10-14-1958 - Regular Meeting - Minutes•
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNZA
October 14, 1958
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Mottinger at 7:30 P. M. in
the West Covina City Hall. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by
Councilman Barnes, with the invocation given by the Reverend Konrad
Koosman of Christ Lutheran Church.
ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Mottinger, Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger,
Barnes
Others Present: Mr. George Aiassa, City Manager; Mr, Robert
Flotten, City Clerk; Mr, Harry C. Williams, City
Attorney; Mr, Malcolm Co Gerschler, Planning.
Coordinator; Mr. Tom Dosh, Assistant Public
Service Director.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
• September 15, 1958 - Approved as sumbitted.
September 22, 1958 - Approved as submitted.
September 29, 1958 - Approved as submitted.
CITY CLERK'S REPORTS
TIME EXTENSION REQUEST LOCATION: Northeast corner of Azusa and
Tentative Map of Tract Vine Avenues.
No. 22004 - Albert Handler
DENIED Request extension of time to file Final
Map, Times expires October 10, 1958.
Mr. Flotten presented and read a communication from the applicant's
engineer requesting this extension of time. Previous extension had
been granted from October 10, 1.957 to October 10, 1958.
Mr, Flotten: I am not so sure we haven't established
a policy that would only grant such matters
as -this an extension of one year and no
more. This request would be the second time extension in this particu-
lar instance.
60 Also.,, the second item, which is a time extension request in relation
to Tract No. 21913, received an extension from 1956 to 1957 and from
1957 to 1958. That was subject to installation, if available, of
sewers and sidewalk policy in effect at that time. In relation to
Co C. 10-14-58 Page Two
TIME EXTENSION REQUEST (Handler) -- continued
this item a letter was written by the City Engineer to the applicant,
W. Co Billsborough, explaining that no further, extensions could be
considered by the City Council.
Possibly these matters are affected by legal decisions.
Councilman Pittenger: Item 2 on the Agenda, was granted two
extensions already?
Mr. Flotten., Yes, the map was approved in 1955. On
October,, 1956, an extension was granted
to October, 1957, and then another year s
extension was granted to October 24, 1958.
Councilman Brown. I believe our City Attorney told us once
that we could not extend these more than
once.
Mr. Williams read from the "Business and Professions Code" Section
11-554 which, in essence, inUl-catedthat time extension requests on
such matters as have been submitted may not be granted (more than once)
not exceeding one year by the governing body.
• Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Barnes and
carried that time extension request on Tentative Map of Tract No.22004
be denied,
Mayor Mottinger indicated that the applicants of the time request should
be advised of the decision and reference made to the Code and Section
as indicated by Mr. Williams.
TIME EXTENSION REQUEST LOCATION: South side of Merced Avenue
Tentative Map of Tract east of Valinda Avenue.
No. 21913
W. Co Billsborough Request extension of time to file
DENIED Final, Map. Time expires October 24,1958.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried
that time extension request on Tentative Map of Tract No. 21.913 be
denied since one extension had already been granted.
ACCEPT STREET IMPROVEMENTS LOCATION: West side of Irwindale Avenue,
AND RELEASE BOND approximately 370 feet north of Garvey
Tract No. 12002 Avenue.
West Covina Estates
APPROVED
J'Mr. Flotten-. This bond was actually accepted in 1950.
This was the first large subdivision in
the City extending from Irwindale Avenue
to Nora Avenue and from Del, Norte School, to Garvey Boulevard. All
11
C. C. 10-14-58 Page Three
• TRACT NO. 12002 - continued
improvements were put in the tract with the,exception of the extension
to Garvey known as Yaleton Avenue between Workman Avenue and the
Freeway. We would not release the bond until all improvements were in.
We tried to contact the Estates people regarding this situation and
the bonding company tried to locate them also. A considerable amount
of time was spent in that attempt. Application had been made to the
Highway Division to connect Yaleton Avenue with the old Garvey Boule-
vard. This was denied because the Highway Division was going to build
Garvey into a Freeway section, which would 'affect the street design.
In the years that have followed there has been no one to help us
straighten the matter out and finally the bonding company permitted us
to accept proposals for the work to be done on Yaleton.
We received four proposals and sent them on to the bonding company who
then recommended the Harvey Construction Company, who was the lowest
responsible bidder in the amount of $1,286.60. We now have the check
of the bonding company in that amount for this work to be done and I
believe this will take care of all claims we have against the bonding
company.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried that street improvements in Tract No. 12002 be accepted and
authorization be given for the release of General Casualty Company of
Americ4 Bond No. 162574 in the amount of $30,000.00.
AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by
WORK ON YALETON AVENUE Councilman Barnes that the award of this
Harvey Construction Co. contract go to Harvey Construction
APPROVED Company, in the amount of $1,286.60, for
improvements on Yaleton Avenue.
Motion passed on roll call as follows. -
Ayes. Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger
Noes: None
Absent: None
ACCEPT STREET IMPROVEMENTS LOCATION: A section of Puente Avenue,
Project No. C-68 between a point 50 feet easterly of
APPROVED Orange Avenue and the westerly limits
of Tract No. 19337.
Mr. Flotten.. This is a gas tax project and the contract
was awarded to Warren Southwest, Inc. in
February, 1,958. Bonds were dated Feb-
ruary, 1958. We have budgeted money in the amount of $5,000.00 for
this project. We have the Inspector's final report dated May 6, 1,958
and recommend acceptance of the improvements and release of the bond.
0
C. C.. 10-14-58 Page Four
0 PROJECT NO. C-68 - continued
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Brown and
carried that street improvements in Project C68 be accepted and
authorization be given for the release of Federal Insurance Company
Bond No. 9670011 in the amount of $2,836.21.
RESOLUTION NO, 1448 The City Clerk presented and read
Approving map of assessment A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
for sewer CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING MAP OF
A111-56-7 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT
ADOPTED OF THE THELBORN STREET, TOLAND AVENUE
AND OSBORN AVENUE SEWER DISTRICT."
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath that said
Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes. Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger
Noes: None
Absent: None
Said Resolution was given No. 1448.
•Councilman Brown, I would ask if it is possible for the work on the
sewer to be started first on Osborn Avenue. This had been split up
into three pieces Ond-then, the piece on Osborn Avehue was held' -up to
enable the three pieces to be taken in under, one district. The people
on Osborn Avenue have had a great deal of trouble and have been continu-
ously Pumping. It has been over two years now since they originally
requested sewers.
The City Attorney indicated this could be done by specifying in the
contract or specifications the order of work to be done and if the
contract becomes part of the bid you would have to have it known to
the bidder.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried
that the specifications (for Sanitary Sewer District A111-56-7) be
modified to provide that the sewer trunk line on Osborn Avenue be the
first one to be installed.
RESOLUTION NO, 1449 (Amended)
Adopting improvement plans
and profiles, and specifi-
cations for sewer
District A111-56-7
ADOPTED
Mayor Mottinger:
The City Clark presented-.
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF WEST COVINA ADOPTING IMPROVEMENT
PLANS AND PROFILES, AND SPECIFICATIONS
FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF THELBORN STREET,
TOLAND AVENUE AND OSBORN AVENUE SEWER
DISTRICT (AS AMENDED)."
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the Reso-
lution,
LJ
0
C. C. 10-14-58
RESOLUTION NO. 1449 (Amended) - continued
Page Five
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Barnes that said
Resolution be adopted.
Motion passed on roll call as fol,lows-.
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger
Noes: None
Absent: None
Said Resolution was given No. 1449,
RESOLUTION NO. 1450
Resolution of Intention to
initiate proceedings for
1911 Act Improvement and
setting date of Protest
Hearing
A111-56-7 November.10,1958
ADOPTED
Mayor Mottinger-.
The City Clark presented.
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA TO INITIATE
PROCEEDINGS FOR THE 1911 ACT IMPROVE-
MENT 01' THELSORN STREET, TOLAND AVENUE
AND OSBORN AVENUE SEWER DISTRICT."'
Set date of Protest Hearing on Novem-
ber 10., 1958.
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes that said
Resolution be adopted-. Motion passed on roll. call as follows..
Ayes., Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger
Noes: None
Absent-. None
Said Resolution was given No. 1450.
RESOLUTION NO, 1451 The City Clark presented, -
Accepting Grant Deed "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
Precise Plan 261) Part III THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING
ADOPTED GRANT DEED OF EASEMENT AND RECORDATION
THEREOF." (Sylvan Shulman)
Mr. Flotten stated that action on this matter had been postponed
from the last meeting to enable a check to be made as to any inter-
ference with Walnut Creek Parkway and it was found there would be
no interference.
Mayor Mottinger: Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolution.
•
0
Co Co 10-14-58
RESOLUTION NO. 1451 ® continued
Page Six
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Brawn that said
Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on rol.l ca4ll, as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes., Mayor Motti nger
Noes: None
Absent: None
Said Resolution was given No. 1451a
RESOLUTION NO, 1452
Granting consent for
proposed Annexation No
to County Sanitation
District No. 22
(Cameron Avenue Annex)
ADOPTED
The City Clerk presented,
"A RESOLUTION OF THE C I TY COUNCIL OF
12 THE CITY OF WEST COVINA,, CALIFORNIA,
GRANTING ITS CONSENT FOR; THE PROPOSED
ANNEXATION NO. 12 TO COUNTY SANITATION
DISTRICT NO. 22 OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY
(Cameron Avenue Annex)."
Mr. Flotten presented and read a communication in relation to this
matter from the Los Angeles County Sanitation District.
Mayor Mottinger. Hearing no objections„ we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Brown,, seconded by Councilman Pittenger that:
said Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilman Heathy Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinge,r°
Noes: None
Absent: None
Said Resolution was given No. 145&
CITY CLERK'S REPORTS
PLANNING COMMISSION
METES AND BOUNDS LOCATION: North side of Sunset Hill
SUBDIVISION NO. 135-147 Drive, between LaSe.r"ena Drive and
Charles Co Hanes Manington Place
APPROVED
1.3 Ades - 4 Lots - Area District III
Approved by the Planning Commission at their meeting of Octcber l s 1J58
•
C. C. 10-14-58 Page Seven
METES AND BOUNDS SUBDIVISION NO. 135-147 - dontinued
Maps were presented with recommendations as follows.
1) That all conditions specified in Planning Commission Resolution
No. 567 be complied with.
2) That all existing buildings be removed or demolished,
3) That the required street improvements include that portion of
Sunset Hill Drive contiguous to subject property.
Mr. Gerschler stated that about a, year and a, half ago a block study
was worked out for this whole area and that this Metes and Bounds
Subdivision does meet the requirements of the Block Study.
Motion by Councilman Brown._ seconded by Councilman Heath and carried
that Metes and Bounds :subdivision No. 135-147 be approved, subject
to the recommendations of the Planning Commission and City Engineer,
HALLOWEEN BAZAAR To be held on October 31., 1958 at
Cortez P.T.A. Cortez School, Rio Verde and Hollenbeck,
CONDITIONAL APPROVAL
Mr. Flotten stated that proper application had been received and
recommends approval subject to proper departmental clearances.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried
that the request of the Cortez Parent-Teacher Association to operate
a Halloween Bazaar at Cortez School on October 31, 1958 be approved,
subject to necessary departmental heads approval.
APPLICATION FROM To be held October 16, 1958.
ST. CHRISTOPHER SCHOOL
FOR BAZAAR
CONDITIONAL APPROVAL
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Brown and carried
that the request of St. Christopher School to operate a bazaar on
October 16, 1958 be approved, subject to the necessary departmental
clearances.
SCHEDULED MATTERS
BIDS
PROJECT NO. C-72
Bid awarded to
Boddum Construction
.Company, Inc.
Street improvements in a section of
Francisquito Avenue from Tonopah Avenue
to Sunset Avenue.
The bids were opened as advertised in
the office of the City Clerk at 10 000 A.M.
October 14, 1958, and referred to the City Engineer for recommendation
to City Council at this meeting.
0
0
t
C. C. 10-14-58
PROJECT NO. C-72 - continued
Page Eight
Mr. Flotten stated that the record should show that the opening of bids
had been advertised in the West Covina Tribune on the 2nd and 9th of
October, 1958 and in.the Green Sheet October, 3, 1958.
The bids were as follows:
A-1 CONTRACTORS, INC.
BODDUM CONSTRUCTION CO.,, INC.
COX BROS. CONSTRUCTION CO.
CROWELL & LARSON
E. C. CONSTRUCTION CO.
HARVEY CONSTRUCTION CO.
WARREN SOUTHWEST, INC.
10% Bid Bond
$ 7,135.00
$600.00 Certified Check 5,708.10
1.0% Bid Bond 6,423.00
10% Bid.Bond 89151.00
10% Bid Bond 7,374.60
$865.00 Cashier's Check 8,619.14
10% Bid Bond 7,679.40
Recommendation was that bid be awarded to the Boddum Construction
Co., Inc. as thelowestresponsible bidder in the amount of $5,708.10.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes that contract
be awarded to Boddum Construction Co.,, Inc. in the amount of $5,708.10,
as the lowest responsible bidder on ProJect No. C-72 and all other bids
and bid bonds be returned to the unsuccessful bidders.
Motion passed on roll call as follows.
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger,
Noes: None
Absent: None
Mr. Aiassa stated that the amount budgeted for this project would -.be
short $708.10 and recommended that Council. authorize this amount be
taken from the Traffic Safety Fund.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Pittenger that
authorization be given for the amount of $708o10 to be transferred
from the Traffic and Safety Fund to Project C-72.
Motion passed on roll cqll as follows;
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, B&xnes, Mayor Mottinger
Noes: None
Absent: None
•
C. C. 10-14-58
HEARINGS
it
Page Nine
AMENDMENT TO ADOPTED - LOCATIONa South side of Merced Avenue,
PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN NO. between Willow and Garvey Avenue.
Simon F. Pepper and Earl Gish
APPROVED
Recommended for, approval by the Planritng Re3,Dllution
No. 568. .
First hearing held by Council May 12, 1958 and hearing closed.
Decision held over to meeting of October, 14, 1958, per letter of
request from proponents dated September 26, 1958.
Mr. Flotten stated that the record show this matter was held over
to this meeting date by written request of the applicant. Communica-
tion was presented and read confirming telephone conversation regard-
ing this being placed on the Agenda. for the first Council meeting in
October.
Mr. Gerschler: There was a study plan prepared for the
joint meeting of Council and Commission
a mOUltb 2.90 R.TjRJY7,JkJ39 Property. The
new plan presented is a1most exactly in accordance, with that. I find it
meets 'he w1nirmm. spec�if Jea C. t!,4.Dns (i,;f R-3A and would reccn)mmend the plan be
approved as subL,,,kitted.
Mr. Aiassa- I would point out that there has been
several meetings with the property
owners and the architects since Mr.
Ger-schler made the survey on R-3 and R-3, as well as prior, discussion,
and they have tried to meet all -the requirements of the survey with
the minimum standards.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried
that Amendment to Adopted Precise Plan of Design No. 109, as submitted
dated October 1.0, 1958, be approved.
ZONE CHANGE NO. 125
Bishop Melvin B. Tew,
West Covina Ward LDS Church
REFERRED BACK TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION'
LOCATION,-, 521 South Glendora Avenue,
between Walnut Creek Wash and
St. Christopher Street.
REQUEST: R3 Use.
EXISTING ZONE. R--A (With 'variance for
Church Use)
Recommended for approval by the Planning Commission Resolution No. 652.
The City Clerk presented and read PlannirAg Co-atmission Resolution
No. 652.
Mayor Mottinger opened the, public hearing and stated that all those
desiring to present testimony on Zone Change No. 125 should rise and
be sworn in by the City Clerk.
•
C. C. 10-14-58 Page Teri
• ZONE CHANGE NO. 125 - continued
IN FAVOR
Mr. Clinton 1 am adjacent to the proposed piece of
521 Glendora Ave. property. From some of the previous
West Covina hearings it has been b.-ought out that
the apponerat-, of this particular zoning
have stated this zoning would be detrime_nita..11. to property adjacent to
it. Being a property owner there a great number of years, l would
take exception to this statement. With a piece, of property, 600 to 700
feet it: .is too deep for, business to come in and take up the whole
area, even with parking facilities for that area, but with multiple
dwellings going in and the proposed street cutti.rag to the rear of it,
we will be able to use all the property that we have. All the pro-
perty owners have the same depth and unless we would have a shopping
center there we would lose some use of it ;its vie can't use the back
part of it. With multiple dwellings backing to property owners on
Sandy Hook Street and putting in single story,, l can see no reason
this zone should not go through.
This would be a buffer zone, their a street, then -any additional
dwellings could be put on the east side of that, area in there.
• Mr. Whitnall made a zone study of this area, and it was his advice
then that a street be brought through from St. Christopher Street to
Blue Ash Road to facilitate the use; of the property as it is right
now. With the piece of property, t.h3it. -we property owners have along
there, this would be about the only -way we could get any use out of
the back of it (property) at all.
IN OPPOSITION
Mr. B. Van Horn l have property di.rectl,y east of the
proposed property across Glendora, Avenue.
The property in the whole area there was
originally a proposed C-1 ;zoning. There is going to be, according to
the new plan of Vincent Avenue, quite an intersection at Vincent and
Glendora, 1 do not think it is quite appropriate; to put; a mortuary
on a very busy corner as Glendora, and Vincent will be.
Mayor Mottinger:
We haven't opened the hearing
Mr. Van Horn:
a, Mayor Mottinger-.
We are not considering the Unclassified
Use Permit, just the zoning for ,the
entire property as R=3 uses.
on the mortuary use.
This is for the: reaar., of the property„ a
change of zone?
That is correct. The back part of the
property.
9
I
C. C. 10-14758 Page Eleven
ZONE CHANGE NO. 125 - continued
Mr, Van Horn: What is the purpose of this if they do
not :intend to put a mortuary use in
there?
Mayor Mottingero They do, but that happens to be a
separate item under Unclassified Use
Permit. This Is gust the hearing on
the R®S portion. Do you have any objections to the R3 development
in here?
Mr. Van Horn- No, x do not
Mr, Bo Lucas 1-have just recently moved on Sandy Hook
Sandy Hook Street and would like to have this matter
clarified. The property this hearing
is for is this property west of Glendora Avenue?
Mr. Lucas was presented with a map for his perusal and at a question
from Mayor Mottinger Mr. Lucas stated that he had nothing to state at
this time.
There being no further testimony presented., the hearing was declared
closed,
Councilman Pittenger. This 50 foot access, is this a proposed
road to get into the apartments until
the so-called future street can be built?
Mr. Gerschlera Yes,
Councilman Pittenger, That is not dedicated or anything?
Mr. Gerschlero That is correct. 1t is simply part of
parking lot
Councilman Pittenger: Apartments on the rear, are they proposed
one story or two story?
Mr. Ger°schler o The Commission suggested they be limited
to one story.
Councilman Heath-. Can you get 'the Fire Department in there?
Mr. Gerschlerg
The
east -west
street is up in the air
and
we have to
get together with the
property owners
to discuss the matter
more fully.
Councilman Pittenger.
Why
grant zoning
when you do not know
what
the block
study will indicate.
The
street may
not be practical, yet
you would be already
committed to
zoning.
C. Co 10-14-58 Page 7`we.".ve
• ZONE CHANGE NO,125 - continued
Councilman Pittenger - continued-.
A think this thing should be held up until you have a block study
and know what's what.
Mr. GerschlsrT, Since the appl-cant can't get a
Precise Plan approved it would not
hinder, anything to hold up the zoning,
too,
Mayor Mottinger: So far' as these str(&Sts ,are concerned,
there is no information available, 'no
plans made and any approval of zoning
would be subject to a precise plan of .later design, which we are not
sure exactly how it can be developed,
Mr. Gerschlero The matter of ,design is completely
open. There is a sale of property in-
volved here and they are vitally inter-
ested in what the zoning would be,
Mayor Mottinger: as there a, precise plan being worked
• on right now?
Mr. Gerschlero Not diligently, We have not., as yet,
gotten the people together, and we
are dealing with 5 or 6 property owners
Councilman Brown: Are the developers working on a precise
plan'
Mr. Gerschlero l do not believe so.
Councilman Pittenger: You do not know what the block study is
going to show as to exact streets and
whether they cam be brought :f.n or not.
You establish R-3 here and everybody in both directions is going to
want R-3 and we haven't anything planned.
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by C«,)unc.ilman Barnes that
Zone Change No, 125 be denied.
Mr. Williams questioned as to why not hold this matter in that to
deny it would entail the applicant paying another fee.
Councilman Pittenger: Flow long would you hold it? It see no
practical reason, this thing could go on
for a year
Councilman Brown. Outright denial would make applicant
pay another fee
Co Ce.10-14-58
ZONE CHANGE NOo1125 - continued
Page Thirteen
The motion of Councilman Pittenger and the second of Councilman
Barnes to deny were withdrawn.
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Brown and
carried that Zone Change No. 125 be referred back to the Planning
Commission with the recommendation it be resubmitted With a Precise
Plan and Block Study.
Mayor Mottingero It is the intent of Council now to
not :indicate they are apposed to R-3
zoning but that they cannot determine
what the future development mould be., at this time, Jif we were to
grant this zoning.
UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT LOCATION; 521E South. Glendora Avenue
NO. 29 between Walnut Creek. Wash and
Bishop Melvin Bo Tewy St. Christopher Street.
West Covina Ward LDS Church
HELD OVER FOR FURTHER REQUEST. Mortuary Uses.
STUDY
Recommended for approval of Mortuary Uses in Zone R-A by Planning
• Commission Resolution No. 651.
Maps were presented and Planning Commission Resolution No. 651 was
read.
Mayor Mottingpr opened the public hearing and stated that all those
desiring to present testimony should rise and be sworn in by the
City Clerk,
AST . FAVnR
Mr, Clanton We have lived in West Covina. :for quite
521 S o Glendora Ave. a while and noted the growth of the
West Covina. City and the facilities needed to take
care of the growth -within the City
itself. We know we have a mortuary within the City and yet quite a.
few citizens travel outside the City for this type of services and
also the use of ambulance service is used outside the, City.
In a city growing such as we are we could easily use another mortuary
within its boundaries.
I have also heard that C-1 zoning isn't feasible for this use, yet
I look around and such use Is located 1n C-h and is not detrimental
to the C-1 area. We have such a use in C-1 now and business adjacent
60 to it is doing all, right so I can see nothing detrimental to business
in the placement of such use in or near C-lo
Adequate parking has been planned for a, large number of vehicles,
LA
•
•
C. C. �0-14-58
UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT NO. 20 - continued.
Page Fourteen
As to actual revenue there would not; be as much, or, none, from Church
use where there would be revenue to the City from such a, use as this.
I live adjacent to this and see no reason why anyone would feel bad
with the type of st-ructure Pierce Brothers would put up. In fact,
they have good landscaping and good architecture, as to most of these
uses and they are usually a fine asset too, the communities.
IN OPPOSITION
Mr, Bert Van Horn
other areas that would be more
with Mr. Clinton there may be
City but it can be located in
I would repeal;, what I said before and
I do not feel this mortuary should be
in proposed C-1 zoning. There are
appropriate for it. I would agree
a need :fox- another ,such use in the
a zone more appropriate for it.
This is going to be a prominent corner. I have been here quite a
while and have seen zoning come and go, seen property build up and
seen quite a bit happen here. I happened to be on the City Council
when the proposed C-1 zoning was put into play and at that time it
was not the purpose of Council. to make C-1 appropriate for this. use.
It is true there is a mortuary use in C-1 zoning but at that time we
had that building which was a, detriment to, the community and I do not
knav how many were here to see that building before it was remodeled.
We studied that matter for quite some t::J,mc?; before granting; the use
in a C-1 zone and felt at the time that as the City grew the use: would
be relocated to some other part; of the City„
It also comes to my mind that I do not see ho%w much more benefits a
city can receive than they do from a church. A city receives more
benefits from a church than any other use I can think of, directly
or indirectly, and I think Council should consider those things and
not put such an establishment on such a busy corner as this will be
in the future.
Mr.
G. Dempke
I have ;seven children and
I would cer-
1731
Larkwood
tainly hate to see one of
my children
West
Covina
have to cross Glendora to
get to a.
church located there:. It
would seem
to me
that Mr. Ilan Horn is
not thinking of the tr°affic..situation
in
relation
to a church use.
A mortuary building is usually, a very attractive type of building and
we need such a use in this City which is building up and when these
type of buildings come in they actually help to beautify the City,
Mr, Clinton: I remember when they remodeled the old
home to -t�aLnsform it into a mortuary
and the only thing they added to it was
a garage and black topped the side and back. They dial away with the
corral or barn, but that is the only thing that was done.
0
0
C. Co 10-14-58 Page Fifteen
UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT NO. 29 - continued
There being no further testimony, the hearing was declared closed.
Councilman Pittenger: I think we have recently changed our
zoning ordinance in relation to mortuary
use so that it, is not pinned down to any
specific area with the exception of not being able to be placed in
R-1 or R-2.
I do not feel that I have studied this enough to want to arrive at a
decision on this. Traffic is to be considered and also adjacent
property owners with firm zoning, I do not think we should act on
this thing until we study it ourselves.
Councilman Brown: You will have four different intersec-
tions of traffic and with mortuary use
pouring more traffic out I do not
think it is the best location.
Councilman Heath: I agree with those comments. I think
to carry commercial down Glendora is
the tentative plan. I can see another
mortuary in the City but would question this location..
Councilman Barnes: I do not question the possibility of
another mortuary in this area but the
fact is that we are, studying this area
now and there will be an extension of Vincent Avenue through this
portion of the City. Traffic might be a problem and another type of
development might be better in there. I -think this should be studied
before putting this use at this location. I would hesitate to vote
for it at this time,
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Pittenger that
Unclassified Use Permit No. 29 be held over for further study.
Councilman Brown: I do not think this needs any further
study. We have the recommendations of
the Commission, and they had a hard
time arriving at a decision on it themselves.
Councilman Heath: I understand there is a motion on the
floor-, but maybe it should be considered
that the matter be finished up tonight
as there is enough feelings that way.
Mayor Mottinger-, I feel there may be some phases of this
problem of which I am not too sure and
I would be willing to study it.
Upon the question, the motion and second to hold this matter over
for further study was carried on the following vot;e of 3-2 in favor.
Councilmen Pittenger and Barnes voted "Aye"
Councilmen Heath and Brown voted "No"
Mayor Mottinger voted "Aye"
0
Co C. 10-14-58 Page Sixteen
ZONE CHANGE NO, 131 LOCATION. 301, to 311 N. Azusa Avenue,
Charles R. Zug between Rowland and Workman Avenues,
APPROVED
REQUESTS Reclassify from R-P to Zone C-1,
Recommended for approval by Planning Commission Resolution No. 649.
Maps were presented, and Planning Commission Resolution No. 649 read.
Mayor Mottinger opened the public hearing, and stated that all those
desiring to present testimony should rise and be'sworn in by the City
Clerk.
There being no testimony presented, the hearing was declared closed.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried
that Zone Change No. 131 be approved, subject to the reommendations of
the Planning Commission and City Engineer.
RESOLUTION NO. 1453 The City Clerk presented:
Accept Bond "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
Precise Plan No. 34 THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING BOND
ADOPTED GUARANTEEING INSTALLATION OF STREET
IMPROVEMENT AND SEWERS IN PRECISE PLAN
NO, 34. 11 (C_b,,arles Zug)
LOCATION. Azusa Avenue, between Workman
and Rowland Avenues.
Aetna Casualty and Surety Company Bond No, 33 S 42771 in the amount
of $2,700.00.
Mayor Mottinger: Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the Reso-
lution..
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Pittenger that
said Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes. Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger.
Noes: None
Absent: None
•
:7
C�
Co C. 10-14-58
Page Seventeen
CITY PARTICIPATION IN Mr. Flotten presented and read a communi-
STREET LOWERING OF cation from Mr. Charles Re Zug which
WORKMAN AVENUE IN stated that: plans have been completed
CONJUNCTION WITH ZONE to improve property on Workman Avenue
CHANGE NO, 131 to Fleetwell Street, some 280 feet, and
APPROVED he would desire to cooperate with the
City in the lowering of Workman Avenue
to Fleetwell as has been done on the east, side of Azusa. Avenue, on
Workman Avenue, recently.
Mr, Aiassa stated that he would recommend participation and acceptance
of Mr. Zug°s proposal at a cost not to exceed $1.,800000,
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Pittenger that
authorization be given for the Citv of Test Covina to participate
in the street .lowering of Workman Avenue, in conjunction with Zone
Change No. 131., with cost of participation not to exceed the amount
of $1,800.00.
Motion passed on roll call as follows.
Ayes. Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger
Noes. None
Absent. None
ZONE CHANGE NO, 130 LOCATION. West side of Glendora Avenue,
Weldon A. Hunter, Robert between Westcove and Vine.
Broadwell and Frank Bowker
APPROVED REQUEST. Reclassify from R-3 and C-1
to Zone C-1.
Recommended for° approval by the Planning Commission, their Resolution
No. 650.
Maps were presented and Planning Commission Resolution No, 650 was
read.
Mayor Mottinger opened the public hearing and stated that all those
desiring to present testimony should rise and be sworn in by the
City Clerk.
Mr. Charles Kupferer, Sr. I am generally in favor of anything in
938 California Avenue that area that would improve it.
West Covina I reside at 938 California Avenue, which
is directly behind this proposed
development.
Approximately a year and a half ago I was before the Council. and the
Commission to have a zone change on the eastern portion of this
property here, about the time when this property here in question now
was changed to R-3. I applied for R-3 zoning, along with my neighbors,
C. C. 1O-14-58 Page Eighteen
ZONE CHANGE NO. 130 continued
Mr. Charles Kupferer, Sr. - continued -
which took in about 400 feet. I applied for a 125 foot depth as a
buffer zone.to this R-3 zone that was granted at the back of our
property. At that time the property owners there dedicated 30 feet
to the City. Now I believe this property is being dedicated again on
this requirement for zone change.
There is nothing definite on this matter as to whether a half street
is going to be put in there or whether it is.noto We each have 618
feet depth, speaking for four property owners in that section. At
the present time, and for the future too, there is 458 feet of that
that is absolutely "deadwood" to us. We did have livestock on it but
that had to go out. We have been sitting there for 12 years waiting
too.
If this development goes ahead, which I hope it does, I would like
Council to consider this half street to come in somewhere from Glendora
and come up in back of us in the business zone so that we will have
some wedge to make use of our ground, if the four property owners
should get together and sell the back part of their property.
It was stated the other night at the Planning Commission meeting this
wa's proposed R-3 which was back of our ground. This is what we want..
It is no good for R-1, it is too deep. It would be good for multiple
units as it is secluded, off the main streets and if developers put
this half street in we would have some sales point to sell to a large
developer, otherwise we have nothing. If we should put our half street
in there it would be blanked at both ends.
A long time ago Council, stated they would never bottle this property
up so at this time I would like to remind Council that we have as
much ground there as the ground in question for zoning tonight.
If you include that half street, - that it would be put in when
development is put in, we are in favor of this,
There being no further testimony, the hearing was declared closed.
Mr. Gerschler presented and made reference to redesign of Block
Study No. 45 and explained the matter to members of Council.
Councilman Barnes,. I am trying to think back, - going back
to the proposed extension of Vine
Avenue. I do not remember for sure
whether it is in the Minutes, but I believe that, Mr. Broadwell tried
to establish some of this zoning due to the proposed extension of
Vine Street, didn't he at that time? Saying this would be a main
intersection there and recommending it for this kind of zoning,
•
Co Co 10-14-58 Page Nineteen
0 ZONE CHANGE NO, 130 - continued
•
Councilman Brown: This was zoned in 1955 on the over-all
zoning of the City. This Vine Avenue
was zoned at the initiation of the
City and the property owners to initiate a traffic flow down there.
This was zoned subject to precise plan, potential C-1. since 1.955.
Mr. Gerschl.er: If the Block Study is not changed, which
might happen with meeting of the pro-
perty owners and it not being acceptable
to them as the Precise Plan shows, it can go ahead with the, original
block study and it would not interfere with that.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried
that Zone Change No, 130 be approved, subject to the recommendations
of the Planning Commission in their Resolution No. 650.
Mayor Mottinger called a recess. Council reconvened at 9:20 P. M.
RECREATION AND PARK
AUTHORIZATION TO NEGOTIATE Mr. Azn.ssa stated that he had received
FOR LAND ADJACENT TO a written recommendation from the Rec-
DEL NORTE PARR reation and Park Commission that the
W. Bo Hindrichs City Council. consider negotiations in
APPROVED relation to the purchase of land owned
by Mr. W. Bo Hindrichs which is adjacent
to Del Norte Park, Mr, Hindrichs has indicated he would-be willing
to negotiate the sale of his property.
Mr. Aiassa stated that there is no allocation in the 1958-59 budget
for this item but that he would recommend that Council give him
authorization to negotiate with property owner to see if the land
could be purchased and to set it up in the next current budget.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried
that authorization to negotiate for this land be given to Mr, Aiassa.
GENERAL MATTERS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Mrs, Van Dame stated that with due respect to Mr. Aiassashe finds
a great deal of fault in where the "coke" machine is now placed and
suggested the "coke" machine be placed where the cigarette machine
is at present and the cigarette machine be placed in the lobby where
both thing would be easily available for everyone.
C. C. 10-14-58 Page Twenty
• ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - continued
Mayor Mottinger stated that it was his thinking that Mr. Aiassa was
endeavoring to give the City Hall a good lobby and doing a good job.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
PROCLAIMING UNITED COMMUNITY Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded
FUND DRIVE by Councilman Barnes and carried that
Latter half of October the Mayor be authorized to proclaim the
latter half of October, 1958 as West
Covina United Community Fund Drive.
COMMUNICATION FROM THE Mr. Flotten presented and read the
CITY OF MONROVIA EXPRESS- communication from the Director of
ING APPRECIATION TO THE Monrovia Civil Defense expressing
CITY OF WEST COVINA appreciation for the concern and offer
COUNCIL AND ADMINISTRATION of help to Monrovia during the recent
disastrous fire.
LETTER OF APPRECIATION Councilman Heath stated that it was
! AND COMMENDATION TO his opinion that during the time of
CLEO BOSCHOFF the recent emergency in Monrovia that
Cleo Boschoff had done a wonderful job
and given outstanding service and report during this time. Council-
man Heath stated that he felt a, letter should be directed to Cleo
Boschoff stating that the Council realized the effort and work done
at this time and commending ,her for her services.
Motion by Councilman Heathy seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried
that the City Clerk prepare a letter of appreciation and commendation
to Cleo Boschoff in recognition of her efforts during the Monrovia
fire.
AMERICAN MUNICIPAL To be held in Boston at the Statler
ASSOCIATION Hilton Hotel November 30 - December 3,
1958.
CITY ATTORNEY
ORDINANCES
INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented°
iendment No. 24 amending ."AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
adopted Sign Ordinance CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING CERTAIN
No. 563 PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE NO. 325 RELATING
TO FILLING STATION SIGNS." (City,
Initiated
Mayor Mottingero Hearing no objections, we will waive fur-
ther reading of the body of the Ordinance.
C. C. 10-14-58
• AMENDMENT NO; 24 - continued
•
11
Page Twenty -One
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried that the Ordinance be .introduced and given its first reading.
INTRODUCTION
Amendment No. 25
amending Zoning Ordinance
No. 325 relating to funeral
parlors,and mortuaries
Mayor Mottinger:
The City Attorney presented-.
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING
CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE
NO. 325 RELATING TO FUNERAL PARLORS."
(City Initiated)
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried that the ordinance be introduced and given its first reading.
SECOND READING
ORDINANCE NO, 593
Rezoning certain property
owned by the City
ADOPTED
Mayor Mottinger:
The City Attorney presented:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA REZONING
CERTAIN PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY."
(City Initiated)
LOCATION-. Northwest side of Sunset
Avenue, between Merced and Cameron
Avenues, adjacent to Corporation Yard,
of the City of West Covina
Hearing no objections, we will waive fur-
ther reading of the body of the Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Pittenger„ seconded by Councilman Barnes that
said Ordinance be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger
Noes: None
Absent. None
Said Ordinance was given No. 593.
SECOND READING, AS AMENDED The City Attorney presented:.
ORDINANCE NO. 594 "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
Ordinance amending CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING ORDINANCE
Ordinance No. 142 NO. 142 RELATIN'G`'}TO THE LICENSING OF
ADOPTED BUSINESS, TRADES 'ND OCCUPATIONS."
Councilman Heath: I believe it was previously stated that
there would be questions that would be
permitted in regard to this.
0
0
0
8
C, Co 10-14-58 Page Twenty -Two
ORDINANCE NO. 5949 AS AMENDED - continued
Mayor Mottinger: That is correct,
Councilman Heath: There are some questioniiii I would like
clarified. If the numbers are right,
with the information I have, the
largest businesses in the City are taking a reduction in business
license (fee) under this statute, are they not?
Mr. Flottenz Yes, they are.
Councilman Pittenger: We studied three plans and under one
plan they would pay much more than they
are presently paying. However, under,
this plan they did not pay as much, relatively speaking.
Councilman Heath-, The ratio under the first plan put out
was that the small operator had his
license fee doubled and the large
operator had it increased a slight percentage. Then there was a re-
vision to that and it ended up, as I understand, with 12 businesses
now getting a cut under what they paid in the original. arrangement in
licenses yet the small fellow getting a 50% increase in -the initial
cost of the license. I believe the cost per employee dropped from
$5.00 to $3.00�
Councilman Pittenger: What we talk about in licenses is to
pay the City for, services rendered for
police and fire protection. By licens-
ing we are not attempting to tax because by collecting sales tax we
get revenue from stores. What we are actually trying to do, and we
discussed this, was to get back from the small operator what it
actually costs us to maintain police and fire protection for him,
A small real estate place requires alert protection as much as a
store with 20 employees. We use licensing as a form of revenue versus
cost of protection.
Councilman Heath: The cost of protecting the small man
has gone up 50% while the large
operator's has dropped,
Councilman Pittenger: The small, man's protection was never
fully covered by license and that is
the theory we worked on.
Mayor Mottinger: The larger businesses actually were
not paying the fee as we intended they
pay it anyway-, and the consideration
was bringing the fee within proper range for the large business as
well as the small business.
0
4
CoCo 10-14-58
ORDINANCE NO. 59C AS AMENDED - continued
Page Twenty-three
Councilman Brown: They were not paying for part time help
or stock help, only paying for salesmen.
They all agreed that the City must have
revenue from somewhere for police and fire protection for merchants.
Actually, in discussing this, four merchants were hit harder, yet we
give no greater protection and in some cases they have their own
watchmen and a policeman is not of real value. To smaller merchants,
p6lice render more service than some larger merchants.
Councilman Barnes: I believe it was consensus, at least of
one of the smaller owners, that, $36.00
and $3. 00 was adequate. I believe
that was his statement in your report, Councilman Brown.
Councilman Brown:
That is correct.
Councilman Heath: I wasn't in on the beginning of this
discussion which was before. my time on
,Council and the question came up in my
mind as to being equal,
Mayor Motti.nger-. We will give this new ordinance a try
and then we will know whether we were
right or wrong,
Councilman Heath: Were all parties happy with this
arrangement?
Councilman Brown: They weren't all happy but they
realized new revenue had to be raised.
Councilman Heath: Was there any cry of discrimination?
Councilman Brown: They did at first but then they felt
better, especially when it turned out
solicitors would be charged. The
small merchants are being more hurt by solicitors than by the bigger
businesses.
Mayor Mottinger-. Hearing no objections we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Pittenger that
said Ordinance be adopted. Motion passed on roll. call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger
Noes: None
Absent: None
Said Ordinance was given No. 594.
0
L�
C. Co 10-14-58 Page Twenty-four
INTRODUCTION
Amending Ordinance No, 142 The City Attorney presented.
relating to Business Licenses "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 142 RELATING TO BUSINESS
LICENSES,"
Mayor Mottingero Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried that the Ordinance be introduced and given its first reading.
INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented -
Rezoning certain property "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
(Pacific Development Co.) THE CITY OF WEST COVINA REZONING
CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST
SIDE OF BARRANCA STREET;, SOUTH OF
WALNUT CREEK WISH (Pacific Develop-
ment Co.)
• Mayor Mottinger4 Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried that the Ordinance be introduced and given its first reading,
Councilman Brown voted "No",
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
AUTHORIZATION TO EMPLOY Motion by Councilman Brown„ seconded
MR. VERN COX TO MAKE by Councilman Pittenger that authoriza-
APPRAISAL OF PROPOSED ton be given to the City Manager to
RIGHT-OF-WAY IN RELATION employ Mr. Vern Cox to make an appraisal
TO CAMERON AVENUE EXTENSION of the proposed right-of-way through
property owned by .Mr. Kendall for the
proposed extension of Cameron Avenue
not to exceed the amount of $650.00,
for complete summary and report of value to be prepared for City
Council review.
Motion passed on roll call as follows-,
AyesCouncilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger„ Barnes, MayorMottinger
Noes: None
Absent: None
C. Co 10-14-58 Page Twenty-five
• CITY MANAGER REPORTS - continued
REVIEW OF PROPOSED Mr. Aiassa requested clarification as
ANNEXATION NO, 161 to the extent to be made to property
owners as to rep u3r,ements of streets
improvement if and when this territory
should come into the City.
•
0
Mayor Mottinger: I believe there were two different
actions and I could not advise the City
Manager of just what they were. How-
ever, it was my thinking on the matter that ,#e wT,shed to tell the
people in this area we would accept annexation, but if there is any
future dedication of the street it must be brought up to City
standards, However, I think that in one of the motions it was indi-
cated that the streets and drainage problem would have to be solved
prior to annexation.
Councilman Pittenger: I -remember the street had to be' brought
up to standard before annexation.
Councilman Heath: I believe that was stipulated, but is
that a street? I. believe it is a.
driveway or . easemer�t-p.
«11'� "*
Councilman Barnes: It would have`to be developed as a street,
Councilman Heath: When it is subdivided It must be
developed and at, that time the improve-
ments could be pp_ t; .in. At the present
time it doesn't rate as a street.
Councilman Brown:
what this one is.
and never come back
Mayor Mottinger:
rp ,
You should'"ta.ke a. look at the contour
of this. The main street for drainage
would come up from the other side from
This will probably develop into a short cul-de-sac
to Cameron to get drainage and improvement on it.
stipulate that the street
the property owners might
to improve the street for
no problem there.
Councilman Pittenger:
Mr, Gerschler:
Another consideration Councilman Brown
had in mind was that if we did create
this annexation and didn't clearly
had to meet standards, at some future date
feel they were justi.f;ied in asking the City
them. If not a dedicated street, there is
Indications are this is a private drive
Could they subdivide and continue to
use the rest of the street?
Not under present city ordinance. They
could not expand it any more for use
than it is now,
Co Co 10-1.4,'58 Page Twenty-six
CITY MANAGEkREPORTS continued
Review of Proposed Annexation No. 161 continued
Councilman Heath: I think if you approve a subdivision
map and insist sewers be put in and
streets imprGved 'that settles that.
Councilman Pittenger- If the front of the property is sub-,
divided, yes, but that is just in
front of existing houses. How are you
going to make him inAprove that portion? You cans make him even
hook up to the sewer.
Mayor Mottinger. At the ' back and of this driveway which
is not dedicated or, would not be dedi-
cated because of lack of 2-snprovements,
if they wanted to make a new development, it would be within our rights
to insist any egress from that property, be over properly developed
streets?
Mr. Williams: I think your ordinance requires now
that a lot abutt upon, public street.
I am not familiar with this location,,
but if this should be a public street, Include on the, condition that
it should be improved and dedicated,
Mayor Mottinger: It is a short driveway which three or
four property owners in there use as a
common driveway and it is the only
access to the street.
Councilman Pittenger-. If they can go ahead and develop by
metes and bounds and continue to use
what is now a private street, then ,re
can't make these people there now using a private street hook up to
sewers and improve the street.
Mr. Gerschler: You could take Willow Lane as an example
of a case that is a private street.
They wished to further subdii;ide by
metes and bounds and the City stated that until it, was brought up to
City standards the metes and bounds won't 'be allowed.
Councilman Pittenger-. People on both sides subdivided?
Mr. Gerschler: Yes, you control that one.
Councilman Pittenger: Here are People preset tly on it and you
can't do a thing to make them hook up
or give a street.
Mr. Aiassa: You also have County territory between
the public street and the City of West
L.
Covina c1ty limits.
•
C. Co 10-14-58 Page Twenty-seven
• CITY MANAGER REPORTS m continued
Review of Proposed Annexation No. 161 - continued
Mayor Mottinger:
Could we have proper control if we
made a provision of annexation that
any street to be dedicated would have
to be brought up to
City standards before we accepted dedication.
Make it a clear stipulation
in this matter. I do not believe in the
other cases it was
clearly stipulated,or if it was we did not have
definite standards
at that time.
Mr. Doshg
What if they asked to improve that
street and we said yes?
Mayor Mottinger:
We could permit streets to be improved
up to the City street or County line.
Mr. Dosh.
This is like an island, - it has to
cross private property.
Mr. Aiassa-.
Perhaps we could turn this over to the
Engineering Department to see if they
could survey the street and the island
of County territory
another egress.
and leave this as private easement and have
Councilman Brown:
When you follow the boundary of the
annexation you have less than half of
this street within the City.
Mr. Williams: I think the chances are you could protect
the City. However,, I am thinking of
the Hidden Valley case of Monrovia
where they allowed people to build on an undedicated street and here
you are not allowing them to build but they have already built and
you are inheriting a situation. The City of Monrovia was servicing
those people with mail and rubbish collection and the court held they
were treating it as a public street and thus the City could not
refuse to grant additional building permits on this. The court held
that since the City was servicing them the City could not require
dedication or improvement, that the City had implicitly accepted
dedication by doing these things and could not deny building on exten-
sion of this street. This is what bothers me.
If it was how in the City you would not allow this to develope with-
out street dedication. To take it into the City you -would require
the same thing that you would require if it was already in the City
and that would be dedication of the street.
8
0
C. Co 10-14-58
CITY MANAGER REPORTS - continued
Mr. Williams - continued.
Page Twenty-eight
I can't answer the problem of going through County territory because
it is under separate ownership.
You could have the same ownership dedicate to the County the part
that is in the County.
Councilman Heath: The people there claim they have given
some land as easement.
Mr. Williams, Frequently easement includes right to
dedicate.
Councilman Heath: Put the annexation through to get the
thing firmed up and state in the annexa-
tion that at any time that this street
is to be dedicated it must be improved at that time and you will
control the rest of it by subdivision plan,
Councilman Barnes. I would like to do that too, if
possible, but can we do it without
accepting it?
Mr. Williams: You have other, areas that are landlocked,
not abutting public street, but are
they improved?
Councilman Heath. How can we force them to improve that
drive with a portion of it in County?
silly to do it with the rest. If we can't enforce that it would be
Mr. Williams: It is possible the people who own in
the County would be content, to dedicate
to the County and improve that short
leg of it if You will. improve the rest
of it.
Mr. Aiassa: I think Council is assured as to the
value of the annexation in case they
may be subject to street improvements.
Mayor Mottinger. If we accept it; as an annexation and
we ran into a legal block with regard
to dedication of sheet: we might be
faced with some expenditure there.
Mr. Aiassa: You might be in the same position as
Monrovia.
It was consensus that the City Manager be directed to have the
Planning Department and Engineering Department study this matter and
make formal recommendations.
•
C. C. 10-14-58
CITY MANAGER REPORTS - continued
•
r�
CONFIRMING REPORT OF THE
CITY MANAGER IN RELATION TO
AWARDING OF ENGINEERING WORK
ON SEWER ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS
Page Twenty-nine
Motion by Councilman Barries, seconded
by Councilman Heath and carried to con-
firm the Special Assessment Distribu-
tion Report in the awarding of engineer-
ing work on sewer assessment districts
for the year of 1958 as submitted by
the City Manager
PRELIMINARY BRIDGE AND Mr. Harold Johnson and Mr. Dosh met
STORM DRAIN with the County Flood Control represen-
tatives and obtained certain tentative
approval of storm drain for acceptance by Los Angeles County Flood
Control District. The map that is before you indicates the items
acceptable, shown in red, by the Los Angeles County Flood Control
District officials on October 7, 1958; the items shown in green
acceptable with minor repairs by these officials on October 7, 1958
and the remainder, as outlined, not acceptable at this time.
We will draft proper resolutions for Council's next meeting on
October 27, 1958.
It was consensus this be done.
NEGOTIATION WITH PROPERTY Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by
OWNERS IN RELATION TO Councilman Barnes and carried that the
VINCENT AVENUE EXTENSION City Manager be designated as City
representative and Councilman Brown
designated as Council representative, forming a committee to negotiate
with property owners in regard to Vincent Avenue extension.
AUTHORIZATION TO NEGOTIATE Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded
FOR LAST PARCEL OF LAND by Councilman Pittenger and carried that
ADJOINING COMIDA PARK the City Manager be authorized to nego-
tiate with Mr. McCall in. relation to
property adjoining Comida Park, last
parcel facing on Puente Avenue.
Mr. Aiassa indicated that there is notsufficient funds budgeted in
1958-59 to cover the total cost of the three parcels and he would
report at the next meeting as to where extra funds would be obtained
to cover the total purchase.
0
Co C. 10-14-58
CITY MANAGER REPORTS - continued
Page Thirty
BIDS FOR IMPROVEMENTS OF Councilmen Heath and Barnes indicated
POLICE STATION ON SUNSET they desired to study this matter, fur -
AVENUE ADJOINING CORPORATION ther and it was consensus this be held
YARD over and put on Agenda of Study
HELD OVER TO STUDY SESSION Session on October 20, 1958.
CITY CLERK
TIME EXTENSION REQUEST One year time extension on zoning and
Sidney Pink special use permit for motion picture
(October 14, 1959) theatre on South Glendora Avenue.
APPROVED
Discussion was held on this matter since there had been other time
extensions denied. It seemed this might not; apply to zoning and
therefore there would be no basis for not granting extension since
time limits were not on zonings but on precise plans. The City
Attorney indicated that time limits were ineffective on zonings, and
so far as use permits, that would be A discretion of Council.
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Barnes and
carried that the time extension of Sidney Pink be granted
to October 14, 1959.
PETITION FOR SEWER
Maplewood Street and others.
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Barnes and
carried that this matter be referred to City Engineer for proper
report.
PETITION FOR SEWER Thackery Street and others.
66% non -validated signatures.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried that this matter be refer -red to the Engineering Department
for proper report.
APPLICATIONS FOR To be considered at next meeting with
CHRISTMAS TREE SELLING suggestion by Councilman Pittenger
that some type of notification be
given, if at all possible." so that all
the applications are received for decision at one time.
9
0
0
0
C. C. 10-14-58
CITY CLERK - continued
INTER -COMMUNITY HOSPITAL
DINNER
NOTICE OF COUNTY BOUNDARY
COMMISSION OF CITY OF
INDUSTRY PROPOSALS FOR
ANNEXATIONS NO. 34 and
NO. 35 FILED SEPTEMBER
29, 1958
CITY TREASURER REPORTS
BADILLO DRAIN REPORT
Page Thirty-one
Mayor Mottinger indicated he would
attend with his wife.
No protests will. be made.
None
Councilman Pittenger: We have presented a report on the
Badillo Drain and had a study meeting
with County agencies and Baldwin Park
in an attempt to solve this problem. As reported, Baldwin Park at
a recent meeting said they were not interested in any kind of drain
at this time, temporary or otherwise,, and preferred to wait for the
November bond issue to be decided before discussing any drains,
although they know that even if the bond issue is passed it will be
two years before construction is done,
In closing the report we have suggested we remove at least a portion
of the berm on Badillo and return some of this water to its original
percolating area. We think there is no reason for us to carry the
burden of the water that is originating in the County., Covina and
Irwindale, down Orange. There has been no response from any agencies
and we feel we must protect the people in the City.
Councilman Barnes: I met with all the County people such
as flood control, road department,
supervisors, and Baldwin Park committee
on this and through all the plans we have had, we have not solved
anything. We feel the berm should be lowered from its existing
height, and to let a portion of this water flow westerly.
We feel quite strongly that a portion of this should go down the old
Badillo drain to the west the Way it used to go. I believe that in
1954 the County put in this berm and as I understand it was without
the permission of the City of West Covina.
I think Councilman Pittenger and myself met with as many people and
tried as hard as we could to get this job done. I think that Council-
man Pittenger has made even more meetings than I have and done a fine
job.
-A
•
C. Co 10®14-58
BADILLO DRAZY REPORT m continued
Councilman Barnes - continued:
Page Thirty-two
We should investigate this matter with our City Manager,, Engineering
Department and City Attorney to see if we can divert some of this
water.
Councilman Brown: I agree and I always felt that should
be done.
Motion by Councilman Brown„ seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried
that the recommendations in relation to the Badillo Drain Report be
accepted and instruct the City Manager, City Engineer and City Attorney
to do all things necessary to see about removing the berm as it now
exists on Badillo Street.
Mayor Mottingero I think this report should be taken in
the light of a report to the citizens of
West Covina. It has been almost a year
since the last rainy season and we have accomplished nothing that they
can see,and they should know on the basis of such a report what has
been done and the effort made to attempt to resolve this matter.
Councilman Barnes: I think the County recognizes this
water should go westerly.
Councilman Brownquestioned as to matter of C-R zoning, It was
indicated that a report would be forthcoming very shortly, possibly
at the study session Monday evening,
Councilman Brown: There are several cases in the City
where we are allowing lots to be de-
veloped that drain to the back of the
lot through the next lot and into next street. The F.H.A. says
drain is to the streets We have no ordinance for that and should
have one.
Mr. Williams: The County Building Code contains
drainage and grading clauses right in
the building code, and we are now,
through the City Manager's office, working to amend our present
building code ordinance to include this provision.
C. C. 10-14-58
I
CLAIM AGAINST CITY
Mary Kathleen Peters
by Matthew Peters
REJECTED AND REFERRED
TO INSURANCE COMPANY
HEALTH CONTRACT
REPORT OF MAYORS MEETING
OF CIVIL DEFENSE MEETING
IN MONROVIA
Page Thirty-three
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by
Councilman Barnes and carried that the
City of West Covina rejects the claim
brought against them of Mary Kathleen
Peters by Matthew Peters and refers it
'to the insurance company.
Held over until next meeting.
Councilman Heath presented the report,
as representative of the Mayor, attending
this meeting.
Possibility was discussed of having sirens and they are going to make
a survey of warning devices in Area D.
Need was mentioned of more men for the Radef Program. The state is
releasing more requipment for testing radiation activity conditions.
Mr..Hoover of the County has just completed a joint power and mutual
aid agreement to be used in Area D. Situation needs some legal
straightening out. It seems the County cannot participate in this
program until a ruling comes back from the Attorney General as to
whether the County can put money into something like this when it is
not a declared emergency.
Discussion was made on the moving of the control center from Claremont.
They had radio problems and they could not pick up West Covina due to
location of City. I believe they have changed radios and have taken
care of this matter.
Committee has been appointed to study a location for this center and
they will report back.
It was brought out at this meeting that most of the participants in
this Area D are concerned about West Covina. First, in that it has
radio center above ground, whereas other cities are getting them into
basements' of public buildings, etc. They would like to see it below
ground.
Mr. Ingram was nominated and elected for another year.
Study is being made on how traffic can be controlled in case of
emergency on state highways. The Monrovia fire brought this question
up as police couldn't block off a state highway.
A resolution was adopted commending Colonel Welling on his services.
Bradbury has entered Area D.
C. C. 10-14-58
Page Thirty-four
DEMANDS APPROVED Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by
Councilman Brown that Demands in the
amount of $407,901.37, as shown on
Demand Sheets C-108, C-110, C-111 and B-50, be approved. This to
include fund transfers in the amount of $42,345.93, bank transfers
in the amount of $132,124.50 and time deposits in the amount of
$180,000.00.
Motion passed on roll. call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger
Noes: None
Absent: None
There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 11:10 P.M.
Study Session - Monday, October 20, 1958, at 7.30 P. M.
APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL 'z 7---5-P
Date
1. As submitted_,,�.
2. With the following corrections-,