11-23-1959 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA
November 23, 1959
if
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Brown at 7:35 Po M. in the
West Covina City Hallo The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman
Pittenger with the invocation given by the Rev. Conrad.Koosman of the
Christ Lutheran Church.
RnT.T. r AT,T.
Present.- Mayor Brown, Councilmen Heath, Pittenger,
Mottinger, Barnes
Others Present: Mr. George Aiassa, City Manager
Mr. Robert Flotten, City Clerk
Mr. Harry Co Williams, City Attorney
Mr. Tom Dosh, Public Service Director
Mr. Harold Joseph, Planning Coordinator
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
November 9, 1959 - Approved as submitted.
CITY CLERKS REPORTS
PROJECT.NO, C-98 LOCATION: Walnut Haven Drive from
Accept Street Improvements Garvey Avenue to Workman Avenue.
Ea Ca Construction Co.
APPROVED
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Mottinger and
carried, that street improvements in Project No. C-98 be accepted and
authorization be given for the release of St. Paul Fire and Marine
Insurance Company Performance Bond No, 404FF5349 in the amount of
$1,154.92.
PROJECT NO. C-104 LOCATION: Service Avenue between
Accept Street Improvements Walnut Creek Wash and Evanwood Avenue.
Warren Southwest Co,
APPROVED
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried,
that street improvements in Project C-104 be accepted and authorization
given for the release of Federal Insurance Company Contract Bond
No. 8002-56-68 in the amount of $1,1591.75,
PROJECT NO. C-54 LOCATION: South side of Merced Avenue
Accept Street Improvements between Primeaux and Lark Ellen Avenues.
W. R. Wilkinson Co.
APPROVED \
Motion by Councilman Mottinger, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried, that street improvements in Project No, C-54 be accepted and
authorization be given for the release of The Traveler's Indemnity
Company Contract Bond in the amount of $3,292.02.
r
Cn Co 11-23-59
TRACT NO. 16876
Accept Street Improvements
Tellis Construction Co.
APPROVED
Page Two
LOCATION- North side of Vine Avenue
west of Pima Avenue.
City Clerk Flottena The item of $2,575.00 relative to the
street improvements on Gretta Avenue
was the maximum amount to be allowed.
Our estimate and check-up on the cost reflect the fact that the total
expenditures would be $2,655.05 which is in excess of the maximum
amount allowed. The recommendation is for payment to the Fergusons
of the amount of $2,575.00 as indicatedo
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Heath, that
street improvements in Tract No. 16876 be accepted, authorization be
given for the release of New Hampshire Fire Insurance Company Bond in
the amount of $12,750.00 and authorization given for payment of
$2,575o00 to Lawrence do and Marion S. Ferguson for street improvements
on Gretta Avenue, between Thackery Street and Vine Avenue, upon receipt
of an itemized statement of expenditures.
Motion passed on roll call as follows,.
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
Noes: None
Absent: None
RESOLUTION NO. 1699
Approving Final .Map of
Tract Noa 24813 and
accepting bond for street
and sewer improvements
ADOPTED
The City Clerk presented-,
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING A FINAL
SUBDIVISION MAP TRACT, ACCEPTING DEDICA-
TION THEREIN OFFERED, ACCEPTING AN AGREE-
MENT BY THE SUBDIVIDER AND SURETY BOND
TO SECURE THE SAME". (Tract No. 24813)
LOCATION: South of Francisquito Avenue, east of Walnut Avenue.
Ohio Casualty Insurance Company Bond No. 928012 in the -amount of
$19,000.00 for street and sanitary sewer improvements.
Mayor Brown,.
Hearing no.objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Mottinger, seconded by Councilman Heath, that
said Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
Noes,. None
Absent,. None
RESOLUTION NO. 1700 The City Clerk presented,.
Accepting a grant deed of "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
easement for sanitary THE CITY OF NEST COVINA ACCEPTING A
sewer purposes (Ross) CERTAIN WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING
ADOPTED THE RECORDATION THEREOF". (Chandler Co
and Mary Florence Ross)
LOCATION: R/W N/0 Larkhill Drive and Springmeadow Avenue, A portion of
Lot 30 in Tract No. 13892 - Metes and Bounds Subdivision 135-149.
Co Co 11-23-59
RESOLUTION NO. 1701
Accepting a grant deed of
eaifsement for sanitary
sewer purposes (Sherman)
ADOPTED
r�
Page Three
The City Clerk presentedo
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A
CERTAIN WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING
THE RECORDATION THEREOF"% (G. A. and
Margaret Ro Sherman)
LOCATION° R/W N/0 Larkhill Drive and Springmeadow Avenue. A portion
of Lot 33 in Tract No. 13892 - Metes and Bounds Subdivision 135-149.
RESOLUTION NO. 1702 The City Clerk presented;
Accepting a grant deed of "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
easement for sanitary THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A
sewer purposes (Lynch) CERTAIN WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING
ADOPTED THE RECORDATION THEREOF", (William Eo
and Gertrude Jo Lynch)
LOCATION% W/W N/0 Larkhill Drive and Springmeadow Avenue. A portion
of Lot 32 in Tract No. 13892 - Metes and Bounds Subdivision 135-149.
RESOLUTION NO. 1703 The City Clerk presented:
Accepting a grant deed of tfA RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
easement for sanitary THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A
sewer purposes (Slough) CERTAIN WRITTEN INSTRUMENT AND DIRECTING
ADOPTED THE RECORDATION THEREOF". (Jack M. and
Wilma Jo Slough)
LOCATION° W/W N/0 Larkhill Drive and Springmeadow Avenue. A portion
of Lot 30 in Tract No. 13892 - Metes and Bounds Subdivision 135-149.
Mayor Brown, Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolutions.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Pittenger, that
said Resolutions 1700, 1701, 1702 and 1.703 be adopted. Motion passed
on roll call as follows-
Ayes-, Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
Noes-, None
Absent% None
RESOLUTION NO. 1704
Accepting bond to
guarantee cost of sewer
installation in Tract
No. 1.3892 and Metes and
Bounds Sub. 135-149
ADOPTED
Mayor Brown-,
The City Clerk presented-,
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A
BOND NO. 12-1805-59 FROM THE FIDELITY
GUARANTY COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT OF,
$3,100.00 TO GUARANTEE THE COST OF
INSTALLING SANITARY SEWERS IN TRACT
NO- 13892 AND METES AND BOUNDS SUBDIVI-
SION NO, 135-149°
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Mottinger that
said Resolution be adopted, Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes-,; Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
Noes, None
Absent-, None
1f
Co Co 11-23-59
DISTRICT A°11-57-6
Street Resurfacing
CITY MANAGER AUTHORIZED
TO ISSUE PURCHASE ORDER
Page Four
LOCATION° Service Avenue from 200 feet
W/O Pima Avenue to Lark Ellen Avenue.
Contract with Bo Jo Zarubica for
resurfacing in connection with the com-
pletion of sewer improvements
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Barnes that the
City Manager be authorized to issue a Purchase Order to Bo Jo Zarubica
for the resurfacing of Service Avenue in District A011-57-6,for the
amount of $1,738.83. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
Noes- None
Absent: None
RESOLUTION NO. 1705 The City Attorney presented:
Approving map of sewer "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY'COUNCIL OF
assessment District THE CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING A MAP
A111-57-7 OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR THE IMPROVE -
ADOPTED MENT OF VINCENT AVENUE AND OTHER STREETS
IN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA (A°11-57-7)
Mayor Brown- Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Mottinger 'that
said Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call'!as follows:
Ayes- Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
Noes: None
Absent- None
RESOLUTION NO. 170'6
Adopting the Profile and
Improvement Plan and
Specifications A11.1-57-7
ADOPTED
Mayor Brown -
The City Attorney presented:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ADOPTING THE
PROFILE AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF
VINCENT AVENUE AND OTHER STREETS IN THE
CITY OF WEST COVINA", (A°11-57-7)0
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Pittenger that said
Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows -
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
Noes: None
Absent: None
RESOLUTION NO, 1707 The City Attorney presented-
Declaring the intention "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
to improve certain CITY OF WEST COVINA DECLARING ITS INTEN-
streets A111-57-7 TION TO IMPROVE VINCENT AVENUE AND OTHER
.ADOPTED STREETS IN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA; DE-
TERMINING THAT BONDS SHALL BE ISSUED TO
REPRESENT THE COST THEREFOR; DECLARING
THE WORK TO BE OF MORE THAN LOCAL OR
ORDINARY PUBLIC BENEFIT AND THAT THE
EXPENSE THEREOF SHALL BE ASSESSED'UPON A
DISTRICT".(A°11-57-7)
C. Co 11-23-59
RESOLUTION NO, 1.707 - continued
By the adoption of
for the setting of
December 28, 1959.
Mayor Brown. -
Page Five
this Resolution, proceedings were also initiated
a date of hearing protests on this proposal for
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolution.'
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Pittenger that
said Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath,
Noes.- None
Absent.- None
SCHEDULED MATTERS
BIDS
Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
FOUR -DOOR SEDAN FOR Bids were opened as advertised in the
FIRE CHIEF office of the City Clerk at 1.0.-00 A. Ma ,
CONDITIONAL BID AWARDED Thursday, November 19, 1959, and re-'
ferred to the Finance Director and Fire
Chief for review and recommendation,
An Affidavit of Publication has been received from the West Covina
Tribune of publication of notice inviting bids in the West Covina
Tribune of November 5, 1959.
CLIPPINGER CHEVROLET Price $2,217.64
(Biscayne) Tax 88.71
2, 30 67. U-5
Trade In 400.00 $1,906.35
EL MONTE MOTOR CO, (Ford) Price $29279.04
(Fairlane) Tax 91.16
2,3
Trade In 350.00
$2,020.20
In the report of the Director of Finance -it was indicated as follows:
El Monte Ford stipulates a maximum delivery date of 30 days.
Clippinger Chevrolet stipulates delivery to be made after resumption
of factory production.
We recommend that.the bid be conditionally awarded to Clippinger
Chevrolet, with the requirement that delivery be made within 30 days
or the bid bond will be forfeited.
If they do not accept the award under this condition, then we 'recommend
the bid be awarded to the E1 Monte Motor Company.
Motion by Councilman Mottinger, seconded by Councilman Barnes that
the recommendation of the Director of Finance be accepted which reads
that the bid be conditionally awarded to Clippinger Chevrolet in the
amount of $1,906.35, with the requirement that delivery be made
within 30 days or the bid bond will be forfeited, and if the bid is
not accepted under this condition the bid shall then be awarded to the
E1 Monte Motor Company in the amount of $2,020.20.
0
Co Co 11-23-59
Page Six
BIDS FOR SEDAN FOR FIRE CHIEF - continued
Councilman Heath-. I would like to ask a question before a
roll call is taken on this matter. Is
it so urgent that we have this car
within 30 days that it would prove necessary to spend another $114,00?
City Manager Aiassa: The only thing that would cause a delay
would be the red paint job and we
didn't want the matter.delayed any
longer than necessary.
Councilman Heath: But it says in the report that Clippinger
stipulates delivery to be made after
resumption of factory production. We
can wait another 60 days and save $100.00. I do not think that we
necessarily need this within 30 days.
Councilman Pittenger: You can wait 60 days but you'll get less
on your turn in. The bid isn't good
indefinitely. Cars might be more plenti-
ful later and price may go down but so will the trade-in price.
Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
Noes: None
Absent: None
HEARINGS
SANITARY SEWER DISTRICT Hearing of protests or objections to the
A111-58-1 confirmation of assessments to cover the
installation of sanitary sewers in the
Hollenbeck Street and Vine Avenue Sewer
District.
Set for hearing this date in the "Notice of Filing Assessment and
Diagram" dated October 30, 1959.
Mayor Brown: Mr. City Clerk, do you have the affidavits
of Publication, Posting and Mailing
relative to this hearing?
City Clerk Flotten: I have the affidavits.
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried that the Affidavits of Publication, Posting and Mailing be
received and filed for the records.
Mayor Brown: Mr. City Clerk, have you received any
written protests or objections against
the assessment, the improvement as
constructed, or the proceedings?
City Clerk Flotten;
There have been no such protests
received.
Mayor Brown: Is there anyone in the audience who
desires to register a protest on this
matter?
There were no protests forthcoming from the audience.
Motion by Councilman Mottinger, seconded by Councilman Heath and
carried, that the hearing of protests or objections on District
A°11-58-1 be closed.
Ca C, 11-23-59
RESOLUTION NO. 1708
Confirming assessment of
District A111-58-1
ADOPTED
Page Seven
The City Clerk presented:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA CONFIRMING THE
ASSESSMENT FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF
LAYTON WAY AND OTHER STREETS" (A®11-58-1)
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Pittenger that said
Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
Noes: Nora
Absent: None
ZONE VARIANCE NO. 293 LOCATION° North side of Workman Avenue
Wright Oldsmobile Co. between Citrus and Calvados Streets,
APPROVED
Request to permit double-faced, 120 sq. ft. detached identifying sign,
as per drawings submitted, in Zone C-2o Denied by Planning Commission
under Resolution No. 817. Appeal filed by applicant on November 6, 1959.
Maps were presented and the City Clerk presented and read the letter of
appeal from the applicant and the Resolution of the Planning Commission.
City Clerk Flotten: Let the record show that there is on file
an affidavit of the publication of notice
of this hearing as published in the
West Covina Tribune November 12, 1959.
�i
Mayor Brown opened the public hearing and stated that all those desiring
to present testimony should rise and be sworn in by the City Clerk.
IN FAVOR
Mrs. Eleanor Bo Samuels of 110 Shoppers Lane, Covina.,
At the time thj�94 � Council made it possible for us to bring this
fine automobile in ere, there were certain conditions that had to be
met to make it feasible and practical for them to try to do business
here, and one was the matter of proper and adequate signs within the
Sign Ordinance of the City. For that reason a free standing, or
detached, sign was shown on the Precise Plan which was approved by the
Planning Commission at that time. Apparently the draftsman who did
this work placed the sign on the west side instead of on the east side,
where it was always intended to be, and the architect's sketch showed
it. It is better on the east side as it is further from the homes
that are on the west side of this property and it also makes a better
balance in relation to the whole thing.
It wasn't brought out clearly at the Planning Commission meeting and
there is already approval on the Precise Plan of a detached sign, which
wasn't given proper consideration. The sign itself conforms to the
sign ordinance and it is simply a matter of the request to place it on
the east side of the driveway instead of on the west side, I think
you will grant this as being reasonable and in conformance with the
intent in every way with the Precise Plan, which showed a detached sign,
Mr. E. Breismeister, speaking for the applicant:
There were a few things indicated at the Planning Commission, one of
which was that we could put the sign on the roof without any further
request and it would be in conformance with the code. However, to do
this we feel it would be more of a nuisance to the surrounding homes
than where it is proposed. The drawback was that putting it on the
Co Co 11-23-59 Page Eight
ZONE VARIANCE NOo.283 - continued
Mr. E. Breismeister - continued. -
southeast corner of property blocked the views Both buildings are set
back considerably from the street. This sign is also entirely interior
lighted and 37 feet in height, which is much lower than if it were to
be placed on the roof.
I would also bring up at this time a matter which was inadvertently
left off at the Planning Commission hearing which is in regard to a
set of letters to be placed on the building to be 30 feet in length.
We would like the length to be 40 feet on that. The total area of the
letters is 124 feet or less.
IN OPPOSITION
Mr. K. Stallmann of_ 18241 E. Workman Avenue, Covina:
I live on the corner and see the Firestone sign. All the people around
there see that sign and this sign would not help the area any. We
have a lot of signs in the area now,
IN REBUTTAL
Mrs. Samuels: At the time of the hearing before the
Planning Commission there was no oppo-
sition to this. To place it on the
east side of the driveway, adjacent'to the sidewalk, is an area in
which it would be the furthest from any houses that might be affected.
This is an actual improvement from their standpoint.
There being no further testimony, the hearing was declared closed.
Councilman Mottinger: It was stated to the effect that this
sign does conform to the Sign Ordinance,
Public Service Director Dosh: As presented it would conform, if it
was an attached signs
Councilman Mottinger: There was the matter of another sign
but I do not believe there is anything
else we could consider except the
application at this time,
Public Service Director Dosh:.. The other sign mentioned is.a sign of
letters indicating "Oldsmobile" across
the building. The request is not in
conformance With what he is allowed in square feet and I believe would
also require a request for variance.
Councilman Mottinger:
Councilman Pittenger:
I do not believe we could.act on that
as it has evidently not gone through
the proper variance procedure on that
particular request.
I notice this extends 5 feet over the
sidewalk,
Public Service Director Dosh: The sign attached to the building aspect
is all right, the overhang over the
right of way is all right, but the only
thing here is.the detached sign and that is the basis of the variance
request. It is not within the Sign Ordinance.
Co Co 11-23-59
Page Nine
ZONE VARIANCE NO. 283 - continued
Councilman Mottingero The Planning Commission Resolution
pointed out one item which we considered
at the time of approving the Precise
Plan which was in regard to any glare or lighting of neighboring resi-
dences. It would seem it has been confirmed that it is an interior
lighted sign and there will be no glare from it, and so on that basis
I would be in favor of granting it.
Councilman Heath: It would seem that it is only a matter
of moving it from one side to the other;
they have permission to have this sign
so I would see no objection.
I would like to make a remark concerning the glare on adjacent property
in that at the time the motion was made to prohibit this I couldn't
see how it might be done, but the motion was "no light from this
establishment onto the adjacent houses". I still do not see exactly
how that can be achieved but evidently the contractor and the developer
are in agreement with this and are going along that line to cut glare
on the lighting.
Mayor Brown. I would go along with the sign being
detached. If it were attached there
would be more light on the residences
than if it were moved out as indicated, and they would be permitted to
have a sign if attached to the building.
Councilman Barnes:
I would question the height of 37 feet,
Don't we have a limit of 35 feet?
Public Service Director Dosh: I believe it is 45 feet,
Mayor Brown: It would be the same as building height
in a C-2 area.
Councilman Mottingero I do not believe it is necessary to send
this back to the Planning Commission,
Motion by Councilman Mottinger, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried, that Zone Variance No. 293 be approved and that the design
cover only the applicant's design No. 5077 which is the one being
considered.
PRECISE PLAN AND RECLASSI- LOCATION.- Southeast corner of Pacific
FICATION NO. 192 (1405) Avenue and Pacific Lane
Walter L. Schroeter (2011 Pacific Avenue)
HELD OVER
Request to reclassify from Zone R-A, Potential C-1 to -Zone C-1 and
adopted Precise Plan of Design. Recommended for approval by the
Planning Commission under their Resolutions Nos. 815 and 816.
Maps were resented b the City Clerk who re onted and read the
P P Y Y P�
Resolutions of the Planning Commission relative. 'to this matter,
Mayor Brown opened the public hearing and stated that all those desiring
to present testimony should rise and be sworn in by the City Clerk.
Co Co 11-23-59
Page Ten
PRECISE PLAN NO, 192 (1405) continued
IN FAVOR
Walter L. Schroeter, applicant, of 2931 E. Mesa Drive, West Covina:
Before I purchased the property I checked with the Planning Department
to see just what "Potential C-1" meant and whether I would be permitted
to put up this type of building. I was told that provided I had a
reasonable building and plane it would be reasonable to expect the C-1
would be permitted to go through. As for the remainder, I think the
Resolution covers the ground pretty well insofar as I am concerne&..
IN OPPOSITION
Mr. Harry Lauder of 245 Morris Avenue, West Covina:
In general the residents of this area feel this type of venture is an
invasion of a residential area. We do not feel there is a need here
for this use. I do not think it has been brought out just what this
is going to be, but it is our understanding it is to be a liquor store
and neighborhood grocery.
We feel the Planning Commission has set a precedent in not providing
this residential area with a buffer zone. Across the street .is 7 acres
zoned C-1 and with which we have bo quarrel, but we feel a buffer zone
is needed to separate the C-1 and residential area.
Insofar as need goes, there is a liquor store on the service area not
far from this location. We further feel there are adequate and planned
areas in the City for ventures such as this sort.
This will increase the traffic on the street during late hours and we
have a great deal of traffic on Morris now —in summer a lot of traffic
and in winter a lot of water.
We do not feel that because Mr. Schroeter went to the Planning Depart-
ment and said "what can I do" and they advised him is any reason of
defenses We do not feel they should assume the responsibility for a
person purchasing property before zoning is secure.
At the hearings of the Commission I believe the City Attorney advised
that it was not necessary to zone this C-1 just because of the potential,.
As I understand it they were obligated to zone C-1 or'they could lift
the potential zoning off.
We do not have petitions to present this evening but there was: sub-
mitted a petition bearing 52 signatures to support the fact that we
feel we do not need this type of venture here.
W. Wittingham of 212 Morris Avenue, West Covina. -
As I see in these plans there are three driveways along Pacific Lane
portion of the street which would be strip zoning, meaning more poten-
tial buildings such as this and which I am against.
Ho Co Fenley of 248 Morris Avenue, West Covina.
I stand opposed to any development for commercial purposes along this
entire residential area until such time as there is some evidence of
commercial zoning coming in to the southwest corner triangle and until
the area is served by a sewer. The property should be developed to its
Co Ca 11-23-59 Page Eleven
PRECISE PLAN N0, 192 (1405) - continued
Mr, Ho Co Fonley - continued:
highest and best use and the applicant isn't putting the property to
its highest and best use and with no development showing in the area
adjacent to it for the zone which it has, this may never be put to
its highest and best use.
Mr. Hupmyer of 218 No Morris Avenue, West Covina:
We like the area and with no saloons or whiskey selling in the area,
nothing so objectionable near use This proposed use is getting into
the flat -iron point there and is nothing more than a wedge coming in
in order to get later petitions for things even more objectionable
than this use.
There were 17 signers opposing this use who were legally eligible,
or 90% of all the people living in that area,
IN REBUTTAL
Mr, Schroeter-. I would like to call to your attention
that I will give up 10 feet of property
to the City which will widen the
streets in the area. You will notice the awkward way there is to get
into Morris Avenue and you can see the advantage of the curb in there.
I do not anticipate any great traffic due to this building. This build-
ing will not face their property and will be at least 200 feet from
the nearest house on Morris Avenue. The people who actually adjoin my
property have no objection to this building. The reason for the hear-
ings was for the location of the building. The first plan wasn't very
good. It is my intention to pave Pacific Avenue along the whole line:
of the property and to develop the rest of it in possibly professional
use. There are some doctors interested in a medical building site.
Potential C-1 has been on this property for 5 years and it would seem
the City would have removed it if it was not right.
In regard to a buffer zone, I think there is a portion set up because
at the back and corner it is potential R-3o
The original petition of the 17 signatures within the 300 feet of the
property comprises about 18% of the property in the 300 feet.
There being no further testimony, the hearing was declared closed,
Councilman Heath-. I sat in on these hearings at the
Commission and there was considerable
controversy about this piece of pro-
perty. I think the main point that was brought out at the Commission
was the "bug -a -boo" that is also haunting us - the obligation on poten-
tial property.
I do not know whether the records show it or not but I feel, and am
convinced, that the final granting upon the part of the Commission of
this zoning was due to the fact they felt there was an obligation to
the person who had this property. This is the reason there were a
number of hearings. As for myself, the property across the street is
six times the size of this piece of property and it is zoned firm C-lo
As the applicant has indicated, this was zoned five years ago, at least.
I believe it was the intention at that time that this was potential C-1
because of a possible overflow from the firm C-1 across the streets
Co C. 11-23-59 Page Twelve
PRECISE PLAN NO. 192 (1405) - continued
Councilman Heath- continued:
However, there has been no need yet established on this firm C-1 and
if there has been no need yet established for the firm C-1 I do not
see how there would be a need for the Potential C-1, From testimony
given here tonight, and in the Planning Commission, there has been no
need established for this type of enterprise.
I call to your attention one other facto This entire piece of property
is under consideration for C-1. If this entire piece is given firm C-1,
all that is left to do with the balance of the property is present a
presentable plan for any other use in C-1, and then we can't turn it
down,
I think in the confusion that has been in the minds of the Commission,
and in some of our own minds, we should ask Mr. Williams to again
state to us the facts stated to the Commission as to our obligation on
the potential zoning, bearing in mind this zoning has been established
for 5 years. At that time there may have been a need established for
that commercial zoning and now it may have gone the other way, it is
.not needed. The question came up as to why the potential was not re-
moved. I hardly think it would be advisable to remove the potential C-1
'-until we see how the firm C-1 developed because if that developed there
might be a need for firm C-1,- a question of the need for the potential
to firm.,
City Attorney Williams: This question has come up several
times, the most recent is this matter
which was before the Commission. The
zon,ing ordinance indicates that where there is a potential zoning that
upon the filing of a satisfactory precise plan the zoning shall be
made firm. The only reason then that you could use to deny the zoning
would be that the precise plan is not sufficient - you could not use
the reason this is not the proper zone for the use. However, potential
zoning, like any other zoning, is not permanent and you can change
the zone, so if you determine the use was improper, rather than the
precise plan was improper, I think you could not then simply deny the
application but rezone it so that it is no longer in a potential zone.
As long as you allow it to remain you can hardly use the basis that
it is not suitable for that purpose as the reason for denying the zone
change.
Councilman Barnes: Can we possibly deny it because of
that,- there wouldn't be a need at
this time?
City Attorney Williams: You could if at the same time you
initiated proceedings to take commercial
zoning off. It is inconsistent to deny
the Precise Plan, that it shouldn't be commercially used, and still
leave the zoning commercial.
Councilman Pittenger:
man bought this as potential
basis and then comes in with
denied the plan but we remove
certainly be an economic loss
but know of many cases in the
This is a basic argument that I am not
sure I interpret as does Mr, Williams,
You go into economics here. What if a
zoning of C-1 and paid for it on that
a Precise Plan to develop and is not only
the potential zoning on it? It would
to him, and I site not only this case
City where this could happen,
N
•
•
-"
C o C o 11-23-59
PRECISE PLAN NO, 192 (1405) - continued
City Attorney Williams:
and someone have money invested
R-1 - it is legal and nobody has
determined time and time again,
Page Thirteen
I am not suggesting you do so as there
is the point of the moral and practical
aspect, but you could have firm zoning
and you still legally could zone it
vested right in zoning. This has been
Councilman Pittenger: If we, as a City, want to develop we
can't afford to get a reputation for
removing zoning when eve feel like it,
regardless. We should ask for business rather than turn business away.
It is a serious thing and gets into a lot of potential zoning,
City Attorney Williams: I would agree, unless it is obviously
a mistake.
Councilman Pittenger: We did not make the mistake, the
mistake was made a long time ago.
Councilman Barnes: So far as the economics mentioned by
Mr. Pittenger, Mr. Schroet.er bought
this property not over 6 months ago and
as far as I am concerned it is a speculative deal in this case, on this
potential, and if a man who is in real estate as the applicant is, and
buys property that is not firm zoning without taking option to buy on
the basis of zoning, I do not think this is very sound thinking on
the City°s part that this piece of property has to be zoned firm.
The second thing is that I do not see any need for a liquor store or a
grocery store on that corner. We have liquor stores. to the east on
the frontage road in this area. There is no need for it.
There was mention of acreage in the area to the south of this zoning
which has firm.C-1. and I do not think it will be good development to
start a C-1 along this strip, and strip zone clear to the corner be-
cause this is potential C-1, and then have to develop this 6 acres in
apartment houses to support it,
I again refer to the survey made by Charles Bennett which stated we
had too much potential and firm C-1, 2 and 3 in the City and that the
economics were not good.
I would recommend that this property along this strip be referred to
the Planning Commission with the recommendation to rezone it to R-3
and possibly R-P on the corner.
Councilman Mottinger: I recall that back at the time an appli-
cation was placed to have a filling
station established on this corner, and
I think we pretty well concluded at that time it wasn't necessary,
together with the fact it wasn't a C-2 zone and we either just prior to
or immediately afterwards eliminated filling stations from C-1 zone
but recognized this was a potential C-1 zone.
With regard to the use the property is to be put, we are not in a posi-
tion to judge other than that it will or will not be used as a C-1 zone
and uses are already spelled out in our ordinance. We may conclude a
particular use is not desirable but we would have to make that stipu-
lation as a separate qualification if we wanted it to be that way.
I feel the proposal made can be put in a classification of a desirable
use in a C-1 zone,
r
C. Co 11-23-59 Page Fourteen
PRECISE PLAN NO. 192 (1405) - continued
Councilman Mottinger - continued,
There is one thing we lose sight of too often, we are continually
searching for ways to bring business into our City and we turn around
and discourage developers from coming in by making it so difficult to
jump the hurdle of potential zones, and we know the problems we had in
our C-R zone and some of the others. I think we should keep in mind
what is good for the over-all community and commercial developments
certainly are going to help.
I feel we are under obligation to property owners, home owners and all,
and since there is and has been a potential zone on this property for
many years, I feel we have a moral obligation to stand by ito
Mayor Brown- I think Councilman Pittenger stated
that if this was potential it was none
of our mistake, but I was on the Council
when this was done.
The report indicated by Mr. Bennett was that we had enough of everything
but houses and "M" zoning, At the time this was given potential C-1
and R-3 it was figured as a buffer against the C-1 across the street
and I sincerely feel this Council owes an obligation to any property,
regardless of how long an owner has it, and under prior acts of Council
and Planning Commission.
Councilman Heath:
other three sides are open
to this indicated from one
be if we had residential. on
Mayor Brown -
We also have an obligation to home
owners in this City. In this development
here you have homes on one side and the
or vacant, If we have the type of objections
side I feel it is indicative to what it would
three sides.
I would agree, but at the time of the
potential there were no protests,
Councilman Barnes- That was 5 years ago and there were
not too many residents that knew about
it in the area. Also, in the Bennett
report we were high on the R-P but below average on R-3o
Mayor Brown- when I read the report I did not take
it that way because R-P is R-3 by the
same token. 3o far as the zoning being
on here 5 years ago, it was strictly the responsibility of the person
buying the property adjacent to it to know what was, or might be, going
in here.
City Clerk Flotten-
1959, There were 36
protest and there is
that a 6 foot block
this is granted,
Councilman Barnes:
Let the record show that publication of
notice of this hearing was advertised
in the West Covina Tribune on November 12,
residents within the 300 foot radius in written
a letter from Charles Do Pray of 1920 Pacific Lane
wall go along the whole easterly property line if
the street developed back to the
If this is granted a block walLto the
north should extend to the end of the
development, sidewalks be provided and
end of the proposed change of zone.
N
L7_1
C. Co 11-23-59 Page Fifteen
PRECISE PLAN NO. 192 (.1405) - continued
Mr. Lauder! If this block wall would be put in
along the easterly area it would be
worse than ever relative to the water
problem during the rains,
Mr. Hupmyer.- Last winter the water went down Morris
Avenue, hit Pacific Lane and over-
flowed at this point, except for the
water that ran west to Willow. Any wall along that side that would
prevent an overflow onto this lot at the corner would back it up
Morris, La Sena and Pacific Lane before it could run out to Willow.
Public Service Director Dosh- The wall would be an obstruction at
this time because there was a lake at
this C-1 area, but if the drainage
problem is taken care of,as anticipated in the Spring it would solve
the water condition now existing here.
Mr. Schroeter.- The engineer has indicated the possible
lowering of the area to help drainage.
Mayor Brown.- You would run into even more problems,
drainage -wise, if it were lowered. It
would never drain no matter what you
could do. Possibly before any action is taken on this we should have
a report from the Engineering Department as to what would happen if the
Badillo Storm Drain is put in.
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried that Precise Plan and ROclassification Noo 192 (1405) be held
'Over pending a report from the Engineering Department relative to the
drainage and lowering of ground as to flooding.
PLANNING COMMISSION
METES AND BOUNDS
SUBDIVISION NO. 135-163
APPROVED AS STIPULATED
LOCATION.- Northeast corner
Avenue and Padre Drive
0.59 Acres - 3 Lots - Area
F. A. Langston, Subdivider
of Morris
District I.
Motion by Councilman Mottinger, seconded by Councilman Barnes and
carried, that Metes and Bounds Subdivision No. 135-163 be approved,
subject to the recommendations of the Planning Department, excluding
the area to the east, 221 x 1001, which is not a part of this subdivi-
sion.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried, that the City Manager be authorized to investigate the avail-
ability of the adjacent 100 feet to this Metes and Bounds Subdivision
No. 135-163.
ZONE CHANGE NO, 145
and
PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN
NO, 199 (Frank Horny)
HELD OVER
LOCATION.- North side of Workman Avenue
between Azusa and Hollenbeck Avenue,
Request to reclassify from Zone R-A to
Zone R-3a and adoption of a Precise Plan
of Design,
The City Council reviewed the matter on November 9, 1959, The hearing
was closed and referred back to the Planning Commission for restudy of
density, drainage, setback, play area and parking,
•
Co Co 11-23-59
ZONE CHANGE NO. 145 and PRECISE PLAN NO, 199 - continued
Page Sixteen
Councilman Pittenger- At the Planning Commission there was
the matter of making the street wider
and I understood that Mr. Horny was
going to revise the apartments to accommodate that.
Public Service Director Dosh- He would revise apartments or apartment
parking stalls, install diagonal stalls
or change apartment design to widen the
street.
Councilman Pittenger -
Public Service Director Dosh-
Has he accomplished that?
It hasn't been changed as yet.
Mr. Horny- It hasn't been done as yet but I stipu-
lated that I would widen the street to
24 feet or make diagonal garages for
parking there and then the width could stay at 20 feet. I would appre-
ciate it if you could act on it tonight so that I can give a written
communication to the F.H.A. of firm zoning to obtain my financing, a
formula which is necessary for them to have.
Councilman Pittenger- I heard the discussion at the Commission
and I do not think they have particu-
larly changed their position insofar as
the approval of the plan is concerned. One of the things we discussed
was the drainage problem which apparently is correct as proposed. They
did question the width of the streets which Mr. Horny felt could be
properly established and the other thing was the one-story building
next to any R-1 zoning but not next to the variance for the school.
They would allow two-story construction along the school property.
I think that was pretty much what was in the report referred back to
the Commission.
Councilman Heath -
Councilman Pittenger.,
Councilman Heath:
If it is changed to angle parking you
have lost spaces somewhere.
It was indicated there was more than
ample parking to be provided anyway.
There was also the question of the
parking area and the playground area
overlaying one another,
Public Service Director Dosh- In section 4 of the report it is indi-
cated the applicant has called the play
area courtyards and if they are one
and the same, even though called courtyards, it will meet requirements
regardless of what he calls them. The entire center area isn't neces-
ary so far as meeting requirements.
Councilman Mottinger- There was something in our minds also
about the small amount of open area and
large number of apartments in this block.
Apparently nothing was done about that, although the figures would indi-
cate there are maximum units and minimum play area,
Councilman Pittenger- The Commission indicated this meets the
requirements and is the same that has
been given to other such type developments.
Ca Co 11-23-59 Page Seventeen
ZONE CHANGE NO, 145 and PRECISE'PLAN NO. 199 - continued
Mayor Brown-. I still feel there is the question of
the proper drainage here. The drain-
age comes from the subdivision to the
north of this property, down Thelborn, in front of the'Legion Hall,-
Danny®s Doughnut Shop and the Service Station, and doesn't hit Azusa
until it gets down to this point, and the property was designed to
have the water go through the center of this property and down to Work-
man Avenue. This drainage, as it is, is only on a temporary basis,'
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried
that Zone Change No. 145 and Precise Plan of Design No, 199 be held over
for further study and particularly in regard to a check relative to _.
the drainage for the area,
ZONE VARIANCE NOo 280 LOCATION° Service Road east of Azusa Ave.
Ray La Anderson Service Station request
DENIED
Motion by Councilman Pittenger and seconded by Councilman Heath that
Zone Variance No. 280 be denied. Motion passed'on roll call as.followso
Ayes, Councilmen
Noes-. Councilman
Absent, None
. GENERAL MATTERS
Heath, Pittenger, Barnes
Mottinger, Mayor Brown
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
REQUEST FROM THE COVINA Re, No sign Ordinance on residential
VALLEY BOARD OF REALTORS properties.
The City Clerk presented and read a communication which stated, in part,
"The following uses are expressly prohibited in all R-1 zones:
'For Rent' and "For Sale' signs and all other signs of
similar type and nature displayed for the purpose of
offering to lease or sell any interest of the owner."
The communication further indicated this be used as a regulatory measure
relating to such signs on residential properties with consideration to
be given to a possible ordinance relative to this matter.
Mr, Milton E. Nelson, President of Covina Valley Board of Realtors:
Before I camehere this evening I received quite a number of telephone
calls in reference to the article printed in the newspaper under today°s
date, and would read that article in that a request for an ordinance
regulating "for sale" signs on homes will be heard by the City Council,
The request by the Covina Valley Board of Realtors would prohibit signs
in front of residential properti.dso An informed source said it was
aimed at persons who sell their own homes without the services of a
real estate agent.
I would read and refer to a letter directed to the Council last July,
Nr, Nelson read the letter which cited the importance of real estate
people to the community, the specific programs provided for training
in land use, community improvement and the various conferences and
refresher courses held to aid and support the community planning.
Co Co 11-23-59 Page Eighteen
COVINA VALLEY BOARD OF REALTORS REQUEST - continued
Mr. Milton E. Nelson, -,continued -
Now there has been much discussion in our realty board by realtors
and sales people in our organization, members of Covina and west Covina,
as to what can be done about these "for sale" signs. It does something
to the people coming into the area to buy homes to see these signs.
Through this type of discussion we were authorized to write to various
cities in California where they have such sign ordinances and we re-
ceived replies from 12 cities, We took it up with our attorney,
Mr. Erickson, and we realize we cannot have a "no sign" ordinance, but
that you can regulate the size, number and location of these signs.
Many cities have done it very effectively. It helps people to buy in
not seeing a City all cluttered up with such signs. We try to give the
best results we can to the communities and we know more about what goes
on in the area than the ordinary citizen, who is not interested in
that phase of it.
It is within your power to make some regulatory ordinance, and we know
that when people come into an area that is not cluttered with such
signs there is a favorable response from the people wanting to come in.
You have too many such signs that indicate "for sale by owner", people
question as to what is the matter with the place, and that is why we
have'so much surplus houses in the City.
I think it is something that should be considered seriously in order
to arrive at some ordinance to regulate the use of such signs.
• Mayor Brown- Do you have copies of any ordinances of
these various other cities?
Mr. Nelson- Mr. Erickson has them.
Mayor Brown- Perhaps he could get copies of them to
the City Clerk.
Councilman Heath,. We have some indications that what
was received, and what was presented in
testimony, is different.
Mr. Nelson: We cannot require removal of all signs.
If an owner wants to sell his property
we cannot say he cannot have a sign to
sell it, I would stipulate this is an amendment to the letter which
was received by the City.
City Attorney Williams- You already have such an ordinance,
Councilman Heath- A move to eliminate all signs is defi-
nitely a breach of democracy.
Mayor Brown- I think we should have copies of the
ordinances that other cities might have.
As to the letter that was written I
would go along with you,Councilman Heath, and say I would want no part
of it when you tell a man he cannot do something such as this on his
property.
Mrs. Van Dame,. With all due respect to the realtors
and sales people I think it is a terrible
thing to think that a person cannot
have a sign on his property to advertise it for sales That would be
just a dictatorship and I don't think the people would stand for it
anyway. Possibly the realtor might do a better job in selling the
property but the person shouldn't have his right to sell his own pro-
perty taken away,
F1
Co C. 11-23-59
COVINA VALLEY BOARD OF REALTORS REQUEST - continued
Mr. Nelson,
he has the right to do it, but
Page Nineteen
I am not in favor of any despotism; We -
want to protect property owners, but if
he sees. fit to sell his own property
there should be some control,
City Attorney Williams° You have a provision in every zoning,
including R-1, for the proper size and
use of such signs for property on
which it is to be displayed. You have what I believe other cities would
have in this regard, although possibly not exactly the same thing.
Mayor Brown°
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
I think we should take a look at the
ordinances referred to so that we know
what they might actually have in mind
relative to this matter,
RECOMMENDED POLICY ON City Manager Aiasszao I believe this
IMPROVEMENT OF EASEMENTS recommendation will provide the City
AND ACCEPTANCE OF staff and Council with a good guide,
INSTRUMENTS CONVEYING and I would like to have a motion to
EASEMENTS TO THE CITY have it spread upon the Minutes.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
. carried that this recommendation of policy regarding improvement of
easements and acceptance of instruments conveying easements be spread
in full upon the Minutes.
to No easement or instrument conveying an easement shall be accepted
without approval of the City Council.
20 Where the easement is to benefit the grantor, it shall be the
policy of the City to require that the easement be improved before
acceptance or that a bond to guarantee improvements be posted at
the time of acceptance.
ao This would apply to subdividers in all cases. The improvement
of the easements should be included in the improvement agree-
ment and bond, The only exception to this might be where the
City requests an easement through the subdivision to benefit
property other than the subdivision itself.
bo Precise Plano
co Lot splits.
do Zone changes,
eo Other cases where the easement is to benefit the landowner
giving the easement.
3. Where the City requests the easement for public benefit, no improve-
ments or bond need be required, but each case shall be judged on
its own merits and the City shall negotiate concerning the improvements
4e In cases where the City accepts an easement over a piece of property
for the benefit of some other property, the City should obtain a
bond for the improvement from the owner of the property to be
benefited, but not from the grantor of the easement unless he, too,
derives benefit.
Co Co 1.1-23-59 Page Twenty
EASEMENTS POLICY - continued
5. In 1911 Acts proceedings, it is usually impracticable to obtain a
bond for the improvement from the grantor of the easement since
the improvement will be paid for by the 1911 Act proceedings. 'In
these cases the easement should be accepted by the City only after
it appears evident that the improvement proceeding will be conduc-
ted to a satisfactory conclusion.
6. Governmental agencies, such as schools, County, Flood Control
Districts, etc., the City shall have the final say as to when and
how these easements shall be received and the extent of the improve-
ments required through negotiations.
ADDITIONAL COST OF STATE City Manager Aiassao We have just
COMPENSATION INSURANCE received an invoice in the amount of
APPROVED $20,000.00 which represents the initial
deposit on our premium for 1959-60.
In order to make the initial payment, it will be necessary to appro-
priate an additional $12,000.00 from the. Unappropriated Reserve for
this account, there having been $8,000.00 budgeted.
The amount of this deposit has been increased considerably this year
as an adjustment for the following factors- (1) Increase in rates;
(2) Increase in payroll; (3) Last year's experience record,
• Final payment of premium will be based on the actual payroll and exper-
iences for 1959-60. Our net cost for the past two years was $6,993.00
and $13,3310000
It is doubtful the premium will run the full $20,000.00 unless our
experience in 1959-60 is poor; however, we have no choice at this time
insofar as the $20,000.00 deposit is concerned. At the time the budget
was prepared we had not been advised of the rate increases.
Councilman Heath-, From your checking this over, does it
sound logical to go from $6,000.00 to
$13,000.00 to $20,000.00 in 3 years?
City Manager Aiassao Yes, as you make salary changes and
payroll increases and dropping the
Civil Defense on this increase, The
$13,000.00 factor we can't dispute too much as what happens is that we
pay it and then get a refund. They bank that on the possible bad
experience over the year and if that happens they use it if you do
have it. I can give you a breakdown on this.
Councilman Heath- No, I do not want it,if you have checked
it that is enough for me.
Motion by Councilman Mottinger, seconded by Councilman Barnes, that the
amount of $20,000.00 be paid to the State Compensation Board as indi-
dated in the report, with the additional appropriation of $12,000.00
to be added to the $8,000.00 budgeted amount, to be taken from the
Unappropriated Reserve for this account.
Motion passed on roll call as follows.
Ayes. Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
Noes. None
Absent-, None
C� Ca 11-23-59
CITY MANAGER REPORTS - continued
Page Twenty -One
BODGER PROPERTY City Manager Aiassa. We have a letter
CLEARANCE AND ESCROW dated November 18, 1959 from John F.
Bodger, which indicated they would.
prefer to have the escrow handled by
the South Hills Escrow Company at 220 So Glendora Avenue in West Covina,
In accordance with the agreement on file, it is necessary to initiate
action to purchase the Bodger property and the following should be
scheduled.
1, Notice in writing of intent to purchase.
20 Open escrow on or about December 15, 1959.
3. Processing of payment at Council meeting of December 14, 1959.
Sufficient funds were budgeted for this purchase, and no appropriations
are necessary.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried, that there be a notice in writing of intent to purchase.
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried, that escrow be opened on or about December 15, 1959, and no
earlier.
. Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Heath and
carried, that payment is to be processed at Council meeting of December
14, 19590
STOP SIGN AT City Manager Aiassa: We have a report
SUNSET AND SERVICE from the Traffic Engineer. A 24 hour
approach volume traffic count was made
and the accident history of the inter-
section was made. The report follows.
No accepted warrants have been developed for four-way stop control,
and warrants suggested by the Standards and Specifications Committee
of the Institute of Traffic Engineers are as follows:
(a) Minimum hourly volume averaging 500 vehicles entering the
intersection for 8 hours with at least 40% of the total
entering the Intersection from the secondary street.
(Note. It should be emphasized that because of the delaying
effect, "four-way stops" should be used only when the volume
of traffic on the intersections roads is about equal.)
(b) Occurrence of 5 or more reported accidents of a type
susceptible of correction by such control within a 12 month
period.
M(c) Pedestrian volume. (Does not apply)
Inasmuch as there has been only one accident and traffic volume
warrant is not satisfied, I do not believe it is advisable to
install additional stop signs at this time.
Some relief will be obtained when Project C-102 (Sunset lateral)
is completed and we are able to fill the ditch on the east side
of Sunset Avenue north of the intersection.
When Walnut Creek Parkway is extended to Sunset Avenue and the
Service Avenue Bridge is constructed, this intersection will probably
require signal-ization. or some other type of control,
Co Co 11-23-59
Page Twenty -Two
STOP SIGN AT SUNSET AND SERVICE - continued
City Manager Aiassa.- I would delay this for a month and see
when the ditch gets improved what
occurs, and we can take another look
at it.
Councilman Barnes- We can put stop signs in until we extend
the Parkway. We will have more traffic
through there after the Parkway has
been extended.
City Manager Aiassao That's what I meant. To hold it over
and then take tests and watch the
traffic through there.
AUCTION SALE November 28, 1959 at the Police Station
A.M.A. CONFERENCE Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded
by Councilman Pittenger that authoriza-
tion be given for either the Mayor or
the City Manager to attend the A.M.A. Conference in Denver in November,
Motion'passed on roll call as follows-
Ayes.- Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes
Noes. None
Absent- None
Not Voting; Mayor Brown
SPECIAL FINANCE REPORT City Manager Aiassao This is report
ON VARIOUS ITEMS of various items to Council. There is
one item that might be clarified.
All available funds at June 30, 1959, were carried over for use during
this fiscal year. It was necessary to charge the final payment
($19,500000) on the Glahn property to this carry_Dvero The present
balance, free of encumbrance, which can be utilized for subject con-
struction is $14,845.38. From previous conversations, I assume that
funds derived from the sale of the old police station would be made
available for this project.
This is a breakdown of incidental expense which we have gone through
for the (a) Police facilities; (b) Fire Station; (c) Paving and
fencing Police and Fire area; (d) Remodeling City Hall and old Fire
Station; (e) A general, report on Budget items and funds.
"CLOSING OUT SALES" The City Manager presented and read a
ORDINANCE communication from the City Attorney
relative to this ..matter indicating his
finding that such a regulation is con-
tained in the Business License Ordinance, No. 142. The regulation was
outlined in the communication and is to be found in Subsection (15) of
Section 28. Copies of this were presented to members of Council.
At the end of the report the City Attorney indicated that if the provi-
sions made do not seem to be adequate he should be so advised and given
recommendations as to -any possible change and that although the exist-
ing provisions seemed to be reasonably sufficient it was suggested the
possible deletion of the second paragraph of Subsection (15), possibly
an increase of the.license fee and.a reduction of the maximum time
during which such sales may be conductedo
r
Co Co 11-23-59 Page Twenty -Three
AUDITOR'S REPORT AND Reports presented to Council.,
EMPLOYEES' EVALUATION
REPORT
FINAL REVISION OF Reports presented to Council, and the
BRIDGE DEFICIENCIES -City Manager stated that they...should-be
filed with the City Clerk as the City
Council°s final decision on Bridge
Betterment.
CITY ATTORNEY
SECOND READING The City Attorney presented:
ORDINANCE NO.. 643 "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
An Ordinance rezoning THE CITY OF WEST COVINA. REZONING
certain property CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH-
(Dubrove) WEST SIDE OF CALIFORNIA AVENUE, NORTH
ADOPTED OF WALNUT CREEK WASH" (Dubrove)
Motion by Councilman Mottinger, seconded by Councilman Barnes and
carried, that the reading of the body of the Ordinance be waived.
Motion by Councilman Heath and seconded by Councilman Pittenger that
said Ordinance be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes., Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
• Noes., None
Absent-, None
Said Ordinance was given No. 643
RESOLUTION NO, 1709
Granting Unclassified
Use Permit No. 27
(Dubrove)
ADOPTED
Mayor Brown,
The City Attorney presented.,
"A -RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA GRANTING
UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT NO. 27t4 (Dubrove)
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Heath, that
said Resolubion be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows.,
Ayes., Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
Noes. None
Absent., None
Said Resolution was given No. 1709
RESOLUTION NO. 1710
Requesting the Los Angeles
Flood Control to expedite
construction of Badillo
Storm Drain
ADOPTED
The City Attorney presented and read.,
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA URGING THE
LOS ANGELES FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT TO
EXPEDITE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BADILLO
STORM DRAIN"
Motion by Councilman Barnes, seconded by Councilman Heath, that said
Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes., Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes
Noes., Mayor Brown
Absent., None,
Said Resolution was given No. 1710
Co Co 11-23-59
Page Twenty -Four
RESOLUTION NO, 1710 - continue'd
Mayor Brown stated that he voted "No" on Resolution No. 1710 because
he did not feel that he knew enough of the facts and it may be that"
the County Engineering Department did support it and maybe they didn't
but that Mr. Bonelli had stated that-dverything possible was being done.
Councilman Barnes: It was intimated that no one would
take bids for storm drains this time
of year but there is a bid on the agenda
of December 13th for a drain as indicated by the minutes from
Mr. Bonelli°s office, They did bid them and would possibly get this
through this winter,
Councilman Pittenger: But what is completion date on the bids?
Councilman Barnes.- That I do not know.
Mayor Brown.- A storm drain is still different from
a Wash.
Councilman Pittenger: I think it makes sense that no one is
going to get down there this time of
the year. If there is no completion
date, where are you?
Councilman Barnes: What about the ones released around
October and November?
• Mayor Brown: It might be a storm drain but not
necessarily a Wash.
RESOLUTION NO. 1711 The City Attorney presented.-
Denying Zone Variance "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
No. 288 and Precise THE CITY OF WEST COVINA DENYING ZONE
Plan of Design No. 195 VARIANCE NO. 288 AND PRECISE PLAN OF
(El Rancho Estates) DESIGN NO, 19511 (El Rancho Estates, Inc.)
ADOPTED
Mayor Brown.- Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Pittenger, that
said Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilman Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
Noes: None
Absent: None
Said Resolution was given No, 1711,
CLAIM OF RALPH MURPHY, Suppr for Court Action No. 733674.
JR., et al. -vs- CITY OF
WEST COVINA, et ale Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded
by Councilman Heath and carried, that
the claim of Ralph Murphy, Jr,, et al,,
be denied and it be referred to the City°s insurance carrier,
•
Co Co 11-23-59
RESOLUTION NO. 1712
Proposed Annexation No, 16
to County Sanitation
District No. 22
ADOPTED
Page Twenty -Five
The City Clerk presented:
°A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA GRANTING.ITS
CONSENT TO THE ANNEXATION OF A CERTAIN
PORTION OF SAID CITY TO COUNTY SANITA-
TION DISTRICT NO. 22" (Alaska Street Annex'
Mayor Brown: Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Mottinger, seconded by Councilman Heath, that
said Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
Noes.- None
Absent.- None
Said Resolution was given No. 1712
RESOLUTION NO. 1713
Proposed Annexation
No. 28 to County Sanita-
tion District No. 15
ADOPTED
Mayor Brown:
The City Clerk presented:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA GRANTING ITS
CONSENT TO THE ANNEXATION OF A CERTAIN
PORTION OF SAID CITY TO COUNTY SANITA-
TION DISTRICT NO. 1511 (Doublegrove
Street Annex) .
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Pittenger, that said
Resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
Noes: None
Absent: None
Said Resolution was given No, 1713
REQUEST OF NORTH POLE Request for helicopter landing at the
SANTA CO., LTD, Eastland Shopping Center on Friday,
APPROVED November 27, 1959.
Motion by Councilman Mottinger, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried, that the request of the North Pole Santa Co., Ltd., be approved,
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT Re: Christmas Fair at Pioneer School
FROM PIONEER SCHOOL PTA on December 12, 1959
APPROVED
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried,
that the request for a Christmas Fair by the Pioneer School PTA be
approved and the license fee waived.
4?1
•
Co Co 11-23-59
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT
FROM WEST COVINA ELKS LODGE
APPROVED AS STIPULATED
Page Twenty -Six
Re.- Benefit Christmas Dance, tent for
overflow, at 8.41 W, Merced Avenue on
December 5, 1959.
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried,
that the request of the 'West Covina Elks Lodge be approved, subject
to the approval of the tent by the Clearance Committee.
APPLICATION TO SELL Covina Charitable Enterprises, Inc.
CHRISTMAS TREES 2520 Workman Avenue
APPROVED
Motion by Councilman Mottinger, seconded by Councilman Barnes and
carried, that the application to sell Christmas Trees be approved
subject to changing name of applicant to L.D.S. Church, Covina 2nd Ward.
COMMUNICATION FROM Re.- Tract No, 21014
FRANCIS G:e WELTON, Schwartz-Yedor Building Corp., Developers
ATTORNEY AT LAW
REFERRED TO CITY MANAGER Damage and drainage problem to the
property of Mr. Edward L. Howard of
19438 Cortez, Covina, created in connec-
tion with the development.
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Heath and carried,
that this matter be referred to the City Manager, pending work sessions
CITY TREASURER
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
Motion by Councilman Mottinger, seconded
by Councilman Barnes and carried, that
the City Treasurer's Report for October,
1959, be received and filed for record.
Councilman Heath: There was a Planning Commission meeting
on November 19th and we have 10 days
to appeal. We are now in the 5th day
and I received a paper today of the actions taken but I still do not
know whether I might want to call something up here or not. I think
that we need more information on these so as to know just what they are.
City
Manager Aiassa:
The Planning Department has been
instructed to sedd you copies of just
what has been done,
Councilman
Heath:
I think that something should definitely
be done about stop signs at Lark Ellen
and the frontage road.
City
Manager Aiassa:
Technically, it is still a State highway,
I am having a meeting to discuss the
possibility of putting in four-way
stops.
However, we
can stop them in the City going north, but I doubt
if we
can put a sign
on the ramp off the Freeway, and it is the off -
ramp
traffic that is
vicious.
City
Manager Aiassa:
There is some consideration being given
to placing better lighting in that
particular area.
C. C. 11-23-59
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS - continued
Page Twenty -Seven
Councilman Heath-. A peace -officer at the Vincent Avenue
• interchange might be better for traffic
than the traffic light. Also, a sign
might be posted at the end of State Street indicating no right turn,
which I think would alleviate a lot of trouble.
City Manager Aiassa-. Could possibly talk to Curtis and
Schlanger relative to encroachment on
their property - one way right hand turns.
Councilman Heath: No right turn - keep off State Street,
Mayor Brown: It might help during Christmas, no
parking along there.
City Manager Aiassa-. I gave Council a suggestion some six
months ago for some possible signal
installation which might have alleviated
this problems The way it is laid out now it is almost impossible to
do anything.
Councilman Mottingero I think it might be given special con-
sideration and it was given special
attention last year during the Christmas
rush. Explore it and give special
recommendations.
• Mayor Brown: I do not think we should do anything
that might block any of the shopping
centers.
v
Councilman Barnes: Councilman Heath and I attended the
Upper San Gabriel Water District
meeting and they are holding the elec-
tion on December 8th to form the district. 120,000 folders are to be
distributed within the district and the district directors names were
submitted. District 1, Mr. Frank Va-chon; District 2, Mr, Forester
and Mr, Orr; District 3, Mr, Clemensonp District 4, Mr. Hawkins,,.and
District 5, Mr. Radford.
The law suit remains status quo between Long Beach and Upper San
Gabriel Valley Water., District.
Councilman Mottinger: I`_would 'like.:=to .ask about'some• •in-forma-
,tion ande investigation' wi=th.' regardl ;.to_,'
sewiar_installa-tiori:..in:'ahe area north of
Walnut Creek Wash and'the Freeway, between Azusa and Lark Ellen Avenues.
Public` Service Director Dosh: That is our largest assessment district
and we have some complications relative,
to some 30 easements to be acquired.
Our last schedule was to start in March but this cannot be assured.
City.Manager Aiassa: The problem is some 15 or 17 various
types of easements we have to acquire
for the main trunk sewer line through
to commercial area.
Co Co 11-23-59
Page Twenty -Eight
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS - continued
Councilman Mottingere Maybe this is another one to give to
the newspaper in the form of a map to
clarify the situation for the public.
Councilman Barnes: The sewer district below the Freeway and
to the west off Willow, which we
processed recently, there have been
several calls on that one and those people are anxious to speed it up
as they are having a great deal of trouble in the area also,
Mrs. Van Dame: What about the signs for the Police
Station? When will they be out?
Mayor Brown: We are working on those and they are
under way.
DEMANDS Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded
by Councilman Mottinger, that Demands
in the amount of $410,791.02,as shown
on Demand Sheets B-62, C-173 and C-174, be approved. This is to include
fund transfers in the amount of $105,498.56 and bank transfers in the
amount of $225,OOO.00.
• Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Heath, Pittenger, Mottinger, Barnes, Mayor Brown
Noes: None
Absent: None
Motion by Councilman Heath, seconded by Councilman Mottinger and
carried, that the meeting be adjourned at 11:05 Po M.
APPROVED
F
ATTEST:
OW
MY Clerk
Mayor