01-09-1978 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA
JANUARY 99 1978.
The regul-ar meeting of the City Council called to order at 7:30 P.M.
• by Mayor Shearer. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman
Chappell.; the invocation was given by -Councilman Miller.
ROLL CAI.
Present: Mayor Shearer; Mayor Pro Tem Tice;
Councilmen: Miller, Chappell, Browne
Others Present: H. Fast, G. Wakefield, L. Preston,
L. Eliot, M. Miller, R. Diaz,
T. Mayer, T. Tynes, R. Paikoff,
A. Koniarsky, C. Meacham
B. Freemon - S.G.V.D.T.
WEST COVINA BEAUTIFUL Mrs. Uribe, Social Chairman of West
I.NVITATI-ON Covina Beautiful invited the City
Council, members of the various City
Boards and Commissions, staff and
employees, to attend the City's 55th Birthday celebration on Saturday,
February 4, 1978 at Temple Beth Ami.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Chappell to approve the
minutes of December 27, 1977; seconded
by Miller and carried.
• CONSENT C.ALENDAR
1. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None.
2. PLAiNNING COMMISSION
SUMMARY OF ACTION January 4, 1978. (Accept and file)
3. HUMAN RESOURCES COMM.
SUMMARY OF ACTION December 22, 1977. (Accept and file)
4. ABC APPLICATIONS: Chief of Police recommends NO PROTEST.
a) Jerry Ernest Tomeo dba JERRY'S HOUSE OF SPIRITS
84.1 S. Terri Ann, W.C. 944 West Covina Parkway
Top Dial Broadcasters, Inc.
Clifton George Paxson, President
Motion by Chappell to approve Consent
Calendar items; seconded by Tice and carried on'roll call vote:
AYES: Miller, Chappell, Browne, Tice, Shearer
NOES: None
GENERAL AGENDA ITEMS
PUBLIC WORKS
TRACT NO. 32567 Location: East side of Orange Avenue,
BATTAGLIA DEVELOPMENT north of Merced Avenue.
COMPANY (Council reviewed Engineer's report)
- 1 -
J
CITY COUNCIL Page Two
PUBLIC WORKS: TR#32567 1/9/78
RESOLUTION NO. 5617 The City Attorney presented:
ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING FINAL MAP OF TRACT NO. 32567
AND ACCEPTING AN AGREEMENT BY THE SUB—
DIVIDER AND SURETY BONDS TO SECURE THE
SAME.
Motion by Browne to waive full reading
of the resolution and adopt same; seconded by Tice and carried on
roll call vote:
AYES: Miller, Chappell, Browne, Tice, Shearer
NOES: None
PARCEL MAP NO. 8124 Location: South side of Merced Avenue
WESTBUILT CORPORATION between Willow and Garvey Avenues.
(Council reviewed Engineer's report)
RESOLUTION NO. 5618 The City Attorney presented:
ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING THE FINAL MAP OF PARCEL
MAP NO. 8124.
Motion by Tice to waive full reading
of the :resolution and adopt same; seconded by Browne and carried
on roll call vote:
AYES: Miller, Chappell, Browne, Tice, Shearer
NOES: None
• SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION Location: North of Amar Road, east
BKK LANDFILL INSPECTION of Azusa Avenue.
(Council reviewed Engineer's,report)
Motion by Chappell to authorize the
establishment of a special account for BKK inspection with a
supplemental appropriation of $15,000 for fiscal year 1977-78;
seconded by Miller and carried on roll call vote
AYES: Miller, Chappell, Browne, Tice, Shearer
NOES: None
CAMERON AVENUE STORM Location: Cameron Avenue, Valinda
DRAIN Avenue to Fernwood Street.
(Council reviewed Engineer's report)
RESOLUTION NO. 5619 The City Attorney presented.:
ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING CERTAIN SPECIFICATIONS FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CAMERON STORK DR'AI'N PROJECT IN THE CITY
OF WEST COVINA AND AUTHORIZING USE OF THE PUBLIC STREETS FOR THE
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THESE"TACILITIES.
• Motion by Tice to waive full reading
of resolution and adopt same; seconded by. Miller and carried on
roll call vote:
AYES: Miller, Chappell, Browne, Tice, Shearer
NOES: None
— 2 —
CITY COUNCIL Page Three
PUBLIC WORKS: Cont'd. 1/9/78
PROJECT NO. SP-76002 Location: Merced Avenue to Francis —
AMENDMENT TO CITY —COUNTY ?uito Avenue.
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT Council reviewed Engineer's report)
Motion by Tice to authorize the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute on behalf of the city the amendment to
City —County Agreement No. 29659; seconded by Miller and carried on
roll call vote:
AYES: Miller, Chappell, Browne, Tice, Shearer
NOES: None
PROJECT NO. SP-75006-1 `Location: Glendora Avenue from Merced
Avenue to Vincent Avenue; Vincent
Avenue and West Covina Parkway; and
Vincent Avenue from Workman Avenue to
Badillo Street.
(Council reviewed Engineer's report)
Motion by Browne to approve revised
plans and specifications and authorize the City Engineer to call
for bids at such time as the plans and specifications are finally
approved by the California Department of Transportation and the
Federal'Highway Administration; seconded by Tice and carried.
HILLSIDE OVERLAY ZONE WATER
STANDARDS.
Councilman Browne:
• Page 1, and I would like to
this.
(Council reviewed Engineer's report)
Mr. Mayor, after going over the
ordinance thoroughly I contacted Mr.
Fast today with a concern over C-2 on
have Mr. Fast give us an amendment to
Mr. Fast: Mr. Mayor and Councilmen; the draft
C-2 that you have before you its
derivation is from the California
Administrative Code, and after further discussion with the City
Attorney we find we have local jurisdiction to change that and
we would offer the following language. (I will read it to you,
the report to you states staff will come back with a subsequent
document, at a"following meeting, so the entire draft will be in
writing before you at that time.) (Read staff's recommendation
and explained the need for the exemption clause)
Also, on Page 1, Section A — Purpose,
we would like to recommend that an additional sentence be added
after the word "zone". "These provisions shall apply to any pro—
posed development in the Hillside Overlay (H) Zone.and each
increment thereof for phase development."
Councilman Browne: Mr.' Mayor, that satisfies me, in the
fact I had great concern over the
ambiguities that existed in the
supplying of water in the hillside areas. I would like to
compliment Mr. Fast for his response to the request. I was
• rather :surprised to see it this soon. I think it thoroughly
covers what I had in mind.
Mayor Shearer: I also had concern with regard to
Item 2 — I am wondering if we could
go one step further and.write in
there that once any area. of deviation is granted by Council that
— 3 —
CITY COUNCIL. Page Four
PUBLIC WORKS: Hillside Overlay Zone Water Standards 1/9/78
that must be recorded with the property so subsequent owners are
aware of it. Can.that be recorded as a permanent encumbrance on
the property?
Mr. Wakefield: Mr. mayor, we could require that any
• variance granted be included in any
covenant that was adopted with refer-
ence to. -the proposed development so it would be a part of the
total package of covenants and conditions which would go with
the sale of the property. (Shearer asked if this could be record-
ed in the same manner as an easement) I might explain that this
is different from an encumbrance in the sense that all it does
is authorize a deviation from an established standard which may be
a smaller pipe or less pressure, etc., that has been authorized
for a particular development. Offhand I don't know if it would be
possible to record it or not but I will be glad to check into it
and report back to you.
Motion by Tice to adopt the standards
for domestic water supply and fire service for the Hillside Overlay
(H) Zone with the changes as discussed and authorize preparation
of an appropriate ordinance; seconded by Miller and carried.
Mr. Fast:; Mr. Mayor, a comment relative to the
format of the ordinance. It had been
our intention, similar to other
documents of the same type rather than include all of this in the
ordinance itself to have it similar to our resolution.fee, to have
the ordinance specifically refer to the resolution fee, so in the
event some further change comes along we won't have to republish
the ordinance or reissue the ordinance every time there is a change
in the standards. It still would require Council action and it is
still an ordinance.
Mr..Wakefield: The ordinance would simply require
the developer to provide water service
to standards specified"by the City
Council by resolution and the resolution then would contain the
details with respect to the procedure and the specific requirements.
Browne inquired if the developer would
be so advised.- would a copy of that resolution be furnished; staff
said it would.
Tice asked what about the rest of the
City - this takes care of the hillside areas only whereas there are
areas in the city that also need better water service.: -Mr. Wake-
field said it would cause a problem in'.the sense there are existing
water systems that serve the developed property and in the main the
same system.will be utilized to serve undeveloped lots -or parcels
that maybe capable of being served from existing systems. We
really don't have the means to compel the upgrading of existing
systems simply b,ecaus'e the PUC has established certain standards
for water systems'and development thereto the extent that existing
system met the regulations at the time;that system then would just
be there; there are systems that have been in the ground so long
• that the pipes need replacing - we would have to approach that
from a different standpoint in the sense that'we might have to
adopt some standards for:the replacement of existing systems.
- 4 -
CITY COUNCIL
CITY ATTORNEY'S AGENDA
Page Five
1/9/78
ORDINANCE
The City Attorney presented:
INTRODUCTION
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA,
AMENDING SECTION NO. 3190 OF THE
WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL
CODE RELATING TO INCREASE IN MAXIMUM SPEED
LIMITS,
.
Motion by Chappell to waive full
reading of said ordinance; seconded by Miller and carried.
Motion by Chappell to introduce said
ordinance; seconded by
Miller and carried.
ORDINANCE
he,City Attorney presented:
INTRODUCTION,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY ]F WEST COVINA" CALIFORNIA,,
'
AMLNDINQ'^5[CTI8N NO. 3191 OF THE WEST
COUI0A MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO DECREASE IN MAXIMUM SPEED LIMITS.
Motion by Tice to waive full reading
of the ordinance; seconded
by Miller and carried. .
Motion by Tice to:introduoe said
ordinance; seconded by
Chappell and oerrlad°
RESOLUTION NO. 5630
The City Attorney presented:
ADOPTED
A RESOLUTION OF THEZI TY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY. OF WEST .� ~ » CALIFORNIA,
REQUESTDVG ASSESSMENT INFORMATION
FROM THE 1978-79 ASSESSM[NTROLL.
Motion by Chappell to waive full read—
ing of the resolution
and.adopt same; seconded b. Miller and carried
on roll call vote:
'
�
AYES: ` Miller,
Chappell,' Browne, Tice, Shearer
mnrcz^ m.."
AT 7:55 P.M. THE MAYOR RECESSED THE CITY COUNCIL'MEETINC FOR THE
PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING THE REDEV[LOPM[NT'AGENCY ME[TINQ AND THE
AUTHORITY
PARKING T D xI|Y MEETING. CITY COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 7:58 P.M.
CITY MANAGER AGENDA
PALM VIEW COMMUNITY CENTER Tice suggeotgd.the name`be�ohangod
PLAQUE ' . to Palm View Neighborhood,Center
(Staff Report), � rather then indicating'it �ao a
. Community Center, Shearer said he
. would hate to take any action on the
pert of this Council to give credence to what hg thinks he read
in the newspaper - that this building was just for the people that
live in the neighborhood — he agrees loud rock bands and things of
that hoture that disturb the neighborhood should notba sponsored
by theCity but to take action that goes right along saying we
are running this for the neighborhood,, heuould not agree to.
Tice explained his suggestion was based on the olza of the.park �
that a Community park should be 20 acres or more and it is loao
than 8 ocroa° Miller suggested eliminating the word "Community"
and oolI it Palm View Center. Council agraed°
format of information to be
change in name to Palm Uiou
chase andjnstalI the plaque.
roll call. vote:
AYES: MilIer,
NOES: None
Motion by Chappell to approve the
placed upon the plaque with the
Center;. d authorize staff t on ar� an au or �o o a o pur~~
s000ndod by Miller and carried on
Chappell, Browne, Tice, Shearer
— 5 ~^
�J
•
CITY COUNCIL
HEARINGS
PRECISE PLAN NO. 684, REV. 1
UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT
NO. 221 - NEGATIVE'DECLARA
TION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Franchise Realty Interstate
Corporation (McDonald's)
Page Six
1/9/78
Location: West of Azusa Avenue and.
north of the San Bernardino Freeway.
Request: Approval of a precise plan
revision and an unclassified use
permit for the construction of a drive—
in restaurant in. the S' C (Service
Commercial) Zone, and certification
of the Negative Declaration of
Envi.ronmental'Impact. Denied by
Planning Commission Resolution No'. 5605. Appealed by applicant
on December 15, 1977. Proof of Publication in the West Covina
Tribune of the.Notice of Public Hearing on December 29, 1977
received; 35 Notices Mailed.
Staff Report presented along with
slides and explanation. Staff recommends Study Plan "B" should
Council reverse the decision of the Plannino Commission.
Mr. Diaz: Mr. Mayor and members of Council,
the Planning Commission at its
last meeting recommended approval
to City Council in the Master Plan of Highways the lessening of
Azusa Avenue from 132' to 1101. TheA mpact that this will have on
this proposal is that the aisle widths in the parking area will
tend to become wider thus exceeding the requirements of Planning
Commission Resolution No. 2513 with .regard to public parking.
The Planning Commission at its meetings of November 7 and December
16 did not have this information available to it. I bring this
out because one of ,the reasons for denial by the Commission was
because of the inability of the site to accommodate the proposed
use. (Continued on summarizing the written staff report pointing
out the main reasons for the denial by the Planning Commission;
also pointed out -the alternatives available to Council)
The staff recommendation would be
that should Council reverse the decision of the Planning
Commission we would recommend that Study Plan "B" dated November
169 1977 be approved with conditions as stated. We also have
some additional conditions that were not recommended to.the
Planning Commission. (Read Conditions 11 and 12)
In addition, on Page 4 of the Staff
Report, conditions j & k should be one condition. Staff
recommended to the Planning Commission that a bond be executed
for a 5 year period to cover the cost. Since that time the
applicant has approached staff and suggested a covenant might be
the better approach and that is what staff is recommending this
evening as a condition: j — Applicant shall execute a covenant
to the satisfaction of the City Attorney that if traffic signals
are required the property owner will pay his fair share of the
cost of installation of a signal not to exceed $20,000.
This covenant will run with the land
and would not.have a 5 year limitation.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
IN FAVOR
John Walsdorf Gentlemen, the rep ort4s you have
Representing Agency for before you are complied both through
McDonald's Corporation a -lot of effort with M cDonald's and
10.960 Wilshire Blvd. staff in order to bring a facility
L.A. at that location that will be benefi-
6..
CITY COUNCIL Page Seven
HEARING: PP #684, REV. 1 1/9/78
cial both to the franchisee as well as the city and the property
owner. The property owner has taken a lot of concern with what type
of tenant he would like to have in there and came up with.McDonald's
as one alternative. That Company has many locations and they are
not one that comes into town and leaves. They are economically
stable and also provide many services within the community.
• The Planning Commission had denied the
use for the reasons stated in the report. Since then we have come
back to the staff and have resolved all those concerns. We have a
traffic :study report from your own agency showing up to 1995 that
there will be a 3% increase at that particular location which gives
us at that time only a .03% usage. We have also been able to,
through staff, satisfy them in regard to the parking and traffic
flow. We have met all the conditions and requirements the different
regulatory agencies have brought to our attention and that is why we
appear before you this evening to appeal this decision.
The Commission did have some genuine
concerns and we resolved those concerns. We ask if it is approved
that in the staff conditions, Page 4, that some consideration be
given, at: the request of the franchisee, with regard to the time
limit of that condition. He is willing to fulfill the obligation
but he would like to know how long in the future he would have to
continue with it. Originally staff had recommended a 5 year
bond. There was a signal there previously and after discussions
through the property owner with Cal —Trans they advised with the
distances to the potential future signal that might go in it would
be injurious to the people and the traffic flow. The traffic
count'NcOonald's has is 906 cars a day. Again, with the City's own
traffic study, with the amount of traffic that will be generated
• and with the widening in the future, it is still .03% with that use.
We have resolved the objections of the
Planning Commission and therefore we are back before you tonight to
say that although the concerns about the shape of the lot still
stand we have come up with a facility that willfit there,. We
ask the City Council to reconsider and approve this use.
The franchisee that would be utilizing
this location is here this evening, as well as a representative
from McDonald's and the property owner. I am sure they would like
to comment. The franchisee has many locations himself, he is not
new to McDonald's. In fact he has been recognized by the City of
Newport Beach for the type of facility he does have there.
Charles Cricks I am the owner of the property. As I
260 La Qu.inta Drive previously stated I think it is
Glendora important to the City that the
stability of the occupant°be consider—
ed and it would seem to me that it would be good business on every—
one's part that we have a well maintained and well built facility
one that will add a substantial amount of money to the revenues of
the City :in sales tax, for instance.
The main thing I would like to point
out with regard to the concerns expressed by the Commission and
• the questions asked and the answers given is,that the experts
we employ„ which is Cal —Trans and the City Staff in this instance,
both came up with positive answers to the question as far as the
"traffic problem" is concerned. Cal —Trans feels there is no need
for a signalization at the intersection at the present time, which
is certainly an indication that the proposal of a McDonald's in
there with the projected traffic figures they have included do not
project a sufficient problem that they feel a signal is necessary.
— 7 —
CITY COUNCIL Page Eight
HEARING: PP #684, REV. 1 1/9/7B
They are going to be putting in a left turn pocket as required by
the City and as approved by Cal —Trans. Certainly the general
public will get some benefit from that because they will be able
to make U turns without causing a traffic hazard which at present
they can't do although U turns are made. So it is a plus the
• public gets without cost.
As far as the access 'to the property
it should be noted that the driveway placed there is over 90' to
the north of the point at which somebody could place a driveway
if they so desired. (Explained)
In my view this is the experts answer —
"yes" in reply to the layman's question "should well, and I think
we should take the experts answer. And since the applicant has
met the requests of the City without any kind of special variances
it would certainly seem to me that they -should receive approval.
Charles Hall I have been with McDonald's for 14
Potential Franchisee years and have 5 existing locations.
Newport Beach One is in your neighboring city of
Baldwin Park where we�have been for
about 6 years. At one time, probably
3 years ago, we were given a commendation by the City of Los
Angeles City Beautiful Program for the attractive building we have
in Baldwin Park. Anybody that is familiar with the internal
operation of McDonald's is aware that one of the contributing
factors to our success is the clean healthy operation we conduct
and its involvement with the City. In some cases, Newport Beach
was one, there was certain reservations but today just about all
• the Cities are glad that we are a neighbor. (Explained and read
from the Daily Pilot dated November 15, 1977, a commendation
he received for his clean establishment in the City.)
THERE BEING NO FURTHER PUBLIC TESTIMONY FOR OR AGAINST, PUBLIC
HEARING CLOSED. COUNCIL DISCUSSION.
Councilman Chappell: Mr.JMayor, in listening to Mr. Diaz's
report to us it appears a number of
items came up after the Planning
Commission denied this request. It would be my thought if that is
the case that this go back to the Planning Commission with these
items to clear up any doubts that they had, before I would vote
to overturn a decision they made. Being the Council.liaison when
this project was presented the first time, in my mind it would
be out of order to approve something they disapproved by not
having the information that we received this evening, which might
clarify their objections and perhaps clear up any objections they
had.
Councilman Miller: What Councilman Chappell has said I
would not oppose, although I somewhat
question even sending it back and
bringing it back to us if it does not resolve one major problem
that I do see. I can only go on my experiences when I have been
• at a McDonald's. but they generally have 3 to 4 entrances, so I
find it: very difficult with their high intense use to find that
one entrance will suffice. It is near the onramp of the freeway
which is a heavy congested area. I have been down there and
from a layman's standpoint I feel the high traffic volume on
Azusa Avenue trying to veer right at that point where they will be
coming out of the driveway and heading to the onramp, to me
creates a hazardous situation. If there can be a solution to
that I will be favorable — I like McDonald's and would like to see
them come again into the City.
CITY COUNCIL Page Nine
HEARING,: PP #684, REV. 1 1/9/78
Tice expressed concern also with the
short distance between the driveway and the onramp and pointed
out if the State should elect to meter these onramps over the
City's objections it could cause serious problems — he had re—
servations about the location for this use. Browne agreed with
• the objections raised by the Councilmen and the Planning
Commission and said he certainly would welcome a McDonald's
into the! City at a suitable location and had no objections to
going along with Councilman Chappell's suggestion of referring
it back to .the Planning Commission. Shearer agreed with
welcoming another McDonald's into the City, especially in the
center of the Community, but didn't think sending it back to
the Commission would do anything but delay the matter. He
stated in reading through the minutes it seemed to him the con—
cerns of the Commissioners that voted against it are exactly
the same concerns Council stated this evening. They are not on —
site, they are off site and those conditions still exist.
Councilmen discussed further saying they would like to see
another McDonald's come into the city and would like to see Staff
attempt to find a suitable location.
Motion by Chappell to send this back
to the Planning Commission for approval with the condition that if
they do not approve it do not bring it back to City Council.
Lotion died for' lack of a second.
Motion by Diller to reaffirm the
Planning Commission decision and instruct staff to prepare the
necessary resolution; seconded by Tice and carried.
RESOLUTION NO. 5621 The City Attorney presented:
• ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA,
DENYING PRECISE PLAN NO. 6849
REVISION 1.
Motion by Miller to waive full read—
ing of resolution and adopt same; seconded by Tice and carried on
roll call. vote:
AYES: Miller, Chappell, Browne, Tice, Shearer
NOES: None
RESOLUTION NO. 5622 The City Attorney presented:
ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA,
DENYING UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT NO.
221.
Motion by Tice to waive full reading
of resolution and adopt same; seconded by Miller and carried on
roll call vote:
AYES: Miller, Chappell, Browne., Tice, Shearer
NOES: None I-
• PRECISE PLAN NO. 562 Location.: 215 North Azusa -Avenue.
REV. 2 — CATEGORICAL Request Approval of a. revised
EXEMPTION Precise Plan,of Design to install two
Charles Cricks vehicle access doors to the south
side of the:,existing muffler shop in
the S—C (Service —Commercial) Zone. This case being considered
Categorically Exempt, no Environmental Impact Report 'or Negative
Declaration required. Denied by Planning Commission Resolution
CITY COUNCIL Page Ten
HEARING:: PP #562,.Rev. 2 1/9/78
No. 2806. Appealed by Applicant on December 19, 1977. Proof of
Publication in the West Covina Tribune of the Notice of Public
Hearing on December 29, 1977 received; 31 Notices Mailed.
(Mr. Wakefield advised that because the two proposals are tied
directly to the approval of McDonald's there would be no need for
a Public Hearing on this item, all that needs to be done would be
the adoption of a Resolution denying.)
RESOLUTION NO. 5623 The City Attorney presented
ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, DENY—
ing PRECISE PLAN NO. 562, REVISION 2.
Motion by Chapell to waive full reading
of resolution and adopt same; seconded by Miller and carried on roll
call vote:
AYES: Miller, Chappell, Browne, Tice, Shearer
NOES: None
WOODLANE DRIVE STREET
VACATION
PROTEST HEARING
Mayor Shearer:
Location:- Easterly terminus of
Woodland Drive.
Set for hearing on this date by
Resolution No. 5601, adopted December
12, 1977.
(Council reviewed Engineer's report)
Madam City Clerk, do you have the
Affidavits of Posting and Publication?
• City Clerk: Yes, I do.
Motion by Miller to receive and file
said Affidavits of Posting and Publication; seconded by Chappell
and carried.
Mr. Mayer:: Mr. Mayor and members of Council,
Engineering Dept. the proposed vacation is a vacation
of a portion of Woodlane Drive which
is not now used and will not be used for street purposes and
therefore it is not necessary to maintain as a street.
Mayor Shearer: Madam City Clerk, have you received
any protests or objections to the
abandonment of the street as proposed?
City Clerk: No, I have not.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. THERE BEING NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY FOR OR
AGAINST„ PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. COUNCIL DISCUSSION — NONE.
RESOLUTION NO. 5624 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 WOODLANE DRIVE.
Motion by Miller to waive full read—
ing of the resolution and adopt same; seconded by Chappell and
carried on roll call:
AYES: Miller, Chappell, Browne, Tice, Shearer
NOES: None
— 10 —
CITY COUNCIL
HEARINGS — Cont'd.
FOURTH 'YEAR DRAFT APPLICATION
FOR FEDERAL FUNDS UNDER THE
HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOP—
MENT ACT OF 1974 (TITLE I)
. BLOCK GRANTS
Page Eleven
1/9/78
First of two Public Hearings for
citizen input to discuss and
identify needed projects which are
eligible under the City's 1978-79..,
Community Development Block Grant.
Proof of Publication in the West
Covina Tribune on December 299 1977
received. No mailed notices required.
(Council reviewed Staff Report)
Gus Salazar advised the hearing tonight
is for the purpose of receiving citizens input in addition to that
already received at the Human Resources Commission meetingaand before
getting into the proposed package he would like to state emphatically
that the application as presented tonight, even if approved after the
second public hearing, does not mean it cannot be changed. There is
always the possibility of amending the application after it is
approved. Advised the 1977*Act contained regulations Withi:a-number
that were changed from the previous regulations. Two of which
significantly affect our proposal. One is relating to the.primary
benefactors of the funds expended through the Community Development
grant and that is to benefit low and moderate income persons — the
handicapped and Senior Citizens. These are our clients as far as
the funding is concerned.
Explained under the new regulations
the City can go citywide with theHome Improvement Program. In the
past it was limited to selecting certain target areas and expending
funds within the target areas. (Explained in further detail.)
. With the new regulations in mind the
Human Resources Commission held three hearings and the package you
have before you is the result of some of the comments received.
(Summarized the proposed projects and fund allocations.)
Councilman Chappell: Mr. Mayor, a few questions. Talking
about the Senior Citizens on Page 3,
first paragraph, re legal counselling,
health screening, housing information, consumer protection, socia.l
security information, etc., — all of these coming out of a facility
along with many other items. What would be the thinking if Covina
and West. Covina pooled their resources to build such a facility so
that WE! could actually provide some of the items written down here.
In my mind with the money we have we couldn't possibly provide
those items.
Salazar said the services outlined
are the services that would be hosted by the facility and not
funded by the city; most of these,services are provided through
the County and the idea is to attract on certain days of the week
a.legal counsellor, etc. This wouldn't mean that the City would
be getting into the providing of the services only the hosting
at a facility — most of these services are now being provided by
the County at other facilities.
Councilman.Chappell: There are still enough items in here
that if you brought in one person from
the County on various.days.you would
not have a large enough facility to support those items. It may be
too late this year to pursue it because we have to have this
application in shortly, but I feel we are trying to provide too
many things for too few people at this time. I would like to see
this.money spent wisely and when you talk about a facility of
$350,000,well possibly with the combination of two or three cities
we might be able to build one that is large enough.
— 11 —
CITY COUNCIL` Page Twelve
HEARINGS: 4TH YR. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM l/9/77
,
Council determined that the funds from
each year do not have to be spent in that year, the funds can be
combined with the Gth year funding if it is,stated that the intentis
to build o larger facility.
Councilman Browne: Along the same concern expressed by
Councilman Chappell — we are looking at
a � �35O OOO building � however,as we go
_
down the roadeach year we are looking at a larger cost factor in
maintaining such e facility. Will the city be in a position to
support once these funds are no longer available to subsidize a
program of that nature? I feel we would have a pretty expensive
facility just to be hosting the services offered by the County in
our City" It would be more logical for the County to build such a
facility to serve say Covina, Baldwin Park and Uaat Covina. I
really don't understand why we are getting into this typo of
an operation. We are not in the service welfare business to dupli—
cate those services already in existence — I don't think it is
incumbent upon us to provide these services, I think we would go to
the higher level — the County — to require they be provided.
Councilman Miller: Along those same lines — I would like
to pursue the coot factor for operating
yearly. We are getting into the
Shadow Oak Center and its cost to -maintain thatopluo the Sunset
School project which in down the road, plus we have the ongoing
cost of our parks that we just passed plans on. We should ask �
where are we at — what can we afford -are we looking at a
tremendous raise in taxes —these are the critical concerns that
should be answered. '
Councilman'Browne: oWno:� I think un are taking a ahot gun
.^ � .
approach to some of these things
and just bg000ao we are getting the
money we have to find a fast means of spending it — I think we
are doing an injustice to what the intent was. I think it is
not well enough planned or coordinated as to what we really want
in this city. I think we should get our sights in line if we
want this Sunset thing to fly. I om not at this time in favor
of encumbering this city or the taxpayers Oithany more of a burden
in support maintenance of these projects.
'
Miller 6uggested the use of Palm View
or some of the other facilities for hosting these activities.
Council was not in favorof hoatingaervioes that aro supplied
by other agencies ~ State and County,
'
Mr. Fast: Mr. Mayor and members 'of Council,
I might suggest a procedure.
The requirements ofthe Community
Development Act do call for the Ci y Council to have two hearings
for citizen input in addition to that .received by the`Human
Resources Commission. Mr" Salazar did outline our concerns rela—
tive to the lack.of suggestions with regard to this particular
allocation with regard to what it m^ ht mpeo'fically, mean a's
opposed to what is under the hoadi.ng.at thia- momgnt° ` Perhaps the
Council would desire to have a work session with the Human Re—
source's Commission scheduled immediately after your second hear—
ing, and prior to taking action, or if we run into a deadline
scheduling problem relative to.aubmittal the plan, of course,
could be amgnded.lmmedietely after a_uork session with the Human
Resources Commission and roollocationv poatpongment or what
determination might be made relative to tho $3SO»OOO allocation
-could be made then.
~l2—
CITY COUNCIL Thirteen
HEARING: 4TH YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 1/9/77
In answer to Browne's question
Salazar stated -February 20 is the deadline for submitting an
application to HUD, and he offered an alternative — that if it
is felt this is important enough to study that we set aside
possibly under something called Planning and Management, a project
• or program which says we are going to study it and not set any
money aside for construction and wait for the following years.
Tice felt that was a goo°d suggestion
because from his conversation with Senior Citizens he was. not sure
this is what they really want. Salazar said unfortunately the ones
that need this are not the ones that come to the meetings such as
the shut—ins.
Mayor Shearer: I would guess the thrust of the
Senior Citizens who testified
before from the standpoint of these
facilities also had in mind a recreational type of facility where
they could play cards, dance and whatever. I doubt that they
really envision a $350,000 facility to,allow a county representa—
tive to come and talk to them once a week about their health,
etc. I am sure in two weeks with: a certain amount of press.cover—
age we will have some people here to express,th.emselves._ And
regardless of its use we still may not be able to'afford the
maintenance.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED.
Mrs. Ur.ibe When Mr. Salazar called the meeting
West Covina before, the Human Resources Commission
public hearing;l came and had a
couple of ideas and afterwards in an
explanation he explained that was not what they were looking for
at all and what I had in mind wouldn't qualify. It may be the
same now but briefly I spoke at'that time for citywide help of the
median and parking strips in our city which are very disgraceful.
And tonight when he mentioned a $1009000 project for street
improvement I thought of California Avenue and what a terrible
thing it is that the citizens have to put up with with the'
closing of California Avenue. (Explained the difficulty of
getting in and out of the postoffice, etc.) So if we are talking
of money for improving this City citywide the first thing he
City should talk about, is the opening of that street — I don't
know how the businesses ever allowed it to be closed.
With regard to the Senior Citizens.
I am all for services for Senior Citizens but I wish I knew that
the Senior Citizens in our city had a great need that was not
being met. I wish they would come before this City Council and
say we have this need, but from the public hearings I'hear I am
inclined to agree with the Mayor — that the Senior Citizens I
have heard speak seem to be thinking about where they are going
to have their social gatherings-.
I would also like to say that once
before when a community center — Palm View — was being built
• the word around the City was that was a Senior Citizen building
and I had to make a very special point of saying.that was a
community center building that was paid for with your taxes and
mine that came in here from the.Federal Government. I would
object very much to it being designated as a neighborhood center
building. (Explained the basis of her objections)
13
r�
CITY COUNCIL Page Fourteen
HEARING: 4TH YR. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 1/9/78
One of the things that might be
considered for using some of this money is some kind of a mini—
bus service for transportation..
If you want public input from the
citizens of,this city a very good thing to'do woIuld be to tell
them exactly what kind of input you are interested in because if
it just covers certain areas and a person has.no.knowledge or
interest about those areas they wouldn't be able to put any input
in. That is what happened to me at the Human Resources Commission
when I did come as a citizen and speak fo,r things that would be
good for my entire city.
(It was pointed out to Mrs. Uribe that the Council's action
tonight in changing the name of the park.to Palm View Center
would cover that problem.)
Motion by Tice to continue the public
hearing to the next regular Council meeting of January 23, 1978;,'.
seconded by Chappell and carried.
ORAL COMffUNFCATIONS None.
CITY MANAGER's AGENDA— Cont'd.
THIRD YEAR GRANT
APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL
FUNDS FOR EAST VALLEY
BURGLARY INVESTIGATION TEAM
(EVBIT) (Staff Report)
Councilman Chappell:
Motion by Chappell to adopt a resolu—
tion authorizing the City of West
Covina to serve as a proponent city
of the EVBIT-project for the third
grant year and authorize the Mayor
to execute the resolution; seconded
by Miller and carried.
Mr. Mayor, we had a report from the
investigation team leader and there
was a remark made that there was an
attempt made to work with the courts so that sone of the
apprehended criminals could be put away'for awhile rather than
left out on the street. I was wondering if we could get a further
report — has that attempt been successful, or has it not come off
yet?
(Mr. Fast stated Staff would have a follow—up report to Council.)
..RESOLUTION NO. 5625 The City Attorney presented:
ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA,
AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION AND
FILING OF AN APPLICATION FOR A LAW ENFORCEMENT GRANT (EAST VALLEY
BURGLARY INVESTIGATION TEAM).
Motion by
Chappell to waive full read—
ing of the
resolution and adopt same;
seconded by Tice and carried
on roll call
vote:
AYES:
Miller, Chappell,
Browne, Tice, Shearer
NOES:
None
LEGISLATION
— STAFF
REPORT
AB 1603
Mandatory
Certification of Local Police
SB 1164
Peace Officer"Tenure
Required
AB 2021
Sales Tax
Repeal and Re -distribution
14 —
CITY COUNCIL Page Fifteen
MANAGER'SCITY I/9/78
Mr. Fast: Mr. Mayor and Council members, the
first two items are following along
the lines generally of the State
Lggialatioe° to continue to wish to invade local prerogative to .
dgoI with our own employee groups, in this case the police officers.
I wish to call particular attention to A8 2021 which if approved
would strike right at the heart of what West Covina has been trying
to do right along in terms of enhancing its tax base through
retail sales and now we would be sharing that which we have tried
to do over many years of suffering* with everybody else who has
not bothered to do so.
Motion by Browne to oppose.AB I603,
S8 1164x and AB 2021 and authorize the Mayor to correopond`uith
the respective legislation; seconded by Tice and carried.
PUBLIC RELATIONS Mr. Fast: Mr. Mayor and Coumoil»
two quick additional
items, A letter was
received from the San Gabriel Valley Tribune signed by Mr. -Totter
along u.ith o copy of the spread sheet for the Spgoial Edition.
Mr. Totter suggests that we might want to participate; in research-
ing the files it appears the last time West Covina participated was
in 1974° I feel this is a Council matter as to whether you wish to
communicate with the citizens in this manner. The cost for a full
page would be about $gGO and ehalP pogo would be looe than $GOO°
There is a deadline for notification prior to your next regular
meeting.
Councilman _Chappell: Mr. Mayor* I would say it might be
time that we think of something like
�N�u this and act on it to let the
-� citizens knou' t uhahao been accomplished over the last 5 or 4 years.
I don't know if a full page could properly point them out but I
think that citi�e'no going to work in the morning and coming home at
night don't really realize'what in going
on in our City and it
might be o timely bit of information at this time. Although there
is a cost involved the coat would be far more to put out a news-
letter. It might be well to'lgt the citizens know that this city
has not been sitting on �ta' anda the.iIomt few years but has been
moving ahead in an outstanding manner (I think).
'
Councilmen Browne: I would agree with Councilman Chappell.
' We don't very often get out in the
front lino with newsletters or any
typo'op media exploiting any type of advancement within the City.
'
Along the same thinklhg - yoa» we have accomplished o lot but
let's boar in'mind it has been the 000poratioe effort of many
' people and organizations in the City that has made this possible
and reoognize^thoae° Qaot Covina Beautiful has played a very
important port and we have many other organizations that have
worked hand in hand with the City in promoting things that we are
trying t. resolve. They get out and work independent and at no
coat to the City. This is ona way we could show ourappreoiation
of their efforts. I would think a full page, properly displayed
and drawn up that we could gat a very good message across.
(Council discussed further; Tice
and Miller in agreement; Shearer commented he 'oat wished the
timing was a little different because he could just hear someone
in the next few weeks saying "look at that City Council putting
an ad in the paper, running for election, etc. I ulah thla'more
in April rather than at this tima"vh
-I5-
C:
CITY COUNCIL
CITY MANAGER'S AGENDA CONT'D.
Page Sixteen
1/9/78
Motion by Chappell to approve a full
page ad in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune Special Edition;
seconded by'Miller and carried on roll call vote:
AYES: Miller, Chappell, Browne, Tice, Shearer
NOES: None
(The City Manager introduced the.new Personnel Officer - Jorge Varel'a.)
MAYOR'S_REPORTS
PROCLAMATION Hearing no objections the Mayor
proclaimed "YMCA WEEK" - February 12 - 18,
19,78..
COUNCILMEN'S REPORTS/COMMENTS
Councilman Chappell: This is the time of the year that
the League appoints various
Council members to committees. If
any of.you have any interest`at all in any of the Committees
that the League of California Cities sponsor I would like to hear
from you. We have a:,number of Committees, Mr. Fast can give you
a'list. If you have an area of interest we certainly would like
to have you participate.
Councilman Browne: We had an item on our agenda this
evening re BKK Landfill inspection.
I note there has been an acceleration
of complaints and I can say again what I said 3 or 4 months ago,
that we would if proper coverage isnot placed on that land opera-
tion. I am wondering if there can be some closer inspection and
supervision during a rainy season in checking out the whole site,
the already filled sites where it has been covered because that is
where the fissures are undoubtedly opening at the higher level,
because the odors are now coming northerly whereas most of the
com-p-la-ints previously were southerly. This $15,000 we are going
to charge back to BKK'I question whether that is going to be
a sufficient amount to cover the cost of personnel for inspecting
and supervising. 'Are'the inspectors from the Building Department
as well qualified on the inspection problems as were the people
from the Engineering Department?
Mr. Miller: Mr.°Mayor and Council; the inspectors
have been trained by the previous
inspectors and supervisors to know
what they are looking for, what the provisions and procedures are,
and they have taken their training quite well and are doing a
good job.
Councilman Browne: When.they are on the site, especially
when it is raining, how do they
traverse the area and perform an
inspection?
. Mr. Miller: The landfill is accessible, by
vehicle in most locations, only
when you leave the road is it
difficult in which case they are provided with the equipment
necessary (explained) to traverse and review the site in the
rainy condition. The conditions we have had the past couple of
weeks can be attributed to'two things. One is the grading of
- 16 -
►Z
CITY COUNCIL Page Seventeen
COUNCILME`N'S- REPORTS/COMMENTS 1/9/78
the upper deck, it was graded in such a fashion that the water
went over the edge instead of back toward the road; that is ..
being corrected now, it was in the pr'ocess prior to this rain.
Secondly, even on those days where wedid not perceive anywhere
in the site an odor at closing time we got odor complaints and
we suspect another odor source further to the south that was
causing that.
Councilman Browne: My concern is,that each time it
rains thi`s.happens and it would seem
to me that the inspectors when on
the site would see to the drainage — this drainage is all pre —
designed in the Master Plan of the Operation.
Mr. Miller: The plan is in the process of being
updated - once it is completed We
would be able to better judge. And
yes, we would be inspecting that to make sure they are conforming
with the plan.
Councilman Browne: Because if.they are creating drainage
problems and we are not catching them
that is our fault.
Mr. Fast: Councilman Browne, we can further
assess whether in wet rainy weather
further inspection is needed — we will take a look at the whole
site for other fissure areasi'n areas where they are not working.
(Ticecalled attention to an article
in the paper that he felt would bear some watching by staff and
• the City Attorney re Supreme Court action allowing a lower court
ruling to stand refusing to change zoning laws providing low
income housing for minorities. He stated this again was an
impeachment on local rights.)
APPROVAL OF DEMANDS Motion by Tice to approve Demands
totalling $637,349.01 as listed on
Demand Sheets U.C.B. 65317, 6523;
seconded by Browne.and carried on roll call vote:
AYES: Miller, Chappell, Browne, Tice, Shearer
NOES: None
ADJOURNMENT Motion by Tice to adjourn meeting
at 9:45 P.M.; seconded by Chappell
and carried.
APPROVED:
M-AYOR
ATTEST: