The URL can be used to link to this page

03-08-1976 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE R[GULAR'M[[TING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA° CALIFORNIA MARCH 89 1976" The regular meeting of the City Council called to order by Mayor Ken Chappell in the West Covina Council Chambers at 7:31 P.M. The Pledge of Allegiance was given, followed by -�' the invocation by Dr" Myruo L. Knutson, Pastor of Christ Lutheran Church of West Covina. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Chappell;CounoiImen: Shearer, Miller,, Broune* Tice 0 Others Present: Leonard Eliot, City Manager Pro Tom George Wakefield, City Lela Preston, City Clerk Gloria Davidson, Deputy City Clerk ` Michael Miller, Acting Pub. Serv~ Dir., Ray Diaz, Acting Planning Director Harry Thomas, City Engineer Rosa Bonham, Administrative Assistant Kevin Northoraft^ Administrative Aas1t. ` Bill Freemon» Staff Reporter ~ S^G.V°D"T° Eric Cohen, Staff Reporter - Sentinel ` APPRgVAL,0F MINUTES Motion by Councilman Shearer to approve the roinpteo qf the F�bruq�ry 23° 1976 megtin0;''secohded by Councilman Miller aMd carried" PRESENTATION Mayor Ch�' � / pll 0rkesented �� Resolution ,� pmm$nding�the Qeot`Covina High School Fb-otbal!:' Team as Co-Che-mpions of the Sierra League for 1975, Coach Tim Branoheau accepted on behalf of the Football Team and the principal.'John Cbtalano° CQNSENT Mayor Chappell explained the procedure of the,)'Conaent Calendar and asked- if thar,a Warm comments on any of -the following items: ' 1° WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS` ' � d/\ STATE OF CALIFORNIA FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION h\ JOHN K. VAN D[ KAMP DISTRICT ATTORNEY o) BOA-RD OF SUPERVISORS Re adootion of Conflict of Interest Codga° (Rafmr to City AttUrney) Requesting support of A8 3121 relat- ing to Juvenile Justice Legislation. (Refer to City Attorney) Re amount of tax increment financing to be paid to the various community redevelopment agencies from the 1975-76 tax levy. (Receive and file) d) STATE DEPT. OF CON- Re preparation of any local regula- SERVATION» DIV, OF OIL tioMo or ordinances pertaining to AND GAS oil, gas or geothermal development. (Receive and file) l CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR — Cont'd. e) BOARD OF SUPERVISORS f) RAE.YEN 1650 E. Verness St., • West Covina g) JERRY CHIA TSO HSU J & H TRADING CO. 415 N. Neil St., West Covina • • Page Two 3/8/76 Re Supervisor,:Ward's transportation proposal "The Sunset Coast Line". Refer to Staff for report) Requesting permission to conduct a mail order business. (Approve subject to City Attorney review) Requesting permission to conduct a mail order business. (Approve subject to City Attorney review) h) PROTESTS AGAINST ZONE (Mayer Construction Co.) CHANGE NO. 495, PRECISE (Refer to.,Hearing Item No. B-1) PLAN NO. 584 and VAR. NO. 718 Ronald E. Gray, M.D., 3334 E. Sunset Hill Dr., W.C. Jared & Louise Morrison,•322 Campana Flores Dr. " Henriette McKay, 3228 E. Holt Ave., W.C. Kay Wood, 2613 E. Evergreen Ave., W.C. Clyde & Carmen Carriker, Jr., 3200 E. Cortez, W.C. Mr. & Mrs. Dan Spadier, 410 La Serena Dr., W.C. Frank & Marilyn S. Walder, 2747 E. Sunset Hill Dr. W.C. Paul N. Bertnes.s, 3407 E. Sunset Hill Dr., W.C. Richard S. Ginn, 3323 Virginia Ave., W.C. Mrs. Pat Altman, 2932 Mesa Dr., W.C. J.U. & Carol Gossett, 432 S. Charvers, W.C. 2. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY OF ACTION March 3, 1976. (4-Geed-aA4d--f-il�-)- (Withdrawn. Refer to Pages 3 and 4 ) 3. RECREATION & PKS. COMMISSION SUMMARY OF ACTION February 24,. 1976. (A=ept---rrd-f-ile) ACTION ITEMS 2/24/76: Refer to City Manager's A enda Item Nos. G-2, G-39 G-4 (Withdrawn. Refer to Page 4) 4. HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION SUMMARY. OF ACTION' February 26, 1976. (Accept and file) 5. YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES February 3, 1976. (Receive and file) February 17, 1976. (Receive and file) COMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER Informational (Receive and file) 6. ABE-APPLICATIONS Chief of Police recommends NO PROTEST. a) Far West Services, Inc., dba REUBEN'S 2701 Alton 531 S. California Avenue Irvine, Ca. 7. CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: a) State Farm Mutual On behalf of insured Suzanne Nalley/ Automobile Ins. Co. Russell Erickson re traffic accident at Grand Avenue and east— bound off —ramp of San Bern ardino Freeway. (Deny and refer to City' Attorney and Insurance Carrier.) mw= CITY COUNCIL Page Three CONSENT CALENDAR - Cont'd. 3/8/76 b) Fracasse & Erdmier On behalf of Richard Jay Johnson re Attorneys alleged false arrest. (Deny and refer to City Attorney and Insurance Carrier) Councilman Miller requested the removal of Item 2-a; Mayor • Chappell requested the withdrawal of Item 3-a. Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor, two comments, if I may. On the Recreation & Parks Commission summary of action there is an item stating the Optimist Club donated a piece of playground equipment and the Recreation & Parks Commissioners were indicating their thanks. I think it would also be appropriate for the Mayor to also address a letter of thanks to the Optimist Club. And also in your packet, attached to it, is a schedule of the opening dates, times and places of the Youth Baseball Leagues, which you might tear off and keep for your future reference. Councilman�Browne: Mr. Mayor in regard to Item 1-e - I would like to.;make a comment. This is in relation to the letter from Supervisor Schabarum regarding the Sunset Coastline which is being proposed in Supervisor Ward's District - it is his dream child - and I wish the Council would give deep thought to it and what Supervisor Schabarum is pointing out here as to how it will affect us and that funds from our community is constantly going into other .areas from which we receive no benefit. The 10 sales tax differential would actually be a burden to our.community and our people would derive nothing whatsoever from it. My suggestion would be that City Council direct staff to file a loud protest to it. • Mayor Chappell: I would have to agree with you on the fact the tax on sales in our community would certainly be a disadvantage to West Covina because we are on the borderline of many other counties and many high cost items would certainly be purchased in the other counties where there would be a sales tax savings, and I am thinking of Cadillacs, Pintos and all kinds of automo- biles that would be purchased outside of our County to save the additional to sales tax. Motion by Councilman Tice to approve Consent Calendar items with the exception of Items 2-a and 3-a; seconded'by Councilman Miller and carried on roll call vote as follows: -- AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None ITEM 2-a Councilman-Mi.11er: No. 2 of Item 2-a, PLANNING COMMISSION dealing with the SUMMARY OF ACTION two story medical building on Sunset - what basically is the nature of this medical set up? In the staff report it said "medical/dental" - is this in relation to general practice for the- entire.community or is • this to serve a certain portion of our community under.a.union contract? Mr. Miller: It is a g.eneral medical office Public Service Dir., building with no specific ties to any union., 3 - 1 CITY COUNCIL Page Four CONSENT CALENDAR - Item 2-a 3/8/76 ,Councilman Miller: Have we reached the saturation point with regard to medical buildings in our community? Mr. Miller: At this point it doesn't appear that we have. The area immediately adja- cent to the Queen of the Valley has • been 'designated for this type of office development for several years and it has taken this long to reach this point. ITEM 3-a Mayor Chappell: The item I question 'RECREATJON & PKS. COMM. is the Shopping SUMMARY OF ACTION Center Recreational Program. As I read this, Mr. Eliot, it appears that if we pass on this tonight we will be implementing this program - is that correct? Mr. Eliot:.-.' Mr. Mayor and members of Council, it is true that the minutes received by Council do indicate its use in certain shopping centers. However, subsequent to that meeting and in meetings with staff on the advisability of conducting such a program and in contact with the people of the shopping centers it has been recommended that we delete this program. Therefore, it will not be implemented at this time. Motion by Councilman Tice to accept the Planning Commissions' Summary of Action dated March 3, 1976 and the Recreation & Parks Commission Summary of Action dated February 24, 1976 deleting the shopping center recreational program; seconded by Councilman Browne and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None • GENERAL AGENDA ITEMS PUBLIC WORKS TRACT NO. 24707 Location: Woodgate Drive, Erin Court, UMARK INC. (BUTLER) Eva.ngelina Street & Erica Street. Motion by Councilman Sheardt-to,'accept street, sewer and water improvements and authorize the release of St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company Faithful Performance Bond No. 400 DR 4400/50 in the amount of 8150,000; seconded by Councilman Browne and carried. 1975-76 FIRST -SUPPLE- Location: .Various throughout City. MENTAL WEED & RUBBISH (Council reviewed Superintendent's ABATEMENT AMENDMENT report.) Adopt the following resolu- tion amending Resolution of Intention No. 5106 approving the First Supplemental Weed and Rubbish Abatement List and setting Monday, March 22, 1976, at 8:00 P.M. for protest hearing on the proposed removal of weeds and rubbish from properties on said list: RESOLUTION NO. 5198 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF • THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION OF INTENTION NO. 5106, BY APPROVING THE FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL WEED AND RUBBISH ABATEMENT LIST AND SETTING A HEARING ON THE MATTER FOR MARCH 22, 1976 at 8 P.M. - 4 - CITY COUNCIL Page Five PUBLIC WORKS - Res. #5198 3/8/76 Motion by Councilman Browne to waive full reading of said resolu- tion; seconded by Councilman Miller -and carried. Motion by Councilman Browne to adopt said Resolution; seconded by Councilman Miller and carried on roll call vote as follows: • AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None ASSESSMENT ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION, ENERGY AND MAINTENANCE, AND LANDSCAPING MAINTEN- ANCE, PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 - LAURENCE J. THOMPSON, INC. Location: Citywide. (Council reviewed Engineer's report) Motion by Councilman Browne to approve agreement and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said agreement; seconded by Councilman Shearer and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice,. Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None CITY ATTORNEY AGENDA ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AMEND- ING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO REZONE CERTAIN PREMISES. (Zone Chan e No. 498 - Bauer Development Co.) (11nincorporated Area) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFO'RNIA, AMEND- ING THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO REZONE CERTAIN PREMISES APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 32620 AND APPROVING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PREPARED WITH REFERENCE TO THE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP. (Zone Change No. 498 - Bauer Development Co.) n .Motion by Councilman Shearer to waive full reading of both ordinances;. seconded by Councilman Browne and carried. Motion by Councilman Shearer to introduce both ordinances; seconded by.Councilman Browne and carried. ORDINANCE The City Attorney presented: INTRODUCTION AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA,.CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 3176 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ESTABLISHMENT OF PARKING REGULATIONS FOR PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED PERSONS. Motion by Councilman Tice to waive full reading of said ordinance; seconded by Councilman Miller and carried. • Motion by Councilman Shearer to introduce said ordinance; seconded by Councilman Miller. Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor - a question. Have we yet resolved the question of enforcement? We have all seen, I am sure, just the - 5 - CITY COUNCIL Page Six CITY ATTORNEY AGENDA 3/8/76 other day out here in one of our handicapped parking stalls a vehicle parked, which may or may not have been parked there by a handicapped person. Is there anyway whereby this can be enforced other than the Police Officer waiting and watching till the person gets back into the vehicle? . Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, there were provisions added to the vehicle code at the last session of the legislature effective January 1, 1976, which provides a pro- cedure underphich a handicapped person may receive an identifying card from the Department of Motor Vehicles. Actually the Police Department will have to depend either on the special license plate or that the person has one of those,identification cards. Councilman Browne: In many instances in our City both on public and private property where the logo indicating the parking spaces is for th'e handicapped is not written out clearly and a.driver coming in on a rainy day cannot read the logo on the pavement. I think somewhere in our precise plan conce'pt where we do require handicapped parking, along with it we could require that a definite signage factor should be placed on the bumper stop indicating it is handicapped parking only and thereby eliminating the problem of understanding the logo'now present, because it is not always written on the pavement itself that it is reserved for handicapped. I brin.g that out as a suggestion so in the future staff might take that under consideration. Mayor Chappell: That is a good point. I did write the Motor Vehicle Department recommending a sticker a;nd received a nice letter back saying they would look into it and that is to date as far • as it has gone. That would facilitate the card procedure because if they put the card in their pocket and,not on the windshield it is of no help. Motion carried. Councilman Shearer: ..I would move also at this time that those stalls under the jurisdiction of the City be marked in some fashion other than just the symbolic wheel chair, possibly along the lines suggested by Councilman Browne, and that we instruct staff to do that as soon as convenient: Seconded by Councilman Browne and carried. HEARINGS PRECISE PLAN NO. 584 Location: East side of 8arranca Avenue REV. 1, VAR. NO. 718 and north of Virginia Avenue. ZONE CHANGE NO. 495 REQUEST: Approval of a change of zone MAYER CONSTRUCTION CO. from R-A (Residential -Agriculture) to MF-8 (Multiple Family - 8 dwelling units per acre, condominium zone); a precise plan revision to construct 49 condominiums; and a • variance to permit increased density, decreasing minimum square footage of units and deletion of west and north wall require- ments and certification of the Environmental Impact Report. Denied by Planning Commission Resolution No. 2631. Appealed by Applicant on January 19, 1976. (Proof of Publication in the West Covina Tribune on January 29, 1976 received. 38 mailed Notices.) Held over from February 9, 1976 to this date. CITY COUNCIL Page Seven HEARINGS: PP #584-Rev.1, Var. #7.18 3/8/76 ZC #495 Mayor Chappell: Madam City Clerk, do we have Proof of Publication? City .Clerk: Yes, we do. • Mayor Chappell: Madam City Clerk, have you received any written communications',other than those listed? City Clerk: Just the one I gave you this evening. Mr. Diaz: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, we Acting Planning Dir., have an unusual situation here in that the applicant does not own all of the property in question but is under negotiations to purchase some of the property. At the time of the hearing before the Planning Commission there was permission of the owners of those parcels for the applicant to go ahead and file for the zone change. Since that time Mr. Harvey, who owns one of the parcels, has written a letter to the city indicating he does not want to have his parcel considered a part of the zone change. Since the letter was received after the notice for the public hearing had been mailed out the City Attorney advised at this point we would have to go ahead with the public hearing. The applicant also called this week to inform us that he does have some precise plans drawn up exclud- ing the Harvey property and we advised him that we could not evaluate those plans at this time. (Mr. Diaz then showed several slides and explained each, pointing out the property that belonged to Mr. Harvey. Also summarized the written Staff Report dated January 7, 1976, and going into further detailed explanation of the VbriancP:request, etc.) . PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. IN FAVOR Dale L. Ingram, Consultant (Representing Robert L. Mayer, P. 0. Box 5922 Mayer Construction Company, Inc., E1 Monte, Ca: 8121 E. Florence, Downey) (Sworn in by City Clerk) The proposal is for a change of zone from R-A to MF-8 (8 units per acre). That requires two variances. One to permit Area District I density because you have MF-8 ordinance tied to Area Districts, and two, to permit the size of the units to be comparable to that in Area District I or II. The third variance requested was to eliminate the requirement for the masonry wall around the city lot. That one really isn't that necessary because that can be handled and I will explain the reason for the variance later on. And then the request to approve the Precise Plan for a 49 unit condominium. I would like you to keep in mind the basic question as we go through the presentation which I think was'very well put by two members of the Planning Commission supporting the application. The basic question here is - is the land lying north of the park- way and south of the freeway different from in nature that is lying south of the parkway and along Virginia and on up into the hills. If there are different considerations, conditions and circumstances affecting those properties. (Mr. Ingram then went into the past history o.f this property as he had at the Planning Commission meeting of January 7, 1976 and transcribed verbatum in the minutes of that meeting and presented to Council in their packet.) _ 7 _ CITY COUNCIL Page Eight HEARINGS• PP #584, REV. 1s V #718, ZC #495 3/8/76 Mr. Ingram: In the interim a new MF-8 ordinance was put in that vitally involved this property. It seems very peculiar that other projects and other properties are developed and go forward but each time we have a problem and this time is not any different. • We had a Staff Report addenda that was mailed on Friday so we got it today but we had no knowledge of it coming out ahead of time and I called the Planning Director's office one week ago to advise that we had a revised plan and asked would he like to have one and he said "no, we will go with what we have", and I interpreted that as meaning the staff report and all, because the staff report given for the Planning Commission hearing and spelled out in the resolution adopted certainly the addenda doesn',t comply with that and this is the Planning Commission resolution. (Mr. Ingram then continued on with the past history of this proposed project as stated in the minutes of the Planning Commission.) The staff addenda stated facts on the make up of the buyers on the Hollenbeck and Badillo project and they are not correct. They state there they are close to commer- cial and they are not. They are not as near to commercial as at Azusa and Citrus Avenue - here on Barranca you just have to walk over the freeway to Eastland Shopping Center. (Continued on with facts as stated in the Planning Commission minutes and in the resolution passed by the PlanningCommission.) In conclusion, I would say that this has been a 5 year effort. We have reduced the density from the proposed MF-45, when the property was purchased, down to 8 units per acre. It is now a condominium instead of apartments, owners instead of transients. It is a quality development and we believe it can be successfully marketed. In our study we believe it was a mistake to force the type of construction as at Aspen Village because when you reduce the density you materially increase the cost of the units and when you increase the size youadd'-materially to the cost and when a condominium unit in this area gets up to a $60,000 to $70,000 price people would prefer free standing. We believe this development will bring about other good develop- ment in the area. We believe it conforms to the desires of,the citizens to reduce densities, which was manifested in the down zoning of,properties,multiple properties throughout the City a couple of years ago. Most certainly the east hills area wanted lesser densities. We•have tried now to complyG.as best as we economically can. This is probably the best possible compromise for development of the property. On the matter of the Harvey property that does project up there, basically what Mayer was proposing to do was to,.satisfy Harvey's dedication for street purposes by paying,Harv'ey for his property and improving it and turning it over to the City. It amounts to about 15,000 square feet. Now Mr. Mayer thought he had an agreement with them for $1.00 per square foot but after the Planning Commission hearing Mr. Harvey notified Mr. Mayer that he changed his mind and wanted now a $1.40 per square foot and we had to buy it right now, no con- tingendies. So we have changed the plot plan design and eliminated one unit. The reason Mr. Mayer was willing to buy that property and improve that portion of the street was to prevent a road going through the central recreational and park area, To satisfy the Park Department we proposed a turf block type of installation in there so the Fire Department could go through there if necessary. Now if Mr. Harvey persists in his feelings we merely-b.av_e to x.onnect that with a._str.e.et .and for the 8 CITY COUNCIL Page Nine HEARINGS: PP #584, REV. 1, V 1718, ZC 495 3/8/76 time being or until such time as Mr. Harvey may have to donate his land to the City, we will have full on -site circulation through the development. Now I don't think Mr. Harvey will stick with that decision of his because obviously who else is going to pay him for his land. Sooner or later, if we don't buy it,.he will have to give i't to the City. • In the final analysis if you agree there is a'difference in the property on the north side of the parkway and the south side of the freeway then either change the zone on the entire piece to Area District I M-F 8 or grant the necessary two variances, that will permit us to build 8 units to the acre 'so we can.price them properly and sell them. We appreciate your being so patient in giving me time to fully explain this case, it is a complex case and needed a lot of explanation. I think it wasn't right for the staff to come out with the addenda at the last minute and really nit-pick - if I may.call attention to the Market Analysis Review which said "for these reasons a more logical market area would include the East San.Gabriel Valley and Western San Bernardino County."',Now W .had no quarrel with the market study when it went to the Planning Commission hearing, and!:,- tthe EIR - and inci- dentally the last page of the Planning'Commission resolution says "the EIR be certified". So they certified it as adequate. The Planning staff here is saying there needs to be more work and says "a more specific and detailed listing of birds and insects might be made." Now I think that is nit-picking. In talking about the noise element staff calls out the fact that this property is within the 65 DB contour and says this is unique and perhaps the City should not consider new residential developments within it and the city might consider alternatives less sensitive to noise such.as commercial uses but these uses would tend to increase the noise level and then staff goes on to say perhaps we should stick to lower density single family housing. And, I say to you, how in the world are you going to sell $75,000 houses in there if it is within that 65 DB range? Our design of the condos takes into consideration the noise, lack of aesthetic in the control channel and minimizes the number of windows and openings on that side. Now if they question how we are going to sell condos in there I sure want to question how you are going to sell $75,000 houses in there. So I think staff in an obvious attempt to bolster their presentation after the Planning Commission voted 3 to 2 on it, in their enthusiasm went too far. I will be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. (Council indicated some confusion over the piece of property owned by Mr. Harvey and asked Mr. Ingram to go to the display board and point it out and explain further.) Robert Mayer (Sworn in by City Clerk), Mayer Construction Co., Mr.'Ingram stated our case very Downey, Ca. eloquently and I only want to mention one thing because I was personally involved and that is the purchase of the Harvey property. I was willing to buy that piece of property and thought I had an agree- ment whereby we would,be able to buy it. My last negotiations broke down because�he raised the price to where I feel I can't .afford it, because all I am going to do is take the property, improve it and dedicate to the City so they can have their park. CITY COUNCIL Page Ten HEARINGS: PP #584.REV. 1, V # 718, ZC #495 3/8/76 So I really felt I was being put into a position in which I didn't want to be put. He told me the only way he would sell that property to me would be if I would buy it within a 2 week period of time and close the escrow for cash - it made no difference to him whether'or not the property was rezoned - and for 5 years I have been listening to hearings on this parti- cular piece of property and to spend any more money than Ihave spent just to satisfy the needs of the parkway ..... I just wanted to clarify that since I was personally involved. I still want to buy it but would only do so if I am permitted to build these particular units. IN OPPOSITION Phillip Smith (Sworn in by City Clerk) 3105 East Virginia Ave., I presented a petition at the previous West Covina meeting with a number of signatures mainly on our street or Virginia Avenue and approximately 85 to 90% of the people were against the proposed development. I have another petition with the signatures of more people living in the general area who also spent a lot of money for their properties and pay taxes on their properties and also have to live in the area and who also happen to go by that 3-story monster on Barranca every day. I work in real estate at Herbert Hawkins Company in West Covina and I deal with condominiums. One of the issues we are discussing here is the need for condominium-�development in West Covina. We have a development on Aroma Drive - I believe it was called Fox Glen, and it sells in the neighborhood of $35,000.:_ It-is.'veiy' difficult to sell these particular properties; there is a limited demand for them and it is very quickly becoming a rental apartment type struc- ture. Another development, Woodside Village, which sold very • quickly and looks very nice, but the problem with it, and being in real estate I see it all the time, is the constant turnover of those properties. We used to have so many real estate signs from different companies that the Homeowners' Association made an ordinance against signs in the grass. We have to show them in the windows now. There is an extremely large turnover and those sell between the $25,000 and $30,000 price range. The third development is Aspen Village and it speaks for itself. It is quite vacant. So as far as a need for another condominium project in West Covina I really don't see the need unless we want to see more rentals. (Presented petition to Council) Mr. Graden (Sworn in by the City 'Clerk) 3102 Virginia Ave., I have lived there since 1956. I West Covina represent to you tonight the East Hills Homeowners' Association and the main point of my being here is to express to you the opposition of this group to this higher density proposal. We have heard a lot about the proposed parkway and the past history of this property and we don't think the past history should have any bearing on the project. One major point that should indicate the opposition of this group to the higher density is that the homes that have been built there recently and sold are single family dwellings built within the zoning • ordinance. I don't think there is any question about the sale of these properties. It has also been presented that condo- miniums are not all they are cracked up to be and�rsgardless of what the promoters might say the actions of what happens are a lot different in many cases then what is talked about. We have had a lot of experience with apartments and the public is kind of disillusioned. So again I want to express the opposition of the East Hills Homeowners' Association against this development. Thank you. - 10 - CITY COUNCIL Page Eleven HEARINGS: PP #584. REV. 4, V #718. ZC #495 3/8/76 John W. Arbenz (Sworn in by the City Clerk) 3149 E. Virginia I believe the northwest corner of my West Covina property is adjacent to the south- west corner of the Mayer property. I would like to speak briefly on three points and that is the need of the Variances and the disparity between the proposed • property and the surrounding property. As far as discussing the need - I think in the last 6 months four developers have asked for a downzoning from R-3 to. R-1 and proposed that now is a more opportune time for single-family homes. The Variances, I believe, are un- reasonable to start with. He has asked for three Variances. Number 1 - he has asked for 49 units against the permitted units of 36, about a 27% discrepancy. He has asked for Area District III,2 bedroom reduced from 1550 square feet to 1090 square feet. That is about 31%. The 3 bedroom units to be dropped from 1750 square feet to 1390/1400 square feet - that is about 20%. He has asked for 16 visitor parking spaces for 49 units, when 13 is required for 36 units. So I believe the asking of the.Variances are unreasonable askings. As for the disparity of the property it is my understanding that 15% should be the disparity between the proposed property and the adjacent landowners. The way it stands now using his own figures his pro- perty would sell from $36,500 to perhaps $46,000 with an average of $41,200 per property. The adjacent land around it sells at an average now of $72,000. The disparity there is 44% rather than 15%. I believe that is completely unreasonable. So for these things I would ask that you turn down his request and for pro- tection of the surrounding property. Thank you. REBUTTAL Dale L. Ingram Mr. Graden spoke about the new homes • being built in the area and the high values on them. True, there are new homes being built on the south side of the parkway. I think staff made mention of that in their report and granted, southside of the parkway is a different place and that property should be handled in a different manner. Mr. Arbenz made a misstatement - that 13 guest spaces are required for 49 units, not for 36. We are pro- posing more than what the ordinance requires for the 49 unit development. Mr. Arbenz talks about the disparity between zones, I would suggest to you the thinking of the Planning Department as long ago as 5 years ago when we got into this, that the property on the south side of the parkway would have a step zone different than those properties running on Virginia Avenue and that is good planning because they still front on the major street areas. The General Plan and the Highway Plan'for the parkway called for the cul-de-saccing street closing off of Virginia Avenue to make it a quiet.residential street when the ,Parkway goes through. HEARING CLOSED. COUNCIL DISCUSSION. Councilman Miller: Mr. Mayor, I appreciate the frustration of the developer but I looked at that piece of property and -from staffs analogy I can appreciate their concern for a lower density and I can also see the problem of decibels - and whatever you • put there you will have that problem. So we come to a point that the property is eventually going to have to be developed. I do have reservations on the Variances from the standpoint I am not quite satisfied as to the No. 2 Variance - being satisfied in relation to a substantial property right possessed by other pro- perty owners in the same vicinity. I hesitate on upping the density. In the report, I am still quite leery of the fact we CITY COUNCIL Page Twelve HEARINGS: PP #584, REV. 1, V #718,,ZC #495 3/8/76 have seen developers in Woodside Village and others trying to establish their market value o.n what they are developing and right now condominiums are at a low priority. So at this point in time I am going to vote not to approve this not seeing the need, and that is not to say that we should stop here. I would • encourage further negotiations -and discussion with the various people involved. -to see what can be done. Councilman'Tice: 'Primarily that area is a single family area. The seven units we recently approved will sell between $750000/859000 as a -.start. True, .it is south of the proposed parkway but the parkway may never come through. The density here bothers me somewhat. We have been striving for the last year or so to bring density down, both in apartments and other types of units. Rather than go up I would want to see it come down. The units themselves ors smaller than we require and I don't like to see that. We have talked in the past about reviewing our condominium ordinance - about 6 months ago,we were "go'i:ng to' et into this and I think there are some studies being done now. ?The Public Service Director advised the whol.e'zoning ordinance is being reviewed and that is part of it.) I see little need for a condominium unit in that area and from the standpoint that most of our requests have been down- graded from multi -family uses to single family my feeling is to uphold the Planning Commission's recommendation to deny the request. Councilman Browne: Going back in the past few years of which both Mr. Ingram and Mr. Mayer speak to, I sat on the Planning - Commission and went through several hearings of this nature. They related to precise plans and requests for zone changes and were told by staff various things and alternates they could develop under. I know the past Planning staff spoke strictly • to the issue, keeping within the bounds of the zoning structure and the ordinances. Zoning ordinances are written, area dis- tricts well established to protect the rights of all residents. Wefspeak of transition on the General Plan, transition as designated on the existing General Plan which is being upgraded and downgraded in density, and I would relate transition to existing conditions whether the trend changes either to high or low density in a specific area. A criteria for transition would relate to surrounding development where there is a deterioration requiring the need for upgrading of a particular area by going to multi -family. Inasmuch, as some of the adjoining properties have been developed by single family residences, there are two that were completed and seven contemplated, and speaking of the marketability of it, I am sure developers looked into this, which relates,to the contention that the property was purchased on a common basis of developing under multiple family zoning. If a person buys property under those conditions that is not up to the city to resolve. Meeting the criteria of a development you -have to take into consideration all of these factors. The higher density, the reduced floor plans, the Variances requested, and not having the walls installed, do not meet my visionof a proper development. Speaking of the Parkway, I think this • is related more to a buffer zone factor. I don't consider any street a buffer zone separating residences. If anything, the Walnut Creek Wash would be a buffer zone and the contingent property thereto running southerly would be basically the same type of property that exists on Virginia southerly. I don't think the criteria has been met. The showings for the Variances have not been met and I have - 12 - CITY COUNCIL Page Thirteen HEARINGS: PP #584, REV. 1, V 718, ZC #495 3/8/76 to speak out in disfavor of allowing this development to go in. It is very unfortunate that the owner of the property is in this position, perhaps he had foresight of it being a valuable piece of property to his liking; there is a situation of land— locked properties in there which necessitates the placing of a street through the area to open it up for development. We talk • about the Parkway going through and yes, we have precised a park— way through there primarily to open it up. The General Plan up— date requires the designation of a scenic highway type of a road through there. The Council in its past action reduced some of the conditions placed on that which reduces the width of the roadway for development'.and I don't think in our time we will ever see a 110' street going through there, however provisions must be made for that. f I think these people in the area de— serve compatible -development and I w.ould only hope the owner of the property bould`�seek to develop his property so it would be more compatible to the surrounding area. Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor, I think the die is cast but I still have a few comments I would like to make. I have sort of a gut feeding due to things that have transpired in the past in that area. References were made this evening to the 113 story monster" and written correspondence we received likened this to that, which I think .is completely out of line, but I get the feeling that maybe if the present developer came in with twelve half acre lots in that area because of certain t.hings that have happened in the past, there might be some people coming up and saying "now this is bad" and I think that is unfortunate. However, I guess the facts in life are such that the past stays with us to haunt us. I hope that is not the case here.. • Mr. Ingram asks the question — is the land north of the parkway different than south of and that along Virginia? I differ slightly with Councilman Browne in that regard. I think — yes — there is a difference as we approach the freeway. Unfortunately the project that comes to us this evening is amended with three Variances, two of which are essential to its development and one which is not. This bothers me. Had the project come in strictly within the MF-8 and the appropriate Area District, I might have been inclined to look differently at it. However, with the major Variances, as one of the witnesses testified, being 30 to 40%, which is quite a Variance, it is almost a complete different ball game to me, so for that reason alone and as it was pointed out that without the approval of one the other one cannot be approved, so it all boils, down to the Variances which I oppose, so automatically I have to vote against the whole project. Mayor. Chappell: In 1969 when the City Council adopted this plan it was a plan through 1990 which I think many people lose sight of.that fact and not of a lot of other facts in that General Plan which meant in many areas of the City property by 1990 would be suitable for the facts stated in the General Plan. This parti— cular area certainly in my mind, and at that time I was on the • Council, was not then to be 45 units to the acre that year or anytime in the near future. I think when you come in with a precise plan you come in with all of the conditions met if you are really interested in seeing your plan fly. We continually turn down requests for Variances because they lessen the project and the rules we have laid down for that particular parcel of land. Again we have two such Variances in this plan. The wall is some- - 13 — CITY COUNCIL Page Fourteen HEARINGS: PP #584, REV. 1. V #718, ZC,#495 3/8/76 thing I am sure could be worked out but the discrepancies are too great to really recognize the fact that this plan should be adopted this evening and the five Councilmen this evening have almost the same opinion on this. Motion by Councilman Shearer that Council deny Variance #718 and • automatically then the related Precise Plan #584 and Zone Change No. 495; seconded by Councilman Browne and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None THE MAYOR RECESSED THE COUNCIL MEETING AT 9:15 P.M. CITY COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 9:21 P.M. ZONE CHANGE NO. 500 Location: 1000 South Glendora Avenue PRECISE PLAN NO. 414 REQUEST: Applicant requests approval ReV. I - W.B. MASSIE of a change of zone from N-C (Neighbor- hood -Commercial) to S-C (Service Commercial) with a waiver of area, and approval of a precise plan revision to accommodate an auto tune-up shop, and certification o-f the Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. Approved by Planning Commission Resolution No. 2641. The City Clerk verified Proof of Publication in the West Covina Tribune on February 27, 19769 received and that 30 Notices were mailed. Mayor Chappell: Madam City Clerk, have you received any mail -in regard to this matter? City Clerk: No, I have not. • Slides were shown and explained by Mr. Diaz, Acting Planning Director, as to the location and surrounding area; summarized staff report dated February 4, 1976 and Planning Commission 'Resolution No. 2641. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. IN FAVOR (Sworn in by the City Clerk) Donald B. Massie Fps Mr. Diaz pointed out this filling 21060 Cloverland Drive station has been empty for 2 years. We would like to change this to a rapid tune automotive tune up. We would not be doing any gaso- ine sales or tires or batteries, strictly rapid tuning. We would change the style of the landscaping by requirement in the front which is shown on the drawing to facilitate -the parking. The trash will be kept inside and as mentioned by Mr. Diaz the fencing in the rear to cover the refrigeration unit and all of the market. We feel this would be an asset to the City of West Covina and we would like to be able to do business in the City. Thank you. IN OPPOSITION (Swor in by the City Clerk) Lee Teckleburg 1 am he co-owner of the property • 20612 Collegewood Dr. directly north of the property in Walnut question here. We just purchased that property, which is a Texaco Station. We purchased with the special intent of - and after we had then Mr. Massie requested a zone change for this specific use for his property. I bring attention to the fact that we havea tune up shop directly across the road.- --:-And also ;abou;t<,thre-e blo,cks� up the •road.: �11;C.'wonder; if over-satura'tion:.of CITY COUNCIL Page Fifteen HEARINGS: ZC #500, PP #414 3/8/76 of the area with one particular type of business is a detriment. I appreciate the need for brevity so that is all I will say. REBUTTAL Don Lassie I would like to say we believe in • free enterprise,,. I think a good example of this are the shoe stores in the shopping plazas. We feel this would be good competition and I repeat we will be in the tune-up business and not .the gasoline business too. I repeat I think this Would be an asset. HEARING CLOSED. COUNCIL DISCUSSION. Councilman Miller: Mr. Mayor, I am a little concerned from the standpoint every time you change from a N-C to.a S=C one of the criteria in our guidelines is to establish the need and in this particular report I have not seen the'need established. I think this is why we have such guidelines but at this point this has not been established. This particular area lends itself basi- cally to serving residential areas and in my thinking the N-C zone is better suited,to that than S-C. I am for holding it over and giving the opportunity to try and establish the need for this. Councilman Shearer: I think the difference between N-C and S-C is to a great extent, particularly at this location, somewhat academic. This was originally a service station and I assume a gasoline station can go in there again. I see very little difference from a planning standpoint between a gasoline station which may give tune-ups or one that only gives tune-ups. As far as planning, I assume because of'the technicalities that Mr. Diaz pointed out in order to accommodate this particular usage a zone change must • be accomplished. However, I have difficulty in taking the position that management should step in and attempt to regulate how many tune-up shops, how many gas stations, etc., - I think in the 200 years of our great country these things have worked themselves out in the free enterprise system. I will support the zone change. I would make one comment and ask Mr. Massie if he is familiar with our Sign Ordinance. One of the statements made in the Planning Commission report is that signs are not a part of this approval and in the past 6 years that I have been involved on Council signs have always been a problem and people keep coming in and saying I was not familiar with that so if Mr. Massie is not familiar with the sign ordinance I would suggest he look into it Councilman Browne: The service station that existed there had become somewhat of a blight in our community and by actual com- parison it was a higher use on that property than the one being applied for at this time. This is an area that speaks to service commercial, we still maintain control if this business .should cease to operate. As Councilman Shearer related we are management and we are not here to judge whether competition should exist or not exist. This country is built on free enter- piiseC'ani those that do a better job of merchandising and servic- ing will do a bette-r business and that is no concern of ours. I support the Planning Commission decision and go along with the approval of it. - 15 - CITY COUNCIL Page Sixteen HEARINGS: ZC #500, PP #414 3/8/76 Councilman Tice: One thing we are doing we are bringing the use down by the re— zoning of it. I reiterate what both Councilman Shearer and Councilman Browne said — some— times a cluster of like businesses will draw more than they will cause problems. I see auto parts stores clustered • together and they seem to survive. I will.vote to uphold the Planning Commission decision. Mayor Chappell: We now have a use for a service station that has been abandoned and we are requiring that the tanks be removed which indicates to me that property will never again be a service station. In the year it was there it was a sub— standard piece of property and I remember using that service station on several occasions. Even though you might want to protect the market in order to earn a living I think to deny one person the same opportunity would certainly be incorrect. The service station across the street has been removed and this one has.been closed for sometime leaving one service station in the area which in my mind is a'distinct advantage and by doing good work I would think that neither would have a problem in making a good living. I. think it is best having some sort of a business operating in there and keeping up the property so I would have to support the new business going in there. I feel that everyone will have the opportunity to make it in our community, we are a large city. and have a lot of automobiles. Motion by Councilman Browne to approve Precise Plan No. 414, Revision I and Zone Change No. 500'.; seconded by Councilman Tice and carried; Councilman Miller voting nay. ZONE CHANGE NO. 501 Location: 2144 East Garvey Avenue. • PRECISE PLAN NO. 671 Request: Applicant requests a zone GLEN D. RANKIN chap e from N—C (Neighborhood Commer— ciM to S—C (Service —Commercial) and approval of a precise plan of design to remodel the existing vacant service station to accommodate a retail boat store, and certification of the Negative Declara— tion of Environmental Impact. Approved by Planning Commission Resolution No. 2645. (The'City Clerk verified receipt of Proof of Publication in the West Covina Tribune on February 26, 1976 and that 43 Notices were mailed.) Slides shown and explained by Mr. Diaz, Acting Planning Director, re location, surrounding area and rendering of plan; summarized Staff Report dated February 18, 1976, and Resolution #2645 approving. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. IN FAVOR Richard Lewis I am representing Mr. Glen D. Rankin. L.A. Ulmquist I would first like to address myself Architect Assoc., to the point Mr. Diaz just brought up 219 N. Indian Hill Blvd. as to the repair aspect of the boats Claremont that will be sold at this site if we • Mr. Rankin has his in Pomona on Gare'y .repairing the boats and need repairing. and small items on are allowed to go through with it. main outlet which is known as Miller's Landing Avenue and it has all of the facilities for he sells and boats that someone else sells Minor adjustments to possible trailer hitches the boats could be facilitated on the site at — 16 — CITY COUNCIL Page Seventeen HEARINGS: AC #501, PP #671 3/8/76 Hollenbeck and Garvey in West Covina, but as far as any tune-ups or major repairs such as working on the engines, etc., would be at the Pomona location. The zone change we are asking for we feel is in keeping with the intent of the General Plan and the need for this type of locatioR.in West Covina may or may not be justified by me this evening with the exception of the fact this • site is a very much blighted eyesore a't;.present. it is"extremely visible because of the topography and the elevation in relation to the San Bernardino Freeway and we,.feel that it.presents a negative impression of West Covina to those people that pass by. We are proposing 19% of the site to be landscaped whereas only 8/ is required. We think it would be a very good looking outlet and not pose any particular problem to the adjacent property owners. We are proposing low key lighting and the hours of operation would basically be 9,to 6 with the exception of possibly starting an engine every once `iri: awhile to show a customer that the engine will start boats. We feel this is a perfect answer to take care of a vacant corner that has been vacant for 4 or 5 years and with the changing of the freeway location we don't feel there is any other answer to this presently blighted and weed -filled corner in West Covina. HEARING CLOSED. COUNCIL DISCUSSION. Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor. I would almost be willing to let another tune-up shop go in there in comparison to what is sitting there. I think it is a marked improvement. I would direct the same question to this applicant that I directed to the tune-up shop - are your clients familiar with the Sign Ordinance and if not. will you become familiar with it before putting your money down. I will vote for it. is (Councilmen Browne, Tice and Miller agreed this would be an improvement to what is there presently and were in favor.) Mayor Chappell: I agree this is a good facility and think it will do some business in West Covina because of its location. There is one question I would like to ask - there is an..ice facility there now and has been there for a long time. That is probably the last place one can purchase ice other than a liquor store.:a.rid-.'that is only small cubed ice. I think it behooves staff and Council to look around for a location where that ice facility could be located and I am not suggesting that it remain where it is. But I do think such an ice facility is needed for campers, etc. So I really hope that we make a real honest effort to relocate that facility - if there is another such ice house in our area I don't know about it. (Asked Mr. Eliot to have staff check this out.) Motion -by Councilman Tice to approve Zone Change #501 and Precise Plan' #671 and certification of the Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; seconded by Councilman Browne and carried. AMENDMENT NO. 133 Proposed amendment to the West Covina • CITY INITIATED Municipal Code relating to sign area, height and copy for parking directional signs, and certification that the Categorical Exemption is con- sistent with the State of California Environmental Quality Act. Approved by Planning Commission Resolution No. 2643. (City Clerk verified receipt of Proof of Publication in the West Covina Tribune on February 26, 1976; and that no mailed notices were required.) - 17 CITY COUNCIL Page Eighteen HEARINGS: Amend. #133 3/8/76 Mayor Chappell: Madam City Clerk, have you received any written communications? City Clerk: No, I have not. Mr. Diaz: Mr. Mayor and.members of Council, this • matter was originally approved as an Urgency Ordinance by City Council, basically limiting the height and wording on parking directional signs and'the Planning Commission has recommended that this limit be carried forth and we continue to make that recommendation. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. THERE BEING NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY FOR OR AGAINST HEARING CLOSED. COUNCIL DISCUSSION. Councilman Shearer: I noticed both tonight and before the Planning Commission hearing there was no one to speak for or against, other than staff.. I am wondering if that -is an indication of what might face us. J am a little concerned that the ordinance as written completely eliminates anything other than the word "parking" and I am relating this now to the California Triangle TOPA Development where at on.e entrance it says "Sizzler Parking" with "Sizzler" in small letters and "Parking" the predominant word. And down at the other end I think it says "Reubens Parking" or Coco's,Par,king" and again the, name designation is small compared to the Word °'Parking!'. I. wonder if we really want just the word parking so noticeable and if we are not possibly developing the possibility where somebody comes in and we have all kinds of requests for a,variance, exemption, etc. On the other hand I am not sure how to handle it because I think that is what we are trying,to get away from, the fact that the parking sign becomes • another advertising sign. I personally find nothing.wrong and think it is actually an advantage to traffic if there is some identification when I go in there to park to find that I am going where I want to be, and if not then it really hasn't served its purpose. That is the purpose of the sign to give information to motorists. So I would find nothing -objectionable of having some wording in there that would allow some reference as to the .main drawing point, such as "Fashion Plaza Parking". And obviously I am not talkinga bout "Park here for See's Candy's" etc., etc., because then we would have a sign a mile high. Mayor Chappell: At this junction we are not trying to identify shops in the Center. Is the Sizzler Parking sign legal as it stands now? (Mr. Diaz said it was.) What is staff's objection to that type of signage? Mr. Diaz: To that particular type of signage we would not object and I don't want to. mention by name those that we would object to. Perhaps, if I might suggest eliminating the limitation on the words "Park" or "Parking" and increasing the area to 8 square feet instead of 6, which might bring about the desired limitations which we are trying to achieve here and that is to not have these directional signs be used as pole signs.. • (Explained further) Councilman Shearer: Mr. Diaz', would you find a problem with wording that would require the word "Parking" to be the outstanding feature on the sign,and that any identification to either a shopping center or any place of business.would have to be subordinate? CITY COUNCIL Page Nineteen HEARINGS: Amend. #133 3/8/76 Mr. Diaz: Yes, that probably would be better and would give us the limitations in height and size.. Councilman Browne: I had concerns regarding this and as Councilman Shearer brought out. You place parking requirements as a condition and a precise plan comes in and you have.adjacent business where each individual has to supply a specific number of parking spaces and in a given. area you have adjacent situations where there is parking on site and just the word "Parking" would mean to me that anyone could go in there and park and they would violate the rights of the individuals — they could park there and go some other place to do business. By having it specific with a predominant directional sign for Parking and a much smaller indicator of whose parking facility it is would perhaps help. Mayor Chappell: A question. We are talking about the Sizzler sign because that is the one Councilman Shearer mentioned and I think that is a good one, but down at the other end you couldn't have Cocos, Swenson's, Bill Beem's, etc., etc., because they are all in that row — so some discretion would have to be used. Mr. Wakefield, who would provide that discretion? Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor, it seems to me that if the sentence that relates to the logo would be changed to read "Parking with an arrow in the direction of the parking spaces which may be followed by the name of the business for which the primary park— ing is being.provided, that would take care of it. (The Mayor asked Mr. Diaz if that would create a problem and he stated it would not. Council discussed further; Mr. Wakefield • ascertained that the size of the sign would be not to exceed 8 square feet instead of 6 and retain. the 4 foot height; Council agreed.) Motion by Councilman Browne to approve Amendment No. 133, City Initiated, relating to the"sign area, height and increasing the square feet to 8 feet and the wordage as Mr. Wakefield amended; seconded by Councilman Tice and carried. AMENDMENT NO. 134. Proposed amendment to Park 16, CITY INITIATED Section 9216 — Unclassified Uses of the West Covina.Municipal Code relat— ing to unattended businesses, and certification that the Categorical Exemption is consistent with the State of California Environmental Quality Act: Approved by Planning Commission Resolution No. 2644. (City Clerk verified receipt of proof of publication in the West Covina -Tribune on February 26, 1976; and that no mailed Notices were required.) Mayor Chappell: Madam City Clerk, have you received any correspondence with reference to this? City -Clerk: No, I have not. • Mr. Diaz Mr. Mayor and members of Council, this is the amendment to the Un— classified Use Permit section which was suggested by Council as a result of a hearing concerning an unattended business held before you a couple of months ago. Basically it would require an Unclassified Use Permit for all un— attended businesses. — 19 — CITY COUNCIL Page Twenty HEARINGS: AMEND. #134 3/8/76 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. THERE BEING'NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY FOR OR AGAINST PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. COUNCIL DISCUSSION. Councilman Browne: Mr. Mayor, I have a question. This includes laundries of which we have many in our community. Have the owners of these establishments been notified of this amendment? • Mr. Diaz: Nov they have not but they would not be affected by it because they would be legal non -conforming. If they would locate to another location then they would come under this provision. Lotion by Councilman Shearer to approve Amendment No. 134; second- ed by Councilman Miller and carried. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. CITY ATTORNEY AGENDA - Cont'd. ORDINANCE The City Attorney presented: INTRODUCTION AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 3191 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO A 9ECREASE IN MAXIMUM SPEED LIMITS. lPortions Garvey and California Avenues) Motion by Councilman Miller to waive full reading of said ordinance; seconded by Councilman Browne and.carried. Motion by Councilman Tice to introduce said.ordinance; seconded by Councilman Browne and carried. ORDINANCE NO. 1291 The.City'Attorney presented: • ADOPTED AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY. OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 9206.5 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE, -RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN THE MEDIUM.DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY (IMF-20) ZONE. (Amendment No. 132 - City'Initiated) Motion by Councilman Miller to waive full reading of said ordinance; seconded by Councilman Shearer and carried. Motion by Councilman Miller to adopt said ordinance; seconded by Councilman Shearer and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer,,Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None ORDINANCE NO. 1292 The City 'Attorney presented: ADOPTED AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY.OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS 2709 and 2710 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO PURCHASES AND CONTRACTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS. Motion by Councilman Tice to waive full reading of said ordinance; seconded by Councilman Browne and carried. Motion by Councilman Browne to adopt said ordinance; seconded by Councilman Tice and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None - 20 - CSTY COUNCIL Page Twenty—one CITY ATTORNEY AGENDA — Cont'd. 3/8/76 RESOLUTION NO. 5199 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED, A RESOLUTION.OF-THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY. OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NO. 1 IN THE WOODSIDE VILLAGE MASTER PLAN. • Motion by Councilman Browne to waive full reading of said resolu— tion; seconded by Councilman Tice and carried.. Motion by Councilman Browne to adopt said resolution; seconded by Councilman Tice and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller,'Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO. 5200 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, APPROV— ING A CERTAIN PORTION OF THE EAST SAN GABRIEL VALLEY BIKEWAY MASTER PLAN WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS. Motion by Councilman Tice to waive full reading of said resolution; seconded by Councilman Shearer and carried. Motion by Councilman Tice to adopt said resolution; seconded by Councilman Shearer and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO. 5201 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF • THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE Director. -;-OF PLANNING TO FILE FOR SB 821 FUNDS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE EAST SAN GABRIEL VALLEY BIKE— WAY COMMITTEE. Motion by Councilman Browne to waive full reading of said resolu— tion; seconded by Councilman Miller and carried. Motion by Councilman Browne to adopt said resolution; seconded by Councilman Miller and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO. 52d2 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO OPERATE ITS HOUSING ASSISTANCE PAY— MENT PROGRAM IN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AND APPROVING APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 8 OF TITLE 119 HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.ACT OF 1974, AS AMENDED, TO THE CITY OF WEST COVINA. Motion by Councilman Browne to waive full reading of said resolu— tion; seconded by Councilman Miller and carried. Motion by Councilman Browne to adopt said resolutio.n; seconded by Councilman Shearer. 4 Councilman filler: A question of staff. Do you have any idea when these funds will become available? 21 — 1 r CITY COUNCIL Page Twenty-two CITY ATTORNEY AGENDA: Res. #5202 3/8/76 Mr. Eliot: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, we are unaware whether or not the County° will be able to implement its program. It was unable to get sufficient funding in the first year and the first year's request has been carried over and supposedly they are attempting to get money for the full two years. Staff is looking • at it carefully and if the County Housing Authority is unable to r deliver we are working on other alternatives and we will keep you - informed. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None AMEND CETA TITLE VI Motion by Councilman Browne to AGREEMENT authorize the Mayor to execute the Amendment to CETA, Title Vi Agreement between the City of West Covina and the County of Los Angeles; and further that the City Council authorize the City Attorney to draft and the Mayor to execute, amendments to Title VI agreements with the West*Covina Unified School District and Mt. San Antonio College to reflect the new expiration date and extended funding"; seconded by Councilman Tice and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None SET PUBLIC HEARING RE Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor and members B.K.K. COMPANY of Council, this item is a request that a public hearing be set for necessary revisions to the Unclassified Use • Permit #71, Revision 5 amendment relating to the sanitary landfill operated by B.K.K. Company. As Council is aware the present Unclassified Use Permit expires on April 1 and in order for the landfill operation to continue it is necessary to update the provisions of the Unclassified Use Permit and provide for its extension. Motion by Councilman Miller to approve the request and set the public hearing for March 22, 1976:at:.,8::.P:'.M.',':peconded by..Councilman Shearer and carried. THE MAYOR RECESSED THE COUNCIL MEETING AT 10:28 P.M. FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING. COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 10:29 P.M. CITY MANAGER AGENDA 3RD ANNUAL STATE (Mayor Chappell acknowledge receipt HUMAN RELATIONS CONFER- of letter from Chairman Hahn inviting ENCE (Staff Report) City Council to attend the third annual State-wide Human Relations Commission Conference.to be held in Long Beach at the Queensway Hilton from March 16/21, 1976. Council members discussed possible attendance and asked for a schedule of the various topics and time of presentation; Mr. Eliot advised this would be supplied to Council.) Motion by Councilman Shearer to receive and file letter; seconded by Councilman Miller and carried. SPONSOR SIGNS FOR Motion by Councilman Shearer to approve GALAXIE LITTLE LEAGUE Recreation & Parks Commission's (Staff report) recommendation to grant the Galaxie - 22 - f � 1 CITY COUNCIL Page Twenty-three CITY MANAGER AGENDA - Cont'd. 3/8/76 permission Little League/to post sponsor signs on the outfield fence at Friendship Park on Saturdays only during the 1976 Little League season; seconded by Councilman Browne and carr1'ed.' FEE AND CHARGE SCHEDULE CHANGE (Staff Report) man Browne and carried. Motion by Councilman Shearer to approve the recommendation of the Recreation and Parks Commission re the revised Fee and Charge Program Schedule effective with 1976 summer programs; seconded by Council- NON-RESIDENT SURCHARGE Motion by Councilman Tice to approve FOR FEE AND CHARGE a $1.00 surcharge be added to the PROGRAMS (Staff Report) Recreation and Park Department fee and charge schedule for all persons enroll- ing in fee and charge classes who are not citizens of the City of West Covina, beginning with 1976 summer programs; and that all monies collected from.�_this,'fee,:shahl be deposited in the 149-31860 Recreation Supplies and Equipment Trust Account; seconded by Councilman Miller and carried. S.C.A.G. SPRING Motion by Councilman Shearer to CONFERENCE receive and file; seconded by (Staff Report) Councilman Browne and carried. MAYOR'S REPORTS FREEWAY LANDSCAPING Mayor Chappell: As you all know we HEARING are in the process of attempting to get the freeway landscaping going; there will be a hearing in Marysville on the 18th of this month. In talking with Assemblyman Lancaster he said who ever represents the City should go to Sacramento the day before and he will drive them-to.Marysville for the conference. The reason for this is because the plane will not arrive in time in Sacramento. I would recommend that the Mayor attend this meeting, whomever he be, to represent our City as I did in front of the Transportation Hearing Committpe. Assemblyman Lancaster would like some verification and I also:think staff should prepare some sort of a briefing wit'h a4little more pertinent information than the one I received, giving chronological facts and figures, which I think is all they will want to hear - what we have done, what we have attempted to do, why we did it, etc. It is an important meeting because at -least they are still hear- ing our case. (Councilman Shearer asked who is conducting this particular hearing because normally the Assembly Committees are held in Sacramento; the Mayor and Mr. Eliot advised it was the Highway Commission and that a report is being delivered to the Highway Commission of its own staff who made an analysis of the unfunded projects that were cut off by the Governor because of lack of gas tax funds and there are only two landscaping projects that are being recommended for reinstituting by the staff and one is West Covina.) Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor, I would recommend very strongly that the City be represented at the hearing. I would move that the appropriate person go with an appropriation to cover expenses up to $150. Seconded by Councilman Tice. (Councilman Tice inquired if this was a result of the action of the meeting with Assemblyman Lancaster and the mayor said he understood this was just another step in this process - Cal -trans - 23 - • r: CITY COUNCIL Page Twenty-four MAYOR'S REPORTS 3/8/76 staff is basically approving our request, in fact they did so that day but there were no funds; So it appears we have friends but we have to appear and state our case and let them know we are concerned and vitally interested that this project be completed.) Lotion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None COMMENDATION Mayor Chappell: We have a letter from the principal of Hollencrest School commending three of our Policemen': - Lt. Goddard, Det. Diersi and Officer Heieck for competent, quick investigation and a successful conclusion, and I think this should be made a part of the record. We are being asked by the ESA's million dollar bike ride for the benefit of the children of St. Jude's Hospital to approve May 1, 1976 for the Delta Upsilon Chapter of the ESA who will sponsor this bike ride. They will use the bike paths we just voted on this evening. Motion by Councilman Shearer to approve the request subject to review by staff; seconded by Councilman Browne and carried. BICENTENNIAL FILM Mayor Chappell: I have a letter "OUT OF WASHINGTON" from Congressman Jim Lloyd who would like to make available a film with regard to the Bicentennial titled "Out of Washington" - a 30 minutes 16 MM film of historical significance. Perhaps we could get some publicity out to the various service groups advising that this picture is available. The film can be obtained by contacting the West Covina office. LEAGUE APPOINTMENT Mayor Chappell: I have a letter from the League of California Cities which says"the League is pleased to recommend your name for con- sideration by the National League of^Cities for appointment as a member of the Committee on Public Safety." As you know I have been representing our League in the public safety area both at the County and State level and they are asking me to accept the National appointment which would necessitate some funds because there will be several meetings throughout the year in various parts of the Country. In December a meeting in Denver and a couple of other locations which they do not mention. I would be willing to accept this appointment from the National League providing my city would support me and pay any expenses that might develop in attending these meetings. Councilman Browne: There should be'ample funds in the Council budget for this. (Mr. Eliot verified that there was.) Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor, a question. I think it is an honor, no question about it, but as a matter of policy with the League, is it that the city of the particular delegate or representative always foots the bill? It would seem to me maybe as your role increases in the League that it would be more appropriate that these types of expenses be funded from the League with perhaps a corresponding necessary increase in the overall assessment. We, - 24 - • • • CITY COUNCIL MAYOR'S REPORTS Page Twenty—five 3/8/76 obviously, in West Covina up to this point have had the benefit of whatever representation we have'had without'having to pay and to ask the city that happens to be the home city of the particular delegate to foot the bill, and I am not questioning your role, but I think this should be brought up at your next League meeting for consideration. Mayor Chappell: This has been discussed. There are only 6 people from California picked. This is the same problem the School Boards had also. When you did receive some sort of an appoint— ment away from your own zone of influence your own community picked up the pad. If there were funds available I would have pointed that out that there would be no expense to the City and if you don't go for this it won't break my hesrt if you turn me down. I am sure they will be able to find somebody else in this State to accept this appointment. I do feel that I would be most happy to serve providing we have the funds and everybody is willing to vote for it, but I am not coming hat in hand to ask for this. I feel it is an honor just to be asked to serve but it won't break my heart or hurt my feelings if you all say "hey the budget is tight, maybe another time." Councilman Shearer: No, I am not taking that position. Mayor Chappell: There are no funds and to raise the dues of the League is just like pulling teeth. If you have been at the League meeting just'at the County level it is a real donnybrook — all you have to do is mention dues and you have the best turnout of any meeting of the year from cities opposing. And this probably will cost us more money than an increase in dues would cost. I doubt that I could attend more than 2 or 3. I can't take that time away 'from my business either, nor do I want to run the cost up for the city. Motion by Councilman Shearer that the City encourage Councilman Chappell to accept the appointment with the National League with the understanding that along with that the City incur a financial obligation; seconded by Councilman Miller and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None PROCLAMATION Mayor Chappell: If there are no objections I would like to proclaim INdopendent= Insurance Month. (No objections, so proclaimed) COUNCILMEN'S REPORTS/COMMENTS (no comments, other than congratulations to the re—elected members.) APPROVE DEMANDS Motion by Councilman Browne to approve Demands totalling $883,430.54 as listed on Demand Sheets U.C.B. 54112 and 54343, and B. of A. 386 and 389; seconded by Councilman Tice and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Shearer, Miller, Browne, Tice, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None — 25 — CITY COUNCIL Page Twenty—six 3/8/76 CITIZENS ADVISORY Mayor Chappell: I overlooked one COMMITTEE item on the agenda RESIGNATION and that is"the resignation of Joe Saucedo from the Citizens Advisory Committee. I think we should all be thinking of a name to submit at our next meeting • because this is an on going committee and"they need to have full strength. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Chappell: 'I have asked several members of the Council to adjourn this meeting to 5 P.M. tomorrow — is there anyone that this would create a problem for or a hardship because rightly it is supposed to be at 7:30 P.M. and it is in favor of myself that I have asked for the rescheduling of it. Councilman Browne: Mr. Mayor, there.are others,than Council to be considered, we have the City Clerk and the City Treasurer. (City Clerk stated she felt sure the change would be agreeable to both the City Treasurer and herself.) (Councilman Tice pointed out there has.been articles in the paper that it was to be at 7:30 P.M. and there might be people that would like to come down but could not attend at 5 P.M., further stated his daughter and her husband had planned on coming with the rest of the family and they could not make it at 5 P.I. Mayor Chappell said he had no objection to leaving it at 7:30 P.M. other than the fact he could not be present having made arrangements to be at another meeting after discussing the change with various Councilmen, but it was hisfeeling that family • came first and for that reason would suggest leaving it at 7:30. Mr. Wakefield advised there was no legal problem involved and that Mayor Chappell could come to City Hall Wednesday morning and be sworn in.) Mayot`thappell; '' t' At th i'"" '''I"Wi1 `congratulate'' Council'ma`n'=Tfce ,and Councilman Miller and ou''City °Clerk "a'nd 'City, T ea'surer on `their "-rb=ele'cflon. ` They` `are `"11 good people" and 'a`re "derta'i'rrl'y doing a' job` 'that Wit11 e-a',crecCit ' tb "our `'community and I commend them on their re—election. At this time I also thank the Council for allowing me to be your Mayor for the past year. I deem it probably as high an honor as a person can have, to be Mayor of this community. We have an outstanding community and the reason we have such is because of the Council make-up and the staff we have in our employment and most important because of our citizens who become involved. Many Mayors that I have talked to of other communities have stated they wished their community would be as involved as we are. We are very fortunate and I hope it continues that way. Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor, in view of your not being here tomorrow night I will say it this • evening. I want -'to congratulate you on being an outstanding'Mayor; as Mayors come and go I think you have done an outstanding"job in the City and will be a tough act to follow. As demonstrated by your action in the League and also as demonstrated by your solution to what came up this evening which was rather a touchy situation I think it shows that you are an individual that is willing to secede perhaps to the desires of others and I know it iq an unfortunate'situation for you to be in, 26 — ' , r CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNMENT Page Twenty-seven 3/8/76 and that speaks very well of your actions not only in this but in the past year and the preceding seven and I am sure for the following four.' So thanks again for a good year. Councilman Tice: Mayor Chappell-1-think you have done'a fine outstanding job. I have had the pleasure of -serving with you for the past sixteen months as a Councilman. You have always put the City first and have put in a lot of y_our.own time on it which is appreciated and is necessary', -as` the:Mayor. You have certainly done an outstanding job. Councilman Browne: Mr. (�tyor, ma J.add-a few woAds of grati ude. H ving served as ayor Prd'Tem under you it has been a very enjoyable experience. During my -term on the Council I have looked up to your leadership which you expressed thoroughly as Mayor. As stated before you put the City first. You have been a good man to work with and have kept the Council together and going in the right direction. I only hope the guy that steps into your shoes will do half as good a job'as you have. Mayor Chappell: I have no doubt that he will. We have some good men on the Council and I am -sure it will continue just as it has been going and in the right direction. I think that is all any of us can ask - is it good for our community and are we doing it in the interests of our community? If we can answer those questions in the affirmative that is all we can ask. It is an easy job but it is time consuming and I do say that having a Mayor just for a year, a Mayor that really gets in there and gives that extra tip.. is -better than having a part time Mayor working- for`:,m6n,y,.,years:1.Y' • Councilman Miller: Mr. Mayor, for myself I want to say it has been a pleasure to -serve under you and you have done a very fine job. Mayor Chappell: Thank you. I am sure we will all get behind the new Mayor and give him the same cooperation that you have given me, which has been excellent. We haven't had one sharp word in the full year, I don't remember one time that.we got to the point of not being able to control ourself and give an intelli- gent solution to the problem. I know it will continue that way, and I think that is the backbone of our Council. Being a Mayor of a city of 759000 people is a thrill that will go with you all your life. I have enjoyed it all and I am willing to serve anytime you want to re-elect me. Motion by Councilman Tice to adjourn at 11 P.M. to March 9, 1976 at 7:30 P.M.; seconded by Councilman Miller and carried. APPROVED: • MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK - 27 -