The URL can be used to link to this page

01-12-1970 - Regular Meeting - Minutes0 M it r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE -CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA JANUARY 12, 1970. The,.regular meeting of the City Council was called to order at 7:30 P.M. in the West Covina City, -Hall by Mayor Leonard S. Gleckman. The'Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Ken Chappell; the invocation was given by the Reverend Steve Gentry of the First Baptist Church of West Covina. ROLL CALL d Present: "Mayor Gleckman; Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd Also Present: George Aiassa, City Manager George Wakefield, City Attorney Lela Preston, City Clerk -George Zimmerman, City Engineer Richard Munsell, Planning Director H. R. Fast,.Public Service Director APPROVAL OF MINUTES December 22, 1969 Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by,Councilman Lloyd, and carried,to_.approve: City Council meeting minutes of December 22, 1969, as submitted. (Mayor Gleckman stated the presentation of Resol-union of Commendation to Fred Shrader would be held over to the next regular meeting of the City Council.) AWARD OF BIDS PROJECT NO. 7003 (MP-70008) LOCATION: Civic Center CIVIC CENTER HELIPORT Bids were .received in the office of the City Clerk at 10:00 A.M. on December 3, 1969. Held over from December 8, 1969, to December 22, 1969, and continued to this date. Mr. Aiassa: The first thing we will have to have is a decision on the execution of the agreement between the City of West Covina and the Los Angeles Airways. Mr. Wakefield did make a written report which was handed to Council this evening. Councilman Nichols: Does the City Manager have a specific recommendation? Mr. Aiassa: Yes„Councilman Nichols. We met with our staff today andalso made.communicati-on with the contractor who has -the low bid. Tonight would be the last night in which we would be at liberty to award the con- tract,and then the contractor would have the right to withdraw his bid. The City Attorney has advised 30 days is a reasonable time to extend the awarding of a bid. We contacted the lowest bidder and he is willing to extend his bid for another two weeks, so I would like to suggest during,this period that the City Attorney and City Manager be authorized to renegotiate with Los Angeles Airways to clarify*.thistechnicality of a public -owned heliport. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, that'.this item be held over for two weeks and the City Attorney and City Manager renegotiate with L. A. Airways in this two week period of time. - 1 - • J ` REG. C X. 1-12-70 AWARD OF BIDS - Cont°d. Page Two (Mayor Gleckman stated that Items 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the Agenda per- taining to the Civic Center Heliport.would not"be-acted upon tonight, due to the further negotiating period granted by Council.) PUBLIC WORKS ITEMS PROJECT NO. SP-70010 LOCATION: Merced Avenue approxi- 'GRANT OF EASEMENT mately 600 feet east of Shadydale Avenue. Engineer's report reviewed by Council. RESOLUTION NO® 4087 The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, ACCEPTING GRANT'OF EASEMENT. (Salvatore and Antoinette Grasso)". Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objections, waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, to adopt the Resolution accepting the grant of easement from Salvatore and Antoinette Grasso for street and highway purposes to be known as Merced Avenue. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum, NOES: None ABSENT: None PROJECT NO. SP-68017 RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION ADOPTED Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman LOCATION: North side of Cameron Avenue between Magnolia Avenue and Citrus Street. Council reviewed Engineer's report. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, approving an exchange of improvements for right-of-way at the above -mentioned location, and that this matter be referred to the Engineering staff for negotiation of the grant deed. RESOLUTION NO. 4088 The City,Clerk presented: ADOPTED ",A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL PARCEL; MAP NO. 1265 OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, APPROVING FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 1265 WEST COVINA PROPERTIES" Mayor Gleckman:. Hearing no objections, waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, to adopt said.Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None PROJECT NO. SP-70006 STREET._IMPROVEMENTS 1911 Act _ `(Short Form) LOCATION: Northwest corner of Francisquito Avenue and Walnut Avenue. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, Accepting and filing Engineer°s report. - 2 - REG. C.C.. 1-12-70 Page Three PUBLIC;,WORKS (Project SP-7Z&O,&.y RCont°d. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd,.and carried, approving the plans and specifications for Project SP 70006, and authorizing the City Engineer to advertise for bids. RESOLUTION NO. 4089 The City Clerk presented. "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL . ADOPTED OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, DIRECTING THE STREET SUPERINTEN- DENT TO GIVE NOTICE TO CONSTRUCT P.C.-C. CURB AND GUTTER,.AND A.C. PAVEMENT WIDENING PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 5870 ET SEQ OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIAON THE WEST SIDE OF WALNUT AVENUE.FROM FRANCISQUITO AVENUE TO 160 FEET NORTH OF FRANCISQUITO AVENUE AND THE NORTH SIDE OF FRANCISQUITO AVENUE FROM WALNUT AVENUE TO 150 FEET WEST OF WALNUT AVENUE",' Mayor Gleckman:. Hearing no objections, waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, adopting said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None PROJECT NO. SP-69006 LOCATION: Sunset Avenue from STREET IMPROVEMENTS Workman Avenue to Puente Avenue. Council.reviewed Engineer's report. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, approving the plans and specifications for City Project SP-69006 .arid authorizing the City Engineer to call for bids. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. AD 1-68 LOCATION: Cameron Avenue between (1911 ACT) Lark Ellen and Azusa Avenues and STREET IMPROVEMENTS Azusa Avenue. D & W.PAVING . Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, accepting street improvements, and authorizing the release of the Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland's Faithful Performance Bond No. 57-67-182'in the amount of $63,495.75. Mayor Gleckman: Mr. Aiassa, staff is to be congratulated on the .manner in which they performed this. I think it is a tremendous improvement in the City of West Covina. PLANNING COMMISSION Revjaw Action of January 7., 1970 (Items individually reviewed by Council) Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that Council accept and file the actions of the Planning Commission meeting of January 7, 1970. Tentative Tract No. 309.03 LOCATION: Southerly extension of P. L.-McNutt Development Co. Leaf Avenue, south of Sunset Hill Drive, east of Lark Ellen Avenue. .REQUEST approval of a tentative .tract on 4.7 acres for 19 single,family`•residential lots in the R-1 Area District I Zone. Recommended by Planning Commission. - 3 - REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page Four Planninq-Commission (Tract No. 30903).Cont°d® Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, approving Tentative Tract No, 30903 as recommended by Planning Commission. Parcel Map No. 1425. LOCATION., Between Far View Lane . Leonard Brutocao and Lark Hill Drive. REQUEST approval of a parcel map to create 3 single family lots on 2.59 acres in the R-1 Zone. Recommended by Planning Commission Resolution No. 2220. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, approving Parcel'Map"No.'.1425. West Covina -Parkway Alignment Mayor Gleckman: We have a staff report and a recommendation that we authorize an engineering study for the precise alignment. Councilman Lloyd:. I.was under the impression that We had already studied this and had selected or approved .. one alignment in preference to the other - Am I correct on that.Mr. Zimmerman? Mr. Zimmerman: The action that had been taken was the recommendation of an alignment by the.,Planning Commission. However9the City Council had not chosen to act on it,but tabled the situation and requested that it be brought before Council item by item as properties developed. So we are following that procedure at this time in bringing this particular location before the Council. Mayor Gleckman: I.might add that what we really did was adopt the Master Plan of Streets & Highways, and what is now being requested is the exact alignment of West Covina Parkway. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Gillum, -approv- ing the establishment of the right-of-way location for West Covina Parkway along the frontage of Precise Plan #584 by the Engineering Department, and authorizing the expenditure of up to $2,000 for surveying the property at City Council approved rates from Account 125-70010, Small City Cooperative Projects. Councilman Nichols: I believe this action of the Council will be critical in the establishment of the alignment of Walnut Creek Parkway. The precedent that will be set by'the adoption of a precise alignment along the frontage of this property will undoubtedly bind the Council -in terms of determination of'alignment of properties immediately adjacent to it; therefore9I would not be prepared to vote on this until such time as I have had a chance to see a visual presentation of the location of the property and the position of the alignment of the street as proposed by staff. I cannot visualize anything,nor do I have any actual knowledge of. the implications of this alignment,as we verbalize it. Councilman Lloyd: In response to Councilman Nichols' comments, I was under the.,impression that the survey was to make that determination as to what the alignment would be in that area, sn°t that what the money is being spent on? Mayor Gleckman: It was my understanding that the recommendation REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Planninc__Commission (W.C. Pkwy). font°do Page Five from the staff, and one that I would be prepared to vote on, would be to authorize the Engineering Department the funds to make a study and come back with a recommendationj,and at that particular time the City Council would either adopt or reject that exact alignment. Is that correct Mr. Zimmerman? (Answer: Yes . Councilman Nichols: If I am incorrect9I stand corrected. It was my understanding the staff already had an alignment that they wanted finalized by a direct survey and needed the funds for that purpose. If staff at this time does not have an alignment proposed that they would want to survey, and are going after thi's from the same point of view' we are, then it would-be premature to ask and I would withdraw my request. Mr. Zimmerman: I would like to clarify the situation. This is part of a 4-step program. The first step being the General Plan; the second step being the Master Plan of Streets & Highways - both of which have been adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council at this time. Then we propose two more steps, one of which is called a Precise Street Plan, and it has been adopted by the Planning Commission and recommended for adoption by Counef-1. This is the plan that showed alignment;J.A, of which we have a drawing available tonight. The City Council chose to table that and asked that the matter be brought before the Council as each property developed. The Precise Street Plan would be #.3 in our steps and #4 would be what is requested in this.memo, the exact location of it by survey in the field and an exact property description of it. Mayor Gleckman: Mr. Wakefield, would there be a public hearing held once this recommendation would come in after the authorization of the funds for the survey? Mr. Wakefield-. No® there is no public hearing required in connection with the precise location of the street. There were public hearings held in connection with the Master Plan of Streets. So there may be no confusion about the matter, and as I understand it - as it now pends before Councilpthe Engineering Department originally recommended two or three. alternate or possible routes within the area in question. One of these routes - Route lA was approved by the Planning Commission as a precise location of the street. There are two steps in process before Council, one is the approval of the alignment, either that which has-been recommended as 1A, or one of the alternates- and then the authorization to the Engineering Department to prepare a precise location of that alignment on the ground. And that is the purpose of•the $2,000 request for allocation of funds. Councilman Nichols: 'Then if Council would chose to take exception for any reason with the recommended alignment as recommended by.the Planning Commission and staff, and if Council would authorize these monies and then,at a later date9determine that.general alignment was' -not acceptable to Council, would it not be correct that these $2,000 appropriated here would be largely wasted monies? Mr. Wakefield: Yes I would think so. Councilman Nichols: Gentlemen, that was the point of my question initially. If we are prepared to live forever with the precise alignment suggested - fine, but if we have any question about any increment of the alignment.. recommended, it is my opinion that we should do that before we spend the money. Gouncilman.Lloyd: I don't understand - are you saying we should not do anything?. 5 REG. C.Co- 1-12®70 Planning Commission..(W.C. Pkwy) Cont°d. Page Six Councilman Nichols-. No, what I am saying is the :Planning Commission has come before Council and recommended a specific alignment',' specific in the sense of certain defined corridors and the Council has said we would not be prepared.yet to adopt the entire corridor alignment recommended by the Planning Commission, that we would rather take this on an area at a time basis, but in the process of doing that there are two things . that have to be done.' If Council -approves the $2,000 figure tonight it is my understanding, and the.City Attorney has confirmed it, and I believe staff would,.that this is to enable staff to precise the route down to the inch and not put it:in a general corridor,,and they are planning to direct the corridor in the position recommended by the Planning Commission but that Council has.not actually adopted; so my point is that if there is any question in our minds as to whether or not that corridor recommended by the Planning Commission to us is not to be the ultimate alignment of the Parkway.,then we should not approve this $2,000. Councilman Gillum: I think there is one other thing -• we have a request for a developer to develop on Barranca and I believe the Planning Commission has. held it over for -two weeks before making a decision. As I understand it,they now have the right to build on this property that we feel at sometime might become West Covina Parkway and we have no right to deny them this right m is that correct? Mr. Wakefield: That is correct. The precise plan filed with the Planning Commission -meek the general requirements of the Ordinance so far as the precise plan is concerned. However, the proposed buildings along the south property line --are located in an area'which is in the. center practically of the originally recommended alignment for West Covina Parkway in front of this particular property. Councilman Gillum: Gentlemen, I think we have to make a decision here. If we decide not to go ahead with the survey and allow this development as,requested, it is conceivable that when this Council or the next decides to put West Covina Parkway through,it could cost the City a considerable amount of money to buy up the existing buildings developed thereon. I think we have to make some definite decision as far as West -Covina Parkway. I feel justified in supporting the recommendation of $2,000 to give us some idea of the l.oc at;ion of this street. It doesn't mean Council has to accept -it-, but if wedon°t take this action,I think in the future Councils could be very critical of us if a future Council would have to buy up some developments in order to put West Covina Parkway through. Whether we like it or not,I think we have reached a point where we have to give•some serious thought about West Covina Parkway. Councilman Chappell: As Council .liaison to the Planning Commission, this was heard the other night and I think it might help the:Council if we could see a diagram of the proposed development, or would that be out of.order? Mayor Gleckman: -That would be out of order at this time. The proposed precise plan as far as I'am concerned is not before us tonight. The only thing before us tonight is a.decision whether or not to authorize the Engineering Department $2,000 to make a study"of the precise alignment. Councilman Nichols-. One further comment. I think when we had this matter before us previously we had the feeling it would be ,5CT,1=_ .,time before -any of these proposal.s.... would, .be..for...thcoming.,,and, ..we, .wozi1d..have:.. some. time to reflect upon it and discuss further with staff; but,glo and behold,the day of reckoning has come upon us. I would reiterate that Council has not adopted the general alignment Yand if we 6 REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page Seven Plannink- Commis§ioft (W.C.'Pkw) Comt°d. appropriate $2,000 we are tacitly accepting a recommendation from the Planning Commission and binding ourselves to an alignment without ever having voted on that alignment. I really feel if we chose to do so we should go ahead and adopt the alignment and then spend the money to precise. You can look at this A-1 plan now and tell within a few feet where the street is -going to.go.. Mr. Zimmerman, how wide is that green bandwhich is the alignment? Mr. Zimmerman: As shown on the Master Plan of Streets the width is 1101 Councilman Nichols: The alignment overall - the corridor? Mr. Zimmerman.: The corridor prior to.your acceptance of the precise plan has never been "set exactly, but it.is considered to be within 2001.' Councilman Nichols: It would be reasonable to say,even without a precise plan,if.that were to be the route of the alignment - Al - you could go with your finger and point within 501 of the precise alignment? Mr. Zimmerman: I think it is at least that close,9or closer., because of controls such as a water reservoir, etc Councilman Nichols- I think the issue is really one that we have to resolve at one`point - whether we are going to make a councilmap.ic commitment to , the alignment. I am prepared to do that. Let me not convey misunderstand- inge'I was prepared to accept it but I wanted to delay if there were other things developing, but I do feel we should adopt the alignment .before we spend the funds to precise. Mayor Gleckman: I think what has been said by Council really sums up our action in the past. We felt at the time this was heard before usnin order to accept a recommendation from the Planning Commission as to what exact recommendation we would accept for a precise alignment and put it on our General Plan, we felt with no one rushing us why do it at that time. There were no developments on the horizon except con- versation and we directed staff to hold in abeyance until such time as someone does force the issue. Evidently what the Planning Commission has said to us is that somebody now has forced the issue, so either fish or cut bait - either make a.decision or abandon it completely with the idea that if and when you decide to do this again in the future it is going to cost you an exorbitant amount of money if there is something built on an exact precise alignment.. So I think the day of reckoning has come to this Council and they will have to make a decision without delay as to an exact precise align- ment,and I gather the,precise alignment on the board is the A-1 recommendation from the Planning Commission,, and.I believe a lot of it might have had to ,do with a proposed development in the particular area. I am not being naive when I.say for the record we do not have a particular precise plan before us, so we cannot allude to a particular precise plan. I think Councilman Nichols has a point in suggesting authorizing a particular alignment and -then -..authorize the funds for the study on that particular alignment. So maybe the first order of business with this Council would.be for a -substitute motion to be offered,and that being that the A-1 alignment be the alignment adopted to coincide with... our Master Plan of Streets & Highways in the City of West Covina, and then the proposed motion that -we authorize the Engineering study. That would be my recommendation. Councilman Gillum: I have a question. I am familiar wi-th this alignment on the easterly end of the City but Mr. Zimmerman do you have the balance of the alignment of this A-1 route that continues past this area? Or are you saying if we adopt this it would be just this section? - 7 - REG.--C.C. 1-12-70 Page Eight l�mi�ngmms:i�nc;(a� P�,' Coast ° do Mayor Gleckman: This is all that.is being requested of Council at this particular time by the Planning Commission and :staff.. Substitute motion by Councilman Lloyd that the alignment as proposed on the map, Route A-1 be adopted for West Covina Parkway. Seconded by Councilman Gillum,- and carried. Mayor Gleckman: .I now call for a vote on the original motion authorizing the Engineering study and funds of $2, 000 for this". study of an exact alignment of West Covina Parkway. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES:. Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None HEARINGS ZONE CHANGE NO. 433 LOCATION,. 510-538z South Glendora Avenue PRECISE PLAN NO. 583 Love ° s_Enterprises, Inc_ REQUESTS approval of a zone change from N-C to S-C .for approximately 1.4 acres of land; and approval of a precise plan of design to upgrade existing commercial buildings and parking area. Recommended by Planning Commission Resolutions No. 2216 & 2217. Mr. Munsell, Planning Director, verbally summarized Planning Commission Resolutions 2216 and 2217. Slides shown and explained. THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ZONE CHANGE NO. 433 AND PRECISE PLAN NO. 583. IN FAVOR None° ,IN OPPOSITION 3oanne Wilner (Sworn in by City Clerk) 2108 Casa Linda Drive I am not sure that I am in opposition or West Covina just seeking a clarification. I heard this matter before the .Planning,Commission and I recall at that time I believe it was Commissioner Mayfield who suggested near the wall on Glendora Avenue that there might be a strip of planting to add percentagewise to the landscaping require- ment, and that there shouldn't be much difficulty in getting water to that area prior to the time tree wells were to be placed in the vicinity. And,based on our need for more oxygen to help our environment,I think the planting area should be added to the plan shown here tonight. HEARING CLOSED. COUNCIL DISCUSSION. Councilman Gillum: I -have a couple of questions on this. On the study Plan A -as• was- pointed -out-, unfortunately this is. not. -one. comple-te. piece.. of ..:property, ' so it is actually being,, .developed:.piecemea-1. ..'..Northeasterly ..o•f -, the.. property line .there-i-s-an-exist ng--s-ig-n_a-ndp-as-_I:-und-er•s.tand..it,.the sign has, to be, enclosed, --in. a planter ..box..- Do.. you...k.now .whether the owner of the theatre has -agreed -to cooperate -al ong -this-line, because most of it is on his property? Mr. Mu.nse11 o Staff . h-as_had---no- indication• -that -he .will----::. .- either. agree-or...object to.. such encroachme-nt into, his _par-Ing-....-lot'. .The staff recommsnded in, terms of • location as to., the overal-l-•• pad=l�-ing-.- l.at, hop iW_the_other owner would, -agree as;-ldr1,g--as--it-didn1t-cost-hi- iEt=--money--and,-••he would - allow the app-lirant -to-encroach-.The--alter-nati-ve. J) REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page Nine Hearin sc s(Zone Change #433 & Precise Plan #583) offered at the Planning Commission meeting was that,if the neighboring owner objected,the parking•would be moved over one space so that the landscaping would all be within theapplicant°s property and this would satisfy the 4.6% landscaping. The hope was that we could have it a little further away from the buildings and -more. closely meeting the code requirements and, hopefully, meeting the requirement'of landscaping and not get all the landscaping jammed up against the buildings and not keep the -'cars away from his premises•,= which of course is the prime reason for parking. Councilman Gillum:, My,next question. East of this proposed sign there is proposed a planter.." It again runs into the same problem, extending about 75% into the other mans'property. Suppose they.can°t work this out? .-The point I am trying to.make,if.we approve this Precise-Plan.as shown and then can°t'get the cooperation of the adjoining property owner,are we in violation of approving a plan that we may not be able to implement? Mr., Munsell: We have an opportunity with the precise plan of design in .terms of as long as the applicant meets the intent of the precise plan, we can approve at staff level a slight modification. Soa movement of this planter from this location to this one is within the context of what the Planning Director can do. (Explained further with the use of slides) We do feel it would be a better situation if he could work out an arrangement with the adjoining property owner.. We.did indicate that if it`,were not just in this location'he could make some other arrangement. - 1 - Councilman Nichols Mr..Mun-sell will -you --please -point out the area Mrs. Wi1ner r.e.f.erred to? Mr. Munsell: Mr. Mayfield -s.uggested..._we-<.all,ow..the applicant to take- the.. space between. •the- bumper of, the wheel stops and the concrete- bl-ock_-wa1-1., whi-ch runs ,all. , the way .around the perimeter of this --prope-r-tya; .which.:is-normal.l.y a 21 area, and allow the applicant to pl.ant. with.. a --low- _shrub-...and_,.perhaps, vine which will grow on the wall-. The. s.taf-f.Indicated.-the.re_ was no problem with allowing this; however,the ma-in_-reason.for not including it was because we are only talking about- 5.5°-- •or- .60 ° . strip of wall and, in fact, the wall continues. on.. for. -.se•ver•al,--hundred .feet all around the property. So we were not in fact picking up enough landscaping to make a difference in .the total ..overall effect, and staff was attempting to get the landscaping in larger green plantings so we could get some trees. Councilman Nichols: Is your requirement at the present time the maximum required under the Ordinances? Mr. Munsell: The requirement is what we felt was practical- 4.6%.,whereas the requirement is 8%. Councilman Nichols: Why is.it impractical, if..it is under the requirement and if there is no big -deal about. it, why did you..not require the..area. along the wall, even though it would only .be a small -percentage of -.the.. total boundary area, it. -would be precedent .setting...in.nature and remind us we can make some requirements and---it--might encourage future requirements in the .general:.-areae Mr. Munsell: Staff would not object to this, but .the.rea.son it zwa•s --not- included - was because it,.,was=:such:. a .sma-11 pex-cent-age.- af...wal-l-..i-nvolved, •.and_,.our,:,,,:.:..: normal standards. . require a minimum planter,,. width -.of-- 3 ° Lt.. T";a&_.not a significant..percent.age..of, added. -planting- area-.-and.-.•the.,planter., ....,,:.:. gard-to.- our--.p-1-a�nter-. requ,irement, so.....ire;_:_ would be substandard --with. �re felt it was ,unimportant. Commissioner Mayfi.eld.._brou'g2i '. it... to the attention of the Planning Commission and evidently.'the balance of the Commission felt this was hot significantly important,and the • REG. C.C. 1-12-10 Page Ten Hearings (Zone Change #433 & Precise Plan #583) suggestion was not implemented into the recommendation. The staff has no objection to including this,but felt we were acquiring the best effect it could as we approached it in terms of a larger planted area. Councilman Nichols: Is there water available? Mr. Munsell: There is not water to any of the planters currently. The applicant will have to get water to each of these planters and to the 3 trees. Councilman Nichols: If there were no plantings there,would that be a paved' area? Mr. Munsell: It is currently a paved area. Councilman Nichols: I would tend to favor that. I would like to see us try it - see what someone might be able to accomplish with greenery in that area. Councilman Lloyd: Mr. Munsell have you approached the owner of the theatre property to see if the 21 strip can be accomplished? Mr. Munsell: No,staff has not. Councilman Lloyd Have --you approached- -with- rega-r-,-d--to the planter boxes- -wi;thin their ,are.a? Mr. Munsell: No.,, -.staff has. not. Councilman Lloyd:. Have you approached 'the�'applcant to do this? 'Mr. Munsell: He was approached at the Planning Commissibn meeting,and hedidapproach the hdjacent property owner .while'he held.his'case over pending an even larger involvement ofthis property. The result was the applicant indicated to staffthe adjacent property owner was uninterested in a zone change and did not indicate one way or the other with regard to the planters. Councilman Lloyd: Then he did not.,in fact,approach him. It seems tome at this. point the Planning Department might take the leadership and either ask the man,whose.plan is -.up before thePlanningCommission to see if he might work ,-out some . kind• •of -an . arrangement which would encompass the lot.. 1-am. honestly of.. the: opinion that, in the guise of beautification and attractiveness,,the owner of the theatre would be at least in a listening -position if not amenable to the thought, and it is my consideration that staf.f..should go forward with the applicant in this case -.to at least open these avenues,,,whether successful or unsuccessful. Mayor Gleckman: My only comments would .be, first- of all here is a -man.-that ..would like- to upgr- ade -hi s: property -and. I•.•th-ink.--we-. oug-ht to .go ..along..•:in cooperation with him -in any way we ,-can - to .help, rather than, put restrictions on him. _ What we .presently have .on the property, is,, not conducive to the 'best ae-sthe-t-i,c value --that. we wau-ld-.--lik-e---to-. see,. on the property. At -the, .same • time,, -he,.,, .appeared befare, ...our.:Planning Department and Comm ss •on and they.,have. -came--up- with.. -.a - particular.-.... landscaping plan -which i,s--very._cos--tly -to..the.-. man;-he---doe,s--,.not..-,ow.n._.. the adjacent property and --he -- is•-• trying to- be--cooperat•i've-:-, in. any way to upgrade his.property and,rather...than:.burden him'.with additional expense to beautify the entire. area whi-ch,.in .thi s". day and age with the . cost of money -is wishful _thinking.,,.. _and L..think if we could get some continuity of a 21 strip around the project and bring the entire landscaping standards up to what we would like to see it, that would in REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page Eleven Hearings (Zone Chanqe ##43'3 .&. Precise Plan #583) be fine, but for this one applicant, as far as I am concerned, I think .the Planning staff,and Commission have done an admirable job and I am prepared to vote for it as recommended by the Planning Commission. Councilman Nichols: I think you have made a good point Mayor, and I concur. My thinking on the 21 strip was -in _terms .of .the orientation we all carry odeveloping properties, but in reality everything we are getting n y greenery and improvement -in-.this area is something the City can no more cla-im°or demand than the man in the moon, and you are absolutely right on that. I would like to see 8% all the way through but,on second thought,I don't think we should request more than the applicant has offered in concurrence with staff. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, approving Zone Change Application No. 433, Love's Enterprises, Inc. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, that Precise"Plan No. 583 be approved with the requirements as spelled out in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2217. STREET VACATION OF;;A PORTION OF FAIRWAY LANE - PROTEST HEARING LOCATION: Formerly cul-de-sac of northerly terminus of Fairway Lane. Hearing of .protests or objections set fore_this •date--by-Res-olution--No. -- 4080. adopted on December 22•, "1969. Council.--reviewed--Engine-e-r- ° s- report.- --. Motion b Councilman Chappel, seconded d by Councilman Lloyd, and carried receivingand filingaffidavits of posting and publication. Mayor Gleckman: Prior to the public hearing"I would like to ask the City Engineer if he has a statement to make? Mr. Zimmerman: Due to the completed extension of Fairway Lane as shown on the Freeway Agreement, these two parcels proposed for vacation tonight are no longer needed for street -purposes. MAYOR GLECKMAN DETERMINED THERE WERE NO WRITTEN .PROTESTS ,OR OBJECTIONS RECEIVED.;BY THE CI-TY. •CLER-K.A---ANT' THERE BEING NO ORAL PROTESTS OR OBJECTIONS,.PECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. RESOLUTION NO. 4090 ..-The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED OF THE CITY OF WEST COVIivA, .-,..ORDERING VACATION OF CERTAIN PORTION .OF FAIRWAY LANEP. Mayor Gleckman: Hearing -no- obj-ec-tions, . waive- further reading of .the -body.-of-.said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, adopting said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES:. Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None STREET VACATION OF A CERTAIN PORTION OF CALIFORNIA AVENUE -PROTEST HEARING. LOCATION: California Avenue and San.Bernardino Freeway. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page Twelve �Iearings ( I:tem , .3.. - ...Street Vacation) carried, holding over protest hearing on street vacation of portion of California Avenue to the Council meeting of April 12, 1970. RECREATION: & PARK ..CO_M_M_I Review action of•December 23, 1969 - Items•individually reviewed by Council. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, accepting and filing,the action of the Recreation & Park Commission of December23, 1969. .PERSONNEL -BOARD.. . Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, to accept and 'file the minutes of the Personnel Board meeting of December 2-, 19.69. WRITTEN.COMMUNICAT.IONS Letter from Lyle A.!Taylor of West Covina re Sian. -Ordinance .. ..". . Motion by Councilman Chappell: a_:. sedohde4 by._.gaunci.lmanGillum, and carried, that this item be referred to staff and the Planning Commission. Letter from residents of-Sunki-st Avenue, West Covina- protesting the granting of an Unclassified Use Permit to Tar Develoa%eit for a 'p'$yn Yiiatric :.hospital Motion"by.Councilman Chappell seconded by Councilman Grilums and .carried-0 referring to City Attorney. .Notice of Filing of Application No. 51563 before -the PUC in the matter of Southern"Califor.niia Gas •Company�' for is.utho.t•ity to increase their aas raters, etc.; Motion by Council man.Chappell ,,-seconded by Councilman Gillum, and carried, referring to`staff.. . Notice of Filing of Application No. 51568 before the PUC in the matter of Southern Counties Gas Company for authority to, increase their gas, fate .etc. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Gillum,,and carried, referring to''staff. Sotice of Filing of Application No. 51569 before the PUC in the matter of the Pacific Lighting Service Company for authority to increase their qas rates. -etc. Motion by Councilman Chappell., seconded by Councilman Gillum, and carried, referring to staff® Notice of Prehearing Conference re Application No. 51567, Southern California Gas Co., Application No. 51568..Southern Counties sCGas for a,'Application No. 51569 Pacific Lighting e .®.._ utkorit ,,to increase, their gas rates, +etc. Motion by Councilman Gillum,•seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, that. Councilireceive and file this informational item. Notice of Amended 'Application before the PUC re the matter of R.E. Fawcett, dba`Holiday Lines, for certificate.of.public r convenience _to .opeate:..a. sightseeing tour, service by motor coach Motion by Councilman°Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, referring to staff for a report. 12 - REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page Thirteen Written Communica_tiom_--- Cont-I d— West Covina Unified School District request to consolidate override Tax Election with the City Election ..Precincts and Officials Mayor Gleckman: I discussed this request with the City Clerk and she advised that this might entail a little more work, but she felt it could be, handled. Councilman Gillum: Question. If there were not a municipal election in April and the School District were to hold an override they would have to stand the expense of the election, so what is the procedure in this type of consolidation? ' Mayor Gleckman: ,In their letter to the West Covina City Council and for.the record and I quote: "The District would participate on an equitable basis on the cost of the election..,." Councilman Gillum: Yes, but I am trying to find out how we establish the cost for "the one additional item and the time required to tabulate that item? Mr. Aiassa: I believe we would have to keep a time record at the various precincts on time -.used for tabulating, etc. I,- would - recommend that, if Council wants this to go through that they --authorize the City Clerk and City Manager' to meet4 with -the School .of.fi.ci.al.s. and determine what percentage they will -.participate ,-We--can bring a --report back to you at your next meeting% on, January:, 26th........ .. ...... Councilman Gillum: The letter.states.they.would..like.to have a decision this, evening._..so..-the.y..c.an convey the information to the School Board at their next meeting on...January :13th.- Mayor Gleckman: I believe the. City-of---Wes-t .Covina on many occasions has -work-ed.-wi-th--the West Covina Unified School.-Di-stnrict on. a -.cost equitable basis,and there bno reason .at .-this---ti-me for us to delay any action if we so choose to do so, in .orde-r -to w-or_k_out the economics. That would be my feeling . and I don't -,think ... it need- be held . over. Mr. Aiassa: I think. _ Council _could take-_ two. motions. I believe the School. ,Disttrict-wants to know first, if they_.can..go....on -.our. ballot. The second action would be meeting with--the_-School--District with regard to what share they would participa-te.in. Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor -,I. haven°t--seen the request from the School.Dis.trict although I discussed it with the . City Clerk ...before• this. evening. It is my understanding that what is -requested, -is, -a partial --.consolidation in a sense; that the School District-would,use.the-same..•pol.ling places, Dthe same istrict in officers and.,.because of -the - boundaries-. of --the School y, cannot have a .complete conso.lid•ation in the -sense that the School District ° s proposition- .wou-l.d •-.appe.a-r- : on the City Is ballot. Actually what you will -have- if youapprove this, is two ballot boxes, two ballots and the School--Di,trict,..pr-oposition will be voted on and placed 'in the School District ballot box, -'-he City proposition will be placed in the City°s ballot box, but when the election is completed the ballot boxes- "wi-1-1..-be. r.eturhed to the School District for canvassing. So➢in effect,.what.the .City is doing is simply authorizing the use of ;;the precincts and election officers within the City. What we are talking about is not a complete consolidation. - 13 - It REG. C.C. 1-•12-70 Page Fourteen ITTEN.COMMUNICATIONS Cont'de Councilman Gillum: Mr.. Wakefield, did I understand you correctly to say there will be two ballot boxes and the one with the School District tax override would leave the. precinct.and'.be'taken to the School District for counting? Mr. Wakefield: No, the precincts would count at that point, but count separately. -The time involved in counting the ballots, completing the tally sheets and completing the�,election, so far.as precincts, would be done in. consolidation. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, that City Council authorize the consolidation of the City Election of April 14th, 1970, providing the precincts and officials for the Tax Override Election that falls within the School District within the City of West Covina.. 11 Mrs. Preston. My question of Mr. Wakefield - should we say City Clerk "partial consolidation" in that there will be two ballots? Mr. Wakefield:. It should be a consolidation as requested by the.West Covina Unified School District. Motion carried. ' Request of'. Govn•a Valley Board of Real -tors- - -- - To be put . on .Mailina. List:- fo-._ _Aas ate.- and_ Minute Motion by Councilman �Ll-o d seconded• b,y...Council.man..Gillum, that the Covina Valley Board of .Real" tors -be -placed --on the -mailing list for the Agendas and .Minutes of City...Counci.l.,..- Councilman Gillum: How many copies --of minutes are we mailing out at th•i s - time.?.. City Clerk: Possibly -about 2-5... A-11.-the utilities and certain title, companies and the - newspapers. n Councilman Gillum: What are ..the- restrictions -on who --can receive and who can -.-request the.-mai.l.ing..of minutes? Mayor Gleckman: I think- •it.- i-s--a- Council_ prerogative. Mr.. Aiassa?........... :........ MP.. Aiassa: About 2_j�.••year-.s. ago --we. had about-60 minutes going.:, -out.. and:•.:agenda-s; ..-and_ atthat time the Council .reque•sted• a- list ,.o.f who was. receiving and the Council discussedg and decided.-who.,shall.rece.ive..them. After that date the list was consolidated..and .approved and from here on any request for additional minutes to-be---ma-il_ed- out- .at • our expense has to be approved by Council.'. _.. ........ ...... ..:....... .... ,..... . Councilman Lloyd: I think Councilman- Gillum, has a good point perhaps at -some later --date- .we should ask the City Manager. to.-..dr.aW-• up.- a.- re so.l.uti.on or ordinance that it be reviewed - :or ..we can_do ,.i•t• he.re. m :but. on a once a year basis,because sometimes.organi.z.atio.ns..that have an interest have no longer an interest and we could°:paaze-•the 'list down. Do we have that protective clause in there? Mr. Aiassa: Yes, Council can review it at anytime. Motion carried.. Mayor G-leckman: I would entertain a motion that the mailing list for agendas and minutes.be reviewed `by:. the Council once a year. in _ REG. C.C. 1-1.2-70 a Page Fifteen WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS' Cont "d So moved by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, - and carried. Information• xe Nat-.ral_99" C1aG fr m _V as,- Inc. . Notion by Councilman Lloyid, seconded by Councilman Gillum, and carried, that Council receive and ;file this informational item. CITY. ATTORNEY-, i ORDINANCE The City Attorney presented,. INTRODUCTION 1, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, ADDING PART 30 TO CHAPTER 2. OF ARTICLE IX OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING;1.TO PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICTS (Amendment No. I''103)"°. Motion -by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, waiving further reading of the body of said Ordinance. • ti• Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that said Ordinance be introduced - (Mr. Wakefield.advised that this item of an Ordinance Introduction was not yet completed,' and • will be ready for the Council "agenda of January 26. ) Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded,.by ,Councilman..ChaPPella and carried, to hold over to January26, 19ZOD Hillside Development ordinance. ORDINANCE__._ The City Attorney presented: INTRODUCTION. "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIE CITY OF WEST COVINA, AD.DING"-PART.'1'.31 TO..,.: CHAPTER.-2 OF ARTICLE IX OF -THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE®•RELATING TO PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (PCD ZONE) .(Amendment No. 10 5) "." . 1 Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, waiving further reading;of the body of said Ordinance. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, introducing said Ordinance. , ORDINANCE -;NO..,:. 1113 "'. The. City ;Attorney presented: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ADOPTED CITY OF WEST COVINA, ADDING SECTION 6226.5 TO THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE GRANTING OF CERTAIN BUSINESS LICENSES WITHOUT FEE°.°• Motion by Councilman GAlum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, waiving further reading of the body of said Ordinance. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, adopting said Ordinance. Motion carried on roll call vote as,follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOtUTION.;:NO.8:...40,91. - The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY -COUNCIL OF THE ADOPTED CITY OF WEST COVINA, GRANTING AN UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT (Unclassified Use Permit, No. •14-8 Maximum -Development Corp. Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objections, waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page Sixteen CITY ATTORNEY (Res. #4091) Cont°do s Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, adopting said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: i� AYES. Councilmen'Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT : None (Mr. Wakefield sta,ted,lthat this, item pertaining to Police Department Clerk -Steno. positions; and salaries was to be held over by Council permission to February,9, 1970.) Motion -by Councilman Gil�um, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, holding over to February.{,9, 1970. FIRE STATION #5. Mr. Wakefield: At your last meeting you authorized the City Manager and City Attorney to negotiate with the Metropolitan Savings & Loan Association to clear the title to Fire Station #5. After a series of meetings the Allstate Savings.& Loan Association, the successor to Metropolitan, has agreed to enter. into a 6 months loan.agreement with the City directly for the purpose of clearing up the outstanding obligation against this particular piece of property. The amount of the obligation i`s $13,500, .and interest will be payable on that -amount at the rate of 8/ for 6 months only. In addition there will be certain fees for recording title policy and a 1/ premium payable --to the-- Savings- & Loa-n Association. In all , we estimate that ';the- total- abl.igation--,of,• the - Ci.ty -will be $14, 500. It seemed to u°'s that -.this was...a....much_better arrangement than trying to work -out an --:agreement with -.-a- Mr, -Messenburg, who owns 4 other lots similarly.encumbered,_ -.... It ,':;would be, my recommendation- that- you authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the,neces.sary<lo.an applications and statements requested bylthe Allstate Savings & Loan Association to consummate the transaction. So'Imoved by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried. - Y SUNDAY CLOSING OF BARBER SHOPS Mr, Wakefield:"' This item was put back on the agenda following the discussion at your last meeting. The means tol,accomplish the end,.removing the present prohibition against the -closing -of barber shops on Sundayowould be to introduce an Ordinance to repeal the existing section. I have such an Ordinance prepared if it is'the decision'of Council to proceed along this line. Mayor Gleckman: I have a question. By your interpretation then, in�the entire State of California,it is illegal to�prohib t barber..shops.from opening on Sunday? Mr. Wakefield: Ye;s. Mayor Gleckman: No doubt? Mr. Wakefield: No doubt. /a Councilman Gillum: I;'don°t think we have choice, I think we have to instruct the City Attorneyto read the heading of the Ordinance. ORDINANCE The City Attorney presented: INTRODUCTION.. "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE . CITY OF WEST COVINA® REPEALING SECTION 6360 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE CLOSING OF BARBER SHOPS ON SUNDAY °C . , REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page Seventeen _CITY,ATTORNEY(Item 8 ) Cont ° d. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Gillum, and carried, waiving further+reading of the body of said Ordinance. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Gillum, introduc- ing said Ordinance. Councilman Nichols: Historically this has been.a rather controversial area,but there have been so many significant court decisions made -during the last few years that I think it is rather widely recognized that this Council has no reasonable alternative other than to repeal this legislation and come into existing harmony with the law, So I favor the action. Councilman Gillum: If I remember correctly, one of the areas we felt justified in having this on the books was the fact that during the Sunday working hours there-were'I'no State inspectors available and,if my understanding is.correct9we have been informed that this is not so and that there areinspector°s available on Sunday. Is this correct? Mr. Wakefield: '' I was informed by the local office of the State.Board of Barbers Examiners that the inspectors employed have the option of working nights and on Saturdays and Sundays every other month and inspections are.made periodically on Saturdays and`Sundays-.every..other month. That doesn't mean,that the -b'arbe'r:•'shops in the City will be inspected every other monthbecause- sometimes --- the.interva-1_ s as much as six months or longer....•. ..,...- Councilman Gillum: I might add that I made -my -own survey and, from the,.•_information.".:I..r.eceived from my perso.nal...coneacts-with ..them:g,they see very few of them and in ; f act some-ha-ve. newer - been=- inspected all the years they have been in lrbusiness. L. feel. --the -:City-.was, .ju-stified in its original concept but apparently,..as.: things-._hay.e.. been-go.ing.. in this country lately,we are owerru,led by -a higher authority so I guess we will have to go along and support the Ordinance as --stated by the City Attorney. Motion -carried. -• Mayor Gleckman: In connection with this -item_,we had a letter from- Arthur Ba-ldonado.. re- presenting a client-- on --this, and_ -I- .wou.l-d..-.appreciate it very much if you would ,prepare a letter ..for-_ --my signatur.e....,._..I.._ would all due respect to staffer done legally rather than -ask staff, with refer to have this let staff, but in dealing..with.attorneys I prefer to make sure I am -on solid" ground. APPROVAL•- OF. CONTRACT BETWEEN . S . Gm V . . HOT.-,LINE-&"..:CITY..OF . WEST COVINA il Mr. Wakefield: Sometime ago the City Council,authorizedthe participation, of the, City. of"Wes.t Covina with other cities in the area i_n -the " funding of the Hot Line project for a'period of 6 months. Since that:ti.me,a non- profit corporation has :been formed to -.actually sponsor.. -.the project and to handle the funding. I have prepared a contract between that non-profit corporation{viand the City of West Covina covering the city°s contribution of';$50.00 for six months. It would be my recommendation that the City Council authorize the Mayor and City. Clerk to sign the contract. So moved by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried. { 17 - • a r REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page Eighteen CITY ATTORNEY !' MERGED AVENUE HORSE RANCH Mr. Wakefield: Since my last report to you there is a new tenant'on the Nichols Horse Ranch. The number of horses has been reduced from 7: or 8 to'the present number of 3, with the possibility there may be,4.. :Two of the present horses on the property belong to children in the neighborhood, the other horse belongs to the tenant. The premises are being inspected regularly by,the health officer and the City°s Service Officer. The last -report from the health officer indicated that -the premises were as clean as they have ever been in recent times. As yet we do not have a trial date. THE CHAIR DECLARED A RECESS AT 9,.02 P.M. COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 9:15 P.M. (The City Attorney'aske& permission to add an agenda item for Council consideration. No objections.) RESOLUTICLR NO, 4D92;i The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED °"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY South Glendora Avenue''Plan COUNCIL'OF THE CITY OF WEST Area II COVINA, APPROVING THE REVISED ai SOUTH GLENDORA AVENUE PLAN AREA III' Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objections, waive further reading of the -body of said Resolution. Motion b Councilman Gill um, ��lum seconded by .Councilman Lloyd, adopting said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as' follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum.o Ni,cho s,. Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman .NOES: None ABSENT: None Mr. Wakefield: 1970, to view- of Clerk should be Mayor Gleckman: One further.ite.m in connection with .the South Glendora Area Plan, the Council set. .the matter fo;'r reconsideration for the meeting of February 16, your action that will not be necessary,and the City instructed to drop that item from the agenda. I would entertain. a-mojtion .tha.t � the City Clerk bed; instructed to drop 'h6 item- from the agenda. So� moved by Councilman "Chappell,', seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried. 18 - REG. Coco 1-12-70 Page Nineteen CITY MANAGER - continued WE.ST:COVINA.SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA Mayor Gleckman: If Council has no objection,I would at this time like:to offer a report on the West Covina Symphony Orchestra and ask"for action in the form of a recommendation from Council. I would like to, report that last Tuesday evening was the first of a.series of meetings probably, to organize the West.Covina Symphony Orchestra. 'The Council had Asked me to meet and gave permission for the Council Chambers to be ..used for the meeting. There were approximately 45 to 55 people in attendance.. Most of them were here with a direct interest in the Symphony Orchestra because there was not a large amount of publicity given in announcing the meeting. Of those present, approximately 22 to 25 were musicians,excluding the 10 to 12 youngsters that were here also,that came to join the West Covina Symphony Orchestra*. Wel had representatives from the West Covina PTA Councils, West Covina Women°s Group; Choral Group; and we had four of the five Recreation & Park Commissioners. I might further report that since our meeting we had some additional "publicity in. the Times and I received today five phone . calls, threel,from West Covina, one from Pomona, and one from Claremont, all saying they had seen the article in the Times and wanted to know when' the. next meeting.would be. All five were either musicians,'and one had a daughter in college that was an accomplished symphony harpist. �iI can only say,from the enthusiasm shown that evening, I am here this evening to ask Council to establish the funds to establish theiWest Covina'Symphony Orchestra. the President of the Chamber of Commerce informed me that th�ir Commercial Committee met and discussed what they could do with the idea of contributing funds for its support. They are taping the recommendation�to their board for adoption that they sponsor five events a year with gifted artists, not necessarily of West Covina, and that the proceeds from those events be contributed directly to the support of the West Covina Symphony Orchestra. aSo, gentlemen, I think it behooves us to endorse the West Covina Symphony Orchestra. There has been another meeting set for this Thursday and we hope.ywith enough publicity,: that we can then establish a West Covina Symphony Orchestra and West Covina Symphony Society for people interested in contributing in whatever way they cane11 I would like to ask Council this.evening to ask the City'Manager if we can fund $2,000 in order to start the West Covina Symphony Orchestra for the entire San Gabriel Valley. If there are any questions, I will be glad to try and answer. Councilman Nichols: The Council funds a sum of money to whom? ..,,Whom would we turn that money over to? Mayor Gleckman: That money would go to the West.Covina Symphony Society Executive Committee, which ;will be organized Thursday evening, which would then set up the bymlaws,.,rules and regulations'and the,, establishment of a West CovinaSypphbgy GEtchestra under the auspices of the City of West Covina Recreation & Park Department and Commission.. 1 Councilman Nichols:, 91Would it be the'Council°s action tonight to direct the City Manager to develop the funding but not actually committed to an entity until it is formed? Mayor Gleckman: That is a very good suggestion Councilman Nichols, that the funding of $2,000 be —authorized by Council toni_Vpt to fund when, and if,the West Covina`'°Symphony Orchestra is established. M REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page Twenty u, West Covina'Symphony Orchestra Cont°d. So moved by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and+'motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum; Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: ..None ABSENT: None Mayor Gleckman: I might also request of the City Council the use'dof the Council Chambers on January 15, 1970, for�jthe organizational purposes of setting up the West Covina Symphony Society. (No objections.-) tl� I would also like to thank those of you that are here tonight and those that were present last Tuesday night,in support of this movement. I think- this will give you an indication that the Council fully 2ndorses such a move. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - Philip Yeager, President, I am here on behalf of the Covina Covina Valley Board of Realtors Valley Board of Realtors. We would %I like to recommend to this Council the consideration of placing a realtor on the Human Relations Commission as an additional member of the Commission. In the past the Realty Board, I think to some degreeihas avoided this problem of becoming involved in problems in the City; however,this past year we have attended some of the Human Relations meetings and we find,in--our opinion.,we are needed onGthis Commission. There is a lot of detail brought up in reference to re.altors..and seal estate. I think we can do some good by our presence, 'so. therefore- I- recommend --to- you -.-your consideration in this matter.. Mayor Gleckman.: Thank,you. I think it is a good recommendation and council will consider. Councilman Lloyd: Mr.�,Yeager9 are you recommending..an.additional member to the Commission or that one of the five be a member of the Reality Board? d Mr. Yeager: Either way, or that he .be-.,an..ho.n.oiar.y member. This"' is entirely up to your consideration; we are happy to cooperate in anyway. Joanne Wilner 2108 Casa Linda Drive I had really wanted to ask -permission-.to speak West Covina earlier but,unfortunately,.I arrived'a little elate and the matter had already been taken care I I would like to state firstpso there would be no misunderstanding,th°at I am just speaking as a citizen interested ,in a,healthy environment in.which to�live•and L am not with any organization. I do want to commend you on.you•r--recent action to improve our environment by having"the city fleet converted to natural gas,and urge that the improvement',of our environment continue to have upper- most .priority in Council action. The matter of Tract #30903 which was before you this evening falls into this category. Another way .to improve our environment is to add anddmaintain open spaces that.are green with grass and trees. They are a source of one of life's..vital,elements, namely - oxygen. The Tract Application is a-rare..piece:of-land in West Covina because it has a large stand of trees,.which.is not normally found on vacant land. Your approval of.this.Tract Map means this timber and source of oxygen .will -..be -lost -forever and re - .placed by people that require oxygen,which.is already scarce to the people that already reside here. The General Plan calls for this area to be a park, and preservation and control of our environment calls for this to be a.park. I had hoped that you would have searched the budget to find the funds to acquire this property,as I. think it ranks number 1 on.a list of priorities that would make West Covina.a good place to live. - 20 - REG, C.C. 1m12�70 ', Page Twenty-one CITY MANAGER traffic Committee Minutes Items individually reviewed by December 16, 1969 Council. r Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that City Council accept and file the actions of'the Traffic Committee meeting minutes of December 16, 1969. Mayor Gleckman: Mr.� Wakefield, does staff automatically set the renaming of Garvey Avenue for public hearing or does it require action by Council, to set a particular date?, Mr.'Wakefield: Mroy Mayor, I think it would be preferable for Council to set a specific date. The matter"of pubolic hearing is governed by a policy memo of the City Council. It is,;;not a matter of law. It could be set either by' staff or City Coun.cil'. Motion by Councilman Gillum0 seconded by Councilman.Chappell, that City Council hold a public hearing within the next 90 days for the purpose of changing or renaming Garvey Avenue within the city limits of West Covina. Mayor Gleckman:, I might comment that doesn't mean the name will be changed on that particular ,date, but that9 if we decide to change.,that it 'can be' set up to take place two or three yearsIfrom now and in this way give those affected a chance to change stationery, etc. Motion carried Councilman Gillum: If I may, a'question of City Manager. This little problem 'I spoke to you about in this area of Valinda.. I have had a number of contacts from the residents'in regard to the corner of Maplegrove and Lark Ellen, that it seems to be under county control and direction as far as stop signs, etc. My neighbor'aand myself recently have had some very close calls on this corner,3andI''I am wondering if I can again prevail on our Traffic Committee and also the County to -give this some further con- sideration. I might refer to a term they used before in denying such a request - "that the accident experience does not justify such an installation." I hope IU,don°t'have to get,hit broadside at that corner before I get a stop sign installed. What are the possibilities, Mr. City Manager? �. Mr. Aiassa: I think there is a good possibility that you can get; -;a 4-way stop sign in, but it is strictly within the jurisdiction'of the County® We have made contact with the County Road Commissioner and,,as you know,these things take time and if you feel it is of necessity, :I will attempt some further pressure. Councilman Gillum: I do think so. On this corner in the early mornings. and evenings the school bus picks up and ';drops off children, .1t is. a blind corner and not patrolled as well, as it should.be,.. and -people do.pass ata rather high rate of speed. I . think. County . should take another look and 9hopefully,,prov de us _with a 4-way-stop--sigh.. Mayor Gleckman: Mr. {Aiassa, will you give us a reportback on th sa say in 30 days? (Answer Yes) Fre.e.wzav Wi.deninq Report Mr. Aiassa: Mr. Wakefield has the Resolut.ion.'. 21 I REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page Twenty-two CITY MANAGER,_(F-reewav widendxim-_ R.eyo.rt.) Cont°d, .RESOLUTION NO. 4093 The City Attorney presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ADOPTED CITY OF WEST COVINA, REQUESTING THE CALIFORNIA STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION TO EXPEDITE THE WIDENING OF THE SAN BERNARDINO FREEWAY WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA4%' Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objections, waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by. Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, adopting said Resolution'. Mayor Gleckman: I would'only hope Mr. Wakefield,'that a copy of that Resolution would be sent to every newspaper and every .TV station and get as much publicity as we can, because the only real bottleneck on the San Bernardino Freeway is within the limits of West Covina. They can widen the freeway all the way to Palm Springs but they can't seem to take care of this bottleneck. Four years ago when we signed the contract they said they would get started within a year and a half, and it is now three and a half years later and now they are telling us 1972. I wholeheartedly endorse this resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows. AYES: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENTS None Mr. Aiassa: One.further comment. I.would.like to have authorization from Council that'the Mayor send letters to all the cities that helped us work on the Grand Avenue contract requesting their support on this by issuing similar resolutions. So'moved by Councilman. Gillum, seconded by. Councilman Chappell, and, carried. Sign Advisory Committee' Minutes Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded,by Councilman Gillum, and carried, accepting the minutes of the Sign Advisory Committee dated January 7, 1970. Pass-& Covina Road Abandonment Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, directing staffuto notify the Los Angeles County Department of Real Estate Management that the City of West Covina has no objections to this abandonment. Armstronq .& Sh.arfman Park ..;Study Agreement Mr. Aiassa: We have met twice with Mr. Sharfman on .the Park Study Agreement and this complies with the direction given by Council. There is a staff recommendation and, -if Council has no objection, they may execute the agreement. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, approving an allocation for funding from the Park Tax Budget .for security lighting, as outlined in the staff report,.dated January. 9, 1970; and that an agreement be executed with the architect firm of Armstrong & Sharfman,.:as.outlined in the report of January 9, 1970, and that the Mayor and.City Clerk be authorized to execute the same. 22 REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page Twenty-three _Caty.Manager (Park Study Agreement) Con.t'd. Mayor Gleckman: Mr. Aiassa, will this work include the redesign of Cortez Park regarding the lighted baseball combination football field? Mr. Aiassa: Yes,it is specifically written in. Councilman Chappell: How long.before we start getting some lights?, Mr. Aiassa: Iwould say within about three months. Motion carried. Dr. Snyder's Request for Administrative Assistance Hot -Line Procgr.am Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Gillum, that City Council grant Dr. Snyder administrative assistance for the Hot -Line project. In doing so, we are not burdening staff with a major time --consuming as and,most importantly.,West Covina can continue to spearhead the present youth awareness trend that has resulted from the Mayor's Narcotics Advisory Committee and the Narcotic Brochure Committee. Councilman Lloyd: Mr°. Mayor - I assume,and it is inferred,that this will be Gontrolled-:through the City Manager's office? (Answer:. Yes) Motion carried. San Gabriel Valli Humane Society Pilot ,Program Mayor Gleckman: Mr. Aiassa, in discussing with Councilman Nichols, who is the liaison to the meeting with the San Gabriel Valley Humane'Society, we find that there is no staff summary in here as to actually what they have projected as to final conclusions"or their recommendation. I -think it would be a good idea to refer this back to staff .for a summary report. Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Gillum, and carried, referring back - 'to staff...for a summary report. LAFC NOTICE City of!, Covina - Annexation,No. 51 Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, directing the Engineering staff to proceed with the analysis of a boundary change, working in conjunction with the City Attorney's office and with the City''of Covina,for a report and approval by City Council. Phil Yeager Letter.re_Flas &Banners Mayor Gleckman: We have a staff report and a Planning Commission report. Mr. Aiassa do you have anything to add to the.information you have given us? (Neither Mr'. Aiassa or Mr. Munse.11 had anything further to add.) Mayor Gleckman: We'have a letter by Mr. Yeager, President of the Covina Realty Company, and -who is .now the current President of the. Covina. Valley Board of Realtors, and if Council ';has no objection I. would like to call on .Mr. Yeager to comment, ifs he so wishes... Mr. Phil Yeager: I thlink.most of you recognize..for manyyears. realtors have used two or three.banners as a symbolism that they are open for business. I am 9� - REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page Twenty-four CITY MANAGER (Phil Yeager Letter) Cont°d. not speaking of service station bannersbut referring primarily to one, two or three small type banners•on a 21standard. And,as far as I am concerned,it is a symbolism in the real estate business. I .have been a businessman for quite some years in this area, having several offices here at one time. The incident I am going'to relate took place at 239 North Azusa Avenue where we had an office and have since closed it. Not as a result of not being able to put up flags, that is probably one of three or four reasons, but basically it has been difficult to get"individuals to drop into that locationyor indi- viduals looking for us to come into that location,because it is in the center of a shopping area. Approximately four months ago one of the salesmen walked- into- the office in the _middle of the afternoon, ..bringing in the banners,stating a gentleman from the City had said to take them down. (Related his conversation with the City Service Officer.) I talked to the,City Service Officer and suggested if he wanted to.contest the flags he should do it through the city - .channels. It rather upset me because as I stood talking to him I no.ted,on this one building alone five major sign violations, although he was requiring that.°I take down two pennant flags. Sio I received some correspondence from the City, wrote a letter and basically�I didn't feel this was a sign request in that there are so many major violations around and I still fe&l this type of thing is an Yn'equitable limitation inasmuch..- as other realtors in other surrounding cities,and especially on Azusa Avenue,,have pennants - an interlinking•type of city limit situation where you can go from city to county,, county to city, etc., A realtor in a shopping center area who has had his flags removed is -put in.a rather difficult situation,especially on Sunday when the rest of the stores are closed. It looks likel,he is closed. This is an unreasonable situation. Recently I moved from that location,although I intend to go.back to a new location within a short period of time. As far as I am concerned,I have temporarily removed myself as a businessman in the City of West Covina, so therefore 'I can't speak as an individual businessman in the City of West Covina, but I can, however,speak on behalf of the Covina Valley Board of Realtors, of which we have several hundred members,and I can assure you they are upset by the City requiring.the removal of a symbol they have used since they began in Real Estate. So I request your reconsideration of this matter. At the last Planning Commission meeting I was .not there because I did not know that this item was to be on the agenda. Probably,I should have known; maybe it was printed.in the L.A. Times. Therefore,they came out with a recommendation :that I .consider is very unf air'to the realtors in this City. Mayor Gleckman: This letter was referred to the Council because Mr. Yeager made.a point that when the subject was before the Planning Commi.ssion,.and one in which he had originally complained about and requested the Planning Commission to look into, he:was�through some error of staff I., assume, he was not notified that this matter was coming before the Commission and, therefore,.did not have the opportunity to speak to the Commission regarding his request and it was thereforereferred to the City Council. I . don ° t,: know- -what- the prerogative would be would the Planning.Department.hawe the responsibility of informing Mr. Yeager that this was going to. be on the. agendaof the..Planning Commission? And if so,i am I correct in saying' -there -was an error? If not, it seems unreasonable that someone. making, a.xequest for review and'when it is Held, they are not notified, especially when they are the primary source of complaint. Mr. Munsell: The -staff received the referral from the Council and handled the item before the Planning Commission. As a fault of mine, we did not notify the gentleman who initiated the action to the City Council. J - 24 - REG. Coco 1-12-70 Q Page Twenty-five CITY MANAGER Cont d - Yeager Letter The Commission reviewed,''the request and had the staff do additional .research into the matter; the staff found that in all of the sign hearings and all of the�minute.s of the activities taken in terms of sign regulations,as related to realty signs in West Covina,that no member of the West Covina Board of Realtors or no member of the West Covina Chamber of Commerce had come forward to comment negatively in terms of the restrictions of no flags. As a consequence,in terms of . flags being a -temporary type of ,advertising? in :a .normal sense an abatement program to clean up the total overall clutter of signs in the community this i.s..,oie item that,when the violation of the ordinance is seen,it is�requested immediately for withdrawal of the banners or'flags. In' terms of adjacent nonconformance signs on the properties, as the Council is well aware we have an abatement period based on the size and the value of a sign which gives the individual a number of years to take down a permanent sign. As far as Mr. Yeager°s not being informed of the meeting, the responsibility rests on me. He was not informed. Councilman Nichols: I�feelithis should be referred back to the Pl;;anning Commission with a request that the applicant be notified and given the considera- tion of being heard bythe`Planning Commission. Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Chappell, that _..,. Council refer back to the Planning Commission and the applicant be ''r will be rehe-d-r -be-foe--the--:Rlann�i,ng-- Commissdonhen the matte a-r- .............. Mr. : Yea eras Yeager: ,, 1-may- -comment.... It, seems-. to me -.-gentlemen, a businessman,and.most.of you are business- men in this community, if you have individual problems that concern your busine.s.s and.yo.0 come to.the City for action - - well,we could play a game of ping gong here, because I can assure you if they turn back the same.thing they just turned back, I am going to contest.it. So we will be right back to where we started from. Not that I am trying -to dictate to you what you have to do but I feel that strongly, that the business community itself has individual problems and I have been working on this thing for several, months in trying to get it corrected and to go back and forth - I would sort of like to hear your viewpoints. Mayor Gleckman: Mt. Yeager,we are trying to give you your day in court. The recommendation made to the City Council to uphold the present sign ordinance was made without the benefit of your testimony. So,in order for this Council to take any type of . action, we-.-wo.uld.- have to know what the Commission would feel after•heari.ng whatever evidence you would have to give them before we could take : action. Mr. Yeager: In other words,you can't take action without that? Mayor Gleckman: We don't feel.it would be proper. It -would leave it open to each situation where ,inst'ead of going to the Commission„they: would go directly to the Council and I think that would -•be- setting --a -bad- precedent. Councilman Nichols: Mr. Yeager, one of the points you made this evening was that your circumstances as realtors are unique® And that.an Ordinance relative to banners should not apply to your business. The Planning Commission,, in your absence,determ'ined if they would grant this privilege to realtors this would be" a bad precedent. Obviously they didn"t enter- tain the consideration, that you posed to the Council tonight. My first reaction was that perhaps there was justification in your point of view, but..if so the burden of proof would be on you to go - 25 REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page Twenty-six PITY MANAGER (Cont_ld.) - Yeager Letter; before our Planning Commission,and`'demonstr--ate that, in fact, you realtors should be treated differently than others if ;you cart and they. recommend a change.- If you can°t,at least your testimony documented your opinion and b ackgrou-nd,and it then comes up to the Council and we would be in much.4be:tter position to concur or overrule the planning Commissi,on;°s position. Councilman Gillum: I can understand Mr. Yeager"s request. I think this was brought up when we had another problem with a sign request. I am wondering now if every -'.time we run into a problem of signs with a business that feels they are unique,,are we going to be going.through the same procedure? I .agree with the suggestion by Councilman Nichols,but is there a way that we don't have to go through this ever.ytime,something comes up in the sign ordinance that doesn't fit a_- particular business? Mayor Gleckman: My only comment would be --I would hope so, because I haven't seen the Ordinance or law that has been written that is so perfect that it doesn't have an exception. So I don't think there is an answer. If there is, lets 'set it up. Councilman Gillum: The point which deeply concerns meis that there was considerable time spent by the .Chamber of Commerce in studying_ this and, -to quote Mr. Nichols on another subject,"when your ox isgoredyou come flying down here". Possibly if Mr. Yeager would be willing,and if he feels it is that important to him -;.further down -on the agenda is a recommendation pertaining to signs- fkxi the Chamber ••• of Commerce, and possibly we could incorporate---a1-1--this-- and- give-•-the-..r-.ealtors a chance to discuss in this review per.iod.-and-.i-n--this--way .n.ot _-only eliminate his problem, but there may _also .be •.othe,rs. ..T.he.us.uggestion by staff is to review the Sign Ordinance. . -..He- --may ,be -very. well justi- fied in his position, but if we permit- that -then the --barbers...-will be coming back with regard to the barber --pole tu-r-ring •• fo_r - years-;, . etc. , etc. What I am trying to say, .is.,1, don ° t.- want-d-iffe•ren•t• bu-sine.sses coming back continually, and if, they -.-are.- made .-awa-re-_.•.that; .Cou.nci.l will review with the Chamber and try.. a.nd.-:.weed .out -as- many...of-...these areas as we can. m I am concerned that. -we .are- go.i-ng through this .continually, unle ss, somehow , through the Chamber of -Commerce and ' the Councilor we can reach the business community and say - look, you have so long to look at this Ordinance - what do you feel should be done with it? Mayor Gleckman: I think you brought out some points, but what is the feeling of the Council? Councilman Lloyd: I think we have touched upon the very basis of the democratic process and,while I would like to collectively solve all -the problems in a relatively short time, I think .when you are --speaking of a man"s individual business..you-get very individual and very pointed to one person very quickly.: I do•n°t .think- Mr.. Yeager, who, i.s. speaking not only as a realtor for himself, -but all the-real.tors - say some 500 members, who collectively -do x numbers -of do-llars .in...bu.sine.ss in a year and,as such they are very vital._1y.-concerned--.and.they say these signs are imperative to 'the continuance- of their -.business -and as such they really do want•personal-.considera-tion. I think that is one of the things we are going to have -to-do. - Give • each •and•• every. item personal consideration -and- I, for -one, have no objection . to .that. I think if we then have .the -barbers or the. -bakers- come,.i.n. I .thi.nk this is what we will-- have •to --face- --Sometimes -it -seems -,like .each :item is very similar,.but•. to them- it. .is.. not.. • They -want-to-make. their..,. presentation, and have a...ruling. made- in their. case, .preferabl.y. .favor- . able to their stand,, but ,.certa•inl.y. they ..Want.._.i'.t.l. individual even if it is unfavorable. . They :want to, know -they have been. considered, -and I think this is what we, have to. do..- - Mayor Gleckman: I think one of the things that could be done as a suggestion - no matter what sign ordinances 26 - DREG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page Twenty-seven CITY MANAGER '(ContId ) - Yeager Letter you come up with, if -t°s on the books, if you would review or set up for review what problems you do have every two years on a review- ing basis,and automatically hold public hearing, so all your new modifications c'an be- considered periodically. Of course,then you would run into. -two years ago you' made me take down my $8, 000 sign -.,and invest in another sign and now two years later you are saying it is permitted, etc. So I really can't give you an answer except to say that,at certain times in certain cities,depending on the individual progress being made in the community that you review the ordinances you have, whether.they be sign ordinances,'general plans, or whatever else. It is the only way you are going to stay on top of it and you are still going'to get the.people in.that don't conform with whatever the City decides; they will still come back and make their case which, is their democratic right. There is noway of shutting off these things except to hear each one in an orderly manner. Councilman Gillum.- Maybe I was misunderstood. I.in no way want to shut off the .democratic process; all I am saying is that with the Chamber reviewing, maybe a lot of these areas could.be cleared up and brought to our attention at one time.,and eliminate the need for someone like Mr. Yeager sitting here most of the evening to make his point and next week someone else. I don't expect it to be perfect but I.am saying at least we do have an opportunity now to try and coordinate all these objectionable areas, all in one large group,and present to Council in one large recommendation. I am sorry if I was misunderstood,and you thought I was saying we don't want to listen to these people, I am just saying we., are as busy as -they are!, and- if we- could find a way to consolidate it would save everybody°s--time.- Mayor Gleckman: Remember; also�we- are_ probably, one- of the few cities -that. -saw fit.to set up a sign ordinance Advisory Committee to meet with' the business people that are not in conformance with the present ordinance�to try and work out in whatever way we can to ease the pain to have them conform. If you are suggesting another open hearing regarding the Sign Ordinance,and at that time let the people be on notice that if they are unhappy with any phase of the Sign Ordinance - and 'we just have another complete.public hearing, I would not even have any objection to that, but:I think it has -to -emanate from the Planning Commission or the City Council before it can take place., Right now we are faced with Mr. Yeager°s letter and the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and the motion on the floor is to refer back to the-.Planni-ng Commission. If you would like -to expand the--motion-to make it a complete Sign hearing, okay; but to talk philosphicall-y-now,-and take in all- these other different aspects,I don't think we are accomplishing anything. So what is your pleasure gentlemen? (Council called for the question.) Motion carried. Emil, Galster Parkway Trees_ Deposit Refund �. Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Gillum, and carried, approving -the refund of.the:$.33.5.00 deposit placed for tree installation by Emil S. Galster. Toland.Avenue:..Pedestrian Over -Crossing, Motion by . Counci`l'man. Chappell,, `%" seconded -by --Mayor Gleckman, approving the relocation as recommended by-the,Plan.ning Commission Councilman Gillum.,,."... Mr-. -Mayor, -I wonder. -if -Council. -would consider the .alternate? Mayor Gleckman: You mean the elimination of it? 27 - REGo C.C. 1-12-70 Page Twenty-eight CITY MANAGER Cont'-d j Toland Ave. Pedestrian Crossing Councilman Gillum: There is an alternate recommendation of elimination, and after reviewing the number of people using the cross -over it seems like a pretty expensive pathway,.when we -are proposing now an underpass at Lark Ellen with sidewalks under the .Freeway and a large underpass at Vincent, and the State is going to put an $85,000 crosswalk. between the two. Mayor Gleckman: My feeling is that Idon't think we should give away anything that we are now presently giving to our citizenry. If the State Division of Highways would give something in return, then I could understand it. But from the standpoint of getting excited over an $85,000 cost to the State - when no one knows what the future will bring,and we may have to go back and spend $500,000 if it is needed later on;:&pending on the development of the community - I don't think we should give away anything that we have. Councilman Nichols: I agree. We have no way of knowing what the particular grox�th and need might be for that facility in 10 'to 15 yearsfrom now, but we could anticipate we would have a great deal of difficulty in getting it then,, if we did need it. Councilman Lloyd: I was one of the first to say if this is not a productive thing and it1was costing x number of dollars for people to walk across this - whether we had need for it, or the placement was bad. it has been reviewed and we do have a recommendation,and I. concur that-.we,.should.'retain it. I think it is one' of those ' dec:isions once- made we- cant correct, and only time, will tell us,if -we were correct. If there is still a doubt perhaps we could ask staff to conduct a survey .in the immediate-area,_..probably a telephone survey, for its best placement. We survey a lot. of things and I think the current placement is,`fundamentally.unsound.* Maybe it can be relocated and maybe the'new area would be unsound - I don't know. Mayor Gleckman: The recommendation is that the relocation recommended has been reviewed by the State and others and this is their recommendation, primarily because the alternative would be the elimination and not the relocation.in some other area. Councilman Lloyd: Is it possible we could have it connected .directly across from City Hall? Mr. Zimmerman: The State has indicated informally to us that location at Toland Avenue is considered close enough to ,the Freeway as toibe considered as acceptable with the Freeway Agreement from their point of view. So, on that basis,if'it were moved any great distance I am sure it would be.considered a revision in the Freeway Agreement. . Councilman Lloyd: When the gentlemen were here I brought this specific point up -and he commented to the effect - we really don't,care where you put it, we are committed to a walkway,; we will put it -up anywhere that is reasonable. How:. would • you account for -that comment? Mr. Zimmerman: I am- .sure he' was- speaking -in the context of the immediate area,. not any place -'on :the Freeway. Councilman Lloyd: But you haven"t asked? Mr. Zimmerman: I would be glad to ask if Councilso wishes. Councilman Lloyd: I don't know where the best place is but we are 28 - REG. C.C. 1-12-70 Page.Twenty-nine CITY MANAGER (.Cant`d:)' -Toland Ave Pedestrian Crossing spending $85,000 of the taxpayers money. I would like to see,frankly, a better utilization. It may well be that where it is proposed is the -best place. But frankly I don°t think anyone has gone out and .:taken a survey. Have they? Mr. Zimmerman: This was considered in connection with the original Freeway Agreement. There has been no recent survey as to another location. Councilman Lloyd: My point then is,since we have made no survey and we are spending this kind of money,,I don°t think it is unrealistic for this body to attempt to obtain the highest and best use for a walkway across the Freeway, a n-d.frankly in my opinion I would rather see the walkway into City Hall area; if I could get it. I think there is more traffic possibility in this'area straight across, than up there. You, individually, Mr. Zimmerman, don't care? (Answer: No) (H. R. Fast,.Public Service Director, arrived at 10:15 P.Mo) Councilman Lloyd: I think this fits into the thinking of Councilman Gillum, if it is that unused at that point maybe we should think of placing it someplace else. It does seem if we are going to spend $85,000 that, if there is a better place to put itJI see no real reason for not doing so since there is'no'objection 'to not placing''it'there I feel we should find out. It irks me when we spend money like this in this stupid economy that we have created, that we don't try and; determine what is best .for._the.people,in the area. I don't think that is unrealistic, part,icula-r-ly--wh-e-n-.we are not losing anything on it anyhow. Mayor Gleckman: Let me respond.' Unfortunately, maybe • Mr. Zimmerman did not relate to you on what basis the recommendation was made as to the State Division of Highways. In the first place it was discussed,not only at Council level but at the'Planning Commission level. We did have staff reports as to relocation., up and down the freeway,including the general proximity of the new city hall. The recommendation for the location•was based on the highest number of users inthe area as to the locations they wanted to go,and that was the commercial. area along Glendora Avenue and ,the Plaza and -St. Christopher°s School; where a lot of the children cross on bicycles to go to and from St. Christopher°s, which is located_.on Vincent Avenue. Also,the State Division of Highways said to us,as long as it is kept in the same general location we would have no objection. As far as the $85,000 cost is concerned,we can always look to the State to save the State money if you want to .refer to.the $85,000 cost as savings, but if somewhere along the 1•ine. that savings can be reflected back to the people of .West.Cov-ina - so I would appreciate comparing it to what usage the City: of West Covina.-.-wouuld , get out ' of it. I don't have any objection to -surveying this, but I would like to go on record as saying the relocation area recommended has been reviewed and has been surveyed<and if the Council wishes to have this done -again, I have no objection. Councilman Lloyd: ..The point I. am- making- is -you were talking about �. Vinee.nt overpass.and.most of the youngsters that ride their -bikes use the .underpass, and I have observed this.... I .th-ink this.,.is one of 'the -thing.s where we are just, g"•'rabbing and saying okay we- are •goi-ng. to do it now. I have no objection to it-, -I . real.ize we , need an.- overpass, ,but -Mr. " Aiassa doesn't care , and Mr... .Zimmer.man doesn °.t--care and you don ° t' care, so my only point is I would- like, to see -it- -rev.iewedso.. we. do. ,get the highest and best use, if"..there is -.a- better place for it, and I think you all would agree with me.' Isn't that true? Mayor Gleckman: No doubt. 29 m i • REG. C..C. 1-12-70 Page'Thirty CITY MANAGER (Copt°d,) - Toland.Ave. Pedestrian Crossing Councilman Lloyd: What is the opposition then to going and taking one more look at it? As far as the monies being, spent, I realize -the' don°.t come out of the taxpaye'r,'s pocket right here but they come -out of the whole State. What I`am really asking for is,I want that which is best for the greatest number of people. Councilman Nichols: Quite a long .time ago this whole matter was thrashed out with the State. My best recollection was they advised they would be willing to reinstall this overcrossing at the location where it was,but they wouldn't be willing to trade or put it at another end of town or any other use in lieu of it. And that was a firm statement at that time. Now apparently, according to Mr. Zimmerman,they have now said they would move it a short distance but any other type of location would be considered not.in the inclusion of the Freeway Agreement. So I don't think Council would accomplish anything;to say to.staff to go talk some more about it at staff level. I think our only approach at this point would be to communicate asa Council with the State.Division of Highways)to determine if they would be willing to consider a substantial relocation of that cross walk or a modification of the Freeway Agreement,and this is worth a try if we think it should go someplace else. This is the first step we should decide, because some 41,000 people have been using this every year. and.there are going to be some unhappy people if this were to be moved down to City Hall. Councilman Lloyd: There are two elements here. I think the people who have negotiated should perhaps continue the negotiation because this is'a very fine point. Second, provided that the service to the community is better served if we can move it , then this is fine. This may after all be the best spot, butI don't know. I think the very fact there.was consideration to move it, is indication that it wasn't. I accept the fact that if you try.and move it..one;inch„from where it is proposed that they might well say - forget it. And at that point we havelhad it. I recognize that. The`only.thing I have asked,and the point I make, I think it is worthy of one more look.. Mayor Gleckman: Mr. Zimmerman, could you give me an estimate of the cost in time'and manpower 'hours and how you would go about making this study, so,I could determine as to how I would like'to vote on this -relative to what it would cost the taxpayers of West Covina relative to what it will cost the State Division of Highways that is paid for by gas tax money? Mr. Zimmerman: Mr.. Mayor, it is entirely possible,and if I :understand your question right it -would be necessary forme to ..speculate but it would seem the first question to be answered would be as Mr. Nichols says - can it be moved without a change -in the Freeway Agreement? If it can,presumably be,moved to.another point at State expense, if however it cannot, it is probable that the.State would permit an overpass being built for -pedestrians at another location at City expense. I think that'would be the first step and.the n a report back to Council'for their further consideration and recommendation. Mayor Gleckman: The relocation we are consideiing°this evening, - if the vote goes thatway, is not going in the same alignment where_it presently exists - then where is it going?. I know, but,'I would__ k-e':you_ to restate. Mr. Zimmerman: The present overpass is at the end of Glendora Avenue and serves - directly north, and . so.uth Garvey...Avenue. - In. the new Freeway Agreement, north Garvey Avenue is to_be.:elimnated and- the overpass would be moved westerly some 5001to a.point opposite Toland;on the northside of the,Freeway and it would span the Freeway and south Garvey Avenue to a landing right in the West Covina Center area. - 30 - REG. C.C. 1-.12-70 Page Thirty-one CITY MANAGER (Cont'd.. - Tola.nd-.Ave. Pedestrian Crossing Mayor Gleckman: This area, the State.Division of Highways has 'agreed to accept? (Mr. Zimmerman -answered that is correct:) .So the suggestion now is to find out, first - if the State Di''visionof Highways would accept, -a relocation of:it.and to what extent, and then come b'ack'to Council and if they said "yes we' would consider.' it th;n -.we would have to discuss it,again. We do.now have a motion on :the floor approving the relocation as recommended. What is the Co.uncil's pleasure? Councilman Lloyd: I would like to.make a .,substitute motion that this be reviewed..:•by,.staff, with; a report buck to Counc-1 at.the next regular City Council meeting. Seconded..by Councilman Gillum, and carried, Mayor Gleckman voting "no"-and,Councilman Nichols "abstaining." Southern. Veterinary Medical Association Motio-n by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, and carried, to accept and file letter of information from the Southern Veterinary Medical Association. CITY CLERK St. Vincent de Paul Society, request that Salvage Bureau make salvage pick-ups,in West Covina in 1970 Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, that the request be granted. Mayor Gleckman: The`ohly discussion I would bring forward, -Madam City Clerk have we given the same permission to each organization of this type, to do this in the City of West Covina, that have requested it? Mrs. Preston: The Disabled Veterans' truck comes in and picks City Clerk up; Goodwill; and St. Vincent de Paul. Society has done this for a number" of"ye ar.s . Motion carried. Claim:of:Mary Pearl Nacey for Personal Injuries Motion by. Councilman -Chappell,., ,seconded .by -..Councilman Lloyd, -and". .carried, that Council deny and.refer'o.the_ ins urahb carrier: Claim of:Bekins Moving.& Storage. Company Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded:by'Councilman Gillum, and Carried; to refer to ' staff and ,the 'City Attorney. MAYOR'S REPORTS Confirmation of Human Relations, Commi-scion Council. Liaison- for January, . thr.auEjh April.,-19-7.0 Mayor Gleckman: y ec man: Councilman Lloyd is the liaison to. the Human Relations Commission, and Councilman Nichols is" the alternate. RESOLUTION,NO.. 4094- Mayor Gleckm-a-n_-presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ADOPTED THE4'CLTY OF WEST COVINA, COMMENDING ` RUDY PHILIPS Mayor Gleckman: Henri-ng- no -objections, way ve-further; xead•ing of. the body- of sad..._Reolt..t=ion.. - 31 .-.. f REG. C.C. 1-12-70 MAYOR'S REPORTS - Cont'd. Page Thirty-two Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell., adopting said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO. 4095 ADOPTED Mayor Gleckman presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, COMMENDING BEN GRANAT." Mayor Gleckman: Hearing no objections, waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Chappell, adopt- ing said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Retirement Report Councilman Gillum: I have a report for Council on the Retirement Committee. As you will recall two years ago April 1, Councill--passed a. Resolution of Intent to decide within two year-s whe•ther- or --not to ,retire the city employees from �social&ecurity----or -to. continue with it.. Since we are drawing close to that time I would like to bring Council up to date on the Retirement Committees which has been in existence for about 18 months., fi Between January 13 and 16th, individual actuary reports will be distributed to all employees through their Department Head (explained in detail.what is included in the individual actuary reports.) On the 19th of January representatives from the Retirement Committee will start meeting with employees to answer questions; on.the 23rd a General Meeting of the Employees' Association will beheld at 7:30.-P..M. in the Council Chambers, with representatives from Social -Security and State Retirement present to answer questions per.ta;ining.to both programs. On the 26th of January ballots will -be issued to the employees for their vote on choice of retirement program. Ballots counted on the 28th and on the 30th a report to the Personnel Board, both minority and . majority reports, hopefully for.their review at their meeting of February 3rd. It is hoped that by February 15th the Board will be ready to make their recommendation to the City Council. I :.have worke-d .on this for 18 months .and to be honest with you, - there ---are portions of .it I cannot- sit and -discuss with you becausQ- it -is that involved-. --We believe-staff...wi:l.l be able to put together quite comprehensive report,.clear.ly •sta-ting- the costs and benefits to the..empl.oyees .and-.-the-City. - One...other....thing - I think Mr. Wakefield,, at.. th-is last meeting -of the - Committee.: thatit would be advisable if we might--have.-the City Attorney presen:tr because in the past with other cities .-such as - the City. .of..Lo-ngbeach there have been cases pending -and .-.-think it wQi ld-be-bes,t.:if..::. >. the City Attorney could .attend. that, last meeting .of .:the,:Ret.irement Committee to clarify ,.or.bring :fbr:th any areas that should be con- sidered by the Personnel _Board' -and the -Council.-in -mak-ing their decision. ....".. ._....-......- - - ... I ........ "" Mr. Aiassa: .The City Attorney -is -here on Wednesday,. -..so we ...can •set it.. for 4-...p.-m... on that -day. ...,,.._.- Councilman Gillum: Basically that is where we stand.. The Committee hopes to have this to the'Persbn`ne'l`,Board by - 32 - REG. CX. 1-12-70 Retirement Report Page Thirty-three February 3rd and that they will be able to make their recommendation to Council no later than February 15th so it will give Council at least 30 days to give this very important program the utmost .consideration before making our decision. If there are any questions at this time? One other item. I think we all received a 1 notification that the IRS ruled the Church of Scientology were no longer a nonprofit or religious organization. I would like to ask Council to direct the staff to reinvestigate their business license and since they are no longer considered a nonprofit organization, probably we'should charge them.a business license fee'.* Mr. Aiassa: I would like to work with the City Attorney on that. Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, referring this item to the City Manager and the City Attorney. Mayor Gleckman: The only other thing I would have to add - Mr. Aiassa, how does the Motor Vehicle license fee proportion for our City compare to what we expected? Mr. Aiassa: We are just tabulating it'now. Mayor Gleckman:: :.;For therecord we received $42,483.45. DEMANDS • Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, that Council approve demands totalling $712,788.93 as listed on Demand Sheets C674 through C677. This total includes payroll accounts and time deposits. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd, Mayor Gleckman NOES: None ABSENT: None Motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried, adjoi:irning this meeting at 10'.40 P.M-. ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED: MAYOR ' - 33 - nb