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 (Refer to Staff) Withdrawn.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 -