Loading...
03-27-1972 - Regular Meeting - MinutesA MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA MARCH 27, 1972. The regular meeting of the City Council was called to order at • 7:30 P.M., by Mayor Ken Chappell in the West Covina Council Chambers. The Pledge of Allegiance was given. Dr..Henry Kraus of Temple Beth Ami of West Covina gave the invocation. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Chappell; Councilmen:*Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd Others Present: George Aiassa, City Manager Lela Preston, City Clerk George Wakefield, City Attorney H. R. Fast, _ George Zimmerman, City Engineer John Lippitt, Ass°t. City Engineer Richard Munsell, Planning Director Bert Yamasaki, Ass°t. Planning Director Craig Meacham, Deputy Chief of Police Calvin Wetherbee, Fire Chief Nevin Browne, Planning Commissioner Alec Andrus, Administrative Analyst Jeff Butzlaff, Administrative Analyst, Jr. Ray. Silver, Administrative Analyst, Jr. APPROVAL OF MINUTES February 28, 1972 Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor, I do have corrections. Page 14. There is a statement concerning the MF-25 and MF-20 zones. The item is the second to the last paragraph attributed to me. It should read: "The 4 bedroom apartment could be 6000 square feet." On Page 15, the first paragraph, 4th line from the bottom add "will not," thereby reading "giving more time to study will not prove to be of much value." And the 3rd paragraph, 5th line should read "I am sure we will at least listen." Page 21, the 2nd paragraph, 3rd line from the bottom of the paragraph should read "This is their deliberation....."". Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Young and carried, to approve minutes as corrected. PRESENTATIONS SALVATION ARMY Mayor Chappell: This evening we have a presentation to the City of West Covina from the Salvation Army. Peter Stewart Mr. Mayor, members of Council and citizens, 1012 No. Lyman it is a pleasure for me to be able to Covina represent the Salvation Army at the Council Salvation Army meeting this evening. No doubt some of you have been wondering why the City is going to receive this citation. The Salvation. Army has been very quietly working in West Covina for many years but very effectively and the City of West Covina has made this. possible because people in need can call the Civil Defense and leave a message to be picked up by myself or one of the workers and we are able to take that call and help eliminate the problem, The Salvation Army is very mindful of this service and very appreciative of it and we want to say to the City "thank you" and present this plaque in - 1 - CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 PRESENTATIONS - Cont'd. Page Two grateful appreciation. Actually this was done a few days ago at our annual meeting but when we received the invitation to come to the Council meeting tonight we did this with honor and Mr. -Mayor., it is a pleasure fore-me'to present this award`of appreciation to you. • I also have a citation for the West Covina Police Department. In emergencies the Police Department can issue orders for families stranded in the City and this service is much appreciated also. (Presented plaque to Mayor Chappell and the Police Department plaque to Craig Meacham, Deputy Chief.) Mayor Chappell: Craig Meacham: unheralded and we in call upon you to provide disaster we call upon you out. We thank you. On behalf of the City of West Covina I accept this award and thank you. On behalf of the West Covina Police Department we appreciate the services of the Salvation Army. All too often your work has gone law enforcement know we only need to services for a needy family or in time of and your canteen and volunteer workers come Mr. Steward: May I add one comment, Mr. Mayor? You may be interested to know at our Annual Report meeting last week, in the year 1971 in the City of West Covina, 143 cases numbering 789 persons received help in West Covina and we spent $2,534.70 on families in West Covina. That takes in all the categories from food to helping with rent, transporta- tion and medical expenses. Thank you. WOMEN'S CLUB OF Mayor Chappell: This evening the City WEST COVINA Council has two awards to pass out to organizations that have done outstanding jobs in our community. The Women's Club of West Covina has donated two Stanton Lytport Resuscitators and one Resusci-Anne life size mannequin to the West Covina Fire Department, and I believe Mrs. Polk is here this evening to accept this award from the City. We think this is outstanding and -are very happy to make these awards and hope we can make more of them in the future. We thank you for your participation and work with our Fire Department. Mrs. Polk: Thank you very much. I represent over 300 women and we are always happy to do ,things in a civic way. FIREMAN - Mayor Chappell: The City of West Covina FREDERICK J. CASE is very proud of one of its firemen - he has been cited for heroic efforts beyond the call of duty. At this time I would like to call -Fireman Frederick Case to step forward and receive this commendation award for meritorious efforts beyond the call of duty. (Read commendation.) Congratulations for the terrific job you have done. The City is very proud to have you as a member of our organization. Frederick J. Case: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and gentlemen of the Council. I am very appreciative of this commendation and I am thankful for the back- ing I received from members of the Fire Department. Councilman Young: Mr. ,Mayor, if I may make a comment with respect to the presentation of Mr. Steward, of the Salvation Army. I think if more people had the spirit of this organization we would have far less concern about taxes and welfare roles, and something of recognition that there is a way to take care of these things if we would just do - 2 - r • • CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 PRESENTATIONS - Cont°d. Page Three it. I think your organization is to be highly commended on this account. Thank you very much. CONSENT CALENDAR ,Mayor Chappell stated the procedure of the Consent Calendar and asked if there were any comments on the following items: 1. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS a) WILLIAM F. GRADEN Re Amendment No. 115 WEST COVINA (Refer to Hearing Item B-2) b) CARMEN K. CARRIKER " & CLYDE CARRIKER, JR. 3209 E. Cortez West Covina11 c) MR. & MRS. E. McCALLISTER 3329 E. Virginia d) MR. & MRS. G. MacEACHERN 3433 E. Cortez St., e) MR. & MRS. L. CALLISON 3013 E. MESA DRIVE f) RAYMOND E. HEYTENS 2612 E. LARKWOOD ST. g) MRo & MRS. B. HENDRICKSON 2627 S. ALTAMIRA DRIVE WEST COVINA h) LOS ANGELES CITY COUNCIL i) BOARD OF SUPERVISORS j) BOARD OF SUPERVISORS k) KIWANIS CLUB OF WEST COVINA 1) NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY m) OSTRIN & OSTRIN CO,, AUCTIONEERS Re impounding all fund Re development of park in Woodside Village. (Refer to Recreation & Parks Commission.) s from Senate Bill 325 for application toward development and tion of a mass rapid t system for greater Los (Refer to staff) construc- ransit Angeles. Re opposition to Assembly Bill 461 (Assignment of County°�s Gas Tax money.) (Refer to City Attorney and Staff) Re selection, of Senior to be honored at the S Citizen eventh Annual- Recognition Day for Older Americans 4/29/72. (�.er�ag�s �oMet����c Re permission to sell "Operation Drug Alert" buttons in the West Covina Plaza and Eastland Shopping Center on April le 1972 from 10 A.M. until 4 PaM. (Recommend approval) Re permission to solicit during Annual Hope Chest Campaign from Mother's Day through Father's Day, May 14 - June 18, (Approved in prior yea 1972. rs.) (Recommend approval) Re permit to conduct auction at Waterwheel Inn, 648 So Sunset Avenue on March 28, 1972 at 11 A.M. (Staff recommends approval subject to auction of only the equipment on hand within the establishment.) i 3 CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - Cont°do n) HAFIF and SHERNOFF 2. PLANNING COMMISSION 3. RECREATION & PARKS COMMISSION 4. HUMAN RELATIONS COMM. 5. YOUTH ADVISORY COMM. 6. TRAFFIC COMMITTEE 7. CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FILED WITH CITY CLERK 8. PARADE PERMIT APPLICATION Page Four Re Court consolidation. (Refer to City Attorney) Summary of Action, March 15, 1972. (Receive and file) Summary of Action, March 14, 1972. (Adj. mtg.) (Accept and file) Summary of Action of March 23, 1972. (Receive and file) Summary of Action of March 21, 1972. (Receive and file) Minutes of March 21, 1972. (Receive and file) Re Paul A. Phillips, 1306 W. Puente Ave., West Covina re accident 3/20/72, parking lot, Vincent and Garvey Avenues. (Deny and refer to Insurance Carrier) American Cancer Society, Saturday 4/l/72 (Approve subject to Staff and Police Review) 9. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT Month of February, 1972. (Receive and file) Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor, I have one item. Item 1 (j) the invitation from the Board of Supervisors re selection of Senior Citizen to be honored at the Seventh Annual Recognition Day for Older Americans. I have none- to offer but I note on the form there is a deadline date of March 31, which is this Friday. So I would urge if a name or names are to be submitted that it be done by Friday. Councilman Young: Mr. Mayor, may this item be considered later in the evening? To be perfectly honest about it, my wife who circulates more than I do, has a suggested name that I would like to submit but I have to phone her and get the name and the information. Mayor Chappell: If there is no objection we will remove Item 1 (j) and discuss it later on the agenda. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Shearer, that the items on the Consent Calendar with the exception of Item 1 (j) be approved as submitted. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION EXCLUSION OF CITY AREA LOCATION: Northwest corner of Orange FROM COUNTY LIGHTING Avenue and Francisquito Avenue. (Council MAINTENANCE DISTRICT reviewed Engineer's report.) RESOLUTION NO. 4532 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA REQUESTING THE EXCLUSION FROM COUNTY LIGHTING MAINTEN- ANCE DISTRICT NO. 1744 OF THAT CERTAIN TERRITORY IN THAT CERTAIN DISTRICT WHICH IS IN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA.°' ® 4 - CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 Page Five RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION - Cont'd. WOODSIDE VILLAGE MAIN- LOCATION: Northerly of Amar Road between TENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 Lark Ellen Avenue and Azusa Avenue. DONALD L. BREN CO. (Council reviewed Engineer's report) RESOLUTION NO. 4533 The City Attorney presented: . ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A CORPORA- TION GRANT DEED EXECUTED BY DONALD L. BREN COMPANY AND DIRECTING THE RECORDA- TION THEREOF. (Parcel Map 2361)" RESOLUTION NO. 4534 "A RE.SOLUTIOI*OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ADOPTED CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A CORPORA- TION GRANT DEED EXECUTED BY DONALD L. BREN COMPANY AND DIRECTING THE RECORDA- TION THEREOF. (Parcel Map 2362)" RESOLUTION NO. 4535 "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ADOPTED CITY OF WEST COVINA ACCEPTING A CORPORA- TION GRANT DEED EXECUTED BY DONALD L. BREN COMPANY AND DIRECTING THE RECORDA- TION THEREOF. (Parcel: -Map 2363)." RESOLUTION NO. 4536 "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ADOPTED CITY OF WEST COV.T-XA ACCEPTING A'..CO.RPORA- TION. GRANT :DEED EXECUTFD._.:BY- DONALD L.... BREN COMPANY..AND, DIRECTING. THE..RECORDATION" THEREOF. (Tract No. 30398)" RESOLUTION NO. 4537 "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ADOPTED CITY OF WEST COVINA REQUESTING THAT CERTAIN CITY OWNED PROPERTY BE ANNEXED 0 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 22." (T®ne Foot Lot -Azusa Avenue and Aroma Drive) Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Lloyd and carried, to waive further reading of the body of each of the foregoing resolutions. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Shearer, to adopt each of the foregoing resolutions. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None END OF CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT NO. SD-72013 LOCATION: An easement between Queen WITON CONSTRUCTION CO. Summit Drive and Hillward Avenue, in the INC., vicinity of Cameo Vista Drive. Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd and carried, to accept storm drain improvements and authorize release of Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland Bond No. 8536802 in the amount of $4,955 subject to Notice of Completion procedure. STORM DRAIN PROJECT LOCATION: Storm drain in Willow Avenue NO. 8451, UNIT 2 between South Garvey Avenue and Francisquito Avenue. (Council reviewed Engineer's report.) RESOLUTION NO. 4538 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA; MW CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 PUBLIC WKS.: Project No. 8451, Unit 2 Page Six STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, DIVISION OF.HIGHWAYS; AND LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT; FOR STORM DRAIN PROJECT 8451, UNIT 2." • Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd and carried, to waive further reading of the body of said resolution. Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor, a question. I would like staff to refresh my memory. I realize we took action on this previously, but refresh my memory - why there is a �'defi&it" of, .$4.6:9.000. What is the County going to do and why are we responsible? Mr. Zimmerman: The Flood Control District bond issue City Engineer for storm drains was set for a specific sum of money and in order to put in the various drains involved, of which there were two categories; one, District drains and the other drains of local control which the City could recommend. In order to fund all of those desired by the City the drains were set up in this manner; however, the estimate made by the City°s engineer and also approved by the Flood Control District was not sufficient to cover the final estimate which came in a little bit higher. So there was a need to make up the difference between the Flood Control District funds and the final estimated amount to cover the drains between the Walnut Creek Channel and the freeway.drain. Councilman Shearer: If the bid is lower then we may not be obligated to pay anything - is that correct? Mr. Zimmerman: Yes, that is correct. Also if the bid is high enough so that we have to contribute something there is a chance that we will get it back in a few years when the final accounting is performed. Mr. Aiassa: Yes, Mr. Shearer, we also had only early preliminaries and not detailed plans which gave the figure for the bond issue not quite as accurate as in the final drawings and final estimate. Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd to adopt said resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen: Nicholse YoungV Lloyd, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None ABS`A"A IN : Councilmen: Shearer GENERAL TELEPHONE CO., LOCATION: Woodside Village REQUEST FOR TEMPORARY (Council reviewed Engineer's report) POLE LINE Motion by Councilman Shearer© seconded by Councilman Young and carried, to grant the request of General Telephone Company for installation of temporary pole line, with the stipulation that the existing west boundary aerial facility be removed by • December 31, 1972, and that a Faithful Performance Bond in the amount of $5,000 be presented to the City. PERSONNEL BOARD LETTER RE PERSONNEL Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded BOARD STUDY SESSION by Councilman Young, to receive and acknowledge the letter from the Personnel Board. - 6 - s 0 CITY COUNCIL PERSONNEL BOARD - Cont'd. Councilman Young: CITY ATTORNEY 3/27/72 Page Seven I feel this is a very commendable endeavor on the part of the Board. Motion carried. ORDINANCE The City Attorney presented: INTRODUCTION "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO REZONE CERTAIN PREMISES. (Zone Change Application No. 462 - Lawrence and Christine Carson)." Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer and carried, to waive further reading of the body of said Ordinance. Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer and carried, to introduce said Ordinance. RESOLUTION NO. 4539 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING A PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN. (Precise Plan No. 625 - Lawrence and Christine Carson)." Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd and carried, to waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer to'adopt said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES:.Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO. 4540 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE CANVASS OF THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL, 1972, TO BE MADE BY THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA." Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer and carried, to waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer, to adopt said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None (MAYOR CHAPPELL RECESSED THE COUNCIL MEETING AT 7:55 P.M. COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 8 P.M.) HEARINGS VARIANCE APPLICATION LOCATION: 1703 S. Avington Avenue. NO. 668 REQUEST: Approval of a variance to RENE' A. MADDOX maintain a horse on a less than one acre parcel. Denied by Planning Commission. Resolution No. 2367. Appealed by applicant on January 4, 1972. Continued to this date at the request of the applicant. Notices mailed 3/15/72. - 7 - CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 PUBLIC HEARINGS: Variance No. 668 Page Eight Mr. Munsell, Planning Director, briefly summarized Planning Com- mission Resolution No. 2367 denying Variance Application No. 668. Slides shown of location of residence, surrounding area, zoning of area, stable location to property line, etc. Mr. Munsell: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, the Building Director contacted me this morning and should the Planning Commissions'decision now be reversed by Council it should be noted that the applicant has not taken a permit out for the construction of the stable and this is in violation as well. We received before the Planning Commission, one protest letter and several letters from neighbors which indicated they were not opposed to having horses in this area. We received a substantial amount of citizen discussion since that time; however, nothing in letter form. This would conclude staff presenta- tion. THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.ON VARIANCE APPLICA- TION NO. 668. IN . FAVOR Mrs. Dolores Maddox I submitted a letter to the City Council 1703 Avington .Avenue and at this time I would like to have the West Covina letter read. Mayor Chappell read letter addressed to the City, Council dated March 23, 1972: "In regard to our variance application #668 we are sub- mitting a change in our request. Instead of requesting a permanent zone variance we wish to ask for a one (1)year minimum zone variance because we are planning to purchase land property and build a new home.' 'We have been conferring with Mr. Ernest Bartollo of West Covina who has a 1.1 acre for sale which is located on Spring Meadow Drive, West Covina. We have also been conferring with O'Donnell Realty, West Covina and the saleswoman is Mrs. Cress. We have looked at two properties located at the top of Buenos Aires Drive in the Highlands, Covina. We are in the process of submitting a bid. I also telephoned Mr. R. Munsell, Planning Director this past week and he has passed on some very sound advice regarding =:.. the Covina properties which we completely overlooked. He suggested we telephone Covina City Hall and check their zone variance pertaining to horses because we have been working only with the realty company.' 'We hope you can realize how important our horse is to us by our plans that I have set before you and also the importance of the one year minimum (being my husband is in the construction business.) Hoping our request meets with your satisfaction, I remain, (signed) Mrs. R. Maddox." Mayor Chappell: Mrs. Maddox, are you going to make a presentation at this time on this letter or is your letter going to do all you want done? Mrs. Maddox: I don't know what to say other than we are planning on moving. On the one parcel that we are interested in the people have gone to Switzerland and in working with the Realty Company we don't know how our bid will be received. So if we can't make contact as far as getting the price we want then we will take the parcel below that. I personally prefer that parcel and my husband likes the one in Spring Meadow Drive. Councilman Young: Mrs. Maddox, you ask for a one year minimum variance request and then again - 8 - CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 PUBLIC HEARINGS: Variance No. 668 Page Nine in the last paragraph of your letter you mention "minimum" - are you asking for a year and that would end the matter? Mrs-. Maddox: When I talked to Mr. Munsell on this because I wanted to know do I ask for a • temporary variance or what - we know what the law is and under the circumstances of the law which we found out at the last Planning Commission meeting, when you annexed into West Covina you had 5 years and at that meeting it was made known that the time was up as of December, 1971, and we don't want to make any trouble. We feel the law is the law and all we are asking for is a year and it may be less, because how much time does it take to close escrow? Councilman Young: Thank you, you have answered my question. IN FAVOR".'-"..." David Witherall (Sworn in by City Clerk) 1245 Maplegrove Mine is neither for or against, but more West Covina of a question to Council. As a neighbor, I live two doors from these people, and have no objection to their horse and would frankly like to see them be able to put a horse there at least temporarily. My question has to do with precedence. We own two horses and we have just purchased them and we live directly across the street on Maplegrove. We have quite a large parcel of land but we don't quite make the required 401 from the property line to build a corral so my question would be precedent. If this is granted how would the Council look upon somebody in my positimi requesting a variance, temporary or otherwise? I don't plan on moving hopefully because we just purchased the property a year ago. We do board the horses. One is a very small pony but how does the Council look upon a precedent? I am in favor of the people having their horse particularly the way their property is situated, I don't believe it would do anybody any harm or is a nuisance because the horse has been there for sometime and hasn't been a nuisance - but on the other hand I guess I am selfish and I would like to go on record as being for it but also on the other hand bringing up the idea of a precedent, because if maybe I do it then others will also do it. Mayor Chappell: You will hear our answer under Council discussion. Mr. Witheral4,: Thank you. I can't speak for my ` neighbors on either side but they seem to have no objections and they did not show up<tonight because they did not want to hamper these people in getting their request. And I guess that would also put me in .the affirmative. IN OPPOSITION George Bershee (Sworn in by City Clerk) 1224 Maplegrove Gentlemen, I have a petition here that West Covina we circulated in the neighborhood with a list of names. We are all opposed to this request because of health reasons, flies, etc., in connection with the horse. Some of them do not get the odor I do, There was a gentleman at my house this afternoon and we walked into the yard and you could smell a horse. I don't think this one year should be permitted, it denies me the use of my property for another year. We can't eat out or use our yard. These people can board a horse cheap enough and allow us to use our yard. Roy Gulf I agree with everything Whitey just said. 1716 Lark Ellen Avenue I know him as "Whitey." West Covina - 9 - CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 Page Ten PUBLIC HEARINGS: Var. #668 Leonard Rodby• (Sworn in by City Clerk) 1733 Avington I am at a loss to understand why this West Covina ever came up. Basically your Planning Commission has turned it down and • secondly when we were annexed to West Covina,Avington at that time, the street itself , was restricted to horses and livestock and it was our understandingwhen we were annexed that the restrictions on that particular street would also pertain to our annexation. It has always been my understanding that before you ask for a variance you do not violate the particular rules or ordinances in effect at that time. Your Planning Commission has brought out several violations of your own ordinances. I do feel this should not be allowed. For years, a variance would set a precedent, I would think. Dan Harbin (Sworn in by City Clerk) 1727 Avington I want to say that I know the Maddox@s West Covina and first of all they are very fine neighbors. I recall the instance of a friend of mine a year or two ago that had a fire and they came to the rescue with clothes, etc. So they are fine and considerate people. This afternoon I was in the backyard of Mr. Bershe.e, a friend of mine, and I could smell the odor from the horse. George has a very lovely patio, swimming pool and outdoor barbecue. I happen to know this gentleman is from the coal country of Pennsylvania where I had the pleasure -of going to school years ago. He came to Southern California to enjoy the sunshine and open air, which we all consider as God given and a privilege. I see no reason why this nuisance should prevent him or other neighbors from enjoying this. I live up the hill far enough so that this horse would not affect me one iota, but if one lone horse is allowed you can see what may develop - we just heard a gentleman express the desire to bring in two horses. So you can glean from that how this could snowball. I have two little farms in Mira Loma and from the generousity of my heart I will see to it, if they so desire - I will arrange with my tenants to take and board the horse just for the cost of the hay bill. I have my property rented out but I believe I can make arrangements for this and I am sure the animal will be well cared for. It is well cared for now, but I feel it is in the improper place and has been and I too wondered why it has dragged on this long staying there. It should be in a place zoned for horses. Thank you. Ernest Swanson I request the City Council not to grant 1709 So. Lark Ellen even a temporary variance. Thank you. West Covina (Sworn In) Bruce Davis (Sworn in) 1712.So. Lark Ellen I recommend that the Council not grant the variance and also they should not permit the horse to stay one day longer. It has been there many months too long already in spite of your ordinances which as far as I am concerned is something that we should not be showing to anybody else. How long does it take for you to enforce the law? Thank you. Mrs. Mary Bershee: (Sworn in) 1224 Maplegrove I can't understand why Mrs. Maddox is West Covina allowed to keep this horse when it is against the law. I don't think just because a person is ignorant of the law that this should be an - 10 - CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 Page Eleven PUBLIC HEARINGS: Var. #668 excuse. If I had a violation of the law in my driving that would be no excuse, but the next time I would really know. I don't think this should be carried on and just because of one person we all have to suffer. There have been times when horses have come through our front lawn and we are in a neighborhood where we like to keep our • houses and our yards in nice order. We put up enough with the dogs and cats let alone with horses. My neighbor has several children and I have often wondered what with the horses running up and down our street whether these horses would run into the children and hurt them. I don't see why all of us neighbors should be denied being out in our yard enjoying the fresh air. Like Mrs. Maddox says - she doesn't want any trouble, well/if she doesn't want any trouble she is just one person and one family so why doesn't she take her horse out and board it so the rest of us can be happy and I think we deserve it. We pay taxes just like she does and it is against the law. I don't see why it has gone this far. The Planning Commission has denied it and I think that should have sufficed. However, if this is the way the law runs and we have go keep coming to meetings - we will,until she gets rid of the horse. I don't think she should have her minimum time it would only be carried on and on from here. I thank you. Mayda Rodby (Sworn in) 1733 Avington Avenue I live up the hill a little bit beyond West Covina Mr. Harbin's, so this horse does not concern me. We had.: another family on the street who had a horse, my next door neighbor, and I happened to be downwind of it. Fortunately my neighbor was gracious enough to understand when I told them about the problem of the smell and the unmerciful plague of flies and flies are so stupid. A fly just jumps up and goes where the wind carries him and in this case the wind current happened to be our backyard and the back of our house. We had to have the patio and the back of our house painted because of the plague of flies from the horse. And this horse was kept clean and the material picked up each day but that is not what pro- duces the odor. The odor comes from the material that cannot be shoveled up and hauled away. There is no way of keeping a horse without stench and a super -abundance of flies. I was fortunate, my neighbors acquiesced when I discussed it with them and they boarded their horse. REBUTTAL Mrs. Maddox (Having failed to be sworn in previously, Mrs. Maddox sworn in by City Clerk.) I don't have anything to say at this time. Thank you. THERE BEING NO FURTHER PUBLIC TESTIMONY PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. COUNCIL DISCUSSION, Councilman Lloyd: of this type. I was very offer to arrange to board • A question of Mr. Aiassa granted a variance for a Mr. Aiassa: Mr. Munsell: Councilman Lloyd: I am always saddened by the fact that people who live in close proximity and are neighbors have to have problems much impressed by Mr. Harbin's generous the horse for the cost of the hay. do we have a precedent on this? Have we hort period of time for a horse? I don't recall that we have in.the 13 years I have been with the City. Mr. Munsell? Not since I have been here. Obviously the ordinances have been set to serve the greatest number of people CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 Page Twelve PUBLIC HEARINGS: Var. ##668 so I will have to go along with the people and ask that the horse be removed. The law is very explicit, you must have a full acre to keep a horse, and in view of the very highly emotional situation brought about by this type of animal I am afraid I will have to go along with the Ordinance. Councilman Young: I think I will have to join Councilman Lloyd in his comments. I personally grew up in a barnyard, so to speak, so perhaps I am more tolerant of the odors and what have you. In fact they have a certain nostalgic value to me, which I must confess my wife and children do not join in at all times. I do feel that a period of 30 days to comply would be a reasonable period to allow for the arranging of the boarding of the horse, whether it be at Mr. Harbin°s premises or elsewhere. In light of the good faith shown by Mr. & Mrs. Maddox when they bought their property and brought the horse in, true ignorance of the law is not an excuse, but at the same time good faith -in the law I would think would justify a reason- able period of a month to make other arrangements for the horse. I frankly felt that the one year they asked for was a reasonable request and I hoped that would resolve the problem, but like Councilman Lloyd, I cannot overlook the requests of neighbors, people living nearby, and I am sure these are as valid in their points as the Maddox-os in theirs. So .I would join Councilman Lloyd and I would suggest strongly a 30-day period to allow them to get the horse properly boarded. Councilman Shearer: I will just add my vote - Mr. Mayor, which makes three. I recognize the desire of the people to have a horse but I personally am not of the horsey seta however, there are rules and regulations, which must be followed from the standpoint of the people and also from the standpoint of the horse. I visited this neighborhood and I feel that the horse ought to have more room and also the neighbors deserve to enjoy the outdoors as they indicated without the interference of the nuisance. What really to me is another important point is the testimony of one witness that implied if we grant this variance that he would be asking for a variance to have a horse or a horse and a half and possibly eventually two horses. So I don't think this would be `fair to that neighborhood or any other neighborhood. My last comment is if in fact there are three other horses in the area that have been there for five years and their period of illegal nonconformity has expired aq stated, I would urge the City to cite those individuals also so we would be con- sistent throughout our enforcement of these various ordinances. Councilman Nichols: Mr. Mayor, I would like to direct a question to the City Attorney. Does the Council have the power to extend a use of this type for any period of time at all without granting a variance? And does the Council. have a power to grant a variance with a limitation of -time? • Mr. Wakefield: To answer your first question first, the City Council does not have the authority to extend a period for which a person may continue a violation of the City Ordinance. The Council does have the power to grant a variance and to grant that variance for a limited period of time. In other words if the Council desires to follow the suggestion made by Councilman Young that a 30 day period be authorized for the removal of the horse, the way to accomplish that would be to grant the variance for a period of 30 days from this date and at the expiration of that time the variance would cease to be effective and the keeping of the horse would 12 CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 Page Thirteen PUBLIC HEARINGS: Var. ##668 again become a violation of the City°s ordinance. I might add one more thing. Some question has been raised with respect to the time the horse has been permitted to remain on the property. Since I have been City Attorney I think it has been the practice of the City if a homeowner has taken those steps provided by our ordinances to obtain a variance or compliance with an ordinance requirement the condition has been permitted to remain until the final decision has been made with regard to that application, Councilman Nichols: Yes, Mr. City Attorney, I was going to comment on that. Several people have mentioned the long delay and I f4ould only respond that delay is the delay of due process. Sometimes they go all the way to the Supreme Court. I doubt that horses do on these types of problems but every human being in our society does have that right to appeal to that ultimate level of decision. I also recognize that this has been an illegal use and that this has been a controversy going on for quite sometime and yet I think it is only right and proper that the Council should act with the assumption that the applicant has shown good faith and was applying with the hope of continuing the use on the property. Had a consensus of neighborhood feeling indicated sosl would have been prepared to grant some moderate extension of this use, although I do not feel in the long term it would be proper -,to grant a variance because of the very elements present mentioned here. I think it would be a courtesy of the Council and I doubt very much if any neighbor would be offended if the Council indicated to the applicant that a 30 day period would be a reasonable date to cease and desist the use and arrange to board the animal someplace else and at the end of that time the City would be in the position immediately to move to remove the animal from the presence of the neighborhood. So giving the applicant the benefit of the doubt and what I would feel would be a maximum length of time to arrange for proper care of the animal elsewhere, I would move that the Council extend and approve a 30 day variance for the keeping of the animal on the premises with the understanding that there is no remote possibility that the Council will entertain any further extensions beyond that time. Seconded by Councilman Young and carried. (THE CHAIR CALLED A RECESS AT 8.40 P.M. COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 8:55 P.M.) AMENDMENT NO. 115 LOCATION: Various locations throughout CITY -INITIATED the City. REQUEST: Amendment to the zoning ordinance, amending Section 9205, Low Density Multiple Family (MF®15) zone and amending Section 9206, Medium Density Multiple Family (MF®25) zone. This public hearing will also consider placing all property presently zoned Medium Density Multiple Family (MF-25) zone in the proposed Medium. Density Multiple Family (MF-20) zone. Recommended by Planning Commission Resolution No. 2372. Held over to this date from February 28, 1972, with hearing closed, to allow time for Joint Study Session with Planning Commission. Councilman Lloyd: I would like to reiterate my stand, I think that my:.stateme nts at the meeting with the Planning Commission are still ® 13 CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 Page Fourteen PUBLIC HEARINGS: Amendment No. 115 valid. I have had a good number of people approach me very strongly on this zoning situation regarding the upgrading, restricting and limiting of multiple housing. I am not sure all the people under- stand all the ramifications of this. One of the things I would point out and correct me if I am wrong - Mr. Aiassa - as I under- stand it if someone wishes to go to MF-25 even under the new ordinanc�eIthis can be done - is that correct? Mr. Munsell: That is correct. It is possible to get 25 units per acre. Mr. Aiassa: Perhaps the City Attorney should answer that also. Mr. Wakefield: Yes, Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, the answer is the basic right which is accorded under the Ordinance to property that will be zoned MF-20 is to build up to 20 dwelling units per acre of the land; however, by meeting certain additional criteria established in the ordinance itself, the density may be increased on a bonus basis up to 25 dwelling units per acre, Councilman Lloyd: So while the new ordinance updates the ordinance which was on the books and although it has only been on the books for a period of two and a half years,I think there is a strong undercurrent on the part of the people who reside in the City, a desire for the inclusion of this type. of an ordinance, Maybe I am super -Sensitive to the attitudes of the people at this time. I rather think that I am reasonably objective and I do know that I have been approached on this as a result of the stand published in the paper, very strongly in support of holding the line or bringing about a more restrictive covenance in this City and I would have to go along with the Ordinance as proposed. I was even asking for an increased situation over this but in view of the talks I have had with the Planning Director and Planning Commissioners I am willing to go along with the Ordinance as proposed and hope it will serve the community for a long time to come. I am favorably disposed. Councilman Shearer: As I indicated two weeks ago having had the benefit of the hearing at the Planning Commissicon/I was prepared then as I am prepared tonight to vote for the change of ordinance with the provisions for inclusion for further study and change in the Planned Community Development' zone which I assume we will also instruct staff tonight to pursue to require all property in the City to come under the development standards as laid out in this particular Ordinance. Councilman Young: Following up on Councilman Lloyd's comments .I think if we follow the wishes of the majority of people in West Covina we would probably declare a moratorium on all apartment development of any kind for an indefinite period in the future. Which may not be true but I glean that as the community attitude in our City of Beautiful Homes and under the circumstances I am certainly inclined • to go along with the Ordinance. I have expressed myself, but I still have a concern for the needs of people of moderate income, even low income, for appropriate housing. And this Ordinance does tend to make low income housing less available to people who legitimately need it. I am not prepared to say that this should be a community that attracts only a s.c,ingl.e s.ayr�- a. higTa...' '"._ economic group, but I am certainly willing to accede to the wishes of constituency to the point of tightening the standards which are involved here. The only request I would make is that in the very near future I trust we will have M� • CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 Page Fifteen PUBLIC HEARINGS: Amendment No. 115 before us the criteria that the Architectural .Review Committee will use in determining when and where to allow the bonus provisions, This criteria has been promised and we have been assured that it will be objective criteria. In summing up I am prepared to support the introduction of the Ordinance this evening. Mayor Chappell: Mr. Munsell, can you give us tome":tim- 3,hg .as ,. towhat Councilman Young just brought up? Mr. Munsell: The Architectural Review Committee itself is an item that will have to be amended into the Ordinance assuming the City Council does adopt the Ordinance and with that section there will be various criteria underwhich they will review the plans. Primarily the criteria will center around preserving of property values in and adjacent to the immediate multiple family projects concerned and having to do with any deviation requested by the applicant from the standards within the code. .For example, a lesser courtyard or something of that nature, the Architectural Review Committee would review that as to the validity of the proposal which would give an offsetting amenity. Councilman Young: Mr. Munsell, you have opened Pandora's Box, because you suggest that the criteria will be amended in the Ordinance right? Mr® .Munsell: Yes sir. Councilman Young. And that causes me to inquire what are we passing tonight? What are we introducing tonight? Can we introduce a partial Ordinance and add to it piecemeal or should we not have this criteria before us before we introduce the Ordinance? Mr. Munsell: No, this section of the Ordinance is very much like the Civic Center Overlay under - which we have had architectural control for a considerable amount of time in that it spells out a number of development standards, all. of which are pretty :objective in terms of if the wall is so long and it develops a distance between buildings on a set formula, certain standards that say all. mechanical equipment shall be architecturally screened and shielded, and that open spaces shall be landscaped, and walls and buildings shall be of the same similar materials® These are all items which the Architectural Review Committee will review at such time as it reviews the Precise Plano In connection with this they will also take a look at the surrounding neighborhood. Now,they do this consistently and what I am saying is that we will try and take some of the .intangibles which would possibly refer to a development in the hillsides, and break them down into a little finer degree of precision .for the applicant to understand what he .is being judged on. Councilman Young: You are not responding, Mr, Munsell. There is a very important bonus provision provided for in this Ordinance. Mr. Munsell: Those provisions have nothing to do with the architectural control. Councilman Young: Yes sir, it does - doesn't it? Mr. Munsell: No sir, 15 - CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 Page Sixteen PUBLIC HEARINGS: Amendment No. 115 Councilman Young: Then what criteria do I have to meet in order to get a MF-25 assuming I am the developer? Mr. Munsell: On Page 3 of the sheet which shows the comparable, the old MF-25 and the new MF®25, there is a section 9206.5 called Development Standards and under that is subsection (a) which talks about Density: "Maximum number of dwelling units per net acre shall not exceed 204" and then it says "to encourage within a multiple family development amenities that create an enhanced living environment and a more efficient desirable aesthetic use of land a density bonus may be approved up to a maximum of 25 if at least one of the following is provided: 1 ® increased floor area as per section 9206.5 (i) Minimum Floor Area per dwelling." And 9206.5 (i) is a straight line chart having to do with the floor area of a unit. Item 2 - "decreased ground coverage as per section 9206.5 (g) Maximum Ground Coverage". And Item 3: "Any combination of the above. Density Bonus must be approved by the Architectural Review Committee and the Planning Commission." All that says is once they have achieved the density percentages the Commission has to indicate that yes it has been achieved and it does meet all the other criteria. And Maximum Ground Coverage "shall not .exceed an aggregate of 55/ of the total lot parcel area." As we read through it tells what is considered under the Maximum Ground,Coverage calculation and it says "an increase in density may be approved if for every one unit per acre increase in density there shall be a decrease of 2/ in the maximum ground coverage if approved by the Architectural Review Committee and the Planning Commission." That means if the developer wishes to have 21 dwellings per acre he may not have more than 53/ ground coverage. That is a pretty objective criteria that the Architectural Review Committee .looks at and says yes it meets the criteria. Only if the developer is trying through some stretching of the interpretation of what is the open space or the ground coverage then there would be a question that the Architectural Review Committee would have to act upon. Councilman Young: What you are saying now is that there isn't really a subjective decision to be made by the Architectural Review Committee? Mr. Munsell: No :sir, I am saying on the open space and unit size there is a specific criteria. Councilman Young; It is purely an objective standard set out in the Ordinance and 'the Review Committee would simply review it to determine that the objective requirements of the Ordinance have been met insofar as the right to the bonus is concerned. Mr. Munsell: That was the intent in the writing but we have found that it is possible • sometimes for developers to come up with borderline cases and the ARC might be used to evaluate those. Councilman Young: Okay. I gleaned a different impression from our Study Session that these were criteria yet to be established, I am glad to have this clarification. Councilman Nichols: A question of the City Attorney. Does the Council have authority -to adopt an Ordinance prohibiting the filing of zone change applications within ® 16 CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 PUBLIC HEARINGS: Amendment No. 115 Page Seventeen certain zoning and if so what is the limitation upon that authority as to time? Mr.. Wakefield: The City Council does have the authority under the State Law to adopt an . Urgency Ordinance by a 4/5ths vote, which takes effect immediately and which would have the effect of prohibiting a specific use or uses within any of the established zones in the City°s existing zoning ordinance pending a study by the Planning Commission and a determination as to the necessity for modifications:or changes in the existing ordinances of the City for the use in question. Specifically the.Council does have the authority to adopt a moratorium in effect for 90 days from the date of adoption. Councilman .Nichols: Is the 90 days a limitation of State Law? Mr. Wakefield: Yes sir, Councilman Nichols: In the statement and the recommendation here it indicates a recommendation for the adoption of a moratorium for 90 days followed by a one year extension. That would then be improperly worded in terms of that additional year? Mr. Wakefield: The City Council may extend an Urgency Ordinance for a period not to exceed one year assuming that the hearing is advertised and notice given and hearing is held as if it were a change of zone proceeding. However, that :proceeding .need-. only be...held before the City Council and not be held by the Planning Commission. You may, after a public hearing, upon Notice,: extend. an Urgency Ordinance not to exceed -one year, Councilman Nichols: Thank you. A question addressed to Mr. Munsell. Is the intention of staff to seek a functional Tiftee.h-mdnth.-:freez® ing of zone applications under the recommendation? Mr. Munsell: No, Councilman Nichols. The staff was proposing the 90-day moratorium as a way to insure that the activities in the moratorium would not take place while we were waiting for the Woodside Village activity to catch up,with the understanding we wanted to spell out there was a possibility for a year's time extension. However, subsequent to our initial writing of the report the City Attorney, Mr. Wakefield, has indicated that if we follow the recommendation 1 through 51, the moratorium would not be necessary. The actual change of the Ordinance, as Item 1 says, the effective date being June 7, 1972, has the same effect as carrying out the moratorium and there would be no need for a moratorium. Councilman Nichols: In other words the schedule in the recommendation would in fact achieve the intent of the 90 day moratorium recommenda- tion and therefore there is not a recommendatitn at this time that the Council act separately on a moratorium. • Mr. Munsell: Yes sir, we did adjust the last sheet and did not modify that,as an alternative,.: We did remove it from what we propose the Council adopt because the City Attorney says effectively it does work. Councilman Nichols: There is no question in my mind at all and I am sure not in the minds of very many people present that the citizens of West Covina overwhelmingly feel that the City should not solicit or 17 CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 PUBLIC ,HEARINGS: Amendment No. 115 Page Eighteen encourage additional multiple housing zoning in the City. There is in fact ample acreage presently zoned in the City for all of the multiple housing that the incorporated limits could possibly digest for the foreseeable future.. It is true© of course, that individual developers may not own that particular acreage and may desire to • develop acreage of their own that they do not have, or are in the process of attempting to achieve, but in reality it is not the Council°s responsibility, as I see it, to express its feelings in terms of individual developers' needs, but in terms of the overall' capacity of the City for providing its housing needs. I was interested in Councilman Young."s comments about low cost housing. We have in fact in the Woodside Village area today several hundred vacant apartments or at least a very large proportion of those apartments vacant, and I believe those apartments would come as much as any apartments could come under the qualification of low income housing in..that...:: the apart- ments range in price from $120. to $220. Looking at the quality of that construction I would suspect that no builder could build anything any cheaper - if you get what I mean. I think the only cheaper kind of housing that might be available would be in terms of the government subsidized housing which is represented by one noble project in our City. So I really do feel the Council is expressing the will of a vast majority of our citizenry that we not only attempt to bring the remaining acreage that is vacant into a more desirable prospect for multiple housing of a better quality but attempt to convey to would-be developers that West Covina has about had it in terms of the building of apartment complexes within the community. At least I subscribe to that view now as I have several times before. So I would hope that the wisdom of this election year will carry over into the shady years where the sun has not yet come upon the Council and enlightened the community as to the future Councils of West Covina in terms of their ideas about multiple housing. I hope the sentiments we are expressing now will be rather rigidly carried forward into future deliberations and I subscribe wholeheartedly to this effort to upgrade those lands that remains yet -to' come.. to: -us as apartment lands, I certainly subscribe to the rec®aunc�atesuaa and:�® Amendment No. 115)City Initiated. Councilman Young: To paraphrase an old saying - "if an election comes can another be far behind?" Mayor Chappell: I think it is the opinion of this Council as it was less than three years ago when we updated the multiple family ordinances and tightened them up and now again we are tightening them up, now that we have more realism as to the type of developments that will be put up in West Covina and we are not only revising the multiple family portion of the ordinances we are also re-examining Woodside Village Planned Community Development and also doing the same thing there - tightening up the same provisions. We are making it uniform through- out the City so that no one group or one organization will have it easier to place a larger amount of units on the acreage. A motion would be in order at this time. Councilman Lloyd: I move that Planning Commission • Resolution No, 2372 be approved as submitted. Seconded by Councilman Nichols. Mayor Chappell: Are we to take care of all five recommendati(ms in this one motion? Mr„ Wakefield: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, they can be handled separately. There is no necessity for taking them altogether.-. CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 Page Nineteen PUBLIC HEARINGS: Amendment No. 115 Councilman Shearer: Should that motion include the effective date? Councilman Lloyd: I did not include it, should it be? • Councilman Shearer: It was my understanding that our intent was in order to make Woodside Village ordinance - which is yet to be developed - effective the same date as this Ordinance that we were to specify June 7 as the effective date. 0 Councilman Lloyd It wasn't the intentiod of -.the rhotlOn I made. I didn't understand the fact that we had to have all five recommendations put in five motions but be that as it may, it was my intention on the motion to move and carry forward the zone changes as proposed in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2372, which incorporates the whole concept as submitted by the Planning Commission and I would presume the effective date would be the date of the enactment which is today. Is that correct, Mr. Wakefield? Mr. Wakefield: The Planning Commission Resolution does not specify effective dates. Now normally if the City approves the proposed changes in the zone which are embodied in Resolution 2372 the ordinance would be prepared and would be on your agenda at your next regular meeting for introduction. It would then be adopted at the next regular meeting following and would become effective 30 days thereafter. So roughly we are talking about approximately 50 days. Councilman Young: In addition to that a recommendation for the grandfather clause. Mr. Wakefield: Yes, the items that are recommended following the approval of the resolution are intended to, for example, delay the actual effective date of the change of zone from property presently zoned MF-25 to MF-20 to a date in the future which would cotre8pond to the time it would take to process the change of zone proceedings that are required to amend the Master Plan for the development of Woodside Village to embody the new MF-20 standards. Each of the items recommended by staff fit into a pattern which is designed to bring about the uniformity which has been mentioned before. Councilman Lloyd: recommendations 1, 2, 3, 4 zoning before the Council. Councilman Nichols: CITY MANAGER I make a motion to amend my original motion which was the adoption of Resolution 2372 to incorporate and 5, as submitted with regards to the The second accepts the amendment to the original motion. Amended motion carried, all voting in favor. Original.motion carried, all voting in favor. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Mr. Aiassa: Council has received a 2ND ANNUAL INTERNATION- staff report on the AL SPRING FAIR ' requests for motorcade and special activities permits and Police escort pertaining to the 2nd Annual International Spring Fair. - 19 - CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 Page Twenty CITY MGR.: International Spring .Fair Requests Motion by Councilman Nichols that -the Council approve the staff recommendations as follows: 1 - Waiver of business license fees for all activities during the Fair be denied; 2 - Waiver of business license fees for civic and nonprofit organizations be • approved; 3 - Issuance of Motorcade Permit be approved, subject to Police Department review and approval; and 4 - All promotional activities beneficial to this Fair be approved subject to conditions set by the Temporary Use Permit issued for these festivities. Seconded by Councilman Young and carried. (MAYOR CHAPPELL'SUGGESTED THAT THE'COUNCIL AT THIS TIME .HEAR ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, AND THEN_RETURN TO THE CITY MANAGER°S AGENDA. COUNCIL AGREED.)`, ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mrs. Sanford Grumet I just want to make a comment with regard 1445 Queen Summit Drive to Amendment No. 115. This is something West Covina we had hoped to do sometime ago and it is very gratifying to see it done better late than never® However, we are a little confused. This is something we discussed and that we petitioned and requested of City Council - just to lower the density and we were told it was absolutely not feasible - among other things. And now it is evidently not only feasible but you all now agree that it is necessary. We just heard Councilman Nichols discuss Woodside Village, the fact that it is of poor construction, and empty. We were at the Planning Department today to look at what is to be installed in a particular area we had discussed, in an area which is definitely not comparable to what, we discussed previously is. going 0-.be built and; the, dtnsity.etco What is going in there is going to be even less expensive building - and I won't even use the word "cheap". It is condominium complexes that will be priced at the market value of $19,000 with open car- ports and composite roofing. We had asked for some help along these lines when we came to the City Council. This is going to be another slum, even worse than Woodside Village, in a very fine area of West Covina. Now that Amendment No. 115 is gassed the question is - why was this not important then? And again the question is was it the owner of the property? Mayor Chappell: I think I should answer thatip gentlemen,° The request Mrs. Grumet and her group made was to deny and take away zoning completely. We are not denying and taking away zoning completely, we are just reducing zoning which we cando, but we cannot take away zoning that has already been granted. Mrs. Grumet°s group did not ask for the proposals as we did vote on this evening. She was asking strictly that we take the zoning away completely from the land already zoned which we were not able to do. Councilman Nichols: Just one observation. I am not presently aware of the application Mrs. Grumet refers to in the term of "condominiums" on a particular.piece of land. I would like to request a staff report on this. I assume it is something now before the Planning Commission and that we will become ,apprised .of; but I would like to as promptly as possible.�f amiliarize myself with the application and the quality that is being alluded too. I am very much interest- ed in that. I wouldn't have any further comments. Mayor Chappell: Mr. Munsell, will you allude to that? 20 - 0 CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 Page Twenty-one ORAL :COMMUNICATIONS m Cont'd. Mr. Munsell: Yes, the property in question is located at Azusa, close to the inter- section of Francisquito and it is a multiple family 15 dwellings per acre parcel which has a precise plan application on it and which will be heard by the Planning Commission on April 5. The individuals in the area of 3001 around this parcel either today or just yesterday. received the legal notice.required to be sent out that the application was before the Commission and the; staffe tBecause of their previous interest, staff also foriaarded letters indicating the plans would be on display at the staff: off' cep so .'that we might have as much of their input - as possible `�prio: "" to "_the hearing to try and work the problems out that were d1scussed at'the time the individuals requested the zone change and this::.was with regard to special care of the architectural features and design features as it would relate to the surrounding properties. The application is for a condominium type of develop- ment and as indicated the market area that is being approached is in the $19,000 to $25,000 bracket, which is comparable to the'same market the Bren 4-plexes are reaching. The applicant has submitted these.items and I believe we are still in precise plan discussions with him as far as a number of design problems within the development itself, as well as currently discussing with him and attempting to create a dialogue with the neighbors on the requirement for walls. on the periphery of :this property: -which- would affect thee - - riA a.� well-as_.r rials.that might be observed from above, Councilman Nichols: Mr. Munsell: Does that zone authorize condominiums by right? Any multiple family -type of unit is allowed and a condominium is treated as a multiple family type of development. Councilman_ Nichols: I thought in the Planned Community Development they were allowed but I didn't know under an MF-15 zone they are authorized by right in that zone. Mr. Munsell: I really would prefer to defer to the City Attorney at this point. The State Laws on condominiums do not71�.ave .,us-:. a great deal of opportunity to say whether a condominium can or can- not be permitted. Councilman Nichols: Well I don't intend to get into a great deal �of detailed discussion - it is obviously something that has not been before the Planning Commission yet and I don't think it would be. appropriate for me to quiz into the details of it here tonight. (THER E BEING NO FURTBER ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, COUNCIL RETURNED TO THE CITY MANAGER'S AGENDA) CITY MANAGER°-.i.. Cont'd. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE Mr. Aiassa: At our last meeting CONTRACT CIVIC CENTER we requested per- mission to negotiate a landscape agreement to be effective in June and we have received today approval of the agreement from the Los Angeles County Department of Real Estate Management. I would like Council authorization tonight. to call for bids. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Young and carried, to approve the specifications and authorize the staff to advertise for bids for the maintenance of landscape and grounds of Los Angeles County/West Covina Civic Center. 21 - CITY COUNCIL,3/27/72 Page Twenty-two CITY MGR.: Cont'd.. REQUESTS FOR LEAVE OF Mr. Aiassa: We have two requests ABSENCE WITHOUT PAY from two Fire Depart- ment employees - Lawrence Meli and John F. Calvert for leave of absence without pay. This is a standard procedure which we have granted but it requires • Council approval., Motion by Councilman, Young that City Council approve the requests for Leave of Absence°Without Pay for Fireman Lawrence Meli a+pr-the j5eriod beginning 4° i:2 ��,.=,197.2 a_nd:.end •ng:.June. ' 1H; 1.9._7..2 and';'€o:r Fireman:,.Join Lr .Calvert ' for the period beginning March 21, 1972 and ending Julie .'19, '"i972= Seconded by Councilman Shearer. 7. A• • Councilman Shearer A question, Mr. Mayor. We have two firemen here and I assume their absence leaves the Department shorthanded - how is this handled? Mr: Aiassa: The Fire Department is covered by platoon shifts and under these circumstances it is handled like they do for..uacations or -sick leave by relief men. Councilman Shearer: Will this require overtime pay? Mr. Aiassa: Possibly but not probablytas the Chief has advised me that he can work it out. Motion carried. REQUEST FOR LEAVE OF Mr® Aiassa: The request made by ABSENCE WITH PAY, Mr. Pike has.been with- GEORGE PIKE drawn because we were able to make other arrangements. We had a part-time man covering this and Mr® Pike will be working a shift, as soon as his cast is off, that will provide him the assistance he needs and he:will be working straight time. We have made this possible without giving him any continued sick leave. Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer and carried, to receive and file. CITY MANAGER REQUEST Mr. Aiassa: I am planning to be FOR VACATION gone only two days - Thursday and Friday, Councilman Lloyd moved approval of the City Manager's request. Seconded by Councilman Young and carried. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Mr. Aiassa: This report is submitted SURPLUS FUNDS to you by the Director of the Recreati.on and Parks Department after the special Recreation and Park Commission meeting of March 14, 1972; and the report includes their recommenda- tion. • Councilman Young: As indicated here in the report, apparently the School District would not want to assist on the Edgewood High School tennis lighting program. Mr. Aiassa: They did assist on the first lighted tennis courts but my staff has made two calls on them and they indicated they cannot put this item high up on their priority list. I would also like to have the City Attorney speak on this subject, we are making improyementss on.. -high school__-nr-operty, and I would 1,*" to 22 - ,.: • CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 Page Twenty-three CITY MGR.: Capital Improvement Surplus Funds carry Item over to April loth to validate whether we can make an expenditure %J Councilman ;Shearer: I think if we were illegal we spent a lot of money for a swimming pool. Mr. Aiassa. That Was somewhat different® We actually got a lease with the school and they put up $40, 000 to assist us in building the pool Councilman.Nichol& Well we have lights on three of.the courts and we put them there a long time ago and at that time it was established as a worthy endeavor." We just don't happen to have any tennis courts on any city property. If we are illegal in contemplating more lights then we are operating illegally and collecting fees from the school for the lighting, I am perfectly willing to hold the matter over but I am convinced it is one of the major community demands in the area of recreation. I.do recall though that someone at a recent CandidatesoForum, I believe a city employee, indicated that he felt the expenditure of such monies was illegal and"did convey that information to the audience present. I didn't agree with the sentiment but perhaps it would be wise to have a formal City Attorney°s ruling before we move ahead on this. Councilman Lloyd: Mr. Aiassa - as I recall out of the park tax there should be $5300 left over - is that correct? We had a $10,000 item and,it only cost $4700. so we had $5300. left over and you were going to give us a report on that. I was going to suggest that we perhaps could incorporate that in this. Would that be out of line? Mr® Aiassa: I am trying to recollect the $5300.. item, Councilman Shearer: My understanding is this $28,.500 includes that plus the surplus on security lighting and this is all that .was left. Mr. Fast: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, this report does in fact respond to the Council°s request to have the Recreation and Park Commission give you their recommendations for new priorities to utilize the funds that have been saved in the contract for the Pergola at Galster Park and for the security lighting. So this does reflect those savings and is in fact a recommendation to you for the reallocation of funds® Councilman Lloyd: In other words we are already spending the money that we saved _ - how would I know that? Motion by Councilman Nichols that the City Council approve both of these items subject to the clearance and approval by the City Attorney. Seconded by Councilman Lloyd. Mr. Aiassa: Mr. Mayor, in answer to Councilman Lloyd. As you were advised when we had the special park anc] recreation tax we ended up with some surplus money and the Council directed that it go back to the Recreation & Park Commission and -MoV come back with a recommendation as to where this could best be spent® They considered their priority list and the tennis court.lights was number 1, and the security lights at Cortez Park number 2. As .Mr. Shearer pointed out -the total amount of surplus money in the Capital Improvement Fund raised solely for Galster Park gave us a surplus of $28,500-and the $17,000 plus the $11,500 is what -we have to use. 23 CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 'Page Twenty-four CITY MGR.: Capital Improvement Surplus Funds Councilman Lloyd: I am very favorably disposed to the Tennis courts and security lighting. I thought I was being very clever to find another,$5300, but apparently I am not as clever as I thought. • Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor, if I may make one comment. At the time the original lights were installed on the School District tennis courts the City and School District entered into a community recreation agreement which provided for a fixed minimum term of 3 years and thereafter automatically extended from year to year unless one of the parties gave written notice to the other that it intended to terminate. the agreement at the end of `hy, year. That agreement is still in effect. However, it only covers the present lighting on the tennis courts and it would be my recommendation, if Council approved Councilman Nichols' motion, that there be a second motion approved which would authorize staff to negotiate a suitable agree- ment with the.School District covering the additional lighting to be installed on the tennis courts. Councilman Nichols: In order to expedite matters I would like to ask the second for permission to amend the motion to have the Council's action not only subject to the City Attorney°s approval which he is in process of granting, but also subject to a suitable agreement to which he can give approval g d--`.'and, conicajtred ::lna_,.: hy:.:.thd .' School District. Councilman Lloyd: You have your second to the amendMbht to the motion. Amended moti®n -catried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell. NOES: None ABSENT: None Main motion carried on roll call vote. as follows:. AYES: Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT-. None P.E.P. MODIFICATIONS Mr. Aiassa: You have a staff report SECTION 5 on this and as the report shows we were able to get some additional staff and they will be carried on until August 31, 1972. These are the positions approved and it requires Council, approval and amending Resolution No© 1277 accordingly. Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd and carried, to approve the positions listed in staff report dated March 24, 1972, and amend Resolution No. 1277 accordingly. FINAL REPORT RE COMPLAINT Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by OF MRo & MRS.'. Councilman Lloyd and carried, to receive (Datsun Agency - PPP.®#606) and file, MAYOR'S REPORTS COMMUNICATION FROM Mayor Chappell: We have a communication RABBI ELISHA NATTIV from Rabbi Elisha Nattiv TEMPLE SHALOM of Temple Shalom thanking us for the efforts. put forth by the City pertaining to the Nazi problem. I have asked him also to direct a letter to the attorney who handled this case in such an outstanding manner. - 24 - CITY COUNCIL 3/27/72 Page Twenty-five MAYOR REPORTS I .t3i ial +: at - a._time Councilman Young you wanted to say something on that. Councilman Young: It is very kind of you to pass that ball • to me Mr. Mayor. I would be just as happy if you would carry on. I am sure that all of us being very honest on this Council realize that with the persistent efforts of Attorney Philip Gordon and his clients, : o. `A� N. 1-brought about the solution to the Nazi problem through the due proces-s of the laws. While this Council certainly.; applauded their efforts and stood behind them all the way they certainly did the yeoman°s work involved and I think some letter of commendation from.the City subscribed by the Mayor would certainly -be in order. Councilman Lloyd: I would second your motion. Councilman Nichols: I certainly want to concur. In .fact I had a note here - mention has been made primarily of the attorney and a letter of commendation and gf course the heart of the matter is the individual who engaged the attorney. �He has shown a tremendous amount of public and civic responsibility and even more significant than that has caused his own property to be vacated and is now suffering a loss of revenue as a result and I certainly hope that an individual letter might be prepared commending the property owner himself for this action. Mayor Chappell: COUNCILMEN'S REPORTS If there is no objection Council will write a letter to Yz. Mr. Gordon also. (No objections.) Councilman Shearer: Just to carry on a bit with what was said and not to cast a negative aspect on what was an unpleasant event in our City, I hope all other owners of like property are as cooperative as IftUAWif our "friends" attempt to rent another Like piece of property in our City. Not that I am overly pas_alkiiti*c.ri but I am just keeping my fingers crossed that we don't see a similar situation crop up elsewhere. As I did two weeks ago, I would like to again extend an invitation to my fellow Councilmen to attend opening day ceremonies of the Maverick Division next Saturday, April 1, at 11:30 A.M. at Maverick .Field. You will again.be introduced and I would like to see all of you there. Councilman Lloyd: I note that the press has moved into the center ring and I am very pleased. Thank you, Mr. Aiassa. • Mayor Chappell,. For the benefit of the audience that .is left I wanted to mention that there is a Candidates'Luncheon on Thursday at the Royal Coachman in case you would like to see those candidates running for City Council: And,Mro Young you did ask us to hold'off the namof the Senior Citizen m have you talked to your wife? Councilman Young:. Yes)I talked to my wife and I would like the opportunity to submit something later 25 CITY COUNCIL 3/2.7/72 Page Twenty-six .SENIOR CITIZEN NAMES in the week. I understand this does not have to be taken care of this evening. Mr. Aiassa: Would this be satisfactory to the Council, that I have my staff poll Council later • in the week and if names are submitted we will notify Council of the names and the reasons. Councilman Young: I know Mr. Lloyd has a couple of names to, suggest and I have one also. Mr. Aiassa:• I have one�also ® Mrs. Josephine Hedges, whose deceased husband was a Councilman of the City, Mayor Chappell: I also<wrote the President of the Senior Citizens Group and asked if he had any names from their group that they would like to submit for nomination® Councilman Shearer: Are we limited to just one name? Mr. Aiassa! No, they select from the group submitted. Each one of the Supervisors reviews their District and they submit 'sometimes three or four names. Councilman Shearer: So we are not limited to just one from West Covina. Mr. Aiassa! No. DEMANDS Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by o Councilman Shearer, to approve Demands totalling $792,473.37 as listed on Demand :Sheets C805 through 807 and B524 (a). Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell. NOES: None ABSENT! None Councilman Young: —Mr.-Mayor, there is anothex Item here to the Auditing Committee from Mr. Eliot. It represents an adjustment m is a motion required on this? Mr. Aiassa! No it is not. It will 'be presented through the auditing ,and, when you get the Audit Report it will be shown in the final report. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Young and carried, to adjourn meeting at 10 P.Mo APPROVED! MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK - 26