10-04-2011 - Special Joint Council/CDC Meeting Minutes of Septe - smin 09.06.11.joint (2).pdf1
M I N U T E S
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE
WEST COVINA CITY COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
September 06, 2011
Mayor Herfert called to order the special meeting of the West Covina City Council at 6:02 p.m. in the
City Manager’s Conference Room at City Hall, 1444 W. Garvey Avenue, West Covina.
ROLL CALL Mayor Herfert, Mayor Pro Tem Touhey
Councilmembers Armbrust (arrived 6:09 p.m.), Lane, Sanderson
(arrived 6:09 p.m.)
Others Present: Pasmant, Bachman, Gorman, Colvin, Chung, Lee, Kim, Wills,
Dominguez, Castanon, Hoppe, Morales
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS ON THE AGENDA
Sue Ibrahim spoke on behalf of Dr. Arshaid regarding proposed
purchase of 811 S. Sunset Avenue (Chamber building)
CLOSED SESSION Mayor Herfert commenced the closed session at 6:11 p.m. to
discuss the following matters:
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING
LITIGATION
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(a)
Irma Herrera v. City of West Covina
Christopher Chung v. City of West Covina
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8
Property: Civic Center Property (West Covina Parkway/West
Covina Avenue/Southwest Corner
Agency Negotiators: Pasmant, Alvarez-Glasman, Chung, Lee,
Kim
Negotiating Parties: C.G.M. Development Inc.
Under Negotiation: Both price and terms of sale
Property: McIntyre Square Assessor Parcel Number 8480-
016-002, 032, 033
Agency Negotiators: Pasmant, Alvarez-Glasman, Chung, Lee
Negotiating Parties: The McIntyre Company
Under Negotiation: Both price and terms of sale and/or lease
Property: 811 South Sunset Avenue
Agency Negotiators: Pasmant, Alvarez-Glasman, Chung, Lee
Negotiating Parties: City of West Covina
Under Negotiation: Both price and terms of sale and/or lease
ADJOURNMENT Mayor Herfert adjourned the meeting at 6:55 p.m.
Submitted by
Assistant City Clerk Susan Rush
Mayor Steve Herfert
M I N U T E S
REGULAR JOINT MEETING OF THE
WEST COVINA CITY COUNCIL
WEST COVINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
September 06, 2011
Mayor/Chairman Herfert called to order the regular joint meeting of the West Covina City Council and
Community Development Commission at 7:06 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1444 W.
Garvey Avenue, West Covina.
INVOCATION Officer Jeff Mosley
West Covina Police Department
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Pro Tem Touhey
ROLL CALL Mayor/Chairman Herfert, Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair Touhey
Councilmembers/Commissioners Armbrust, Lane, Sanderson
CHANGES TO THE AGENDA None
PRESENTATIONS None
REPORTING OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION
Deputy City Attorney Matt Gorman reported the following:
Prior to convening into closed session, all items on the City
Council/Community Development Commission agenda were
announced for inclusion in the closed session discussion. All
members were present.
Items on the agenda:
Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation –
Irma Herrera v. CWC – Council received a report from staff and
City Attorney’s Office. The Council voted 4 -1 (Sanderson – No)
to accept a settlement offer to pay $1.5 million in exchange for a
full and complete dismissal of the case. No further information to
report.
Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation –
Christopher Chung v. CWC – Special Council provided the
Council with a report and direction was provided to Special
Council with no further action and nothing further to report.
Conference with Real Property Negotiators – Property
Assessor Parcel Number Civic Center Property; McIntyre Square
Assessor Parcel No. 8480-016-002, 032, 033; and 811 South Sunset
Avenue - Reports were provided by staff to the CDC; direction was
provided to Staff with no further action and nothing further to report.
ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Herfert recognized the following individuals who have
recently passed away and in whose names the meeting will be
adjourned this evening:
Jose Robles, nephew of Sandy Galvez, City Manager’s Office
Monica Alday, sister of Margaret Garcia, City Clerk’s Office
Loretta Scheliga, mother of Don and Vickie Scheliga
Denise Schubin, long-time resident
Don McFadden, father of former Councilmember Bradley
McFadden
City Council/CDC Minutes September 06, 2011
2
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Armando J. Sanchez Armando J. Sanchez, West Covina resident, addressed notifying
residents of City meetings and asked that meetings be televised.
City Manager Pasmant explained that audio recordings of
City Council meetings are available including live audio recordings.
Alfred Williams Alfred Williams, West Covina resident, addressed concerns of city
trees maintenance in the paseo; residential yard maintenance at
residence at Adrienne and Betsey; and cable access to meetings.
Robert Sotelo Robert Sotelo, West Covina resident, spoke on recycling plastic and
paper grocery bags and the prospect of stores charging residents for
use; and addressed other issues of concern within the City.
Norvelle A. Harris, MD Norvelle A. Harris, MD, speaking on behalf of Sunset Surgical
Center, invited Council to a free health fair on September 29, 2011.
Fredrick Sykes Fredrick Sykes, West Covina resident, requested clarification of a
staff report attachment from the Special Meeting of August 23, 2011.
Mayor Herfert briefly explained the subject matter of the
attachment stating it was a result of State legislation eliminating
redevelopment agencies and that the City had to take action. He then
called forward Assistant City Manager Thomas Bachman to further
explain.
Bachman addressed the financial aspects involved and
explained how the City would recover lost revenue to offset the
State’s actions that would’ve resulted in lost income to the City.
Tommy Garcia Tommy Garcia, West Covina resident and employee, addressed the
City employees and the quality work they perform for the City and
inquired as to why budget issues are often balanced on the back of
the dedicated employees, and asked that City management develop
innovative ways to solve the City’s budget problems.
Councilmembers commented on budget issues and the tough
decisions.
Robert Reyes Robert Reyes, West Covina resident, speaking on behalf of the
Filipino Community, requested the City engage minority ethnic
groups into the City; opposed the Continuum ordinance to continue
the operation of the CDC.
Wen Wen Zhang Wen Wen Zhang, West Covina Librarian, reported on the successful
library summer programs and success of the West Covina Library
branch; announced upcoming library programs.
Rudy Almeida Rudy Almeida, Hacienda Heights resident, addressed the upcoming
election.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Approval of Meeting Minutes (receive & file)
1) Special Joint Council/CDC Meeting Minutes of July 5, 2011
Minutes Regular Joint Council/CDC Meeting Minutes of July 5, 2011
Commission Summary of Actions (receive & file)
2) Community Services Community Services Commission - May 10, 2011
3) Planning Commission Planning Commission – July 12, 2011 & July 26, 2011
4) Senior Citizens Commission Senior Citizens Commission – April 28, 2011
City Council/CDC Minutes September 06, 2011
3
Claims Against the City
5) Government Tort Claim Denials (deny & notify claimant
Claims Against the City Recommendation is that the City Council deny the following
Government Tort Claims and the claimants and/or their respective
attorneys be so notified.
Raymond A. Mata vs. City of West Covina
Thomas Mayer vs. City of West Covina
Elizabeth Jaramillo vs. City of West Covina
Carolyn Beserra vs. City of West Covina
Kevin Weemering vs. City of West Covina
Richard Eschagary vs. City of West Covina
Beatriz Falcon vs. City of West Covina
Raquel Gomez vs. City of West Covina
Ordinance for Adoption
6) Continuum Ordinance Pursuant to AB1X27
Continuum Ordinance Recommendation is that the City Council adopt the following
ordinance:
Ordinance No. 2219 ORDINANCE NO. 2219 – AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA,
DETERMINING IT WILL COMPLY WITH THE VOLUNTARY
ALTERNATIVE REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PURSUANT
TO PART 1.9 OF DIVISION 24 OF THE CALIFORNIA HEALTH
AND SAFETY CODE IN ORDER TO PERMIT THE
CONTINUED EXISTENCE OF OPERATION OF THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF WEST COVINA
Traffic Committee Meeting (accept & file )
7) Meeting Minutes of August 16, 2011 (accept & file)
Traffic Committee Minutes I. Request
City Initiated
Annual Intersection collision Rate report for the Year 2010
Staff Recommendation
That existing right-edge striping be repainted along Cherrywood
Street and Garvey Avenue South and install retro-reflective
payment markers on the curve along southbound Cherrywood
Street at the intersection.
That stop ahead signs and pavement markings be installed at all
approaches of the Hollenbeck Street and Merced Avenue
intersection.
That a side road (W2-2R) sign be installed on eastbound Holt
Avenue west of Oak Knoll Drive.
That stop ahead signs and pavement markings be installed on the east
and westbound approaches of Walnut Creek Parkway at Glendora
Avenue.
That stop ahead signs and pavement markings be installed on the
eastbound approach of Merced Avenue at Hollenbeck Street and
southbound approach of Hollencrest Drive at Merced Avenue.
That staff continue to monitor the intersection of Amar Road and
Witzman Drive and notify Los Angeles County regarding the
collisions history of the intersection.
City Council/CDC Minutes September 06, 2011
4
That clear retro-reflective pavement markers be installed along
outside edge of crosswalk at the intersection of Glendora Avenue
and Walnut Creek Parkway.
That staff verify street lighting level at the southwest corner of
Glendora Avenue and Walnut Creek Parkway.
II. Request:
Jefferson De Roux, West Covina resident
That traffic control at the intersection of Cameron Avenue and
Lark Ellen Avenue be reviewed.
Staff Recommendations:
That signal ahead signs and pavement markings be installed at all
approaches of the Cameron Avenue and Lark Ellen Avenue
intersection.
That radar enforced plates be installed at all speed limit signs on
Cameron Avenue from Valinda Avenue to Barranca Street.
That radar enforced plates be installed at all speed limit signs on
Lark Ellen Avenue from Garvey Avenue South to Francisquito
Avenue.
That right turn movements on red phase be prohibited at the
intersection of Cameron Avenue and Lark Ellen Avenue on school
days during the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. to
3:00 p.m.
That pedestrian phase time be modified based on a 2.8 feet per
second walking speed.
That staff seek grant funding to install pedestrian count-down
indications at the Cameron Avenue and Lark Ellen Avenue
intersection.
That staff conduct traffic and speed studies after school begins to
determine if left-turn phasing for the east and westbound approaches
is warranted.
Treasurer’s Report (receive & file)
8) City Treasurer’s Report City Treasurer’s Report for the Month of June 2011
9) CDC Treasurer’s Report CDC Treasurer’s Report for the Month of June 2011
10) City Treasurer’s Report City Treasurer’s Report for the Month of July 2011
11) CDC Treasurer’s Report CDC Treasurer’s Report for the Month of July 2011
Finance Department – Miscellaneous
12) Prop A Fund Exchange – City of Commerce
Prop A Fund Exchange – Commerce Recommendation is that the City Council approve the agreement
authorizing the sale of Prop A Funds to the City of Commerce.
13) Prop A Fund Exchange – City of Industry
Prop A Fund Exchange – Industry Recommendation is that the City Council approve the agreement
authorizing the additional sale of Prop A Funds to the City of
Industry.
Public Works – Miscellaneous
14) Approval of City of West Covina Energy Action Plan
Energy Action Plan Recommendation is that the City Council approve the City of West
Covina Energy Action Plan.
City Council/CDC Minutes September 06, 2011
5
CONSENT CALENDAR ACTION Motion by Lane and seconded by Armbrust to approve all items
listed on the Consent Calendar as presented.
Motion carried by 5 – 0.
DEPARTMENTAL REGULAR MATTERS (Council Action)
Planning Department
Urgency Ordinance Establishing a Moratorium to Create an
Equestrian Overlay Zone on Single-Family Properties on the North
Side of Vanderhoof Drive Between 2633 and 2807 Vanderhoof
15) Drive
Urgency Moratorium Mayor Herfert announced the subject matter and Deputy City
Attorney Matt Gorman stated a conflict of interest existed in this
matter for two councilmembers in which both Councilmembers
Armbrust and Sanderson both own property or live within 500 feet of
the area that is subject to the moratorium. He then detailed the
following:
· Government Code Section 65858 states that this item requires a
4/5 vote of the entire legislative body and, therefore, if two of the
five members present abstain, the item cannot go forward.
· Under FPPC regulations, in this circumstance, one of the two
conflicted councilmembers can be designated to participate in the
item. FPPC Regulation 18708D provides that by some random
method of selection, a councilmember with a conflict can be
designated to participate.
· Deputy City Attorney recommended a coin toss.
Councilmember Sanderson was designated, through a coin toss, to
participate in the item. Councilmember Armbrust recused herself
and left the dais at 8:15 p.m.
Acting Planning Director Jeff Anderson provided a brief staff
report stating that this item is an urgency ordinance to establish a
moratorium for a period of 45 days while the City studies the
possibility of a code amendment and zone change to zone subject
properties as equestrian uses. The concern is a potential conflict
between the construction of residential living quarters in areas that
have historically been designated for equestrian uses adjacent to
Maverick/Ridgerider Park. Anderson outlined how construction of
residential living quarters in the upper pad of the area could become
a potential for a general encroachment into the equestrian properties
in the lower pad adjacent to Maverick/Ridgerider Park, thereby
limiting equestrian uses.
He then went into the proposed creation of a new equestrian
overlay zone that would preserve and protect equestrian uses such as
current and future equestrian opportunities, protect riders from injury
and create orderly development standards. The properties included
in the moratorium are located on the north side of Vanderhoof Drive
between 2633 and 2807 Vanderhoof Drive.
City Manager Pasmant added that this is a temporary, short
term moratorium to study the issue and help prevent conflicts that
would squeeze out equestrian uses by limiting how close habitable
structures can be to equestrian areas, and that would include issues
such as the safety of riders and the potential for injuries as they share
bridle trails and service roads.
Assistant City Clerk presented:
Ordinance No. 2220 ORDINANCE NO. 2220 – AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA,
PROHIBITING CONSTRUCTION OF GUEST HOUSES,
HABITABLE SPACE ADDITIONS, SPORTS COURTS, TENNIS
COURTS, SWIMMING POOLS AND OTHER SIMILAR TYPES
OF IMPROVEMENTS ON THE REAR, LOWER PORTION OF
EQUESTRIAN ORIENTED PROPERTIES IN SPECIFIED
City Council/CDC Minutes September 06, 2011
6
AREAS OF THE CITY PENDING COMPLETION OF STUDY
AND REPORT BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION
PERTAINING TO THE PROPER CONDITIONS AND
REGULATIONS FOR SUCH USES, DECLARING THIS AN
INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE, AND SETTING FORTH
FACTS CONSTITUTING THE SAME AS AN URGENCY
ORDINANCE
Motion Motion by Touhey and seconded by Lane to introduce and adopt the
ordinance.
Motion carried by 4 – 0. (Armbrust did not participate due
to a conflict of interest living within 500 feet of the location).
Councilmember Armbrust returned to the dais at 8:22 p.m.
CITY COUNCIL/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION COMMENTS
Mayor Herfert informed the public that on Sunday, September 11,
2011 at 6:00 p.m. a ceremony will be held in the Courtyard
commemorating the September 11, 2001 tragedy at the Twin
Towers.
Mayor Herfert also announced several new businesses that have
recently opened in West Covina.
Mayor Herfert also announced that the meeting on September 20,
2011 will recognize the sports champions in the City. The meeting
will be held in the Courtyard.
ADJOURNMENT Motion by Herfert and seconded by Touhey, to adjourn the meeting
at 8:25 p.m. in memory of the following:
Jose Robles, nephew of Sandy Galvez, City Manager’s Office
Monica Alday, sister of Margaret Garcia, City Clerk’s Office
Loretta Scheliga, mother of Don and Vickie Scheliga
Denise Schubin, long-time resident
Don McFadden, father of former Councilmember Bradley
McFadden
Submitted by:
_______________________________
Assistant City Clerk Susan Rush
___________________________________
Mayor Steve Herfert
M I N U T E S
REGULAR JOINT MEETING OF THE
WEST COVINA CITY COUNCIL
WEST COVINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
September 20, 2011
Mayor/Chairman Herfert called to order the regular joint meeting of the West Covina City Council and
Community Development Commission at 7:20 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1444 W.
Garvey Avenue, West Covina.
INVOCATION City Manager Andrew Pasmant
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmember/Commissioner Lane
ROLL CALL Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair Touhey
Councilmembers/Commissioners Armbrust, Lane
Absent: Mayor/Chairman Herfert
Councilmember/Commissioner Sanderson
CHANGES TO THE AGENDA None
PRESENTATIONS Mayor Pro Tem Touhey recognized Robert Bryant of Flowers by
Robert Taylor for their annual Good Neighbor Day and flower
giveaway and presented him with a certificate for outstanding
community service.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Donna Lee Donna Lee, representing South California Edison, presented a
resolution of appreciation of behalf of Southern California Edison
and Edison International and thanked the city for their partnership.
Lloyd Johnson Lloyd Johnson, West Covina resident, commented on the 9/11 event
held at City Hall and expressed his disappoint with Councilmember
Sanderson’s absence at the event; and requested a written report
regarding gangs and crime in West Covina.
Irene Fleck Irene Fleck, West Covina resident, expressed her support for the
Farmer’s Market and promoted upcoming library events.
Police Chief Wills addressed gangs and crime in West Covina as
brought forth by a speaker.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Approval of Meeting Minutes (receive & file)
1) Special Joint Council/CDC Meeting Minutes of July 19, 2011
Minutes Regular Joint Council/CDC Meeting Minutes of July 19, 2011
Special Joint Council/CDC Meeting Minutes of August 23, 2011
Commission Summary of Actions (receive & file)
2) Planning Commission August 23, 2011 & September 13, 2011
City Council/CDC Minutes September 20, 2011
2
City Manager’s Office – Miscellaneous
3) Relocation of Farmers’ Market to Glendora Avenue
Farmers’ Market Recommendation is that the City Council approve relocating the
West Covina Farmers’ Market to Glendora Avenue, adjacent to the
Lakes Entertainment Center.
4) Discount Prescription Drug Program
Discount Prescription Drug Prog. Recommendation is that the City Council authorize staff to promote
various discount prescription drug programs which benefit residents
in West Covina that do not have prescription drug insurance.
CONSENT CALENDAR ACTION Motion by Lane and seconded by Armbrust to approve all items
listed on the Consent Calendar as presented.
Motion carried by 3-0.
CITY COUNCIL/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION COMMENTS
City Manager Pasmant announced to the City Council that the City
of West Covina is a finalist for the 2011 Business Friendly City
competition.
Councilmember Armbrust thanked the staff and all those who
attended the 9/11 event, also those who attended and supported the
Night of Champions recognition which occurred prior to the council
meeting. Ms. Armbrust complimented the police department and the
Police Chief on continuing a great job with the reduction of crime
with less officers on staff.
Mayor Pro Tem Touhey recognized several West Covina residents
who have succeeded with successful sports careers.
ADJOURNMENT Motion by Touhey and seconded by Lane to adjourn the meeting at
7:40 p.m. in memory of West Covina Police Department Chaplain
Gordon Coulter.
Submitted by:
_______________________________
Assistant City Clerk Susan Rush
___________________________________
Mayor Steve Herfert
City of West Covina
Memorandum
AGENDA
ITEM NO. 2
DATE: October 4, 2011
SUMMARY OF ACTIONS
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF WEST COVINA
September 27, 2011
OMMISSIONERS PRESENT
ABSENT:
CITY STAFF PRESENT
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Redholtz, Sotelo, Stewart and Carrico
Holtz
Gorman, Freeland, Anderson, Wong, Garcia,
Yauchzee, Lee, Morales and de Zara
Regular meeting, September 13, 2011 — The minutes were approved as submitted.
A. OTHER MATTERS OR ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
B. CONSENT CALENDAR
FORTHCOMING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS AND PUBLIC
HEARING SCHEDULE
Motion by Redholtz, seconded by Sotelo, to approve the items listed. Motion
carried 4-0 (Holtz absent.)
Agenda Item No. 2 was heard out of order.
C. PUBLIC HEARINGS
(2)
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 11-09
VARIANCE NO. 11-09
APPLICANT: Michelle Felten, Core Development Services for Verizon
Wireless
LOCATION: 2223 Ramona Avenue
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting the approval of a conditional
use permit to allow the installation of an unmanned 60-foot
tall wireless telecommunications facility. Twelve panel
antennas are proposed on a wireless telecommunications
facility designed as a monopine (pine tree). A new
equipment shelter will be installed on site. The applicant is
also requesting the approval of a variance to deviate from
the minimum separation requirement between wireless
telecommunication facilities.
COMMENTS:
Aigmeh Mailian, representing Michelle Felten for Verizon Wireless, spoke in
favor of the project. No one spoke in opposition.
There was a discussion by the Commission regarding why collocation on an
existing facility wasn't feasible. It was the consensus of the Commission that this
Z:\ PLANCOM\SUMACTS \SumActs 2011\9.27.11 sum act.doc
Planning Commission Summary of Action
Paae 2 — September 27. 2011
facility would be beneficial to the area and wouldn't have a negative impact on the
area, since there isn't a residential neighborhood in the vicinity.
Motion by Redholtz, seconded by Stewart, to adopt Resolution No. 11-5438,
approving Conditional Use Permit No. 11-09. Motion carried 4-0 (Holtz absent.)
Motion by Redholtz, seconded by Stewart, to adopt Resolution No. 11 -5439,
approving Variance No. 11-09. Motion carried 4-0 (Holtz absent.)
(1 )
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 11-02
ZONE CHANGE NO. 11-02
PRECISE PLAN NO. 11-05
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 71644
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
APPLICANT: Tom Lao, Charles Company
LOCATION: 301 South Glendora Avenue
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a General Plan
amendment to add a Mixed Use land use category to the
General Plan and to change the land • use designation to
"Mixed Use". The applicant is also requesting a zone
change to change the zoning from "Regional Commercial"
(R-C) to Specific Plan No. 24 (Lakes District Specific
Plan). Furthermore, the applicant is requesting a precise
plan to construct a five-story mixed-use development
(residential and commercial) and a tentative tract map to
create residential and commercial condominium units.
COMMENTS:
Tom Lao, representing the Charles Company, and Craig Chinn spoke in favor of
the project. Shirley Buchanan and Joanne Wilner spoke in opposition.
There was a discussion by the Commission regarding the proposed development,
parking for the residents and for the retail uses, the types of businesses that would
occupy the retail spaces, the size of the residential units, possible revitalization of
the Lakes Entertainment area, the recommendation of the Vision 20/20
Committee for a central gathering place, improving existing businesses on
Glendora Avenue and other specific Plan developments in West Covina. It was
the consensus of the Commission that this development would provide new
businesses to the area, and encourage improvements on Glendora Avenue. In
addition, the Commission concurred that this development would provide the city
with additional property tax and sales tax revenues.
Motion by Sotelo, seconded by Redholtz, to adopt Resolution No. 11-5440
approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. Motion
carried 4-0 (Holtz absent.)
Motion by Sotelo, seconded by Redholtz, to adopt Resolution No. 11-5441
recommending to the City Council, approval of General Plan Amendment No. 11-
02. Motion carried 4-0 (Holtz absent.)
Motion by Sotelo, seconded by Redholtz, to adopt Resolution No. 11-5442
recommending to the City Council, approval of Zone Change No. 11-02. Motion
carried 4-0 (Holtz absent.)
ZAPLANCOM\SUMACTS\SurnActs 2011\9.27.11 sum act.doc
Planning Commission Summary of Action
Pav,e 3 — September 27, 2011
Motion by Sotelo, seconded by Redholtz, to adopt Resolution No. 11-5443,
approving Precise Plan No. 11-05, as amended. Motion carried 4-0 (Holtz
absent.)
Motion by Sotelo, seconded by Redholtz, to adopt Resolution No. 11-5444,
approving Tentative Tract Map No. 71644. Motion carried 4-0 (Holtz absent.)
D. NON-HEARING ITEMS
None
E. OTHER MATTERS OR ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
COMMISSION REPORTS/COMMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
Stewart — regarding West Covina Day at the Fair.
Sotelo — congratulated Hometown Hero recipient, Lloyd Johnson.
Redholtz — regarding his attendance at West Covina Day at the Fair.
Carrico — regarding Jeff Anderson's appointment as Planning Director, thanked staff
for their work on the Charles Company project.
(1)
CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
October 4, 2011: Code Amendment No. 11-04, Tattooing, and Urgency Ordinance
extension for Code Amendment No. 11-06, Equestrian Overlay Zone.
(2)
PLANNING DIRECTORS REPORT:
a. Project Status Report
G. ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Sotelo, seconded by Redholtz, to adjourn the meeting at 8:25 p.m.
Motion carried 4-0 (Holtz absent.)
Z:\PLANCOM\SUMACTS\SumActs 2011\9.27.11 sum act.doc
Prepared by: Dennis Swink
Controller
Approved br Thomas Bachman
Finance Director
City of West Covina
Memorandum
AGENDA
Item No.
Date October 4, 2011
TO: Andrew G. Pasmant, City Manager
and City Council
FROM: Thomas Bachman, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: CITY TREASURER'S REPORT FOR AUGUST 2011
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council receive and file this report.
DISCUSSION:
Effective January 1, 2006, Section 53646 of the Government Code states that a city's chief
fiscal officer may submit quarterly reports to their legislative body. This report is to include
the type of investment, issuer, date of maturity, par and dollar amount invested on all
securities, investments, and money held by the local agency. It must also include a statement
that the portfolio is in compliance with the City's investment policy, or manner in which it is
not in compliance, and note the ability of the local agency to meet its expenditure
requirements for the next six months, or provide an explanation as to why sufficient money
may not be available.
Although it is no longer a requirement to submit quarterly reports to the local legislative
body, the Finance Department will continue to submit treasurer's reports to the West Covina
City Council each month.
The August Report shows the City's portfolio increased from $49,697,689.60 on July 31,
2011, to $49,725,497.71 on August 31, 2011. Beginning with the May 2001 report, average
maturity information has been provided for investments in the City's portfolio. The overall
average maturity of the portfolio is 819 days or approximately two years. Approximately 4
percent of the portfolio is on deposit in various bank accounts. These funds are available to
satisfy obligations as needed. The majority of the portfolio is on deposit in two investment
pools. Approximately 29 percent is held in the State of California Local Agency Investment
Fund (LAIF) and 39 percent is in the Los Angeles County Investment Pool (LACIP). These
funds are completely liquid since the City could withdraw them at any time. The portfolio
also includes two long-term, high interest investments made in the early 1980s which
constitute approximately 28 percent of the portfolio.
REVIEWED BY: Angel F. Pqeefia, Revenue Services Supervisor A/PPRO,ED BY: Dennis Swink, City Controller Marifan V. Smith n, City Treasurer SUBMITTED B Thomas Ba hmen, Assthnt City Manager/Finance Director PREPARE CITY OF WEST COVINA STATEMENT OF TREASURER'S ACCOUNTABILITY AUGUST 31, 2011 TYPES OF DEPOSITS: CHECKING ACCOUNTS WELLS FARGO GENERAL CHECKING WELLS FARGO BANK GEN AUTO & LIABILITY WELLS FARGO BANK WORKER'S COMPENSATION WELLS FARGO PAYROLL SUB-TOTAL OTHER INVESTMENTS: JULY 31 DEPOSITS WITHDRAWALS AUGUST 31 252,779.00 10,977,170.65 10,887,541.65 342,408.00 1,000.00 216,295.37 216,290.37 1,005.00 50,000.00 78,630.16 78,630.16 50,000.00 230,386.90 2,766,663.54 2,899,896.39 97,154.05 534,165.90 14,038,759.72 14,082,358.57 490,567.05 0.987% 2.824% 7.418% 20.513% 29.266% 38.993% WELLS FARGO SWEEP ' FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (FNMA) FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION (FHLMC) LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND - CITY (LAIF) LOS ANGELES COUNTY POOL (LACIP) SUB-TOTAL TOTAL 844,834.26 3,688,593.75 10,199,962.50 13,552,808.69 20,877,324.50 49,163,523.70 49,697,689.60 3,602,110.67 1,000,000.00 11,944.17 4,614,054.84 18,652,814.56 3,042,647.88 1,500,000.00 4,542,647.88 18,625,006.45 1,404,297.05 3,688,593.75 "''` 10,199,962.50 ** 14,552,808.69 19,389,268.67 49,234,930.66 99.013% 49,725,497.71 100% **These two high interest long term investments were made before State Law limited investments to a maximum five-year term. It has been verified that this investment portfolio is in conformity with the City of West Covina's investment policy which was approved by the City Council on January 18, 2005. The investment portfolio provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet estimated expenditures for the next six months. This report is accurate with respect to all information received as of September 20, 2011. EARNED INTEREST YIELD THIS PERIOD: 2.797% SIX-MONTH TREASURY BILL YIELD: 0.060%
City of West Covina Portfolio Details August 31, 2011 AVERAGE 08/31/2011 07/31/2011 INVESTMENT INVESTMENT ISSUER MATURITY PURCHASE DAYS TO CUSIP RATE YIELD COST PAR MARKET MARKET NUMBER TYPE DATE DATE MATURITY VALUE* VALUE* 1986-06-01 ** FHLMC U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCY ** FNMA U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCY 06/01/16 06/01/86 1711 313400MC4 8.250 7.728 10,199,962.50 10,199,962.50 9,555,000.00 9,555,000.00 11,975,759.25 11,975,759.25 11,774,817.60 11,774,817.60 1985-12-10 12/10/15 12/10/85 313586UB3 10.350 8.418 3,688,593.75 3,688,593.75 3,000,000.00 3,000,000.00 4,163,250.00 4,163,250.00 4,118,370.00 4,118,370.00 1540 1992-04-20 LACIP LOS ANGELES COUNTY TREASURER*** 04/20/92 557 N/A 1.130 1.130 19,389,268.67 19,389,268.67 19,389,268.67 19,389,268.67 1989-10-19 LAIF STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10/19/89 227 N/A 0.408 0.408 14,552,808.69 14,552,808.69 14,552,808.69 14,552,808.69 819 TOTALS: 47,830,633.61 46,497,077.36 50,081,086.61 49,835,264.96 "MARKET VALUES HAVE BEEN PROVIDED BY UNION BANK. ** These two high interest long term investments were made before State Law limited investments to a maximum five-year term. *** For this month's report, July 2011 LACIP Earnings Rate and July 2011 LACIP Weighted Average Days to Maturity were used due to the unavailability of August 2011 figures as of the writing of this report. Note: The Wells Fargo Sweep account was not included in the calculation of average maturity.
City of West Covina
Memorandum
AGENDA
Item No. 4
Date October 4, 2011
TO: Andrew G. Pasmant Executive Director
and the Community Development Commission
FROM: Thomas Bachman, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: CDC TREASURER'S REPORT FOR AUGUST 2011
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the Community Development Commission Board receive and file this
report
DISCUSSION:
Effective January 1, 2006, Section 53646 of the Government Code states that a city's chief
fiscal officer may submit quarterly reports to their legislative body. This report is to include
the type of investment, issuer, date of maturity, par and dollar amount invested on all
securities, investments, and money held by the local agency. It must also include a statement
that the portfolio is in compliance with the City's investment policy, or manner in which it is
not in compliance, and note the ability of the local agency to meet its expenditure
requirements for the next six months, or provide an explanation as to why sufficient money
may not be available.
Although it is no longer a requirement to submit quarterly reports to the local legislative
body, the Finance Department will continue to submit treasurer's reports to the West Covina
Community Development Commission Board each month.
The August Report shows the CDC's portfolio decreased from $12,968,144.58 on July 31,
2011, to $10,837,326.27 on August 31, 2011. To ensure funds are available on short notice
to take advantage of development opportunities, the CDC's surplus funds are in investment
pools with the State of California Local Agency Investment Pool (LAIF) and the Los
Angeles County Investment Pool (LACIP). These funds are completely liquid since the City
could withdraw them at any time. Approximately 40 percent of the portfolio is on deposit in
LAIF and 52 percent is in LACIP. The remaining 8 percent of available cash is on deposit
in various checking accounts. This report also shows cash holdings for the Community
Facilities District. These funds are used for district operating expenses and debt service and
are invested in a separate LACIP account.
Prepared by: Dennis Swink
Controller
--- 4•111111111111111.
Ree - • /Approved by: homas Bac 'T - .,- --
Finance Director
EARNED INTEREST YIELD THIS PERIOD: 0.818% SIX-MONTH TREASURY BILL YIELD: 0.060% SUBMITTED: • Thomas Ba City Manager/Finance Director REVIEWED BY: Dennis Swink, City Controller /PREPARE": Angel F -atetia, Revenue Services Supervisor < Ciirsi 10VED BY: / /e ,., n V. Sm" , City Treasurer COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION STATEMENT OF TREASURER'S ACCOUNTABILITY AUGUST 31, 2011 TYPES OF DEPOSITS: CHECKING ACCOUNTS WELLS FARGO GENERAL CHECKING PACIFIC WESTERN NAT BANK RDA PROGRAMS (SBA/FTHB/HPP) SUB-TOTAL OTHER INVESTMENTS: LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF) LOS ANGELES COUNTY POOL (LACIP) SUB-TOTAL TOTAL COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT REVENUE FUND WELLS FARGO BANK C.F.D. CHECKING LOS ANGELES COUNTY POOL (LACIP) TOTAL FOR C.F.D. REVENUE FUND JULY 31 DEPOSITS WITHDRAWALS AUGUST 31 10,847.08 $ 2,637,252.20 $ 1,791,446.24 $ 856,653.04 3,000.00 - 3,000.00 13,847.08 $ 2,637,252.20 $ 1,791,446.24 . $ 859,653.04 7,290,477.09 $ $ 2,980,000.00 $ 4,310,477.09 5,663,820.41 3,375.73 - 5,667,196.14 12,954,297.50 $ 3,375.73 $ 2,980,000.00 $ 9,977,673.23 12,968,144.58 $ 2,640,627.93 $ 4,771,446.24 $ 10,837,326.27 884.89 $ 2,479,000.00 $ 2,478,808.14 $ 1,076.75 2,637,092.93 1,548.38 2,320,000.00 318,641.31 2,637,977.82 $ 2,480,548.38 4,798,808.14 $ 319,718.06 It has been verified that this investment portfolio is in conformity with the City of West Covina's investment policy which was approved by the City Council on January 18, 2005. The investment portfolio provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet estimated expenditures for the next six months. This report is accurate with respect to all information received as of September 20, 2011.
City of West Covina
Memorandum
AGENDA
0: Andrew G. Pasmant, City Manager ITEM NO.
and City Council
DATE October 4. 2011
FROM: Chris Freeland, Deputy City Manager
SUBJECT: LETTER REQUESTING GOVERNOR JERRY BROWN TO FULLY FUND
THE PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT PROGRAM
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council send a letter to Governor Jerry Brown requesting the State
of California fully fund the Public Safety Realignment Program.
DISCUSSION:
In May 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that there was "serious constitutional violations" that
California prisons were not providing the basic medical and mental health care for prisoners
because of overcrowding. As a result, the State of California passed Assembly Bill (AB) 109 and
AB 117, which was intended to reduce the number of inmates in the State's 33 prisons and reduce
the fmancial burden to manage these inmates. The U.S. Supreme Court ordered the State of
California to reduce the prison population by May 24, 2013. The management of these inmates
would then be transferred to the counties to house certain inmates in county jails, rather than State
prisons, and to manage the parole of these inmates to the counties as well. The realignment plan
begins on October 1, 2011.
When Governor Jerry Brown signed the legislation, he promised that the realignment of these
responsibilities would include proper funding to offset the costs to the counties. Los Angeles
County has told cities that they were not given the time to properly plan for this transition, nor are
they being provided the proper funding to incarcerate, maintain medical and mental health needs
of inmates, or probation officers to monitor parolees under the realignment plan. In addition, Los
Angeles County does not have sufficient space to house the thousands of additional inmates.
Governor Brown maintains there is proper funding and is supporting a ballot measure in 2012 to
provide additional funding to meet any funding gaps.
Locally, West Covina and other cities have enjoyed record low crime rates. Communities across
California are concerned that the realignment of inmates from the State prisons to the county jails
will only transfer the overcrowding problem to local jurisdictions. Los Angeles County District
Attorney Steve Cooley is opposed to the realignment because "criminals will escape adequate
punishment," as serious offenders that should be in State prison would qualify to be housed in
county jail. In addition, public safety professionals are concerned that the County of Los Angeles
will need to release less violent criminals back into our communities to make room for the State
inmates. This will increase crime rates in communities and may result in a "catch and release"
program where cases are not prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law because there is insufficient
space in the State prisons or county jails for new inmates.
At the League of California Cities Annual Conference, the General Assembly approved a
resolution calling upon the Governor to fully fund the Public Safety Realignment Program.
Attached is a fact sheet on the 2011 Public Safety Realignment Program provided by the
California State Association of Counties.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The actual fiscal impacts on public safety under the realignment are unknown at this time.
Prepared by:
Chris Freeland
Deputy City Manager
Attachment: 2011 Public Safety Realignment Program Fact Sheet
2011 Public Safety Realignment: CSAC/CSSA/CPOC Update (7-22-2011)
Page 2
Effective Date
AB 117 delayed the operative date of the public safety realignment elements contained in
AB 109 to October 1, 2011. The provisions of the public safety realignment are prospective
and, therefore, as people are sentenced on or after October 1 or released to supervision on or
after October 1, they will be the responsibility of the counties — if they meet the criteria for
the realigned population. No one in prison on October 1 will transfer to county jails, and no
one currently on parole will transfer to local jurisdiction.
Realigned Populations
AB 109/AB 117 does not result in the early release of any currently sentenced felons. It
changes the jurisdiction of specified populations from state to local control to complete their
sentences, as outlined below.
I. Sentenced Locally (Non/non/non felons)
• Revises the definition of felony to include specified lower-level (i.e.,
non/non/non) crimes that would be punishable in jail or another local sentencing
option.
• Does not change length of sentences.
• Does not limit the felonies eligible for sentences of three years or less, but
instead determines eligibility by qualifying crimes, as specified. Therefore, some
sentences now served locally can exceed three years. However the time served
may be done in a variety of settings: jail, probation, alternative custody or a
combination of these settings.
• Felonies ineligible for state prison (non/non/non): Non-violent, non-serious, and
non-sex offenders as defined in the Penal Code. There are 60+ felonies that
would otherwise fall into the non/non/non category that are excluded and
therefore continue to be eligible for state prison. (See attached list of additional
felonies that are expressly excluded from the non/non/non category.)
• Felonies eligible for state prison: Any person being convicted of a serious or
violent felony as described in Penal Code (PC) Sections 1192.7 (c) or 667.5 (c), the
person would be required to register as a sex offender pursuant to PC 290, or
they had a previous serious, violent or sex offense in their history that requires
sex offender registration.
• Options at sentencing of a non/non/non felony: Jail instead of prison for the
entire sentence; felony probation; alternative custody; split sentence (imposed
sentence of combined period of jail custody with the remainder on mandatory
probation)
Imposed sentences (everything but felony probation) prison prior attaches to
the sentence
Split sentences cannot exceed the original sentence when combining custody
and supervision time
• Options in custody: Sheriffs continue to have all the existing tools at their disposal
to manage this population as they do with their current population. In addition,
counties may use new alternative custody options for electronic monitoring and
home detention (PC 1203.018), contract with other nearby counties, or contract
with public community correctional facilities. Finally, there is authorization for
counties to contract back with the state for housing inmates. The state has not
yet set a rate or provided specifics on who or how many they could
2011 Public Safety Realignment: CSAC/CSSA/CPOC Update (7-22-2011)
Page 3
accommodate, especially in light of the prison overcrowding case. However, the
Administration has indicated there may be different rates set depending on the
type of inmate. We also expect to have a proposal from the state as to how to
address the need to incentivize continued placement of inmates into fire camps.
Non/non/nons sentenced locally do not have post incarceration supervision time.
Specifically, there is no parole tail for these offenders.
Credits for all offenders serving time in jail will prospectively apply day-for-day
starting October 1, 2011, similar to what prison inmates currently receive.
II. Post Release Community Supervision
Who will be under local supervision: Starting October 1, 2011 any offender who
was convicted of a non-serious, non-violent felony and is not deemed a high risk
sex offender will be placed on local supervision.
Who remains on State Parole: Anyone on parole before October 1, 2011 remains
under state jurisdiction until they are discharged. In addition, any individual who
is serving a term for a current serious or violent offense, a third striker, high risk
sex offender, or a mentally disordered offender (MDO) will remain in state
parole's jurisdiction.
Supervision and case plans are not specified in statute. There are general
conditions in statute as a minimum that are given to the PRCS at release. The
supervising entity may add conditions pursuant to the risk and needs of the
offender.
Statute requires CDCR to notify the county within at least 30 days of an
impending release onto PRCS. However, we understand that it is CDCR's intent to
provide the release packet much further in advance on most offenders.
Ill. Parole Revocations/PRCS Violations
All parole revocations for state parolees (except those with a life term) will be
served in county jail but capped at 180 days and receive day-for-day credit.
After parolees have completed their revocation time, they will return to state
jurisdiction to complete any remaining parole time.
PRCS violations will also be served in county jail and subject to the same 180 day
cap and receive day-for-day credit.
Parole revocation hearings (for state parolees only) will continue to be done by
Board of Parole Hearings (BPH) until July 1, 2013 when that responsibility will be
moved to the local courts.
PRCS final violation hearing will be conducted by courts beginning October 1,
2011. Courts may appoint hearing officers for this workload. The supervising
entity must establish a review process for assessing and refining conditions
consistent with the statutory authority to impose sanctions up to and including
flash incarceration (up to 10 days).
Contracting back with CDCR is not an option for either state parolees or PRCS
violators who are revoked.
2011 Public Safety Realignment: CSAC/CSSA/CPOC Update (7-22-2011)
Page 4
CCP and the Planning Process
• Purpose: Expands the current role of the Community Corrections Partnership (CCP), which
was previously established in PC 1230 as an advisory committee on the implementation
of SB 678, to be a policy planning body for the public safety realignment.
• Requires: The CCP is to develop and recommend to the board of supervisors an
implementation plan for 2011 public safety realignment.
• Establishes an Executive Committee: The executive committee is charged with voting on
the plan that will be put before the Board of Supervisors and is composed of members
from the larger committee. The statute indicates the entire CCP develops the
implementation plan, but gives the following members a vote to approve a plan to be
presented to the Board: Chief Probation Officer (Chair); Sheriff; Presiding Judge (or
designee); District Attorney; Public Defender; Police Chief; and one other department
head selected by the board of supervisors from among DSS, Mental Health, or Alcohol
and Drug.
• What it doesn't say: There is no requirement on what the plan must contain or when it
must be presented to the board. There is also no mandate on how often the group
should meet or how the process should look. Given the October 1, 2011 effective date,
some counties may want to have a complete plan in place by then, but it is not required.
However, considering the timeframe, some counties may want to address their plan in
phases, with both short- and long-term recommendations. The CCP planning process is
intended as a tool to assist counties in the monumental task of preparing for the impact
to the county system, but it preserves the true spirit of realignment, which is local
flexibility.
• How is the plan approved? The implementation plan voted on by the CCP Executive
Committee is deemed accepted by the county Board of Supervisors unless the Board
rejects the plan by a four-fifths vote. In that case, the plan goes back to the CCP.
• How is the plan funded? Allocation/budgetary authority remains with the Board of
Supervisors. Further details regarding AB 109 funds and allocations are discussed below.
• Application of the Brown Act: County counsel indicate that the Community Corrections
Partnership (Penal Code Section 1230(b)(2)) and its Executive Committee (Penal Code
Section 1230.1) are subject to the Brown Act. Government Code Section 54952 (a) sets
forth the definition of a legislative body within the Brown Act. That definition includes
"any other local body created by state or federal statute." Since the CCP and its Executive
Committee are established by statute, each is considered a legislative body under the
Brown Act, and the requirements of the Act are therefore applicable. We advise counties
to seek guidance of counsel as the meetings of the CCP and its Executive Committee are
convened.
Allocations and Funding
The attached Excel spreadsheet details 2011-12 county-by-county allocations for four distinct
aspects of 2011 public safety realignment:
1. AB 109 adult population shifts — COLUMN 1 in the attached spreadsheet shows the
per-county allocation associated with the programmatic aspects of AB 109. The
estimated funding level for these activities statewide in 2011-12 is $354.3 million,
adjusted to reflect nine months of operation given the October 1, 2011
implementation date specified in AB 117. These funds are intended to cover all
aspects of the adult population shifts: the transfer of the low-level offender
2011 Public Safety Realignment: CSAC/CSSA/CPOC Update (7-22-2011)
Page 5
population, counties' new supervision responsibilities for state prison inmates
released to post-release community supervision (PRCS), and sanctions — to include
incarceration —for those on PRCS who are revoked. (Note that programmatic
allocations for AB 109 implementation do not rely on a "daily jail rate" model, but
instead are intended to fund the range of programmatic and detention options that
best meet local needs, as specified in each county's AB 109 implementation plan.)
2. District attorney/public defender revocation costs — COLUMN 2 in the attached
spreadsheet details the per-county allocation associated with the revocation hearings
for those on PRCS in 2011-12.2 These funds, allocated on the same formula as the AB
109 programmatic costs, are to be divided equally between the local district attorney
and public defender offices to cover costs associated with revocation hearings
(Government Code 30025(f)(5)).
3. One-time allocation for AB 109 start -up costs —COLUMN 3 in the attached
spreadsheet details the per-county allocation associated with a one-time state
General Fund appropriation of $25 million. These funds are intended to help cover
counties' costs associated with hiring, retention, training, data improvements,
contracting costs, and capacity planning pursuant to each county's AB 109
implementation plan. Funds are allocated on the same formula as the AB 109
programmatic costs.
4. One-time grant for CCP planning — COLUMN 4 in the attached spreadsheet details
each county's one-time grant, awarded based on population "bands," for purposes of
assisting each county's CCP in developing its AB 109 implementation plan 3. Grants will
be administered through the Corrections Standards Authority and will be awarded in
full within 30 days of the enactment of the 2011-12 state budget. CCP planning grants
are distributed as follows:
County population Grant level
Up to 200,000 $100,000
200,001 to 749,999 $150,000
Over 750,000 $200,000
Requirement to estabHsh County Local Revenue Fund 2011 (and other accounts)
AB 118, the budget trailer bill that creates the funding framework for all aspects of 2011
Realignment, requires the county or city and county treasurer to create the County Local
Revenue Fund 2011. (See Government Code Section 30025(f)(1)). Within the County Local
Revenue Fund 2011, each county must also establish a:
• Local Community Corrections Account
• Trial Court Security Account
• District Attorney and Public Defender Account
• Juvenile Justice Account
• Health and Human Services Account,
• Supplemental Law Enforcement Account
2 Recall that pursuant to changes enacted in AB 117, the revocation process for state parolees will
remain with the Board of Parole Hearings through June 30, 2013. On and after July 1, 2013, the entire
revocation process — including for state parolees — will become a local responsibility.
3 Furthermore, each county must provide the Corrections Standards Authority with a copy of its
approved AB 109 implementation plan within 60 days of its approval by the county board of
supervisors.
2011 Public Safety Realignment: CSAC/CSSA/CPOC Update (7-22-2011)
Page 6
It is imperative that the County Local Revenue Fund 2011 and specified accounts are created
as quickly as possible so that counties are able to receive 2011-12 allocations.
Conclusion
We hope this broad overview will assist you in your collaborative planning efforts and budget
discussions locally. The three associations intend to also work collaboratively to provide the
most up-to-date and useful information and will offer other joint communications as the need
presents itself. If you have any questions on these items, feel free to contact us.
California State Association of Elizabeth Howard Espinosa
Counties (CSAC) eespinosa@counties.org; 916/650-8131
Rosemary McCool
rmccool@counties.org; 916/650-8116
California State Sheriffs' Nick Warner
Association (CSSA) nick@warnerandpank.com; 916/443-7318
Curtis Hill
7318
1 Chief Probation Officers of 1 Karen Pank
California (CPOC) Karen@wal
repared by: Miguel Hernandez
Civil Engineering Associate
Reviewed/Approved by:
City of West Covina
Memorandum
AGENDA TO: Andrew G. Pasmant, City Manager
and City Council ITEM NO. 6
DATE October 4 2011
FROM: Shannon A. Yauchzee, Director/City Engineer
Public Works Department
SUBJECT: LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 177
1724 CIGAR TERRACE AND 1738 CIGAR TERRACE
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the following resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING LOT
LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 177 AT 1724 CIGAR TERRACE AND 1738
GIGAR TERRACE AND DIRECTING THE RECORDATION
THEREOF (PAUL AND ANN GIGAR)
DISCUSSION:
The owners have requested the adjustment of the lot line between their two properties located at
1724 Gigar Terrace and 1738 Cigar Terrace. The lots were initially designed to accommodate a
certain style and size of home that would fit onto each lot. Since then, the style and size of the
home on 1724 Cigar Terrace has changed and requires a larger lot to comply with the required
setbacks. The lot line adjustment would reconfigure the existing lots as indicated in the
following table.
Address Existing Size Proposed Size Change
1738 Gigar Terrace 13,982 S.F. 17,642 S.F. 3,660 S.F.
1724 Gigar Terrace 35,546 S.F. 31,886 S.F. 3,660 S.F.
Lot Line Adjustment No. 177 has met all conditions required for City Council approval per
Chapter 20, Article VII of the West Covina Municipal Code and Division 2, Chapter 2, of the
Government Code, cited as the Subdivision Map Act.
ALTERNATIVES:
Since this request complies with all legal requirements, there is no reason to not approve Lot
Line Adjustment No. 177.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
Reviewed/Approved S anon A.Yauchzee
Director/City Engineer
Attachments: Attachment No. I — Location Map
Attachment No. 2 — Legal Description and Nat
Attachment No. 3 — Resolution
ZAAGENDA - 201 IlLat Line Adj 177.doc
PROPOSED LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 177
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
EXHIBIT A
PARCEL A.
PORTION OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 46202, IN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, COUNTY OF
LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FILED IN BOOK 1137 PAGES 69 TO 71
INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, WHICH IS ALSO A PORTION OF PARCEL A OF LOT LINE
ADJUSTMENT NO. 160 IN SAID CITY, COUNTY AND STATE, RECORDED AS
INSTRUMENT NO. 04-594249 ON MARCH 12, 2004 IN OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID
COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF GIGAR
TERRACE (FORMERLY G1GAR ROAD) CUL-DE-SAC, HAVING A RADIUS OF 45.00 FEET,
SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE EASTERLY TERMINUS OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID
LOT 3; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 12 DEGREES 43 MINUTES 56 SECONDS AND A DISTANCE OF 10.00 FEET TO
THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SAID POINT HAVING A RADIAL BEARING OF NORTH
70 DEGREES 29 MINUTES 5 SECONDS WEST FROM THE CENTERPOINT OF SAID CUL-
DE-SAC; THENCE NORTH 64 DEGREES 4 MINUTES 53 SECONDS WEST 107.02 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 70 DEGREES 49 MINUTES 34 SECONDS WEST 102.81 FEET TO THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT; THENCE FOLLOWING THE WESTERLY,
NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY LINES OF SAID LOT, ALONG THE FOLLOWING COURSES:
NORTH 33 DEGREES 38 MINUTES 34 SECONDS WEST 162.76 FEET, NORTH 84
DEGREES 52 MINUTES 23 SECONDS EAST 150.00 FEET, SOUTH 0 DEGREE 20 MINUTES
35 SECONDS EAST 28.00 FEET, NORTH 89 DEGREES 39 MINUTES 25 SECONDS EAST
151.72 FEET, AND SOUTH 9 DEGREES 20 MINUTES 51 SECONDS EAST 106.87 FEET TO
THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG
SAID LINE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 61 DEGREES 8 MINUTES 14 SECONDS
AND A DISTANCE OF 48.02 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING AN AREA OF 0.732 ACRE, MORE OR LESS.
APN: 8740-012-044
PAGE 1 OF 2
PARCEL B:
LOT 4 AND PORTION OF LOT 3, BOTH OF TRACT NO. 46202 IN THE CITY OF WEST
COVINA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FILED IN BOOK 1137
PAGES 69 TO 71 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, IN THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY,
WHICH IS ALSO A PORTION OF PARCEL A OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 160 IN SAID
CITY, COUNTY AND STATE, RECORDED AS INSTRUMENT NO, 04-594249 ON MARCH 12,
2004 IN OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 4, SAID POINT BEING ON THE
WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF GIGAR TERRACE (FORMERLY GIGAR ROAD) CUL-
DE-SAC, HAVING A RADIUS OF 45.00 FEET; THENCE FOLLOWING THE SOUTHERLY AND
WESTERLY LINES OF SAID LOT 4, ALONG THE FOLLOWING COURSES: SOUTH 57
DEGREES 50 MINUTES 26 SECONDS WEST 135.81 FEET, AND NORTH 33 DEGREES 38
MINUTES 34 SECONDS WEST 149.29 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT;
THENCE NORTH 70 DEGREES 49 MINUTES 34 SECONDS EAST 102.81 FEET; THENCE
SOUTH 64 DEGREES 4 MINUTES 53 SECONDS EAST 107,02 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID
RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, SAID POINT HAVING A RADIAL BEARING OF NORTH 70 DEGREES
29 MINUTES 5 SECONDS WEST FROM THE CENTERPOINT OF SAID CUL-DE-SAC;
THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 51 DEGREES 40 MINUTES 29 SECONDS AND A DISTANCE OF 50.48 FEET TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING AN AREA OF 0.405 ACRE, MORE OR LESS
S SHOWN IN EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE
PART HEREOF
PN: 8740-012-045
7.---,?,,,.n eFESSIGN
I syt --n - 41
No. C-31604
PAGE 2 OF
0 A =5140'29 -
L=50.48'
R=45.00'
0 A=61 -08'14"
L=48.02'
R=45.00'
® A=12.43'56-
L=10.00'
R=45.00'
MAP
EXHIBIT "B"
7,7„,,ovEssioN,4„,„
DE
43- `C'' 0 2 '
* No. C-31604
\ :Ile OF CAOC:39-4
LOT
• '51;5 k:5" 7R1 C
LO T 4
OLD LOT LINE c5 ki
PER LLA NO. 160 N
INST. NO.
n4-n5q424q O.R.
.ff• • iff• •••n1"1 fl
b
A=0.41 AC
o z
28.50'
N 02035-W
UJ 2,
..Crt 0.
LIJ 0)
I— 3 r "r) cr) ›- co < -62 z
CD Lj
es
NO. 46202
(28.00')
(S 0'20'35"E)
111 C.1
LOT LINE 1:1
co
PARCEL
A=0.73 AC
(VACANT)
RADIAL
GRAPHIC SCALE
( IN FEET )
1 inch =50 ft.
ATTACHMENT NO.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST
COVINA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO.
177 AT 1724 GIGAR TERRACE AND 1738 GIGAR TERRACE AND
DIRECTING THE RECORDATION THEREOF (PAUL AND ANN
GIGAR)
WHEREAS, Paul and Ann Gigar, the owners of the two adjacent parcels, submitted legal
descriptions to this meeting and by reference thereto made part hereof, for a lot line adjustment
between the two parcels, and submitted a written request for a lot line adjustment; and
WHEREAS, said submitted lot line adjustment has been reviewed by the City Engineer
and the Planning Department; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer and Planning Department has determined that said lot line
adjustment is in conformance with the Subdivision Map Act and with the General and Specific
Plans of the City of West Covina.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of West Covina does resolve as
follows:
SECTION 1. That the lot line adjustment submitted to this meeting be and the same is
hereby approved.
SECTION 2. That the proper officers of the City of West Covina be and hereby
authorized and instructed to approve said lot line adjustment, per Section 66412(d) of the
Subdivision Map Act, on behalf of the City.
SECTION 3. That the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution, and shall
cause the lot line adjustment to be filed for record in the Office of the County Recorder of the
County of Los Angeles.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of October 2011
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the City Council
of the City of West Covina, California, at their regular meeting thereof held on the 4' day of
October 2011, by the following vote of the City Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ity Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM
ity Attorney
ZARESOLUTION - 2011 \ LLA No 1774oc
TO:
FROM:
Andrew G. Pasmant, City Manager
and City Council
Shannon A. Yauchzee, Director/City Engineer
Public Works Department
Cio, of West Covina
Memorandum
AGENDA
ITEM NO. 7
DATE October 4, 2011
SUBJECT: MONUMENT SIGNS ON INTERSTATE-10 FREEWAY
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve the conceptual drawing and location of freeway
monument signs welcoming motorists to West Covina on the Interstate-10 Freeway corridor and
direct staff to pursue funding options.
DISCUSSION:
As part of the Cahrans High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane project, there is an opportunity to
have monument signs (Attachment No. 1) constructed as an integral part of the sound walls that
will be installed by the CaLimns contractor. One sign will be visible on the eastbound lanes and
another sign on the westbound lanes as motorists enter the City limits. Including the monument
signs in the Ca'trans construction bid documents will be a cost saving versus having the signs
built as a separate component. The City will reimburse Caltrans for the incremental cost
difference from the concrete masonry unit block sound wall and the cost to build the monument
signs. The signs would be similar to the concrete mural in the City of Duarte or at the Los
Angeles/San Bernardino County line; however, there is an opportunity to use colored stained
concrete in West Covina.
Currently, Caltrans plans to have a public meeting and wrap up the Environmental
Documentation in the Fall of 2011. Design would then be finalized and the project will be out to
bid in 2012. Although Caltrans has not provided the City with a written schedule for the HOV
project, from discussions with their design team it's understood that construction would begin in
early 2013 and should take about two to three years to complete. It is still unclear if Segment 2
(Puente Avenue to Citrus Avenue) and Segment 3 (Citrus Avenue to Pomona) would be
completed at the same time or in sequence.
ALTERNATIVES:
The City Council may choose not to pursue putting monument signs on Interstate-10 Freeway.
Also, the City Council may want to provide direction on alternative designs and/or locations.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost to the City could range from $100,000 to $200,000 for both signs; however, it cannot be
confirmed until designs are completed and the project is put out to bid. Staff is investigating if
any non-general or grant funds are available for this project. To reduce the cost of the proposed
monument sign further, the City Council could reduce the size of the monument or remove the
detailed scroll work at the end of the monuments. Another option is to fund the signs with
proceeds from the Caltrans acquisition of Community Development Commission's property.
ta_
Prepared by: Dave ichols
Public Works Project Supervisor
Reviewed/Approved y:FF:hannon A. Yauchzee
Director/City Engineer
Attachments: Attachment No. 1 — Conceptual Monument Drawing
Attachment No. 2 — Location Maps
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
Z:\AGENDA - 2011 \Monument Signs.doc
Monument Sign Eastboun tJ Proposed Loca ti on Cewrig rE(C).2dCi7.. I wlep P ukticr_s. n=e wed. COG'S
Copyright @-2011, Digital Map Products, Customer ata, County A.ppraisr, TeleAtlas in = 204' Monument Sign Westbound Proposed Locations CitvGIS apyig Xi 07, Dt:cd I I4a0 Vsioxis 13rir-1 ume reTCE.
City of West Covina
TO: Andrew G. Pasmant, City Manager Memorandum and City Council
AGENDA FROM: Shannon A. Yauchzee, Director/City Engineer
ITEM NO. Public Works Department
DATE October 4, 2011
SUBJECT: OPPOSING SAN JOSE CREEK TRUCK ROUTE
RECOMMENDATION:
is recommended that the City Council adopt the following resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, OPPOSING
THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
(SCAG) PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT DEDICATED TRUCK ONLY LANES
ALONG THE SAN JOSE CREEK FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL AND
STATE ROUTE 60 FREEWAY CORRIDOR
DISCUSSION:
The Southern California Council of Governments (SCAG) is again revisiting the concept of
dedicated truck lanes along the State Route 60 (SR-60) Freeway corridor. Previous conceptual
plans for similar projects were abandoned by SCAG in 2001 and 2008, mainly due to steadfast
opposition and leadership in developing a coalition of cities and County supervisors that were also
not in favor of such a plan.
This year, as part of a recent East/West Freight Corridor White Paper, SCAG is again pushing the
concept of truck lanes along SR-60, this time using the San Jose Creek Flood Control Channel as a
preferred corridor. The Channel travels closely parallel to SR-60 and Diamond Bar, passing
through the cities of Industry, Walnut, Pomona, and adjacent to the West Covina border. The
truck route would be over 40 feet in the air and contribute additional traffic, pollution and noise to
the surrounding areas. As evidenced by this most recent proposal, SCAG continues to advocate for
dedicated truck lanes only on the San Jose Creek Flood Control Channel/SR-60 Freeway
alternative, while ignoring other major east/west freight corridors such as State Route 91,
Interstate-10, and Interstate-210. SCAG should also consider the negative long-term
environmental and community impacts the current proposal may have on the affected cities
surrounding the project area. The City of Diamond Bar and the cities of Walnut and South El Monte
have all adopted resolutions in opposition to this SCAG proposal
The cities have long been a supporter of effective goods movement strategies and congestion relief
solutions that result in the least overall impact to the community. However, SCAG's most recent
attempt to construct tucks-only lanes on the San Jose Creek Flood Control Channel has not been
studied thoroughly enough, as the engineering and environmental review completed thus far is
insufficient to warrant its inclusion in any long-term transportation planning documents, including
the upcoming 2012 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).
ALTERNATIVES:
The City Council may choose not to adopt the resolution or choose to support the project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Approved via Email
Prepared by: Shannon J. Yauchzee Reviewed/Approved by: City Attorney
Director/City Engineer
Attachment No. 1 Resolution
ATTACHMENT NO.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF THE
CITY OF WEST COVINA OPPOSING THE SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS PROPOSAL TO
CONSTRUCT DEDICATED TRUCK ONLY LANES ALONG THE
SAN JOSE CREEK CORRIDOR
WHEREAS, the Southern California regional freeway system represents one of the
highest volume goods movement corridors in the United States and is of major importance to the
distribution of consumer goods and in facilitating international trade; and
WHEREAS, an important part of the movement of goods within the region is
accomplished through a complex system of transportation infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of the City of West Covina is generally
supportive of regional transportation alternatives as long as they do not impact or interfere with
the quality of life within the City of West Covina; and
WHEREAS, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) has twice
proposed the concept of dedicated truck-only lanes on the State Route-60 (SR-60) Freeway
corridor only to withdraw the plans in 2001 and 2008 after facing strong opposition from the
City of Diamond Bar and a coalition of other impacted communities and elected officials; and
WHEREAS, SCAG is again proposing the concept of elevated dedicated truck only
lanes that impact communities along the SR-60 freeway corridor, this time along San Jose Creek
between Interstate 605 and the City of Diamond Bar; and
WHEREAS, SCAG has repeatedly refused to consider other east/west transportation
corridors, including State Route-91, Interstate-10, and Interstate-210 for alternative locations for
dedicated truck lanes, focusing all traffic congestion and quality of life impacts on the
communities along the SR-60 corridor; and
WHEREAS, there is currently insufficient engineering and environmental review of the
proposed San Jose Creek alternative to warrant the inclusion of this option in any long-term
transportation planning document, including the 2012 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of West Covina, California does
hereby resolve:
SECTION 1. That the City of West Covina opposes any SCAG proposal for dedicated
truck lanes along San Jose Creek or the SR-60 Freeway corridor.
SECTION 2. That the City of West Covina supports alternative regional goods
movement plans that equitably distribute truck traffic between all east/west transportation
corridors between Interstate-710 and Interstate-15.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall attest and certify to the passage and adoption of this
Resolution and it shall become effective immediately upon its approval, with a certified copy of
this Resolution being forwarded to the Southern California Association of Governments, Los
Angeles County Board of Supervisors, and City of Diamond Bar.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council this 18 th day
of October 201
Mayor Steve Herfert
ATTEST:
City Clerk Laurie Carrico
I LAURIE CARRICO do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted
by the City Council of the City of West Covina, California, at their regular meeting thereof held
on the 18th day of October 2011, by the following vote of the City Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
City Clerk Laurie Carrico
APPROVED AS TO FORM
City Attorney Arnold M. Alvarez-Glasman
City of West Covina
Memorandum
AGENDA
TO: Andrew G. Pasmant, City Manager ITEM NO.
and City Council
DATE October 4, 2011
FROM: Chris Freeland, Deputy City Manager
SUBJECT: AB 1234 CONFERENCE AND MEETING REPORT — INTERNATIONAL
COUNCIL OF SHOPPING CENTERS (ICSC) MEETING AND
CONFERENCE REPORT
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council receive and file the report.
DISCUSSION:
The following is a summary of the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC) Conference
held September 7, 2011, through September 8, 2011, in San Diego, California. In attendance at the
conference were Mayor Pro Tem Michael Touhey and Councilmember Karin Armbrust.
Founded in 1957, the International Council of Shopping Centers is the global trade association of
the shopping center industry. At the ICSC Western Division Conference, the sessions included
current trends in shopping center developments, retail investment, and the retail real estate market.
The session topics included: rapid growth and development of the markets; creative strategies for
new deals and lease modifications in the tough economic times; a review of the top 20 retailers that
are expanding and what they are looking for; and how to make vacant spaces more desirable to
potential clients.
An important aspect of the Western Division Conference is the Deal Making convention, which
provides a forum for local developers, shopping center owners, retailers, public sector professionals,
brokers, and financial institutions to discuss and negotiate deals specifically to the western region.
Council Members and City staff were able to market properties directly to developers that may not
be as familiar with West Covina and to solicit follow up meetings with prospective tenants or
developers. Subsequent meetings with businesses have provided additional interest by those
businesses in West Covina.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
Prepared by:
Chris Freelind
Deputy City Manager
GO, of West Covina
Memorandum
TO: Andrew G. Pasmant, City Manager AGENDA and City Council
FROM: Jeff Anderson, Acting Planning Director ITEM NO.: 10
Planning Department DATE: October 4, 2011
SUBJECT: 2011 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (CMP)
CONFORMANCE SELF-CERTIFICATION AND
LOCAL DEVELOPMENT REPORT (LDR)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following resolution:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST
COVINA, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THE CITY TO BE IN
CONFORMANCE WITH THE CONGESTION MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM (CMP) AND ADOPTING THE CMP LOCAL
DEVELOPMENT REPORT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65089
DISCUSSION:
The proposed action is the adoption of a resolution certifying the 2010 Congestion Management
Program (CMP). Compliance with and self-certification of the CMP allows for the City of West
Covina to maintain its eligibility to receive its share of State Gas Tax revenues for capital
improvement projects.
The CMP for Los Angeles County was established to meet the requirements of Section 65089 of
the California Government Code. It was intended to address regional congestion by linking
transportation, land use and air quality decisions. State legislation requires the Los Angeles
County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) to annually monitor and determine that
local jurisdictions are in conformance with all applicable requirements of the CMP. For several
years MTA has required cities to report development activity (debits) and transportation
improvements (credits) to MTA. Jurisdictions were required to keep a positive balance (credits
greater than debits) in order to continue receiving their State gas tax monies and maintain
eligibility for State and federal transportation monies. The City of West Covina receives
approximately $1,700,000 annually in gas tax revenues.
In August 2003, the MTA adopted the 2003 Short Range Transportation Plan (SRTP). As part of
the plan, MTA staff was authorized to conduct a Nexus Study to determine the feasibility of
implementing a Congestion Mitigation Fee to meet CMP Deficiency Plan requirements. Until
this study is complete, MTA has suspended the credit/debit program and the necessity to mitigate
development impacts or generate credits. MTA will be making a presentation to the City
Council regarding the Congestion Mitigation Fee concept at an upcoming City Council meeting.
In order to stay in compliance, cities must continue to report their development activity through
the Local Development Report (LDR). The information in the LDR is an inventory of the
construction and demolition that has occurred in the reporting period. While MTA is considering
replacing the "debit-credit" point system with a different system, the City is required to comply
with the LDR reporting requirement in order to receive gas tax revenues and in order to submit
projects for MTA's annual call for projects.
Currently, the City of West Covina has 11,314 credits. These credits will remain, and in effect
be placed on "hold" during the time that MTA conducts the Nexus Study. The conclusion of the
study will provide a recommendation to the MTA Board on future changes to the CMP process.
Following a review period and hearings, the MTA Board will take action. That decision will
include the manner of addressing congestion and transportation issues, which may or may not
include credits and debits (as are used in the current system).
ZAAGENDA STAFF REPORTS\Agenda Reports 2011\10.04.11\ltem 10.doc
2011 Congestion Management Program (CMP)
Conformance Self-Certification and
Local Development Report (LDR)
October 4, 2011 - Page 2
The LDR reports the amount of development activity between June 1, 2010, and May 31, 2011.
Building permits have been issued for 2 new single-family residences and a 65-unit senior
apartment housing development (West Covina Senior Villas II). New commercial construction
activity includes H&M, Nordtrom Rack and Golds Gym at Westfield Shopping Center and two
retail pad buildings at McIntyre Square (formerly Country Club Center). During the reporting
period commercial pad building was demolished at McIntyre Square.
In conclusion, the City of West Covina will meet all of the major CMP responsibilities for the 2011
reporting period by holding the required public hearing and by adopting the attached resolution that
finds the City to be in conformance with the CMP and adopts the LDR.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Should the City not adopt a resolution that finds the City in conformance with the CMP and Local
Development Report, the City could potentially lose approximately $1.7 million of gas tax revenue
this year.
Prepared by: Ron Garcia Reviewed/Approved by: Jeff Anderson, AICP
Planning Associate Acting Planning Director
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Resolution
Attachment 2 -2011 CMP Local Development Report
ZAAGENDA STAFF REPORTSAgenda Reports 2011\10.04.11\ltem 10.doc
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF WEST COVINA,
CALIFORNIA, FINDING THE CITY TO BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH
THE CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (CMP) AND
ADOPTING THE CMP LOCAL DEVELOPMENT REPORT, IN
ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
65089
WHEREAS, CMP statute requires the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation
Authority ("MTA"), acting as the Congestion Management Agency for Los Angeles County, to
annually determine that the County and cities within the County are conforming to all CMP
requirements; and
WHEREAS, MTA requires submittal of the CMP Local Development Report by September
of each year; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a noticed public hearing on the 4th day of October, 201
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the City has taken all of the following actions, and that the City is in
conformance with all applicable requirements of the 2004 CMP adopted by the LACMTA Board
on July 22, 2004.
By June 15, of odd-numbered years, the City will conduct annual traffic counts and
calculated levels of service for selected arterial intersections, consistent with the requirements
identified in the CMP Highway and Roadway System chapter.
The City has locally adopted and continues to implement a transportation demand
management ordinance, consistent with the minimum requirements identified in the CMP
Transportation Demand Management chapter.
The City has locally adopted and continues to implement a land use analysis program,
consistent with the minimum requirements identified in the CMP Land Use Analysis Program
chapter.
The City has adopted a Local Development Report, attached hereto and made a part hereof,
consistent with the requirements identified in the 2004 CMP. This report balances traffic
congestion impacts due to growth within the City with transportation improvements, and
demonstrates that the City is meeting its responsibilities under the Countywide Deficiency Plan
consistent with the LACMTA Board adopted 2003 Short Range Transportation Plan.
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\LocahMicrosofhWindows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WMS1F7PP\No
10 attach 1 (5).doc
CMP Resolution
October 4, 2011
Page 2
SECTION 2. That the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall
forward a copy of this Resolution to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation
Authority.
ADOPTED this 4th day of October, 2011.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES)
CITY OF WEST COVINA)
I, Laurie Carrico, City Clerk of the City of West Covina, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of West Covina, California, at
a regular meeting held on the 4th day of October, 2011, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
AB STALN :
DATE: October 4, 2011
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppDataLocal\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PP\No
10 attach 1 (5).doc
Dwelling Units
2.00
0.00
0.00
1,000 Net Sq.Ft.2
332.62
133.80
0.00
1,000 Net Sq.Ft.2
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Daily Trips
0.00
0.00
CITY OF WEST COVINA
Date Prepared: #444/4ttl########/#
2011 CMP Local Development Report
Reporting Period: JUNE 1, 2010 - MAY 31, 2011
Contact: JEFF ANDERSON
Phone Number: (626) 939-8422
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
FOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY :
2011 DEFICIENCY PLAN SUMMARY
* IMPORTANT: All "#value!" cells on this page are automatically calculated.
Please do not enter data in these cells.
DEVELOPMENT TOTALS
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY
Single Family Residential
Multi-Family Residential
Group Quarters
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY
Commercial (less than 300,000 sq.ft.)
Commercial (300,000 sq.ft. or more)
Freestariding Eating & Drinking
NON-RETAIL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY
Lodging -
Industrial
Office (less than 50,000 sq.ft.)
Office (50,000-299,999 sq.ft.)
Office (300,000 sq.ft. or more)
Medical
Government
Institutional/Educational
University (# of students)
OTHER DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY
ENTER IF APPLICABLE
ENTER IF APPLICABLE
EXEMPTED DEVELOPMENT TOTALS
Exempted Dwelling Units
Exempted Non-residential sq. ft. (in 1,000s)
64
0
Page 1
2. Net square feet is the difference between new development and adjustments entered on pages 2 and 3.
City of West Covina
Memorandum
AGENDA
TO: Andrew G. Pasmant, City Manager
and City Council ITEM NO. 11
DATE October 4, 2011
FROM: Jeff Anderson, Acting Planning Director
SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 11-04
TATTOOING
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission and staff recommend that the City Council introduce the
following ordinance:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 26
(ZONING) OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED
TO PERMANENT MAKEUP AND BODY PIERCING AND
ESTABLISHING STANDARDS FOR TATTOOING
BACKGROUND:
On March 22, 2011, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 11-5409 initiating
Code Amendment No. 11-04 to consider allowing tattooing in the City of West Covina. A
study session on the code amendment was held by the Commission on June 14, 2011 and a
public hearing was held on July 26, 2011.
DISCUSSION:
In September 2010, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9 th Circuit Court of Appeals determined
that a prohibition on tattooing was "facially unconstitutional" in a court case involving the
City of Hermosa Beach. The Court of Appeals found that tattooing was protected by the
1 St Amendment (freedom of speech). Hermosa Beach adopted an ordinance establishing
standards for tattooing and has proceeded to approve some tattooing businesses. Based on
that legal decision, the Planning Commission felt it was appropriate to consider a code
amendment to allow tattooing in the City and establish standards for the operation of a
tattooing business.
Currently, the West Covina Municipal Code does not allow tattooing. In preparing the
draft code amendment, staff researched current code requirements from other cities,
including Hermosa Beach. Most cities have not yet reacted to the court case. Based on
consideration of the court case, standards from other cities, and current standards for adult
businesses, body piercing, and permanent makeup, the following amendments are
proposed.
1. Revise the definition for "Tattooing"
Currently the definition states that tattooing is not allowed in the City. Additionally, the
definition is revised to clarify that permanent makeup is not the same as tattooing.
2. Revise the Land Use Matrix
Add tattooing and tattooing with accessory permanent makeup and body piercing to the
matrix.
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local Nicrosoft\Windows \Temporary Internet Files \Content.Outtook\WMSIF7PIANo 11 SR (3).doe
Code Amendment No. 11-04
Tattooing
October 4, 2011 - Page 2
Modify Permanent Makeup Standards
Revise the permanent makeup standards to allow it as an accessory to a tattooing use
(currently permanent makeup is allowed as an accessory use to a beauty shop only).
Additionally, remove outdated reference to revocation section of Code.
Modify Body Piercing Standards
Revise the body piercing standards to allow it as an accessory to a tattooing use (currently
body piercing is allowed as an accessory use to a beauty shop or jewelry store only).
Additionally, remove outdated reference to revocation section of Code.
Add Tattooing Standards in Article XII, Special Regulations for Unique Uses
Add a section that provides the process, allowed locations, and regulations for tattooing.
Regulations include the following.
Allow tattooing with a conditional use permit in the R-C (Regional
Commercial), S-C (Service Commercial) and M-1 (Manufacturing) zones.
Require that tattooing businesses must be 300 feet from residential uses or
zones, religious facilities, public parks or educational institutions used by
minors.
Require a separation between tattooing uses of 1,500 feet.
Prohibit operation of a tattooing use between 10:00 pm and 10:00 am.
Prohibit temporary use or mobile tattooing uses or events.
Define parking requirements for tattooing as personal service (1 parking
space for every 250 square feet of floor area, same as retail).
Require tattooing uses to comply with standards of the Los Angeles County
for Body Art Establishments.
Require that a business licenses be obtained from the City prior to start of
operation.
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission held a study session on June 14, 2011. At that study session the
Commission discussed the Hermosa Beach court case and adopted code standards,
information on process from other cities, and current standards in the City's Municipal
Code. A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on July 26, 2011. The
Commission discussed the proposed code standards and also discussed whether there
should be a numerical limit on the number of tattooing business licenses allowed. The
Planning Commission determined that the standards, including the minimum separation
between tattooing uses of 1,500 feet, would regulate the number of tattooing business that
could open. The Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the proposed code
amendment to the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed Code Amendment would not have any direct fiscal impact to the General
Fund.
Prepared by: Jeff Anderson
Acting Planning Director
C:\Users\mgarcia\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files \Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PP \No 11 SR
(3).doc
Code Amendment No. 11-04
Tattooing
October 4, 2011 - Page 3
Attachments:
Attachment 1 — Draft Code Amendment Ordinance
Attachment 2 — Planning Commission Resolution No. 11-5434
Attachment 3 — Planning Commission Staff Report, July 26, 2011
Attachment 4 — Planning Commission Minutes, July 26, 2011
Attachment 5 — Planning Commission Study Session Report, June 14, 2011
Attachment 6 — Survey of Other Cities
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppDataEocal\MicrosoftWindows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.OutlookVAIMSIF7PP\No 11 SR
(3).doc
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST
COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 26 (ZONING) OF THE
WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO PERMANENT
MAKEUP AND BODY PIERCING AND ESTABLISHING STANDARDS
FOR TATTOOING USES.
WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of March, 2011, the Planning Commission initiated a code
amendment to consider allowing tattoo uses in the City; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a study session on the 14 th day of June, 2011, to
discuss potential revisions to the code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, upon giving the required notice, did on the 26 th day
of July, 2011, conduct a duly advertised public hearing as prescribed by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, upon giving required notice, did on the 26th day
of July, 2011, conduct a duly advertised public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the
Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 11-5434 recommending to the City Council
approval of Code Amendment No. 11-04; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered evidence presented by the Planning
Commission, Planning Department, and other interested parties at a duly advertised public
hearing on the 20 th day of September, 2011; and
WHEREAS, studies and investigations made by this Commission and in its behalf reveal
the following facts:
In September 2010, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9 th Circuit Court of Appeals
determined that a prohibition on tattooing was "facially unconstitutional" in a court case
involving the City of Hermosa Beach. The Court of Appeals found that tattooing was
protected by the 1 st Amendment (freedom of speech).
The West Covina Municipal Code does not allow tattooing.
The permanent makeup and body piercing standards in the Municipal Code need to be
revised to address the adoption of standards for tattooing.
4. Tattooing uses could have a detrimental effect on impressionable children and minors.
Therefore standards have been developed to require separation between tattooing uses
and uses frequented by children and minors.
The proposed action is considered to be exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA
Guidelines, in that the proposed action consists of a code amendment, which does not
have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of West Covina does ordain as
follows:
SECTION NO. 1: Based on the evidence presented and the findings set forth, Code
Amendment No. 11-04 is hereby found to be consistent with the West Covina General Plan and the
implementation thereof. -
SECTION NO. 2: Based on the evidence presented and the findings set forth, the City
Council of the City of West Covina approves Code Amendment No. 11-04 to amend Chapter 26
(Zoning) of the West Covina Municipal Code to read as shown on Exhibit "A", attached hereto
and incorporated herein by reference.
Code Amendment No. 11-04
September 20, 2011 — Page 2
SECTION NO. 3: This ordinance and the various parts thereof are hereby declared to be
severable. Should any section of this ordinance be declared by the courts to be unconstitutional
or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the ordinance as a whole, or any portion
thereof other than the section so declared to be unconstitutional or invalid
SECTION NO. 4: The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance and it
shall be published as required by law.
PASSED AND APPROVED on this 20th day of September 2011.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF WEST COVINA
I, Laurie Carrico, City Clerk of the City of West Covina, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. was regularly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on the 20 th day of September, 2011. That, thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day
of 2011.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\LocahMicrosoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PP \No 11 attach 1
(3).doc
Code Amendment No. 11-04
September 20, 2011 — Page 3
Exhibit "A"
CHAPTER 26 ZONING
Article II
Section 26-63. Definitions
Tattooing. The business of inserting pigment under the surface of the skin by pricking with a
needle or otherwise, so as to produce an indelible mark or figure visible through the skin. This
definition is not intended to apply to any act of a licensed practitioner of the healing arts
performed in the course of his practice. Tattooing does not include application of permanent
makeup that is performed as an incidental service in a beauty shop. No person shall manage,
conduct, carry on, or participate in, directly or indirectly, the business of tattooing. This
prohibition is declaratory of existing code provisions. This definition is not intended to apply to
the application of permanent make up.
Article X
Section. 26-597. Service, trade, cultural, public and private uses
(except industrial or manufacturing).
No building or improvement or portion thereof shall be erected, constructed, converted,
established, altered or enlarged, nor shall any lot or premises be used except for one or more of
the following purposes. All such uses shall be within an enclosed building unless specifically
stated otherwise.
Uses specifically noted as "(Outdoor Display)": Outdoor display and sales uses are allowed
providing all functions other than display are at all times conducted within an enclosed building.
* Indicates stated use is prohibited in the Civic Center Overlay Zone.
x Indicates stated use is allowed by right.
c Indicates stated use is allowed by conditional use permit.
p Indicates stated use is allowed subject to administrative review and approval by the planning
director.
a Indicates stated use is allowed by administrative use permit.
b Indicates stated use is allowed by adult oriented business permit.
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PP\No 11 attach 1
(3).doc
Code Amendment No. 11-04
September 20, 2011 — Page 4
RA R1 MF
8
MF
15
MF
20
MF
45
OP NC RC SC C2 C3 M1 IP PS OS
Tailor shops x x xxx —
Tanning salon x x x xxx
Tattooing (see art. c c c
XII, div. 24)
Tattooing (see art. c c c
XII, div. 24) with
accessory
permanent makeup
and/or body
piercing use
Taxidermist x x x —
Theaters, open air c c c ccc c — x c
Theaters (not open
air)
c c c —
Trailers, (temporary
only) in conjunction
with a school,
hospital, church or
other similar
institutional use (not
permitted with
commercial uses)
1) 1) PPP') —
Truck rental
accessory, not in
conjunction with
automobile
dealership (outdoor
display)
c c x
Tutoring facility c c ccc c
(Code 1960, § 11001; Ord. No. 1333, § 1, 4-25-77; Ord. No. 1392, § 2, 8-14-78; Ord.
No. 1418
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PP\No 11 attach 1
(3).doc
Code Amendment No. 11-04
September 20, 2011 — Page 5
Article XII. Special Regulations for Unique Uses
DIVISION 22. PERMANENT MAKEUP
Sec. 26-685.6300. Purpose
This division sets forth a uniform set of standards for the application of permanent make-
up. The application of permanent makeup shall be allowed in conjunction only with a beauty
shop or tattooing use. Only permanent make-up uses shall supply permanent make-up services
to the general public.
(Ord. No. 2086, § 2(Exh. A), 7-16-02)
Sec. 26-685.6400. Definition.
Permanent make-up. The business of inserting pigment under the surface of the skin in
the facial area by pricking with a needle or otherwise, so as to produce an indelible mark or
figures visible through the skin. The application of permanent make-up is intended to principally
consist of, but is not necessarily limited to, the application of permanent eyeliner, eyebrows, lip
liner, lip color, and beauty marks.
(Ord. No. 2086, § 2(Exh. A), 7-16-02)
Sec. 26-685.6500. Permit required.
An administrative review and approval by the planning director shall be obtained prior to
establishing and operating permanent make-up use as an accessory use to a beauty shop in the N-
C, R-C, S-C, C-2, C-3, and M-1 zones.
(Ord. No. 2086, § 2(Exh. A), 7-16-02)
Sec. 26-685.6600. Permanent make-up regulations.
The application of permanent make-up shall be subject to and comply with the following
standards and regulations.
(a) Permanent make-up uses may be established and operated only in the zones
specified in Section 26-597.
(b) Permanent make-up uses may only be established as an accessory use to a beauty
shop or tattooing use.
(c) An administrative review and approval by the planning director shall be obtained
prior to establishing a permanent make-up use (as specified in section 25 685.65
26-296.1400)
(d) The permanent make-up use shall comply with the Los Angeles County Code
Department Regulations Body Art Title 11 — Health and Safety Code Division 1 —
Health Code, Chapter 11.36— Body Art Establishments and Environmental
Health Regulations Part 1 Public Health Chapter 36 Body Art Regulations as
adopted July 1999 or as may be amended in the future.
(e) The person conducting the service of permanent make-up application shall be a
licensed cosmetologist.
(f) The administrative review and approval may be revoked, amended or suspended
by the planning director under the provisie - . - *; - ;
Covina Municipal Code.
(f g) A business blicenses and permits as required by Section 14 117 Chapter 14 of
the West Covina Municipal Code shall be obtained prior to the start of the
operation use.
(h) The use shall be conducted in compliance - . . • . ; - - - - -
- - . - 4 -. - - . ..-: • r,
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WM5IF7PP \No 11 attach 1
(3).doc
Code Amendment No. 11-04
September 20, 2011 — Page 6
(g i) The planning director may impose other conditions deemed necessary to
reasonably relate to the purpose of this division.
DIVISION 23. BODY PIERCING USE
Sec. 26-685.6700. Purpose.
This division sets forth a uniform set of standards for the practice of body piercing. The
practice of body piercing shall be allowed in conjunction only with a beauty shop or jewelry store
use. Only body piercing uses shall supply body piercing services to the general public. Medical
practitioners licensed by the State of California under the Business and Professions Code Chapter 5
(commencing with Section 2000 of Division 2) who utilize body art activities as part of patient
treatment are exempt from the registration and permitting requirements of this division.
(Ord. No. 2103, § 3, 7-1-03)
Sec. 26-685.6800. - Permit required.
An administrative review and approval by the planning director shall be obtained prior to
establishing and operating a body piercing use as an accessory use to a beauty shop or jewelry
store in the R-C, C-3, or M-1 zones.
(Ord. No. 2103, § 3, 7-1-03)
Sec. 26-685.6900. - Body piercing regulations.
(a) Requirements. The practice of body piercing shall be subject to and comply
with the following standards and regulations:
(1) Body piercing uses may only be established as an accessory use to a
beauty shop or jewelry store in the R-C, C-3, or M-1 zones or a
tattooing use in the R-C, S-C or M-1 zones and shall occupy no more
than ten (10) percent of the gross floor area of the primary business.
(2) Body piercing uses may only be established in permitted businesses with a
minimum of one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet of gross floor
area.
(3) An administrative review and approval by the planning director shall be
obtained prior to establishing a body piercing use (as specified in Section
26 685.65 26-296.1400).
(4) The body piercing use shall comply with the Los Angeles County Code
Department Regulations Body Art Title 11-Health and Safety Code
Division 1 — Health Code Chapter 11.36-Body Art Establishments and
Environmental Health Regulations Part 1 Public Health Chapter 36 Body
Art Regulations as adopted July 1999 or as may be amended in the future.
(5) The administrative review and approval may be revoked, amended or
suspended by the planning director under the provisions of section 26 253
of the West Covina Municipal Code.
6) A business blicenses and permita as required by section 14 117 Chapter
14 of the West Covina Municipal Code shall be obtained prior to the start
of the operation of the use.
(7)
(6 -8) The planning director may impose other conditions deemed necessary to
reasonably relate to the purpose of this division.
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PP \No 11 attach 1
(3).doc
Code Amendment No. 11-04
September 20, 2011 — Page 7
(b) Exemptions. The following exemptions shall apply:
(1)
Existing beauty shops and jewelry shops performing body piercing as
an accessory use to the main business, prior to August 21, 2003, may
be allowed to continue the accessory use under the following
conditions:
(a) Application. An application to maintain an accessory body
piercing use must be submitted to the planning department by
January 31, 2004. Said application shall include the following:
(1) Sufficient information to verify to the satisfaction of the
planning director that the accessory body piercing use was
in place prior to and has been continuously functioning on
the property since the date of the adoption of this division.
Such information may include receipts or affidavits from
clientele
(2) A signed statement from the applicant stating that he/she will
or has applied to the Los Angeles County Health
Department for a body art establishment plan review and/or
body art technician registration to allow an accessory body
piercing use.
(3) A signed statement of understanding from the applicant stating
that he/she understands that the process has to be complete
with the city within six (6) months and Los Angeles County
in no more than one (1) year from the time of submittal.
(4) During the term between filing an application to maintain an
accessory use body piercing use and granting of necessary
permits, the use may continue to operate provided that any
and all body art technicians possess a valid registration
from the Los Angeles County Health Department. In the
event that no body art technicians possess such registration,
the body piercing use shall suspend operations until such
time as one or more body art technicians in the employment
of the use have completed such registration.
b. Review. The planning director shall review the submitted
application and render a decision within twenty (20) days. In
making the decision, the planning director shall consider the
impact of the accessory body piercing use on surrounding private
and public property.
c. Conditions of approval. The use is subject to the standards set
forth in section 26-685.6900 numbers 2 through 8-6.
DIVISION 24. TATTOOING
Sec. 26-685.7000. Purpose.
This division sets forth a uniform set of standards for the practice of tattooing.
Sec. 26 -685.7100. Permit Required
A conditional use permit shall be obtained prior to establishing and operating a tattooing
use in the R-C, S-C, or M-1 Zones.
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\TemPorary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PP \No 11 attach 1
(3).doc
Code Amendment No. 11-04
September 20, 2011 — Page 8
Sec. 26-685.7200. Tattooing Regulations
The practice of tattooing shall be subject to and comply with the following standards and
regulations:
(1) Tattooing uses may only be established in the "R-C," "S-C," and "M-1" Zones.
(2) A conditional use permit shall be obtained prior to establishing a tattooing use (as
specified in Section 26-246).
(3) Tattooing uses shall be located a minimum of three hundred (300) feet from a
residential zone or use, religious facility, pubic parks, or educational institution which
is utilized by minors.
(4) Tattooing uses shall be located more than one thousand five hundred (1,500) feet
from the perimeter of the tenant space of any other tattooing use.
(5) Tattooing uses shall not operate between the hours of 10:00 pm and 10:00 am.
(6) Temporary or mobile tattooing uses or events are not allowed by this section.
(7) The parking requirement for a tattooing use shall be consistent with standards for
personal service business. Accessory use tattooing shall comply with the parking requirements
for the primary use.
(8) The tattooing use shall comply with the Los Angeles County Code Title 11,
Chapter 11.36, Body Art Establishments.
(9) A business license as required by Chapter 14 of the West Covina Municipal
Code shall be obtained prior to the start of the operation of the use.
(10)The Planning Commission may impose other conditions deemed necessary to
reasonably relate to the purpose of this division.
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PANo 11 attach 1
(3).doc
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 1 1 — 5 4 3 4
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF CODE AMENDMENT NO. 11-04,
REVISING STANDARDS FOR PERMANENT MAKEUP AND BODY
PIERCING AND ESTABLISHING STANDARDS FOR TATTOOING
USES
CODE AMENDMENT NO. 11-04
GENERAL EXEMPTION
APPLICANT: City of West Covina
LOCATION: Citywide
WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of March, 2011, the Planning Commission initiated a
code amendment to consider allowing tattoo uses in the City; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a study session on the 14 th day of June,
2011, to discuss potential revisions to the code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, upon giving the required notice, did on the
26th day of July, 2011, conduct a duly advertised public hearing as prescribed by law; and
WHEREAS, studies and investigations made by this Commission and in its behalf
reveal the following facts:
1. In September 2010, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
determined that a prohibition on tattooing was "facially unconstitutional" in a court
case involving the City of Hermosa Beach. The Court of Appeals found that
tattooing was protected by the 1 st Amendment (freedom of speech).
2. The West Covina Municipal Code does not allow tattooing.
3. The permanent makeup and body piercing standards in the Municipal Code need to
be revised to address the adoption of standards for tattooing.
4. Tattooing uses could have a detrimental effect on impressionable children and
minors. Therefore standards have been developed to require separation between
tattooing uses and uses frequented by children and minors.
5. The proposed action is considered to be exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of
the CEQA Guidelines, in that the proposed action consists of a code amendment,
which does not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the
environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City
of West Covina as follows:
SECTION NO. 1: Based on the evidence presented and the findings set forth, Code
Amendment No. 11-04 is hereby found to be consistent with the West Covina General Plan
and the implementation thereof.
SECTION NO. 2: Based on the evidence presented and the fmdings set forth, the
Planning Commission of the City of West Covina hereby recommends to the City Council
CAUsers \mgarcia\AppData\Local\MicrosofhWindows \Temporary Internet Files \Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PP\No 11 attach 2 (2).doc
Planning Commission Resolution No. 11-5434
Code Amendment No. 11-04
July 26, 2011 - Page 2
of the City of West Covina that it approves Code Amendment No. 11-04 to amend Chapter
26 (Zoning) of the West Covina Municipal Code to read as shown on Exhibit "A",
attached to this Resolution.
SECTION NO. 3: The Secretary is instructed to forward a copy of this Resolution to
the City Council for their attention in the manner as prescribed by law.
I HEREBY CERTIFY, that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of West Covina, at a regular meeting held on the 26 th day of July,
2011 by the following vote.
AYES: Sotelo, Redholtz, Stewart, Holtz, Carrico
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
DATE: July 26, 2011
Alan Carrico, Chairman
Planning Commission
Jeff Anderson, Secretary
Planning Commission
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local\MicrosoftWindows\TemPorary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PP\No 11 attach 2
(2).doc
AGENDA
ITEM NO. C-1
DATE July 26, 2011
PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT
CODE AMENDMENT NO. 11-04
GENERAL EXE1VIPTION
APPLICANT: City of West Covina
LOCATION: Citywide
I. DESCRIPTION OF APPLICATION
On March 22, 2011, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 11-5409
initiating Code Amendment No. 11-04 to consider allowing tattooing in the City of
West Covina. The initiation of this code amendment requires that a draft code
amendment be presented to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission
will then make a recommendation and the code amendment will be presented to the
City Council. A study session on the code amendment was held by the
Commission on June 14, 2011.
II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending
approval of Code Amendment No. 11-04 to the City Council.
III. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed code amendment is exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA
Guidelines in that it consists of a code amendment, which does not have the potential
for causing a significant effect on the environment.
IV. BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission held a study session to consider potential revisions to the
Municipal Code. The Commission held the study session on June 14, 2011.
Information presented to the Planning Commission is attached.
V. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS
In September 2010, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9 th Circuit Court of Appeals
determined that a prohibition on tattooing was "facially unconstitutional" in a court
case involving the City of Hermosa Beach. The Court of Appeals found that
tattooing was protected by the 1 st Amendment (freedom of speech). Hermosa
Beach has proceeded to approve some tattooing businesses.
Currently, the West Covina Municipal Code does not allow tattooing. At the study
session there was discussion about the possibility of revising other Code sections
dealing with permanent makeup and body piercing. Based on the Commission
CAUsers \mgarcia\ AppData\LocahMicrosoft\Windowsgemporary Internet Files \Content.Outlook\ WMSIF7PANo 11 attach 3 (2).doc
Code Amendment No. 11-04
Tattooing
July 26, 2011 - Page 2
direction at the study session, Planning staff has completed a draft code amendment
(Attachment 1). The following is a summary of the proposed code amendment.
Revise the definition for "Tattooing"
Currently the definition states that tattooing is not allowed in the City.
Additionally, the definition is revised to clarify that permanent makeup is not
the same as tattooing.
Revise the Land Use Matrix
Add tattooing and tattooing with accessory permanent makeup and body
piercing to the matrix.
Modify Permanent Makeup Standards
Revise the permanent makeup standards to allow it as an accessory to a
tattooing use (currently permanent makeup is allowed as an accessory use to a
beauty shop only). Additionally, remove outdated reference to revocation
section of Code.
4. Modify Body Piercing Standards
Revise the body piercing standards to allow it as an accessory to a tattooing use
(currently body piercing is allowed as an accessory use to a beauty shop or
jewelry store only). Additionally, remove outdated reference to revocation
section of Code.
Add Tattooing Standards in Article XII, Special Regulations for Unique Uses
Add a section that provides the process, allowed locations, and regulations for
tattooing. Regulations include the following.
Allow tattooing with a conditional use permit in the R-C, S-C and M-1.
Require that tattooing businesses must be 300 feet from residential uses
or zones, religious facilities, public parks or educational institutions
used by minors.
Require a separation between tattooing uses of 1,500 feet.
Prohibit operation of a tattooing use between 10:00 pm and 10:00 am.
Prohibit temporary use or mobile tattooing uses or event.
Define parking requirements for tattooing as personal service (1 parking
space for every 250 square feet of floor area, same as retail).
Require tattooing uses to comply with standards of the Los Angeles
County for Body Art Establishments.
Require that a business licenses be obtained from the City prior to start
of operation.
Conclusion
The proposed code amendment addresses the issues discussed at the Planning
Commission study session and allows tattooing in the City. The proposed code text is
attached to the resolution for your review (Attachment 1). If the Planning
Commission chooses to recommend approval of the proposed code amendment, the
City Council will hold a public hearing to consider adopting the proposed code
amendment.
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windowsgemporary Internet Files \Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PP \No 11 attach 3
(2).doc
Code Amendment No. 11-04
Tattooing
July 26, 2011 - Page 3
VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending
approval of Code Amendment No. 11-04 to the City Council.
Jeff Anderson, AICP
Acting Planning Director
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Code Amendment Resolution
Attachment 2— Planning Commission Minutes, June 14, 2011
Attachment 3 — Memorandum to Planning Commission, Study Session, June 14, 2011
Attachment 4— Survey of Other Cities
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\TemPorary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PP\No II attach 3
(2).doc
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF WEST COVINA
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman
Carrico in the West Covina Council Chambers. Commissioner Sotelo led the Pledge of
Allegiance and the Commission observed a moment of silence.
ROLL CALL
Present: Carrico, Redholtz, Stewart, Holtz, Sotelo
Absent: None
City Staff Present: Anderson and Wong
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Regular Meeting, July 12, 2011 — The minutes were approved as presented.
A. OTHER MATTERS OR ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
B. CONSENT CALENDAR
FORTHCOMING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS AND PUBLIC
HEARING SCHEDULE
Receive and file.
Acting Planning Director presented the staff report. He told the Commission that
the regular meeting scheduled for August 9, 2011 was cancelled due to lack of
business.
Motion by Redholtz, seconded by Sotelo, to approve the items listed. Motion
carried 5-0.
PUBLIC HEARING
(1)
CODE AMENDMENT NO. 11-04
GENERAL EXEMPTION
APPLICANT: City of West Covina
LOCATION: Citywide
REQUEST: The proposed code amendment consists of certain amendments to
the Zoning section of the Code as it relates to allowing tattooing
and modifying standards for permanent makeup and body piercing.
Acting Planning Director Jeff Anderson presented the staff report. Mr. Anderson told the
Commission that the proposed code amendment was to consider allowing tattooing in
certain zones within the City: including the "Regional Commercial", "Service Commercial"
and "Manufacturing" zones, with a conditional use permit. Standards would be set for the
distance between tattoo parlors and other sensitive land uses within the City, hours of
operation, parking and prohibition of temporary use for mobile tattooing. Commissioner
Redholtz asked if the revised standards would make tattooing a primary use.
Commissioner Holtz asked about regulating signage. Mr. Anderson responded that the
City already has sign standards in the Code that would address signage.
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local\MicrosoftWindows\Temporary Internet FilesTontent.Outlook\WMSIF7PP\No
11 attach 4 (2).doc
Planning Commission Minutes
Page 2 — July 26, 2011
PROPONENTS:
Steve Potts addressed the Commission and thanked them for taking steps to allow
tattooing within the City.
OPPONONENTS:
None
Chairman Carrico closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Holtz expressed support for the code amendment with the addition of a
regulation of the number of tattoo parlors allowed within the City. Commissioner
Redholtz stated that the standard of distance proposed between establishments will
regulate the number of tattooing businesses allowed and is in favor of the drafted code
amendment. A discussion was held regarding the parts of the City that tattooing would
be allowed.
Motion by Sotelo, seconded by Redholtz, to adopt Resolution No. 11-5434
recommending approval of Code Amendment No. 11-04 to the City Council. Motion
carried 5-0.
Final action on this matter will be considered by the City Council at a public hearing
tentatively scheduled for September 20, 2011.
D. NON HEARING ITEMS
(1)
REVIEW OF SUBCOMMITTEE FOR DESIGN NO. 11-24
APPLICANT: Rick Lam
LOCATION: 3176 East Hillside Drive
Review of a request for a guest house in the front yard of a single-family residence.
Acting Planning Director Jeff Anderson presented the staff report. He stated that this
proposal had been presented to the Subcommittee for Design. The subcommittee asked
for revisions and that it be forwarded to the Planning Commission. Mr. Anderson said
the applicant is requesting a guest house in the front of the existing house, which will be
detached and setback from the street.
The Subcommittee's recommendation was to set the guest house further back as to not
give the appearance of a duplex. The new plan proposes an increase in front yard setback
and reduction of square footage of guesthouse.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the proposed guest house.
Commissioner Holtz asked if the neighbors were notified. Mr. Anderson stated that
guest house is allowed by right, and notification of neighbors is not required.
Commissioner Stewart asked the applicant if he could put trim on the main house to
match the guest house.
The applicant, Rick Lam, said the revisions were made to minimize intrusion into the
front of the property and that with the addition of the guest house they would still be
under the 35% lot coverage. He also stated that there is a large pool in the rear of the
property.
There was a discussion by the Commission. Commissioners Redholtz and Stewart said
they were in favor of the guesthouse. Commissioner Sotelo said he would be in favor if
the neighbors were notified and there were no concerns reported and Commissioner Holtz
asked to look at the possibility of putting the guest house in the rear yard.
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WMS1F7PP\No 11 attach 4
(2).doc
Planning Commission Minutes
Page 3 — July 26, 2011
Motion by Sotelo, seconded by Holtz, to continue this item to August 23, 2011, and
provide courtesy notices to neighboring properties. Motion carried 4-1 (Redholtz
opposed).
(2)
STUDY SESSION
BILLIARD PARLOR
A study session to review billiard parlor regulations and if appropriate, adopt a resolution
to initiate a code amendment to consider revising the Game Arcades section of the Code.
Acting Planning Director Jeff Anderson presented the staff report. He stated that the
Planning Commission can specify code standards to be revised within the Game Arcades
section of the Code in relation to billiard parlors, game arcades and intern& access
computer gaming centers.
Dana Sykes spoke and said she was concerned about these types of establishments being
located too close to schools and initiating penalties for not following the Code.
There was a brief discussion by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Sotelo asked
about age restrictions. Commissioner Stewart asked about alcohol and age restrictions
and hours of operation. Mr. Anderson advised that a study session would be scheduled to
allow further commission input on the sections of the code to be modified.
Motion by Redholtz, seconded by Sotelo, to adopt Resolution No. 11-5435 to initiate a
code amendment to revise current standards for billiard parlors in the Game Arcades
section of the Code. Motion carried 5-0.
E. CONTINUATION OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Continuation of Item A, Oral Communications
None
F. COMMISSIONREPORTS/COMMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
None
CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
City Council meeting July 19, 2011 — Public Arts Commission Annual Work Program
approved.
PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
a. Project Status Report
G. ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Carrico, seconded by Redholtz, to adjourn the meeting at 8:25 p.m. in honor of
Alhambra Police Officer Ryan Stringer. Motion carried 5-0.
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local\MicrosoftWindows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PP\No 11 attach 4
(2).doc
Code Amendment 11-04
Tattooing
June 14, 2011 - Page 2
Staff surveyed cities to obtain information on how other cities have adopted codes allowing
tattooing. That information can be found in the attached table. The City of Hermosa Beach
has adopted the following standards.
• A required separation of 1,000 feet between tattoo uses in the C-2 Zone and 1,500
feet in the C-3 Zone.
• A requirement that permits be obtained from the LA County Department of Public
Health.
• Allowed hours of 10:00 am to 10:00 pm.
• No expansion of approved tenant space and no other sites in the City allowed for
business owner.
• No temporary use or mobile tattooing allowed.
As the court case regarding Hermosa Beach is very recent, most cities have yet to react and
make changes to their codes. Staff asked for information from cities that allow tattooing
on a listserve through the League of California Cities. The results of that survey are
indicated on Attachment 1. In addition to the information received through listserve, staff
also surveyed the surrounding cities on the tattooing use.
In considering the standards set by other Cities (especially Hermosa Beach) and current
standards on other types of uses, Staff recommends the following standards for tattooing
businesses.
Zones — allow tattooing in the R-C, S-C, and M-1 zones. The R-C (Regional
Commercial) Zone and S-C (Service Commercial) Zone are the zones that
allow the highest intensity of commercial businesses and are located on
arterials or highways. The M-1 (Manufacturing) Zone allows industrial uses
of moderate to high intensity.
Process — The survey indicates that most cities require the approval of a
conditional use permit (CUP). That process seems appropriate given that the
use has not historically been allowed in the City. The CUP allows for
notification of surrounding property owners, discussion by City officials, and
allows for revocation if conditions are not met.
Separation - Staff recommends a separation requirement of 300 feet from
residential zone or use, religious facilities, public parks, and schools (utilized
by minors). Also, a separation requirement of 500 feet from other tattooing
businesses is recommended. Measurement of the distance would be from the
structure or floor area devoted to tattooing to the property line of the
residential zone or use, religious facility, public park, and school.
Hours — Staff recommends the restriction on hours that Hermosa Beach has
adopted, 10:00 am to 10:00 pm.
Staff is requesting that the Commission provide direction to allow staff to draft an
ordinance that could be brought to the Commission at a public hearing. Once the Planning
Commission has created an ordinance that they recommend, the code amendment would
then be presented to the City Council for their consideration.
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WM5IF7PP \No 11 attach 5 (2).doc
Code Amendment 11-04
Tattooing
June 14, 2011 - Page 3
III. CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the information in the staff report
and provide direction to staff regarding standards to be included in the code amendment.
Amy Davis
Assistant Planner
REVIEWED AND APPROVED:
Jeff Anderson, AICP
Acting Planning Director
Attachments:
Attachment 1 — Survey of Other Cities
CAUsers \mgarcia\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows \Temporary Internet Files \Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PANo 11 attach 5 (2).doc
Survey of City Ordinances
City Land Use Regulations Special Criteria
Azusa Allowed by Right Only allowed in industrial zones.
Baldwin Park Not Allowed by Code N/A
Citrus Heights Minor Conditional Use Permit None
Covina Not Allowed by Code N/A
Dixon Conditional Use Permit None
Elk Grove Conditional Use Permit None
Hanford , Conditional Use Permit None
Hermosa Beach Permitted Use Separation from other tattoo business,
1,000 feet in C-2 Zone and 1,500 feet
in C-3 Zone.
Operate between 10 am and 10 pm.
Once established cannot be expanded
and cannot establish in another
location in City.
No temporary or mobile
establishments.
Montclair Conditional Use Permit None
Pasadena Conditional Use Permit Separation from other tattoo business
of 500 feet.
Rancho Cordova Conditional Use Permit Separation from other tattoo business
of 1,000 feet.
Separation of 250 feet from public
school, park, community center or
library.
Stanton Conditional Use Permit Subject to adult-oriented business
standards.
San Dimas Not Allowed by Code N/A
San Ramon Conditional Use Permit None
Walnut Not Allowed by Code N/A
City of West Covina
Memorandum
AGENDA
TO: Andrew G. Pasmant, City Manager
and City Council ITEM NO. 12
DATE October 4, 2011 FROM: Jeff Anderson, Acting Planning Director
SUBJECT: URGENCY ORDINANCE EXTENDING THE MORATORIUM TO
CREATE AN EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY ZONE ON SINGLE-
FAMILY PROPERTIES ON THE NORTH SIDE OF VANDERHOOF
DRIVE BETWEEN 2633 AND 2807 VANDERHOOF DRIVE AND
PROVIDING A PROGRESS REPORT ON THE PROPOSED CODE
AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council introduce and adopt the following ordinance to
extend the moratorium on ten properties located on the north side of Vanderhoof Drive:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST
COVINA, CALIFORNIA EXTENDING THE TERMS AND
PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE NO. 2220 FOR AN ADDITIONAL
PERIOD OF TEN MONTHS AND FIFTEEN DAYS, PROHIBITING
CONSTRUCTION OF GUEST HOUSES, HABITABLE SPACE
ADDITIONS, SPORTS COURTS, TENNIS COURTS, SWIMMING
POOLS AND OTHER SIMILAR TYPES OF IMPROVEMENTS ON
THE REAR, LOWER PORTION OF EQUESTRIAN ORIENTED
PROPERTIES IN SPECIFIED AREAS OF THE CITY PENDING
COMPLETION OF STUDY AND REPORT BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION PERTAINING TO THE PROPER CONDITIONS AND
REGULATIONS FOR SUCH USES, DECLARING THIS AN INTERIM
ZONING ORDINANCE, AND SETTING FORTH FACTS
CONSTITUTING THE SAME AS AN URGENCY ORDINANCE
BACKGROUND:
At the City Council meeting on September 6, 2011, the City Council adopted an ordinance
establishing a moratorium on the construction of guest houses or other types of habitable
space and other types of improvements (such as sports courts, tennis courts, swimming pools)
that could be distressing to horses and create a danger to riders on neighboring properties on
the rear, lower portion of the subject properties. The properties included in the moratorium
are 2633, 2641, 2653, 2707, 2715, 2727, 2743, 2755, 2769, and 2807 Vanderhoof Drive.
DISCUSSION:
A report on the progress of the code amendment and zone change is required prior to the
extension of a moratorium from 45 days to 10 months and 15 days. City staff is concerned
over the potential conflict of land uses that appear to be occurring in the subject area
regarding future construction of residential living quarters in areas that have historically been
used for equestrian uses adjacent to Maverick/Ridgerider Park. The subject properties are
located on the north side of Vanderhoof Drive and are contiguous to Maverick/Ridgerider
Park. If residential living quarters are allowed to spread to the lower pad areas, there is
concern that there will be a general encroachment into the equestrian properties and an
eventual increase in land-use and safety conflicts. It is expected that the addition of accessory
habitable structures, sports courts, and similar uses will generate parking issues and more
vehicle usage on the bridal path/private road that separates the properties from the park and
that these types of improvements could disturb horses and create a hazardous environment for
riders.
CAUsers\mgarcia\ AppData\Local Wicrosoft\Windows \Temporary Internet Files \Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PIANo 9 SR.doc
Report and Extension of Moratorium/Equestrian Overlay Zone
October 4, 2011 , Page 2
Staff is currently researching other cities' standards and evaluating the types of the
improvements that could cause conflicts with equestrian uses. A study session is currently
scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting of October 11, 2011, to introduce the
proposed code amendment to create the Equestrian Overlay zone and zone change to add the
Equestrian Overlay zone to the properties and discuss the issues. Depending on the input at
that meeting, a public hearing before the Planning Commission could occur in December or
January. Once the Planning Commission provides a recommendation, a public hearing will
be scheduled before the City Council.
The initial urgency ordinance adopted by the City Council established a moratorium for 45
days. California state law allows the moratorium to be extended for an additional 10 months
and 15 days. If extended the moratorium would last until September 6, 2012.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed code amendment and zone change would not have any direct fiscal impact to
the General Fund.
Prepared by: Jeff Anderson
Planning Director
Attachments:
Attachment 1 — Moratorium Ordinance
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PP\No 9 SR.doc
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST
COVINA, CALIFORNIA EXTENDING THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS
OF ORDINANCE NO. 2220 FOR AN ADDITIONAL PERIOD OF TEN
MONTHS AND FIFTEEN DAYS, PROHIBITING CONSTRUCTION OF
GUEST HOUSES, HABITABLE SPACE ADDITIONS, SPORTS COURTS,
TENNIS COURTS, SWIMMING POOLS AND OTHER SIMILAR TYPES
OF IMPROVEMENTS ON THE REAR, LOWER PORTION OF
EQUESTRIAN ORIENTED PROPERTIES IN SPECIFIED AREAS OF THE
CITY PENDING COMPLETION OF STUDY AND REPORT BY THE
PLANNING COMMISSION PERTAINING TO THE PROPER
CONDITIONS AND REGULATIONS FOR SUCH USES, DECLARING
THIS AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE, AND SETTING FORTH
FACTS CONSTITUTING THE SAME AS AN URGENCY ORDINANCE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION NO. 1: The City Council finds that on September 6, 2011, it adopted
Ordinance No. 2220 entitled, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of West Covina
Prohibiting Construction Of Guest Houses, Habitable Space Additions, Sports Courts, Tennis
Courts, Swimming Pools And Other Similar Types Of Improvements On The Rear, Lower
Portion Of Equestrian Oriented Properties In Specified Areas Of The City Pending Completion
Of Study And Report By The Planning Commission Pertaining To The Proper Conditions And
Regulations For Such Uses, Declaring This An Interim Zoning Ordinance, And Setting Forth
Facts Constituting The Same As An Urgency Ordinance."
SECTION NO. 2: The City Council finds that in accordance with the terms and
provisions of Ordinance No. 2220, the City Staff commenced studies and hearings pertaining to
the proper criteria, conditions of approval and regulations for the orderly, planned and
coordinated development and future use for such construction of guest houses, habitable space
additions, sports courts, tennis courts, swimming pools and other similar types of improvements
on the rear, lower portion of equestrian oriented properties, and that the City Council at its
regular meeting of October 4, 2011 received the City Staffs written report, attached herein as
Attachment A, describing the measures taken and to be taken to alleviate the conditions which
led to the adoption of Ordinance No. 2220.
SECTION NO. 3. The City Council finds that in accordance with the terms and
provisions of Section 65858 of the Government Code, and following notice given in the time and
manner required by law, it held a public hearing on the first extension of Ordinance No. 2220 on
October 4, 2011. After hearing all applicable evidence, the City Council finds that the conditions
and findings recited in Ordinance No. 2220 continue to exist and that further studies by the
Planning Commission are necessary in order to develop the proper criteria, conditions of
approval and regulations for the orderly planned and coordinated development and future use of
such equestrian oriented properties.
SECTION NO. 4: The City Council therefore ordains that Ordinance No. 2220 be
extended for an additional term of ten months and fifteen days, terminating on September 6,
2012, subject to all of the terms and provisions contained in Ordinance No. 2220.
SECTION NO. 5: The City Council hereby finds, determines and declares that the
immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety and welfare necessitates the enactment
of this Ordinance as an Urgency Ordinance. The City Council further finds there is a current and
immediate threat to the public health, safety and welfare necessitating the adoption of this
Ordinance as an Interim Zoning Ordinance under Section 65858. Said findings are as follows:
1. The City has received applications for the development of guest houses and other
similar structures within the areas of the Properties. These applications may adversely affect or
conflict with current and future equestrian uses, regulations and setbacks within the Properties.
CAUsers\mgarcia\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\WMSEF7PANo 9 attach 1.doc
Ordinance No.
Page 2
2. If an Urgency Interim Zoning Ordinance is not adopted immediately, the
processing of these applications under the existing City of West Covina code provisions could
result in conflicts between residential and equestrian uses and the irreversible loss of properties
available for equestrian use, and render ineffective any new laws, permits, or regulations
concerning the preservation of equestrian use properties.
3. Equestrian use properties require special consideration due to the complexity of
balancing residential property owner rights with the need to preserve equestrian use properties.
4. The economic and social welfare effects of loss versus preservation of equestrian
use properties needs to be studied in relation to the overall benefits or detriments to the economic
and social welfare of the community.
SECTION NO. 6: In order to protect the public health, safety and welfare it is
necessary to enact this Ordinance as an urgency measure to go into effect immediately upon its
adoption, and that to enact this Ordinance after giving notice, holding public hearings and two
readings thereof, and thereafter to await thirty days for said Ordinance to become effective, will
be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, in that during the interim period further
such guest houses, habitable space additions, sports courts, tennis courts, Swimming pools and
other similar types of improvements on the rear, lower portion of equestrian oriented properties
may be established without the benefit of proper criteria and regulations. It is therefore
necessary that this Ordinance go into effect immediately upon adoption.
SECTION NO. 7: The provisions of this Ordinance shall not apply to the following:
1. The issuance of permits for alterations or additions to the primary residence
and/or issuance of permits for accessory structures within 125 feet of the front property line.
2. The issuance of demolition permits issued by order of the Building Official for
purposes of protecting the public health, safety, and welfare due to damage to a structure caused
by fire, earthquake, or other natural calamity.
SECTION NO. 8: The proposed action is considered to be exempt from the provisions
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the
CEQA Guidelines, in that the proposed action consists of the adoption of a zoning moratorium
ordinance which does not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.
SECTION NO. 9: The City Council hereby declares it would have passed this
Ordinance sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph, and section by section, and does
hereby declare that the provisions of this Ordinance are severable and, if for any reason any
sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance shall be held invalid, such decision shall not
affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
SECTION NO. 10: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance, and
the City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted or published as prescribed by law. This
Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption.
CAUsers \mgarcia\AppData\Local Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files \Content.Outlook\WMSIF7PP \No 9 attach 1.doc
Ordinance No.
Page 3
PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS day of , 2011.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
CITY OF WEST COVINA
I, Laurie Carrico, City Clerk of the City of West Covina, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City
Council on the day of ,2011.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
CAUsers \Ingarcia\AppData\LocahMicrosoft\ Windows \Temporary Internet Fi1es\Content.Out1ook\WMSIF7PP\No 9 attach 1.doc