12-22-1958 - Regular Meeting - Minutesr
•
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA
December 22, 1958
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Mottinger at 7:35 Po M. in
the West Covina City Hall. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by
Councilman Pittenger, with the invocation given by Mayor Mottinger,
ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Mottinger, Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger,
Barnes
Others Presents Mr, Deane Seeger, for Mr, Aiassa
Mr. Robert Flotten, City Clerk
Mr, Harry C. Williams, City Attorney
Mr. Tom Dosh, Assistant Public Services Director
Mr, Malcolm Ca Gerschler, Planning C6ordi.nator
Absent: Mr. George Aiassa, City Manager
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
December 1, 1958 Approved as submitted
December 8, 1958 - Approved as submitted
CITY CLERK'S REPORT
ACCEPT STREET IMPROVEMENTS LOCATION: North side of Vine Avenue,
Tract No. 24139 East of Azusa Avenue.
(Harry C. Battaglia)
APPROVED Accept improvements and authorize re-
lease of Firemans Fund Indemnity Co.
Bond No. C-7034679 in the amount of
$5,500.00 and additional deposit for street improvements in the amount
of $1,206.57. Retain deposit in the amount of $80.00 for street trees
not installed to date.
Mr, Flotten: The Final Map was approved and the bond
accepted for sanitary sewers and street
improvements in May, 1958. The sewer
bond was accepted in the amount of $3,000.00 and this was released on
November 24, 1958. We now have the certificate of completion and the
Inspector's final report with recommendation for acceptance and release
of bond and additional deposit,
I
Co C. 12/22/58 Page Two
TRACT NO. 24139 - continued
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Brown and carried
that street improvements in Tract No. 24139 be accepted and authoriza-
tion be given for the release of Firemans Fund Indemnity Co. Bond No.
C-7034679 in the amount of $5,500.00 and the additional deposit for
street improvements in the amount of $1,206,57; retaining a deposit in
the amount of $80.00 for street trees not installed to date.
ACCEPT STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Tract No. 15860
(Gregory Estates, Inc., et al)
APPROVED
of $43,500.00; retain deposit
not installed to date.
LOCATION-. Southeast corner of Merced
Avenue and Walnut Avenue.
Accept street improvements and -author-
ize the release of Seaboard Surety
Company Bond No. 521430 in the amount
in the amount of $280.00 for street signs
Mr. Flotten-. The Final Map was approved and the bond
accepted in the proper manner. Sewers
were accepted and the sewer bond was
released as of October 14, 1958. We have the certificate of completion
• dated November 5, 1958 and the Inspector's final report. Recommendation
is to accept the facilities and release the street improvement bond.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried
that street improvements in Tract No. 15860 be accepted and authoriza-
tion be given for the release of Seaboard Surety Co. Bond No, 521430 in,
the amount of $43,500.00; _retaining a deposit in the amount of $280,.000
for street signs not installed to date.
ACCEPT STREET IMPROVEMENTS LOCATION-. 820 So Barranca St.
Metes & Bounds Subdivision
No, 135-11 (John Zsenyuk) Accept street improvements and auihot-
APPROVED ize release of deposit in the amount of
$200.00.
Mr, Flotteno This deposit was accepted on July 21,
1958. We have the certificate of com-
pletion dated December 11, 1958 and
have the Inspector's final report. Recommendation is to accept the im-
provements and release the deposit. This is on curbs and gutters only
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried
that street improvements in Metes and Bounds Subdivision No. 135-11 be
accepted and authorization be given to release the deposit in the amount
010 of $200.00.
C. C. 12/22/58
ACCEPT STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Precise Plan No. 62
Zone Change No. 57
(Spencer Jones)
APPROVED
Page Three
LOCATION. Northeast.corner of Azusa
Avenue and Puente Avenue.
Accept street improvements and authorize
release of United Pacific Insurance Co.
Bond No. 276282 in the amount of $3,000.00.
Mr. Flotten. This bond was accepted quite some time
ago, August, 1956, under Resolution No.
1005. We have the certificate of com-
pletion dated October, 1958 and the Inspector's final report. Recommenda-
tionis to accept the improvements and release the bond. This Precise Plan
was adopted in 1955.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried
that Street Improvements in Precise Plan No. 62 and Zone Change No. 57
be accepted and authorization given for the release of United Pacific
Insurance Co. Bond No. 276282 in the amount of $3,000.00.
ACCEPT STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Project No. C-73
(Cox Bros. Construction Co.)
APPROVED
Mr. Flotteno
report. Recommend acceptance
LOCATION. Walnut Creek Parkway,.east
of California Avenue.
Accept street improvements and authorize
the release of Continental Casualty Co.
Labor, Material and Performance Bdnd
No. 1521669 in the amount of $4,363.34.
The contract was awarded to Cox Bros.
in July, 1958. We have the certificate
of completion and the Inspector's final
and release of bond.
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and carried
that street improvements in Project No. C-73 be accepted and authoriza-..
tion be given for the release of Continental Casualty Company Labor,
Material and Performance Bond No. 1521669 in the amount of $4,363.34.
ACCEPT STREET IMPROVEMENTS LOCATION. Miniature Golf Course,.west
Unclassified Use Permit side of Azusa Avenue, north of Rowland
No. 19 .(Russell E. Uhl) Avenue.
APPROVED
Accept street improvements (sidewalks)
and authorize release of remainder of
deposit in the amount of $182.50. Retain $300.00 deposit for street
lights.
0 Mr. Flotten.
Deposit was accepted in April, 1958.
We have the certificate of completion
dated September 15, 1958 and the Inspec-
tor's Final Report dated October, 1958. Recommend acceptance and
release of deposit.
4F C. C. 12/22/58 Page Four
•
UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT NO. 19 - continued
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried
that street improvements (sidewalks) in Unclassified Use Permit No. 19
be accepted and authorization given for the release of the remainder of
the deposit in the amount of $182..508 retaining $300.00 deposit for
street lights.
RESOLUTION NO. 1480
Restoring vehicular access
to Lark Ellen Ave, from Lot
No. 10, Tract No. 18807
ADOPTED AS AMENDED
The City Clerk presented and read:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA GRANTING A
PERMIT FOR DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO LARK
ELLEN AVENUE".
LOCATION: Southwest corner of Lark Ellen
Avenue and Louisa Avenue.
Subject to construction of driveway turnaround.
Mr. Gerschler:
Councilman Brown:
Mr. Dosh:
The Planning Commission reviewed this
matter and they recommended the access
be permitted provided that a driveway
turnaround be installed.
I think we can accept this one but in
the future I feel we should look these
over in relation to the 90 day revoca-
tion clause in the resolution,
There is nothing in the Resolution
stating that he must install the drive-
way turnaround.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes that said
Resolution be adopted subject to the condition that the installation
of a driveway turnaround be included in the body of the Resolution and..,
that the 90 day revocation clause be stricken from the body of the Reso-'
lution.
Councilman Barnes: I think that such a thing is permanent
and you can't restrict it to 90 days.
Mayor Mottinger: A subdivision map is not subject to such
a time limitation. Once improvements
are completed and put in they are not
revocable as this Resolution would indicate.
City Attorney Williams: This is a situation where you are giving
beck an access right to which you have
title, However, you can keep the title
but give someone a permit to cross it. In that way the title is still
in the City. The best practical way to treat this is as City property
with the right being permitted, revocable at any time, and I think the
•
Co Co 12/22/58 Page Five
RESOLUTION NO, 1480 - continued
City Attorney Williams - continued:
Resolution is properly worded. If it is a hardship on the parties to
build the garage you can waive it, but if you do so you waive the City°s
right to that property. However, the Resolution could be so worded
that this use could be revocable when such use would no longer exist.
The motion of Councilman Brown and the second of Councilman Barnes was
withdrawn.
Mr. Williams presented and read the Resolution as amended in relation to
the installation of driveway turnaround and the City's right to revoke
the permission given when such use ceases to exist for which permission
was given.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Pittenger that said
Resolution be adopted, as amended. Motion passed on roll call as
follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger
Noes: None
Absent: None
Said Resolution was given No, 1480
PROJECT C-80 LOCATION: Orange Avenue from Durness
DELETED FROM AGENDA Street to Merced Avenue.
Street improvements. Approve Plans and
Specifications. Instruct City Engineer to advertise for bids.
Mr„ Flotten stated this item should be deleted from the Agenda in that
the Plans and Specifications were not quite completed. It was consensus
this be done.
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS LOCATION: Rowland Avenue, from Azusa
PROJECT No. C-81 Avenue to 400 feet westerly.
Rowland Avenue
Urich Station Approve Plans and Specifications and
APPROVED authorize the expenditure of lowering
the existing pavement to grade,
Amount $1,500.00.
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman 'Brown that
Plans and Specifications for Project No, C-81 be approved and authoriza-
tion be given for the expenditure of $1,500.00 for lowering of existing
pavement to grade. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger
Noes-. None
Absent: None
9
1
4P
C. C. 12/22/58
ZONE VARIANCE NO. 199
Approval of Contract
(Harvey Construction Co.)
APPROVED
Page Six
Approving contract for reconstruction of
center portion of Rowland Avenue adjacent_.
to Pioneer School to Harvey Construction
Company in the amount of $1,789.40.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Pittenger that the
City Manager be authorized to sign the contract with Harvey Construction
Company in the amount of $1,789.40 in relation to Zone Variance No.199
for reconstruction of center portion of Rowland Avenue adjacent to
Pioneer School. Motion passed on roll call as follows-.
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger.
.Noes: None
Absent: None
SCHEDULED MATTERS
PROJECT C-79 Bids were opened as advertised at 10:00
BID AWARDED o°clock A.M., December 22, 1958, in the
• Warren Southwest, Inc. office of the City Clerk and referred to
the City Engineer for recommendation at
this meeting.
Street improvements on a portion of Glendora Avenue and a portion of
Lark Hill and Spring Meadow Drives.
Mr. Flotten stated that proof of publication on December 4 and 1.1, 1958,
had been received from the West Covina Tribune, and published as a news
item in the Green Sheet.
The bids were as follows:
WARREN SOUTHWEST, INC.
AMERICAN ASPHALT PAVING CO.
HARVEY CONSTRUCTION CO.
10% Bid Bond $3,451.00
10% Bid Bond 4,104.70
$412.00 cert.check 4,112.64
Mr. Flotten presented and read the report of the City Engineer which
recommended awarding the bid to Warren Southwest, Inc. as the lowest
responsible bidder, and that all other bids and bid bonds be returned
to the unsuccessful bidders.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes that the bid
award for Project No. C-79 go to Warren Southwest, Inc. as the lowest
responsible bidder in the amount of $3,451.00, and that 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
C. C. 12/22/58 Page Seven
CITY CLERK'S REPORT CONTINUED
ACCEPT SEWER FACILITIES LOCATION, Vine Avenue, Hollenbeck Street.
APPROVED and Greenville Drive.
Accept sewer facilities and authorize re-
lease of Pacific Employers Ins. Co. Bond
No. 11-B-61387 in the amount of $13,100.00.
Mr. Flotten, The bond for the sewer was accepted on
February-18, 1958 under Resolution No.
1303. The Plans and Profiles were
approved by the City Engineer and the Sanitation Division in November,
1958 and signed by the County Engineer and the Sanitation District.
We have the Inspector's final report of December 16, 1958 reflecting
information that leakage tests were completed, lines cleaned, the area
back -filled and properly resurfaced.
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried
that sewer facilities be accepted in Vine Avenue, Hollenbeck Street
and Greenville Drive sewer district and authorization be given for the
release of Pacific Employers Ins. Co. Bond No. 11-B-61387 in the amount
• of $13,100.00.
ACCEPT SEWER FACILITIES LOCATION, Hollencrest Drive and Casa
Tract No. 21425 Linda Drive.
APPROVED
These sewers were installed under option
of the subdivider and installed under
excavation permit. No subdivision bond
was required for these improvements.
Mr. Flotten, This subdivision is at the extreme south
end of Hollenbeck Avenue. The Plans and
Profiles were approved by the City
Engineer and the Sanitation Division in August, 1956. They were
approved by the County Sanitation District. We have the Inspector's
final report dated December 16, 1958 which reflects leakage tests
completed, lines cleaned, area back -filled and properly resurfaced..
Motion by Councilman Pittenger,.seconded by Councilman Brown and
carried that sewer facilities in Tract No. 21425 be accepted.
ACCEPT SEWER FACILITIES LOCATION, Vine and Pima Avenues. .
District A111-56-5
APPROVED Accept sewer facilities and authorize
the release of Continental Casualty
Company Bond No. 15-2-1697 in the amount
of $63,925.00.
4? C. C. 12/22/58
DISTRICT A111-56-5 - continued
Page Eight
Mr. Flotteno This district was approved by the City
Council in May, 1958 under Resolution
No. 1357. The Plans and Specifications
were approved at that same meeting under Resolution No. 1358. On June
30, 1958 Resolution of Intention No. 1379 was passed, setting hearing
for July 14, 1958. On July 14, 1958 Resolution No. 1403 was passed
ordering work to be done. On August 11, 1958 the City Council awarded
the bid for the work to Jerry Artukovich. We have the Inspector's
final report which reflects leakage tests completed, lines cleaned,
area back -filled and properly resurfaced.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Brown and carried
that sewer facilities in District A'11-56-5 be accepted and authoriza-
tion be given for the release of Continental Casualty Company Bond
No. 15-2-1697 in the amount of $63,925000.
PRELIMINARY REPORT LOCATION: East and west side of Califor-
SANITARY SEWER DISTRICT nia Avenue, between Service and Merced
District A111-58-4 Avenues, designated as the California
REPORT ACCEPTED AND Avenue and Crumley Avenue Sewer District.,
CITY ENGINEER
INSTRUCTED TO PROCEED Preliminary report of City Engineer.
Mr. Flotten presented and read the report which stated that transmitted
is a signed petition and preliminary assessment map for this district.
All the signatures have been validated against the last tax roll and
represent 62% of the area of the district.
The preliminary estimate of the cost for this project is $134,500.00,
or $395.00 per lot. This includes construction costs, engineering and
incidental expenses.
It was recommended that the map be approved and filed with the City
Clerk, and the City Engineer be instructed to request the Health
Officer to investigate the sanitary conditions of the district, and
that the City Engineer be instructed to proceed with the preparation
of final plans and specifications for the project.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried
that the map be approved and filed with the City Clerk; that the City
Engineer be instructed to request the Health Officer to investigate
the sanitary condition of the district and to proceed with the prepara-
tion of final plans and specifications for the project.
40
4? C. C. 12/22/58
PROJECT NO. SS-5
Civic Center Sewers
APPROVAL OF PLANS,
AWARD OF BID AND
APPROVAL OF.EXPENDITURE
FROM SEWER CONSTRUCTION
FUND
Page Nine
Sanitary sewer ,facilities for future City
Hall, Public Service Building and present
City Hall.
Informal bids received by the City
Engineer as per City Council instructions
of April 28, 1958,
Request is for approval of plans, authori-
zation for the expenditure of funds from
the Sewer Construction Fund, and award of the contract to Tony Pipeline
Construction Company per their low bid in the amount of $1,946.56.
This covers the construction of the mainline sewer only.
Mr. Flotten stated that under the date of December 18, 1958, the -Sani-
tation Engineer had furnished reports to members of Council in relation
to this project with respect to number of bids and the bidders.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Pittenger that the
plans on Project No. SS-5, Civic Center Sewers, be approved; that
authorization be given for the expenditure of funds from the Sewer
• Construction Fund; and the award of contract be given to the Tony
Pipeline Construction Company, as per their low proposal in the amount
of $1, 946. 56 .
Motion passed on roll call as follows -
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger
Noes: None
Absent: None
RESOLUTION NO. 1481 The City Clerk presented:
(Precise Plan No. 111) "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
Accepting bond for the CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING BOND TO
installation of Sanitary GUARANTEE THE COST OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS
Sewers AND THE TIME OF COMPLETION IN PRECISE
ADOPTED PLAN NO. 111 IN SAID CITY".
LOCATION: Fairway Lane to Walnut Creek Wash.
Maryland Casualty Company Bond No. 90-615386 in the amount of $3,850.00.
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. 1481
0
Co Co 12/22/58 Page Ten
CITY CLERK'S REPORTS
PLANNING COMMISSION None
RECREATION AND PARK
Councilman Barnes: At the last meeting of the Commission
they were very interested in whether
Ordinance 390 had been brought before
Council at their previous meeting, and I believe it was, and also
the Resolution in regard to Cameron Park in relation to the Teen -Kan -
Teen. Other than that I have nothing to report,
Mayor Mottingero
GENERAL MATTERS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
• WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
I believe these matters have been taken
care of.
None
Mr. Flotten stated that a letter had been received from the Edison
Company appealing the decision of the Planning Commission regarding ;
Unclassified Use Permit #31 and requesting hearing for January 26,1956)4'
It was indicated this matter had been tentatively set for the date
requested.
REQUEST OF PAUL Co DAVIS Mr. Flotten presented and read the communi-
Land at northeast corner of cation. It was indicated that Mr. Davis
Fairgrove and Sunset had run into a problem on a tract of land
REFERRED TO PLANNING at the northeast corner of Fairgrove and
DEPARTMENT Sunset. The south boundary of this pro-
perty is Fairgrove and across the street
is Los Angeles County which has been de-
veloped into 6000 square foot lots and the houses sold for $12,500.00.
On the akst line there is still 6000 square foot lots and houses that
sold for $10,500.00. On the north line is a tract of land with the
same zoning as the property on the northeast corner of Fairgrove.-and
Sunset, but north of it there is a business center, Across Sunset the
Bassett School has bought this land, except eight acres,for a school.
The tract of land indicated is, at present, placed in Zone 2 requiring
40 9450 square feet per lot.
Mr. Davis requests the City to make a study of this property to have it
come under Zone 1 making the lots 7500 square feet.
It was consensus this be referre4 to the Planning Department.
I
•
C. C. 12/22/58
COMMUNICATION FROM
May L. Pendill
443 N. Irwindale Ave.
West Covina
REFERRED TO CITY
ENGINEER
Page Eleven
Mr. Flotten presented and read this
communication which was in relation to
having the curb and gutter paving in
front of the home at 443 N. Irwindale
Avenue, along with residence at 445 N.
Irwindale
It was consensus this matter be referred to the.City Engineer for
report.
EXPRESSING APPRECIATION Mr. Flotten presented and read a Resolu-
FOR ASSISTANCE IN THE tion of the County of Los Angeles, Board
CONTROL OF MALIBU FIRE of Supervisors, commending agencies, asso-
ciations, organizations and commercial and.,
business enterprises assisting in control
of said fire.
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
ZONE CHANGE NO. 127 Annexation No. 159 - Hill, Hoke and
and Ferraro (still pending)
PRECISE PLAN NO. 135
NO DECISION DUE;TO LOCATION: Northeast and northwest corners
TIE VOTE of Lark Ellen and Francisquito Avenues.
REQUEST: R-3, R-P and C-1 Uses
EXISTING ZONE: R-1 Y I
e_a-
'q,,Z n Ma or Mottinger: It was requed.4thA this item be de-
-tided on this evening,
This had been referred to the Planning
Commission for further investigation. The City Attorney has advised
us that it is not necessary to have another general public hearing,
and that it is up to us to make a decision on this matter.
I do not believe we need to go through all the history on this matter,
which also reflects the matter of Annexation No. 159 -- it isall a
matter of record. The item is whether Zone Change No. 113 should be
granted because annexation No. 159 is dependent upon the passage and
approval of the zone change. .
Councilman Heath: I believe the applicant said the annexa-
tion should be held up until the zone
change was decided upon.
Mayor Mottinger: That is correct. They have reserved the.;.
right to withdraw the annexation if.the
zone change is not granted.
Mr. Flotten: Zone Change No. 113 was the original
application that was denied. Zone Change
No. 127 is the application now before you.
I
E
r:
C. C. 12/22/58
ZONE CHANGE NO, 127 - continued
Page Twelve
Councilman Heath: I have investigated a lot on this thing.
I am concerned about this problem. It
started before I came on the Council
and has dragged out for quite some time. I took the liberty of going
to the official City files and read them through from beginning to end.
I feel that this application for .zoning has been the most controversial
issue before Council, that I know of, and I wanted to know what all the
problems were to find out if I were missing something.
I read through the entire information in the files, three booklets of
it. I went back through the Minutes of the Planning Commission and
Council meetings and the best I could make out of it was this: the
opponents to this zone change want to determine first that a need exists
for this zoning.
The second problem (of the opponents) is the yards backing up to this
development and they will lose their privacy. The opposition felt that
due to the slope of the land the people in the shopping area would be
able to look in.
The third problem was flashing advertising signs causing a nuisance.
The fourth was that in the second story E-3 people could look into
adjacent yards.
The fifth problem was dangers to children on Lark Ellen Avenue due to
a heavier concentration of trucks on this street and there were no
sidewalks.
The sixth problem was, and I quote, "We just don't want it"
In conversation with some of these people in the area there were two
more things brought out that are not in the record. They were, "suppose
this is granted? Next week they will want gas stations in there", The
other was, "Suppose a malt shop opens up and it turns out to be a hang-
out for kids on motorcycles?"
I have tried my best to bring out every opposing statement made in the
Minutes. I might have missed some but I do not think I did, so I will.
take the oppositionsl�statements.one at a time.
The opposition wants to determine whether the need exists. The propon-
ents, through Mr. Eisner"s report, have shown that a neighborhood
shopping area will support itself in this location. Mr. Eisner was
misquoted on a point and according to official records he said this,
"This is not to say that this is. the only location for a shopping center
in West Covina". This is where the quotation ends and is true so far
as it goes. However, the statement goes further and he says, "But we
were asked what it would draw from without doing actual economic damage
to other markets. Centers which are a mile apart have a tendency not
to overlap the area of purchasing power available to them." We got this
word from Mr. Eisner and,he seems to feel a shopping area would support
4FC. C. 12/22/58 Page Thirteen
ZONE CHANGE NO. 127 - continued
-Councilman Heath --continued:
itself over there. He is of the opinion that neighborhood shopping
areas should be about a mile apart. He is basingthis on a report put
out by the Realty Board based on the standards of the Urban Land -Insti-
tute of the Realty Board.
If you remember when Mr. Bennett was here, giving his report which we
were waiting for as final information on this question, Mr. Bennett
backed him (Mr. Eisner) up and said a mile apart is good for a shopping
area. In talking to Mr. Bennett at 11:00 o'clock this morning the
latest information he has is now, three-quarters of a mile apart (for
shopping areas) is all right.
Now I think that with Mr. Eisner°s experience, and Mr. Bennett's remarks,
you have two reliable people saying that a shopping area could support
itself in there and would be in keeping with the standards set up all
over the United States by the Urban Land Institute of the Realty Board,
and is something that should be considered.
The second problem was, yards backing up lose privacy, and slope of the
land would cause people in back of the shopping area to lose their
• privacy.
This Saturday I went over the entire land area. Along the rear of
this lot there is a six foot wall for about a third of the length of the
lot. The wall is six feet high. I would defy anyone to stand on the
south (end) of that wall, regardless of where he stood on the lot, and
look into those properties surrounded by the lot. A wall is supposed to
be put on this property. Mr. Garvey stated that the parking area would
even be lowered if it was found to be necessary. I think that if you
would visit the land and stand next to the six foot wall you would agree
that privacy is not violated.
In relation to flashing signs being a nuisance I would state that we
now have an ordinance prohibiting this (type of sign).
The problem that in the second story R-3 people could look into adjacent
yards is similar to the flashing sign mentioned. We now have an R-3
ordinance which would take care of that problem.
The next problem was dangers to children on Lark Ellen Avenue because
of large trucks using the street and at a place where there are no
sidewalks. I do not think the City would sit still one minute and have
that street be used for heavy trucks. It is posted for 6000 pounds
gross and would be posted against any trucks going up that street.
Now we have the next one, not in the record, and again I quote, "Suppose
this is granted then next week gas stations will be wanted in there".
It is quite true that gas stations were proposed in the beginning, but
they have been withdrawn. I feel this way about gas stations, that I
will absolutely and positively oppose any gas stations in that area or
in the (entire) southeastern area of the City.
C. C. 12/22/58 Page Fourteen
ZONE CHANGE NO. 127 - continued
Councilman Heath - continued:
There was another one, "Suppose malt shop opens up there and it becomes
a hang-out for kids on motorcycles". I believe this is a policing
problem. I have faith in our Police Department and they have done a
good job in these matters and such things have not occurred anywhere in
the City so why should they let this happen in this area?
The statement "we just don't want it" I can't say anything about.
I went through the records and found an interesting statement made by
Mr. Jackson of the Planning.Commission as indicated in the Minutes of
February 19, 1958, and he says, "Recently the City committed itself to
contract with Mr. Bennett as to the need of commercial in the City. I
think it would be unappropriate to change the Master Plan to allow more
commercial to come in as we may find that we have enough commercial".
Commissioner Pink agrees with Mr. Jackson and states, "We should take it
easy until we find out just exactly what we do need and where we need
it".
I feel by listening to Mr. Eisner, and Mr. Bennett to whom we paid a lot
of money to obtain advice from, that if we don't heed that advice there
qF was no sense in spending the taxpayers' money. We waited and by much
discussion on this to find out what Mr. Bennett had to say and you all
know what he had to say on the matter. In talking to him (Mr. Bennett)
on the phone I verified what was in his report, of which you all had a
copy, and he stated we still are going to have to have more commercial
area in this City.
In looking at the facts, I think every opposition proposed has been
satisfactorily remedied.
Councilman Pittenger: You have given a very eloquent speech,
Mr. Heath, on the fact that we should
have,more commercial zoning and particu-
larly on this property. However, I would take up some of the things
you have mentioned and reply to them.
I have not gone over the records so completely as you have, but I was
on the Council when this thing started and we have had many hotter
issues and of much more importance to the City. This is important to
the land owner and the home owners but has no major effect upon the
City so far as I can see.
As to the reports of Mr. Bennett and Mr. Eisner, Mr. Eisner was hired
by the client and I would throw out that testimony as being, shall we
say, a bit prejudiced. Mr. Bennett was hired to do a job for our City
soand one could interpret his findings in two or three ways. Other cities
such as Los Angeles have neighborhood shopping areas within a mile
apart, and this practice is also done in the San Fernando Valley. How-
ever, I, do not know that the San Fernando Valley (example) is what we
are trying to copy out here. I would be much happier to have examples
from some other distkicts, as these mentioned are pretty botched up.
4? C. C. 12/22/58 Page Fifteen
ZONE CHANGE NO. 127 - continued
•
Councilman Pittenger - continued:
These areas are momma and poppa stores. However, people go to major
markets to shop and the people know where the best bargains are and do
not need this for neighborhood convenience,
We have had other areas in this same section proposed for commercial
which had far better plans by a long way and bigger areas. If we'are
going to discuss commercial and discuss it in this area I would suggest
going back and looking at the commercial area formerly proposed.
We are annexing This to give it commercial zoning. Mr. Bennett may be
correct in that we need more commercial than we have but there is a
lot of existing commercial to develop, as yet. I can't say all of this
commercial will develop before we take on any more but I do not think
it is necessary to annex and give commercial just to get more commer-
cial. They will build it when the market is there and not before:
It has been indicated.that, if they can't get it from the City they
will get it from the County. I think that is hocus-pocus. There is
County land zoned within a mile for commercial. I believe that if we
turn it down the County would not touch it with a ten foot pole.
You have stated that Lark Ellen will not be a heavily traveled street
and that we can post it. We have an off -ramp on this street right from
the Freeway and because of that we would have lots of traffic and light
trucks. If we did, it would have to be brought up to specifications
for such°heavy_ use or we would be in trouble. There is a high school
and a grammar school close in the area and that will cause a traffic
problem anyway.
I see no need for this in this area a-nd the home owner's need has to be
considered. The statement, "We just don't want it" is a good reason to
consider when we have better locations within a half mile better than
this location will ever be.
Councilman Heath: We may have had other areas in -there, had
offers, but they are not in front of us
at the present time nor are there any
being brought up in the near future. You can't assure any commercial
in that area over there.
Councilman Pittenger: If we would deny this and give any indica-
tion of the 40 acres over there, he would
be back in the morning. There is no
Councilman who would deny that.
40 Councilman Heath:
you say the County would
as Mr. Bennett?
That is your opinion but I do not think
you actually know. The question is whether
this is going into County or not. Would
disregard the comments of City planners such
C. C. 12/22/58
ZONE CHANGE NO. 127 - continued
Page Sixteen
Councilman Pittenger: I think they would consider Mr. Breivogel's
recommendation instead of Mr. Bennett's if
it was left to the County. If we turned
it down I would feel they would not accept it for commercial.
I have heard it said, for money, that property could be made into commer-
cial but I do not think there is enough property to put it through. I
do not think there is enough money involved.
Councilman Heath: You have brought up the matter of money.
This was a point made in Mr. Eisner's
report and he seems to be fairly honest.
He stated that he estimated the sales tax alone would roughly run about
$9,000.00, which is a nice piece of change. On top of that there would
be property tax above that $9,000.00. There was another thing he
brought out at the time in that R-3 adjacent to a shopping area would,
no doubt, keep it rented because of the closeness to a shopping area and
would stand up a lot longer than R-3 in other places.
Councilman Pittenger: I would still go back to the fact that
there is a better area for it and a better
development than these fellows show at
• Azusa and Cameron. There would be much superior stores, no apartments -
all commercial - so if we must go for commercial Let's at least get the
best.
If they put R-3 against these people's homes there is not enough depth
to the property and there is talk about a smaller market. This is a
neighborhood thing and if some larger one develops down below what would
happen?
Councilman Barnes: I do not think we should take anything into
consideration other than the support of
this here as indicated in Mr. Eisner's
report. I think he might be prejudiced but I think his report is accur-
ate that it would be supported in this location, in relation to the
market.
Mr. Bennett said a shopping area was needed in that particular area of
..the City and as Councilman Pittenger states, we have had other and
better developments proposed for such use in the area. However, the
reason I wasn't for that is that it was in close proximity to the high
school and I still believe this way. I would not want a shopping area
there and Lstill do not think,it would be good next to the high school.
In regards to the privacy of the property owners, there is a six foot
wall, and if the parking lot is lowered I think this should be done in
Go a property of this type if it will be developed as to the use proposed.
So far as signs and two story (R-3) buildings next to R-1, I believe
that is a matter that is completely under control by the Planning
Department.
4? C. C. 12/22/58 Page Seventeen
ZONE CHANGE NO. 127 - continued
Councilman Barnes - continued:
In the matter of this use being dangerous to children on Lark Ellen,
I suppose that in a City growing as ours is, such a thing is a danger
hazard on moat of our streets.
I would not go for gas stations on either one of those corners down
there.
Councilman Brown: It was mentioned that Lark Ellen was a
posted street. I am wondering, however,
how long we can `keep it for a posted
street. I am wondering how long we can keep it that way with gas tax
money due for improving it?
So far as stating that in the general area commercial zoning has
already been granted by the County, which would annex to West Covina
at any time we so desired it, this has been zoned for some 3j to 4
years now and it has never been developed, so whether it is financing
or the merchants,,.there_.is something wrong with the community. There
is one small development such as this less than a mile away and right
around this is two zonings already granted for such commercial use in
• the County.
As has been mentioned we have had other pieces of property submitted
asking for similar zoning which was probably much more desirable to
develop commercially, particularly since this request has land which .
lies on two sides of the street and it is difficult to get the whole
picture on it.
So far as Mr. Bennett°s report I have been to Sacramento, was not
present at the time of the.meeting with him, and I have not read the
report.
Mr. C. Powell I would like to ask a question. A great
1313 McWood Street deal of this seems to hinge on the
West Covina Bennett report. However, since this was
not presented at the hearings we have
never had the opportunity to answer that
report.
Mayor Mottinger: The Bennett report only supplies us with
general information and is not on this
particular piece. Our discussion and
mention of the report is based on the statistics given to us as to
whether commercial would be needed in this whole area and it does not
point out any particular area or piece of land. I do not believe, be-
cause of this, it could be brought in as specific testimony and if it
40 were it would be at the request of Council to open the hearing. The
Bennett report is of a general, nature for the entire City and some
questions were asked as regards the southerly portion of the City and
answers were given but not with this particular piece of property in
mind. It was in a general way and nothing to require us entering it as
public testimony.
0
•
•
C. Co 12/22/58
ZONE CHANGE NO. 127 - continued
Mr; Powell:
Mayor Mottinger:
Council would want to reopen
out in the Bennett report.,
Page Eighteen
Would it be possible to request opening
of the public hearing?
It could be requested but it would not
necessarily mean the request would be
granted. I do not really think the
the hearing in relation to what was brought
I feel what has been stated by members of Council in relation to this
matter pretty well covers -it and I would have nothing to add to what
has been said.
Motion by Councilman Pittenger that Zone Change No. 127 and Precise,
Plan No, 135 be denied received no second.
Motion by Councilman Heath that Zone Change No. 127 and Precise Plan
No, 135 be approved with modifications, if already not contained, that
no gas stations will be permitted, received no second,
Mayor Mottinger pointed out that he believed that item would be con-
tained since this is C-1 zoning and such use is not allowed in C-1
zoning,
Councilman Heath stated that there were certain things that the propon-
ents stated they would not do. However, it is in the Minutes as a
matter of record and that should be enough to make them abide by it.
"Perhaps my recommendation should be subject to the recommendations of.,
the Planning Department and the regulations of C-1 zoning",
Motion by Councilman Heath that Zone Change No, 127 and Precise Plan
No, 135 be approved subject to the recommendations of the Planning
Commission received no second.
Motion by Councilman Heath that.Zone Change No. 127 and Precise Plan
No. 135 be approved bubject to the review of the Precise Plan received
no second,
Councilman Heath: I think the Minutes have enough official
statements as to what the proponents will
do and I think we can force them to do it.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Barnes that Zone
Change No. 127 and Precise Plan No. 135 be approved, subject to the
recommendations of the Planning Commission report of July 16, 1958-
Motion tied on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Barnes
Noes: Councilmen Pittenger, Mottinger
Absent: None
Not Voting: Councilman Brown
0
•
•
C.C. 12/22/58
Page Nineteen
ZONE CHANGE NO. 127 - continued
Councilman Barnes: Would a malt shop be permitted in C-1
zone?
Mr, Gerschler: It would be permitted.
Councilman Heath: It may have to be patrolled but we have
no trouble with this type of use any
other place in the City.
Mayor Mottinger: It is a tie vote and therefore it is
not approved?
Mr, Williams: In effect, it is denied, However, I would
point out that the annexation proceeding
is still pending. You have not passed
the Ordinance approving or disapproving it.
Countilman Brown: They (applicant) asked us to hold this
over until a decision was given on this
matter.
Mayor.Mottinger: There would seem to be no decision be-
cause of the tie vote and the zoning will
remain the same as it presently is - as
County property.
CITY ATTORNEY
ORDINANCES
INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented:
Adopting Uniform Building "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
Code, 1958 Edition CITY OF WEST COVINA ADOPTING BY REFERENCE
THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, 1958 EDITION,
AND PRESCRIBING PENALTIES FOR THE VIOLA-
TION THEREOF"
Mayor Mottinger: Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the Body of the Ordin-
ance.
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Barnes and
carried that the Ordinance be introduced and given its first reading.
C, Co 12/22/58
4F ORDINANCES - continued
E
Page Twenty
INTRODUCTION The City "Attorney presented:'
Ordinance Adopting Uniform "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
Plumbing Code 1958 Edition THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ADOPTING BY
REFERENCE THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE,
1958 EDITION, AND PRESCRIBING PENALTIES
FOR THE VIOLATION THEREOF."
Mayor Mottinger: Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Barnes, .seconded by Councilman Heath and carried
that the Ordinance be introduced and given its first reading.
INTRODUCTION
The City Attorney presented:
Ordinance Adopting
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
an Electrical Code
CITY OF WEST COVINA ADOPTING AN ELEC-
TRICAL CODE, REGULATING THE INSTALLATION,
ARRANGEMENT, ALTERATION,REPAIR, USE AND
OPERATION OF ELECTRICAL WIRING, CONNEC-
TIONS, FIXTURES AND APPLIANCES IN BUILD-
INGS AND STRUCTURES IN THE CITY OF WEST
COVINA, PROVIDING FOR ELECTRICAL PERMITS,
.ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE NATIONAL ELEC-
TRICAL CODE,-"1956 EDITIONe AND THE,ELEC-
TRICAL'SAFETY ORDERS, 1955 EDITION, AND
PRESCRIBING PENALTIES FOR THE VIOLATION
THER OF",
Mayor Mottinger:
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried
that the Ordinance be introduced and given its first reading.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried
that public hearing on the Ordinances relating to Building Code,
Plumbing Code and Electrical Code be set for January 12, 1959,.
INTRODUCTION
Regulating activities in
and about Gymnasiums,
Massage Parlors, Turkish
Baths
.The City Attorney presented:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA REGULATING
CERTAIN ACTIVITIES IN AND ABOUT GYMNASIUMS,
MASSAGE PARLORS, TURKISH BATHS AND SIMI-
LAR ESTABLISHMENTS".
. Mayor Mottinger: Hearing no objections, we will waive fur-
ther reading of the body of -the Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried
that the Ordinance be introduced and given its first reading.
4?
0
C. C. 12/22/58
ORDINANCES - continued
INTRODUCTION
Ordinance regulating
landing and taking off
of aircraft
Mayor Mottinger:
Page Twenty -One
The City Attorney presented;
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF WEST COVINA REGULATING THE LAND-
ING AND TAKING OFF OF AIRCRAFT".
Hearing no objections, we will waive fur-
ther reading of the body of the Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried that the Ordinance be introduced and given its first reading.
INTRODUCTION
Ordinance amending certain
provisions of Ordinance No.
325 relating to'.R-1 and R-2
Zones and creating R-3a,
R-3b and R-4 Zones
-Mayor Mottinger;
The City Attorney presented:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING CERTAIN PRO-
VISIONS OF ORDINANCE NO. 325 RELATING TO
THE R-1 AND R-2 ZONES AND CREATING THE
R-3a, R-3b AND R-4 ZONES".
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.
ORDINANCE NO. 606
Proposed Amendment No. 26
to Comprehensive `,Zoning
Ordinance No. 325
ADOPTED
Mayor Mottinger:
The City Attorney presented:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING CERTAIN
SECTIONS OF THE ORDINANCE NO. 325 PER-
TAINING TO ZONING AND ZONING PROCEDURES".
(City Initiated)
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Brown 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. 606.
I
C. C. 12/22/58
ORDINANCES - continued
ORDINANCE NO. 607
Amending Ordinance No. 390
( Recreation and Parks )
ADOPTED
Mayor Mottinger:
Page Twenty -Two
The City Attorney presented:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF NEST COVINA AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. 390 RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF
PUBLIC PARKS".
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Brown 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. 607.
ORDINANCE NO. 608
Ordinance amending official
zoning map correcting
typographical error in
Ordinance No. 601 which
amends Zoning Ordinance
No. 325
ADOPTED
Mayor Mottinger:
The City Attorney presented:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 60111.
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Heath 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. 608.
ORDINANCE NO. 609
Amending Section 1410.1 of
Ordinance No. 325
(Temporary Uses)
ADOPTED
Mayor Mottinger:
The City Attorney presented:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
.THE CITY OF NEST COVINA AMENDING
SECTION 1410.1 OF ORDINANCE NO. 325
RELATING TO TEMPORARY USES".
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Ordinance.
Co Co 12/22/58 Page Twenty -Three
ORDINANCE NO, 609 - continued
Motion by Councilman Brown, 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, 609.
RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION NO. 1482 The City Attorney.presented:
Accepting Grant Deed "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
(Robbins) CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A CERTAIN
ADOPTED WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING RECORDA-
TION THEREOF (Robbins)
LOCATION, Proposed extension of Vincent
Avenue between San Bernardino Freeway
and Glendora Avenue
• Mayor Mottinger: Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the Reso-
lution.
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Brown 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, 1482.
RESOLUTION NO. 1483 The City Attorney presented:
Regarding revision of "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
Mayo -Breed Formula to CITY OF WEST COVINA URGING THE STATE
increase Southland LEGISLATURE TO REVISE THE MAYO-BREED
Highway Funds FORMULA TO INCREASE SOUTHLAND HIGHWAY
ADOPTED. FUNDS",
Mayor Mottinger:. Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the Reso-
lution.
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Brown 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. 1483.
8
C. C. 12/22/58
RESOLUTIONS - continued
Page Twenty -Four
RESOLUTION NO. 1484 The City Attorney presented:
Supporting Greater Los Angeles "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
Safety Council Program during THE CITY OF WEST COVINA SUPPORTING
Christmas Season GREATER LOS ANGELES SAFETY COUNCIL
ADOPTED PROGRAM DURING THE CHRISTMAS SEASON".
Mayor Mottinger:
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, 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. 1484.
RESOLUTION NO. 1485
• Improvements and Extension
of Grand Avenue
ADOPTED AS AMENDED
The City Attorney presented and read:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, COUNTY OF LOS
ANGELES,,STATE OF CALITORNIA, REQUEST-
ING THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO
IMPROVE GRAND AVENUE, A MAJOR HIGHWAY
IN THE COUNTY MASTER PLAN OF HIGHWAYS,
WITH SPECIAL LOS ANGELES COUNTY ROAD
DEPARTMENT FUNDS". (AND THAT THE FUNDS
NOW APPROPRIATED FOR THIS PROJECT BE
EXPENDED DURING THIS FISCAL YEAR)
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Brown 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. 1485.
RESOLUTION NO. 1486
Approving Precise Plan of
Design No. 139
(Allen and Retherford)
ADOPTED
Mayor Mottinger:
The City Attorney presented:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING
PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN NO. 139 UPON
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2149 EAST GARVEY
AVENUE".
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the Reso-
lution.
I
•
El
C. C. 12/22/58
RESOLUTION NO. 1486 - continued
Page Twenty -Five
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. 1486.
RESOLUTION NO. 1487
Authorizing execution
of Quit Claim Deed
ADOPTED
Mayor Mottinger:
The City.,Attorney presented:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF WEST COVINA AUTHORIZING EXECU-
TION OF A QUIT CLAIM DEED'•. (Faris)
LOCATION: South side
west of Orange Avenue
of Badillo Avenue,
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolution.
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. 1487.
RESOLUTION NO. 1488
Proppsing modifications in
those certain proceedings
for the improvement of - .
Thelborn Street and other
streets. (A'11-56-7)
ADOPTED
Mayor Mottinger:
The City Attorney presented:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA PROPOSING MODI-
FICATIONS IN THOSE CERTAIN PROCEEDINGS
FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF THELBORN STREET
AND OTHER STREETS INSTITUTED PURSUANT
TO RESOLUTION NO. 1450".
(Sanitary Sewer District A111-56-7)
Hearing no -objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolution.
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. 1488.
t
C..C..12/22/58
Page Twenty -Six
RESOLUTION NO. 1488 - continued ,
Councilman Heath: This is a small district and I am wonder-
ing about possibility of adding more on
to it?
Mr. Dosh: We are making a point of it not to leave
any isolated areas.
CITY CLERK
SEWER PETITION A°11-57-F Phillips Avenue and Danes Drive Sewer
REFERRED TO CITY District
ENGINEER FOR REPORT
Mr. Flotten stated there were 37 non -
validated signatures which constituted
64% of the area involved, and recommended it be referred to the City
Engineer for report.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried
that the sewer petition Aa11-57-F be referred to the City Engineer for
proper report.
PETITION REQUESTING Mr. Flotten: We,have a petition regard -
EXCLUSION FROM PARTICIPATION ing the lighting district on East
IN LIGHTING DISTRICT Cortez Street, east of Barranca Avenue.
Tract No. 11310 Copies of the report from the City
Engineer have been submitted to Council.
The petition is signed by property owners
on the opposite side of Campana. Flores who do not wish to be included in
the lighting district. The City Engineer's recommendation is that this
application be denied.
Councilman Brown: vI can't quite see that because a light-
ing district is set up in a new subdi-
vision why the older, existing buildings
should be brought into this lighting district. I am not necessarily in
favor of it. This has been done before and I voiceo my opinion about
it that I did not think it was right, but this is the first request to
be excluded.
Councilman Heath: Are these areas to be picked up later?
Councilman Brown: Any time they want to go in they can be
picked up.
Mr. Flotten:
to the City,
in the tract.
are on Cortez
Engineer.
There are seven street lights to be put
on the existing wooden poles on Cortez
Street and to be installed, at no cost
by the Edison Company. These lights are on Cortez and not
These houses, the people who are registering the protest,
and that is the basis of the recommendation of the City
N
•
C— C- 12/22/58 Page Twenty -Seven
PETITION RE LIGHTING DISTRICT
Councilman Pittenger: These might be benefits, but benefits
they do not wants I would like to hold
this for further discussion and see
what the problem is.
Mr, Dosho Of all the people who signed this peti-
tion only four are being assessed. Those
inside the older tract are not affected
at all. We required street lights with this tract No. 21014 and in
speaking with Mr. Thompson this seems to be the standard practice all
over the County - that if. people receive benefit from lights it is up
to the City to see that the property is assessed and it is the only
equitable way we know. The lights are going to be there and this is
based on benefits received,
Mayor Mottingero I think we should hold this over for
discussion at our newt meeting, and
also I think it should be found out just
how many dollars are actually going to be paid for this by property
owners.
LETTERS FROM BOUNDARY No protests will be registered,
COMMISSION
City of Industry proposed
Annexations No. 38 and Noo39
ANNEXATION OF LOTS NO, 81 9, South side of San Bernardino Freeway,
10, 11, 12, LOS ANGELES east of proposed extension of Grand
COUNTY Avenue.
REFERRED TO CITY ENGINEER
It was consensus this be referred to the Planning Department.
CITY TREASURER None
Mr, Deane Seeger There has been a recreation tax problem
for Mr. Aiassao at Halinor and Siesta Streets in the
City. There has been a similar problem
in E1 Monte and Mr. Aiassa wished me
to report to Council that he is waiting for a report from E1 Monte and
will possibly have a written report at next meeting of Council,
0
11
r7l
C. C. 12/22/58 Page Twenty -Eight
MAYOR'S REPORTS
SANITATION DISTRICT MEETING I attended the Sanitation District
meeting last Wednesday. At that time
various representatives acted upon the
recommendation that the sanitation district follow the County°s plan
of salary increase of 5j%. There was very noticeable concern among
those,present at these blanket increases and although it was approved
t'was.cautioned'about future blanket --increases and'their affect upon
the cities. Although approved, they disapproved of continually increas-
ing to meet competition of adjoining governmental agencies. It is some-
thing we need to keep in mind in discussion of the budget next year.
DECEMBER 26, 1958 Mayor Mottinger: I believe the Presi-
AS OFFICIAL HOLIDAY dent has proclaimed December 26, 1958
APPROVED as an official, holiday and I am wonder-
ing whether we should so proclaim it
.for the City and have City offices
closed that day?
Mr. Flotten: I contacted the Attorney General as to
the wording of the President's state-
ment. This was only in respect to
Federal employees, not County, State or City. There are two cities
in the Valley that are closing on that date and Los Angeles leaves a
skeleton crew on for the 26th of December and the 2nd of January,
Councilman Brown: I think -we have discussed this infor-
mally and I think it would be a greater
_advantage to the City to give the
employees the 26th off and have them work the week of the New Year's
Holiday, with the exception of New Year day,
Mr, Williams: The problem here is the City Hall has
to be open except on holidays declared
by the State and this is not a general
holiday, .,.So long as you keep the doors open you can allow the
employees the day off.
Councilman Barnes: I think it is a good suggestion, but the
only thing I would not want to do is
start a precedent of any kind, Perhaps
for this year it might be good.Perhaps Flotten, Deane and Swindall
could draw straws as to which one would be here on the 26th.
Councilman Pittenger: It should be indicated that whoever
did stay at the City Hall on the 26th
.would have January 2nd off, to compen-
sate for that.
Councilman Brown: I would feel that only one.person would
be necessary in the City Hall on that
Friday after Christmas, but I would like
to go on record that this shall not set a precedent that this will be
always permitted the day after Christmas.
ti
9
t
•
Co Co 12/22/58 Page Twenty -Nine
OFFICIAL HOLIDAY DECEMBER 26n 1958 - continued
Motion by Councilman Browne seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried
that the City employees be given the day of December 26, 1958 as an
off -day and whoever finds it mandatory to work on the 26th of December
shall be given January 2, 1959 as an off -day, but in no way is this to
set a precedent for future years.
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
Councilman Barnes: The Upper San Gabriel Water Association
annual associate member dues are due
which is in the amount of $100.00, to be
paid January 1, 1959. This year the producing members are paying .06
an acre foot assessment to make it equal for all companies. They have
asked us, as an associate member, to contribute $100.00 to the associa-
tion.
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Heath that the City
of West Covina retain its membership in the Upper San Gabriel Water
Association and that payment of dues from January 1, 1959 to January 1,
1960, in the amount of $1000.00, be paid.
Motion passed on roll call as follows.
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger
Noes: None
Absent: None
HANDLING OF CASH DEPOSITS In discussion, it was indicated that
CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE this practice of accepting cash deposits
RESOLUTION is costing the City money in relation to
work necessary to be done as regards
bookkeeping, etc., at no cost to the
parties for which the cash deposits are handled.
Mayor Mottinger stated that Mr. Williams should prepare a resolution
along the lines indicated in that Council is against handling these
cash bonds without some remuneration for the services that must be
rendered by the City in accepting these, and that the City does not
desire to accept cash bonds over a certain figure, possibly only up to
$1,000.00.
TRAFFIC DONDITIONS AT Councilman Brown: We have a serious
CITRUS AND SERVICE ROAD traffic condition at Citrus and the
INTO EASTLAND AND TURN Service Road into Eastland and the turn
INTO AKRON into Akron Store. There is a double
line on Citrus that should stop traffic
from turning left going into Akron, but
it doesn't seem to mean anything. I think we should have the traffic
engineer make a survey to see if Akron needs another inlet or outlet,
Y
N
•
C. C. 12/22/58
TRAFFIC CONDITIONS - continued
Councilman Brown - continued:
Page Thirty
or a berm, to keep them (traffic) from going over the double line to
get in there. At one time I was against a road off from the service
road but rather than see this thing happening I would rathersee a
road off the service road.
Mr. Dosh indicated this matter is already under study and that now it
is just a. matter of putting it together for report.
Councilman Heath queried -as to whether any communication had been sent
to Baldwin Park in.relation.to their proposed annexation near the
Hartland Hospital and Mr. Flotten indicated this had been done, and no
pkotest had been registered.
Councilman Heath queried as to the Holding Cell in the new police
headquarters and that it must meet certain specifications. Mr. Dosh
indicated this Holding Cell had been deleted from the contilact.
Councilman Heath: I would refer to Page 7 of the Minutes
of December 1, 1958 and in reference to
the motion which states:
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Heath and
carried that the petition for Fircroft and dine Avenue Sewer District
to be added to District A111-58-1, and referred to -the City -Engineer
for proper report, be approved, but with the stipulation that the
award of the bid contract be withheld until the matter is cleared up in
relation to the property in question and the school property.
Since this was stated we have found out that the property in question
is not a part of Ae11-58-1 and yet we are still holding on to this and
there is no connection with it.
Mayor Mottinger indicated that Council was waiting for a complete report
on the matter.
Mr. Dosh stated that in speaking to the owners in the area there it
was the general consensus of the people involved that they would not
make a decision until there is.something.concret4- in relation to the
proposed sub -station.
Councilman Barnes: In any event, where an easement is
granted if the easement is not used for
the purpose originally indicated it
reverts back to the property owners.
I
•
•
Co C. 12/22/58 Page Thirty -One
Councilman Pittenger: If you had an easement for sewer on one
side of a man's property and it was not
used for such, that easement would be
released.
Mr..Dosh: That is correct, we would release it if
we could or did get a better easement.
Mayor Mottinger: I think this thing should follow through
in the procedure we have started, which
was to get a report from the City staff.
There is nothing being held up and it could be put on our next Agenda
to be sure this thing gets cleared up.
Councilman Brown: In relation to the matter of Azusa Avenue
south of the Freeway which is to be
introduced at a legislative session by
Ron Cameron, who is ready to introduce it. Letters from our own staff
were sent out to business peo'le asking for their endorsement to have
Azusa Avenue put through, but it seemed to be the feeling that if such
endorsement was given for Azusa it might lose Vincent or Grand. I feel
this matter should have gone to the Chamber of Commerce, which has
been our practice in the past. I think it should be clarified and pre-
sented to the Chamber of Commerce for their support and explained to
them.
Mayor Mottinger: You are.on the committee representing
the Council and I think it would be well
for you to explain this matter to them
and get their Resolution in back of it.
DEMANDS APPROVED Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded
by Councilman Brown that Demands in the
amount of $228,940.86, as shown on
Demand Sheets B-52, C-120 and.C-121 be approved; this to include bank
transfers in the amount of $136,500.00 and Fund Transfers in the amount
of $43,331,43.
Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger, Barnes, Mayor Mottinger
Noes: None
Absent: None
There being no further business, at 10:25 P. M. motion by Councilman
Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Heath that the meeting be adjourned.
APPROVED BY.CITY COUNCIL
Date January 12, 1959
As submitted
Page 11 - Mayor Mottinger's statement should
With the following corrections: read: "It was requested by the applicant
that this item be decided upon is evening", instead of "It was
requested that this item be decided on this evening.", as indicated.