Loading...
04-28-1958 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES•:OF° THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE C�TY COUNCIL • CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA April 28, 1958 The meeting was called to order by Mayor Mottinger at 704® Po Me in the West Covina. City Hallo Invocation was given by Mr. Roy Plummer, Minister of Education of the First Baptist Church. ROLL CALL Present- Mayor Mottinger, Councilman Barnes, Brown, Pittenger, Heath Others Present! Public Works Director and Acting City Manager, City Clerk, City Treasurer, City Attorney, City Engineer, Planning Ccowi.sEion Secretary. Absent. None APPWVAL OF MINUTES April 7, 1958 - Approved as submitted. April 14, 1958 - it 11 it • April 15, 1,958 - , Mayor Mottinger, With the consent of Council there will be a deviation from the order of the Agenda this meeting. This is necessary as I[ am not sure whether I will be able to complete the meeting or not and also our Acting City Manager, must leave early and there are one or two items that perhaps may be taken care of immediately. First I would like to express the appreciation on behalf of Mrs. Mottinger and myself for the many, °get -well' wishes we received from our friends. I want to thank the mLembers of Council for electing me to serve as Mayor for the next year and I will do everything possible to see their confidence is not misplaced. I feel this is the proper time to explain my feelings in regard to the position of Mayor and the Mayor Pro Tempore, We often puce too much importance on these positions. Legally we must have a presiding officer, but otherwise all duties and honors should be shared as equally as possible. We should be a legislative body, which we are in fact, and rely on the City Manager for City activities, Since our own Ordinance requires we reorganize every year I feel the rotation of the presiding officer has an advan- tage to the City, as the burden of office can be shared by all ®f the members of Council. Co C, 4-28_58.. Page two Mayor° Motti,nger - continued • l would commend Council for its efforts on behalf of the City for the past two years, first under the leadership of Jay Brown and later under Jim Kay. While we have had some healthy differences. of opinions Council his tried to avoid dramatics and to act for the City as a whole. It is my hope this situation will continue to prevail. There are several appointments necessary to be made to continue activities for the coming__. year and I would like to make these appointments with the approval of the other members of Council For those not aware of it already; we have eliminated Commissioners, as such, from our Council operations because they are not compatible with the City Manager form of government. It is agreed that Council representatives to different commissions would not exist as it acid last year but they would continue to sit in on various commissions, commission meetings, etc., so Council can get. information first-hand from these various groups and keep ourselves well informed. So no Commissions will be appointed, On the Fast San Gabriel Valley Planning Committee Councilman day Brown is the present representative. He was elected Chairman of that group and his term does not expire until June so I believe it would be in order to have him continue as our representative, at • least until that time. Councilman Claude Barnes is our representative on the Upper San Gabriel Valley Water Board and I would like to have him continue with them as our representative. I would like to appoint Councilman Dale Pittenger as Director of the League of California. Cities. On the.-Mayorle Committee the Mayor is the city's representative,. but here again I would like to follow the policy that we share in representation on that Board as we are able to. On the Sanitation Districts the Mayor is the automatic representa- tive of the City but 1 would suggest that Councilman Jay Brown con- tinue as �.1ternateo _t I was working wtth the Chamber of Commerce Committee during the last year and it has been very successful and !I feel it should be continued. I would ask Councilman Jay Brown to'continue on that, and to have Councilman Robert Heath assist Councilman Brown with this. The League of California. Cities, County Government and the Ci.ty�.;tp--"" Los Angeles have gone together and are -organizing a Metropolitan' • Area Government Study Commission. The President of the Los Angeles County Division has recommended that a. representative from each city serve on that Commission. I think that it is important that opr Director, Councilman Pittenger, be a member of that Commission. Co C. 4--28-58 Page three • Mayor M6ttinger continued The Audit Committee consists of Councilman Heath, Chairman and Councilman Barnes. There was one item of controversy the last year which I think should be brought to light and studied by a committee of Council and otherO and that is in relation to C-R Zone and Precise Plan No. 100. There is a great deal of data available. The City -Attorney has given some opinions on that matter and the Planning, Department has presented facts and I think those things should be studied by a group of men from the city government who were not in the thick of the controversy before. I would appoint Councilman Barnes as Chairman and Councilman Heath as the other Council member of this committee. I have appointed Commissioner Green and Commissioner Getches from the Planning Commission to be on this committee and also request that the City Attorney be in on this I* matter. This committee may wish to have others sit in with them to obtain other .data they may feel is relevent to the situation, but that will be left entirely up to them - Motion by Councilman - Brown, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and carried that the appointments as made by Mayor Mottinger be approved, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTORI'S REPORT 1 The Public Workcs Director recommended that Council adopt the following proposed Resolution covering the Study.for Freeways and Expressways in Los Angeles County as noted under Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 26, Freeways and Expressways. The purpose of the proposed Resolution is to speed the additions to Freeways and Expressways in the County of Los Angeles in accordance with the attached Master Plan of Freeways and Expressways which the Metro- politan Engineering Board adopted on February 28, 1958. It ' affects the City of West Covina in that the proposed Huntington Beach Crystal Lake Freeway will pass through and in the vicinity of West Covina in a manner similar to previous reports and requests for the extension of Route 62, South Azusa. Avenue (sign route 39). '-RESOLUTION NO. 1334 "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCEL OF THE Proporsed Freeway and CITY OF WESTICOVINA APPROVING THE PLAN Expressway Plan for OF FREEWAYS AND EXPRESSWAYS FOR LOS Los Angeles County ANGELES COUNTY AS ADOPTED BY THE METRO - ADOPTED POLITAN TRANSPORTATION ZWGINEERTNG BOARD FOR SUBMISSION TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS." • i / C.-C. 4-28-58 Page four • Mayor Mottinger: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the Resolution. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes that Resolution No, 1334 be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as Follows° Ayes: Councilmen Barnes, Brown, Pittenger, Heathy Mayor Mott.inger Noes; None Absent: None INTERIM CONSTRUCTION OF BADILLO CHANNEL Badillo Channel to -be held in Covina, at 8 Po Me, WeAnesday, each City Council attend and pation it will authorize for I have presented Council with copies of a. letter reminding you of a final meeting to resolve the financing on the Interim Construction of the Council Chambers in the City of West May 7th, 1958. It is requested that be prepared to designate what partici- the construction of this channel A This last week we had a meeting of the three citiesr-(_involved) and officials of the County Flood Control..Districto It wis a discussion taking" some two and a half hours and �i,t was decided that each representative of Council would go back to their respective Councils and come to a $irm decision as to what participation each Council • would make in this proposal: I would suggest the entire City Council be present at this meeting. In a study session next Monday night to which I would recommend we adjourn, take this matter up to make a last review and take our position can it so that this matter can be resolved one way or the other, for good. I wish to report a conversation I had with the LA County Flood Con- trol District.todayo We had two meetings of the Fgs San Gabriel Valley Engineers of the cities of Baldwin Park and`Covina and County Storm Drain Division to pro-ra.te the'.r share of the Badillo permanent drain providing a. bond issue should be successful in November°° After these two meetings we went away in agreement as to the pro -rated share. Then, unknown to anybody, these two cities (Baldwin Park and Covina) reduced their figures. We maintained ours and the County maintained theirs. The project was reduced from three million to a million and a. half. Covina was in the amount of $235,682.00, Baldwin Park $159,287.00, West Covina. $190,000.00 and the County $075,632.00. These amounts come out of ofir"allotted share of the bond issue. When the reports were turned out Baldwin Park had reduced theirs to $60,000.00 and Covina had reduced theirs to $151,000.00 which is 4pproximately $184.,000000 short, and unless additional funds are forthcoming by some party maybe the permanent solution to this project will not come about. . However, we thought this might be a possibility and submitted an alternative so that we are well protected. C. C. 4-28-58 Page five • The Flood Control will make repeated attempts with Covina to have them re -instate their amount as agreed but whether they, will be successful only time will tell. This matter is critical on both the permanent and interim phases. Councilman Barnes: Would this $151,000.00 on Covina's part reduce their total amount? They have sub- mitted a bond issue for one million eight hundred thousand for the City of Covina yet they cut the San Dimas Basin project back to $151,000000. Is that correct? Public Wks. Dir. I believe their figure is $400,000 submitted for bond issue. They have submitted the sur� of $84,000.00 for share of Badillo Drain which comes through their City and benefits them far greater., Councilman Barnes-. Did they indicate why? Public Wks. Dir, They have been asked two or three times and we have heard no satisfactory reply, Councilman Barnes: Their flood water comes down on us yet they .do not want to participate to the fullest. extent on the bond issue where mosO of the money would come from the County and are exposing 33,000 people to a, flood hazard for a town • of approximately 14,000 and are not submitting a large enough bond issue to carry their own flood water. 1b6l,ieve Tsaw an article in the newspaper sometime ago in regard to'4, proposed storm drain on Fenimore Street which I believe the City of Covina lets flow into San Dimas Wash. I do not know if this is right or not but if they continue to put water'from up above into the E?aft Dimas Wash, bring it down and let it flow over into West Covina I do mot know what we can do about it but I think we shotild do something. I do not know the next step but something should be done. Mayor Mottinger- This will probably be discussed on the meet- ing of the 7th and we should not lose sight of that condition. JMTENSION OF SERVICE This is in conjunction with the joint coop - AVENUE SEWER FOR eration program of the County and Civic CIVIC CENTER Center site facilities. In addition to the APPROVED sewer, we are proposing at this time that we be permitted to go ahead with sewer d�.'signs to serve the City Hall. If constructed now it would avoid cutting up the County Property and paved parking area in the future. The money could be appropriated from the sewer construc tion fund. • Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Pittenger that the City Manager be authorized to have the engineering plans started for this project (by the City Engineer) and to obtain.bids C. Co 4-28-54 Page six; • on the extension of the sewer line for the Civic Center site in an amount not to exceed $1999.00. Motion passed on roll cull as follows: { .Ayes: Councilman Barnes, Brown; Pittenger, Heath, Mayor Mottinger Noes: None Absent: None REQUEST FOR CITY Tract 19192 Montezuma Way from Cameron PARTICIPATION IN Avenue to 5551,+ or - southerly. SANITARY SEWERS RECOMMENDATIONS APPROVED This matter was previously referred to the City Attorney and Public Works Director for report. • "It has always been m y y policy to encourage the development of sanitary sewers in the City of,West Covina by whatever means were legally available. You will remember that in the,past on several occasions I recommended limited participation in sewer projects which would have otherwise failed to develop due to special prob- lems in connection with theme Also, you will remember that approxi- mately one year ago I recommended that you adopt the policy of no • further cash projects unless there was 100% participation by the. property owners as the construction of sewers is of benefit to private properties. Some special conditions here which I believe should be considered are: 10 there is definitely a problem that is rather expensive to the • citizens involved. 2. It is limited to 12 lots, being so small in scope and nature that the 1911 Act proceedings would be a most expensive type of solution to thiw.problemo From the testimony of Mr, R. Klema, Registered Civil Engineer, it appears he was lead to believe there would be City participation in this project, I would recommend that the City either construct or participate -in the construction of $432.60 worth of sewer main in this project.' This recommendation is based upon our present right to collect frontage -connection charges to an existing sewer from properties Which had not participated in the construction df said sewers. This means that 206 line it.of frontage would be charged at $2.50 per foot when they connect to the sewer, The net return, after administrative charges to the City of West Covina, would be the sum . of $432d60o Co Co 4-28-58 Page seven Assuming that the City Attorney would approve this method, sindd"it • is not lending of public funds as was suggested in the other m6thdd proposed by the property ownersi I would recommend that you approve my proposal subject to the City Attorneys§ apptovalo However, it is still my recommendation for all future cash projects that the Council indicate to the staff that no cash project will be approved unless there is 100% participation by the property owners." Mayor Mottinger: Does Council, feel this matter perhaps should be studied further? Councilman Arown': I think it should be acted upon this evening in that the people were led to believe by those in the City that the City would par- ticipate and they went out' and did this on that basis. 8o far as Council policy I think it was made clear a year ago we would not participate anymore, although these people were led to believe we would. On this basis I do not see how we can stop this unless we • change some personnel Councilman Pittenger: If we built it would we be on safe ground? City Attorney: You could consider it to be a project of 10 lots, with the first two not participating so that you do not deviate from the policy of 100% participation but houses would face two lots and 10 .Lots would pay 100%. They ask City to extend the sewer to the end of their district and this you can do at public expense, You can build sewer past the 10 lot district, You will eventually recover part of that expense if the other two lots connect and in that way you are not lending public money to the project. It is true the recommendation is not a direct sharing of these two lots but I am afraid it is doing that without saying so. If you will simply carry the sewer to an edge of a 10 lot district -you are not contributing to anyone else but bringing it to point that the other lots can go ahead. Although I am not concerned with precedent if this is started you may find in the future you will have lots wanting the opportunity to do this. Motion by Councilman Pittinger, seconded by Councilmen Brown that the recommendation of the Acting City_-Kanager and Public Works Director be accepted to extend the sewer through the two lots mentioned and that Council goes on record that in the future there must be 100% participation in cash on such projects. Motion passed on roll call as follows: . Ayes: Councilmen Barnes, Browns Pittenger,. Heath, Mayor Mottinger Noes: None Absent: None C. C, 4-28-58 ZONE VARIANCE NO, 224 The Classis of California (Reformed Chur6h of America) HELD OVER Held over to this date. Page eight LOCATION: Southeast corner of. Cameron and Valinda Avenues. Denied Church Use in R-A, Planning Commission Resolution No. 572. Mayor Mottinger: The committee of Council and the Ministerial Association failed to have their meeting last Thursday night and at the request of the proponents this item will be held over until our next regular meeting, May 12, 1958, for decision. ACTING CITY MANAGER REPORTS PRESENTATION OF PRELIMINARY Copies of the budget were presented MUNICIPAL BUDGET OF THE CITY by the Acting City Manager OF WEST COVINA FOR 1958-59 FISCAL YEAR ACCEPTED FOR STUDY Councilman Pittenger commended the Acting City Manager, the Finance Officer staff, and others in the City for getting this bud$6t to the Council ahead of schedule by about seven weeks and that Council appreciated this fact as it gives them adequate time to study it.. • sufficiently before acting upon it, The Acting City Manager stated that if it had not been for the way the staff worked on this matter it would not have been done and he felt he could take no credit for it being presented so far ahead of schedule. Council accepted the Preliminary Budget for study. RECOMMMATION FOR EXECUTION The following recommendations were OF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WITH made in a written report presented COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR and read by the Acting City Manager: CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS COUNTY COURT AND CIVIC CENTER SITES APPItOVED 1. Approve the plans and specifications for the Sanitary Sewer in Service Avenue -and the Court site, and Street Improvements on Service Avenue and Sunset Avenue, and the Storm Drain in Sunset Avenue. 2. That the Mayor and City Council be instructed to eXcute the proposed agreement which is attached herewith provided that it be amended to specify the diameter of the Sanitary Sewer and to grant to the City the right to connect its publicbuildings to the northerly end thereof on County property without additional charge for the privilege. This would include the right to dis- pose of said City sewage through the County sewer crossing the County property. 0 0 0 0 C. Co 4-28-58 Page Nine 3.. Authorize the expenditure of deposit of $27,135.00 to be paid to the County Treasurer in accordance with the pr--.'posed agreement. The deposit of $27,135.00 will ultimately be paid as follows: From County Aid to City Gas Tax Funds $14,880. From Traffic Safety Fund Contingencies 7,255. From flan-ttary—Sewer.'.Constriicti6n-*, : and Maintenance Fund 5,000. The Agreement does not provide for granting of jurisdiction with respect to the proposed Storm Drain in Sunset Avenue, This is due to the fact that the City of West Covina is not participating in this construction. Motion by Council*iAn Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried that the 16-rbposed agreement with County of Los Angeles for certain improvements to County Court and Civic Center Sites be approved and properly executed, provided that it be amended to specify the diameter of the Sanitary Sewer and to grant to the City the right to connect its public buildings to the northerly end thereof on County property without any additional charge for the privilege, this to include the right to dispose the said City sewage through the County sewer crossing the County property, and other recommendations as stated in the report. RESOLUTION NO, 1335 Permit the use of certain Gasoline Tax Money allocated as County Aid. ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, TO PERMIT THE USE OF CERTAIN GASO- LINE TAX MONEY ALLOCATED AS COUNTY AID, TOWARDS THE IMPROVEMENTS OF SERVICE AVENUE FROM ORANGE AVENUE TO 728 FEET WESTERLY OF SUNSET , AVENUE, AND SUNSET -AVENUE FROM 148 FEET SOUTH OF SERVICE AVENUE TO 688 FEET NOR W RLY THEREFROM, BY THE CONSTRUCTION OF ASPHALTIC PAVEMENT ON AGGREGATE BASE, CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, CROSS CUTTERS AND APPURTENANT WORK." Mayor Mottinger: Hearing no objections -,.we will waive further reading of the body of the Resolution. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes that Resolution No. 1335 by adopted. Motion passed on roll call as Follows - Ayes: Councilmen Barnes, Brown, Pittenger! Heath, Mayor Mottinger' Noes: -None Absent: None E 0 E 40 Co Co 4-28-58 Page ten AUTHORIZATION TO NEGOTIATE In accordance with the appraisal FOR H,7iRBERT PROPERTY FOR in council:'s hands I would recommend ADDITION TO CORTEZ PARK the .base be executed. CtRTAIN ITEMS APPEARING ON THIS AGENDA Mayor Mottinger: Any items on the Agenda that have not been discussed with and approved for submission by theCityManager will not be acted upon at all by Council. RECOMMENDATION FOR IMMEDIATE Acting City Manager.- This matter CONDEMNATION PROCEDURE BE r,*-n be taken care of since the STARTED ON PROPERTY ADJACENT recommendation will be read TO COMIDA PARK tonight. Acting City Manager: SCHEDULED MATTERS 01.1 PROJECT C-70 Street Improv6ments on a Section of Azusa Avenue, between Vine and Cameron Avenues BID AWARDED .(Warren Southwest Inc.) Mr. Aiassa will arrive Wednesday evening at 8 P.M. and a staff meeting will, be held the following morning at which time I will re - ,port to him.. Improvements to consist of excava- tion, grading, removal of excess excavation and the construction.of 3" asphaltic pavement on aggregate base and all incidental work thereto. The bids were opened as advertised at 10:06 A.M., April 28, 1958, in the office of the City Clerk and referred to the City Engineer for recommen&L='6n-_1to the City Council at this meeting. The City Clerk stated, for the record, that this matter was properly advertised on April 11 and April 18, 1958 and appeared as a news item in the Green Sheet and that Affidavits of publication had been received from the West Covina Tribune. The City Engineer reported the result of bids as follows: COX BROS, 0% Bid Bond $10,539a41 (This bid was ,brought in during the opening of the bids WARREN SOUTHWEST, INC. 14 Bid Bond J. E. HADDOCK, LTD, 10% Bid Bond 11,027.65, 12,013.78 • 0 • U 1: C, C6' 4-28-58 BIDS'- Continued A-1 CONTRACTORS, INC. W, E. MCKkGHT CONSTR. CO, GRIFFITH COMPANY HARVEY Bo ADAIR, JR. AMERICAN ASPHALT PAVING CO, 10% Bid Bond 10% Bid Bond Page eleven $12,063.55 12,394.12 $14W 00 Bid Bond 12, 728=a 3,5 . 10%® Bid Bond 13,177.04 $1450C 00 Bid Bond 14, 013. 20 CROWELL & LARSON 10% Bid Bond 17,314.95 CITY ENGINEER. We received a late bid from Cox Brothers. I have consulted with the City Attorney on this matter, and if there is his approval I would recommend the bid be awarded to Cox Brothers as the lowest respon- sible bidder. City Attorney'. This is an illegal submission of a bid after the hour set for opening of such bids. The Counbil has three possible courses of action_ open to it. You can reject the late bid, simply ignore it, on the grounds it was late an.d'.Vraceed as you would to award the bid to the next lowest bidder. In doing this you would be on safe ground and the rejection of the late bid would be upheld. You could reject all bids and re -advertise and this, no doubt, would put you on safe grounds. You could, I think, make a finding that this illegality of a late bid was done inadvertently; that no harm was done to anyone; public interest was not jeopardized and that no advantage wa.s .takeA.by reason of filing a late bid. You could waive the illeg- ality and award the bid to the late bidder. However, in doing this '*jpu are not on safe ground. The courts have held that illegalities regarding strict compliance may be waived in instances where public interest is not affected; where deviation is minor; or where no gain or advantage is derived therefrom. IV However, I think that in all probability if you made such findings as I have indicated that these things were so you possibly would be._ upheld in your decision but I can give you no assurance that it might not result in litigation for the City. Councilman Brown. City Clerk. How many bids were opened at the time this late bid was submitted? We were working on the last bid when this late bid Was presented. Councilman Brown. The reason I asked that question was that the bids were started to be opened at 10:06 and this was presented at 10.14. This is a. low bid by some $500.00 and I would dislike to lose that amount for the City. C. C. 4-28-58 Page twelve i BIDS - Continued Councilman Heath: The thing is that you might be spending more than that if you run into litigation on'this matter, Councilman Brown: I would agree with that and there is a possi- bility this bidder could have been outside waiting to be the low bid. Councilman Heath: I believe the bid should be discarded. The deadline is 10:00 A.M. on such matters and I think that should be aheld firm. You permit fourteen minutes to elapse on this and the next thing such a thing could go on and on. I think this bid should be rejected. • Councilman Pittenger: I think that is the safest thing to do. Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Heath that the bid on Project C-70 be awarded to Warren Southwest, Inc. (as the lowest responsible bidder) in the amount of $11,027.65 and that all other bids and bid bonds be returned to the unsuccessful bidders and that the bid of Cox Brothers was not considered because it was filed after the 10:00 A.M. deadline for the opening of bids in the office of the City Clerk. Motion passed on roll call as • follows: Ayes: Councilmen Barnes, Brown, Pittenger, Heath, Mayor Mottinger X66 ': None Absent: None HEAkINGS • PROTEST HEARING LOCATION: South and North side of Annexation No. 154 Francisquito Avenue, between Azusa. Avenue and Lark Ellen Avenue. Hearing held on April 14, 1958 as advertised and continued to this date to allow 10 day period for filing additional protests as required by law. Continue -61,6aring. Mayor Mottinger: Does the City Clerk have any additional Protests. on this mat ter? City Clerk: Yes, we do. The total land value in the area is $84,800.00, fifty percent of which would be required for protest or $42,400 in total land value, against this ann6kation. It was directed by Councilman April 14, 1958 that up to the date of April 24, 1958 further protests could be presented. By that date we had received $56,000 of the assessed valuation in protest, which is well over the 50%. C. C; 4-28-58 Page thirteen HEARINGS.- Continued City Attorney: No further action should be taken, but I would sugggst that a motion be forthcoming by Council findt,ug there has been a protest of more than a. majority of the assessed valuation. Motion by Councilman, Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried that thefindingsdEthe City Clerk, showing more than 50% of the total land valuation has protested, be accepted, RECLASSIFICATION NO, 125 LOCATION: 1101 Wescove Place, south - William W. Lovett east corner of Wescove Place and APPROVED Glendora Avenue. REQUEST. R-P Use and Adoption of Precise Plan of Design. EXISTING ZONE: R-1, Potential R-P Maps were presented by the City Engineer and the Resolution of the PlAh'fting Commission, recommending approval were read, The Recommendations were as follows: • 1. That all conditions specified in Planning Commission Resolution No. 567 be complied with. 2. That sanitary sewers be praljided. 3. That all buildings and signs not exceed one story in height. 4. That the required street improvements include those portions of • Glendora Avenue and Wescove Place contiguous to subject prop- erty. 5. That a 6-foot masonry wall.be constructed along the southeast- erly and southwesterly property lines. Mayor Mottinger requested that all those desiring to present testi- mony should rise and be sworn in by the City Clerk, There being no testimony presented, the hearing was declared closed. Reclass. #125 Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried that Reclassification No. 125 be approved. ZONE CHANGE NO. 115 • Pacific Development Co. REFERRED BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL LOCATION: West side of Barranca Street, south of Walnut Creek Wash. Recommended for approval from Zone R-A, Potential R-3 under Planning Commission Resolution No. 585. C. C, 4-28-58 • Z. C',' No,' 115 - continued Page fourteen Maps were presented by the City Engineer and the Resolutions of the Planning Commission were read, Planning Comm. 3ec'yo There has been no appeal within the 10 day period of the Precise Plan of Design No. 124 in connection with this matter and that will become final if the zone change is approved. Mayor Mottinger stated that all those desiring to present testimony should rise and be sworn,in by the City Clerk. Mayor Mottinger indicated that Council was operating under procedural • ordinance under which testimony can be limited as to time and requested of the proponents to indicate, if possible, how much time it would take for their testimony to be presented. The proponents indicated that 20 minutes would probably be sufficient, Mr. Candreva, of Candreva & Jarrett, architectural firm, spoke in favor. A brochure was presented to members of Council presenting the var- ious points in relation to the Precise Plan and arguments in favor of the zoning petition filed, "We have set up the original presentation that -we made before the Commission relative to the Precise Plan so that Council would be given an opportunity to look at it and we will speak on it briefly. • We have here a study showing what might be constructed here under a typical R-3 zoning on this property. We show the number of units that could be put on this land and the 20-foot alley that ran around the back of the property along Wa.lwest Drive and the same size units proposed to be placed on our precise plan as now proposed. There could be 164 one -bedroom apartments and 124 two -bedroom apartments for a total of 288 apartments with 288 enclosed garages and no open parking places. This shows.a typical 15-foot setback and 20-foAt between buildings. The next board shows our present Precise Plan developed after confer- ences with the Commission and developers. The apartment covering is 24%®, 10.7 for service area and garages with 34.7 total of buildings. Parking and drive is 13.7, with approximately 50% for walks, courts and landscapingo Our setbacks were 45-feet at the nearest point and 65-feet at the furthest point. We have large central courts approxi- mately 70 x 180 feet in this scheme, with swimming pool, recreation areas with private patios on the ground floor and patio decks on the second floor. C. C. 4-28-58 Page fifteen 0 Mr. Candreva - continued The entire developmentis meant to be a true luxury type development. In this instance there are 132 one -bedroom units and 72 two -bedroom units for a total of 204 units. There are enclosed garages and park- ing spaces with additional space, if required, for parking with planting buffer on our.o*n property and which can,hold 55'cars. We had foreseen in our scheme, and are within the requirements as set forth.in the original study, that landscaping was an important part of the whole project and so we attempted to keep this screen landscaping so that th6people above were not looking down into bare buildings but into something that will have a pleasant outlook. We have shown the auto circulation and how we come in at five separ- ate points to Walwest. We think it is a workable scheme and well within the things produced in a report by the joint committee. We have a floor plan -layout showing the type of unit we wish to build on this property. The two -bedroom unit has approximately 1024 square feet and the one -bedroom unit has approximately 784 .square feet. These apartments are larger than that recommended in the joint committee report but we felt those recommendations were too low for what we had in mind but although this gave us a higher building covering we did eliminate all the bachelor apartments • which we feel draws transients. After meeting with the Commission there were several points that they wished us to consider on the Precise Plan so we restudied it. One of those requirements was that this property across Walwest Drive very probably might one day become R-1 property and the Commission did not feel they wanted this R-1 facing across from Wal- West Drive with any streets or drive openings coming out this way. • We believe the block study shows the fact that streets come in from the other side and these properties back up to this. This necessi- tated a 60- foot A.Q.W-, out of'our property. This recommendation that we change this also included a 6-foot masonry wall on the south side of.Walwest Drive.and we lost a.few units to maintain the set- backs required, losing some 8 apartments so there is a total of 128 one -bedroom and 68 two -bedroom for 196 units. We have several points as to why we think we should be favored in the zoning on this matter. It is.our understanding that subject property is at present zoned A -A, Potential R-3 with a small area in the corner R-A, Potential C-1. However, we are including that area"; this request for R-3 zoning. This property has been so zoned for several yeaks'and although• there has been considerable difference of opinion as to the merit' of this particular property for the zone classification as applied -..- to it I do not believe there has been *any effort made to remove the potential R-3 classification. Lunderstand it has been up for considerable difference of opinion and arguments before Council and Commission but actually this is still zoned on t"ke--zoning map as Potential R-3. C. C. 4­28.58 Page sixteen Mr. Candreva-continued We have..attempted to the best of our ability to fill the require- ments of the joint committee report of June 6, 1956. The location of the site itself as regards its surroundings dic- tates multiple family as it is the only reasonable classification for this land backed against the flood control channel and a major roadway Lido not think that any people would enjoy having a resi- dence backed.against A flood channel or it would have developed R.-I prior to this time had that been go. There has been no formal opposition to the Precise Plan of Design nor were Any objections -filed dui'ing.the 10 day period after approv- al by the Commission. • We request only.the potential R 3 as shown on the zoning map with the C-1 for R 3 on this particular property and will comply with all recommendations and conditions contained in the Resolution of the Commission and made the .changes indicated by them. Mayor Mottinger stated the proponents had used 20 minutes for their testimony and the opponents would be granted the same amount of time. • Mr. J -Hall of-3131 E. Cortez Drive stated he was representing the recently formed West Covina Highland Association and speaking in opposition We are definitely opposed to any apartment development or multiple h6using, moving into the area south of the Walnut Creek Wash, We have many reasons we are opposed to this not because it is the basic development but for reasons we feel are very important • k.dcently we circulated a petition and for the record would read this petition 1) The, described property should not be classified as R,3 as it is impossible to develop this into multipl,p residential dwellings without inviting.similar use in adjacent residential area, 2) The land south of the Wash is already.developed to single family - residences. 3) The requested change to R 3 Constitutes preferential treatment to one piece.of property at the expense of single family dwell- ings. 4-) A zoning of R 1 Area District 11A would ptovide a reasonable development of the land and be compa . tible.with the surrounding development, We pe,tition that Precise P ' lan of Design No.� 124 and ,Zone Change No 115 be denied and further request that the City Council remove the Potential R 3 on this land and reclassify it to R,l, Area II. -A." C. C. 4-28­58 Page seventeen The petition was presented to the City Clerk to be filed for.the record. "The petition just read covered many points. We feel that there is a great possibility of the.spread of ' R-3 or multiple units in the area south of the Wash if this is permitted to go in. Mr' * ' Candreva pointed out what could be done hereunder typical R.-3. However, I do not think we are here for the purpose of what could be done but ­_-W-hat is, being done. The apartments in that areo'are looked down upon by homes that have a great deal of'.value, Thdy may not be unsightly because I am sure'tlie apartm4nts will have many good points, but.it will cer-�-. tdift%rreduce the\value of the land on.the hills overlooking this proposed development. We feel. that other property, as was stated in the Commission hear-, ing, will go multiple if this is permitted to do so Mr. Burkman stated his homewaslocated on northeast Mesa Drive and Barranca Street directly -.,overlooking these Apartments. "This property is in an area of very fine homes and I am sure that the people in the area bought them with the idea they would be in a quiet peaceful residential neighborhood, • If 'apartments were brought into this area it would mean the first move in the direction to break down the barriers in this area. It would not just be this one coming in to upset the way of living of the home owners in this area but would be a breakdown of values and would mean the opening of a door for the right to ask for R 3 in adjacent property and much of the area would lose any further residential use. • Lt is no secret that two or three people are just waiting to see how this matter goes to ask for just such further use on property -in this area. This would bring 200 apartments into a peaceful area and then there would be traffic problems noise, odors and other such nuisances imposed on the surrounding residences. This represents a threat to the stability and safety of the area. It willbringin people without permanent ties, bring in the prob lems of delinquency and increase the shortage of school rooms. Apartments themselves are good for a community but they should be located in suitable area so as not to interfere with established home areas or to tear down property values." Mr. D. Cullen of 3150 E. Virginia Avenue spoke in opposition. C. C. 4-28-58 Mr. Cullen continued Page eighteen In our work relative to this particular cage we did not file an appeal to the Precise Plan. Actually there was a purpose in not filing such an 'appeal as we wanted to 'Let it stand as an example of what had been done and let the Council wrestle with the change of zone in the neighborhood. The study I have presented shows the Wash in the area to the north with the subject property outlined and the street pattern which is to be established under the amended Block Study No. 41 as amended by the Commission to conform with the development to be brought.about by this particular plan if it is put into effect. The basic factor in the joint committee report overlooked by these people was the greater coverake of land than the committee had recpmmended.�which was not to exceed 25%. That has been exceeded . in this development. Service to this area is on Walwest Drive and that corresponds to frontage road shown on architects plan. This is for the sole purpose of serving a development and westerly end of i, They are setting it up so that 20--feet will come off single residential property to the south with no interest in the development of the established plan It throws a load, on single family property that should be borne by the parties requesting multiple family use. • At Walwest where it intersects Barranca and the street below and Virginia Street is planned as an intersection use of two streets intersecting Barranca less than 150 feet apart and I do not see how they can plan a street intersection such as this. It is an invita- tion to suicide and it is being done to allow adjoining property to back up to this particular piece of property, • The adjoining property owners will not develop in single family dwellings and they will want multiple dwellings. This is primarily single family area and to try to plan it any other way would be to try to change an area without the proper room to do so and making bad plannings. I.feel the proposed R-1, II -A would be equitable for the area. Mr. Ells of Vanderhoof Drive spoke as follows: This R-3 got in by being an arbitrary line around certain intersec t.ions but it is not taking into consideration topographical condi- tions. We have a 135 foot Wash which is a very fine barrier between the higher type of residential development and any other that would be developed to the north. To try to establish, by this artificial means, a barrier a few hundred feet to the south is not going to be satisfactory. C. C. 4. 28,­58 Page ni'heteen 9 -Mr. Ells - continued I. think the Commission did the best ,job they could conceive of in order to try to separate this fine residential district from this R.•3. I think it might call -.for a step down in zoning on the flat but there has been no difficulty in selling homes near the Wash. Because of the freeway and Eastland perhaps there should be a step down from District III on.the flat land and I would say the petition read tonight is in order and would bring about a development of ` this area in a very fine way. This use now proposed would bring in 10 times greater density than Area III, 7 times greater tlyari Area .II and 5 times greater than Area I and yet this adjoints Area III_. Mr. Als_op of 130 So. Barranca 'Mated as follows: I.testified at the Commission hearing that although I do not want to start such use going in here that if this goes R-3 I would have no alternative but to submit such a request myself. I have two or three neighbors waiting for this to happen and who adjoin my prop erty in the back and constitute some 15 acres in.the heart of this area to the east of the proposed area. It would seem that if you are'going to stop this it should be at the Creek and not going over the Wash. Mr. M. Abrams of 2907 Mesa Drive stated as follows: I would point out the effect that this proposed use would have on the surrounding property dollar wise. I was aFinember of the joint committee some two years ago and have intimate knowledge of the proposed development as regards apartment units in this area. After the matter abated the first time I received a call from a • representative of the Prudential Insurance Company who were turning down an application for a construction loan for a proposed house on Mesa Drive. .He had heard and read of the proposed development of apartments that might come in here on this land and the loan was being turned down because of that. However, I assured h1m those apartments weren't going in. I believe the people surrounding this area could give the clue as to the highest and best use of this property There was a tract of homes put in by Mr. Ells off Vpnderhoof which received no objec. Lion from those in the su.rrounding.area because it fitted in with the overall picture. I felt that the Planning Commission had to approve the Precise Plan and zoning and possibly had no choice in the matter, but I believe the City Attorney will bear out the fact that Council does not have to put up with this potential zoning on this if it does not desire • to do so Ca C. 4=28-98 Page twenty • Mr, J. Kay of 2747 E. Sunset dill drive spoke in opposition, I speak as a former member of the joint committee. The report mentioned 96 apartments in the area and they were restricted to only one-story. I do not feel this should have been passed by the Commission in that the joint committe report was not complied with by the applicant, and did not resemble the conditions of the report. I feel that the property should be R-1 II or III. There is no question of the desirability of the land to be developed R-1. We approved R-1 Area III in this area only two weeks ago and Council has the power to initiate proceedings to go R­1 from R 3. Mr. W. Lyhch of. 1032 Spring Meadow Drive stated as follows- f . This property got into the potential R-3 classification at the time the school district was looking for sites. On that basis it was given considerations for R-3. The City Clerk presented and read a written protest from R.B.Rounds of 3038 Mesa Drive. Mr. Candreva spoke in rebuttal. . r believe we are not here to bring up whether this should rather be R.1 Area II property but to determine whether or not the potential R 3 zoning should or should not be granted. Mr. Cullen brought up the matter of 20--feet being taken from R-1 property. Actually you will find in most subdivision procedures that when a new street is dedicated that property on both sides of the proposed right-of-way deeds approximately 50% of that to the • City or in fee simple. In this case we are giving 40-feet to the 20-Meet of R-1. ,Mr. Burkman brought up the point of noise, odors and such things a(fting in with this use. If the noise and odors from the freeway are not noticeable now I am sure this use will not bring in any 'further disturbing influences that will be noticed along those lines. The line of the bluff where these houses are sitting overlooking the property is a'physical barrier also. I checked to see how many houses looked down on this area and to the best of my ability I came up with approximately 15 to 20 houses to look down upon this property so there are not many people doing so. We believe we have more control architecturally and landscape wise with R-3 then with R-1. Most people do not hire landscaping artists for lay out designs on their property so you might be looking upon something • more pleasant with exacting design in apartments than with R-1. C. C. 4-28-58 Mr. Candreva continued Page twenty-one In so far as people having homes backing up to the Wash, .I think things are going to change quite a bit so far as the looks of the Wash ire concerned when the flood control people come in and con- crete that Wash with 15 to 20 foot high walls and make a rectangle concrete waterway rather than looking down as it is now, which is rather a pleasant place with trees, weeds,etc. I also believe that the Planning Commission merely has the power to suggest what should be done with property and that theinein on the Commission, Mr. Gerschler and even Mr. Bennett said this land lshould be R-3 and I believe men having their background would know quite a bit about planning. l do not believe that surrounding homes will be materially effected. I site the case of the Baldwin Hill's Village Gardens where surround.. . ing,lan_d with single family homes has increased rather than decreased since such use was put in there. I think this is a growing community and land values will continue to rise and that these people who are wanting their peace and quiet will find that within five years they will be in the 'hub' of the city rather than on its outskirts in ..spite.of what the picture seems to indicate now. There being no further testimony, the hearing was declared closed, .Mayor Mottinger: What would be the legal requirements in de- veloping property established potential R.-3? The property owner has that information and fries to develop it is it necessary it be changed to permanent R-3 or might it be denied? • City Attorney: There is no compulsion it be changed at any given time. Potential is an indication that it remains there: and indicates that at a time the City deems it proper it could be changed. There is a paragraUh in the Ordinance which is somewhat obscure but does clearly cbnfain the exercising of your descrimina- tion as to the time and design. It is not compulsory it be changed merely, because someone comes in with an acceptable plan for us. Mayor Mottinger: There is no compulsion to change it at any given time, but how about any time at all? City Attorney: _ The compulsion without time is not a c6mpu_1 ' lion. ,Counci<lman drown: As a Council we have authority to give or take this away from property? • City Attorney: Any time you wish you could change it to some other zoning and it would have the same effect as denial. C. Co 4.28.,58 Page twenty. -two • Councilman Pittenger: However our actual policy has been that when - there is an acceptable Precise P:'.an we have granted the firm zoning, City Attorney: Now you are talking about something that is not legal in nature. This constitutes some sort of committment by the City as to what it would do but it is not legally feasible and has no time limit. Councilman Pittenger: I was a member of the committee when Mr. Daniels owned it and although I do not recall - the number of units stiuplated but I do know it was not 196 and that it did prohibit two. -story. The south and west side required garages not carports and it set out a limit on building area which was 25%® total cover. -- • age of the area. None Plan. However we can't of these things are met with in this Precise turn down the think the plan unless we change is not the best use of the property.and on that basis I do not think it is the best use. We would have more people than is intended for the. area living here. Iihaven't made up my mind whether the apartment use is proper and I"can understand the feelings of these people who live on the hill, .but we have better"control over the land if it is used for apart- ments - so far as esthetic use'is concerned than if the zone was R-1, Area I, We can better control position of buildings and the view. Councilman Brown: It was brought up by Mr. Lynch that this was originally marked R­3 for a school site which is correct and I was on the Council at the time it was done and also on the committee with the Covina School District. is This is the first time there has ever been a zone change without a Precise Plan being presented. I voted against this zoning when it first came up and would be doing the same thing tonight, but it seems there is something that is trying to be railroaded in here tonight. Councilman ]Barnes: Have you checked the revised plan for drain- age and flood conditions? City.Engineer; We have not had the opportunity to check the revised plan. Mayor Mottinger: The statement was made that the Precise Plan had been adopted so.that it.would not come before Council for approval but still it does not take effect until the zoning is granted. .Would that not make it possible for ejections to be still in order 10 day,ys after zoning were granted? The precise Plan is not approved until the zoning is. City Attorney: I think that might be true. There may be some cases where'the Planning Commission C.;. Co 4-28-58 • City Attorney continued Page Twenty-three would approve the Precise Plan where planning would be good regardless of the zone change. This plan would not be good unless you grant the zone change, Mayor Mottinger: If the zone change were granted we would still be able to have the Precise Plan concur with our wishes? City Attorney: I believe that could be worked out admini- stratively and presented to Council. Mayor Mottinger: Should this be referred back to the Planning Commission, if it should be denied by Council? City Attorney: The otdinance provides that it shall be with a request for further report. Failure to report on the matter within 40 days may be deemed approval of Councij°'s, recommendation by the Planning Commission. Motion by Councilman. Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried that Zone Change No. 115 be referred back to the Planning Commission for report and with the recommendation it be denied for the reason that this R-3 is not to the highest use of the particular property, _REQUEST TO COPOIDER Mr. Nitrini, representing the May Company ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY Granada RealtyandEastland Businessmen's REGARDING MAY COMPANY Association stated as follows DIRECTIONAL SIGN$ "I know what the action of Council was regard- • ing this matter a couple of weeks ago. However, I am here this evening to re discuss it with Council and to try.to clarify our posi- tion in the hope of your understanding the importance of these signs. It is my opinion that the Council has agreed that directional signs are of good use for citizens and business in the area. It is my further understanding that Council will take under advisement the study of such signs so that it will bring in the conformity of such signs for the benefit of the shopping centers. With that in mind I ask Council to consider that if such signs are good for the busi- ness in the area why should we be forced to take down our signs dur- .ing the interim time of such a study? I believe the signs are important to the area and there is a responsibility of direction to the citizens which is a joint consideration of the City and of business. Councilman Pittenger: I think I made my position quite clear last meeting. We do want directional signs to show people where our business districts are. Several months ago I went to Sacramento and that is one of the C� • C. C, 4-08-58 Councilman Pittenger - continued Page 'I'Venty-four things we requested consideration of: the matter of directional signs. We know, as of now, that the best we have is the 'Road- side Business' sig*s which is about 18" high and 15' long. These .bear no similarity to the directional signs of Eastland. This thing could drag on for many months and we have more urgent things. we think, regarding off ramps and additional ramps off the freeway on which we would much rather have reports than roadside business signs and I think these matters are very important to the area. The last reports were that such matters were being considered. We granted the original Eastland sign until January 1 of this year. Then they came in for an extension which was granted and then we granted another extension, the last being until the sign ordinance went into effect which was the stipulation on it. I think we have played ball with Eastland in that we have granted two extensions and when we did it we had pressures from the Plaza and the Center merchants. They deserve signs as much as anyone and they want to do business in the community too. If we grant one we should grant them all and in all fairness those (E^stland) signs should have gone down immediately the sign ordin- ance went into effect. I can see no reason to quibble over this. • We granted an extension twice and I think that is as far as Council should go. Councilman Barnes: I,think that originally Mr. Nitrini or a ._s+apresentative came in and asked for direc tional signs to direct traffic for the Christmas shopping. We thought that there would be quite a bit of congestion in the City and we felt the need for such signs and we . agreed that this was the reason for granting such signs to January 1. After that time they came in for an extension and we were going through the process of our sign ordinance which we had not adopted and we thought that in all fairness we should grant this extension because we did not know what kind of a sign ordinance would be adopted. We granted this extension until May 1 or until the sign ordinance was adopted, and I feel these signs should have been down as of April 10 when the sign ordinance was adopted. Councilman Heath: I think that the past and present Council was of the opinion that such signs are necessary for the shopping districts of the City, all three of them. We seem to give such indications but then we go around and say such signs must be taken down yet we have nothing to propose in place of them I think this puts a 'monkey on our back' by saying signs should be taken down but with nothing to offer in replacement. • I believe that before we say signs must come down we should have something to offer to those business people as to what we feel we would rather have. C; C. 4-28-58 0 Councilman Heath - continued Page twenty-five I think there should be a compromise here to say that until some definite decision and design is reached by the State that permission ..,be_,given to put something up, approved by Council until such time as we can tell them what kind of permanent signs can be given to them. Councilman Brown: I made my stand previously. I do not think that it is so much a question of taking the signs down but a question of deciding that every business have a sign. We give permits for business and then do not advertise it. People may want to stop at these various business centers and I think that everyone of them should have directional signs to indi.- cate them and that it be made a uniform sign. The center merchants • group asked us to consider a sign for the center and I think the same thing should apply to the Plaza, to Azusa Avenue, to Starks and to Eastland, I do not think it is too good on the part of Council to tell Eastland to take down the signs, even though they have gone over their allotted time, since it is a source of revenue to the City and we should protect that revenue and not drive it away. Sears has a sign on the freeway and I do not see why we should not. • Councilman Heath: I do not think it should be signs directing to special businesses but=business districts. Councilman Brown: I would agree but Azusa and Hollenbeck should have some type of sign indicating business district. Mayor Mottinger How long do you think it might be before • there is any decision from the State Highway `department as to what they will permit as to signs along the freeway? Acting City Mgr: The Highway Department is presently in nego,.. tiation with the City of West Covina and to date they have refueed to grant such signs. We have a resolution that Council could adopt asking the Highway Commission to grant signs of business districts of uniform stand- ards. We outlined the signs we felt were needed but it was turned down except for a few street directional signs. We contacted them 8 or 10 days ago and we still cannot get an answer as to what they will or will not do but I would recommend that you pass a resolution requesting standard business district signs including the civic center. w • We are designing formal signs now. C. C. 4-28-58 Page twenty-six Mayor Mottinger: I believe the signs that exist in regard to Eastland will not conform to what we will have. But since they are up this long I be- lieve another month'or two extension will not be objectionable so long.as we are in the process of what manner of signs there will be and to be expedited as quickly as possible. Councilman Pittenger: I do not believe it is our decision to make. This is State property and we haven't accep- ted the freeway or the service road and we may be getting into trouble. I am quite sure the sign does not con- form and what we are doing is giving an extension of some months and at the same time we are turning down the center and the Plaza who have just as much right to directional signs. I agree each one should have the right type of sign but you do not have the right to use the land for the sign. • Councilman Brown: Since the matter is under discussion., one sign is on State property but that is leased from the State and they know the use that it is being put to. I understand another piece of State property is being leased with the understanding this will be used for a sign. If the State is renting this property with the known thought what this will be used for I do not see that we are violating our posi- tion with the State. Mr. Lynch: At the time of the latest extension request of the Eastland sign Mr. Nitrini was ill and I appeared for him. At the time I stated that Perhaps the time request was too short but the letter of Mr. ..Nitrini indicated the time limit requested would solve the problem, but it has not. Mr..W. DeMuthe (Center'Merchants Ass'n.) If a mistake was made in granting per- mission for these signs I won�lt argue that point., but when you did grant it it should have been a broader scope of permission so that the Plaza and Center were not imposed upon. I made a point last time, .in'the absence of the Mayor, that 10 weeks ago tonight the Minutes will show considerable discussion regarding our request for signs and you as Council agreed something should be done. In 10 weeks it seems you should have been able to make some type of a.decision. It seems it is a bankrupt policy on the part of the governing body to take that long to decide a policy. If you are going to give us the right to put up signs the request of Mr. Nitrini shouldn't be penalized, and have those taken down. We feel it is time for you to make a decision and not be continually waiting'to see what the State is going to do. This is bound up by the State Engineers and engineers are notoriously slow.thinkers and take a long time to make up their minds. C. C. 4-28-58 • Mr. W. DeMuth - continued Page Twenty seven After 10 weeks of talking of policy. give us the -opportunity to put up our signs, and also the Plaza, and we will take our changes on what the State will do, but let's not go on with this differing leaving one sign up and penalizing everyone else. Motion by Councilman Brown for the. Eastland Directional Signs to remain status quo for the next thirty (30) days and'to come up with something to let the other merchants know where they stand as to whether they do or• do -not_ have sigps-f-ailed for lack of second. Councilman Huth: I think that is a good idea but you still, have two other groups that must be repreF�. sented and At .is showing partiality. I think there is one way to go and that is to let the signs stay up and let the Plaza and the Center have signs, although not the same size be- cause of uncertain conditions, in o3der to have some equality until we can decide what we are going to do about these signs. We are penalizing these people for something that we cannot give them a substitute for. If the Plaza and Center want to gamble and put up signs' with our approval, let them do so and do not take the signs down until there is a definite substitute for something that can be put up. Mayor Mottinger: I believe it is agreed among all of us that the signs under dispute have very little like- lihood of being aparoved by the State Depart- ment.. These signs will probably be lost and we all agree on that. Councilman Brown: I feel that is correct but let's sit down and work on a sign that is fair to all groups. Mayor Mottinger: Mr. Johnson you, are working on such a propo- sal. When would it be ready? Acting City Mgr: You could direct the City Manager to have (Mr. Zohnson) them ready in 30 days. If you clear this motion out someone should be instructed to carry this responsibility through. Mayor Mottinger: I believe any signs proposed would have a reasonable possibillt:�_of being successful with the Highway Department. I would be in favor of granting 30 days on that basis provided something defi- nite is going forward on signs. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath that the Eastland Directional Signs remain status quo and that the City • Manager be instructed to bring in recommendations on signs (for such use) within 30 days and that Council act within 15 days of that time which makes a total of 45 days. C. C. 4-28-58 Page Twenty-eight • Directional Signs - continued Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Brown, Heath, Mayor Mottinger Noes: Councilmen Barnes, Pittenger Absent: None Mr. Bentley representing the Plaza stated as follows: So far as we are concerned 45 days won't bother us. We want the same consideration given us and the signs should conform. I would direct a thought to the City Manager that we feel the signs that .just say 'Roadside Business' are as useless as can be. We should advertise or say we are the Plaza or Center or Eastland. People want to know where the certain centers are located and they should be defined by name rather than just say roadside business. • Mr. Lynch: I would like to say that I believe that cer- tain considerations should be made relative to Stark's for presentation to the City Manager. • A recess was called and the Mayor left the Chambers at 10:35 P.M. Council reconvened at 10:50 P.M. and Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger took over the Chair. REQUEST FOR FUNDS For Junior Horse Show schedule on the newly FOR INSTALLATION OF leased Valencia Heights Water Company pro - SPRINKLERS AND GRAD- perty in accordance with terms of the City's ING ON RIDING RING sub -lease with the Ridge Riders. Horse Show PARTIAL APPROVAL to be held May 25. FOR IMMEDIATE WORK In the discussion on this matter there was indication by Council that the Precise Plan on this had been approved when the zone change was given but the Plan was to come before the Commission at their meeting of May 7. It was indicated that because of the short notice given on this matter that at the present time possibly the grading only could be done now and sprinklers as soon as possible. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried that the Director of Public Works and Park Director proceed with the.,ough grading and put in the sprinklers as soon as we (City)" can do so. • C. C. 4-28-58 Page Twenty-nine • 44SOLUTION NO. 1336 LOCATION: Hollenbeck acid "Okeenville Sewer Accepting Dedication District. For Sanitary SewO'k Purposes in of Easement Tract No. 21425. ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A CERTAIN .WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING THE RECORDATION THEREOF." (Ralph E; Adams and Alice K. Adams.) Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger: Hearing no objections, we will waive fur- ther reading of the body of the Resolution. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes that Reso- lution No. 1336 be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilman Barnes, Brown, Heath, Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger . Noes: None Absent: Mayor Mottinger RESOLUTION N0, 1337 LOCATION: Hollenbeck and Greenville Sewer Accepting Dedication District. For Sanitary Sewer Purposes for of Easementr Tract No. 21425. ADOPTED • "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A CERTAIN WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING THE RE- CORDATION.,THEREOFo" (W.E.Hardy and Emily M. Hardy-) Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the • Resolution. Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Beath that Resolution No. 1337 be adopted. Motion passe.d on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Barnes, Brown, Heath, Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger Noes: None Absent: Mayor Mottinger RESOLUTION NO. 1338 LOCATION: West side of Vincent Avenue, south Accepting Grant Deed of Puente Avenue. For street and highway (Project C 65) purposes. ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A CERTAIN WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING THE RECOR- DATION THEREOF." (Robert E. & Ethel • Lucile Probst) • 0 • C. C. 4-28-58 RESOLUTION NO. 1338 - continued Page Thirty Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the body of the Reso- lution. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes that Resolution No. 1338 be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as .follows: Ayes: Councilman Barnes, Brown, Heath Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger Noes: None Absent• Mayor Mottinger RESOLUTION NO, 1339 LOCATION: West side of Vincent Avenue. south Accepting Grant Deed of Puente Avenue. For street and highway (Project No. C-6S) purposes. ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A CERTAIN WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING THE RECORDATION THEREOF." (Joseph Principe and Frances Principe) Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger: Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of the Resolution. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath that Resolution No. 1339 be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilman Barnes, Brown Heath, Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger Noes: None • Absent: Mayor Mottinger PRELIMINARY REPORT Ardilla and Ituni Sewer District Sanitary Sewer Dist- rict A'11-57--J The City Engineerstated a signed petition ACCEPTED had been submitted for subject district and all signatures had been validated against the last tax roll and represent 62.5% of the area of the -district. The preliminary estimate of cost for this project is $39,550.00 or approximately $309,00 per lot. This includes con$truction costs, engineering and incidental expenses. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried that this preliminary report be accepted and filed with the City Clerk, and that the City Engineer be instructed to request ,the health officer to investigate the sanitary conditions of the • istrict, and that the City Engineer be instructed to proceed with the ,preparation of final plans and specifications for the project. C. C. 4-28-58 Page thirty-one • TRACT NO. 22669 LOCATION: South side of Puente Avenue, east Accept Street of Lark Ellen Avenue. Improvements (George Meeker) APPROVED Upon the recommendation of the City Engineer. motion by Councilman Barnes. seconded by Councilman Brown and carried that street improvements in Tract No. 22669 be accepted and authorization given for the release of General Casualty Company Bond No. 338343 in the amount of.$36,000.00, retaining deposit of $966.00 for sidewalks and $250.00 for street signs not installed to date. TRACT NO. 21479 LOCATION: South side of Cameron Avenue, Accept Street East of Barranca Street. Reconsideration Improvements of condition of acceptance. (Myers Bros., Inc.) APPROVED • Upon.the recommendation of the City Engineer, motion by Councilman Brown seconded by Councilman Heath and carried that street improve ments in Tract No. 21479 be accepted and authorization be given for the release of Great American Indemnity Company Bond No. 616651 in the amount of $52,000.00, subject to the receipt of deposit in the amount of $1942.00 for street improvements not installed on Cameron Avenue. PROJECT C-44 LOCATION: California Avenue, north of Street Improvement Francisggito Avenue. Project constructed by L.A. County Road City Engineer. presenting written report: Department We agreed to construct, on a cooperative APPROVED basis, the two projects as shown. Since California Avenue was a local street we • could not spend County Aid or Gas Tax money on it. At that time_.we agreed with the County Road Department to pay $1000.00 out of the Street Widening and Lowering Fund. On Francis- quito Ave. it was proposed to do some work there at a cost of approximately $3000.00. The County Road Department did not pay much attention to the different ways of our financing and they charged $2487.64 for the California Street Project and $2182.06 to Francisquito Avenue. In addition they did some additional work on California Avenue which amounts to a difference in the neighbor- hood of $600.00. To square this account with the County we have a bill of $2487.64 presented to us for California Ave. At this time I would recommend a supplement to the $1000.00 approved • on the California Project and pay the additional bill of $1487.64 from the Traffic and Safety Contingent Fund. C. Cs 4-28-58 . Project C-44 - Continued Page thirty-two Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath that the recommendations of the City Engineer regarding Project C-44 be approved and authorization be given to pay the amount due the L.A. County Road Department of $1487.64 to be taken from the City':s Traffic and Safety Contingent Fund. Motion passed on roll call as follows Ayes: Councilmen Barnes, Brown, Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger Noes: None Absent: Mayor Mottinger HKARIXGS' PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO, 22 A proposal to establish a new zone City Initiated classification to be known and desig- HELD OVER nated "M-L" (Limited Manufacturing) Zone. Planning Commission Resolution No. 584. Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger opened the public hearing. There being no testimony presented, the hearing was declared closed. • Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried that Proposed Amendment No. 22 be held over for further study. as it is entirely too restrictive to get new manufacturing into the City. PROTEST HEARING Hearing of protests or objections to Installation of Sanitary forming 1911 Act Assessment District to Sewers - Distr. A111-57-4 cover installation of sanitary sewers in the Bixby Avenue. Hartley Street and Astell Avenue Sewer District. Set for hearing on this date by Resolution of Intention No.' 1313 passed by the City Council at their regular meeting of March 24, 1958. Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger: The hour of 11:25 d'block P. M. having arrived, this is the time... and place for hearing protests or objections against the improvement of Rowland Avenue and other streets in the City of West Covina, as described in Resolution No. 1313. Does the City Clerk have the Affidavits of Publication, Posting and mailing? • City Clerk: I have the affidavits. • n U 0 C. C. 4-28-58 Page ithirty-three HEARINGS - continued Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger: I will entertain a motion to receive and file the affidavits. Moti.ob by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried that the Affidavits of Publication, Posting and Mailing 2?e received and filed for the record. Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger: Has the City Clerk received any written protests or objections against the doing of this proposed work? City Clerk: We have received no such protests. The Mayor Pro Tem questioned if there were any present desiring to present protests. None were forthcoming. RESOLUTION.NO. 1340 "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE Ordering work to be CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING done on Bixby Avenue, YIDRK,ffO BE DONE ON ROWLAND AVENUE AND Hartley Street and OTHER STREETS IN ACCORDANCE WITH RESOLU- Astell Avenue Sewer TION OF INTENTION NO. 1313." District ADOPTED Mayor Pro,Tem Pittenger: Hearing no objections, we will waive fur- -tIzer remding,- of the body of the Resolu- t9 an'-- Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes that Resolution No. 1340 be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows Ayes: Councilman Barnes, Brown, Heath, Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger Noes: None Absent: Mayor Mottinger PARKS' AND RECREATION CONDEMNATION PROCEDURE Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by ON PROPERTY ADJACENT TO Councilman Barnes and carried that the. COMIDA PARK City Manager and the law firm of Burke, APPROVED Williams and Sorenson be instructed to proceed with condemnation proceedings to acquire three (3) parcels totaling 4.327 acres for the proposed addition to Comida Park. ACTION TO COMPLETE Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by • ARRANGEMENTS FOR LEASING Councilman Barnes and carried that the OF THE O.D. HARBERT Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to PROPERTY ADJACENT TO sign the lease. CORTEZ PARK APPROVED C.—C. 4-28-58 . Page thirty-four • PARKS AND RECREATION - continued Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and .carried that the written agreement on the above be held over to be presented to Council at their adjourned meeting Monday evening. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS' Letter from Equestrian Trails, Inc. Request o devel-o-p—IflUing and Hiking Trails along Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Walnut Creek Wash Councilman Barnes that this matter be HELD OVER held over for further study. It was indicated the Planning Commission was working on this matter at the present time. .REPRESENTATIVE FROM A communication indicated that Mrs. WOMAN'"_B _C.LUB OF WEST• ,Johnson will continue to attend Council C:OVINA meetings as a representative of The Mrs.. Arthur B. Johnson Woman's Club of West Covina, PLANNING CiOMMISS'ION' TENTATIVE MAP OF LOCATION: South side of Merced Avenue TRACT NO, 20714 between Willow and Garvey Avenues, West Covina Associates • HELD OVER TO 3.14 Acres - 11 Lots -- Area District I meeting'of May 12, 1958 The Planning Commission Secretary stated that a call had been re- ceived from the applicant's representative requesting this matter be held over until the Precise Plan is presented which is scheduled for hearing on May 12, 1958. . It was consensus this be done. .RESOLUTION NO. 592 "A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD OVER OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A _.CERTAIN REPORT ENTITLED 'WEST.COVINA- ST PUENTE VALLEY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN', adopting the physical development plans therein as tentative guides for future consideration and defining the application of interim zone designations." Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger stated this matter had not been presented to the City Manager and that it should be given further study. Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Brown and carried that Planning Commission Resolution No.592 be held over for further Council Study. 0 C,.C, 4-28-58 Page thirty-five RESOLUTION NO. "593 "A Resolution of the Planning Commission OF.THE PLANNING COMM, of the City of West Covina. recommending ACCEPTED to the City Council that the U.S. Army Comps of Engineers be asked to include 11ae lowering of the Glendora and Vincent Avenue bridges in conjunction with forth- coming Walnut Creek Project to permit the, completion of certain intersection secondary highways." Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried that Planning Commission No. 593 be accepted. This was given approval by the Acting City Manager. Motion by Councilman Brown seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried that the City Attorney be instructed to draw up a Resolution, of the Council in relation to the matter as indicated in Planning Commission Resolution No. 593. PLANNING COMMISSION "A Resolution of the Planning Commission of RESOLUTION NO. 594 City of West Covina recommending that HELD OVER the position of Planning Director be established and that Malcolm C. Gerschler be appointed to that position." • Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried that this matter be held over for further consideration by the City Council and the new incoming City Manager. Not studied by Acting City Manager. PLANNING COMMISSION "A Resolution of the Planning Commission RESOLUTION NO, 505 of the City of West Covina to the • HELD OVER Regional Planning Commission requesting their taking whatever steps are neces- sary to prevent the removal from the Master Plan of the Riding and Hiking Trails within the boundaries of the City of West Covina. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Brown that this matter be held over for further Council study. This had not been studied by the Acting City Manager. CITYATTORNEY SECOND READING "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ORDINANCE NO.571 CITY OF WEST COVINA REZONING CERTAIN Rezoning certain PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1030 GLENDORA AVENUES," property (Delaney) (Lot 32 of Tract 14681) �ADOPTED C. C. 4-28--58 ORDINANCE NO. 571 continued Page thirty-six Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried that further reading of the body of the ordinance be waived. Motion by Councilman Barnes seconded by Councilman Brown that Ordinance No. 571 be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Barnes Brown, Heath, Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger Noes: None Absent: Mayor Mottinger RESOLUTION NO. 1341 The City Attorney presented and read Amending conditions of "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE approval of Precise Plan CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING ONE OF THE #60 and Variance 158 in CONDITIONS OF THE APPROVAL OF THE PRECISE Ord. #443 PLAN AND VARIANCE SET FORTH IN ORDINANCE ADOPTED NO. 443." (Sidney Pink) LOCATION: East side of Glendora north of Service Ave. Motion by Councilman Brown seconded by Councilman Barnes that Reso- lution No. 1341 be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: • Ayes: Councilmen Barnes, Noes: None Absent: Mayor Mottinger. ABSOLUTION NO, 1342 Denying request for Change of zone and denying approval of Precise Plan (Zone Change No, 113 Precise Plan No. 121) ADOPTED • Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger: Brown, Heath, Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger 'A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA DENYING'A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONE AND DENYING APPROVAL OF A PRECISE PLAN." (Ferraro Hill & Hoke) Proposed Southerly Annexation.No�, 159 Hearing no objections, we will waive further reading of .the body of the Resolution. Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Heath that Reso- lution No. 1342 be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as.fol,lows: Ayes: Councilmen Barnes, Noes: None Absent: Mayor Mottinger City Attorney: Brown Heath Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger Council can now pass an Ordinance approv- ing Annexation No. 159 or a Resolution disapproving Annexation No. 159. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried that the matter of approving or disapproving Southerly Annexation Noy: 159 be held over for further study. C. C. 4-28-58 Page thirty-seven • INTRODUCTION Location, North side of Puente Avenue. Ordinance rezoning west of Azusa Avenue, certain property (City Initiated) "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COV.INA REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PUENTE WEST OF AZUSA AVENUE," Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Brown and carried that the Ordinance be introduced and given its first reading. INTRODUCTION "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE Ordinance Amending CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING ORDINANCE . Ord. ##556 relating NO, 556 RELATING TO THE PERSONNEL SYSTEM." to„Personnel System . Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried that the Ordinance be introduced. RESOLUTION NO-1343 "A'RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF Amending,Resolut.ion No. THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING 12.77 with resPect•to--pJky- RESOLUTION NO, 1277 WITH RESPECT TO ment of -overtime THE PAYMENT OF OVERTIME." t"I- OPTED • Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger: Hearing no objections, we will waive fur- ther reading of the body of the Resolu tion. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath that Reso- lution No. 1343 be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows• • .A.yes• Councilmen Barnes Brown, Heath, Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger Noes: None Absent: Mayor Mottinger RESOLUTION NO. 1344 The City Attorney presented and read Unification of school "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF district boundaries THE CITY OF WEST COVINA RECOMMENDING ADOPTED THE RECONSIDERATION OF THE PROPOSED UNIFICATION AND REALIGNMENT OF SCHOOL DISTRICT BOUNDARIES" Motion by Councilman Brown seconded by Councilman Heath that Resolution No. 1344 be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Barnes, Brown. Heath. Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger hlWs : None Absent: Mayor Mottinger` C, .. C, 4-28 .58 . ACTING CITY MANAGER' REPORTS , Page thirty-eight CITY.ENTRY INTO CITY Full cooperation was asked by the EMPLOYEE SAFETY CONTEST Acting City Manager in regoi:td to entry of West Covina into City Employee Safety Contest sponsored by the League of California Cities. ENTRY.OF CITY INTO "ALL Sponsored by National Municipal League AMERICAN CONTEST" and Look Magazine. Pr©ject Citizen Capital Improvement Progr m The Acting City Manager stated the application was sent this date. RESOLUTION NO, 1345 The --City Attorney presented and read • Appointing Civil Defense "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF Chiefs of Service THE..CITY OF WEST COVINA APPOINTING ADOPTED. CIVIL DEFENSE CHIEFS OF SERVICE." Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes that Resolution No. 1345 be adopted. Motion PS sed on roll call as follows: • Ayes- Councilmen Barnes, Brown, Heath Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger. .Noes: None Absent Mayor,Mottnger PURCHASE OF STATION Acting City Manager: I- have a recom-- WAGON mendation to Council for the purchase HELD FOR STUDY of a Station Wagon to go into the equipment pool and to turn in the 1953 • Ford Pick-up Truck. There is a summary of the bids attached to this recommendation presented to you and I feel the price is extremely reasonable. This would be for the sole use of field trips. which is the recommendation of the City Engineer. but I would like Council to enlarge on that use in that it can be used for Council and Commission for their field trips and other such purposes. It was consensus this be held for further study and it was re- quested that the City Engineer find out the difference in cost be tween the six and eight cylinder engine iby- the' time of the adjourned meeting Monday evening. City Manager: I have received a few items from the City Employees Association in relation to the Personnel Ordinance. LJ C. C. 4-28-58 CITY 'CLERK PROCL'AiATIONS' Fire Service Day - May 3, 1958 Burglary Prevention Week - May 4 through 10 1958 Hope Sunday - June 8 1958 City of Hope Month June 1958 "KDWC" National Radio Month - May, 1958 Page thirty-nine The above were so proclaimed by the Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger. Reminder of Area "D" directors meeting to be held April 30, 1958 • League Directors Meeting reminder May 1 1958 - Councilmen Pittenger and Heath attend CONFERENCE OF MAYORS Invitation from the Office of the Mayor of Los Angeles to join conference of • Mayors to be held in New Orleans during September 11-13 1958. EL MONTE ANNEXATIONS Proposals for annexation Nosn.156 & 157 to the City' -of Er ^Monte o --No protei§ts * l l be . made e COV'INA HIGHLANDS Notice from the County Boundary Commis - INCORPORATION sion that incorporation will again be • attempted by the Covina Highlands. CITY TREASURER March. 1958 Report Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried that the City Treasurer's report for March. 1958 be accepted and filed for the record. SIGNATURES FOR Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by ,SIGNING OF CHECKS Councilman Heath and carried that the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tempore and Chief Finance Officer and City Treasurer sig, natures be obtained enabling them to sign checks on the Trust Account and General Account of the City of West Covina at the Bank of America of West Covina. C. C. 4-28-58 Page forty TENTATIVE TRACT Mary E. Willston MAP NO, 24035 A FERRED TO THE LOCATION: North Lark Ellen Avenue. PLANNING COMM.� Involved a revision of the Tentative Map in relation to a 12--foot land strip on the easterly side of North Lark Ellen Avenue which was included in the original map. Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Brown and carried thfit this matter be referred to the Planning Commission. COUNCTL; COMMITTEE' REPORTS APPOINTMENT OF CITIZENS TRAFFIC -SAFETY COMMITTEE • CHAIRMAN No Report. CONTRACT EXTENSION Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded FOR SERVICES OF DIRECTOR by Councilman Heath that the Mayor and OF PUBLIC WORKS the City Clerk be authorized to exe-- APPROVED cute the contract extension between the City of West Covina and.Harold L. Johnson for services as Director of Public Works commencing July, 1958. and continuing for two years thereafter. Motion passed on roll call as follows. Ayes: Councilmen Barnes, Brown, Heath Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger Noes: None Absent: Mayor Nottinger • City Attorney: I contacted the City of Hayward concern- ing their industrial commission. They do have such a commission and it is almost identical to the resolution adopted here. The commission is advisory and made up of citizens working in conjunction with the Planning Commission and presents recommendations on industrial location and extends good will toward industry locating in the City It is appointed by Council and serves the pleasure"of Council. The only way you might put more teeth into this would be to adopt A City Charter which exempts certain things now prevented by the State Constitution. 40 C. C. 4--28 •58 Page forty-one • Councilman Heath stated that he had many questions put to him re- _garding the sign ordinance and they were not necessarily favorable opinions. He was wondering who such matters might be referred to. It was indicated that they might be referred to Bob Ebiner of the Chamber of Commerce. Upper San Gabriel Water Association meeting on May 14, 1958 'at Eaton's Santa Anita. Councilman Brown: The Precise Plan of Design No. 126 on Zone Change No. 117 was not appealed so now that Plan will not be presented to Council •. City Attorney: You will usually have a meeting before they are effective and you can appeal them yourselves. They can be called up for review so that you can look at them without having to have a public hearing unless you would feel it is absolutely necessary. Those plans accompanying a zone change.will not be effective unless .the zone change is granted. Councilman Brown: I would appeal the decision on Precise Plan of Design No. 126 and desire a public hearing the same time that Zone Change No. 117 hearing is held. Discussion was held on the matter of the possibility of West Covina being a charter city. The City Attorney indicated that Council must first determine whether there is advantage to the City in making such a step and then appoint a Board of Freeholders or Council to proceed. Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried that the City Manager be instructed to proceed as soon as possible to secure information on the advantages and disadvantages to West Covina as a charter city Councilman Barnes stated he had attended a meeting of 12 home owners in West Covina who had asked whether or not to go into the Baldwin Park School District. They wanted to know if the City Council would realign the City boundaries and give their homes away to Baldwin Park. Councilman Barnes replied to them in • the negative. 'They questioned the fact of where that boundary was between Baldwin Park and West Covina, whether on the football field; C.. C. 4-28-58 Councilman Barnes - continued Page forty two curb line or fence. This was because of weed conditions and trash collection around the football field on the outside of the fence and if something could be done about it. Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Barnes and .,carried that.this matter be referred to the Director of Public Works for report. DEMANDS APPROVED Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Barnes that Demands in the amount of'$47,872.69 as shown on Demand Sheets B--42, C--83 and C-84 be approved, this to include bank transfers in the • amount of $35,000.00. Motion passed on roll call as follows: Ayes: Councilmen Barnes, Brown Heath, Mayor Pro Tem Pittenger Noes: None Mayor Mottinger s There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 12:40 A.M. until Monday. May 5, at 7:30 P.M. • 0