10-09-1973 - Regular Meeting - Minuteszf MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA
OCTOBER 9, 1973.
The regular meeting
of the City Council called to order at 7:33 P.M.
in the West Covina Council Chambers by Mayor James Lloyd. The Pledge
of Allegiance was led by Christy Ping, Virginia Deleon and-Melisa Ward
• of Girl Scout Troop
#189. The invocation was given by the
Reverend John L. Reid of the Community Presbyterian Church.
ROLL CALL
'
Present:
Mayor Lloyd; Councilmen: Young, Shearer,
Chappell
Russ Nichols (Arrived at 8:31 P.M.)
Others Present:
George Aiassa, City Manager
Lela Preston, City Clerk
George Wakefield, City Attorney
Leonard Eliot, Controller
John Lippitt, City Engineer
Allen Sill, Chief of Police
Ora Short, Acting Fire Chief
Ramon Diaz, Ass't. Planning Director
Wm. Fowler, Building & Safety Director
Ross Bonham, Administrative Assistant
Gary Duvall, Administrative Assistant
Bert Yamasaki, Community Redev. Coordinator
Ken Larson, Administrative Analyst, Jr.
Mike McDonnell, Staff Reporter - S.G.V.D.T.
Jim Samuelson, Editor - Sentinel
• (Mayor Lloyd stated
the Presentation of the AAA Pedestrian Safety
Award postponed to the 29th of October.)
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
September 24, 1973
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by
October 1, 1973
Councilman Chappell, to approve minutes.
Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor, a couple of
corrections. On Page 30
the bottom of the page, in a discussion with regard to the baseball
field there is a statement "At the time there was an attempt made to
put lights and a fence at Battery Field" should be "Maverick Field";
and two lines down "P.K.K." should be B.K.K."
Motion carried approving minutes as corrected.
Mayor Lloyd: I would like the record to show I hold a note
from Councilman Nichols saying he would be
late this evening due to a professional
arrival about 8:30. (school) commitment and we can anticipate his
Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Young and
carried, to approve the minutes of the adjourned joint meeting of
October 1, 1973.
• CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Lloyd explained the procedure of the Consent Calendar items and
asked if there were any comments on any of the following items either
by the audience or the Council:
- 1 -
r CITY COUNCIL
CONSENT CALENDAR
Page Two
10/9/73
•
•
•
1. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
a) MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY
ASSOC. OF AMERICA, INC.
b) MARCH OF DIMES
2. PLANNING COMMISSION
SUMMARY OF ACTION
Request permission to conduct annual fund-
raising appeal during the month of
December, 1973. (Approved in prior years,
recommend approval)
Request permission to conduct fund-rais-
ing campaign from January 1, - 31, 1974.
(Approved in prior years, recommend approv-
al.)
October 3, 1973. (Accept and file)
3.. RECREATION & PARKS COMMISSION
SUMMARY OF ACTION September 25, 1973. (Accept and file)
4. PERSONNEL BOARD
a) MINUTES September 111 1973. (Receive and file)
b) ACTION ITEM From 10/2/73 regular meeting: Approve
Reclassification of Fire Inspector
Position to Fire Engineer Position.
5. HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION
SUMMARY OF ACTION September 27, 1973. (Accept and file)
6. ABC APPLICATIONS Chief of Police recommends NO PROTEST.
Christel & George Krause dba THE POST HORN
3061 S. Caricia Drive 178 S. Glendora Avenue
Hacienda Heights, Calif.
7. CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FILED WITH CITY CLERK
a) Eugene & Diane Jaynes Re sewage backing up into house and
302 N. Sunset Ave., yard. (Deny and refer to City Attorney
West Covina and Insurance Carrier.)
b) Southern California Re damages to underground facilities
Edison Company during excavation for city waterline.
(Deny and refer to City Attorney and
Insurance Carrier)
Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Young, to
approve Consent.Calendar Items 1 through.7 and carried on roll call
vote as follows:-. AYES: Young, Shearer, Chappell, Lloyd
NOES: None
ABSENT: Nichols
AWARD OF BIDS
SP-73013 LOCATION: Various throughout the City.
STREET MAINTENANCE
PROGRAM
The City Clerk stated bids received in the Office of the City Clerk
up to 10:00 A.M., on Wpdnesday, October 3, 1973, and thereafter
publicly opened, checked for proper bid bonds and read as follows:
Griffith Company 10% Bid Bond $141,542.00
Sully -Miller Cont. Co. 11 It It1490661.00
Vernon Paving 11 11 11158,392.50
Industrial Asphalt It ti it1801246.50
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Chappell, to
authorize the transfer of $2,000 to the Street Maintenance Program
from Street Repair Contract Services fund; and accept the bid of
Griffith Company of Long Beach as presented at the bid opening on
October 31 1973 for City Project SP 73013, and authorize the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute an agreement with said Griffith Company
- 2 -
CITY COUNCIL
AWARD OF BIDS: SP 73013
Page Three
10/9/73
L�
•
for the work to be done. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Young, Shearer, Chappell, Lloyd
NOES: None
ABSENT: Nichols
BID NO. 74-02 City Clerk stated bids received in the Office of the
ASPHALTIC PAVING Purchasing Agent up to 10:00 A.M., on Wednesday,
MATERIALS FOR October 31 19731 and thereafter publicly opened and
FY 1973-74 read as follows:
Bid Price Distance Total Cost
Associated Asphalt $4.85 3.5 miles $5.20 per ton
Industrial Asphalt $5.00 5.1 miles $5.51 per ton
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer, that
Associated Asphalt of Azusa, California be granted the agreement to
provide the City of West Covina with approximately 3,000 tons of
Type I-D asphalt concrete at a cost of $4.85 per ton at a distance of
3.5 miles from the City of West Covina, for a total per ton cost of
$5.20, or approximately $15,600 for fiscal year 1973-74. Motion
carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Young, Shearer, Chappell, Lloyd
NOES: None
ABSENT: Nichols
BID NO. 74-0.5 Bids advertised to be opened on
LIABILITY AND FIRE August 29, 1973; postponed to Monday,
INSURANCE September 17, 1973. Bids received in the
Office of the Purchasing Agent up to
10:00 A.M., and thereafter publicly opened
and read; City Clerk stated bids received
as follows:
AGENT: Butler, Christian & Dunn, E1 Monte, Ca.
Liability Policy $48,880
CARRIER: Ins. Co. of the Pacific Coast
Excess Coverage - 2 Million Dollars 3,200
Firemen's Fund
(requested quote for l and 2 million dollars
excess)
Property Coverage
CARRIER: Ins. Co. of the Pacific Coast 8,513
Total Premium $60,593
AGENT:
CARRIER:
CARRIER:
Cal-Surance Companies, Torrance, Cal.
Liability Policy
Central Mutual & Reserve Ins. Co.
Appalachian Insurance
Excess Coverage - 2 Million Dollars
Property Coverage (Excludes Boiler Protection)
Central Mutual 12,032
$71, 519
TOTAL PREMIUM
AGENT: Christ & Spang, So. El Monte, Ca.
Liability Policy
CARRIER: Providence Washington Ins. Group
Excess Coverage - 2 Million Dollars
Providence Washington Ins. Group
Property Coverage
CARRIER: Craven, Dargen Co.
. TOTAL PREMIUM
AGENT:
CARRIER:
Hummer Ins. Agency, West Covina, Ca.
Liability Policy
Pacific Indemnity Group
Excess Coverage - 1 Million Dollars
Stuart, Smith & Haddinger
$57, 987
1,500
$65, 250
3, 825
9,259
$78, 334
$68, 17.5
44,500
- 3 -
CITY COUNCIL
AWARD OF BIDS: Bid #k74-0 5
Page Four
10/9/73
Property Coverage
CARRIER: Pacific Indemnity Group
TOTAL PREMIUM
7,961
$80, 636
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Chappell, to approve
the naming of Butler, Christian & Dunn of E1 Monte, California, as the
• representative of The Insurance Company of the Pacific Coast at a fiscal
year 1973-74 premium of $60,593.00 for comprehensive liability and pro-
perty insurance.
Councilman Chappell:. Mr. Mayor, I would like to express the
fact I am an agent for the Pacific
Indemnity Group but have had no dealings
in this bid whatsoever.
Councilman Young: Just a comment and I don't know just how
far this should go, but I have had con-
versation with a couple of individuals
interested in the bidding process this week who happened to be high
bidders who indicate that No. 1, they feel the major carrier in this
situation is upon rough times. I suppose that is not of our immediate
concern but they do consider this to be a highly unrealistic bid and
they do predict a cancellation within a year by the carrier owing to
the loss experience of our City, which at the present time is within
the top 6 loss ratio -wise. I don't know if that is in the County of
Los Angeles, State of California, the nation or the world; however we
are top sixth somewhere, which makes it difficult for us. They stated
our main problem is our Police Department and the -Police Department is
here tonight so maybe they can slow down a bit and improve our loss ratio.
Councilman Shearer: Not to put Councilman Chappell on the spot,
• but with the allegations made - and I
assume they mean.the Insurance Company of
the Pacific Coast - my report here indicates it has a rating of
A+SA, whatever that means in insurance language but I assume it can't
get too much better. Are you aware of any current problems with this
Company?
Councilman Chappell.:. Not current. A couple of years ago they
were taken over by a data processing
company and milked of their funds.and
their rating went down, I believe to A+2B. They have since recovered
their finances in a proper manner and A+SA is next to the very best
financially. A+SA+ being the best. Perhaps Mr. Eliot.should expound
on this because I have nothing to do with this bid. I do represent
this Company and feel they are a good company or I wouldn't represent
them, but I wish Mr. Eliot would elaborate on the remarks rather than
myself.
Mr. Eliot: Thank you, Mr. Chappell. Mr. Mayor and Councilmen,
yes we did investigate those allegations as were
raised to us earlier by other bidders and to insure
ourselves of the latest rating we called the Best Insurance Rating
Service, which is the official guide of all insurance carriers as to
their ability and financial stability and -last week they ascertained
their official 1973 ratings which came out jus t this week and the
rating you see before you tonight is the 1973 rating, the latest
• official rating of the Gulf Insurance Group. The Insurance Company
of the Pacific Coast is a subsidiary of the Gulf Insurance Group,
all of the insurance of The Insurance Company of the Pacific Coast is
reinsured through the Gulf Group. As far as the loss ratio, yes it
has been high but not primarily from police cars. Our primary loss
was from two losses on contractor jobs and by management correction
we hope it will not reoccur again.
Actually our losses were two very large ones from
- 4 -
CITY COUNCIL
AWARD OF BIDS: Bid #74-05
Page Five
10/9/73
accidents occurred on contract street jobs and by taking corrective
action in the manner in which we protect ourselves on the bonding by
the contractor on our insurance matters we would have avoided those
two large losses, and we would hope that our loss ratio will improve
dramatically this year.
• Councilman Shearer: I think all of us would like as much as
possible to do business with local
firms, whether it be insurance or leasing
cars or whatever, but when the difference in a year is as great as
these two bids - the difference is $20,000 - I think that is too far
to stress for doing business with the home concept,.so I will vote in
accordance with the motion.
Motion carried; all voting in favor.
PUBLIC WORKS
PROJECT NO. 125-7304 LOCATION: Gingrich Park
RESTROOM FACILITIES
GINGRICH PARK
Mr. Zimmerman: Mr. Mayor and members.of Council, as you know the
Gingrich Park restroom bid has been advertised
before and came in with a $20,000 cost, rejected by
Council. We have now proppsed some revised designs which hopefully
will result in considerable lower costs. The designs consist of two
(explained). One would go at a price of $30. per square foot and the
other at $40. per square foot. They are approximately equivalent
size -wise. Staff recommends that the Council authorize us to go ahead
and advertise both with the final selection to occur at the end of the
• advertising period, at the award time. Council has been presented with
some floor plans of the layouts and as you can see there is a slight
difference in size, along with a few other minor differences.
Motion by Councilman Shearer that Council approve the plans and
specifications for installation of restroom facilities at Gingrich
Park and authorize the City Engineer to call for bids for Alternates 1
and 2. Seconded by Councilman Young and carried.
EMERGENCY WATER SERVICE LOCATION: La Puente Road near Nogales
AGREEMENT Street.
Mr. Zimmerman: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, this agreement is
something that was contemplated in the original
report for the Umark Water System, the system
serving Woodside Village, and will connect with .the Rowland Area County
Water District with.pressures available in such.a manner that they can
supply water to either Rowland or Umark (the City's Woodside Village
System). The agreement has been approved. Last night at the Rowland
Area County District Board of Director's approved the agreement pre-
sented to you.' Involved is'an agreement with Umark whereby we would
prepay a portion of our receipts if we were to sell water, to Umark to
help pay off the bond issue and we have clarified this issue and pro-
pose to put it on the same basis as the rest of the water sold to
Woodside Village. Namely, the various percentages of pay off to
Umark by the City. On this basis Staff recommends that the agreement
ibe approved and the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute same.
Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor - the action of the City Council .should
be subject to the formal approval of Umark. As I
understand it has been discussed informally with
them and they have approved but their approval should be obtained in
writing prior....
Mayor Lloyd: Mr. City Attorney, does that come before us properly
then?
- 5 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Six
PUBLIC WORKS: Emergency Water Service Agreement 10/9/73
Mr. Wakefield: Yes, Mr. Mayor.
Motion by Councilman Young that subject to the approval of the
Umark, Inc., that Council approve the agreement for Emergency Water
Service Connection (Rowland Area County Water District) and authorize
the Mayor and City Clerk to execute it. Seconded by Councilman
Shearer and carried.
TRACT NO. 25047 LOCATION: Northeast corner of Tract No.
APPROVE FINAL SUB- 24006 easterly of Lark Ellen Avenue.
DIVISION MAP -
RE VERSION TO ACREAGE
BREN COMPANY
RESOLUTION NO. 4798 The City Attorney presented:
ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF WEST COVINA APPROVING THE FINAL
SUBDIVISION MAP OF TRACT NO. 25047 AND
ACCEPTING AN AGREEMENT BY THE SUBDIVIDER."
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer and
carried, to waive further reading of said Resolution.
Motion.by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Young, to adopt
said Resolution and carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Young, Shearer, Chappell, Lloyd
NOES: None
ABSENT: Nichols
VACATION OF ADDITIONAL LOCATION: Batelaan Avenue between vacated
• PORTION OF BATELAAN Sylvan Avenue and West Covina Parkway.
AVENUE
Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, you will
remember that several months ago the hear-
ing was held upon the vacation of Sylvan
Avenue and Batelaan Avenue within the redevelopment project area and
at that time the matter of vacation was taken under submission as to
portions of Batelaan Avenue. This evening the Resolution presented to
you vacates the major portion of Batelaan Avenue which has not previous-
ly been vacated with the exception of one-half the street which is
contiguous to the Abramson property on which the Alpha Beta Market is
located and which is the subject of a condemnation action. The action
this evening indicates the adoption of a Resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 4799 "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL'OF THE
ADOPTED CITY OF WEST COVINA ORDERING THE
VACATION OF AN ADDITIONAL PORTION OF
BATELAAN AVENUE."
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer and
carried, to waive further reading of said Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Young, to adopt
said resolution and carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Young, Shearer, Chappell, Lloyd
NOES: None
ABSENT: Nichols
PARKING GARAGE
CONSTRUCTION BID
Mayor Lloyd:
a parking garage and requesting the Parking
tract subject to the sale of bonds.
M:2E
We have before us the
approval of a low bid
for the construction of
Authority to award a con -
CITY COUNCIL Page Seven
PUBLIC WKS.: Parking Garage Construction Bid 10/9/73
•
E
•
Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor and Councilmen, there is on
the Parking Authority agenda this evening
the adoption of a resolution approving the
low bid and authorizing the award of the contract subject to the sale
of.bonds. Inasmuch as the Parking Garage when constructed will be
leased to the City it is requested that the City Council at this point
in time request the Parking Authority to award the contract as indi-
cated. It can be done on a motion which simply approves the low bid
of J. B. Allen Company and authorizing the Parking Authority to award
the contract. The amount is $318201000.
by Councilman Shearer. Councilman Young moved approval; seconded
Councilman Young: A question. I don't know if it is pre-
mature or not but it is pointed out in the
Parking Authority material there are
several items not covered by this bid and I would like to have from
staff an estimate, if available, as to what the additional items will
cost so that we have kind of a complete picture now as to what is
required for a complete job on that structure.
Mr. Eliot: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, the
motion before you tonight was to award the
contract for the actual construction of
the Parking Structure. It does not include any other items such as
landscaping, architectural fees, etc. The total amount of the bond
issue would also be increased by a contingency fund of approximately
10% and a change order fund of 5%. There would also be funded inter-
est; that is interest to pay for the following 3 years after the issue
of the bonds plus a l .year'.resorve for -.additional: interest to assure
the bondholders of the capability of paying off the bonds during the
period of construction and before the tax increment begins to flow.
The bond issue is 7.6 million dollars and you are asked to approve
tonight 3.8 million, approximately half of the total cost of the
structure including.funded interest. Actual construction items total
something like 5.7 million dollars, the difference being funded
interest.
Councilman Young:
funding available with the
Mr. Eliot:
So we are not really getting an enormous
bargain on this bid. It is a bid that
is compatible with the overall ineans of
bond issue. .
bid of 3.8 million dollars is
estimate.
You are correct in the latter part, that
it is compatible with our bond issue
and the means for financing it, but the
considerably under the architecturals
Councilman Shearer: I direct this to the City --Attorney. I
discussed this with him on the phone
previously. Mr. Wakefield, are you
satisfied from a legal standpoint that the Environmental Protection
Agency's requirements with regard to permits, etc., will not
interfere unduly if we proceed tonight on this - or will we perhaps
find ourselves in a situation one of these days where we have a white
elephant on our hands because of the requirements of the Environmental
Protection Agency?
Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, I have
made inquiry with the Environmental
Protection Agency concerning their
requirements with respect to the construction of parking structures
by public agencies. Effective October 15, just a few days from now, I
- 7 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Eight
PUBLIC WKS.: Parking Garage Construction Bid 10/9/73
am advised that the EPA will promulgate its final rules with respect to
the environmental protection requirements for the South Coast Air Basin,
which includes the County of Los Angeles and the City of West Covina.
These rules were still in the formative stage at the time I discussed
the matter with the representatives of the Agency in San Francisco.
It is my impression that the rules when promulgated
• on October 15 will require that contracts awarded for the construction
of parking facilities by public agencies which exceed 100 parking spaceE
and not designed to specifically relieve the number of vehicle miles
travelled within the area will be subject to permit requirements. The
tentative rules as promulgated by the Agency authorized local agencies
to qualify for the administration of the rule and to hold a public
hearing in connection with that matter. However, the Agency has not
implemented that rule, they have not appointed any local agency to act
for that purpose up to this point in time.
I think all I can say to you by awarding the con-
tract now we will have done what we can do to anticipate the action whic
the Environmental Protection Agency will take and to conform as closely
as we can to that action. If it turns out that we need to apply for a
permit before construction can actually start then we will have to take
that initial step.
Councilman Shearer: Then in your recommendation I assume what
you said is full steam ahead?
Mr. Wakefield: Yes Sir.
Motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
• VARIANCE NO. 700 LOCATION: East Side of Pass & Covina Road,
,
LA PUENTE CONGREGATION north of Lark Ellen intersection.
OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES REQUEST: A deviation from the minimum
code requirement of two acres for a church
site on a 1.1 acre parcel. Denied by
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2491.
Appealed by Applicant. (Precise Plan and
Unclassified Use Permit approved)
Mr. Zimmerman: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, the
matter of Variance No. 700 which is the
item before the Council tonight for con-
sideration has to do with the proposed church on`a 1.1 acre parcel of
land located at Pass and Covina Road, north of Lark Ellen intersection.
This matter was heard along with the Precise Plan and the Unclassified
Use Permit and the Environmental Impact Statement by the Planning
Commission of which the Precise Plan and Unclassified Use Permit were
approved. The Variance application was denied under the provisions
of the Municipal Code 9216.2, which requires that a minimum of 2
acres be provided for any church. The City Council has been provided
with a complete list of the actions, the plans, etc. I would however
read into the record the question of the reasons for the denial of
the Variance. We do have a few slides and a map. The investigations
placed before the Commission showed the Code states: 1 - The sole
• purpose of a Variance has not been met. The Code states that "the
purpose of any Variance shall be to prevent discrimination, and no
Variance shall be granted which would have the effect of granting a
special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity
and zone in which such property is situated." Therefore, the
applicant is requesting something that no one in the immediate
vicinity or zone possesses.
2. The hardship involved is self-
imposed, in that the applicant is aware that .the property is less than
8 -
CITY COUNCIL
PUB. HEARINGS: VAR. #700
Page Nine
10/9/73
the required two acres, and that the area is predominantly R-1
(Single Family Residential) Zone.
3. There are no other exceptional or extra-
ordinary circumstances applicable to other property or use in the
• same vicinity or zone.
4. The Variance is not necessary for the pre-
servation and enjoyment of a property right now enjoyed by other pro-
perty owners, as there are no other churches that have less than two
acres in the area. (Slides shown and explained by Mr. Zimmerman.)
Mayor Lloyd: Madam City Clerk, have we received any written
communications?
City Clerk: We have received just one addressed to Council but
we have received numerous communications. (Read
into the record the letter addressed to City Council)
"I sincerely hope you will reconsider the request for a Variance for the
proposed Kingdom Hall at Pass and Covina Road. Even if all 80 members
of the congregation including men, women and children drove cars to the
meeting the parking area of 8,608 square feet and assuming all the cars
were huge, 18 x6' in area, it would still hardly make a dent in a lot
of 60,000 square feet. (Signed by Mrs. Lorraine Yorker, Merced Avenue,
West Covina.)
(Mayor Lloyd ascertained that the Council had received copies of all
communications received.)
THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON VARIANCE NO. 700.
• IN FAVOR
Carl G. Johnson (Sworn in by City Clerk)
1319 Montezuma Way Mr. Mayor, I will need 30 minutes. (Counci
West Covina agreed to request). I am a resident and
homeowner of West Covina and I reside at
1319 Montezuma Way. I and Richard Ferris and James Flores have been
asked to represent the LaPuente Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses in
their request of the City Council for their approval of a Variance to
deviate from the Ordinance which requires a minimum of 2 acres for a
church site. On September 5, 1973, the Planning Commission of West
Covina approved the request of LaPuente Congregation of Jehovah's
Witnesses for an Unclassified Use Permit and a Precise Plan of Design
for a Kingdom Hall to be built in an R-1 Zone. In addition the
Planning Commission approved the Environmental Report.
Since I am a registered Civil Engineer and a
registered Mechanical Engineer in the State of California and partici-
pated in the development and construction of Kingdom Halls perhaps I
can be of assistance to the City Council in stating just what the
LaPuente Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses intend to do with this
proposed land. We have an architect's conception of the proposed
Kingdom Hall (drawing exhibited).
Mayor Lloyd: And this purports to be an actual rendering of
what the building will look like when completed?
• Mr. Johnson: Yes. We also have a scale model here in front.
This is a scale model of the plot with finished
grades and with the proposed Kingdom Hall on it.
The scale is one -eighth inch on the model which equals 1' on the
actual land. This scale applies both horizontally and vertically
.directions. As can be seen from the scale model with the two men in
the parking lot and the two ladies.adjacent to Kingdom Hall the
estimated land of 1.1 acres is really a large piece of land. The plot
- 9 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Ten
PUB. HEARINGS; VAR. #700 10/9/73
of land in front has 180' and the long side that goes back is approxi-
mately 247' in extent;on the rear side of the plot of land this
distance is approximately 145' in the rear. 55 parking areas have
been provided on the land here and have been approved by the City of
West Covina as meeting the requirement of Kingdom Hall capacity of
221 persons. All requirements of the Planning Commission have been
met by this proposed Kingdom Hall with the exception of the Variance
• to the 2 acre minimum. The Kingdom Hall itself is 3760 square feet and
occuppies approximately 8.7% of the plot of land.. This is an important
fact because such a size of Kingdom Hall on this plot constitutes an
efficient land use within the City. Perhaps if you had any questions
on the model at this time I would be very happy to answer them for you.
Mayor Lloyd: Continue on with your presentation.
Mr. Johnson: Perhaps a brief history might be of value to the
City Council....
Mayor Lloyd: No, Mr. Johnson. We are..dealing with the denial of
a Variance. You have appealed that denial, we will
stay with that.
Mr. Johnson: Fine. Jehovah's Witnesses in West Covina are con-
vinced that this Ordinance 1029 requiring a minimum
of 2 acres for a church is excessive in its demand
and is not a reasonable Ordinance. Since the Ordinance's adoption it
has resulted in total discrimination against all small religious
groups including Jehovah's Witnesses. Its blanket discrimination has a
tendency to allow larger religious groups toflourish while suppresses
religious freedom for the smaller group. We feel if this particular
Ordinance were tested in the courts it would perhaps be found to be
unconstitutional and an abridgement of the inherent right of lawful
• assembly as well as the expression of religious freedom. It also con-
stitutes an opinion of a few responsible for the ordinance's enact-
ment and we feel it does not express the will of the people as we hope
to demonstrate before you. The criteria by which this Ordinance was
established is not well publicly known, at least to me as well as
others, and its adoption I believe has been arbitrary and lacking in
good commonsense and sound judgment.
Mr. Mayor and members of Council, many residents
have written you personal letters requesting your approval of this
Variance to this Ordinance 1029. Those residents are present here
this evening. If given time and the opportunity I feel they would
express the same sentiments that are being made public at this time.
I do hope you had the occasion to read at least a portion of these
personal letters to you and that you have given them your thoughtful
consideration prior to the public meeting of this date. To determine
the will of the -people a ballot survey was conducted in West Covina
to ascertain their position in regard to building a Kingdom Hall on'
this 1.1 acre site. I want to read this petition. It is entitled
"Petition to the City Council of West Covina. We the undersigned
as residents and homeowners of West Covina do hereby approve and
support the LaPuente Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses in their
request to the West Covina City Council to obtain a Variance to
build a Kingdom Hall on the east side of Pass and Covina Road north
of Lark Ellen intersection in West Covina. We, the undersigned, are
• convinced the proposed Kingdom Hall will be_ an asset to the
community of West Covina and we do not object but fully support the
LaPuente Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses in their efforts to
construct a Kingdom Hall in our neighborhood."
Now the results of the findings of this petition
circulated are as follows: 485 signatures in favor of the petition
were obtained; 92.8% or 450 signatures are homeowners in the West
Covina City limits. 382 signatures in favor of the petition were
- 10 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Eleven
PUB. HEARINGS: VAR. ##700 10/9/73
signed by residents and homeowners in the immediate vicinity of the
proposed Kingdom Hall. This is perhaps within a one-third to one-
half mile radius of the proposed site. 93% or 355 signatures by these
residents adjacent to Kingdom Hall are homeowners. The date, the name
and address of each homeowner are given on this petition. Now at this
time I would like to submit this documented objective evidence for
• your review. (Handed to City Attorney) I believe that these
petitions as signed here are proof of the will of the West Covina
citizens and residents in favor of this petition. Many of the home-
owners expressed their sincere support and said "I hope you get the
Variance."
I believe the sample although small .in relation to
the 75,000 people living in West'Covina reflects the desire of the
people to have a church close to their home and Kingdom Hall satisfies
that need. In fact, although we did not have a copy of the petition
that was forwarded to the Planning Commission, some of the homeowners
that signed against the construction now signed in favor once they
understood the purpose and intentions of Jehovah's Witnesses on this
project.
As Jehovah's Witnesses we intend to comply with the
spirit as well as the requirements stipulated by the Planning
Commission in the designated plan for the property improvement. I
believe and I am sure that this large congregation of people attending
here this evening will concur, that Kingdom Hall on the property will
certainly be an improvement to the City of West Covina and the resi-
dents of the surrounding area. Cost of thi.s proposed Kingdom Hall is
in excess of $100,000 andperhaps two and a half to four times the
value of adjacent properties. In a City approaching 75,000 in popula-
tion what better cause could be espoused for granting a variance than
• the construction of a Kingdom Hall which the citizens of West Covina
need in view of the growth of West Covina and the surrounding
environments it is a citizen's request of Council to allow us to
build on this proposed site. We are requesting this Variance because
the very nature of Jehovah's Witnesses does not require us to build
on 2 acres. In my experience not one has been built on 2 acres.
Other localities have seen fit to grant the building of two Kingdom
Halls on property of only one acre in extent. Our request is to build
one Kingdom Hall and only one on this approximate one acre of land.
Many families reside in West Covina and have a need
for a place to worship and thus f.ar no Kingdom Hall has been erected
in the City of West Covina because of the restriction imposed by
Ordinance 1029. Many residents of West Covina including myself and my
family have to leave their community to worship at other places
such as Covina, La Puente, Charter Oaks, Rowland Heights, Hacienda
Heights and Azusa. These Kingdom Halls are filled to capacity and
are being taxed by the attendance of citizens from West Covina.
This community's responsibility should not be passed on to other
surrounding communities. Jehovah's Witnesses are a body of upright
taxpaying citizens and are willing to contribute to construct and
maintain a Kingdom Hall which will be of immeasurable benefit to the
City of West Covina, the families of Jehovah's Witnesses, as well as
all interested persons who freely attend with us. Therefore, we are
entering this plea as the LaPuente Congregation of Jehovah's
Witnesses to request the Variance of this Kingdom Hall; and simply
• stated, gentlemen, if you just want to you can make.this expectation
come true. I now would like to turn over the presentation to
Mr. Richard Ferris, a minister of Jehovah's Witnesses.
R. G. Ferris (Sworn in by the City Clerk.)
1420 W. Durness Ave., Mr. Mayor and members of Council, I
West Covina would like to address my comments
basically to point 2 in the Planning
staff analysis which deals with the
self-imposed hardship. Obviously we do not agree with this point.
- 11 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Twelve
PUB. HEARINGS: VAR. #700 10/9/73
The property we are asking this Variance for is extremely well suited
for our purpose. And we feel it is a reasonable and just one. If I
may direct your attention to the scale model I would like to point
out that asking for this Variance does not constitute a self-imposed
hardship. As you can see from this scale model the exact location
where we plan to build Kingdom Hall there is land that is unused
• north of the Kingdom Hall which rises very steeply. In fact part of
the water reservoir for the City of West Covina is on top of this
hill. The land I am speaking of up here that might be available,
but certainly is not suitable because of the very nature of the land,
it would be impossible to build on that land or park cars on that
land. In reality the only thing the land can support now is a nice
crop of weeds which it is doing. I have five slides I would like to
briefly discuss with you because I think it will enforce more the
idea of the suitability of the land. (Slides shown and explained as
to the unsuitability of the property above the proposed site and the
suitability of the proposed property for a Kingdom Hall.)
(Councilman Nichols arrived at 8:31 P.M.)
Mr. Ferris: The land to the south as has been pointed out is
under the control of the City of West Covina
therefore unusable. As you may have heard the
world wide and long established policy of Jehovah's Witnesses is to
limit the size of our congregation to 125 to 150 members. In your
mind you are probably saying - I know they say that but what will
happen 2 or 3 years down the road?" The answer to this is quite
simple. First of all we do not have a paid clergy. Our ministers
are self-supporting and they follow the example of Jesus and the
other apostles in serving the congregation without pay. Also we keep
our Kingdom Halls, although well maintained and cared for and a
. credit to the neighborhood, still we keep them comparatively small
and modest with a minimum of overhead. All the work and upkeep on
our properties is.done free of charge by the members of the congrega-
tion. In fact we view this as a christian duty. Hence we have no need
for large buildings and extensive properties. And also gentlemen, in
a.sense you do have control over the size of our congregation from a
legal standpoint; the West Covina Fire Department establishes the
lawful seating capacity of the Hall and a sign to this effect is
posted where it will be well observed. Therefore, you would have
lawful control not only now but in the future as to the size of our
congregation and as christians we certainly do obey the law.
In closing I would like to quote from amendment 85
to Ordinance 1029.and Section 9216.1(c) states this - "The site for
the proposed use is to be adequate in size and so'shaped as to
accommodate said use as well as all yard spaces, fences, walls, parking,
loading, landscaping and any other features necessary to adjust said
use with the land and uses i_n the neighborhood and make it compatible
thereto." Gentlemen, we have done everyone of these things and we
meet 100,E all of these requirements. We submit therefore that this
is not a self-imposed hardship and we do request that a Variance be
granted. Thank you, gentlemen, for your consideration. And
Mr. James Flores will now address you.
Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor, a question of.Mr. Ferris.
If by some miracle somebody gave you an
• acre of land adjacent would you build a larger
building?
Mr. Ferris.: No, we would not on that premise. We do not
really need that large of a building and our policy
is still to maintain the congregations in a small
manner.
- 12 -
CITY COUNCIL
PUB. HEARINGS: VAR. #700
Page Thirteen
10/9/73
Councilman Shearer:
Mr. Ferris:
In other words if you had two acres you .
would still propose to build as presented?
Yes.
James Flores (Sworn in by City Clerk)
• 1626 South St. Malo Mr. Mayor and Councilmen, I have been a
West Covina resident and homeowner of the City of
West Covina for the last 12 years and have
resided at the same place. In the Planning Commission's denial of
Variance #700 under point 3 it states "There are no other exceptional
or extraordinary circumstances applicable to other property or use in
the same vicinity or zone." This is true, but we can ask the question -
but why? Well because the area isn't fully developed to date. 50%
of the area is still vacant; much of this being hills. Do you gentlemen
foresee a future growth in that area? And if so, then you will have to
admit there, is a need now and even more so in the future for a church
for that particular area. In view of the Woodside project, the Braun
Company project and others that may come into the area the area is
going to grow.. Our members should not have to travel far to assemble
and worship God Almighty, especially outside of the City of West Covina
when they could meet near their homes. Now you don't have to answer
this question, but how far do you gentlemen have to travel to worship?
Is it outside of the City? Well most of the people here tonight do.
As mentioned previously the policy of our
organization world wide and this has been the policy for the last
century, is to limit the size of congregations. A good reason why
whenever a congregation gets large - what happens? It is hard to meet
the spiritual needs -of the congregation. So when they reach 150 to
200 we form another congregation and in this way the flock is taken
• care of, especially the spiritual needs. So why require us to have more
land than we actually need? We are sure the 1.1 acre is sufficient for
the needs and all our needs of the future too. In the past did you know
that churches that are built on two acres or more are not using all the
land they have? You might be wondering what happens to all this land
that the City's Ordinance requires these churches to have, well I would
like to show you some slides right now that show you what has happened.
(Slides shown and explained in regard to the excess land the First
Lutheran Church, 512 South Valinda, built in July.of 1969, added
a classroom in 1971 and still had land left over - showed slide showing
condition of.left over land - unattractive. Shepherd of the Valley
Lutheran Church, 1030 East Merced, built in November, 1969, added two
classrooms - still leaving unused land. One section of church land
sold to a developer and he built houses on it but had to regrade it
and bring in fill dirt and now the water from the excess land is
going to.run into the neighbors place on Valinda and he is complaining
that the water is going to run into his yard. Slide shown of
St. Martha's Episcopal Church, 520 South Lark Ellen, consisting of a
large building and class rooms, a recreation hall and still unused
land in an unattractive condition. First Church of Christ Scientist,
1600 East Merced, built in March, 1972. In back of the church there
is a cul-de-sac which ends at the property. Explained the unused
land. Christ Lutheran Church, 311 South Citrus. Slide shown of
vacant land looking quite unattractive.)
So I ask why impose a hardship on small
• organizations such as Jehovah's Witnesses by forcing them to buy
land that we don't need? Why impose a hardship for the members to
keep up properly and that will eventually grow.weeds2 Or trash will
litter? So there really is a hardship. The Ordinance as it stands
at present is really excessive in demand. Don't you see a need for
a Variance on smaller organizations such as Jehovah's Witnesses?
Gentlemen, under point 4 of the Planning
Commissions' denial of Variance No. 700 it states the Variance is not
- 13 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Fourteen
PUB. HEARINGS: VAR. #700 10/9/73
necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a property right now
enjoyed by other property owners, as there are no other churches
that have less than two acres in the area." This is not what the
facts show. For example; (Slides shown of the West Covina Church of
Christ, 705 North Lark Ellen, built in 1970 on 1.46 acres; West Covina
• Masonic Temple, 2101 South Orange, listed as a church on their
building permit, built on 1.09 acres in February of 1968.) As you can
see they have even added on since originally built and they still have
excess land and they have adequate parking. Also the Faith Assembly of
God Church, 1417 West Badillo, built in March, 1968, and built on not
one acre or more but under an acre, .81 of an acre to be exact. That is
less than an acre. This is a slide of the same church and they have
parking. Were you gentlemen aware of these facts before? Yet these
churches are still functioning well and without the two acres. Is it
right that some churches enjoy a property right that Jehovah's
Witnesses cannot? Their members do not have to travel outside of the
city limits like Jehovah's Witnesses do.
There is something that I am sure you gentlemen are
aware of; you have it, we all have it. This is a certain amount of
a sense of justice that Almighty God implanted in each and everyone of
US. So, Mr. Mayor and Councilmen, all of us here appeal to that sense
of justice. Please grant us that Variance so that we can build this
beautiful Kingdom Hall that you see there on your right. Let us be
able to worship God within this beautiful city that you so admire and
it would certainly be of benefit to this beautiful community of West
Covina. Thank you.
IN OPPOSITION
Gail Girt (Sworn in by the City Clerk)
• 1840 Pass & Covina Rd.� I am speaking against the church being
West Covina - built. I am just an ordinary homemaker,
active in PTA, not an engineer or a
lawyer, so I don't know if I will do very well speaking but I will
give it a try. About a year ago these people were before the
Commission asking for a Variance. They are aware we have the require-
ment of two acres. What I can't understand is why they want to waste
your time and the taxpayers money to repeat the same statements over
and over again. The Planning Commission voted on the Precise Plan and
they did finally approve it, however what they failed to state was
about 11 P.M. at night there was a 2 to 2 vote, 2 against and 2 for it.
If you will review your records you will find that one of the Planning
Commissioners changed his vote because he said "it didn't make any
difference anyway because they need a Variance for the property." Also,
the people say they are driving to a neighboring community and it is a
hardship. Well our neighboring communities are so close that we pay
our telephone bill in LaPuente and our water bill in Valinda.
I can't understand their statement that
they build their churches small. An example of how they filled this
room tonight shows that they need a larger church and they should buy
a larger lot. This property is located on a curve. This was not
shown in the slides but there.is a curve sign stating "slow - curve
ahead." The driveway enter and exit would be right where that curve
sign is. The new tract of homes have a street coming out that would
be even with the driveway of the church. The parking is for 55 cars
• and we assume four people would be in the car and we would only have
55 cars in the parking lot, however if they have less than four in a
car they will be parking on the curb or on a side street and it will
create a congested traffic problem. We still don't know what the
environmental impact will be from the new condominiums being built on
Pass and Covina Road and the Maplegrove area. We will have increased
traffic on Pass and Covina Road which will be probably before the end
of this year. I don't know what the Traffic Department has said but
the little reflectors marking the curve are bent and knocked down
- 14 -
CITY COUNCIL
PUB. HEARINGS: VAR. #700
Page Fifteen
10/9/73
continually because.of cars taking it too fast. It is like a speedway.
Old Pass and Covina Road used to be straight through and they drove it
real fast now they drive the curve to see how fast they can go.
That is about all I have to say in opposition to it.
I hope you don't grant this Variance for this particular site, that they
get a larger piece of land someplace else.
Councilman Shearer: One question. If the church has two acres
and were proposing to build on the same
site with the same size building with the
55 parking spaces but had two acres would you oppose it then?
Gail Girt: Yes I would oppose it if the two acres were this
particular lot because of the curve. If they had
the adjacent lot and could exit on Lark Ellen with
two entrances and two exits, but if you are talking about 55 cars
lined up there at one particular time it will block that whole curve.
Councilman Shearer: Thank you.
IN REBUTTAL
Mrs. Guy L. Rich (Sworn in by the City Clerk)
338 East Herring Ave., Mrs. Girt mentioned that we have a packed
West Covina house here tonight and she is worried this
might be the congregation. I would like
to point out there are members present from perhaps thirteen
congregations and these are the congregations that West Covina members
are travelling too and using and these people have come to support us in
our request so they can put their own Kingdom Halls to use for their
• own people. Also the point she mentioned about the environmental impact
from condominiums, I would like to point out that our negative
environmental report was approved by the Planning Commission and our
Unclassified Use Permit was passed by the Planning Commission, so both
of those points brought up do not seem to be pertinent to this issue
tonight.
Mr. Ferris: First of all the driveway is not on the
curve side. Our driveway is on the far
end of the property. Pass and Covina Road
used to be a major thoroughfare but now with Lark Ellen coming through
it is the major thoroughfare and also Azusa. So never at one time
do we anticipate there would be 55 cars lined up at Pass and Covina
at Lark Ellen. They will be going in both directions and by our very
nature we would not all be coming or leaving at the same time. That
has not been a problem at any of the existing Kingdom Halls. Thank
you.
Councilman Shearer: A question. When do you normally conduct
your services?
Mr. Ferris: It varies; different times. Normally we
meet for Sunday service possibly at 3
in the afternoon until 5 or 5:30, or in
.the morning from 9:30 to 12. The hours have not been decided and.
each individual congregation has leeway to set their hours. We also
• normally have meetings on Tuesday night and Sunday. We have other
meetings but not at Kingdom Hall.
Councilman Shearer: Not to put you on the spot, but as with
other religious groups meetings during
the week are not as well attended as on
Sunday or do you have the same enthusiasm on Tuesday as you have on
Sunday?
- 15 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Sixteen
PUB. HEARINGS: VAR. #700 10/9/73
Mr. Ferris: I am pleased to say we have the same enthusiasm
on Tuesday as on Sunday. Our meetings are all
well attended.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER PUBLIC TESTIMONY PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION.
Councilman Chappell: I notice the church I am a member of and
have been President of twice was shown
in the slides and I would like to point
out to Council we have over 9 acres of property at Christ Lutheran
Church on Citrus. Showing a slide comparing 2 acres to 9 acres is
really immaterial to what we are talking about today. We are talk-
ing about an ordinance that was thought out and voted on by prior
Councilmen. Two acres - not talking about 9 acres or 10 acres, or
6 or 8 but 2 acres, and most of those churches pictured as having
excess land were far greater. than 2 acres. I have always felt the
2 acre requirement was a just one, it allowed for expansion and
after churches get started and get underway they seem to find that
they need an additional fellowship hall, or an additional meeting
place for their youth, or a basketball field, etc., and by having
extra acreage they can readily put.it to use later on and probably
would be much happier if they started out with 2 acres. We have
heard this before and I voiced roughly the same opinion then as
I am voicing now. It certainly is in my mind a justifiable Ordinance
to limit it to two acres and I would say that we should not change
that Ordinance unless we have a study session to change the complete
ordinance itself and I don't think we are ready to do that at this
time.
Councilman Young: I think Councilman Chappell makes some
valid points but I will have to disagree
in certain respects. There is always a
problem with an Ordinance regulating a land use as we see demonstrat-
ed here this evening and that is everyone isn't the same. We have
an Ordinance which generally says 2 acres or more for church use
and I think,it does discriminate in the situation where we have an
organization that simply doesn't need it. A substantial part of
the land lies fallow for gathering weeds or being maintained.
The Ordinance doesn't necessarily have a reason for every religious
group that comes along and wants to build. Where the reason for
the rule doesn't exist then I think there should be sufficient
feasibility to modify the rule to suit a specific need. I think
this has been demonstrated here. This is the second time since.
I have been on Council that this group has come forth with their
positirn so I am thoroughly familiar with their position of
maintaining a small sized congregation and I respect their integrity
when they state they do keep small sized congregations.
Here they are with a 1.1 acre piece of
ground that they plan to use 8.7% of in the building - I don't
know what percentage the parking would be but probably substantial
and their activity apparently does not lend .itself to recreational
uses - and I see some dissent that this is done elsewhere as in
our church and others, but this is not the case in this organization.
I was going to ask the question if it
didn't come up - whether or not we do have churches in the City
established on less than the required 2 acres and we have three
mentioned here. I think there is a sufficient showing of a hardship
just on that and on the total.presentation to justify the granting
of this particular request and I intend to vote accordingly if I
have the opportunity.
Councilman Shearer: The first thing I will acknowledge is that
I too as most of my colleagues, have
- 16 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Seventeen
PUB. HEARINGS: VAR. #700 10/9/73
received in the mail quite a number of letters - I appreciate this
and the turnout. I wish we could get the interest on other issues
that we have here tonight. There is only one thing I regret and that
is that not one of the letters remembered that I was the only voice
that spoke up in support the last time and I kind of wish somebody
had remembered that. You like things that you do, to be remembered.
• My position has not changed. I feel that perhaps
from a legal standpoint that -conditions to grant a Variance have not
been met, but as Councilman Young stated these conditions perhaps
do not apply across the board and that while the Ordinance might have
validity with regard to congregations that do not by practice, and z
don't think ,there is any question about that, not in my mind, that
the practice is one that is a realistic one with regard to this
organization, it is not something they say simply to impress the
Council to get the Variance and then do something else. I don't
think it applies to you and for that reason I think our Ordinance
is perhaps discriminatory. I wish you had been successful two years
ago when you applied for a Variance on Merced Avenue and you wouldn't
have to be here again this evening telling us the same thing over
again. However, I think personally this is a better location.
I think the Variance is one that is justified in
this case. I think our Ordinance should be based on the need of
property. There is property that is developable and undevelopable
and it is very conceivable that the slope area pointed out by
Mr. Johnson if some of this had been available and included in the
proposed purchase of the property they might have met the 2 acre
requirement but 9/10ths would be unbuildable property because of
being so -steep. We have seen this situation in Woodside Village,
but then they could have met the two acre minimum requirement and
• still have no more usable property than they have here. So in this
case I think the Ordinance is inappropriate so I will join
Councilman Young in granting the Variance.
Councilman Nichols:. With the attendance of Jehovah's Witnesses
tonight I have seen a very tremendous
example of a demoncracy in action, and
political pressure being exercised through the rights of the people.
Councilmen listening, responding - using their conscience and
rationale to make a decision. Nobody has fixed anything, everything
will be decided by the five of us sitting up here. I have received
letters and telephone calls and I will try and give it my best considera
tion.
Last night Mrs. Nichols and I went out and
spent several hours cruising the area and visiting Kingdom Halls
throughout the San Gabriel Valley, getting out of our car, walking
your properties, spacing them off and checking the parking spaces,
the activities going on from El Monte to Hacienda Heights. So I too
have spent some hours considering your plea and I take a different
point of view and it is in equally good conscience and a hard -one
because I knew when I came here tonight I would face a large number
of people who would have a feeling of spirit and fellowship committed
to a certain viewpoint and I don't accept that viewpoint. I have
reached my opinion and I think in equal good conscience. I have walked
the lots of some of your Kingdom Halls and saw the grease spots in the
• dirt against the walls where there were no landscaped areas because
of the crowd that came to your place of worship which exceeded the
capability of the spaces provided.
West Covina has never claimed itself to be
La Puente, it has never tried to be E1 Monte or the County, or the
unincorporated areas of Covina or San Dimas. It has claimed to be
West Covina and we established a long time ago that we felt that
those of our brethren who wished to worship in our City gather
- 17 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Eighteen
PUB. HEARING: VAR. #700 10/9/73
together two acres of land. That has been applicable to every group
that has built here since 1968. Any slides purported to show
developments of less than two acres were on standards applicable before
1968, because the Ordinance was changed at that time. If the Council
here, in its wisdom, should decide that two acres is excessive as a
requirement then we should change the requirement, because the purpose
of a Variance is not to exempt individuals from that which is required
• of all other people but to exempt individuals from unfair requirements.
We should not require of you people here what we do not require of
others. In my humble judgment the use of the Variance is to insure for
all equal rights, and it is not granting to Jehovah's Witnesses that
which is never granted to any other religious group. If the Council
is in error in the sight of God then the Ordinance itself should be
changed. This body shouldn't come before this Council seeking an
exception of the requirements, in God's eyes yhe law itself should be
changed. The device of a Variance under the law if it is unjust is
unjust to all. If it is just it is just for you.
I do feel in all sincerity that my walking of your
acreage in the East San Gabriel Valley indicates to me that an acre
isn't enough land to do justice to the standards of design and space
of landscaping required by the City of West Covina. If we exempt you
from that requirement then you will have a development that in truth
will not meet the standards set and it would indeed be sad if in six
months or a year from now we have most of the people in our City saying
there is one church in our City that doesn't meet the standards of all
the others. I don't believe you people would be proud of that, to
seek an exception for one acre less of land at $15,000 to $20,000 for a
development that will have testimony of it for 201 30 or 40 years -
that additional cost would be a wise investment in my opinion.
Until the Council is prepared to change the
• Ordinance and say to all people and all religions one acre is enough
I don't think it is a wise decision to make the first exception for
your body. So I will vote against it.
Mayor Lloyd: I have a couple of questions of staff.
Mr. Zimmerman, as I understand it there are 55
parking spaces for the 3000+ square foot of space
in the Hall - does that meet the basic requirements of the City?
Mr. Zimmerman: Yes sir and it has been approved by the Planning
Commission.
Mayor Lloyd: And the Environmental Impact statement was approv-
ed?
Mr. Zimmerman: Yes, the Negative Declaration of Environment
Impact was approved.
Mayor Lloyd: Mr. Johnson - you alluded to the constitution of
the United States and the operation of a small
group - I do not concur with your remarks on that.
I do feel under the first amendment of the constitution which provides
not only for assemblage but freedom of religion, that you have been
afforded that by the constitution of the United States and that is my
opinion. I am a student of the constitution and the due process, both
under the clauses of the fourth and fifth amendments and it is my
considered opinion that you have been afforded those processes.
A further question of Mr. Wakefield - is this taxable land?
Mr. Wakefield: No sir, they are entitled to an exemption.
Mayor Lloyd: I think it has been alluded to by Councilman
Shearer when he spoke about the size of the church-
es in West Covina - - Mr. Zimmerman, do you know
- 18 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Nineteen
PUB. HEARING: VAR. #700 10/9/73
offhand the size of some of the churches in the City?
Mr. Zimmerman: They vary widely; I am sure they go up to ten or
fifteen acres - some of the very large sites.
Mayor Lloyd: Is it true that since 1968 we have not given any
• Variance to the Ordinance?
Mr. Zimmerman: I am not aware of any Variance; however I have not
made an exhaustive: study. I have been to most of the
Planning Commission meetings and I do not recall
any such Variance.
Mayor Lloyd: I certainly rely on your memory because I have
checked it on several occasions and it has been
accurate. In the presentation they referred to
three being under the acreage required - is that correct?
Mr. Ferris: Yes sir.
Mayor Lloyd: And that was -prior to 1968, I believe?
Mr. Zimmerman: Yes sir.
Mayor Lloyd: One of the questions asked by Mrs. Girt - was the
parking adequate and I think we have responded to
that. On the petitions - Mr. Johnson - when ycu
presented the petitions do all of these people reside within the
immediate vicinity?
Mr. Johnson: Yes. Actually Mr. Zimmerman showed a very good
. slide of the proposed site....
Mayor Lloyd: Yes, but the people that signed they live more or
less within the vicinity of the church?
Mr. Johnson: I think they live all over West Covina, although
we have many that are adjacent to the site.
Mayor Lloyd: (Asked for a raise of hands of those in the
audience that are residents of West Covina - a
majority of hands went up.)
This is a very difficult situation and I am really
terribly torn because I am not totally in favor of a Variance of
this type which requires a change in the Ordinance. There is no
question about it. Councilman Nichols alluded to that and I would
concur. However, no Ordinance.as far as I am concerned , if it
doesn't serve all of the people it is not required or sacred and we
can make changes. The question asked here is this change one that
will enhance the City as a whole, all of the 75,000 people, and I
don't have the answer to that. I don't have the wisdom of
Solomon. My inclination on one hand as far as religion is concerned -
because I hold that document - the United States Constitution - as
almost a sacred document, so I would have to say on that basis I
would be favorably imposed to a Variance, yet on the other hand I am
torn because I have helped to constitute a prior Commission of five
• very capable and learned men and I have asked staff to make
recommendations to me in the operation of this City, and if I then
turn around and run counter to that - which I have done on occasion -
then I am immediately brought forward to saying is the staff doing
an adequate job or am I communicating adequately with staff in the
first place. All of these concerns go into it and there isn't a man
up here who hasn't done that type of thinking because to vote in
favor of your request is to vote against the recommendations of the
staff and the Planning Commission which spend a great deal of time
and effort in arriving at their recommendations. So my inclination
- 19 -
CITY COUNCIL
PUB. HEARINGS: VAR. #700
Page Twenty
10/9/73
is that I will continue with staffs' recommendation and that it was
made in the best interests of the City and I tend to go along with
them unless I see something to the contrary. I am extremely sorry
I have .to make that decision but unless I see something to the con-
trary I will go along with their recommendation.
Councilman Young: Does your last comment mean you are open to some
consideration yet?
Mayor Lloyd: Yes, indeed I am.
Councilman Young: May I inquire of the City Attorney - - have you
formulated an opinion as.to whether or not a
proper showing has been made for a Variance in this particular case?
Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, I think there
has been a showing made which would justify the
granting of a Variance in this case. However, at
this point in time the matter is simply a matter for the determination
of the City Council, the evidence that has been presented would really
justify any action which you may take on the matter now before you.
Councilman Young: Thank you, Mr. Wakefield. I think that partially
hits the nail on the head. The City Attorney is of
the opinion that proper showing has been made, which
puts me in the frame of mind that I would not be doing any injustice to
my oath of office here, which I take very seriously, in passing this
particular Variance.
Mayor Lloyd: 'I would like to have a dialogue with you on that.
I am not 100%anything. I really haven't formulated
• an opinion, my attitude is one to uphold the find-
ings of the Planning Commission. If you can convince me, I am willing
to be convinced because I have not really made up my mind, but the
question I have for you is do you really feel the best interests of the
City will be served by granting this Variance from two acres to 1.1
acre?
Councilman Young: I don't know if the best interests of the City
would be served or not. I don't know that the
best interests of the City per se is necessarily the paramount issue.
The City is nothing more or less than its body of citizens and we
have a substantial body present that are putting up a fairly good
scrap for it and I think that in general when you do satisfy the
yearning of a substantial group and you do it on justifiable grounds
at a minimum of inconvenience to anyone then yes, you are serving the
best interests of the City in doing that. That is one point.
The second point is so the land does come off the tax rolls -
ultimately we force these people into a two acre area and take that
much more land off of the tax rolls. Thirdly, they have come in and
I don't take the comments of Mrs. Girt at all lightly, I didn't
comment on them, but nonetheless I feel as churches go churches are
not the most desirable thing in any given location. This is true of
my church located at Glendora and Vine,;and of any church in the City.
They create some problems on some specific occasions of congestion.
They have that potential of congestion and some inconvenience to the
people living nearby. This happens to be a location that is somewhat
• remote as compared to many locations they might have selected through-
out the City that would create a substantial problem. It is on
somewhat of a thoroughfare, it is across the street of what will
ultimately be a park, at least that is on the present planning
on the Master Plan of development for that area and it is in a
terrain that lends itself to some isolation because of that steep
slope on one side of the property and I think it would very well be
one of the more ideal locations for this type of use.
- 20 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Twenty-one
PUB'. HEARINGS: VAR. #700 10/9/73
Councilman Nichols: I am rather of the opinion that the
Ordinance we are talking about may well be
one that should be reviewed. I am
rather of the opinion that the Ordinance in light of the concerns
expressed by the people here and the hearing of many months ago on
Merced Avenue site, that this Ordinance might really and truly be
• subject to change. I think there might be formula developed that
would indeed qualify this group to build a church in West Covina on
less than 2 acres, but I think it is a political observation that
says it calls for a Variance. I don't believe that there have been
conditions shown that would indicate that the Jehovah's Witnesses
here in this application are being treated any differently than any
other religious group that has applied in West Covina for an applica-
tion to build a church since the effective date of the existing
Ordinance - 1968. Now if there is any person in West Covina that
can demonstrate to this Council that subsequent to the Ordinance
change which was effective of that year that there have been other
groups in West Covina for religious purposes have been granted a
usage of less acreage then I would be prepared to say a precedent
has been stablished and I would change my mind. If that cannot be
done then the recourse is not to give a Variance saying that this
group is being excepted, the answer is to change the law so that all
groups can build under comparable conditions. Now I stand to be
corrected, but if I am not corrected then that is the position I
am taking - that your recourse is to seek a change in the
Ordinance; but to ask an exception, a Variance, for your group alone,
for the first time - I don't think it will be good for you or the
City and I won't support it.
Councilman Young: Well Councilman Nichols - almost thou
• persuadest thou self!
Councilman Nichols: Almost but not quite.
Councilman Young: I know, but you say maybe we should change the
Ordinance, maybe it is too tight of an Ordinance,
and if we. are that far.. along and if we have
definitive legal opinion - and I know Mr. Wakefield is a concilliatory
man but I also know that Mr. Wakefield has not expressed opinions
that he can't live with - I have had that much experience with him and
I have asked questions of him hoping to get a certain answer and
getting the exact opposite - so I have the utmost reliance on the
comment he has made. But with these thoughts in mind then I can't
see a really sound reason for denying this application. I don't
feel that we are doing the Planning Commission a great injustice in
that respect because the Planning Commission simply by its nature
doesn't have that type of discretion, but I think there is a place
in the ultimate deliberations of a body of this nature for political
considerations as well as the strict letter of the law type con-
siderations. I think that is why we exist, that is why we have this
form of government. And it is not at all a bad thing. First of all
assuming we have a legal basis to act on and then determining that
justice is best served by granting the request, I see.no reason not
to do it. I would like to persuade you. I would like to persuade
the Mayor. I would like to persuade Councilman Chappell.
• Councilman Nichols: I think attorneys deal in the area of the
possible and school principals deal in the
area of righteousness. I think I have
expressed the way I feel.
Councilman Young: I think we may well have the location
here which would be less controversial,
totally acceptable, more acceptable than
any other location this group can come up with in the City of West
Covina. I think the proper showing has been made and we have the
- 21 -
CITY COUNCIL
PUB. HEARINGS: VAR. #700
Page Twenty-two
10/9/73
support here and I think we ought to get this time done with and let
them build a church.
Mayor Lloyd: May I have a motion?
Councilman Young: I will move the intent of my remarks, that the
Vdriance be granted.
Seconded by Councilman Shearer. Motion failed on
roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Young, Shearer
NOES: Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd
ABSENT: None
Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor, before we recess, in view of the
comments made by Councilman Nichols and all
of us in fact, I would like to have Council
instruct the Planning Commission and Planning staff to review the
present Ordinance and see if in fact it is an Ordinance that should be
revised.
Seconded by Councilman Nichols and carried,
all voting in favor.
MAYOR LLOYD CALLED A RECESS AT 9:31 P.M. COUNCIL RECONVENED AT
10:43 P.M.
Mayor Lloyd: I would like to deviate from the agenda to
acknowledge the presence of the Honorable
Councilman from the City of Baldwin Park - Russ
We are very pleased to have you with us this evening. Also the
• Honorable Councilman from Covina - Louis Brutocoa.
And I have one other slight variance, we have with
us this evening the Pirates and they are coming with a warning.
With a gun in my back I will read their proclamation. (Read the annual
proclamation issued by the Pirates warning all businessmen in the City
of West Covina to be prepared to be taken captive on October 25th,
subject to ransom for their release.)
PUBLIC HEARINGS - Cont'd.
ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION LOCATION: 2222 West Garvey Avenue (between
NO. 485 - PRECISE PLAN Willow and Sunkist Avenue.)
OF DESIGN NO. 657
MIKE HANICH
Mr. Zimmerman: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, the request is
for the approval of a Zone Change from R-A
(Residential Agricultural) and R-1 (Single Family)
to S-C (Service Commercial; and approval.of a Precise Plan of Design
for the construction of'a recreational vehicle sales facility
(to include retail shops, service station, restaurant, indoor and
outdoor displays and offices) on a 4.8+ acre parcel. In the action
of the Planning Commission, Resolution No. 2494 denied the request
which is now appealed by the Applicant.
In the action of the Planning Commission denying
the request they came upon the following conditions: 1 - In the
General Plan projected to 1990 and the Merced/Orange Avenue Plan
specified different land uses on the subject property than proposed
by the Applicant. 2 - These plans recommend against shallow or
spot zoning for commercial uses and the Applicant's proposal falls
within this category. 3 - The prominent location and the high
potential of the site and the adjacent parcels should be considered
comprehensibly as recommended by the Merced/Orange Avenue Plan, so
22 -
CITY COUNCIL Twenty-three
PUB. HEARINGS: ZC #485 PP #k657 10/9/73
as.to utilize the land for the uses specified in those plans. 4 -
Cumulatively the criteria set down by these adopted plans have not
been met. 5 - The authorized Applicant's revised Precise Plan of
August 20, 1973, did not reflect the General Plan or the Merced/
Orange Avenue Plan land use designations and did not meet the City
of West Covina's Zoning Ordinance requirements or other City
Departmental requirements. (Slides shown and explained.)
• THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ZONE CHANGE
APPLICATION NO. 485 AND PRECISE PLAN NO. 657.
IN FAVOR
Rodney R. Buck (Sworn in by the City Clerk)
322 .Vista Del Mar Good evening Mayor and members of the
Redondo Beach Council. I am an attorney here representing
Mr. Hanich and the proposed development.
I am sure you are aware of the deep lot problem at the westerly
entrance to the City. It is one that has been with you for sometime.
We, as developers, have brought before the City Planning Department
other projects, one the Beverly Manor Hospital which has been
developed, and we have brought other plans forward which we were unable
to develop. A little over a year ago we brought'a plan before the City
Planning which was only four of these lots which included mainly an
office building a,.d they told us to come back with a larger parcel
because this was considered strip zoning. It took us over a year to
get this parcel together, it is a little over 5 acres. When you have
as many diverse owners as you do in this area it is hard to get them
together. We finally obtained a parcel and have financing for this
particular project and we are able to go forward. What you have in
this area is homes built prior to 1945, you have lots 320' in depth,
the majority of the lot is not landscaped, it collects weeds, old
barns and fences, a real eyesore to West Covina. We have been trying
• to develop this property in excess of 6 years and feel this is the
best development we can come up with at this time..
We were instrumental in developing the
Merced/Orange Avenue Plan. We had a large company that wanted to
put their factory here and couldn't wait for the outcome of the
Merced/Orange Avenue Plan and they went to Covina to build their
factory. Since that time we have not been able to attract any
other factories here as the City of Industry, your neighbor, offers
them a much better plan and much better facilities. It is our
feeling that S-C is compatible with an industrial park and we feel
an industrial park development will not materialize here because
you cannot compete with the City of Industry. That is what we
found out, we would be wrong but we have spent many years on this
and we feel S-C would bring to the City a nice westerly entrance
to the City, it would bring in sales tax to the City from the sale
of mobile trailers and additional property tax to the City.
We feel this Council should recommend its passage. I will be glad
to answer questions.
Jim DeLaney (Sworn in by the City Clerk)
302 South Azusa I am a realtor and own some of the property
Covina in this parcel. I have owned property in
the area for 2.0 years and 10 years ago we
brought one of these very large lots before the City Council for an
• apartment house and it was turned down, but Council did say there
was a problem here and they suggested that the Planning Staff study it.
That was 10 years ago. About 5 years.ago we did bring in another
project to the City and the City instituted a study which was quite
expensive - $800000 or $901000 - but it was a very good study.
It reiterated several things - the urgency of the problem - the
problem to do something with this area. Your study also indicated
that the land is not being put to any highest or best use - a
tremendous waste of money to the people.
- 23 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Twenty-four
PUB. HEARINGS: ZC #485 PP #657 10/9/73
For instance we could have had apartment housing
for the last 10 years. I could have used the income in putting my
children through school. The Planning Staff agreed with that, the
people of the area agreed with that, the City agreed with it, but the
problem is we couldn't bring to the Planning Department a grand
enough or expensive enough plan to meet the planning perfection
for the area. It was 22 acres of industrial park which must all be
• developed.at once. This makes a need for a tremendous amount of
money. Also families have lived in the area for 30 years and you
can't walkin and say we are moving you all out, we are going to
put an industrial park in here. So that makes the plan unfeasible.
You cannot relate a practical development to this plan. You can't
relate human beings to it. You have separate families to deal with.
So down through the years when we bring these plans in for study it
amounts to nothing more than rejection. The plan precludes.develop-
ment unless we can take an alternative such as we have here, and
when we find a person that is willing to put his money into it.
I didn't know 5 years ago that was strip zoning,
every day we made all those trips to the other Planning Director and
we decided we couldn't get a compromise here when we just had the
two string lots along Garvey. So after a few years when we do put
together a plan and a person will invest the money - and incidentally
we will comply with the Planning and Engineering requirements. So we
feel that it may be a long long time before we can find another
developer for this property. We think it is a good development and
we request that you pass your approval on it.
Michael Downing (Sworn in by the City Clerk)
Lawyer Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, I am
412 South Citrus Avenue speaking here on behalf of Mr. & Mrs. Edgar
• Covina Heaton who own the property at 920 South
Meeker Avenue. This is one of the parcels
included in the proposed development.
However, what I say may be applicable to some of the other homeowners
in the neighborhood too. First of all this is an area which is
ceasing to become desirable as a R-1 neighborhood. The lots are very
large. The homes by and large are quite small. Mr. & Mrs. Heaton's
home is something like about 800 square feet.
You are aware that with the widening and
improvement of.the San Bernardino Freeway this is going to increase
the noise and the fumes in the.surrounding properties of which
Heaton's property is one. So from the standpoint of the people living
there it is highly desirable for them and therefore for the City of
which they are a part to convert the property to some other usage.
Also from the standpoint of maintenance these very large lots are
burdensome. Much of the land is simply left there to be roto-tilled
periodically. It is not generating a fair amount of revenue to the
City, it is not generating a fair return to the owners. As a matter
of fact it is an eyesore to the City and it is our position that
if the technical development difficulties are cured, which I am sure
they can be, it would be very much to the benefit of the citizens of
the community if a project such as is proposed here is adopted.
Thank you.
Mike Hanich (Sworn in by the City Clerk)
• 2222 W. Garvey Mr. Mayor - I don't think anybody could
West Covina know it any better than what you could
because you had to pay $1.50 for a car wash
for me about five or six years ago when I bought a 1968 station
.wagon and had it washed because of the flood waters from underneath
the wash - it was a beautiful sunshiny day but then the waters came
in from the other side of the freeway. I parked my car in front of
my office and with the back window open and every car that went through
there just splashed the inside of it and covered it over with water and
- 24 -
CITY COUNCIL
PUB. HEARINGS: ZC #485 PP #657
Page Twenty-five
10/9/73
dirt and I sent the letter in and you were gracious enough to offer to
pay for the car wash. So I want to thank you.. That was just a minor
problem that I know will be straightened out now with the new freeway
widening.
The Planning Department has done a real good job
• in trying to work with us and trying to get plans together so we can
accomplish something and do something with the property that will be
a betterment for the City of West Covina. I know this is the gateway
that is opening up to the City and it is advantageous to have some
kind of development in this area that has been a sore spot for quite
awhile. There are areas that show pride of ownership east of this
particular project. On the east end we will do and develop exactly
as the plan sets forth, into office building and that would buffer
the area off and lives with the plan. Yet at the sametime a motor
home sales lot, a travel trailer sales lot, service and accessory
sales, all of these kind of sales are necessary for the recreational
minded public. Young people have more time to spend in a recreational
vehicle and they are doing it. There are thousands of these vehicles
being sold every day. The larger motor vehicle industry is just
getting geared up into selling. General Motors is putting out a
unit that is going to be a real product. It is beautiful to see it
work. It is more like a Greyhound bus. We are motorized and this
property is right next to the freeway. There is a demand for this
kind of business to exist, there is a demand for it to be sold. So I
feel with your permission we can definitely put this together, you
make the rules and we will live by them.
Mrs. Jennie Graves (Sworn in by the City Clerk)
2141 Lakewood We own three pieces. of property in the area
West Covina that will border as well as I can determine,
• next to or within one lot of Mr. Hanich's
property, what he is requesting to be rezoned. We own three pieces
of property there and lived there since 1947 and moved away about ten
years ago. We did not buy that land to develop it but as a home.
We bought a piece of property two doors from us that was available
at that time for our daughter who was left with three small children
so she would be close to us. And because we were stuck with this
property and could not sell it even with the value of land at that
time we bought the piece of property in the middle of the two lots.
Now we own three pieces of property within one lot of Mr. Hanich's
parcel.
Now this area has deteriorated to the place
where we can not even get a decent renter. We have had a lot of
trouble renting and if we do get a renter it is of the caliber that
will live in'a ghetto. We have poured money into it trying to keep
up the property and I think if any one would walk or ride down
there they would see that we have made an effort to keep it up.
Down at the end of the street towards Mr. Hanich's property, towards
the freeway, it is a disgrace to the City of West Covina. It is the
first thing you see as you enter, you can't help but see it if you
go down the freeway. Five or six years ago when this Orange/Merced
Plan was developed we thought we were on our way. People living
there they can't get rid of the property, and it isn't feasible I
don't believe for an industrial park and I am certainly not an
authority on that, but I know the parcels in there that have homes
• on and well cared for and still used as homes, you can't expect those
people to want that area to go into an industrial park. So'I feel
this is a start for the people in this area to have something done
to alleviate the situation as it is now and I am for the plan.
Mayor Lloyd: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would speak
in favor that has something new to add?
- 25 -
• CITY COUNCIL Page Twenty-six
PUB. HEARINGS: ZC. #485 PP #657 10/9/73
Kathy Ferree (Sworn in by the City Clerk)
1125 South Willow Ave., I have lived at 1125 for 22 yearsI have
West Covina ,
literally waded through water in the
winter time, I have carried my five children,
one at a time through water to catch buses. I love West Covina with
all my heart and I don't intend to leave West Covina but I do think
• I am for Mr. Hanich's idea because I believe we need a start someplace,
and if someone doesn't start it it isn't going to get done. I live
next door to people that I wouldn't want to stick on my worst enemy.
It used to be I could leave my door unlocked day and night, or
go away for a vacation and never even worry about locking my house.
My garage has been broken into twice, my freezer has been completely
emptied, my sons motorcycle stolen. I have had damage to my cars,
the opening of hoods and tearing out of wires and this has only
happened in the last few years. If we don't start someplace it
will never get started and I think Mr. Hanich's idea of a start is a
good one. I think we should all get behind him.
IN OPPOSITION
Louis Brutocao (Sworn in by the City Clerk)
1645 Aldenville I am neither in opposition or for itI
,
Covina just have an observation. I have some
property in the area. I have been invited
by the West Covina Chamber of Commerce to participate in a meeting
on the 19th with other property owners to discuss this plan. I think
it is worthwhile that we partake in this meeting and see what the
Chamber's viewpoint it.
The other thing is that we do own some land
on Meeker Avenue and I don't believe it is right to close off Meeker
Avenue. I think the usage of service commercial especially for the
• recreational vehicle sales is a good usage, I am not opposed to it at
all. Mr. Hanich has contacted me in the last two weeks and has
indicated he would be willing to buy the property if reasonable, and
we have agreed the price is reasonable, although the escrow has not
been signed he has.indicated escrow will be opened. It is a matter
of getting additional property for making a bigger development out
Of it. He did state there was a desire to store recreational
vehicles in the deep lot area. I stated I felt Elder Avenue would be
a good circulatory street and I think protect other properties.
I felt it could be done on a triangle basis rather than strip along
the freeway and he didn't say he had any objection to this. I will
say again I am neither for or against the plan but I think I am
against closing off Meeker. I think the usage of recreational
vehicle sales in that area is a good usage.
Joseph Angiuli (Sworn in by the City Clerk)
1814 East Danes Drive As he said - one pie.ce of property is an
West Covina eyesore, I see it every day on the way
home and it needs development,.but I can't
see it as a motor home recreational vehicle sales or anything of
that sort. One thing we don't need in West Covina or in Southern
California for that matter is more recreational vehicles. One of
them takes the place of two cars on the freeway and this we don't
need on the freeway if you have ever driven home on the freeway at
five o'clock.
• IN REBUTTAL
Mr. Hanich: Mr. Mayor and Councilmen, I don't think we
need any rebuttal. I think the case has
been plainly presented and the facts
presented very well. Thank you.
Councilman Young: Mr. Mayor, a question. This issue
Mr. Brutocoa raised on Meeker Avenue, it
- 26 -
• CITY COUNCIL
PUB. HEARINGS: ZC #485, PP #657
Page Twenty-seven
10/9/73
is the plan to close Meeker Avenue?
Mr. Buck: Yes, that is the plan. This was discussed
with the City before and it was their
recommendation that we close the street
off.
• Councilman Young: Does Meeker Avenue directly affect the
Brutocoa interests?
Mr. Buck: No, we feel closing Meeker Avenue this will
be a buffer for the rest of the area and
will eventually help the rest of the area
to develop. The main thing is we are trying to create a buffer. This
is something we can change, it is not absolutely necessary to our plan,
the closing of Meeker it was just their suggestion.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER PUBLIC TESTIMONY'PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. COUNCIL
DISCUSSION.
Councilman Nichols: Mr. Mayor, I sat through multiple hearings
and multiple recommendations over the years
in regard to this area and changed my vote
and my plans, ranging from multiple to light industrial, or to holding
the land as residential, and over these many years that area has
continued to deteriorate. As a School Principal in West Covina I can
give fact that the area in question is not one of the more stable
areas of the City.
Some two or three years ago at the urging
of the Chamber of Commerce and our City Staff we applied some new
• designations to the area and nothing happened, but things have
continued to slide downward. I think probably the truth is in
reality we have reached the time when we need to forego some of our
ultimate dreams and face the reality that we have a major area in our
City that desperately needs some impetus for change. So I tend to
favor this proposal and this may come as a shock to my fellow
Councilmen and to the staff of the City but I don't think five acres
is a strip zoning. The term "strip zoning" is a nice term to use
to knock somebody down. Whatever space you don't think is enough
you can always say that is strip zoning. But in reality people have
put something together. They have made a plan, a proposal that
will be subject to all of the controls and standards set by West
Covina.
I think the closure of Meeker Avenue where
there is still the potential of development should be reconsidered.
I would like to see the people involved get together and work on
this and see if they can't come up with a proposal. I would like to
see it held over and turned back to those that have been working
on this and see if they can't finalize this in terms of the
interests expressed and see if we could get such a package together
and then I will support it. That is my reaction.
Councilman Chappell: My only question - where are you going to
send this back to?
• Councilman Nichols: My position is that I would like to hold
this matter open and over and have the
people proposing the development look at
it again. They indicated you will recall that the closing of
Meeker Avenue is really not essential to the people, there may be
some other elements that can be incorporated. My own personal
position is I would like to hold it open for a couple of weeks,
but I also expressed to my fellow Councilmen that after all these
years we can't constantly turn down people who want to restore
some of this land to some kind of use.
- 27 -
CITY COUNCIL
PUB. HEARINGS: ZC #485 PP #657
Page Twenty-eight
10/9/73
CJ
LJ
r�
U
Councilman Chappell: When you talk about bringing it back you
are talking about actually bringing back a
Precise Plan such as the number of seats
in the restaurant as well as Meeker being kept open? Then I would
have no objection to holding it over until those that are suggesting
this can bring that information back to us. It is a reasonable
request.
Councilman Nichols: In other words the thought is to hold the
hearing open and over for two weeks.
Councilman Chappell: Right, that is a reasonable request.
Councilman Young: Should we inquire if that would be a
reasonable time to work this problem out?
Mr. Buck: I am a little confused.....
Mayor Lloyd: Let me see if I can help unconfuse you.
It has been suggested by Councilman
Nichols that this item be held over for a
period of two weeks to give you and Mr. Hanich an opportunity to
contact others that might be interested in joining with you and giv-
ing some consideration to opening Meeker and work out some sort of a
situation with Mr. Brutocoa, in essense is what they are asking.
What is your response?
Mr. Buck: I think we can work that problem out and
we will have to work it out also with the
City Planning. My feeling is if we work
all this out I would like to know what the rest of the City
Councilmen's thoughts are. If we work this out are they in favor
of our project and we have only heard from one City Councilman.
Councilman Shearer: I think it is a very good point. .I wouldn't
want to go back and spend more of my money
and then come back and find the other four
Councilmen didn't like it from the beginning. This is one of the
dilemmas I guess, each time we go out and contract with someone to
do a plan, whether it be the Orange/Merced Plan or the General Plan,
or the one we will be taking under consideration shortly, that we get
back the plan and it looks good on paper, such as a plan saying
we want an industrial park on the west end of West Covina, and we
sit back and wait for the industry to move in and as pointed out they
don't always move in because some go to Covina or the City of
Industry, where perhaps things are a little more attractive for
various reasons. So there we sit with a nice plan and no implementa-
tion and in the meantime as it has been pointed out the area needs
something. Maybe this isn't the best. Idealistically it perhaps
should be rejected and wait for the ideal to come along, but we may
not live that long and if we live that long we may not be here that
long.
I would like to see this referred back, not
held over, but referred back to the Planning Commission. In.concept
I think the idea is fine. I don't consider this to be strip zoning.
I have no quarrel with the fact that it deviates from the Orange/
Merced Plan. I think at least it is better than what we have there
now. But I would like the Planning Commission under the control or
feeling that the zone change is acceptable to come up with a Precise
Plan that is acceptable. We have a report here that lists eleven
points that the Precise Plan is lacking. I don't want to sit in
judgment two weeks from now as to whether the location of the trash
area is practical,. or whatever, this is one of the objections in
the Staff Report. This is what I would like the Planning Commission
and Planning Staff to review. Similar to the proposal we had before
CITY COUNCIL Page Twenty-nine
PUB. HEARINGS: ZC #485, PP ##657 10/9/73
us tonight where they turned down the Variance but they did say if the
Council decides to override our recommendation with regards to the
Variance we approve the Precise Plan. I would like to see that done
so we don't sit here and attempt to determine if the trash is in a
practical location, or there are too many trees or whatever. I. think
• the concept is fine but I would like to refer it back to the
Planning Commission to develop a plan that is acceptable and then come
back to us.
Councilman Young: Mr. Mayor, my mind is more flexible and I
am also younger than Councilman Nichols and
he therefore persuades me more than I am
able to sway him on occasion. I frankly came in here without much of
an opinion and I am persuaded this development should be encouraged.
I think there are too many loose ends frankly at this moment and that
is all that disturbs me. I will go along with just about anything
that will move it along but move it along in the fashion that we
have voiced so we have the definite thing before us when we are asked
to vote. It is just a little bit too much up in the air at the
moment. From what I have seen I would say,. -full speed -ahead,. but I want
it pinned down.
As far.as Mr. Angiuli is concerned, I am
afraid the recreational vehicles industry is here to stay and
assuming they are here to stay we can certainly use the sales tax
revenue in the City which will benefit the entire. City and I am sure
this will be a good location for that type of industry.
Councilman Nichols:- Mr. Mayor, in light of what has been said I
would defer to Councilman Shearer and perhaps
• he can frame a motion.
Mayor Lloyd: Before a motion is made I would like to speak
to this issue. I too would have to agree that
after looking at this area fora.good number of years and watching
the Merced/Orange Plan come forward in very high hopes and.seeing it
go down the drain as a result of very high property values - that
people can buy property at 50e, or $1.00 a square foot or whatever in
the City of Industry and they have to pay a great deal more here they
simply are not going to put in industry unless there are some very
offsetting situations and unfortunately we don't have those offsetting
situations and I am indeed sorry because I for one would be most
pleased to have an industrial situation of some type that was viable
and on going and productive for the City of West Covina but I sure
don't see it in the cards at the present moment.
Mr. Hanich, whom I have known for many years
comes forward with a plan which I know he has worked very hard to
achieve. I know the time and effort he has put into it because I
have seen his operations over many years. I am favorably disposed
to something that he might propose because I know him that well that
he is a man of integrity and goes forward to do things that not only
is of benefit to his organization but also profitable to his
community. Going a step further I think this is a plan which merits
consideration. It merits my favorable consideration and I am prepared
to give it that way. I am not really sure,Councilman Shearer,. that I
• see the necessity of it going all the way back to the Planning
Commission. If that is what you want I am prepared to support you.
You frame your motion and we will go forward from there.
Councilman Shearer: I think it is necessary in this respect
because we have a Precise Plan and legally
it probably is not required, but generally
when adopted zoning and the Precise Plan go hand in hand and here we
have a Precise Plan that is not acceptable. I don't think it is
acceptable to us. Statements have been made by two of the proponents
- 29 -
CITY COUNCIL
PUB. HEARINGS: ZC #485, PP #657
Page Thirty
10/9/73
•
•
•
that they are willing to comply and work out the technical details
and I think they should be worked out before we grant the zoning.
We have the Planning Commission who is hopefully more expert in that
area than we so in that regard I would move that this matter be
referred back to the Planning Commission with the stipulation that
the Council agrees in concept with the zone change and requests that
the Planning. Commission review and devise an acceptable Precise Plan
and that it come back to us with an acceptable Precise Plan.
Councilman Young: Mr. Mayor, a question. Will this action
establish an insurmountable burden of some
kind or shoot a deal down or something?
Mayor Lloyd: Mr. Hanich, would that be an insurmount-
able situation for you?
Mr. Hanich: I can see no reason why we should take it
all the way back to Planning....
Mayor Lloyd: Well I think it is already going there.
Can you work out the questions which have
been posed by Councilman Shearer with
regards to the recommendations by staff? Council has indicated to
you it would like to see some cooperative effort between you and
Mr. Brutocoa in the establishment of streets or traffic flow.
Obviously this brings it all the way back to the Planning Staff and
Planning Commission and you will then get a hearing. However, they
will be advised that the Council is favorably imposed to what you wish
to achieve.
Councilman Young: And the question is - can you live with that?
Mr. Hanich: I have to. We will.
Councilman Chappell: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Buck had his hand up, I would
like to know if he had anything further
to state.
Mayor Lloyd: Mr. Buck.
Mr. Buck: Just one comment. The eleven items you are
referring to, Councilman Shearer, have been
complied with with the new plan which was
fully prepared at the time of the last meeting but we didn't get it in
in time but by the time we get back to the City it will now be a very
fast action for approval. If you look at those they are very techni-
cal things.
Councilman Nichols: So a few weeks will not harm the dreams of
a lifetime!
Mr. Buck: No.
Motion seconded by Councilman Young and
carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Young, Nichols, Shearer, Chappell, Lloyd
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
MAYOR LLOYD CALLED A RECESS AT 10:40 P.M. COUNCIL RECONVENED AT
10:50 P.M.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (A gentleman requested to speak with regard
to Item G-5. Council had no objection)
30 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Thirty-one
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - Item G-5 10/9/73
DANES DRIVE Mr. Zimmerman: Mr. Mayor and members of the
CUL-DE-SAC Council, a report on the Danes
Drive subject particularly pertaining to the gate
in the wall has been furnished you. We have
taken a poll of the citizens and given you the benefit of that poll.
The consensus of the poll is that a self -closing gate with a high
• latch should be installed. It is estimated the existing gate can be
changed to accomplish this at a cost of about $75.00 and it is
recommended that the Council authorize City forces to provide the
self -closing gate with the high latch.
Ursal Lattimore I reside on Danes Drive. I believe that
1827 East Danes Drive what has already come forth in the
West Covina collection of the opinions of the people on
the street I believe -that most of us
completely agree upon the self -closing gate with a high latch and
I have no other opposition to it and fully support this view and
would urge you to.
So moved by Councilman Young, seconded by
Councilman Chappell.
Mr. Angiuli: I am fairly new to West Covina, I have only
1814 East Danes Drive lived here possibly 18 months, but when I
West.Covina did buy my home on Danes Drive, adjacent to
the wall, I was under the impression when I
bought the house that the wall would be total, no passway, no
entrance of any sort. Identical to the one on Eckerman. The one
we have now is an eyesore. They asphalted, they tore up my driveway,
there is really no comparison between the two. They put a gate in
which I wasn't aware of at the time. When they first put it in there
• was no lock of any kind on it, it just swung open and closed. And
in turn it was used as a plaything by the children who lived on the
street. So the gate came down. Two weeks later the City came in
and repaired the gate and in a matter of days the children took it
down again. So now.the City put a lock on it, which is reasonable
enough. But a gate is in no way a comparison to a blocked wall.
Now if they did this to Eckerman why can't they do that to Danes
Drive? Why can't they wall up that entrance? What is the purpose
of it? Why are we so different than Eckerman? Can anyone give me
an answer on it?
Mayor Lloyd: We are listening to your presentation and
as I understand it you want the wall
totally blocked off.
Mr. Angiuli: Yes.
Lillian Vess I live directly across the street from,
1815 East Danes Drive Mr. Angiuli and right on the cul-de-sac.
West Covina When we purchased this home in July of
1972 we were told at the time the corner
would be made into a cul-de-sac with a complete block wall and that
in addition with several other things about the house, sold us.
I have a 3 year old son and a baby daughter a year old. My son has
unfortunately been out on Azusa Avenue and almost killed by a
trailer truck but fortunately one of the other children on the block
• moved in time to catch him. I am not a public speaker but I am a
mother and you gentlemen are not so I don't know how you feel about
the safety of your children but this is primary as far as I am con-
cerned. My husband and I and Mr. and Mrs. Angiuli do live on the
cul-de-sac. They did tear out a lovely tree we had and we felt
they did not beautify the end of the street, they ruined it. And as
Mr. Angiuli said the children have wrecked the gate and the latch
from the wall several times and a number of other incidents have
occurred very recently. One was a robbery. The gentleman that got
up and spoke for putting in a self -closing gate has been robbed and
31 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Thirty-two
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Item G-5 10/9/73
there have been other incidents where the police have tried to catch
someone and they have just gone right through the opening in the wall.
My interest is primarily for the safety of my children. There are two
schools one block down from us. There are children who live on the
other side of Azusa, I would imagine, that are constantly climbing
that gate in order to get home. My feeling is that should be blocked
• off completely so no one can get in or out which will deter anyone
trying to make a fast get away unless they are a pretty good high
jumper.
Cornelius Vess I am the husband of the previous speaker.
1815 East Danes Drive I feel if you spend $75.00 for a self-clos-
West Covina ing gate - well I have a number of times put
in temporary locks in that gate and tried to
reinforce in such a way so the kids could not break it open although
allowing them to lift the latch, open the gate and get through and
close it again; however they always managed to break the latches and
leave the gate open. So I feel spending $75.00 on a self -closing
gate will not help this situation because the kids will find away to
break the lock. Also children using the gate now if there is a
blocked wall the children living on the other side of Azusa going to
the two schools will be forced to go to Puente crossing or the
Rowland crossing rather than crossing in the middle of Azusa and
being exposed to traffic. If the wall is completely blocked they will
be forced to cross at Rowland or Puente and,therefore probably save
a life.
Chet Chalis I would like to speak in the affirmative
1821 Danes Drive for the latching of the gate because of the
West Covina many many advantages it creates for the
entire residency of the street with the
• exception of the two at the end of the street. I have lived on the
street for 13 years, I lived on it when it was an open end street.
We have never had an accident, never had an incident but since that
gate d s on there we have had several incidents of children crossing
over and hurting themselves, of children running loose on the street,
dogs and children making a playground of the street which is
illegal to begin with. To satisy two people, two families, that are
new in the neighborhood,that know nothing of what has been going on,
these people here want us to sacrifice our freedom for their children
and for the raising of their children. It is their duty to keep their
children out of the street, not our duty.
Insofar as their being sold a piece of
property - believe me I was sold the same bill of goods when I came
to the City. The realtor told me Azusa Avenue was going to be a
freeway with beautiful shrubbery growing in the center of it. I
bought my property with the understanding that one end of the street
would be closed for school facilities and at the other end of the
street a beautiful parkway, a City of Beautiful Homes. I wasn't in
there three months before there was a petition put out for a change
of variance for the corner property. I watched that area go from
orange grooves to a high business area which was against my
principles when I bought the home.
I don't like to give up my privilege of
• walking a half block to reach the mail box to raise somebody else's
children. The alternative I have is to walk five blocks to reach
that same mail box. I.am only one person. The vote was 9 to 1 for
the latch on the gate. Are we going to listen to the old residents
on the street or raise somebody else's children? So insofar as
feeling bad about being sold a piece of property they were told some
stories about they needn't feel bad, so was I and in addition to that
three months after I moved into my home I was robbed of some $1200.
which I never received back. In addition to that I was held up on
that street. In addition to that there have been many things happen
32 -
CITY COUNCIL
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Item G-5
Page Thirty-three
10/9/73
on that street. In fact I don't know what the hell I am hanging
around for, I guess I just want to see what is going to happen
next. And now they want to take the privilege of a normal ingress
and egress away from that street because they don't want to watch
their children. Thank you.
• Councilman Shearer: Before we vote I would like to answer the
question raised - why is Danes different
than Eckerman? I know the answer. I think
this particular hole that is there and first it wasn't and then it
was and then it wasn't, has caused more time to be spent by this
Council than a lot of other issues. As I recall the original con-
tract for the cul-de-sac called for a solid block wall, then in
response to the overwhelming desires of the people that elected the
five of us to sit here, the people came to us one night and said
"hey we just saw the plan and there is no place for us to walk to the
mail box, etc."' And in response to that, as this Council does all
the time, in response to the majority wishes we said "okay what will
satisfy you"and they said "a gate in the. wall." This Council is
treating Danes perhaps differently because the people on Danes came
to us and said this is what we want. I am sure we would have done
the same thing on Eckerman or any location in the City.
The information we have here is that a
poll was taken and 9 out of the 12 people living on the street
responded wanting Option 2, which was the self -closing gate with
a latch. There was one other first choice - closing completely,
and two did not respond. Apparently twelve homes are directly affect-
ed and 9 out of 12'said this is our choice. As far as I am concerned
that closed it. I don't live there. I do share the concern for
my children as these people do:for theirs. I live on a street that
opens directly onto Azusa Avenue, I live on a street that directly
around the corner opens on Vine Avenue. The exposure is there. So
I am no different? I have children and I can appreciate that, but
in this case 9 out of 12 said this is the solution to the problem.
So I guess that is what they are going to get, at least they have my
vote.
Motion carried.
Sandra Idleman First of all I want to thank you for taking
123 North Toland your life in your hands and coming by our
West Covina street. I am glad you all made it and are
here tonight. The stop sign we want is on
northbound Toland. The recommendation has it in the wrong place, I
gave the wrong direction. I am referring to Item G-3.
Mayor Lloyd: Supplemental report on request for Stop
Signs on Toland Avenue at North Garvey
Avenue and Mardina Street at Toland
Avenue - Traffic Committee meeting of 9/18/73 - Staff Report.
Mr. Zimmerman: Yes, Mr. Mayor. It is a fairly lengthy
Staff Report furnished you. (Read
excerpts from the Staff Report.)
• Mrs. Idleman: The traffic coming from the other end,
not here because it has only 30 dwelling
units, but coming from the other way, the
ones we are talking about are coming from the apartments. These
are mainly young people, they drive very fast and have fast cars.
Most of this report was done during the week, I don't believe the
traffic committee was there on a weekend.
(Mayor Lloyd determined the date of August 23rd was on a Thursday.)
- 33 -
CITY COUNCIL
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Item G-3
Page Thirty-four
10/9/73
•
r�
LJ
Mrs. Idleman: This was not taken on the weekend which is when
most of the traffic problems occur. The parents
are home and usually there is a lot more traffic.
It said in here they were going to intensive the police patrol, well
that can be done but that will cost the City more and the police are
needed elsewhere and a stop sign we believe would take care of it.
There is also the words "so many people have almost been killed" but
that is not good enough, we have to get somebody killed first and
so far we have no volunteers whatsoever. Because of this we would
like a stop sign, about five minutes before the meeting a car came
around the corner and it skidded all the way around and I thought
well somebody is going to get hurt now and maybe we can get our stop
sign. It is sad that we have to have so many fatalities or so many
people hurt or children hurt before we can get something.
Mayor Lloyd: You have made your point - you want a stop sign
on Toland.
Councilman Shearer: A question. You indicated you are not
familiar with the directions so I will draw
you a diagram. Now the speed problem that
you described, I assume, is coming on Garvey from the area of the
apartments westerly of Toland coming eastbound around the corner and
then going north on Toland. You mentioned the car skidding around
the corner tonight and I am not trying to put you on the spot but
how would a stop sign completely around the corner past the curve
at the intersection of Mardina and Toland have slowed that car that
came around the corner tonight which skidded - because all this
took place in advance of where you are asking for the stop sign
location._
Mrs. Idleman: They come around the curve and there is
usually a "Stop Ahead" sign and that
usually slows them down. (Explained further.) The road markers
on the road haven't helped nor the signs. We thought that might
help it but it hasn't at all.
Councilman Shearer: So you believe a curb sign that says
1115 Miles Per Hour" which I believe is
the sign that is there now would draw
less attention than "Stop Ahead"?
Mrs. Idleman: Yes, it has so far. Of course we haven't
had a stop sign so we don't know.
Councilman Young: I went down there and looked it over. It
is kind of curious - Garvey westbound has
a miscellaneous stop sign sticked up,
that's on the curb. You stop and then go again, which I did. They
are asking for almost the same thing down at the other end. There
is a great inconsistency to have a stop sign at the west end of
that particular block because the only purpose it could possibly
serve is to slow the traffic down so someone doesn't run into a
problem. I was there last Saturday and I didn't notice any recent
improvements in the way of striping as recommended by the last
report. There was absolutely no traffic. I am extremely reluctant
on the one hand to reverse the staff, on the other hand I am
extremely reluctant to reject the strong arguments for trying to
control the traffic. I think the suggestion of intensive enforce-
ment is frankly very impractical in the area. I don't think it
will happen. I am always impressed by painted lines right on the
street, myself. They use this at critical school crosswalks;
possibly something like that would tend to call people's attention
to this curve. I suspect cars that skid around that thing do it
one time and then tend to slow down from that point on.
- 34 -
CITY COUNCIL
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Item G-3
My tendency is
with the proviso that some further
of cures warnings on the street.
Page Thirty-five
10/9/73
to uphold the staff recommendation
painting be done there in the way
Councilman Nichols: I recall sometime ago the Council faced a
• request for a stop sign at the corner of
Cortez and Barranca some years ago and the
traffic warrants didn't justify it and it was denied and some months
later a teenage girl came busting through because there wasn't a stop
sign and she was killed and then the people came back to the Council
and Council did vote for some change that overrode those first con-
siderations - so we all know accidents of this type do happen. With
all due respect - on.every issue of this kind someone comes before
Council saying "how many children must die before you make these
changes" and we feel so guilty each time because it is a decision
we really have to make. And it does put us on the spot.. The older
I get the more I am inclined to defer to the wishes of the people
where I don't see an overriding interference with the traffic
pattern, and if there aren't a substantial number of people objecting
to the stop sign. I have found that those that go right through
a stop sign and the same kids that jump off the curb in front of
cars will continue to do it whether the stop sign is there or not,
but I will support it.
Mayor Lloyd: My stand is similar. First of all I
really don't like to be told "why do we
have to wait until a child is killed?"
We don't wait until a child is killed, we all have children and we
raised our children in this community and we try very hard. Every
Councilman up here has materially contributed to some area, either
• crosswalks or the widening of streets, etc., and has put serious
effort into making the area safe. I say that not in condemnation
of what you say but I ask that you review the record before you
indict us. We try very hard.
I presume that you have children and if
you.feel better as a parent in raising your children in this
community because there is a crosswalk or a stop sign on some
street or some outward vestige of an attempt to control traffic I
will vote for that, because I think .the world is tough enough and
if you feel better for it and that your youngster has a better
chance to survive in this cruel world I am all for it.
Hopefully we will have some extra police
control by way of a radar car in that area for the next few weeks.
And I see all the problems but be very cautious when you accuse
us of not being sensitive. We really are sensitive. We really
try for this community. Every man up here goes into the streets,
goes into these areas,and that is why we are so familiar with it.
I think this community is.well served by this Council and with a
great deal of sensitivity.
Councilman Shearer: I would like to make 'a few comments.
Believe it or not, of course I am somewhat
judicial being a civil engineer by trade,
• but believe it or not there are some scientific reasons for the
placing of stop signs and there are some disadvantages in placing
stop signs in locations where they are not warranted. One, just
stated by Councilman Nichols, is a stop sign gives people a certain
assurance. I made a left turn the other day in front of a car that
had his left turn blinker on, he honked at me and looked at me like
he was saying "what did you do that for" and he went straight on down
the street. The fact he had his left turn blinker on said to me he
was going to turn left when he had no intention evidently of doing
SO. Putting up a stop sign and I am not saying this will happen here
- 35 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Thirty- six
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Item G-3. 10/9/73
but this is one of the reasons why engineers are careful in placing
stop signs, because they tell the youngster, the mother or whatever,
now that isa safe place for Johnny to cross because there is a stop
sign there and everybody will stop so it is safe for you to cross,
but unfortunately somebody zooms around the corner and runs the stop
sign and Johnny is injured. It may never happen but that is one of
• the reasons why traffic controls, whether it be stop signs or whatever
should be judiciously placed. Councilman Young made some comments
with regard to the stop signs at the other end of Garvey that swings
to the north and there is a little bit of a different situation there.
.One that is not obvious, it is at a corner. There is a cul-de-sac
at the `end and a sight distance.problem somewhat different than.the
sight distance problem here and that is the reason for the stop sign,
there. A question of staff - Mr. Zimmerman - if Council votes to
place the stop sign just exactly where are we talking about placing it
At the southeast corner of Toland and Mardina?
Mr. Zimmerman: There was a petition for two stop signs. One at
Toland to stop traffic on Mardina from entering
Toland from the east. The other one, which I think
they really wanted was for northbound traffic on Toland to stop at
Mardina.
Councilman. Nichols: That is the only statement I support. The one
stop sign.
Councilman Shearer: All right. If the Council were.to say yes it is
that stop sign would you and staff recommend that
a counter stop sign on the opposite corner for
southbound Toland traffic also be installed to avoid someone coming
out of Mardina noticing that there was a stop sign for northbound
• traffic making a left turn and getting clobbered by somebody coming
southbound who do not have a stop sign?
Mr. Zimmerman: I think staff would not recommend either stop sign
but theo.ritically speaking and referring back again
to the other intersection at Mardina there is one
stop sign there for southbound traffic and I presume this would be
handled in the same manner.
Councilman Chappell: I must be tired or something,. I still don't
know where that stop sign is going to go now.
(Councilman Shearer pointed out the location stating it was at the
southeast corner of Toland and Mardina.)
Councilman Nichols: If that is the corner then I will move
that the Council direct staff to install a
stop sign at that location.
Seconded by _Mayor Lloyd and carried on roll
call vote as follows: AYES: Nichols, Chappell, Lloyd
NOES: Young, Shearer
ABSENT: None
CITY ATTORNEY
ORDINANCE The City Attorney presented:
• INTRODUCTION "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING SECTION 3190
OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING
TO AN INCREASE IN MAXIMUM SPEED LIMITS."
(Sentous-Avenue from Valley Boulevard to
Hollingworth Street - 35 M/P/H)
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer and
carried, to waive further reading of said Ordinance.
mr;w
CITY COUNCIL
CITY ATTORNEY: Ord. Introduction
Page Thirty -.seven
10/9/73
Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Shearer, to
introduce said Ordinance and carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Young, Nichols, Shearer, Chappell, Lloyd
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
• ORDINANCE #1229 The City Attorney presented:
ADOPTED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
WEST COVINA AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF THE WEST
COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE UNIFORM
CITY SALES AND USE TAX."
Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Chappell and
carried, to waive further reading of said Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Shearer, to
adopt said Ordinance.
Councilman Young: Mr. Mayor, at this late hour I hate to do this but
could the City Attorney briefly expand on this
item?
Mr. Wakefield: Yes, this is the Ordinance that is designed to make
the provisions of the West Covina Municipal Code
conform to the changes in the State Law which
were made in the - Burns Local Sales Use Tax Law. These
amendments become effective on January 1. What the amendments do is
to eliminate certain exemptions from the Sales and Use Tax which
have been enjoyed by utilities in California. The change was pre-
dicated upon the reduction in the ratio of assessed value to market
value of utility properties of 25%.
• Councilman Young: This is an area where we have very little dis-
cretion?
Mr. Wakefield: Right. We are required to make our tax
uniform.
Motion carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Young, Nichols, Shearer, Chappell, Lloyd
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ORDINANCE #1230 The City Attorney presented:
ADOPTED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF WEST COVINA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1224
AND APPROVING A PROPOSED REVISED LEASE OF PARK-
ING FACILITIES FROM THE PARKING AUTHORITY OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA."
Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Young and
carried, to waive further reading of the body of said Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Young, to
adopt said Ordinance. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Young, Nichols, Shearer, Chappell, Lloyd
• NOES: None
ABSENT: None.
MAYOR LLOYD RECESSED THE COUNCIL MEETING AT 11:30 P.M. FOR THE
PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
AND THE PARKING AUTHORITY MEETING. CITY COUNCIL RECONVENED AT
11:37 P.M.
- 37 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Thirty-eight
CITY MANAGER AGENDA 10/9/73
LAFCO SPHERE OF INFLUENCE Mr. .Aiassa: Mr. Mayor, you have two
STUDY III - Staff Report reports. One I submitted to
you in regard to the meeting
of the City Administrators -
Don Russell, myself and Mrs. Bonnell. It appears that we still want to
• maintain the same recommendation we received from LAFCO and that is using
the railroad right of way as the boundary line.
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Chappell, to move
approval of the.Staff recommendation.
Councilman Shearer: I assume the City will be represented tomorrow at
the hearing by the Mayor?
Mayor Lloyd: I will be there. Who else would like to join me?
I know Mr. Zimmerman is going. Councilman
Chappell?
Councilman Chappell: I can't go, Mr. Mayor. I have a meeting in the
morning that is an hour and half drive from here.
Councilman Shearer: I don't think I will be attending in the morning,
I don't believe that I will be getting out of bed
but if I feel better I will be there.
Mayor Lloyd: All right. I will be in attendance. There seems
to be a great deal of comment certainly in the
newspapers in regard to irate Councilmen and I
think it would be safe to point out.that,I find no Councilman on this
Council enraged. I think they are concerned and properly so. I think
• they have done what I consider to be a very level good job on behalf
of the City. I know Councilman Chappell has gone forward and tried to
sell the City's point to other people around. I know that Councilman
Shearer has done exactly the same. I know that every member of this
Council has spoken. I have seen no evidence of enragement. I think
there was a great deal of calm, cool deliberate consideration to a
problem, which by the way was not of our own doing but thrust upon us
as a result of a decision by our good legislators in Sacramento. As a
result for the demand for a creation of spheres of influence the
LAFCO has not with a great deal of glee come into establishing spheres
of influence. When you establish spheres of influence you do indeed
approach the ego of cities, including the City of West Covina and I
am certain equally the ego of the City of Covina. I think there has
been consideration given and whatever the outcome may be I am going to
say without any reservation this City will of course abide by it.
There is.no doubt we will support that which is recommended by the
staff at LAFCO not because it - quote "favors our position" but because
I think it is the logical division of influence and I want to clarify
my position for the Tribune or any other paper that wishes to listen.
I was of course perturbed at reading an article tonight wherein I
found myself saying that these were strictly political - and indeed
they are, the individuals are not political but the situation is
political. We are involved with the identification of these cities
and West Covina, as I said, is going to do its level best.
I will be there and if necessary I will stand up
• and speak in support of our stand. I think we have every right to ask
for a continuation of what LAFCO staff has recommended. They have done
so after serious study and there is a staff report to this agency and I
am going to do my best to have the Agency go forward and find in the
favor of staff, not the City of West Covina, although in this case I
think it is favorable to West Covina. But I would also point out
the City of Covina has indeed not been challenged in its request for
its area of influence. What has really happened is they have challenged
other cities for areas - the City of Glendora, the City of Azusa and I
believe San Dimas, and they are now contending with the.City of West
Covina. What it amounts to is apparently they see a necessity to bust
- 38 -
CITY COUNCIL Page Thirty-nine
" CITY MANAGER AGENDA - LAFCO 10/9/73
LJ
0
out from their present position to incorporate a greater amount of area.
I don't disagree with their right to make that stand. Certainly it is
theirs; all I disagree with is the stand they take. I don't do it in
the function of enragement and I know no one on this Council does, nor
does staff. We will go down there and do our level best to get that
which I firmly believe belongs in the sphere of influence of the City of
West Covina for a basic simple reason - that we can serve better than
any other legislative entity in this area and that is really what it
amounts to. Does anybody else have a comment?
Councilman Shearer: Yes, just one. From the whole concept of the
sphere of influence there was a recent editorial
that stated the best solution of the problem -
it best be left to the voters of the community - and I wholeheartedly
ascribe to this. I think the opinion of this Council many many weeks
ago was along this line. However, we didn't have a choice in the matter.
The legislators in Sacramento said there will be a sphere of influence.
Therefore certain meetings between Mr. Aiassa and Mr. Russell were
necessary not because we were trying to decide the fate of people in
unincorporated areas but because the legislature said we do this and we
complied. If I had a vote.I for one would have voted never to have had
a sphere of .influence study but that was not my choice.
Mayor Lloyd: I would like to add - Mike - certainly as an
accolade to you, I think the City of West Covina
has been well served by you as a reporter. I have
personally been delighted with the way you interpreted the situation.
Mr. Aiassa - do we need a motion on this?
Mr. Aiassa: Yes, Mr. Mayor,
be directed to
Council.
you need a motion that the Mayor
carry out the wishes of the
Motion by Councilman Shearer that the Mayor be authorized to present
the Council's position tomorrow at the LAFCO meeting. Seconded by
Councilman Chappell and carried.
PROPOSED CONTRACT WITH Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor - is
WILLIAMS & MOCINE there any urgency
(Redevelopment Areas) that this matter
be deed d
i e on tonight
It is a quarter to 12 and my back aches. This is an item that I think
perhaps is worthy of some discussion in view of the fact that earlier
tonight we had a Merced/Orange Plan that didn't hold water when we
came right down to it and here we are being asked to spend another
$12,000 for another report, that I am not saying will come out the same
way, but I would like to see this held over so we can give it more
time and consideration.
Councilman Young: Mr. Mayor, I concur with Mr. Shearer.
Mayor Lloyd: I have a motion and a second to hold over.
Motion carried.
EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by
(Personnel) Councilman Shearer and carried, to hold over to
• CIVIC CENTER the next Council meeting.
PARKING DIRECTIONAL Mr. Aiassa: There is a staff report.
SIGNS - Staff Report All they want to do is
in the median strip at the Civic Center. put up directional signs
Councilman Shearer moved approval of the Staff Report; Councilman
Young seconded.
- 39 -
CITY COUNCIL. Page Forty
CITY MANAGER AGENDA - CC PARKING SIGNS 10/9/73
•
Councilman Young: Is there anything wrong with making this read
"Civic Center - Citrus Court - Free Parking"?
I think you would get a lot more trade. At
most places where you park in an area like this you have to pay to
park and if you say "free" it will help.
(Staff had no objections.)
Motion amended and carried to include "Free
Parking."
CITY MANAGER'S Mr. Aiassa: With Council permission I would
VACATION like to take two days off on
the llth and 12th of October.
Mayor Lloyd: I have no objection, but this time take the time
off.
Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Council-
man Young and carried, that the City Manager take two days vacation
October 11 and 12, 1973.
MAYOR'S REPORTS
PROCLAMATIONS: Mayor Lloyd:
of National Guard and Reserve Forces"
"Animal Welfare Day" October 13, 1973.
so proclaim. (No objections.)
I have been asked to proclaim
"National Business Women's Week"
October 21 - 271 1973; "Support
October 14 - 20, 1973; and
If there are no objections I
J. M. ROCHE, Mayor Lloyd: We have a statement of support,
NATIONAL CHAIRMAN National Committee for Employer
"STATEMENT OF SUPPORT" Support of the Guard and
Reserve. We accept the state-
ment.
COUNCILMEN'S REPORTS/
COMMENTS
Councilman Chappell: Two things, Mr. Mayor. What did we get
this for?
Mr. Aiassa: That is informational and it represents
the General Plan of Covina which does not
include the area south of the freeway.
Councilman Chappell:
Secondly.
The West Covina
Republicans
Group has
asked that these
chambers be made
available
to them to put on
a pro and con
on Proposition I for the
citizens of
the community and
ask that Council
approve this meeting.
We are simply
sponsoring this, I
think the
League of Women Voters
is providing the
"no" to it and
Governor Reagan's
office is providing the
"yes" to it.
I should be a timely
item because
we are going to vote on
it the following
week.
• Councilman Young: As a democrat I will move approval of the request
because I do respect the source it comes from.
I would also like to inquire of the City Attorney
if there is any legal problems involved?
Mr. Wakefield: None.
Motion seconded by Councilman Chappell and carried.
. " CITY COUNCIL
Page Forty-one
10/9/73
r1
U
DEMANDS Motion by Councilman Shearer to approve Demands
totalling $489,200.39 as listed on Demand Sheets
C913 through C916, C852A and B, and 593A through
594A. Seconded by Councilman Young and carried
on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Young, Nichols, Shearer, Chappell, Lloyd
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ADJOURNMENT Motion by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Council-
man Shearer and carried, to adjourn meeting at
11:55 P.M.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
APPROVAL
MAYOR
- 41 -