor Gleckman: On which side of the street? Mr. Bedaux: It's a north to east direction and it would be on the east side of Glendora Avenue. Mr. Zimmerman: Northbound on Cameron, turning right east onto Cameron. -13- Reg. C.C. 7/28/69 page fourteen PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont'do) THERE BEING NO FURTHER TESTIMONY, THE CHAIR DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARINGS CLOSED COUNCIL D'ISCUSSION Councilman Lloyd: Something that comes to mind on this is the fact that we have two things which are in the works-. one of these is a study of this area by a professional group, and I think before we make any decision on this we should hear the out- come and recommendations of that study. In addition, we are anticipating the hiring of a Planning Director, and I would like to be assured that that Director, whoever he may be, would be in accord with this plan. In deference to that individual, I think it would be wise to hold this over until these things come as solution, Councilman Gillum: Mr. Aiassa, when are we going to have the final recommendation from Staff on our con- sultant Mr. Aiassa: The recommendation is going to be on my Agenda this evenings Councilman Gillum: Would you have any idea, based on your experi- ence in this field, what we are talking about if we would hold this over, where it would come in the overall program.of the consultant when they finally got into this phase of their program. Since we have spent considerable time on this project, presenting this program to the businessmen on Glendora, would it be possible for this area to be one of the first considered by the consultants, so we could proceed with the development of. Glendora Avenue. Mr. Aiassa: I believe when.you see my,report tonight to the Council, you will see that certain phases are earmarked for early consideration. We can list this as one of the items for early review and report to the Council. Councilman.Nichols: I could, -I think, take one of two courses: To concur absolutely that the matter should be held over and save any reservations I may have until a later time, or to raise the reservations at this time, and that is what I will do at this time. One is a question I had raised as a concern on my part many months ago about the matter of leaving free access into the residen- tial areas off Christopher Street, that is, having Christopher Street should be cul de saced, therefore Sandy Hook would be somewhat protected from commercial inroads. The access to this area from West Covina Parkway to Blue Ash, Sandy Hook etc., is quite easy, and may become increasingly so, and I would like to ask the Staff if there was any thought given to the concerns I have expressed or any discussion held with regard to cul de sacing that area and if not, why, and if there was consideration given why was it not considered favorably, Could I get a reaction to this? Mro.Bedaux: I believe that the Planning Commission really did not consider cul de lacing Christopher Street, and I do not recall whether the Staff has thought about this particular alternative or whether it has not. I really couldn't give you an answer. Cpuncilman.Nichols: My only concern is that Christopher street is becoming and will increasingly become a commercial street westerly of Glendora, that it therefore then feeds into a totally residential area. It might be more practical to cul de sac Christopher at some point when the commercial area to the north develops in order to protect the residential area. There may be reasons why this is not practical to do, butt think it would be meritorious if the Staff would give that some additional thought before a final determina- tion occurs on this matter. -14- Reg. C.C. 7/28/69 Page fifteen PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont'da) Councilman Nichols: I have some concern in my mind about the R-3 zoning in the area easterly of the alley which lies just to the east of Glendora Avenue and north of Cameron Avenue, The property now lying to the east of that alley is all very nicely developed as a single family area. The homes are all well maintained and they abut homes equally well maintained into the easterly area across Craig Drive. I do not know what the philosophy was that impelled a spreading of the R-3 zoning across the alley other than that there should be larger blocks of land together when you talk in terms of R-3 zoning. As I analyzed this area, it seemed to me that the logic of such development wasn't really there. Probably you would get a more defensible type of use if you had the alley -way as the buffering area between the land that had a multiple - use facing onto Glendora Avenue. If you come out to _Craig Drive with what we term a medium density, multiple -housing, then you are, in fact, in the heart of a residential area. If you drew the.line down that alley -way, we'd have the rear of lots abutting the rear,of lots, divided by an alley. I recognize that Staff has taken the position that it would like to see larger portions of land developed into R-3 zoning as compared to the typical residential lot. That is a philosophic matter that has not been decided by policy by the City. That is, there is no Ordinance that limits the frontage. Even if there were such a policy in force, it would be as feasible to develop it lengthwise along Glendora Avenue, as it would depthwise across the alley. I would ask Council and S"taff to think a little bit more in terms of the proposal for the multiple zoning here; to maybe drive into that area, familiarize yourselves with it, and ask yourselves whether that is really what we are seeking to do. That is, move multiple types of development into the -area abutting Craig Drive and, in fact, clear over to Holly Place. I think we might not really want to go that faro Those are the two reservations I have at this time,•Mro Mayor. Perhaps others could think further about it and react to it. Mayor Gleckman: I would have the same reservations as Council- man Nichols has alluded to, and I think we should postpone the adoption of this final plan even though I think it is an excellent plan, with the two exceptions that Russ brought up. It may not be developed that quickly that our consultants and new planning director could not take a look.at it. At that time we could take some definite action. If, there are no other comments from the Council, I would entertain a motion to postpone for 90 days. Is that about right, Mr. Aiassa? Mr. Aiassa: I would say yes, approximately. Mr. Wakefield: The hearing would be held open and continued to the first regular meeting in October. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Chappell to hold the hearing on the Revised South Glendora Avenue Plan - Area I - City Initiated, open and continued to the first regular meeting of the Council on October 14, 1969. Motion carried. PROPOSED ALIGNMENT FOR A PORTION OF WEST COVINA PARKWAY - CITY INITIATED. the Preliminary Alignment Study,.of West Mr. Bedaux A-1 and turned the to Mr. Zimmerman. i` Mr. . Bedaux Commission presentation of the REQUEST: A proposed preferred alignment for West Covina Parkway between Citrus Street and Grand Avenue. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2161 recommends the adoption of Route A-1 as shown in Covina Parkway, read the Resolution of the Planning recommending the adoption of Route Preliminary Alignment Study over -15- Rego C.C. 7/28/69 Page Sixteen • • • PUBLIC HEARINGS.. (Cont'do) Mr. Zimmerman: Mr. Mayor, t were based o Parkway as shown on the General Plana of the facility, traffic volumes etco,.o Study Plan for traffic within the City. basically toward determining a location not particularly toward when it would be he studies made by the Staff n the alignment of West Covina They were also based as to width n the Peat, Marwick & Mitchell Our efforts were directed for the street in this area, built or how it would be funded. The study included five routes which we can show on the Board. All of these routes were reasonably close cost -wise to the extent that other considerations were believed paramount, such as traffic service, the location of the intersection between Barranca and West Covina Parkway, and matters of this nature. Mr. Zimmerman showed and explained Route A on the map. He then asked for permission to read an objection which had been received by the Staff this date. The objection was received from John We Chavers who said "My residence address is 210 So Plateau Drive, West Covina." This property is identified as lot No. 6 on our map. "Since I will be unable to attend the City Council meeting on July 28, 1969, in person, I would like this letter read into the record in opposition to proposed Route A-1 for the West Covina Parkway." A-1 is very similar to Route A, and I will show that in a moment. "According to Route A-1 little consideration has been given to the disruption of a residential area of expensive homes, lots No. 5 and 6, whereas the undeveloped pro- perty, lots 7 and 12, has been almost totally unaffected. There appears the possibility of premature action in adopting route A-1 between Citrus and Grand for the adoption of the route west of Citrus Avenue to the shopping center. That section of the route will lie completely within residentially developed property. In other words, it appears you are getting the cart before the horse. I respectfully request due considera- tion be given to relocating the route of the West Covina Parkway between Citrus and Grand to a more northerly site which would allow by-passing of this residential area." Mr. Zimmerman: Mr. Chavers residence is on the cul-de-sac known as Plateau Drive approximately half way between. Citrus Street and Barranca. (Shows Route A-1)o Route A-1 does show an effort to accommodate Mr. Chavers' objection in that there is a greater curve at the edge of Plateau Drive, approximately half way between. Citrus and Barranca This was shown to Mr. Chavers this after- noon, and he indicated that he would be satisfied with this route were it not to occupy more than the northerly 20' of his lot, and we believe that is in substantial agreement with this design which is not intended to show the exact location right down to the individual foot. Mr. Zimmerman: Route A-2 (shows on map) is similar to routes A'and A-1 except that the westerly end of the alignment is over Walnut Creek Channel. It is considered a satisfactory route excepting that the costs in this case are substantially higher due to the high cost per square foot for bridging Walnut Creek Channel. Mr. Zimmerman: Route B is the other substantially different location proposed for West Covina Parkway in this area. (Explains in detail), The Staff found this objectionable from a traffic point of view because the intersection of. the West Covina Parkway is too close to the intersection of Garvey and Barranca to accommo- date the heavy traffic loads which will be coming off the San Bernardino Freeway and using West Covina Parkway and Barranca under ultimate load conditions as shown for 1990 on the Peat, Marwick report. There would not be enough room between these two intersections for cars to stack up, and they would not function properly from a traffic point of view. -16- Reg. C.C. 7/28/69 Page seventeen PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont'd a ) Mr. Zimmerman: Shows other route and explains disadvantages. As indicated in the report,,Mro Mayor, the Staff recommends route A-1 As,being the most satisfactory from the point of view of traffic use, particularly at •Barranca, and for the best use of land in the remainder parcels which would be most susceptible to development. CHAIR DECLARES THAT THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ALIGNMENT FOR A.PORTION OF WEST COVINA_.PARKWAY. Dean Pitzel Mr. Pitzel is sworn'in by City Clerk. Asks 2463 Buenos'Aires Drive for about 7 minutes time in which to speak, Covina, California Council approves. I appear before you in my representative capacity as president of the Ridge Riders„ As you may..have noted, we just walked in, having just received a call ten minutes ago during our Board Meeting as to the fact that this particular subject was to come before the Council. We heretofore appeared.before the Planning Commission. I would assume that in light of the proposed alignment shown on the map you are aware of the general position of the Ridge Riders facility, and Also the fact that the proposed route essentially wipes out the smaller of the two rings maintained on the Ridge Rider facility. It also, for all intents and purposes eliminates the parking facility thatwe have maintained. I certainly do not, on behalf of the Ridge Riders, intend to appear before you and attempt to prevent,in any sense, •the normal machinations of the wheels of progress. I am, however, aware of the general study that was made in the city, and the fact that one of the three crucial issues with which the city of West Covina.was concerned was the minimal recreational facilities available to the citizens of this community. The route that has been proposed to you by the Planning Commission is one of a number of alternate routes,and the one which minimizes those recreational facilities which are presently available. I do know that during my absence during the last month, Mr. Ray Rich, the vice president of the Ridge Ridersfdid send to Mayor Gleckman and members of the Council an invitation to attend a Ridge Rider show for the purpose of seeing what it is that we are attempting to do in that area. Not for the benefit of the horses, and not for ourselves, but for the benefit of the young people who live in this community. As a lawyer by profession, having represented persons in.varying walks of life, with varying problems, I can assure you that what the Ridge Riders are attempting to do for the young people in this community is the exact same thing that any City Council would be interested in doing for its citizens. We have less problems with the young people with whom we are concerned in that facility, and. it is an institution,,a facility that should be aided. There are certainly a number of possible routes for the road that has been planned. I realize that the proposed route suggested by the Staff serves best the land in the general vicinity of. Barranca and the San Bernardino Freeway, and I understand that there are financial interests that wish to develop that land for apartment houses, etc. I think in deciding which route this Council will approve we must balance the advisability of additional apartment houses in that particular area with what the Edgewood Little League facility, which is also jeopardized by the present route, as well as the Ridge Rider facility, are attempting to provide in this area. I don't know how many of you have had occasion to see the Ridge Rider field, but I can represent to you that it is recognized as probably the most unique facility in the entire state d=California. It has one of the most beautiful equestrian fields available. When a show is staged at the Ridge Riders we have entrants from Paso Robles, Phoenix, and -17- Rega'C.C. 7/28/69 Page eighteen PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont'do) Mr. Pitzel from as far away as Ohio to participate in equestrian shows which are put on at that field. The young people who participate in events there are interested in developing the facilities. There are IsJunior groups, and if any of you have had any contact with Ridge Rider activities, I am sure you have found, as I have, that it is an extremely worthwhile activity. We have a wash going through our facility that separates the Country Club Shopping Center from the Ridge Riders and the Maverick Little League. There is absolutely no reason that I can find,why, for that particular portion of the route that adjoins those areas that are actually owned by Valencia Heights Water Company and leased to the City of West Covina and in turn, by you, sub -leased to the Ridge Riders, no reason why that route could not follow the channel of the wash that is there, right over the top of it. The land is already worthless as far as surface use is concerned, and this would •avoid interfering with those recreational facilities that are already there established,, I realize that when you attempt to evaluate city progress, development, taxes, and all of those facilities in practice, that the idea of a horse dnd its development is of no particular conse- quence. As I said when I initially started, I am not concerned with the advancement of the horse, but rather what those recreational facilities, both the Ridge Rider field itself, and the Little League facility, have done for the young people of this community, and I certainly suggest to you gentlemen that in light of the fact that recreational facilities are needed in the City of West Covina, it would take, I suggest, a lot of serious thought to jeopardize one of the most unique and well -established -recreational facilities when there are alternative routes available to you. It so happens that the entire Board of the Ridge Riders came with • me this evening, and if there are any questions you might have concerning -the operation of this facility, they would be most happy, as would I, to attempt to answer them. My only request is that you attempt to evaluate very seriously what it is that you are jeopardizing when you select the -route which the staff has apparently recommended to you in.light of a reasonable, practical alternative which is available. Mayor Gleckman, thank you. Robert Walker Mr. Walker was sworn inby the City Clerk. 211 Plateau Drive West Covina I am the owner of, lot 5, the one with the big red gash on it, and naturally we object to being sliced up, very much. We would prefer route A-2 in preference to route A-1 as our neighbor, Mr. Chavers, would. Also in going over the report we notice the acquisition costs proposed or estimated. I think this is very much out of line and I would suggest that further study be made so that the city would know more accurately what the costs may be, and I further suggest that the matter be referred back to the Planning Commission to be held over until that study is made. John Cox Mr. Cox was sworn in by the City Clerk, 2727 Vanderhoof Drive West Covina My home is on Vanderhoof Drive overlooking Ridge Riders and the Little League Baseball field. I suspect I am three or four lots to our left from Mr. Walker's • property. Most of what I would have to say Dean Pitzel has already spoken of. The main thing is that people living all along Vanderhoof Drive overlooking these fields a o o I don't think you will find any obstructionists there when it comes time for a road through there but we can't see right now where there is any need for a road through from .Citrus to Barranca. I can see some problems from Barranca to Virginia, Most of those lots between Citrus and Barranca already have access. Certainly there are some others there that do not have access, one of which spoke before the Planning Commission and stated that they were not con- cerned. Savings and Loan stated they would develop it their own way if there were no road to go through there. They, and most of the others could develop their property without having a road through there, so, Elm Rego C.C. 7/28/69 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont'd e ) Page Nineteen John Cox what we are really thinking of on Vanderhoof Drive is that things are a little topsy-turvy. We can see the possibility that if you pick this route now and start to develop this, that soon this would be a road through here without anything going to the West, If the routes were already picked, rights of way .purchased, and it looked like it would go on through there, I don't think you would ;find any obstructionists on Vanderhoof Drive.. Most of us are quite, - ive in the Ridge Riders. I have four teen agers myself, three of them boys, so we are quite active in Edgewood Baseball League and the Ridge Riders. I can echo what Mr. Pitzel has said about the quality of the property there. We have good working.relationships with Valencia Water Company; they are not concerned at all .there. We would like to see something done to preserve that area. I might mention that the Master Plan has colored that area green as if it were intended to .be a recreation area, including an area there that was zoned for apart- ments zoned R-3o Nothing has been said about purchasing this land to replace the land that would be lost to.the Ridge Riders, so we are con- cerned that that might not occur, that parking would be taken away and it would certainly decrease the efficiency of that highly desirable re- creational land. So we would favor, my close neighbors and I, would favor some modification at least, of the route that has been recommended by the Planning Commission. The only thing we have heard so far about the Wash is that it would be too expensive to go over the Wash. An alternative might be to go part way down the Wash. Certainly it is more expensive in dollars, but if you look at it in terms of a recreational area, it might not be as expensive as it looks on the face of it. So we recommend that you go down the wash at least about where the Cadillac agency is now, and from there on of, course Mr. Chavers and Mr. Walker both are hurt, but the damage even then would certainly, I believe, •be preferable to the present routing which they have recommended to you. .Thank you. Lois Pooley Mrs.Pooley was sworn in by the City Clerk. 334 Newport Long Beach I am interested in parcel 8 which I have owned since 1964 and according to the square footage that is being taken from.my property it amounts to about 44% which I do not feel is exactly fair. I think that possibly a little more equitable proportioning could be considered and I would like to go on record as having said just this. Kelly Hamilton Mr. Hamilton was sworn in by the City Clerk, 8725 Se Colima Whittier, I am against route A-1. We have discussed it with Mr. Menard and in fact almost everybody in the City. I always thought about the channel because the City already owns the channel property so I don't think there is an acquisition cost there, or probably route B since it doesn't take a hot} es it d esn't disturb the Water Company and at the present time/aXylA81 4089 property which I own which is on the northwest corner involving 2.3 acres of Barranca and Virginia. I verified last week with the city engineer's office that I was going to be left with approximately 70 feet on Barranca with a depth of 700 feet and 20 feet on the very west end.of the property. I also discussed at the last City Council meeting with Mr. Wakefield whether or not there would have to be legal action taken to get the money •out of this property since it is going to be a useless property when they get finished. I haven't had any satisfaction whatsoever on this. I find out that the city has no money at this particular moment to acquire any land and I also feel that if this route goes through as it is now, and they do not even have the exact alignment, and they talk about five or ten feet as though it's nothing, I feel it should have a lot more study. I feel they should get it down to the exact alignment that they are going to use so we will know what we are going to have lefts whether we are going to have enough to build on or are we going to sit here for two years waiting for an exact alignment. -19- `Rego C.C. 7/28/69 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont ' d o ) Page twenty Richard Volpert,.Attyo Mr. Volpert was sworn in by the City Clerk. 611 W. Sixth Street Los Angeles, I represent, the owners of the large parcels No. 7 and 12. Very briefly I formerly represented Brentwood Savings and Loan who owned the parcels and sold them to the Amigos Restaurants. We happen to have gotten caught up in this Parkway discussion by sheer accident of timing with our sale. The sale closed in April, and we held off filing for a building permit to build apartments in accordance with existing zoning on those parcels following these hearings, three before the Planning Commission and one tonight. In an effort to cooperate with the City and to work out our own planning, we retained a traffic engineer to do a study'of-this and to advise us separately of the traffic problems, and we'd like him to have an opportunity to speak briefly to you. In sum, our position is that we would like to go forward with this, We would hope that the City Council would either approve the route as recommended, A-1, or if it determines that it has no- present ability to finance the project to make some determination on the financing or abandon the project because it does represent a cloud over all the properties in the area. One time we had spoken to Mr. Hamilton that if the City was prepared to go forward we would cooperate and purchase the excess of property you would condemn from him. Subsequently, we've learned that the City has no plans for financing so it puts both us and other people in the area in a very difficult position. We would urge you to study this on the engineering merits as it has been presented to us, and to make some decision so we could go forward as we would like to do,immediately if possible,with building on the property, We don't think the decision that was made by the Planning Commission was accurately characterized by Mr. Pitzel saying that they were trying to help the financial interests of the Savings and Loan. We were the last people on board and we followed the studies and attended the hearings, as did they. We have no interest in ruining or hurting parks or horse riding'or any part of their enter- prise. In fact, in settling a lawsuit with their group a few years ago they retained an easement over the whole length of our property for horses. We would hope that you would act on the route as your engineers have pro- posed, and that you would also go forward with precising it so that we, and other property owners, could use the property and not wait two to ten years as people have told us, until final decisions were made. We think that would be unfair to us and to our neighbors. Can our traffic engineer make a short presentation at this time? Mayor Gleckman: Yes, if he steps to the microphone and gives his name and address and is sworn in. Robert Cromli.n Mr. Cromlin was sworn i.n.by the City Clerk 17000 Ventura Boulevard Encino, My studies pertain to the intersection of the (Consulting Engineer) various alternates with Barranca and it becomes very clear, as your assistant City Engineer stated,that alternate B is not a workable solution from a traffic viewpoint. The main reason is that alternate B is only 195 feet south of Garvey and when the Freeway is rebuilt the intersection at Garvey will be just as heavy or heavier than it is now. When there is only 195 feet between center lines, that leaves only an actual distance of 85 feet for storage of cars, or three cars and a Volks= wageno With two intersections close together it will have to be signalized. With very heavy volumes they would be three-phase type signals, and the complicated interweaving of these movements would be such that somebody is going to be stuck by a red light in one direction or.another between the two streets. The streets are too close together. Traffic will back up into the other intersection. Alternate A is 575 feet south of Garvey with enough storage vehicles for these vehicles even if they are caught. -20- Rego C.C. 7/28/69 page twenty-one PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont'da) Mr. Cromlin: An additional point, is that in reviewing the capacities of these various streets with the volume projected by your traffic consultants and your General Plan studies, you just don't need two streets. Out of the six hundred feet available you would be taking up a third, where you really only need one. Alternate A would require only a little over 20% of the total frontage along Barranca, Alternate B with two streets within six hundred feet would require almost a third. I have reviewed the area to the east of Barranca, and I would feel that alternate A gives better access to these land -locked parts which are there now, and is much more suitable for development of this land. My conclusion is that alternate A-1 is superior to all these others. I did look at intermediate routing halfway between A and B which has been suggested by some at the Planning Commission meetings, and find similar problems with that middle alignment because it wouldn't allow proper coordination for signals. . Edward Laberge Mr. Laberge was sworn in by City Clerk. 2817 Pacific Coast Highway Malibu, We own 3-1/2 acres just east of Barranca, and a 15 foot road is our only access to the property now, which we own in fee simple, so we do own an easement, but we have been denied building permits for additional units there because we only have a 15 foot road, so this is going to open up our whole area. We're for A-10 THE CHAIR DECLARED THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE HEARING.CLOSEDo 9:45 P�M, COUNCIL DISCUSSION • Councilman Nichols: Gentlemen, I will tell you how I feel about this. I'm against it because I think the City of West Covina is biting off more than it can chewo I think that we do not have the fiscal capabilities to develop this in the foreseeable future and by that I mean, a decade ahead. To adopt this alignment, as one gentleman said, casts a cloud over everybody's ownership in the area. It stymies them, stops them from moving, stops them from utiliz- ing their land. I'd like to say that I'm totally sympathetic to the Ridge Riders' presentation, but I'm really not, partly because the City of West Covina doesn't own that property, we're just leasing it. We don't own the Wash either. Even if we would say to the Ridge Riders, "We agree with you 1000%; we will never use your land for anything else," we don't have the right to say that. The Water Company controls that land and I don't think the City should predicate its planning on something over which it doesn't have control. I really feel, gentlemen, that we are in the process, as City Government, of making a staggering and tremendous commit- ment toward the improvement of Walnut Creek Parkway into a central business area. It seems to me that the great thrust of our efforts is going to be -to get that alignment established, and that street improved in the area west of where the Huntington Beach Freeway will go through the City. Unless someone can assure me that we do have the capabilities as a.City to do all of that and do it as quickly as we should be doing it, and as well, going out to the east edge of the City and buying land, as well as reserving rights o o a unless someone can really demonstrate that, I idon't think that we, as elected officials, have the right to tie that land up on the assumption that we may be able to get this alignment out. It is true that by adopting an alignment now, certain parcels that may develop in the interim will be required to dedicate the right of way. A study of this area will show that that is only one portion and that the portions of land we would be required to acquire as a city would be very expensive indeed. I am afraid that if we adopt this alignment and then get under the pressure of having to make good and buy pieces of land as people have legitimate use for them, we will do so only at the penalty of developing the Parkway close in to the business area, which, in my mind -21- Reg, C.C. 7/28/69 Page twenty-two PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont'da) Councilman Nichols: is the one area that must have a priority. I should state, unless I can be convinced otherwise, that I: am going to oppose any adoption of this Parkway easterly of the tentative alignment of Huntington Beach Freeway, until, I can be assured that we will be able to move ahead first of all, in that most vital area westerly of that proposed Freeway, Councilman Chappell: Councilman Nichols has brought up some fine points. I feel somewhere along the line someone must have known where the money was going to come from. I'd like to ask that question now, Mr. Mayor. What provisions do we use to acquire this moneys If we do make a determination this evening, we are going to have to start spending that money to acquire the land that cannot be developed by the developer, and also to start building -the road. I don't feel we can decide where to lay out a road that may not be developed for eight or ten years without some knowledge of how we are going to get the money. Mayor Gleckman: Mr. Aiassa, would you care to take a crack at that? Mrs Aiassa: Mr. Zimmerman? Mr. Zimmerman: Mr. Mayor, this was initiated at the Planning Commission level,of course. The Staff's efforts were only to the extent of attempting to locate the road in accordance with the two reports mentioned, and did not speak to the issue of how to finance it. However, the Planning Commission has set a study session for Wednesday, July 30, 1969, to discuss these things and get into so-called policy regarding what would be privately financed require- ments, and what would be publicly financed requirements for such develop- ments. Councilman Chappell: my land." Do we have going to do anything there until we decide Mr. Wakefield, say we adopted this tonight and Mr. Hamilton came in and said, "O.K. take to take his land, or can we tell him.we aren't with it for five years and he'll just have to sit to develop it. Mr. Wakefield: Once the precise alignment is established for the road, from that point on it simply becomes a political question as to when and how the City will provide the acquisition for that right-of-way. The City cannot be compelled to acquire any of the property along the route; the City, like the property owner, may be in a very difficult situation. It may prevent the development of this land and all we could do would be to come forward with a plan for the development of the parcel and, at that time, the City would have to decide whether it wished to acquire the property or to improve:.the development as proposed. In any event, as has been indicated, it would impose an impediment to the development of the property because some time in the foreseeable future the City would require the property even if it were developed to some acceptable use consistent with the present zoning on the property. To answer your question specifically, the City has no obligation to acquire the property; its obligations are purely moral at that point as to when and how fast it will go forward with the development of the street. If the City has imposed an unreason- able requirement in connectionwith the dedication of the property right- of-way as a condition of development, then the property owner's only recourse is the courts. Again, however, if the City is compelled to approve of a development, it still leaves the potential threat that some day the property will be acquired for the widening of the street. -22- Reg,. C.C. 7/28/69 Page twenty-three PUBLIC HEARINGS (Coot ' d . ) Councilman Gillum: I am inclined to go along with what Mr. Nichols has brought to our attention. I think we would be doing an injustice in this area if we were to adopt any of these routes this evening. I think also, that this City would be doing an injustice if •we think we can stop progress of an East/West thoroughfare through the City. It may be that we have the cart before the horse at.this time as far as routes are concerned without really considering the financial require- ments we were going to need, and how we were going to raise the funds. I think it is imperative to the growth of this community;, since the San Bernardino Freeway did eliminate our East/West Street through this community years ago, that we do provide adequate traffic flow south of the Freeway for East/West traffic. Unfortunately when the City does progress and grow, there are areas of property owners, facilities and things of this type that have to be disturbed, or in a sense destroyed. I believe that the Parkway will eventually be built; I am inclined to believe it is five to eight years away, but it is something to benefit the City as a whole. I think the City has, in the past, and will in the future, give every consideration to those individuals whose lives and properties are disrupted as a result of this Parkway. I am inclined to go along with Mr. Nichols' thinking that we are creating problems for ourselves when I think the recommendation from our traffic people and our General Plan was to try to eliminate or correct some of the traffic problems pertaining to our central business district. I, for one, would like to see the Planning Commission and the Staff give serious consideration to West Covina Parkway starting more in the area of our business district and working its way toward the east end of the community. We do have some existing major thoroughfares around the business district and one, in fact, this Council has designated as West Covina Parkway. If we are really going to get at the core of the problem of traffic flow around our business community which has developed, I think we should start in this area and work our way eastward. In the fifteen years I; have lived in this City I haven't really seen a traffic problem develop out there around the Ridge Riders, so we may be trying to develop something out there that we really don't need at this time. I would lake to see this program in this area tabled and a request made to the staff and the Planning Commission to put their efforts toward -two things recommendation of working this program easterly through the City and along with each phase of it present it At a public hearing in the Council with a strong recommendation as to where and how this project is going to be financed. When it comes before us again we can actually say that we have the funds and they are available, and we can start on this project at a given time. Councilman Lloyd: I am indeed sorry that there is such a dichotomy of opinion as to the development of .our City. I think that the Council, however, is of an accord that we will have to, of necessity, hold this off because we have studies which very materially affect what we are going to do with the City, and these studies have not been completed, they have not been presented, and I, for one, am not pre- pared to go forward on any of these things until such time as I have a better grasp of the material of the future developmental phase of our City.. I was very much impressed with the presentation of the Ridge Riders, and I am sympathetic although I don't own any horses. I appreciate the problems that these people have. I think it is indeed a unique presentation, and I think it merits consideration, even though they represent a very minute group of people. Nevertheless, it is a distinguishing mark for the City and I think it speaks well of our recreational activities and I feel that recreation is, indeed, a very important phase. As to the development of apartments I can tell you that as soon as the apartments are ready to be presented to this Council, there will be groups of people who will be in opposition. As Councilmen up here, and again, I think it is important for you to understand our position, we are faced with having to make decisions that are not always as acceptable to All the people as we would like them to be. -23- Rego C.C. 7./28/69 Page twenty-four PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont'do) Councilman Lloyd: We have acted in good faith. We have presented ourselves to the problems which are at hand, and have tried valiantly to come up with reasonable solutions for the betterment of the future of the City of West Covina. At the present moment I would concur with Councilman Nichols until such time as we take a little better look at the alignment of the Huntington Beach Freeway and into 1971-72, As a matter of fact, Mr. Zimmerman, have we finalized on the widening of the San Bernardino Freeway yet? Mr. Zimmerman: Mr. Lloyd, the Freeway agreement has been signed, and we are constantly receiving details of plans of this and that area. We are moving right along. Councilman Lloyd: We really have finalized it. That was one phase which has just occurred. Again, it is a very important one. If you don't like what you see with regard to the San Bernardino Freeway now, you have to accept the fact that in 1971-72 it isn't going to be better, it's going to be worse for a period of two or three years. We would be less than honest if we didn't see these as problems. Let it be said that I happen to favor the'East/West drive through the City. We cannot survive without it. That means that if we don't do something toward the solution of these problems, you and I, as individual home owners and as residents of 'the City of West Covina, are going. .to pay more taxes. I think all of you here this evening will agree that it is a very complex problem. I am not sidestepping it whatsoever, If I honestly believed that a decision had to be made tonight rest assured I would make that decision, and so would my colleagues. Nobody here is trying to get away from anything. The problem is far more complex than the simple introduction of an East/West road which moves somewhat parallel to Virginia. This area is developing, and we are going to have to pay close attention. So, I am only saying that at this moment I must concur with my colleagues that this must be set aside until such time as we have better presentations by the experts whom we are asking to step forward and give us information. I deeply regret, those of you who.want to develop right now, the answers that you demand, but let me assure you that the people who were ahead of you ten years ago had far fewer answers.. As you know, some of the problems that exist today in West Covina rest solely on the fact that people made decisions perhaps, without proper study. Maybe we commit the error of waiting too long, but we have some pretty good reasons for doing it. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Gillum to delay action on the proposed alignment of the West Covina Parkway for 90 days. Discussion: Councilman Gillum.: I think we would be playing games with these people, Councilman Lloyd, if we say we are going to decide in 90 days. I'm being serious; what are we going to decide in 90 days? Mr. Aiassa, could you in 90 days provide this Council with information on financing and things of this type? Mr, Aiassa: In 90 days we'll probably have the consultant for the C.B.D. area who can also make a study of the Walnut Creek Parkway alignment. Councilman Gillum: Now we come back to this thing of financing. Mr. Aiassa: That is why we are hiring these experts, to guide us through this project. Councilman Lloyd: Mr. Aiassa., let me answer that question, I think it is a valid question and if, you like, I would be glad to make it 180 days. However, it is my considered opinion that -24- Rego` C.C. 7/28/69 Page twenty-five PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont'do) Councilman Lloyd: City of West Covina, because the decision if we were to make a decision this evening, we would not do that which is best for the we don't have the facts on which to make Councilman Gillum: I'm not saying we should make the decision this evening, Mr. Lloyd, I'm saying, should we hold these people off for another 90 days with the idea that we can then come up with a decision. Can we really come up with a concrete answer in 90 days, or are we just delaying these people from making any plans for another 90 days. Councilman Lloyd: I will answer that by saying that I don't have the wherewithal to make the decision at the present moment as I see it. I don't guarantee anything in 90 days. I guarantee to give consideration between now and the end of 90 days to a very serious problem. That's all in the world I can do. Councilman Nichols: If the Council had the capability of saying that within any reasonable period of time funds would be available to put West Covina Parkway across this City, then I would support adopting such an alignment. I certainly concur with Councilman Lloyd that it would be in the best interests of this community to provide a complete East/West Parkway across the southerly belt of the City . o a the proposed West Covina Parkway. I think we can talk about it as an aspiration for the future, but all that I know about the fiscal structure of the City tells me that we are not capable, as a community, at the present time, or in the foreseeable future, to put this Parkway completely across the southern part of our City. If we iadopt some of these route segments, we are obligated to buy land. If we do that, we are, in turn, diluting our capability of providing for the even greater need of street development in our Central Business District. We have all agreed on the Council that this is our first and absolute priority. From my point of. view, I would like Council to reiterate its thrust to get that job done. If, in the interim, or any place along the way, Staff can demonstrate for us through consultants, resources, or whatever, that we do have the fiscal capability of going to greater lengths, then we can bring this thing back up. Mr. Wakefield, I would like to ask a question to see if. what I am thinking is not, in fact, correct, If, hypothetically, the City would adopt one of these route alignments o any one, say route A, and Mr. X who lives at such and such an address, has two acres of land that straddles this proposed routing, he has access to a street at the present time, and he desires to build houses on the land. 0 o can the City require him, as part ofa precise plan, to dedicate the entire street frontage in an area where the street does not run, and cannot run in the foreseeable future? Mr. Wakefield: Yes, I think that could be done. Whether or not it is a reasonable or unreasonable requirement would depend on the particular circumstances, but as you have outlined them, I would think it would be an unreasonable circumstance. Councilman Nichols: So, what we are saying is that the only way we could get the route we are talking about would be by two vehicles: one, go in with City funds and buy the land, or wait until all the rest of the land develops and try to get dedication a piece at a time over all the years. It would seem to me that the key would be the capability of the community to put its resources into the easterly area and buy that land, and put that project through. If that prognosis is dim, and if that likely cannot occur in the relatively near future, then I think we can all see that we would probably be doing a disservice to our citizens by adopting an alignment that fouls up all of their aspirations and plans during that period of time. -25- Rego C.C. 7/28/69 Page twenty-six PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont'de) Councilman Nichols: For my part, I want to focus on the area from about Azusa Avenue westerly, and what resources we have, put them there. I would suggest therefore, Councilman J'im, that you amend your motion to table it and wait until Staff and the Planning Commission see fit to bring it back to us, rather than set a stipulated time when it has to be done. Councilman Lloyd: We have the prerogative of moving.it on down; that 90 days was not an arbitrary time. I'd be more than glad to say let us hold this over, but that Staff should do a study and when the study is completed, it should be brought up. I think we should probably vote the motion down as we have presented it, and bring a new motion up. Motion failed on roll call vote as follows: AYES: None NOES: Councilmen Gillum,.Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman ABSENT: None Mayor Gleckman: I would ask the Council if I may get my two cents' worth in here. First of all, I think the idea of the City planning for its future is not wrong. We are in this position today because the City did not plan its future in the paste The time to get the East/West Street at the least cost to the citizens was at the time the San Bernardino Freeway came into the City of West Covina, because at that time the law stated that they did have to supply whatever.they took away. At that time, whoever was sitting in these chairs did not see fit to seek out the necessary access East and West. The obligation of the Staff and the Planning Commission of. this Community • has been served well. They may have jumped the gun.a little bit from the standpoint of where they started, but I think they were looking at what this Council has discussed and what this Council has budgeted for, and that was an East/West Street from one end of our city to the other, i.e. West Covina Parkway. Their obligation to this Council, and this Council's obligation to its Citizens, is to plan for the future. They have gone ahead and done what I consider an admirable job in recommending to the elected officials what they feel should serve as East/West access to this Community. In all fairness, it is the obligation of this elected body to make the decision as to whether they should continue with their studies, we should go forward, or we should start from another vantage point. In discussing the Ridge Riders and Edgewood Baseball League's position, I agree with what Mr. Pitzel has said. I did visit the Ridge Riders' field and spent most of an enjoyable day there; I am familiar with the Maverick Baseball League as several boys in my neighborhood play there. I hope one day my boy will play there. The consideration of recreational facilities did not come into focus in this particular alignment. We didn't ask that it come into focus. We should have, I agree. I think recreation in our community is probably one of the most important things, and it is one of the things that we lack a great deal of and we should cherish what we do have. However, we must take into consideration the fact that we charged our Staff to come back with a recommendation to us that would be good for this community and its future development. This is their recommendation to use How we do it is up to us to find the answers as elected officials. If we feel • at this particular time there are no answers to this, I don't think any developer, any place, should be prohibited from developing his property to the highest and best use with the idea that sometime, someway, some place, in the future, we may need that particular piece of property. I don't think it's right, I don't think it's fair. I can see where a City Council could prohibit the development of an entire community,if they so sought,on this particular basis. I do think, however, that we -26- Rego C.C. 7/28/69 Page twenty-seven PUBLIC HEARINGS (Cont'do) Mayor Gleckman: ought to bring these particular roadways, or any other development through more of the vacant property in the City, just to see how quick these people want to develop the land that stayed still for 20 years, It's amazing, all of a sudden, how a road going through the middle of,their property calls them up in arms because they were just going to build tomorrow. I hope that the people in the audience this evening do not think this body is so naive as to believe that this road prevented them from developing during the last 20 years, since its inception was maybe six months ago. But, if this is what it takes to get the people interested in our community to build the highest and best, not 20 years from now, so that their land goes out of reach, and the City suffers from non - development, then O.K., let it come about this particular way. I don't know of any time this Council has ever sat and said, "You cannot develop your property," especially anywhere along the alignment we are talking about tonight. I don't know of a proposal that has ever come before this Council on any of this property, any place, any time, prior to this, where we have said to the developer "Hold it, we may need your property for a road." I don't intend to do that this evening. I do think that some time in the future the City of West Covina is going to look back on this particular evening and say,"It's most unfortunate that at that particular time they did not have the answers as to how they would get the money, where they would get the money, and how quickly they would be able to build it." I think that for the development and future of this community it is to the best interest of everyone. I do think that the road should be built allowing the recreational facilities to remain; I think the road could be built with the idea of certain involvements. I know that tonight we are going to decide on a consultant to build this very thing that we don't have any money for. If we don't .have the answers, we certainly will get some answers. I think from .Citrus to Grand was premature for what we want to do, and for as slowly as City Government has to move. Not that it wants to move, but that it has to move. I do agree with what has been said;I don't feel the City could honestly look at any of the property owners here this evening and say, "We want your property, we are definitely going to build this road and we will pay you," I agree, not at this particular time. It is going to be interesting to me to sit on the Council, if it comes in while I'm on this Council, and be able to judge on these great pro- posals that are going to be developed if this street doesn't go through. .I would look very favorably on some type of development. I really do feel, ladies and gentlemen, that the Staff and the Commissions have all acted in good faith. I think the Council is trying to act in good faith, and in order to act in good faith, I agree with everything that was said here this evening; there is no way to make a decision since we don't know where the money is coming from. I personally don't feel that the money is going to be available in the next 60 or 90 days,or in the next three to five years. Until we find out where the road leading west of Citrus is going to come out, I don't think we should tie up this property, but I would do so with the idea of seeing this property developed within the next four to five months if this particular study is abandoned. Most people have indicated that they just can't wait until we drop this in order to build. I think it is good for the city that something like this happens to get these types of commitments.. I could probably talk for another 20 minutes on this subject, but I do want the people to understand that this was not something we just made up. There were many man hours put into this project for the best interest of all the people in this community and the future of West Covina. If we have to abandon it at this time, it is because we have actually been put on the spot of putting up or shutting up. We don't have the money to put up. As far as budgeting items, we can only budget from year to year, so even if we planned this 10 years from now we couldn't budget today. We'd never have the money because City governments don't work that way. It has to -27 Rego C.C. 7/28/69 Page twenty-eight PUBLIC HEAR.INGS_(Cont`do) Mayor Gleckman: come from Gas Tax money, from a Bond Issue, but it couldn't come from _budgeted items. So don't let anybody tell you that if'we don't have the money we can't do it, because we'll never have the money. It's not budgeted. Gentlemen, what type of motion would you have in mind? 0 Councilman Nichol: Mayor, I would defer to Councilman Lloyd to re -word his motion, Councilman Lloyd: Motion to table the Proposed Alignment fora portion of West Covina Parkway until additional facts come in, seconded by Councilman Chappell. Mayor,Gleckman: Councilman Lloyd, do I gather from your Motion that we are not adopting this particular route? Mr. City Attorney,if a Council does not adopt this route this evening, and let's say that the people who bought the property from Empire Savings and Loan and Amigos would care to make an application tomorrow, and they decided to build, could they build on this land without this particular study, or this particular route standing in their way? Mr. Wakefield: AYES: Councilmen Gillum, NOES: None. ABSENT: None Yes sir. Until the precise route is adopted there is nothing to stop them. Motion passed on roll call vote as follows: Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman THE CHAIR DECLARED A TEN MINUTE RECESS. 10:25 P.M. 10:38 P.M,.THE CHAIR DECLARED COUNCIL BACK IN SESSION RECREATION AND PARK COMMISSION Review action of July 22, 1969. Mayor Gleckman: Item 6. REQUEST FROM RIDGE RIDERS RE: TRAILER AT RIDGE RIDERS AREA Mayor Gleckman: ITEM 7. MUSTANG PONY - COLT REQUEST FOR SWIMMING POOL PASSES Mayor'Gleckma.n: Mr. Wakefield: I think our congratulations should go to Mrs. Plesko as the new Chairman of the Recreation and Park Commission. Anybody have any comments? No comments Mr. Wakefield, can these passes be granted by the Recreation and Park Commissioner, or do they have to go to the Council; They have to go to the Council.. MHz Rego C.C. 7/28/69 Page twenty-nine RECREATION AND PARK COMMISSION (Cont'd.) Councilman Nichols: The Council hasn't adopted a policy on passes to the Swimming Pool and I*W,have a philosophic reservation on this although I know it is not too popular to confront any request from youth leagues with reservations, but I would like to see these matters handled on some basis other the process of giving out passes. Where do you draw the line and how do you rationalize this with the fact that it is a public pool built with taxpayers` money, and you let some ,people in free at your own discretion, and charge others. I suppose it is a legal matter. George, is there any legal implication with a City Government waiving fees and charges to certain groups by issuing free admission, or are we in a strictly ethical area? Mr. Wakefield: I think it has some legal implications. The Council is confronted really with two alter- natives: One, making the pool available on a free use basis, or two, establishing charges for the use of the pool. If charges are established they should be uniform and should apply to every individual. The only deviations from that rule that occur to me would be those that would occur on special days or events at the pool when everyone might be permitted to swim without charge. Councilman Nichols: This is the feeling that I had that we were getting on a little sticky ground if we were to give the department permission to let this group in free and that group in free, and I felt we certainly didn't want that. We had one request from a group in Bassett which was turned down because they weren't in the City. This request came to the Commission when.Mro Lloyd and I were sitting in on the Recreation and Park Commission meeting, and we wondered if, this time, the Council might know of somewhere we could get a donation. I know I would be happy to make a contribution, and I'm sure other people would, so that these boys could have the privileges of the pool. I understand there are three teams of boys numberi.ng some 30 or 35 In the future I think we should direct the Department to be very cautious about any type of commitment. I would like to work with the Council and see that these boys do get in as guests Councilman Chappell: My only thought; here was that this is a group of boys invited to our City to participate in an athletic event, and this would be one of the rare'occasi.ons when the Council would vote on something like this; however, if it is getting into legal .implications where we can't or shouldn't do it, then.I would be in favor of passing the hat and picking up the tab. We might not do this ever again. These boys are basically guests of the city; they are living with people in our community; they're participating in our tournament which perhaps in our lifetime we won't see again in our community. Councilman.Gillum: I can appreciate and understand Mr. Chappell's feelings on this, but I am'always amazed how much money it takes to run these Baseball Leagues. Here we have right after this'a request for Tournament Admission Charges. I think if it boils down to who they are guests of, they are guests of this League because the League participates in this. It happens to be on property controlled by the City but my main concern, and I think it is Councilman Nichols' concern, that once we open the door o , a we could have a church group invited in this community and could have a request like this because the church is in the city. I am always concerned that when we do set a precedent, we haven't the right to deny anybody the same privilege. I think it is fine we have the Tournament and, I'm sure with the small admission we charge the League can find some way,through donations etc., to pay admission to our pool. I don't think we should charge our citizens and -29- Reg. C.C. 7/28/69 Page thirty RECREATION AND PARK COMMISSION (Cont'd . ) Councilman Gillum: let others in free. What are we going to do with our young people who live in the City and are participating in the Tournament. We can't deny them the right to go in with this group from out of town. I think it is rather a touchy subject, and if they want to go, let the League pick up the tab for it this time. If we let them in free I think we are going to cause problems on.any future requests, Councilman Lloyd: We are faced with a difficult situation here. I agree we may set a precedent, and Council- man Nichols and I did discuss this. I see the pros and cons of this situation; I see these people coming into our homes and as guests of the city° I'm sure we can control the situation. Maybe what we should do is to vote the money out of. the Council to pay for this thing and carry it through Recreation and Park. In that way we'd make them guests of the City. I think we have the right, Mr. Wakefield, to adopt this Approach without getting ourselves into any legal entanglements? . Mr. Wakefield: I'm not sure I understand just what your proposal is, and I would hesitate to give you an answer without some further consideration. Councilman Lloyd: I'm asking for a point of law which I'm sure may require some research. If it is question- able, as' you have already indicated, and we do not have this right, suffice it to say that's the end of the conversation. I think there must be some way to set up criteria for those who come into the city. I believe a decision has to be made, and I think Russ has already pointed it out, We are going to have to go forward and get the money somewhere now. • Mayor Gleckman: I can appreciate and respect everything that is being said here and I am sure it is well - intended. But, gentlemen, the City of West Covina, whether it likes it or not, is going to have approximately 100 boys participating in Baseball from all over the country'. It could just as well be any other city in the state of California. ;If there's anything that this City has to be thankful for, it iz the boys' Baseball program in this com- munity that the parents of these boys participate in to such a tremendous extent, out of pocket, on City property, I agree, but the capital improve- ments to this property and the return for the investment that this City gets from boys Baseball, Little League, etc., . . . I'm beside myself, to be honest with you,to find there is a big issue being made about whether we can permit 30,60,90 boys from out of state, from all over the country, to use a municipal swimming pool. This is going to be a West Covina event, advertised in newspapers all over the country, and I am amazed to see an issue being made out of it. Again, I appreciate and respect your remarks, but we should be fighting for a way in which we can, in every way, shape, and form, make these --boys proud'to be visitors in the City of West Covina. I think in this particular Tournament it is not going to say "The Orangewood Baseball League is hosting the Colt ,Tournament." It is going to say the games are going to be played in the City of West Covina, with the winner of that Tournament going to the World Series of Baseball in this particular category. If it bothers the Council and the City Attorney, from the standpoint of whether we're legal or not, we have awarded in the past $200 to Edgewood High School for some kids from that school going out of State singing in a choral group; we've awarded to a.Soft Ball Team $90,plus other things,to go to Mexico to play Soft Ball, etc. I appreciate, gentlemen, what you're saying, and you may be 1007o right, but I would really feel bad if this Council didn't see its way clear to pick up the tab on these people going swimming, especially when most of these kids are going to be housed by residents of this community, for which they get no remuneration whatsoever. I might also add that when you talk about the cost of Baseball in this City, the return for its investment could never be replaced if we didn't have it, number one, and number two, the cost for this Tournament is going to be well over.$2500, of which not ten cents of it is coming from.City Funds, or the General Fund. -3 0- Rego C.C. 7/28/69 Page thirty-one RECREATION AND PARK COMMISSION (Cont'd.) Mayor Gleckman: I think the least the City can do in order to to help along Boys'Basebal.l, and promote the name of West Covina, and its hospitality, shall I say, is to authorize $50 or $100 out of the fund to go towards entertaining these visitors. Councilman Nichols: Mr. Mayor, I'm sure you didn't intend to, but the gist of your comments tends to divide the Council into Bad Guys and Good Guys on this issue, and I don't really think that is the point at all. The purpose of my comments initially was not to see how harmful I could be tothe youth of the community. It was an entirely different issue. The issue had been raised that the Staff of the Recreation and Park Department was requesting permission to begin issuing.passes. Mayor Gleckman: I wasn't talking in regard to that, I'm sorry. I was talking.about whether we should give permission for these people to participate in our swimming pool free, not whether the authority should be given to the Recreation Department. Councilman Nichols: Then, I would allude back to my original comments that I would hope we could find a way to go ahead and make this possible, but to direct our Department to be very careful in terms of making verbal statements suggesting that we might give passes to people. So,I would have said nothing that wasn't deep in my own heart also. Although I don't have a son,and I am not active in these groups that you are,and Councilman Chappell is, I think they are worth while,..and I dearly wouldn't like the record to show that I'm Fagin on the Council. I would suggest that first we find out how many boys are involved. We were told that there were to be three teams. < Mayor Gleckman: I think each team is composed of approximately fifteen boys on each team, plus a manager, plus a coach, plus a bat boy probably. I would say, safely, twenty boys on each team. Councilman Nichols: It would be my feeling that we could well ask the Staff to make a determination of the exact numbers of young people we may expect, and the Council,at its next meeting might,be able to make an appropriation for the League and for community.promotion in connection with the particular event. Now, how they expend these funds in helping to promote the Tournament, I think we have to have some discretion. I think this will tend to fill the need of the request for back-up support, and get away from this problem, which is really a problem of issuing passes. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, that the Staff, including the Legal Staff,review what can be done, investigate the number:of people who would be guests, and recommend to the Council the procedure to be followed for the issuance of funds which will be used as advertising for the City. AYES: Councilman Gillum,. Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None Councilman Gillum: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make one statement, and I'm being very sincere about this. It seems that not only in this .community, but other communities as well, when you get on the subject of children and baseball, or parks and schools, the minute you stand up and say something somebody points at you and says, "Oh, you're a bad guy, you're saying the wrong thing." I want it understood that I wasn't opposed, but I just think we are creating a problem. It does irritate me somewhat,not only in here but in other areas, that when you do start to question the requests of baseball or football or other types of activities like this financially, you end up being the bad guy, and I don't appreciate it. -31- Reg. C.C. 7/28/69 Page thirty-two • 0 RECREATION AND PARK COMMISSION (Cont'd.) ITEM 8. MUSTANG PONY - COLT REQUEST FOR TOURNA- MENT ADMISS..ION CHARGES_ Mayor Gleckman: I would entertain a motion that permission be granted. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd_,. and carried,that permission be granted to collect a donation -admission fee from spectators at the Pony Sectional and Colt Divisional All -Star Tournaments during the weeks of July 29, and August 13, 1969. ITEM 9. MUSTANG PONY- Discussion and clarification of the term COLT REQUEST.FOR "Curfew" which pertains to night lights, CURFEW EXTENSION and not the legal Curfew of the City. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Nichols, and carried,that permission be granted the Mustang Pony -Colt League to extend the night light curfew from 10:45 P.M. to 12:00 Midnight, during the baseball tournament weeks of July 29, and August 13, 1969, at Orangewood Park, with the condition that no new inning shall start after 12:_00 Midnight. Comment by Councilman Nichols that the question of any objection to these extended hours by the hospital had come up at the Recreation and Park Commission meeting. Commissioner Wilson stated that this had been done before and they have had no complaint of any sort. ITEM 10. GALAXIE LITTLE Mayor Gleckman stated that a report is LEAGUE - SENIOR DIVISION coming back to the Recreation and Park FIELD DEVELOPMENT Commission. ITEM 11. WEST COVINA SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA ITEM 12. FRIENDSHIP PARK MASTER PLAN Mayor Gleckman: Plan for Parks? Mayor Gleckman stated that a report is coming back to the Recreation and Park. Commission. Mr. Aiassa, would this be within the preroga- tive of the Commission, to approve a Master Mr. Aiassa: Normally, they would approve it and then it goes to the Planning Commission and then 'to the City Council, Planning Commission has to approve it as to function and design. ITEMS 13-14 Mayor Gleckman stated that these items are self-explanatory ITEM 15, CAPITAL How about this item, Mr.,Aiassao What type IMPROVEMENT.RECOM- of action are we to take on this? MENDATIONS FOR 1969-70 BUDGET Mr. Aiassa: I think you ought to take it under advisement. Councilman. Nichols: Mr...Ai,assa, I have a question. It has seemed strange to me that Staff recommends to the Commission, Commission recommends to Council, and then Council recommends to Staff. Where are we on that kind of an operation? -32- RECREATION AND PARK COMMISSION (Cont'd.) Page thirty-three ITEM 15. (Cont'd.) Mr. Aiassa: I think,basically,it is on this kind of a program, The Commission reviews it after Recreation and Park recommends it. Suppose Council receives it and turns thumbs down on it. There's no point in my wasting hours with the Finance Officer arranging funds. If the Council feels it is warranted, • I can .review it,'relate'it to the Budget, and come back with a full report. Councilman Nichols: When this type of thing comes from Recrea- tion and Park through the Commission to the Council, have you normally seen these proposals yourself? Mr. Aiassa: Normally I don't review them first. Councilman Nichols: So really our referring them back to Staff is not referring them back to the same Staff level? Mr. Aiassa: No, you're now coming to the final Staff that puts the red pencil through it. Councilman Chappell: There is one question on this list, we have provided money for security lights, is this an additional amount under item 4 to that we already budgeted? Mr. Aiassa: This is kind of a priority item that the Commission is recommending where they showed the first phases first. As you know, we still have Galster Park to finish and that is phase two. Then they have listed these other • items, and they are, of course, dependent on the funds that are available. Mayor Gleckman: Is that $10,000 Security Lights for all parks, for one park, for what? Mr. Aiassa: That's the amount that we earmarked from the original appropriation for Galster Park, and we are now reviewing three possible parks with one possibility of having Security Lights. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that the Capital Improvement Recommendations for 1969-70 Budget as recommended by the Recreation and Park Commission be referred to Staff. ITEM 16. To be taken up at a later date. PARK TAX ITEM 17. No action. SENIOR CITIZENS Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by. Councilman Nichols and carried, that the minutes of the Recreation and Park Commission, with the exception of those items requiring Council action, be accepted and filed as submitted. PERSONNEL BOARD To be presented under City Manager's Agenda. HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Nichols and carried, that the Minutes of June 26, minutes of the Human Relations Commission 1969 be accepted and filed as submitted. -33- Reg. C.C. 7/28/69 Page thirty-four ORAL COMMUNICATIONS THE CHAIR ANNOUNCED THAT THIS IS THE TIME_. AND PLACE FOR ORAL_ C.OMMUNI.CATI.ONS . Mayor Gleckman:' There being no one present who wishes to address the Council,. we wi11. go. on. 0 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS_... Letter from Allison W. Mayor Gleckman: I would like permission from Jones re Merced/Orange the Council to answer this letter. Rather Avenue Plan. than have it received and filed, I think all correspondence should be answered. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Nichols that this letter be acknowledged, received and filed. Motion carried. Report from.League of Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by California Cities on Councilman Lloyd and carried,that this letter "Guidelines for'Recrea- be received and referred to Staff. tional uses of Flood Control Properties" and report from Resolu- tions Committee. Opinions re West Covina Motion by Councilman Chappel, seconded by Walnut Water Company Councilman Lloyd and carried that this letter be and Suburban Water received and filed. Systems Applications • from PUC Goodwill Industries Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by request for placement Mayor Gleckman, and carried, that the letter of collection booths. be referred to Planning Commission and Planning Staff.. Copy of President's Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Message re Planned Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that this Parenthood - World letter be received and filed, Population Letter from VFW re Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by licensing of clubs Councilman Nichols and carried, that this letter be referred to the City Attorney. Letter from Cliff Reckow Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by re position of Director Councilman Nichols, and carried, that this of proposed Symphony letter be referred to the Recreation and Orchestra Park Commission. CITY ATTORNEY ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney Presented: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, ZONE CHANGE NO. 415 - ROBERT • HIRSCH, AMENDING CODE TO.REZONE CERTAIN PREMISES.. Mayor Gleckman:, For the benefit of the Council, where is that? Mr. Wakefield: It is located generally at the terminus of Mardina Street east of Maplewood Avenue. -34- REG. C.C. 7/28/69 Page thirty -,five CITY ATTORNEY (Cont'd) ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION (Co.nt'd) Motion by Councilman Chappell., seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that further reading of the body of said Ordinance be waived. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, :,hat said Ordinance be introduced. ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AUTHORIZING FILING WITH THE CITY CLERK REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE USE OF THE PARKING AREA AND THE DRIVEWAYS AT THE CITY HALL, AND OTHER PUBLIC PROPERTY. AMENDING THE CODE RELATING TO TRAFFIC REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO CITY FACILITIES. Motion by Councilman Chappell., seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that further reading of the body of said Ordinance be waived. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that said Ordinance be introduced. RESOLUTION NO. 4019 The City Attorney presented: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ADOPTED CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING THE REVISED MERCED/ORANGE AVENUE PLANe Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objection, we will waive further reading of the body of said • Resolution. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Nichols to adopt said Resolution. Motion passed on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION N0,.4020 The City Attorney presented: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ADOPTED CITY OF WEST COVINA REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 3357, AND ALLOWING THE PAYMENT OF CERTAIN EXPENSES OF THE MAYOR. Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objection, we will waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. Councilman Nichols: What expenses are these? Mr. Wakefield: This resolution increases the monthly allowance of the Mayor for incidental expenses incurred by him in connection with this office from $25 to $50 per month. 4kotion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd,to adopt said Resolution. Motion passed on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd NOES: None ABSTAIN: Mayor Gleckman ABSENT: None -- 35 - Reg. C.C. 7/28/69 Page thirty-six CITY ATTORNEY (Cont ' d o ) Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor, I have one additional item I'd like to present. Mayor Gleckman: Does the Council have any objection to the City Attorney..present.ing..an..additional item? Mr o Wakef ie.ld,.....pr..oc.ee.d_a... ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION ..AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE BY REPEALING PART.14-A, and ADDING THERETO A NEW PART 14-A, ALL RELATING TO THE INDUSTRIAL PARK ZONE. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, to waive further reading of the body of the Ordinance. Motion carried. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that said Ordinance be -introduced. CITY MANAGER LEGAL AID SOCIETY REQUEST FOR OFFICE SPACE IN CITY HALL - Staff Report Mr. Aiassa: I'd like to refer this to Mr. Bedaux, I did meet with the representative of the • Legal Aid Society and Mr. J. Brenner, and after considerable discussion, and an opinion from the City Attorney stating that they are not eligible to use our facilities, I recommended that they meet with some representatives at the Court, and I believe he met with Mr. Joe Cavell.and,..may make:some arrangements over there. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Nichols, and carried, that the request for space in the City Hall be denied, as they are not a bona fide public agency as required by City Council policy. SENTINEL NEWSPAPER In going through the whole are of the COMPLAINT - Oral Report entire City Hall, this appeared to be a series of errors mainly caused by our moving and the resultant confusion ,with a chain reaction of not getting the things on the Agenda,. I apologized to Mr. Jim Samuelson, and I presume he is satisfied. Mayor Gleckman: Mr. Aiassa: MASTER TRANSPORTATION • PLAN - Staff Report Does the Council require any further action. I don't believe so,, Discussion of the complexity of the questions involved in this request resulted in the following motion: Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Nichols, and carried, that this questionnaire be taken under advisement by the Council, and referred to Staff. RESOLUTION NO. 4021 AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 1277 ESTABLISHING ADOPTED LEVELS OF COMPENSATION FOR CITY EMPLOYEES -36- Reg. C.C. 7/28/69 Page thirty-seven CITY MANAGER. (Cont'd . ) RESOLUTION No. 4021 (cont'd.) We have had two breakfast meetings with the Personnel Board. The one held Mr. Aiassa: this morning, had only one member of the Board absent and I met with him later and reviewed all changes. • The Personnel Board has accepted all changes, and these have been discussed with the Council as well. Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objection, we will waive further reading of the body of the Resolution Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell to adopt Resolution 4021. Motion passed on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None Councilman Chappell: I think we should commend our Personnel Board for the fine job they have done here. I have sat in on a lot of lengthy meetings with them and they have made some excellent decisions.. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman:Nichols, and carried, that the •Personnel Board be commended by letter over the Mayor's signature for the fine job they have done and the extra hours they have spent in amending this Resolution. STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA REQUEST TO CONDUCT VIBROSEIS STUDY - Staff Report Mr. Aiassa: You have a staff report on this matter. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell and carried that the Standard Oil Company of California be permitted to conduct Vibroseis Study as requested, on the streets outlined in the Staff Report of July 24, 1969. RESOLUTION No. 4022 AUTHORIZING THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ADOPTED TO PURCHASE CERTAIN ITEMS. Mr. Aiassa: This is a new program that Mr. Eliot has undertaken to permit the City to now buy automobiles at a very substantial discount by taking advantage of jointly purchasing automobiles with the State of California. We have been buying gasoline with the same allotments with the County and we have done rather well. This arrangement will probably save us approximately a couple thousand dollars. Hearing no objection, further reading of the body of the resolution was waived. Councilman Lloyd: Are these automobiles purchased through local agencies? Mr. Aiassa: Mr. Eliot, are these bought through local agencies? -3 7- Reg. C.C. 7/28/69. Page thirty-eight CITY MANAGER (Cont'd.) Mr. Eliot: Not the Fords or Chevrolets Councilman Lloyd: In other words, are we going to be giving our City money to some other community? Mr, Eliot: Just the 1% Sales Tax Councilman Lloyd: There's a great deal more in this than just 1%. We have some moral requirements in support of our local businessmen. I don't mean we have to buy at a loss, but are we -getting a fleet rate because some dealer is being cut out .of the pattern? As a city, are we helping to foster this pattern? I'd like to have some more answers on this. Councilman Gillum: Unfortunately for our city, there are no dealers in the city handling the type of cars we have been purchasing. There are no Ford and no Chevrolet dealers, I would support you in this if we had.a Ford or Chevrolet dealer within the City limits, but we are losing the money out of the City as it is with the cars we have purchased during the last two or three years. Mayor Gleckman: What kind of savings are we talking.about? Mr. Aiassa: $400 or $500 per car. Councilman Gillum: What about the service warrants on these • cars? Mr. Eliot: They are honored by the local dealers. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell to adopt Resolution 4022. Motion passed on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckmano NOES: None ABSENT: None WATER PROBLEM WITH Letter to Council by Covina City Manager CITY OF COVINA Mr. Christopherson. Councilman Gillum: We had discussed the possibility outlined in the letter as somewhat of an immediate solution to our problem. I think it might be an immediate solution, but where does this lead? I would like to help these people with their problem, but I would like to discuss this proposal further with the Mayor and the City Manager. Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Gillum and carried, that this subject be held over until the next regular Council Meeting, PERMISSION TO HIRE PART-TIME HELP FOR FINANCE DEPARTMENT Mr. Aiassa: We're having a change in the Assistant Finance Officer, and I have a possibility of hiring Mr. Vaughn Walters on a very short term basis. -,Reg. C.C. 7/28/69 Page thirty-nine CITY MANAGER (Cont ' d . ) Mayor Gleckman: Ar-e you asking us for permission? Mr. Aiassa: I'm telling you what I would like to do. I do have the right to hire part-time help in case of a vacancy, but I just want to advise you. I also have to discuss it with Mr. Eliot to see if it will work out. No comments from the Council. SISTER CITY BUDGET This is from our joint meeting. We have REQUEST a request for $750, and the Council must approve this. We have a committee now of Mr. Nichols and Mr. Lloyd. Councilman Lloyd: If you'd like to have this as: an ad hoc committee and want to start out right now and take this kind of time, all right, otherwise I'd recommend we hold it over. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Chappell that this be held over to the next Regular Council Meeting. Motion carried. Mr. Aiassa: ROBINDALE.-STREET We haven't been able to get together with COMPLAINT the property owners, but Mr. Zimmerman has filed a report with you so you know we just haven't been letting it sit. • Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd and carried, that this report be received and filed. MAIL ORDER HOUSES IN Informational to the Council. No action. WEST COVINA.. STATE DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS' Mr. Aiassa: I talked to Mr. Mayfield, and REPRESENTATIVES INFORMAL he'd like to have a joint meeting with MEETING WITH CITY COUNCIL.. the Council to discuss the problems we are ON SAN BERNARDINO FREEWAY going to be faced with in the widening of WIDENING the San Bernardino Freeway, and the possibili= ties of some alignments and detours. A tentative date of August 18, 1969, was suggested and that was prior to -the time that we received the announcement that the new theatre will be having its grand opening on the 18th - the Sanborn Theatre. Mayor Gleckman: Could they make a 4 o'clock meeting Mr. Aiassa? Mr. Aiassa: Yes. Mayor Gleckman:. How about August 25th, could we meet at 4 P.M. Mr. Aiassa: That is O.K. I won't be here that day. I plan to take that week as vacation. Mayor Gleckman: How about August 12th, a Tuesday. 4 P.M. Mr. Aiassa: That is O.K. How about the Chamber? CLARIFICATION RE ADVISORY COUNCIL TO MODEL ROCKET SOCIETY Councilman Chappell: It is a good report. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, to receive and file the Informational Staff Report. -39- 0 Reg. C.C. 7/28/69 Pag.e.forty CITY MANAGER (Cont'de) SELECTION OF CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT CONSULTANT. -Staff Report Mra.Aiassa: We have reviewed the two applicants and the best in our opinion were George Vernon ' Russell and Williams and Mocine, to do the phase 1 of our Central Business District. I'd like to have an authorization from the Council to direct the Staff and the City Attorney to prepare a contract with the firm of Williams and Mocine, and I will present the contract to the Council at your next meeting. Motion by Councilman Gillum, Seconded by Councilman Nichols, and carried, that the Staff and the City Attorney be directed to prepare a contract authorizing the firm of Williams and Mocine to proceed with Phase 1 of the Central Business District project. CITY CLERK ABC APPLICATION Robert Warren Durocher "Jimmy's" 328 So Glendora Avenue CITY MANAGER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CONTRACT Mre Aiassa: have one provision made, by the City Attorney and to sign it. City Clerk Preston advises no protest on this application. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd and carried, to approve ABC Application as presented, The City Manager requested permission to add another item to his Agenda. Council acquiesced, We have a contract similar to the one submitted to Council. I would like to and that is that this contract be prepared that the Mayor and the City Clerk be authorized Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Chappell and carried, that the City Attorney prepare a contract between the Chamber of Commerce and the City of West Covina, for the signatures of the Mayor and the City Clerk. CITY CLERK REQUEST FROM MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA TO CONDUCT A FUND RAISING CAMPAIGN DURING THE MONTH OF DECEMBER, 1969, and WAIVER OF LICENSE FEE. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that the request from the Muscular Dystrophy Association be approved. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried,.that the City Treasurer's Report be accepted and filed MAYOR'S REPORTS Mayor�Gleckman: With the permission of the Council, I would like to take up in executive session the appointments to the Human Relations Commission, Through an oversight, we did not acknowledge the re -appointment or the new appointment of Commissioners, and I'd .like to hold that off until August lltho _an_ Rego C.C. 7/28/69 Page forty-one COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS HELICOPTER SITE Councilman Lloyd: I have nothing to report at the present time because Mr. Aiassa is negotiating with them, and it is now at the Staff level. HELICOPTER SERVICES Councilman Lloyd: With regard to helicopter services for public service, I noted with a great deal of pleasure that the City of Covina had allocated funds as agreed between their City Manager and their represen- tative, Mr. Oscar Yaeger. We now are supposed to take some action putting funds t6ward the possibility of indemnifying the three companies Bell, Hughes, and Engstrom. In turn, we are asking them to provide helicopter service for our City each in turn for not less than two days, and not more than three. If there are any funds expended by these companies, and so that there is no obligation on the part of the City, we will allocate funds so we can pay for it, There is every indication that they will turn this down. Each of them stated emphatically that that goes with the service, but nevertheless, if we do this we are not indebted in any way, and if a helicopter is purchased, or leased, or whatever, we have no obligation to anyone. Councilman Gillum: Mr, Lloyd, how did we come to the determination of $1,000 as our share of this helicopter service. • Councilman Lloyd: Roughly, it was based on population. Their City at about 31,000 and ours at about 68,000,.or about 2 to la We are actually, I believe, in geographical area about twice as big as they are. Councilman Gillum: I'm asking a hypothetical question. What would happen if. this Council could not find the funds. What would happen to this program? Councilman Lloyd: Do you mean you don't want to allocate funds? If you don't want to allocate funds�l think you are saying that you don't want to proceed further. Councilman Gillum: My only concern at the moment is, Mr. Aiassa1 do we have $1,000 that we could spend. Mr. Aiassa: We earmarked $7,000 in the budget for this type of service. Councilman Nichols: Do we have a program worked out to make an evaluation of this type of service. Councilman Lloyd: Yes, we have asked the Acting Chief of Police from Covina whose name was Paul Weimer, and he was in part responsible for and working with Hughes Aircraft in their police patrol helicopter concept. He has agreed to structure a program which will aid us in making the airframe we would be interested in. Councilman Nichols: What are we going to learn in the spending of this $1, 500 . Councilman Lloyd: What we are going to learn is which one will be of the greatest value, plus the fact that assuming any monies were spent it would apply on one of those. In other words, we would only lose a third of that because $500 would be applied on whichever one we chose. -41- +'Reg. C.C. 7/28/69 page forty-two COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS (Cont'd.) Councilman Nichols: Who will tell me "This is a good investment," and we should buy "this machine." Councilman Lloyd: Two things will be done, one,a report will be written and submitted to you, and two, your liaison, which happens to be myself plus Mr. Aiassa, will also have commentary based on that report. Councilman Chappell: Are they planning to use this for some kind of night time activity? Councilman Lloyd: Yes, all three aircraft have night lights so they can be used at night. We will have the airframe for 48 hours or more. They don't just come in for a day and then leave. It is physically parked here. Councilman Chappell: Will the Council be informed prior to the test being made? Councilman Lloyd: Yes, you will be notified. There will be an actual schedule which will be published. I am sure the Tribune and the Sentitel,will take an avid interest in this. Mr. Aiassa: Before we actually tie down the money, we should talk with the.City Attorney when we are dealing with these people to be sure where we stand. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, secbnded by Councilman Chappell that $1,00Q.be allocated for the payment of the use of any helicopter services provided by any of these three helicopter companies to the City as requested in a letter forthcoming from the City Manager's office. Motion passed on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilman Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None APPROVE DEMANDS Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman.L.loyd authorizing'payment of demands totaling $310,858.86 as listed on Demand sheets C-365 through C-367 and Payroll Reimbursement Sheet. Motion passed on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilman Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None ADJOURNMENT Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried,that at 11:45 P.M. this meeting adjourii .to. August 4, 1969 at 7:30 P.M. -42-