Loading...
12-22-1975 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 22, 1975 The regular meeting of the City Council called to order at 7s32 P.M. in the West Covina Council Chambers by Mayor Ken Chappell. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor.Chappells the invocation was given by the Reverend John Freitag, Immanuel Lutheran Church. ROLL CALL Presents Mayor Chappell, Councilmen's Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice Others Presents George Aiassa, City Manager Lela Preston, City Clerk Gloria Davidson, Dpty. City Clerk George Wakefield, City Attorney Michael Miller, Public Services Director Leonard Eliot, Controller Bob ScYraef er ,- Traf�f is °Engineer;, Ray Diaz, Planning Director Gus Salazar, Redevelopment Coordinator Fred Terrell, Administrative .Intern Bill Freemon, S.G.V.D.T. APPROVAL OF MINUTES December 8, 1975 Councilman Miller made the following corrections Page 8, paragraph 10, should reads "...and, 4 of the 5 required showings..." Councilman Shearer made the following corrections Page 34, paragraph 11, should reads °'...says the Council appreciates the recommendation of the Traffic Committee..." Motion made by Councilman Shearer, . seconded.by,Councilman Tice to approve the minutes of December 8, 1975 as corrected. Motion carried. , CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Chappell explained the procedure of the Consent Calendar items and asked if there were comments on any of the following items. - 1 - CITY COUNCIL Consent Calendar December 22, 1975 Page Two 1. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS a) CALIFORNIA REGIONAL Copy of letter to B.K.K. Company WATER QUALITY CON re Waste Discharge Requirement's TROL BOARD, LOS for the B.K.K. Company Class I ANGELES REGION Landfill. (Receive and refer to Staff) b) BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Notice of Relinquishment of Jurisdiction re Nogales Street Project, Cash Contract No. 2054, effective 10 days after December 15, 1975• (Receive and file) c) LOS ANGELES CITY Re Implementation of Proceedings to CLERK, REX E. LAYTON Establish a County Service Area. (Receive and refer to Staff) d) ANDEL DEVELOPMENT Appealing certain conditions set CORPORATION, DELBERT forth'by the Planning Commission B. HENSLEY re Precise Plan No. 661. (Receive and refer to Hearing Item No. B-2) e) STATE DEPARTMENT OF Notice of new legislation requiring FISH AND GAME said department to license most species of wild animals and requesting names and addresses of people owning such animals. (Refer to Staff) Withdrawn. Refer to Page4::4 f) MRS. MARY HAMLET, Requesting Mail Order Business'License dba THE CANYON CITY (Approve subject to review by the City DEPOT Attorney) g) MOUNT SAN ANTONIO Re annual Marathon running event RELAYS scheduled for Saturday, April 24, 1976, and requesting approval of route through City. (Refer to Staff) h) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Re Los Angeles County Application for DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Designation as a Health Systems Agency SERVICES and schedule of Public Hearings. ( Receive and: refer to Staff) i) LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA Requesting cities to contact their CITIES respective Supervisors to ask the Board of Supervisors to defer action on the County Proposal to Eliminate Gas Tax Aid to Cities Program for the time being. (Refer to Staff)(Withdrawn. Refer to Pages 4 and 5) j) LOCAL AGENCY FORMA- Notice of Proposed Hearing, January 14, TION. COMMISSION: 1976, re proposed Annexation No. 198 to County Sanitation District No. 21. (Refer to Staff) - 2 - 1, f CITY COUNCIL Consent Calendar 2. * PLANNING COMMISSION a) SUMMARY OF ACTION • 3. RECREATION AND PARKS COMMISSION a) MINUTES 0- b) SUMMARY OF ACTION December 22, 1975 Page Three December 17, 1975 (Accept and file) November 20, 19751,, (Receive and file) December 16, 1975 (Accept and file) 4. HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION a) SUMMARY OF ACTION December 18, 1975 (Accept and file) 5. YOUTH ADVISORY .COMMISSION a) MINUTES November 25, 1975 (Receive and file) Adj Reg Mtg b) MINUTES December 9, 1975 (Receive and file) Adj Reg Mtg 6. ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS AND/OR RELEASE OF BONDS a) TRACT NO. 25047 Locations Fairgrove Avenue, east of RELEASE CASH DEPOSIT Lark Ellen Avenue. UMARK INC. Authorize release of cash deposit in the amount of $570 for setting monu- ments. Monuments in place. (Staff recommends release) 7. ABC APPLICATIONS Chief of Police Recommends NO PROTEST a) Golden Tripot Corp. dba O',MEXZ RESTAURANT Chin-Cheng Peng, Pres. 533 S. Glendora Avenue 243 S. Murphy Sunnyvale, Ca. 8. TRAFFIC COMMITTEE MINUTES a) REVIEW ACTION December 16, 1975 (Accept and file) (Patesrgwg.6)Refer to discussion on 9. CITY TREASURER g a) NOVEMBER REPORT Report for the Month of November, 1975 (Accept and file) Councilman Tice requested that Item 1-e be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion; Councilmen Tice and Miller requested that Item 8-a be removed for discussions Mayor Chappell requested Item 1-i be removed for discussion. - 3 - I • 9 CITY COUNCIL Consent Calendar December 22, 1975 Page Four Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller to approve Consent Calendar items with the exception of Items 1-ei, 1-i and 8-a. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: NOES : ABSENT: ITEM 1-e STATE DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME Councilman Tices Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell None None Does this over -ride any Licensing Ordinance of the City? Mr. Wakefield: It is my understanding that it does not. We have our own regulatory licenses as far as wild animals are concerned. This is for the State Department, in addition to ours. Councilman Tices Have they given us a specific list of what they consider wild animals? Mr. Aiassa: No, we are going to ask for it.. Councilman Shearers I was unaware that we license any animals in this City -other than dogs. Mr. Wakefield: We have a permits there is no fee involved. Councilman Shearers Are we required to provide this information? Mr. Wakefield: I think not; it is a convenience to them. Councilman Shearer: My comment iss they should have thought of that before they.made it a State law - the difficulty 'they . were ' go'ing 'to have in enforcing it. Here is another example of "panic legislation." My feeling when I read this was to write back and say that we do not license such animals, and thank you. But, perhaps the Council wishes to be a little more cooperative. Mayor Chappell: The recommendation is to refer the matter to Staff. Maybe they will come up with some ideas. Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller to refer Item 1-e.to Staff. Motion carried. ITEM 1-i LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES Mayor"Chappell: This matter also appears on the Agenda under Public Works, Item 6. As you know, I am the Vice -President of the Los Angeles Division of the League of California Cities. Rather than referring this Item to Staff, I would like us to act - 4 - • • CITY COUNCIL Consent Calendar December 22, 1975 Page Five as speedily and directly as we cart -.,to indicate to Supervisor Schabarum that we certainly want some time to have the League prepare a good document outlining reasons for not eliminating this portion of our assistance. So, if I could have a motion authorizing the Mayor to write a letter to our Supervisor requesting him to hold off until the end of February to allow the League preparation' time... Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Tice to approve Mayor Chappell's request. Motion carried. ITEM 8-a TRAFFIC COMMITTEE MINUTES Councilman Tice: Re Item 5 of the Minutes, I am in favor of adopting the Blue Curb Law, but I do notsee how we can enforce it. Mr. Wakefield: That section of the Law which relates to enforcement is the amendment to the Vehicle Code which authorizes the City to paint a portion of a curb blue and thereby reserve that space for use by the physically handicapped, particularly those persons having special license plates to identify the handicapped. It would be enforced in the same general fashion as the yellow and red curbs. Councilman Tice: There are existing parking spaces marked people abusing them. type of thing. Mayor Chappell: for use by the handicapped, for instance in the parking structure, but I see So, I do have a question of enforcing this the percentage of people the State of California to the handicapped? The Has the State come up with a sticker for the windshield? Some license plates indicate a handicapped individual, but using them is small. Could we suggest to that a special sticker be adopted and issued sticker would allow us to enforce the law. Mr. Wakefield: I would think that the appropriate Agency to issue such a sticker or certificate would be the Department of Motor Vehicles in connection with the annual renewal of the vehicle registration. Mayor Chappell: Then, if there is no objection, the Mayor will write a letter to the proper Agency recommending the sticker. (There was no objection by the Council.) Councilman Miller: Re Item 3 of the Minutes, in the Traffic Signal Warrants,91-a and 91-b, what are the grounds for recommending the signal? - 5 - CITY COUNCIL Consent Calendar December 22, 1975 Page Six Mr. The Traffic Signal Warrants are the guidelines for the installation of traffic signal devices. There is situation where you can have none fully satisfied up through Warrant No. 8 and still be met. In,this particular case there is an additional problem which is not outlined in the Report. There is.no crosswalk at this location. When the State installed the traffic signals at the ramps, the City.requested the installation of crosswalks there because of the number of school children crossing Grand Avenue from the apartments to the east. At the present time, one of the major problems is that the children are crossing up and down the whole area. This is one of the reasons' a for requesting the installation, s well as the delay caused to traffic trying to,--�*ilt_: Fairway Lane. Councilman Millers Thank you. Now, on page 13 of'the Minutes, dealing with left turns at the intersections. For clarity, on Workman Avenue you have a left turn for the'southbound; apparently there is no need for a left turn for the northbound. Mr..,Sc.,haefer:- There is an existing pocket at that location. The median was constructed up to Workman Avenue as part of the freeway widening project. Therefore, it was not included. Councilman Millers Thank you. Now, on page 15 of the Minutes, another point of clarification at this point there are two signs for the RTD at the location; is there a third needed, or will the two existing signs be combined? Mr. Sc-lia-efer: The situation was such that the RTD requested Ie4u'ested the two existing signs on a pending approval basis to handle the Christmas traffic. They were given permission to erect the signs pending Council approval. Councilman -Miller: I see no reason why they cannot be approved tonight. Thank you. Motion made by Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Tice to accept and file Item 8'-a. Motion carried. Mayor Chappell: Mr. Miller, this may be a good place for one of our new benches$ Councilman Shearers Another good place would be Cameion and Orange Avenues. Mr. Miller; We will be looking into all of these. CITY COUNCIL December 22-, 1975 General Agenda Items Page Seven Award of Bids GENERAL AGENDA ITEMS AWARD OF BIDS PAINTING CITY HALL, Bids were received -in the Office.of POLICE FACILITY AND the City Clerk up to 1Os00 A.M., on PARKING STRUCTURE Wednesday, November 19, 1975, and thereafter publicly opened and read. Held over from November 24th and December 8th to this date. Review a Staff Report and award contract. Councilman Tices I am amazed at the range of the bids - a low of $8900 to a high of $57,000. Does everyone fully understand? Mr. Aiassas This is one of the reasons we carried this matter over. Mr. Bill Fowler, Head of the Building and Safety Depart- ment,checked out this individual and it appears that he has all of the requirements, and this is his price. Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Browne to award the contract to Mr. Nick .Mantikas in the amount of $8900. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYESs Shearer-, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOESs None ABS12i T s None PUBLIC WORKS ACCEPT CORPORATION GRANT Locations Wescove Place between Glendora DEED - BPO-E LODGE NO.1996 Avenue and Sandy Hook Street: Review Engineer's Report. RESOLUTION NO. 5161 The City Attorney presenteds ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING CORPORATION GRANT DEED EXECUTED BY THE BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS, LODGE NO. 1996, NAD DIRECTING THE RECORDATION THEREOF. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of the body of Resolution 5161. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution 5161. Motion • carried on roll call vote as followss AYESs Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOESs None ABSENTS None - 7 _ 0 CITY COUNCIL General Agenda Items Public Works December 22, 1975 Page Eight TRACT NO. 26909 Location: Northwest corner of Shadow APPROVING FINAL MAP Oak Drive and Gemini Street. Review DONALD L. BREN COMPANY Engineer's Report. RESOLUTION NO- 5162 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FINAL MAP TRACT NO. 26909 AND ACCEPTING AN AGREEMENT BY THE SUB- DIVIDER AND SURETY BOND TO SECURE SAME. Motion made by Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Browne to waive further reading of the body of Resolution 5162. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Browne to adopt Resolution 5162. Motion carried on roll call vote as followss AYESs. Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None NORTH VINCENT AVENUE PROGRESS Ii6cktio North Vincent Avenue.. REPORT AND AUTHORIZATION TO Revjew'E'ngineerls Report. REQUEST,RIGHT-OF-WAY SERVICES FROM LOS ANGELES COUNTY Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller to authorize the City Manager -to request right-of-way services from Los Angeles County under the terms of the County general services agreement. Motion carried. TRACT NO. 26283 Location: North side of Amar Road APPROVING FINAL MAP near Temple Avenue-. COVINGTON BROTHERS Review Engineer's Report. RESOLUTION NO. 5163 The City Attorney.,presenteds ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST-COVINA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FINAL MAP OF TRACT NO. 26283 AND ACCEPTING AN AGREEMENT BY THE -SUB- DIVIDER AND SURETY BOND TO SECURE SAME. Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by.Councilman Miller to waive further reading of -the body of Resolution 5163. Motion carried, Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution 5163. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYESs Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOESt None ABSENTt None 51 CITY COUNCIL December 22, 1975 General Agenda Items Page Nine - Public Works WEST COVINA HOSPITAL Location: Orange Avenue between AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT Cameron-Aven'ue and San Bernardino, STREET VACATION - CORP. Freeway. • QUIT CLAIM DEED Review Engineer's Report Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Browne to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk rk to execute amendment to land exchange agreement. Motion - carried. . I RESOLUTION NO 5164 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION.OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA,-CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE VACATION OF A CERTAIN PORTION OF ORANGE AVENUE SUBJECT TO THE RESERVATION AND EXCEPTION OF CERTAIN RIGHTS AND EASEMENTS. 'Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Shearer to waive further reading of the body of Resolution 5164. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Shearer to adopt Resolution 5164. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT None RESOLUTION 5165 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CORPORATION QUIT CLAIM DEED IN FAVOR OF WEST COVINA HOSPITAL, AND DIRECTING THE RECORDATION THEREOF,. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Tice to waive further reading of,the body of Resolution 5165. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Tice to adopt Resolution 5165- Motion carried on roll call vote as followss AYES: Shearer, Miller', Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ';ABSENT s None STATUS OF ATC FUNDING Request County Board of Supervisors to continue funding the Aid to Cities Program. Action taken by Council under Consent Calendar, Item 1-i. REVISED WASTE DISCHARAGE Motion made by Councilman Shearer, REQUIREMENTS - B.K.K. seconded by Councilman Miller to LANDFILL (Informational) receive and file report. Motion carried. _9® 0 CITY COUNCIL City Attorney CITY ATTORNEY_ ORDINANCE NO. 1284 ADOPTED December 22, 1975 Page Ten The City Attorney presenteds AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO REZONE CERTAIN PREMISES. (Zone Change Application No. 494 - City Initiated) Locations Parks Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of the body of Ordinance 1284. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Ordinance 1284. Motion carried on roll -call vote as followss ORDINANCE NO.. 1285 ADOPTED AYESs Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOESt None ABSENTS None The City Attorney presenteds. . AN ORDINANCE OF:THE .CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING PART 16 OF CHAPTER 2 OF ARTICLE IX OF THE"WES-T COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE'RELATING TO,UNCLASSI- FIED USES* Amendment No. 131) Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Browne to waive further reading of-the.;body of Ordinance 1285. Motion carried. seconded by Councilman Browne carried on roll call vote as ORDINANCE NO. 1286 ADOPTED ,Motion made,by Councilman Tice, to adopt Ordinance 1285. Motion follows& AYES$ Shearer, Chappell NOES: None ABSENTs None Miller, Browne, Tice, The City Attorney presenteds AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO REZONE CERTAIN PREMISES. (Zone Change Application No. 496 - City Initiated) Locations Northeast corner of West Covina Parkway and the eastbound on and off -ramps of I-10. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of the body of Ordinance No. 1286.., Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Ordinance 1286. Motion carried on roll call vote as followss AYESs Shearer, Miller,.Brovme, Tice, Chappell NOESs None ABSENTs None - 10 - • CITY COUNCIL Public Hearings PUBLIC HEARINGS DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 11 TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 2895R ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT December 22, 1975 Page Eleven Locations West of Nogales Street, North of Shadow Oak Drive. REPORT SUPPLEMENT Requests Approval of a Development Butler/Umark Plan for 30 acres and an accompanying tentative tract map for a 168 lot subdividion in the PCD Zone (Woodside Village), and certification of an Environmental Impact Report Supplement. Denied by Planning Commission Resolution No. 2623. Appealed by Applicant on November 25, 1975. (Proof of Publication in the West Covina Tribune on December 11, 1975 received. 1 Mailed Notice.) Mr. Diaz: The Planning Commission, at their regular meeting,November 19, 1975, adopted Resolution 2623 rejecting the application of Butler/Umark, Inc. to develop said property. (Mr. Diaz presented slides of the subject area, four proposed floor plans, the elevation of the proposed units, the materials board, and Study Plan A.) The primary reason for denial by the Planning Commission was that it was felt the developer did not meet the objectives and intent of the Planned Community,_. Development Zone - "To provide the developer with.greater flexibility in site design, density, and housing unit options in order to . stimulate variety and innovation within the framework of a quality residential environment; and encourage the most effective use of a site with a variety of residential environments providing necessary public facilities, ample open space and a functional, well-balanced community. The objective of providing -the developer with flexibility was attempted with the designation of developable areas with density segments rather than conventional dwelling unit types. It is Staff's feeling that the intent was to provide flexibility rather than a method of constructing single family homes on what could be considered substandard lot sizes: we felt the lots proposed are substandard from the intent of the PCD Zone (although there is no minimum lot size in the PCD Zone). (Mr. Diaz presented a chart illustrating comparable single family homes and lot sizes,in Woodside Village.) (Mr. Diaz corrected the Staff Report as follows: The average lot size is 5113 square feet; however, eliminating the 8 largest lots, the average lot size drops to 4950 square.feet without common open space area.) As far as open space is concerned, in the Amendment to the Woodside Village Master Plan two things • were done: (1) A definition was given to "open space." so that mere 2sl slopes could not be counted against streets, and (2) the amount of open space required to off -set the streets was reduced from 100 percent to 80 percent in order to permit developers to use the gross amount of acreage multiplied by the dwelling unit density category. CITY COUNCIL Public Hearings Dev. Plan No. 11 December 22, 1975. Page - Twelve We note that there is no common open space in the proposed development that qualifies. In terms of the Code, the homes;,and ,,,and • the ground coverage of the lot requirements are met. The amount of homes per net density requirement is met. But, Staff feels, and the Planning Commission concurred with that fee ' ling, that the intent of the PCD Zone was to provide more than average lot sizes of 5113 square feet without any off -set open space provisions. As pointed out in the Staff Report, prior to the PCD Zone,,the smallest lots which could be developed in the City were 7500 square feet. Although none of the present Staff was employed by the City at the time the PCD Zone was developed, it is Staff's feeling that the intent of the Zone was to permit smaller lot sizes to be developed as long as some portion of the differences in the lot sizes be used in common open space. Staff, therefore, recommended denial of the application and the Planning Commission upheld the recommen- dation. In addition to the Staff Report, the Staff did recommend to the Commission that should the applica- tion be approved, certain conditions be applied. Staff would make that same recommendation to the Council. THIS IS�THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING OF TESTIMONY FOR OR AGAINST DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 11, TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 28958. IN FAVOR M. Butler, Pres. Butler Housing Corp. (Sworn in by City Clerk.) 1691 Kentering Ave. Gentlemen, with your permission, our Irvine, California presentation to you this evening will be a little longer than the one we made to the Planning Commission. We feel that although we had two Study Sessions with the Commission, we did not thoroughly succeed in explaining our intentions to them. Because'of this feeling, we feel that we should make a more detailed presentation to you this evening so that we.:,-'.- will be able to inform you as to the progression of our reasoning and the fact that we have fully and completely, in our opinion, complied with the provisions of the present City Ordinance. As I indicated to the'Commission, we would like to compliment you on the Ordinance under which we are operating, It does give latitude to the developer for the full employment of architectural and engineering principles. This enables us, for one of the first times in our business career, to actually adapt a housing and land planning scheme into one 'package. interest of our presentation the verbatim comments of two time of our Hearing. I think it would be in the best if I was to begin n by reading all,-- 'of of the Planning'Commissioners at the (The Council indicated that they were in possession of a copy of.the verbatim transcript.of,that Hearing, had read same and were familiar with.same.) - 12 - CITY COUNCIL Public Hearings Dev. Plan No. 11 December 22, 1975 Page Thirteen As we read the Ordinance, as we understand it, the Ordinance is applicable to the property that we have. We see that there are two methods provided the developer here. (1) Creation of a 210 unit attached housing development with common area and recreational facilities. (2) Creation of 168 single family housing development without common area and recrea- tional facilities. After analyzing No. 1, we went to No. 2. Tonight we will be speaking to you on our employment and enactment in the use of the provisions of method No. 2 under the Ordinance. We believe that we have complied with all aspects of the Ordinance. We are asking for no waivers, nor any changes to the Ordinance, nor any variances. We believe that we have complied in each and every respect of the Ordinance, and have fully met the intent of the Ordinance. In our opinion, we have created a highly innovative, very effective subdivision that matches house and lot design. We think that we have created a subdivision that will be extremely successful for all of the elements who enjoy the benefits of a subdivision - the City, the residents, and the developer. We feel that this subdivision complies with virtually all of the discussions that we' -have had with the Planning Commission, And,. although there is a controversy between Staff and'diirse-IV-6st We feel that we have complied ,with the Ordinance in full measure. I would like to emphasize that we look at this property on the basis of the Zoning that is on it - 7 units per acre. We do not contend, nor have we ever represented, that the project we propose is in any way comparable to the developments designed for 5 units per acre. We have divided our remarks into a series of remarks. Part I is regarding our land plan; and, that i.s,divided into two categories. The first speaks to the subject `,of', congestion, and the second to substandard lots. Under the comments regarding con- gestion, I would like to ask Mr. Hunsaker to hold up the land plan which, in our opinion, fully illustrates what we might have done with a townhouse development. According to our calculations and understanding of the Ordinance, we would be permitted to develop 210 houses with a common area. From this plan, you can see we would,have garages served off of alleys, 400 square feet of patio area, and, of course, the living area. This is a historical townhouse type of development. The common area would be served by a homeowners association. As of today., this type of development, generally, cannot be financed. And, those of us who have them available on the market today are experiencing extreme difficulty in selling them; i.e. the triplex development pending in this area. Knowing this, wee analyzed what would • be the best thing to do as an alternate to develop the,.subject property. The first thing we did was to detach the houses. Applying the rules of the Ordinance, we came up with a development using the same street patterns as discussed in Study Sessions with the Planning Commission, and a total of 168 single family homes. We discarded the common area because in order to have a common area - 13-- CITY COUNCIL Public Hearings Dev. Plan No. 11 December 22, 1975 Page Fourteen we would have to establish a homeowners association. Today it is very difficult to merchandize property in the lower price ranges with a homeowners association. The people who are going to buy homes in the $38,000 to $45,000 price range simply cannot afford to hire someone else to paint their house, repair their roof, mow their lawn, etc. So, we have taken the open area and drawn lot lines; the people can maintain their own homes and do their own repair work. We feel that this development enables us to do something unique in today's market. That is, to take a house plan, match it to a lot, and put the development together whereby we can appeal to a specific buying segment of the market. That segment ' tobviously lies between the Kauffman and Broad development (New American Homes) and our development, Influential Homes. We believe that this development provides a very viable, highly desirable, more attractive means of utilizing this land. Through the proposed development, I feel that we have reduced congestion, if by "congestion" we mean numbers of people, by 20 percent. One of the Commissioners was concerned that we were creating substandard lots. We did not feel that way when we developed this plan, and by definition of the Ordinance we have not created substandard lots. We have given an alternative to townhouse type development. (Mr. Butler presented charts illustrating comparable developments on properties zoned for 7 dwelling units/acre.) Mayor Chappell: Are the units represented on the charts attached or detached units? Mr. Butlers They are attached. (Mr. Butler presented charts illustrating comparable devlopments on properties zoned for 7 dwelling units/acre and the useable yard areas.) We have tried to take the space and put it to the best use commensurate with today's market place. It is obvious to us that, on the basis of 7 dwelling units per acre, we have come up with houses that more definitely speak to the market and which provide just as much liveable space. We think it is important that in today's market and in the general tenor of America today to provide as many single family homes as possible. Therefore, we do not feel that we have provided substandard lots. We have used the provisions of the Ordinance to create what we think is an extremely innovative sub- division. • (Mr. Butler reviewed the four floor plans with the Council, noting the easy living unit pattern, side, front, and rear yards.) - 14 - CITY COUNCIL December 22, 1975 Public Hearings Page Fifteen Dev. Plan No. 11 Two of the floor plans require different widths of lots, and they have been scheduled for the larger lots in the subdivision. So, we have really taken our property, determined what could be done lot-wise,;and taken the larger.plans and put them on the larger lots. (Mr. Butler presented two renderings illustrating street scapes, and noted that the side yard clearances are exactly the same as those for the Influential Homes which are currently selling in the $50,000 price range.) Our materials will be in the wood tones; samples.have been submitted. Basically, we'have tried to provide a family home - a single family, detached home, in lieu of the town- house, and to eliminate the necessity for the homeowner to pay $35-40 per month in homeowners association dues. Part II of our presentation concerns the overall criteria. For that purpose, I would like to ask Mr. Ron Sloan of,Umark Inc. to address the Council. R;� Sloan ( Sworn in by City Clerk.) Umark Inc. You have heard our story many, many 30961 Agoura Rd.."' times in Woodside Village. Some of West Lake Village, you were even on the Planning Commission California in 1970 when Woodside Village was approved. One of the items which I wanted to point out is the backbone facilities which we have built and put in with each development. We have not tried to cut corners. Every backbone facility on the property - the sewers, storm drains, streets, telephone and electrical facilities, has been designed according to the ultimate density that was allowed on the property. We are coming way under our densities on every development done thus far, but the backbone facilities have not been reduced. I point this out because we could have piece-mealed the facilities. For example, in this proposed tract, if we took advantage of the PCD alternative and provided common open space,'An exchange for an increased density, we would have 214 liveable dwelling units. As it is with this approach, we will only have 168, so obviously we have reduced the surface flow of traffic, the -number of people generated within the area, and, yet, we have sized the backbone facilities for more than what the area will take. As you know there is no minimum lot size called out in the PCD Ordinance. One of the reasons for that is that there simply are not too many subdivisions that are built in West Covina which require a community park to be built - that • is 20 acres of land. In Woodside Village we have even graded that property. The conventional subdivision throughout West Covina does not do this. - 15 - CITY COUNCIL December 22, 1975 'Public Hearings Page Sixteen Dev. Plan No. 11 As you read the Planning Commission minutes, you probably realized that it was denied on the basis of congestion, tightness, and too many people living in an area. The only exhibit which we used before ' the Commission is the one you now see on the bulletin board. None -,'of the others which you have seen tonight were.used. That was our fault. That is why we are here this evening. We want the Council to realize and_ see" :what we are trying to develop. We are not just trying to squeeze people together. If that were the case, we would go to the townhouse or some other Vehicle to accomplish this. Some of you will recall the first field trip after Woodside Village was a reality - three dimensional with people living there, cars, and children. One of the first criticisms was the attached house. People did not realize that was what they had approved. I am trying to point out simply that in this proposal we are providing a single family, detached home; the person can totally live within their own yard. If we take all of these pieces of paper and all of these ordinances and throw them away... We meet every requirement and have been able to provide the single family image that people are trying to find. rovi If I live on a half acre lot, I cannot see living on something that is less than 5000 square feet; it becomes personal opinion. But, yet if you take the criteria that we have to live by and design by, we have met every requirement, and created a lesser density, Mr. Butler: I would like to conclude my remarks by saying that our presentation thus far has obviously been one of a technical nature. We have been brought to this position, however, by the economics that are in America today. I would submit to you, and I am sure that you would agree, that it is the responsibility of both the government and the private industry to house the American home -buying public. We, frankly, feel that is our principle charges to bring good housing within an affordable means. In order to do that we have to respond to the marketing demands today within the escalating costs of construction. We find, utilizing this scheme, that we can -provide people who will live in West Covina a single family, detached home at a price that will be competitive, and, perhaps even less on a monthly payment basis, than a townhouse or attached.home where the homeowners are obliged to pay a substantial monthly amount to a homeowners association. Therefore, We have attempted to create a subdivision which will (1) allow residents to utilize the open space within their own yard, (2) provide their own.maintenance services, and (3) pay for street maintenance through the dedication of streets in the subdivision. Obviously, we would like to encourage the Council -to approve our request this evening to enable us to develop what we think will be a very successful subdivision. Mr. Mayor, I am unable to respond to Mr. Diaz' charts. I have not seen them before, and could not see them during the presentation to the Council. If you would care to have me comment on them, I will need a few moments to review them. 16— CITY COUNCIL Public Hearings Dev. Plan No,-ll IN OPPOSITION.,. Maryaxin,Murphy 2904 Farview Lane West Covina, Ca. that time I did not thought "I have been weary housing on Air occupancy; the price December 22, 1975 Page Seventeen (Sworn in by City Clerk.) I don't have anything to tell you about Ordinances, I am speaking purely emotionally. I attended the Planning Commission Aearing on this matter. At speak to it, but I have thought about it and there before." I have. I have lived in Force Bases. There was no problem with was right. At the Planning Commission we were told that this is low cost housing. Now, if your point of view is San Marino, this is low cost housing. In West Covina, $38 to $40,000 is not low cost housing. During the Planning Commission Hearing, it was stated that one of the goals of the General Plan is to keep the young in West Covina. $38 to $40,000 is not going to keep too many young''-'i:n.the City. Furthermore, it certainly is not going to provide any housing for the elderly; retirees carmot.afford this type of housing. We know that there is no financing and that these attached or condominium houses are not selling. However, I do not believe that West Covina should lower its own standards by reducing the required square footage for single family homes. I was a member of the Housing Committee of the Citizens Policy Conference. As you know, we suggested that the density be decreased. Our feeling was that people do want single family detached homes, but that 5000 square feet is not adequate. I think we have to think of the future and what will happen to these homes 10 or 20 years from now. In conclusion, I would like to suggest that when anyone is presenting an exhibit in a Public Hearing, that the exhibit also be presented to the audience. This." .4evening none of the exhibits could be seen by the audience. IN REBUTTAL Mr. Butler: May I have just a moment here. THE MAYOR CALLED A RECESS AT 900 P.M. THE CITY COUNCIL RECONVENED AT gilO P.M. Mr. Butler: Just a brief comment on the charts Mr. Diaz presented to you. He has taken the lot sizes of Development Plan No. 11 and compared them to lot sizes of detached home developments within the City. Mr. Diaz: Yes, single family, detached homes in the Bren portion of Woodside Village, Amar and Shadow Oak. - 17 - CITY COUNCIL Public Hearings Dev. Plan No. 11 December 22, 1975 Page Eighteen Mr. Butler: Let me, state��. - ,that we are-not'saying to you tonight that we are under the impression that our lot sizes are equivalent to the standard lot sizes of a single family subdivision, i.e. our Influential Home Tract where we are zoned 5 dwelling units per acre. Our plan enables us to develop this property now with single family, detached housing in lieu of having it attached where we cannot proceed. We would like to develop the land. We think we have a very viable alternative which obviously complies with the Ordinance. We are not representing that this particular plan, under a 7 dwelling units per acre zoning, would compare with a subdivision we are building with a 5 dwelling units per acre zoning. In regard to Mrs. Murphy's comments, I do not know what low cost housing is any more, and I have been in the business for 17 or 18 years. The problem, of course, lies with both governmental agencies and private industry. But, it is obvious that every 30 days we are being priced right out of the market. And, every 30 days we appeal to less and less people who want to buy a private home. We do not want to compound our effort (trying to provide a low-priced home) by adding to it the burden of homeowners association dues. You cannot save enough money, gentlemen, in delivering a unit in the 210 townhouse development to off -set in the monthly payments the $35 - 40 per month dues. The cost of construction does not allow that type of saving any longer. I agree with Mrs. Murphy. I wish we could find better means. Kauffman and Broad is doing.an outstanding example of providing homes from $34 - 38,000. They are small and have virtually no amenities, but they have been popular and well - received. We are trying to fill in the gap between what Kauffman and Broad is doing and what we are doing (Influential Homes). Hopefully, this will enable some of the young to stay in West Covina. Housing for the elderly is really a program which is specialized, and it is not our speciality. are not answer, are not viable houses. today's Mrs. Murphy admitted that condominiums selling. I would submit to her in reply that this is our It is a subdivision that can be developed and sold. We reducing the square footage of lots here. We are giving a alternative It is the market, under the existing Ordinance to living in town - .only method by which we can move forward in We have built better than 2500 homes in the last 15 years on 5000 square foot lots, and, to my.knowledge, they have all continued to grow in value; the people have enjoyed excellent living standards; the people have had all of the yard area needed; and, they have complied with all of the.FHA/VA require- ments. I think 5000 square feet is adequate if the house is properly designed, and I submit that we have done so. • rebuttal. Thank you for this opportunity for THERE BEING NO FURTHER PUBLIC TESTIMONY, PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. INW-M CITY COUNCIL Public Hearings Dev, Plan No. 11 December 22, 1975 Page Nineteen Councilman Browne: I sat on the Planning Commission when the concept of the PCD originally came 0 into our City. As was stated by Mr. Sloan, some of'the first developments that went in were not to the liking of the City Council or the Planning Commission of that time. We repeatedly hear of economic conditions and that certain types of dwellings are not selling. Each time a new development comes in, the developer uses that as his selling point to change the concept of the PCD. I think the real intent of the PCD was outlined in the Resolution of the Planning Commission - "To provide the developer with greater flexibility in site design." Very frankly, I do not see any flexibility exhibited in the site design here. To me, this is an interpretation of whoever wants to read the Ordinance,,,- how much can I squeeze into a given area of land? Mr. Diaz indicated that the minimal lot size throughout the City is 7500 square feet. The PCD does not dictate any particular size, however, there are designations of density. Tonight I am not in arguement with the density proposed; however, I am in argu6%ment about the lot sizes. To take a single family dwelling and place it on a small lot size, substandard, what option do the people have living in that house other than going out in the backyard which has an average 20 foot depth? People generally like to have an area for gardens or swimming pools, and that would not be possible. The average lot size depicted here is way below that of previous developments. You can throw any number of figures you want together,;but you have to compare apples to apples. Innovation is looked upon differently bya developer than by those people who have to live with it. I don't think that this is good judgment and -d.eclinates -_-.:`,=the original intent of the PCD. The PCD relates to open space:; -areas interlinking throughout the whole area; paseos connecting the open spaces. I see none of that here. People are confined to their own yards because there will be walls and fences surrounding them. I think we are creating a future situation within our City that we don't want to live with. On the curvatures of the streets there are no provisions for people parking campers, boats or trailers. You know the single family dwellings all attract that type of people. There will be an overload of cars on the streets which will be obstructive to street cleaning processes and maintenance. I think that we would see a situation similar to that in one of our ,neighboring cities. On this particular property, what was the original intent of development? Mr. Miller: The 7 dwelling unit per acre area was intended for duplex or attached type of • development. Councilman Browne: Here we are breaking up the original intent. The philosophy of economics can be used. lot sizes.) (Councilman Browne reviewed the proposed In my own mind, I personally do not believe that any single family dwelling should be built on a lot less than 7000 square feet. This would afford people to have - 19 - • 0 CITY COUNCIL December 22, 1975 Public Hearings Page Twenty Dev. Plan No. 11 gardens and swimming pools. I am sorry, I just cannot buy the concept, Councilman Shearers I will comment briefly so as not to belabor some of the points made by Councilman Browne. I recognize the economics. We are some- what on the "horns of a dilemma." Looking back to 1970, one of the first experiences I had as a Councilman was being taken out to lunch and given -a nice presentation on Woodside Village - the paseo system, etc. The impression that was given to me at that time, whether spelled out in the Ordinance or not, was that those areas designated 7 dwelling units per acre were for development of duplexes, four- plexes, etc., or cluster -type units,.which would be able to utilize sideyards and otherwise useless space. It may well be that these types of units in today's markets do not sell; so, what are the alternates? Are they to change the type of development on the land, or to change the density from 7 to 5 or 4, whatever the other is---.. for single, detached units? If the market has changed in 5 years, then perhaps the whole area should be revised. I would have to agree with Councilman Browne. While the letter of the Ordinance has been met, I do not think this was the intent of the Ordinance in 1970. Councilman Tices I think Councilmen Browne and Shearer have stated the problems we will be facing if we go this route. I, personally, do not feel that we should have anything less than 6500 square feet as far. as single residences are concerned. Councilman Millers I, too, feel that space for an individual to meet his needs is very important. I do concur with the rest of the Council. Even though we have to try to meet the market needs, etc. there are other needs that have to be considered. I wonder if, as I hear this presentation and consider other similar presentations down the road, that it is time to completely review the PCD program, Maybe the market is getting to the point where new challanges are being presented to us. Mayor Chappells When the Planned Community ty Development was presented to the Council, it was presented as a total picture. There were things at the time that I did not agree with, but because it was a complete package I went along with it. Other Councilmen at the time had the same feeling. It did appear that it was a total good plan at the time, including 7 units per acre for this particu- lar area. I never considered at that time that this would be converted to single family residences. We had - th�6 concept in the City, and still do, of 7500 square feet for a single family dwelling. I think that some coordination and study with our Planning Department is needed here. Perhaps the area should be considered for 5 dwelling units per acre. - 20 - • • CITY COUNCIL Public Hearings Dev. Plan No. 11 December 22, 1975 Page Twenty-one There are areas in the proposed plan where one could not even park a car in front of a house. There will be congestion. Some residents will have boats, campers, etc. and there will be no place to park them. I would say that the whole concept has not been violated here, but it certainly has been stretched out of shape. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Tice to uphold Planning Commission Resolution 2623 to disapprove Development Plan No. 11, Tentative Tract 28958 without prejudice. Motion carried on roll call vote as followss PRECISE PLAN NO. 661, REVISION 1 NEGATIVE DECLARATION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Delbert BP Hensley by Planning Commission on November 24, 1975. Tribune on December 11, AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None Locations Southwest corner of Glendora and Merced Avenues OF Requests Approval of a precise plan of design for a self-service car wash in the S-C (Service Commercial) Zone, and certification of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. Recommended Resolution No, 2625. Called up by Council (Proof of Publication in theWestCovina 1975 received- 32 Mailed Notices.) Mr. Diaz presented slides of the location, existing similar uses, proposed elevations, the applicant's proposal, and Study Plan A,�,as approved by the Planning Commission.) Mr. Diaz reviewed the Summary of Data, and the Conditions imposed by the Planning Commission, noting that Condition 14 will have to be worked out between the applicant and the adjacent property owner. Mr. Diazs These are the Conditions.that the Staff and the Planning Commission adopted on this development in order to assure its compatibility with the surrounding land uses. The matter was called before the Council, and I also understand that the applicant himself had wished to appeal and question some of the Conditions. . Staff would continue to recommend adoption of the Resolution as it stands, and would not recommend modification.in any event. Councilman Tice: Do you happen to know the distance between the southern -most stall and the residence on the adjacent property? I notice that stall almost abuts against the fence. Mr. Diaz: The house itself would be approximately 41 feet or more from the stall. - 21 - CITY COUNCIL Public Hearings Precise Plan No. 661.-Rev. 1 December 22, 1975 Page Twenty-two THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING OF TESTIMONY FOR OR AGAINST PRECISE PLAN NO. 661, REVISION 1. • IN FAVOR Delbert Hensley (Sworn in by City Clerk.) 615 N. Euclid The photos that were shown of the Ontario, Ca. Upland and Chino plantsthatwe operate did a good job. This is a sample of the block that we used at Chino, and is the type that we would like to use here. (He distributed samples and snapshots to the Council.) The items that the Commission found that we are in disagreement with are the ones which I will cover. Condition 14 ("The wall along the south property line shall be a height of six feet above highest finished grade of subject property.): To the best calculations that we can make at this point, this means that the wall will be approximately 10 feet high in so far as the neighbor to the south is concerned. The other problem is the approach. We could add onto the existing wall, but the wall was hid at a time when we doubt sufficient steel was used to support an addition. Thus, we are forced into the position of either tearing down the existing wall which As, I believe, totally on the adjacent property, which I am sure the owner wouldn't like, or to make. some other arrangement. If the wall is to be required,,.- .,,_we have no.. objection to building it"provided it is built on our property parallel to the existing wall. We do object to being forced to build on someone else's property or having to take"',down someone else's wall. We would be willing to remove whatever planting necessary, build the wall on our property, and replant again. Condition 2 ("Conform to all elevations as submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission. The south wall of the building shall be constructed with no openings..)s This would change the architectural configuration of our spanish arches. It could be done structurally, but we do not feel that it would accomplish anything if we build a 10 foot wall to the south and then turn around and bring the wall of our building up to the top - header line. Condition 4 ("Signs are not a part of this approval."): This has been appearing quite regularly in all of the conversation, and each time we are told "Wait until the Council acts and then we will decide on it." We submit that in every case we have submitted an application and a design of basic size.and wording for a free standing sign. We would still like to have this approved. Condition 10 ("Hours of operation shall be limited to not earlier than 7300 A.M. and not later than • 10:00 P.M. Equipment shall be turned off automatically at 103,00', P.M. to prevent its usage between lotoo P.M. and 7:00 A.M.): This creates a severe problem as far as we are concerned. This is a self-service type unit. We have found from experience that any - 22 - CITY COUNCIL December 22, 1975 Public Hearings Page Twenty-three Precise Plan No. 661,_ Rev. 1 time something does not work, no one will read the sign that says it i's-turned off; their next inclination is to destroy it. Therefore,.we do everything that we possibly can to keep every- thing working at all times. That way whenever someone puts in his 500 he gets what he pays for. To have an automatic turn-off and a sign will not solve the problem. We are perfectly willing to have our lights turned off except for the security lights at the 10:00 P.M. period, but we would object severely to having our equipment turned off and put into the position of having it damaged. We feel that the hours placed upon us also opens the door to someone objecting to us being open on Saturdays, Sundays, or Mondays, etc. - whenever they might choose. So, we feel that placing hours upon one single business is totally unacceptable unless all other businesses in the community are forced to meet the same requirement. Condition 11 ("Vehi"cular ✓access to the premises shall be limited to one driveway on Merced and one driveway on Glendora."): We have discussed this to some length with your Engineer trying to resolve the problem. We feel that the four driveways that currently exist are more appropriate to moving vehicular traffic than two driveways. We purchased this property, entered escrow on it, on the basis of its vehicular count, not pedestrian count. It is zoned for Commercial use, otherwise we would never have considered it, and the traffic count according to City records is in excess of 27,000 cars per day. We bought the property for the sake of doing business. It is our hope that we can utilize it for that purpose, but we do not see that the utilization of two driveways is preferrable to four. I think that covers the items I objected to. All other items are in agreement. IN OPPOSITION Robert Escherich (Sworn in by City Clerk.). 820 Merced Several years ago I was involved West Covina, Ca. with a steel corporation, manager of their general construction. We were involved with this type of an operation. I notice that a change in construction has taken place because, as Mr. Hensley indicated, people tend to destroy things. My office is right next door in the professional building. We have been quite concerned about what is going in. We feel that the total lack of supervision on this operation is very poor. If you go up the street about a mile on Glendora, you will find a similar operation. If you look at the graffiti on the walls, it is unbelieveable. The traffic count may be high in the area, but do we really need another one that close to the one which is already there and has been defaced? The slides of the existing operations portrayed amounts of trash. We have enough trouble keeping our parking lot clean;;with people dumping out their ashtrays, - 23 - CITY COUNCIL Public Hearings Precise Plan No. 661, Rev. 1 December 22, 1975 Page Twenty-four :this type of.operation, people are going to be dumping everything out of their cars onto the ground. People don't always care about trash bins. There is no separation required from my particular office and the operation. I look right out where those vacuum cleaners are going to be. They are going to be noisy. I feel that, if it is permitted, there should be some type of separation required between the professional building and the operation.' The traffic problems on the corner are, I know, substantial. I have heard many close calls, although I have not seen an accident there. I am there four days a week, all day long, and the changes that the City made recently there were because of problems.`Y1raffic control, I feel, is very serious. I wish to go on record as opposing this. :Chester Falacki (Sworn in by City Clerk.) 809 W. Pine St. I appeared before the Planning West Covina, Ca. Commission and voiced my objection to this proposal. I live on the property to the immediate south of the proposed development. Did the Council see the copy of the letter which I sent to the Director of the Planning Department? Mayor Chappells, The Council received a packet of information on this matter, including the minutes from the Hearing before the Planning Commission. However, a copy of your letter does not appear here separately. Mr. Falacki: My letter was dated October 31, 1975• I objected to the installation of the car wash at this location initially because it is a very noisy activity. Noise will be produced from the equipment as well as from the people utilizing it. People will be coming in, shouting, honking horns, starting cars, slamming doors, etc. I do not see how that can be prevented. The proposed use will cause my home and property to lose what little privacy we have. Standing at one point of the area to be developed, you can see my entire yard and into my home. I also object "to the pollution - the fumes. .As a member of the community, I object. This operation will become an attractive nuisance. We have youugsteTs in the area; they will migrate to the area to use their skateboards, etc. Monies will also be involved, and I would not be surprised if someone tries to come in to get the money. There will be vandalism, which I do not believe is proper anywhere, especially next to a residential area. I am concerned about the use of this parcel. We will have vehicles coming eastbound on Merced entering the facility - just how do they get to the vacuum cleaners and then to the other part? Vehicles coming north on Glendora will - 24 - CITY COUNCIL .Public Hearings Precise Plan No. 661, Rev. 1 December 22, 1975 Page Twenty-five present another problem. This is a divided street - will vehicles be required to make a U-turn, or will they turn left and then _ cut across lanes of traffic? This will be a very dangerous situation. • There are other car washes within a short distance - Glendora and Garvey (self-service), and on Vincent. I do not feel.that we need another. I would like to leave a copy of my letter with you. Mayor Chappell: Thank you. Although we do not have a copy, your remarks were entered into the minutes which we do have. Larry Epstein (Sworn in by City Clerk.) 1031 Serenade I have heard quite a bit, but I have West Covina, Ca. not heard anything about the children who go to school in the area. My daughter walks from Edgewood High School through the area daily. I feel that the safety of.the children should be taken into consideration - the possibility of excessive accidents, that is most important. There is a nursery a few doors down from this site, too. Has a police survey on accidents been done in this area? IN REBUTTAL Mr. Hensley The older unit on Glendora near Garvey has been referred to. That unit was presented to us sometime back. We seriously considered it until we contacted the City and found that the entire;area,is under a Redevelopment Plan, and the chances of getting a Redevelopment Permit on that were very slim. Insofar as supervision is concerned, at the cost of equipment that we put into plants today, we cannot afford to let them just sit and deteriorate. We are not a big corporation; our life savings are in the business, consequently, we want to see it work and be successful and clean. We own and operate the ones we have built and continue to do so. From an equipment noise standpoint, all pumps and equipment of that type are located solely within an enclosed building. We are constantly working on the vacuum noise trying to reduce the problem. Horns honking, doors closing - I don't know how to solve that. This is why we pick Commercial areas on major intersection streets; these areas should be least susceptible to residential disturbance. Our installation in Upland probably has more pedestrians than this site at any time I have been watching it. We have yet to have any problems. We do our best to discourage skateboards, etc. because, frankly, they do not wash their vehicles in the car wash. THERE BEING NO FURTHER PUBLIC TESTIMONY, PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. - 25 - CITY COUNCIL December 22, 1975 Public Hearings Page Twenty-six Precise Plan No. 661,E Rev. 1 Councilman Tides I am,concerned with several aspects of this development. One is the distance between the southern -most stall and the adjacent residence. I think there should be more open space; this is too elose. I am not so sure that this is the best use for this land. In looking at the surrounding area, I have doubts. Mr. Hensley has requested that we allow operation around the clock. There are residents in the area, so I would be concerned with that particular aspect. The Elks Lodge is across the way, and there are some gas stations. I believe the gas stations close down between 10s00 and lls00 P.M. At this point, I am not so sure this is the best area for this operation. I would rather see it in more of a commercial area. Councilman Shearers Before we get too involved, could we ask the City Attorney to make clarification? Based on the present zoning, which I believe is Service -Commercial, how much discretion does the Council have in this matter - all the way from saying that we don't want a car wash to setting Conditions on the car wash such as the height of the wall, etc. Mr. Wakefield= The car wash is a permitted use in the Service -Commercial Zone. We are faced here not with a question of zoning or use, but simply precise.plan approval. The precise plan requirement is designed to insure that the development and use of the property will'be consistent with the basic zoning and is compatible with and will not be a detriment to the surrounding properties. What is before you are the Conditions recommended by .the ;,Planning Commission which it deemed necessary to make the proposed use, which is a permitted use, compatible with the surrounding properties. Councilman Shearers Is there a definition that says what a car wash is? Does it speak to whether it is attended or unattended in the present Ordinance? Mr,. Wakefields No sir, we have no requirement with respect to that. Councilman.Shearers Could we make/requirement, and be within the laws of the City, that an attendant be on duty during the hours of operation? .Mr. Wake -fields Yes, it could be made a requirement. . Councilman.Tices Could we require elimination of the southern -most stall? Mr. Wakefield: Yes, it could be done. Councilman Shearers Could.we add a wall along the.western property line? Mr. Wakefie-lds Yes. -26- CITY COUNCIL.- December 22, 1975 -Public Hearings Page Twenty-seven Precise Plan No. 661, Rev. 1 .Councilman Tice: But, as far as the use of the property, it is zoned Service - Commercial, so we can't do too much about that. Mr. Wakefield: That is correct. Councilman Browne: I have a question relative to :the professional building - is there an existing wall at that property line? Mr. Diaz:. No, there is not an existing wall between the subject property and the professional building. Councilman Shearer: I have a question of Mr. Falacki. With the Conditions that have been discussed here, specifically the height of the wall which would be 6 feet from the highest point, and the noise abatement measures, would these answer your concerns as to noise? That sort of puts you on the spot. If you answer "yes" that does not mean you are in favor of the car wash. Mr. Falacki: That is the spot I find myself in. If I say "yes" I find myself agreeing with this particular use. I certainly do not feel that it belongs here. I was under the impression that whatever use is put in would not prevent adjacent residents from fully utilizing and enjoying their rights. I thought the precise plan had to conform to these as well as the proper zoning. Councilman Shearer: But, as far as you are concerned regarding the noise, would it be correct for me to assume that you feel as long as the wall is constructed and other measures taken, your concerns for noise would be alleviated? Mr. Falacki: I am uncertain. You never know how noise will come over a wall, or around it until.it is built. Councilman Shearer: Mr. Escherich, if a wall were built on the west property line would your main concern be alleviated? Mr. Escherich: I think it would help. I am concerned though because those vacuums are very noisy, and as Mr. Hensley said, they do not know how to control that noise. If the noise was kept and enforced within the statutory range of West Covina, I could not object to it. However, I think the chances of enforcing that are very remote. I just don't know. People don't like to go to the dentist or the M.D., so we like to keep i.t..kind of quiet. There • used to be a gas station there. Gas stations are fairly quiet. They do not have vacuums running all of the time, etc. I still have my qualms about this use. -,27- CITY COUNCIL Public Hearings. Precise Plan Not 661. Rev. 1 Councilman Shearer: Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Escherichs handle it. I would consider a that it would be a help. December.22, 1975 Page Twenty-eight Would our N.oise Ordinance be applicable at this location? Insofar as the residential property, yes. As far as the commercial property, no. If the vacuums are going to go right outside of my office, I don't feel that unless they are enclosed the wall can 6 foot walls there is a possibility Councilman Shearers I think we have a very tough situation. On one hand we have a zone which says a car wash is permitted. Yet, I think some very valid objections have been raised because of noise next to a residence. I don't necessarily agree that this,is a residential area; it is not a residential area even though there are residents adjoining it. However, that does not mean "anything goes." ,. I am concerned with the noise, and, also, with the fact that it is not supervised. When there is not an attendant on -the premises, that leads to graffiti and other types of'things we spoke to this evening. If someone is there it will not make the vacuums any quieter, but it might reduce some of the other problems. I don't know where we stand legally, but I am concerned enough aboutthis that I would move later that another Condition be added to require an attendant be present during the hours of operation. Councilman Tices, While people are wiping their cars off they. often play a radio, and that could be quite loud, particularly after 10:00 P.M. Councilman'$hearers I think that we are tied by the fact that a car wash is by law allowed in this area. In addition to the attendant, I would include some sort of a provision (wall) along the.west property line. All we can do at the present time d s to try to impose enough Conditions to make the use compatible, as much as possible, with the adjoining property. I think another wall would tend to alleviate some of the noise element, and an attendant on duty would tend to alleviate the vandalism, and have some control over the loud noise. Councilman Tices. I am concerned with the last stall, too. It is so close to the wall. . Councilman Millers Is there a way we can also require, at hopefully a reasonable cost, some type of an enclosure for the vacuums? Mr. Diaz: This.would be a Condition that the Council could place on the development as part of the precise plans the vacuum cleaners be enclosed on three sides and roofed. CITY COUNCIL December 22, 1975 Public Hearings Page Twenty-nine Precise Plan No. 661, Rev. 1 Chairman Chappells. I have another question of Mr. Falacki. At the.Planning Commission Hearings, you indicated that you would have no objection.to your .wall being torn down, and another constructed 6 feet above the highest point of the subject site. Did you agree with that? Mr. Hensley indicated that you probably would not agree with that. Has that been discussed with you? Mr. Falacki: It was mentioned at the Planning Commission Hearing. Mr. Hensley has not discussed that particular aspect with me. I see no problem there. He indicated he would prefer to construct on his property; that would be perfectly alright. I don't think he wanted to tear down my fence. Mayor Chappells That is what we will decide tonight. Councilman Browne: I am in agreement with all of the statements made by Councilmen Shearer and Tice. I think we have to resolve this in a manner that will make it compatible within the area concerned. I think we have pretty well covered it with the recommendations made by Councilmen Shearer and Tice. However, you brought up another concern with the west wall, so we will probably have to include that Condition, too. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Tice to approve Precise Plan No. 661, Revision 1 with all of the Conditions imposed by the Planning Commission.plus.the followings (1) There shall be a 6 foot wall constructed along the west property line; (2) There shall be an attendant on duty during the hours of operation; (3) There shall be a wall adjacent to the residential property 6 feet above the highest grade of the development, and that the applicant shall consult wth•the property owner to make arrangements to remove his wall and construct the wall on the development property; (4) The south wall of the installation shall be removed and a driveway of at least 25 feet constructed; (5) There shall be a semi -enclosure of the vacuum cleaners to muffle the sound - three walls with a roofs and (6) Mission type tide shall be used for roofing of the installation. Motion carried on roll call vote as followss AYESs Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOESs None ABSENTS None Note: Conditions•(1) and (2) were imposed by Councilman Shearer; Condition (3) was imposed by Councilman Browne; Condition (4) was imposed by Councilman Tice; Condition (5) was imposed by Councilman Miller; and, Condition (6) was. imposed by Mayor Chappell. • Councilman Shearers This matter points out a situation that is becoming more and more prevalent - self-service anything, i.e. gasoline, car wash, etc. We have at the present time certain facilities that are not allowed as a matter of right in any zone. They run quite a spectrum, but - 29 - CITY COUNCIL December 22, 1975, Public Hearings., Page Thirty I can think of two off -hand gas stations,and' churches would like to suggest that we instruct Staff to prepare an ordinance that would place any unattended business in the same category so we do not come to grips with another situation where we have a matter of right and we have to put a lot of Conditions on it to make it acceptable;,,we could just refuse it. Motion made by.Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Browne to instruct.Staff to prepare an ordinance that would place any unattended business into the category of unclassified use permits. Councilman Tice: How would this affect a laundromat? Councilman Shearer: It would be in the category. Motion carried. I AMENDMENT TO SECTION 5100 Ordinance Introduction on November, OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL 240 1975 and Public Hearing set for CODE BY ADOPTION OF CERTAIN this date by the City Council. AMENDMENTS TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH CODE OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller to receive and file Affidavit of Publication. Motion carried. THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENT TO SECTION 5100 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE. THERE BEING NO TESTIMONY, THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. ORDINANCE NO. 1287 ADOPTED Councilman Tice:. The City Attorney presented: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 5100 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CERTAIN ORDINANCES OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES AMENDING THE PUBLIC"HEALTH CODE OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES. What items are they talking about? Mr. Wakefield: Many years ago, the City Council adopted by Reference the Health Code of the County of Los Angeles inasmuch as the County Health Officer is, in effect, the Health. Officer for the City of West Covina. From time to time it is necessary to update the provisions of our own Ordinance to incorporate the changes that aremadein the County Health Code by the Board of Supervisors. The changes that are proposed to be adopted this evening are technical changes in the Health Code designed to redefine swimming pools,in.accordance with the definition that is in the County Ordinance to control the construction of electrode wells, and to add to,the City's Ordinances the procedures that are provided for the issuance of citations for violations of the County Health Code. - 30 - • CITY COUNCIL Public Hearings Amendment to Section 5100 Motion made seconded by Councilman Shearer to waive body of Ordinance 1287. Motion carried. _December 22, 1975 Page Thirty-one by Councilman Browne, further reading of the Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Shearer to adopt Ordinance 1287, Motion carried on roll call vote as followss VACATION OF EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS -OF -WAY - WEST COVINA PARKWAY PREVIOUSLY VACATED - PROTEST HEARING AYESs Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOESs None ABSENTS None Locations West Covina Parkway previously vacated, between San Bernardino Freeway and Toluca Avenue. Set for Hearing this date by Resolution No. 5144 adopted November 24, 1975• Review Engineer's Report. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Shearer to receive and file Affidavit of Posting. Motion carried. THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON VACATION OF EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS -OF -WAY, WEST COVINA PARKWAY PREVIOUSLY VACATED. THERE BEING NO TESTIMONY, THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. RESOLUTION No'.-�5166 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE VACATION OF CERTAIN EASE- MENTS AND RIGHTS -OF -WAY LOCATED WITHIN THE PREVIOUSLY VACATED WEST COVINA PARKWAY. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Browne to waive further reading of the body of Resolution 5166. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Browne to adopt Resolution 5166. Motion carried on roll call vote as followss AYESs Shearer, Miller, Browne,.Tice, Chappell NOESs None ABSENTs None COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT First Public Hearing held on November OF 1974 (TITLE I) 24, 1975; Second Public Hearing held BLOCK GRANTS on December 8, 1975 and continued to this date. Mr. Salazar presented slides of the Second Year Draft Application for Federal Funds under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (Title I). The distribution of funds to be as follows: -.31 - CITY COUNCIL December 22, 1975 Public Hearings Page Thirty-two Community Dev. Act Community Development Program Palm View Community Center $200,000 Installation of Security Lighting 30,000 at Palm View Park • Architectural Barriers 20,000 Removal Program (Physically Handi- capped) After School Recreation Program 5,000 (Storage Cabinets and Equipment) Home Improvement Incentive Program 25,000 Commercial improvement Incentive 67,000 Program Planning and Management 5,000 Citizen Information Program Administration 56,000 Contingencies 10,000 .$418,000 Plus an estimated $30,000 carry-over from the first year program. Mr. Salazar reported that both the County and State Public Hearing Houses have received copies of the accompanying Environmental Impact Report; no comments have been received to date. Regarding the allocation of funds, Mr. Salazar explained that previous charts reflected administra- tion costs in each category, whereas the final chart (see above) reflects administration costs in total under the category of "Administration." This change was made per recommendation by the Citizens': Advisory Committee. Mr. Salazar briefly reviewed each of the programs with the Council. It is hoped, that the application will be ready for the A-95 Review by January 26, 1976. That review will take approximately 60 days. Somewhere in the area of March 15, 1976 the application is due to HUD. The City'is well within the time schedule on the application. No comments have been received to date on the application; the Citizens;'_�,Advisory Committee has approved the application and recommended same to the City Council. THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE THIRD PUBLIC HEARING OF TESTIMONY FOR OR AGAINST THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974 (TITLE I) BLOCK GRANTS. THERE BEING NO TESTIMONY, THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. Mayor Chappell$ The figures presented this evening are different than those presented at the last Hearing. Why is that? Mr. Salazars The figures still total $418,000. The difference in each project is - 32 - • • CITY COUNCIL Public Hearings Community Dev. Act December 22, 1975 Page Thirty-three that,at the request of the Citizens"", 'Advisory Committee, we have taken out the administration costs. All of the administration costs now appear under "Administration." Mayor Chappells Do you feel that $5000 is adequate to provide the After School Recrea- tion Program as originally conceived? Mr. Salazar: Originally the figure showed as $35,000, but $30,000 was for the security lighting at Palm View Park, which -now appears under a separate category. It has always been felt that $5000 would be adequate for the After School Pro ram. The After School Program is anon -going program (currently. We are supporting the program by constructing some cabinets and purchasing additional equipment. The monies were not intended for park improvement, but, rather, to expand an on -going program. Councilman Millers Under the Housing Condition Survey, "Suitable for Rehabilitation," number 3, the total is 1173, then owner type 880, and the rental type - that is the one I question. Mr. Salazars Yes, that figure should be 293. Councilman Tices Under "Removal of Architectural Barriers for the Handicapped," do you feel that the $20,000 ear- marked is adequate to cover at least 25 percent.of'the_ problems that we may have? Mr. Salazars We are talking about City facilities City Hall, recreation centers at City parks, Cortez and�Youth Center specifically. We have done a preliminary survey of what might be needed in order to make them accessible. 1-think this figure will. handle those three facilities. We just looked at restrooms inside of these structures at this point. We also have funds carried -over from the first year program which will go into'the Contingency Fund, and we can always draw from that if need be. Councilman Brownes I would like to congratulate Mr. Salazar on the preparation of this application and the provisions for implementation of the projects. It shows a keen insight into the needs of our community. (The other members of the Council concurred with Councilman Browne.) RESOLUTION N0. 5167 The City Attorney presenteds ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR SECOND YEAR GRANT FUNDS PURSUANT TO THE FEDERAL HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOP- MENT ACT OF 1974, AND CERTIFICATION THAT -THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. - 33 - CITY COUNCIL December 22, 1975 Public Hearings Page Thirty-four Community Dev, Act Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of thebody of Resolution 5167. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution 5167. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None PERSONNEL BOARD (Next regular meeting Tuesda January 6, 1976 at 7330 P-M ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Chappell apologized for the late hour due to the busy Agenda. Wayne Brewer I am working on my Eagle Project Troop 437 and would like to paint the fire Eagle Scout hydrants on Glendora Avenue red, white and blue for the Bicentennial. I would go from Michelle Avenue to State Street, both sides of Glendora. I would like to know if there are any special funds for the Bicentennial with which I could buy some paint. If there are no funds, I will have a fund raising event. (Mr. Brewer presented a pietttre of the proposed design.)* Mayor Chappell: Please leave the design with us. We will have to review this with our Fire Department as we have certain Ordinances that may or may not prohibit this project. Mr. Brewers. I have talked with the Fire Chief. I have to give him some pictures. He told me all of the things I would need. Mayor Chappell: The City Council has no Bicentennial funds. Provided the Fire Chief approves this, this will be a good project for you. You are about ready to take on a fund raising project, too. I am sure that you can call upon the assistance of the City Council and the news media to publicize your project. I am sure that funds will be raised and it will not be an impossible task. You will be doing the painting yourself? Mr. Brewers Yes, and I will be having other Scouts helping me. Mayor Chappell; I would suggest that you get the older Scouts to help. Show the picture to the Fire Chief. Mr. Aiassa, will you follow up on this. I think the Council should have something to say, depending upon what the Chief says, Does anyone have something to say at this point? - 34 - CITY COUNCIL Oral Communications December 22, 1975 Page Thirty-five Councilman Tices I drive to work up through Alta Dena, the unincorporated area of Los Angeles; a number of the hydrants there have been painted, and they stand out more so than the yellow hydrants. I do not know whether the County did it, or if private citizens did it. They are not quite -the design you have presented, but they really stand out. I -think it is a worthwhile endeavor, if he can raise the funds. Councilman Brownes I, too, have seen fire hydrants painted in various Bicentennial designs in the City of Vernon. I think it is very commendable for this young man to come before us tonight..and ask permission to do this. I would support you on the terms outlined by the Mayor. Councilman Shearer: I do not want to throw any cold water on Wayne, but we had some request from another citizen sometime back (it happened to be the son of the Chairman of the Planning Commission) proposing something similar to this. I do not know what happened to that request, but I would like that looked into so that we do not have an internal squabble between young people in the community over who is supposed to be doing what. (The Council tried to recall the circumstances of the previous request, whether the young man was proposing to do the work himself, whether it was merely a suggestion or whether there was a charge involved. Staff will look into the matter.) I commend Wayne on his offer and his ingenuity in this, but we do not want to create another problem. I think it is great that he has proposed a project which is accomplishable. Councilman Miller: It is very commendable and exciting to see this endeavor. It is realistic and I wish him the best. Mayor Chappell: We will be coordinating with you through the City Manager and his Staff. Councilman Shearers One other thought, you might contact the paint stores in West Covina. CITY ATTORNEY RESOLUTION NO. 5168 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, DISAPPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 19?5-3 TO THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA. Bounded on the.northeast by Merced Avenue, on the southeast by Sunset Avenue, on the northwest by Trojan Way and on the southwest by the northerly line of Lots 1 through 7 inclusive Tract No. 23971. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of the body of Resolution 5168. Motion carried. - 35 CITY COUNCIL City Attorney December 22, 1975 Page Thirty-six Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution 5168. Motion carried on roll call vote as followss AYESs Shearer, Miller,,Browne, Tice, • Chappell NOESs None ABSENTs None Mr. Wakefields The next three items are three separate Resolutions proposed to implement the action which you discussed at your last regular meeting with reference to additional retirement benefits for the three classes of employees. There are some blank spaces in the Resolutions for first year increases in the tax rate. Mr. Eliot has supplied the City Council with what his best estimate is that the additional retirement benefits will cost during the first year. These percentages will need to be added to each of the Resolutions in the appropriate places, if adopted. There is also a reference in Mr. Eliot's memorandum to the fact that the Firemen's Association has requested the military service buy-back benefit be dropped from the proposal. I was not aware of that at the time the Resolution was prepared, and that item was included in each of the Resolutions, item number 2 on the first page. If Council desires to eliminate the item, that paragraph should be deleted. Councilman Tices I did make an issue of the buy-back and the Firemen's Association, under the circumstances, felt I made some valid points and they are willing to withdraw the item. I think, if we pass this, I would like to see item 2 struck from all 3 Resolutions. Mayor Chappell: One cent raises how much in dollars and cents? Mr. Eliots One cent raises $18,200. Councilman Tice: We have some other problems. I talked with Staff today and we probably could not get a ballot actuary study until the end of January. Mr. Eliot: That is correct. Councilman Tices These are your best estimates., I think, knowing how actuaries sometimes work, they usually post more. I would rather rely on your figures to start with. Mayor Chappells One of our problems here is the fact that the Firemen passed a petition and received the proper number of signatures. I do not know if they have been approved or checked, but still, as Councilman Shearer brought out, we are not going to hold this off because of any technicalities. Has anyone contacted any of the Associations to see if they would be willing to hold this off until June;`,' so as to include the actuaries? - 36 - CITY COUNCIL City Attorney December 22, 1975 Page Thirty-seven Mr. Aiassas No, we thought they would be present tonight. They knew it was on the Agenda. Mayor Chappell: I would say that because we have a .good faith situation here, we accept the estimates of our Staff and move Ahead with these Resolutions. That way we can get them on the ballot March 2, 1976. If the Council desires, we could hold off to see how the Firemen feel, but we are just about at the deadline to get these on the ballot - to have it properly written with the pros and cons against the tax rate. Mr. Wakefields This is probably the last effective opportunity the Council has to submit the propositions at the General Municipal Election in March. It is true that they could be submitted at the Primary Election in June, if that is your decision. Then, there is not the same urgency about proceeding this evening. Two deadlines are confronting you. The first is -the necessity for adopting the Resolutions calling the election which appears on the Agenda this evening. It appears in alternative form - with the propositions included and with the propositions not included. The last practical date for the sub- mission of pro and con arguements is January 5, 1976. That date can be pushed back slightly, but it involves a printing problem. The fact of the matter is that tonight is actually the last time to resolve the question as to whether or not to submit the propositions at the March election. Councilman Tice: Shearer brought we vote on this year after this Mr. Wakefield: I am not so worried about costs; the first year's estimates are usually off, even actuaries. Councilman up the point, and he was wise in doing so, that on a year to year basis. So, we have another to make adjustments. Thereafter, it would be the benefits. That is in the Resolutions. The first year is the only year where there is a ceiling fixed for the tax rate. whatever increases are necessary to fund Councilman Shearer: I think we should proceed in March for a number of reasons, not the least of which if we wait until June it is going to cost us more money to hold an election. If we get on the ballot in March, we will probably not run our costs up too much more than what we are going to incur anyway. Whereas, if we go into June, it is going to cost us more. Did we ever find out what it cost us last November? Mrs. Preston: The,County billed us for $567.00. Councilman Shearer: Regardless of that, I think we should get it on and disposed of in strictly a City election. I would support Councilman Tice in deleting item 2, re military buy-back, since the - 37 - CITY COUNCIL City Attorney December 22, 1975 Page Thirty-eight the Firemen's Association has agreed to this and there is some difficulty in estimating costs. (Councilmen Miller and Browne concurred.) • RESOLUTION NO. 5169 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF.WEST COVINA.,-CALIFORNIA, SUB- MITTING TO THE VOTERS OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON MARCH 2, 1976, A PROPOSITION FOR THE ENACTMENT OF AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL RETIREMENT BENEFITS FOR UNIFORMED EMPLOYEES (.LOCAL SAFETY MEMBERS ONLY) IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA TOGETHER WITH AN INCREASE IN THE MAXIMUM CITY PROPERTY TAX RATE IN AMOUNTS SUFFICIENT TO PAY FOR SUCH ADDITIONAL BENEFITS. The amount to be inserted in Section 2s $0.12. Item 2 shall be deleted. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded�by Councilman Tice to waive further reading of the body of Resolution 5169. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Tice to adopt Resolution 5169. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYESs Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO. 5170 The City Attorney presenteds ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, SUBMITTING TO THE VOTERS OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON MARCH 2, 1976, A PROPOSITION FOR THE ENACTMENT OF AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL RETIREMENT BENEFITS FOR THE SWORN EMPLOYEES (LOCAL SAFETY MEMBERS ONLY) IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA TO GETHER WITH AN INCREASE IN THE MAXIMUM CITY PROPERTY TAX RATE IN AMOUNTS SUFFICIENT TO PAY THE COST OF SUCH ADDITIONAL BENEFITS. The amount to be inserted in Section 21 $0.15 Item 2 shall be deleted. Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Browne to waive further reading of the body of Resolution 5170. Motion carried. CITY COUNCIL December 22, 1975 City Attorney Page Thirty-nine Motion madebyCouncilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Browne to adopt Resolution 5170. motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO. 5171 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, SUB- MITTING TO THE VOTERS OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON MARCH 2, 1976, A PROPOSITION FOR THE ENACTMENT OF AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL RETIREMENT BENEFITS FOR THE EMPLOYEES, OTHER THAN UNIFORMED EMPLOYEES IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND SWORN EMPLOYEES IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT (MISCELLANEOUS MEMBERS ONLY) OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA TOGETHER WITH AN INCREASE IN THE MAXIMUM CITY PROPERTY TAX RATE IN AMOUNTS SUFFICIENT TO PAY THE COST OF SUCH ADDITIONAL BENEFITS. The amount to be inserted in Section 2: $0.09 Item 2 shall be deleted. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of the body of Resolution 5171. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution 5171. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell. .NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO- 5172 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, "NOTICE OF THE HOLDING CALLING AND GIVING:', OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN SAID CITY ON TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH, 1976, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS OF SAID CITY AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES AND FOR THE SUBMISSION TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF SAID CITY OF CERTAIN PROPOSITIONS RELATING TO ADDITIONAL RETIREMENT BENEFITS AND TAX RATES THEREFOR. Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of the body of Resolution 5172. Motion carried. - 39 - CITY COUNCIL December 22, 1975 City Attorney Page Forty Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution 5172. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO- 5173 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RSOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO PERMIT THE REGISTRAR OF VOTERS OF SAID COUNTY TO RENDER SPECIFIED SERVICES TO THE CITY OF WEST COVINA RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN SAID CITY ON MARCH 2, 1976. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Miller.to waive further reading of the body of Resolution 5173. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution 5173. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES:. None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO- 5174 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING CERTAIN OF ITS MEMBERS TO FILE A WRITTEN ARGUMENT FOR OR AGAINST A CITY MEASURE. Mr. Wakefield: This Resolution would authorize any one or more members of the City Council to prepare and file arguments either for or against any of the ballot propositions. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of the body of Resolution 5174. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution 5174, Councilman Shearers Point of clarification. In case some- one other than the Council submits arguments for or against, how is it determined which ones go on the ballot? - 40 - ' CITY COUNCIL December 22, 1975 City Attorney Page Forty-one Mr. Wakefield: If there are no arguments.for or against submitted by the Council, then there is a procedure established in the Elections Code by which the City Clerk can select the appropriate argument. Councilman Shearer: But, if the City Council, a member or members thereof, elects to submit one, it takes precedence? Mr. Wakefield: That is correct. Councilman Shearer: What .if two Councilmen decide that they each want to submit one? Mr. Wakefield: Those City Councilmen who wish to submit an argument for a particular measure should get together to draw up the argument. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None Councilman Shearer: I assume that at an early date, like tomorrow morning, that the various employee Associations will be advised of the Council's action. And, I would hope, as a matter of good faith, that they be advised of our action and also be advised of the procedure for submitting ballot arguments;on the propositions. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller that the three employee Associations be advised at the earliest possible date of the Council's action and the procedure for submitting ballot arguments on the propositions. Motion carried. THE MAYOR RECESSED THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 11:15 P.M. IN ORDER TO CONVENE THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING. THE COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 11:18 P.M. CITY MANAGER APPROVE CITY MANAGER'S December 23, 24, 26 and 29, 1975 VACATION . January 2, 1976. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller to approve the vacation request of the City Manager. Motion carried. ASSEMBLY CONCURRENT Relative to Interstate Routs 10 through RESOLUTION NO. 127 the City of West Covina. Mr. Aiassa: Assemblyman Lancaster would like to have one of our representatives there when the Resolution is introduced, January 7, 1976. - 41 - CITY COUNCIL December 22, 1975 City Manager Page Forty-two Councilman Shearers Mayor Chappell, are you available on that date? Mayor Chappell: I can become available. Councilman Tice: I.think we should send the Mayor. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Tice to authorize the Mayor to attend at an expense not to exceed $100.00. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None Miller, Browne, Tice, INFORMATIONAL REPORTS a Report on Odor Complaint of December 13, 1975• b Progress Report on B.K.K. c Freeway Underpass Erosion Control d Progress Report on 1974 State Park Bond Issue Projects e CETA Consortium Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Tice to receive and file above informational reports. Motion carried. CITY CLERK None MAYOR'S REPORTS None COUNCILMEN'S REPORTS COMMENTS Councilman Tice: I received a letter from Charles Bahn,- President West Covina Fire Fighters Association, as I am sure you all did, and I don't remember the case of Holland vs the City of West Covina. Mr. Aiassas That is mine. It was dismissed. Mayor Chappell: We have a letter from the Chief of Police requesting that the City Council pay special recognition to Capt. William Ryan, who has completed 30 years with our Police Department. Councilman Tice: There was no 30 year award the other night; I wondered what happened. Mr. Aiassas We do not have a 30 year award. What we would like to do, if possible, since he is probably the only employee eligible for a 30 year award, is have the Council prepare a resolution commending him for his service -to the City.. RESOLUTION The City' Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, COMMENDING CAPTAIN WILLIAM RYAN FOR HIS THIRTY YEARS OF SERVICE TO THE CITY. Motion by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Browne, and carried to waive further reading of the body of the resolution. Motion by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Browne to adopt Resolution No. 5175 and authorize said resolution to be permaplaqued. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell. NOES: None ABSENT: None - 42 0 CITY COUNCIL Councilmen's Reports/Comments December 22, 1975 Page Forty-three Mayor Chappells I received a letter as Mayor of the City from the United States Conference of Mayors enclosing our statement of dues for the Conference. It is in the sum of $900.00. I think we should refer this to the City Manager for Staff consideration and a report back to the Council. I do know that this particular organi- zation has been actively working in the area of revenue sharing. They have spent considerable time talking with the President and members of the Congress. I think the City Manager should review the organization to see if our money would be well -spent in supporting their efforts. Mayor Chappell: The South Hills 1975 Varsity Football Team did very well in the CIF play- offs. Last meeting we recognized the West Covina High School 1975 Varsity Football Team for their efforts in the CIF playoffs. I would like a resolution to commend the South Hills Team for their excellent efforts and sportsmanship. RESOLUTION NO''5176 ADOPTED The City Attorney presented: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, COMMENDING THE 1975 SOUTH HILLS HIGH SCHOOL VARSITY FOOTBALL TEAM FOR THEIR OUTSTANDING SPORTSMANSHIP, ABILITY AND EFFORTS IN THE CIF PLAY- OFFS. (To be perma plaqued.) Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of the body of Resolution 5176. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution 5175. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: Councilman Miller: Councilman Tice: Mr. Aiassa: Councilman Browne: some sort of a study to amend dwellings. Mayor Chappell: AYESs Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None I would like to wish everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Have we received any input on the chairs and tables for the recreation centers? They have been ordered through Community Development Act funds. to I have one comment relativV the Butler/ Umark Inc. Hearing this evening. I think it is about time that we make the minimal lot sizes for single family Do you feel in order on Development? that a Study Session is the Planned Community -43- 1 0 v t CITY COUNCIL December 22, 1975 Councilmen's Reports/Comments Page Forty-four Councilman Brownes I think that -Staff should research this and then call a Study Session, probably with the Planning Commission. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Miller to instruct Staff to research the Planned Community Development Zone, and to call a Study Session with the City Council and the Planning Commission right after the first of the year. Motion carried. Mayor Chappell: A meeting has been called for the members of the League of California Cities in Sacramento the early part of January to discuss some important business as far as cities are concerned. I would like to ask the Council for approval of a one day expense to attend the meeting. Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Browne to authorize the Mayor to attend the League of California Cities meeting in Sacramento at an expense not to exceed $100.00. Motion carried on roll call vote as followss Mayor Chappells APPROVAL OF DEMANDS ADJOURNMENT ATTESTs CITY CLERK AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOESs None ABSENTS None I would like to take this opportunity to wish all of the Council, the Staff and citizens of the community a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Motion made by Councilman Browne, seconded by Councilman Tice to approve Demands totalling $1,725►290.83 as listed on UCB 53088 and 53295; and BA 368 and 371. Motion carried on roll call vote as followss AYESs Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOESs None ABSENTs None Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller to adjourn the meeting at 11,30 P.M. until January 12, 1976 at 7830 P.M. Motion carried. APPROVED s MAYOR - 44 -