Ordinance - 2115ORDINANCE NO. 2115
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST
COVINA APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE THIRD AMENDMENT
TO THE WEST COVINA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE WEST
COVINA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
•WHEREAS, on December 20, 1971 by Ordinance No. 1180, the West Covina City
Council (City Council) adopted the redevelopment plan to establish the original Central
Business District Redevelopment Project Area; and
WHEREAS, on July 14, 1975, by Ordinance No. 1269, the City Council adopted a
redevelopment plan to establish the original Eastland Redevelopment Project Area; and
WHEREAS, on May 23, 1977, by Ordinance No. 1342, the City Council adopted First
Amendment to the Central Business District Redevelopment Project Area; and
WHEREAS, on July 2, 1980, by Ordinance No. 1481, the City Council adopted the
redevelopment plan for the Second Amendment to the Central Business District Redevelopment
Project Area Central Business District Redevelopment Project Area; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 1984, by Ordinance No. 1657, the City Council adopted
the Third Amendment to the Central Business District Redevelopment Plan; and
WHEREAS, on July 9, 1990, by Ordinance No. 1852, the City Council adopted the First
Amendment to the Eastland Redevelopment Project Area; and
WHEREAS, on December 21, 1993, by Ordinance No. 1927, the City Council adopted
the First Amendment to the West Covina Redevelopment Plan and approved the merger of the
Central Business District and the Eastland Redevelopment Project Areas and by Ordinance 1928,
adopted the West Covina Redevelopment Project Area and added three non-contiguous areas to
the merged Project Area; and
WHEREAS, on February 12, 1996, by Ordinance No. 1964, the City Council adopted
Amendment No. 2 to the West Covina Redevelopment Plan ("Redevelopment Plan") that deleted
an estimated 21.05 acres from the boundaries of the Project Area. This Amendment also set or
changed various time limits pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33333.6; and
WHEREAS, on December 2, 2003, by Ordinance No. 2106, the City Council amended
the West Covina Project Area in conformance with Senate Bill 211 and Senate Bill 1045; and
WHEREAS, Ordinances Nos. 1180, 1269, 1341 1481, 1657,1 1852, 1927, 1928,1951,
1964, and 2106 (collectively, the "Original Ordinances"), including the findings and
determinations made by the City Council therein are made part hereof by reference, and are final
and conclusive, there having been no action timely brought to question the validity of the
Redevelopment Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Commission of the City of West Covina
("Commission") is vested with the responsibility to carry out the Redevelopment Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Commission now desires to amend the Redevelopment Plan
("Amendment" or "Third Amendment") to extend eminent domain authority within the West
Covina Project Area; and
isWHEREAS, the City Council has received from the Commission the proposed Third
Amendment, a copy of which is on file at the office of the City Clerk, 1444 W. Garvey Avenue,
West Covina, California, 91793, together with the Commission's Report to the City Council on
the Third Amendment, including the reasons for the Amendment; an overview of the general
physical and economic conditions existing in the West Covina Redevelopment Project Area; a
plan for the relocation of families and persons who may be temporarily or permanently displaced
from housing facilities in the West Covina Redevelopment Project Area; a neighborhood impact
report; a summary of consultations with West Covina Redevelopment Project Area owners,
businesses and community organizations; an Addendum to the previously certified Final
Environmental Impact Report prepared for the West Covina Redevelopment Project Area; and a
summary of consultations with taxing agencies; and
WHEREAS, a Project Area Committee was not required to be formed in connection with
the Amendment because there are not a significant number of persons or families that reside
within the Project Area, and because the Amendment does not contain public projects that will
displace a substantial number of low- or moderate -income persons; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has prepared an addendum ('Addendum") to the
previously certified Final Environmental Impact Report prepared for the West Covina
Redevelopment Project Area ('Final E1R") pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq. ('CEQA"), and the Guidelines for
Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Title 14, California Code of
Regulations, Sections 15000, et seq. ("CEQA Guidelines"); and
WHEREAS, the Addendum consists of the necessary revisions to the Final FIR; and
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Commission held a joint public hearing on May
18, 2004, on the adoption of the Amendment in the West Covina City Council Chambers, 1444
W Garvey Avenue, West Covina, California, 91793; and
WHEREAS, notice of said joint public hearing was duly and regularly published in a
newspaper of general circulation in the City, once a week for four successive weeks prior to the
date of such joint public hearing, and a copy of said notice was mailed, by first class mail, to
each last known assessee of each parcel and to all known residents and businesses located on
each parcel in the Project Area not less than thirty days prior to the date of commencement of the
joint public hearing and affidavits of such publication and such mailing are on file with the City
Clerk and the Commission; and
WHEREAS, each assessee in the Project Area whose property would be subject to
acquisition by eminent domain, under the provisions of the Amendment was sent a letter to such
effect attached to the notice of the joint public hearing, including a map of the Project Area; and
WHEREAS, copies of the notice of joint public hearing were mailed by certified mail
with return receipt requested to the governing body of each taxing agency which receives taxes
from property in the Project Area; and
WHEREAS, the Commission and the City Council have received and reviewed the
Addendum to the Final FIR submitted pursuant to CEQA and Health and Safety Code Section
33352; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Revised Report to the City Council of
the Commission, the Third Amendment, and the Addendum to the Final FIR, has provided an
opportunity for all persons to be heard, and has received and considered all evidence and
testimony presented for or against any and all aspects of the Amendment and has made written
findings in response to each written objection of an affected property owner or taxing entity, if
any, filed with the City Clerk before or during such joint public hearing; and
WHEREAS, all actions required by law have been taken by all appropriate public
bodies.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA
DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
isSection 1. The purposes and intent of the City Council with respect to the Amendment
are to eliminate conditions of blight in the Project Area through necessary means, including the
use of eminent domain, and to prevent their reoccurrence by undertaking all appropriate
redevelopment projects and programs outlined in the Redevelopment Plan and pursuant to the
California Redevelopment Law (CRL).
Section 2. Based on the evidence in the record, including, but not limited to, the
Commission's Revised Report to the City Council on the Amendment prepared in accordance
with Health and Safety Code Section 33352, and all documents referenced therein, and evidence
and testimony received at the joint public hearing on adoption of the Amendment held on May
18,2004, and the Original Ordinances, the City Council hereby makes the following findings and
determinations as warranted by the Amendment:
a). The finding and determination required by CRL Section 33367(d)(1) is not
warranted by the Amendment because the Amendment does not require that blight or significant
remaining blighting conditions within the Project Area be identified. This finding is based on the
City Council's findings contained in the Original Ordinances, which found prevalent and
substantial conditions of blight within the Project Area. The decisions by the City Council in
connection with the adoption of the Original Ordinances are final and conclusive and after those
dates it has been, is and shall be conclusively presumed that the territory included in the Project
Area is a blighted area. Since the adoption of the Original Ordinances, the Commission has
made efforts to eliminate blighting conditions within the Project Area through the
implementation of Commission -related projects and programs. However, a portion of the
blighting conditions described in the Original Ordinances have not improved and, therefore, the
adoption of the Amendment will assist in the implementation of the Commission's projects and
programs for the Project Area. The extension of eminent domain authority will give the
Commission the ability when deemed necessary, to facilitate development opportunities and the
overall elimination of blighting conditions by either consolidating parcels for development or
eliminating structures that pose a health and safety risk to the public.
b). The Amendment will assist, as deemed necessary, in the redevelopment of the
Project Area in conformity with the CRL and in the interests of the public peace, health, safety
and welfare. This finding is based upon the fact that the purposes of the CRL would be attained
by implementing the Redevelopment Plan, as amended by the Amendment, to eliminate
conditions of blight in the Project Area and prevent their reoccurrence through the
implementation of the Commission's on -going projects and programs in conjunction with other
agencies public and private projects and programs.
c). The finding and determination required by CRL Section 33367(d)(3) is not
warranted by the Amendment because the Amendment does not require that the economic
feasibility of the Amendment be determined. The adoption and carrying out of the Amendment
will not change the economic feasibility of the Project. The determination that the
Redevelopment Plan is economically sound and feasible has been made by the City Council's
findings contained within the Original Ordinances.
d). The Amendment is consistent with the General Plan of the City, including, but not
limited to, the Housing Element of the General Plan, which substantially complies with the
requirements of Article 10.6 (commencing with Section 65580) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of
Title 7 of the Government Code.
e). The carrying out of the Amendment would promote the public peace, health,
safety and welfare of the City and would effectuate the purposes and policies of the CRL. This
finding is based on the fact that redevelopment will benefit the Project Area by correcting
conditions of blight and by coordinating public and private actions to stimulate development and
improve the economic and physical conditions of the Project Area.
f). Except as provided in this Paragraph f, the condemnation of real property is
necessary for the overall execution of the Amendment and adequate provisions have been made
for payment for property to be acquired as provided by law. This finding is based upon the facts
set forth in the Commission's Report to the City Council, in particular that without eminent
domain authority, the Commission's redevelopment efforts may be impaired. This finding is
further based on the fact that in connection with the acquisition of property by the Commission,
the Commission will comply with all applicable provisions of the California Eminent Domain
Law (Code of Civil Procedure Section 1230.010 et seq.) and the California Relocation and Real
Property Acquisition Laws (Government Code Section 7260 et seq.), including provisions
requiring the payment of just compensation.
g). The Commission has a feasible method and plan for the relocation of families and
persons who might be displaced, temporarily or permanently, from housing facilities in the
Project Area. The Commission also has a feasible method and plan for relocation of businesses.
This finding is based upon the fact that in conjunction with the adoption of the Amendment, the
Commission has prepared a method or plan for relocation of families, persons and businesses
who may be displaced by Commission projects. The relocation plan prepared for the Project
. Area by this Amendment, and included within the Report to the City Council provides for
relocation assistance within the Project Area according to law, and the fact that such assistance,
including relocation payments, constitutes a feasible method for relocation.
h). There are, or shall be provided, within the Project Area or within other areas not
generally less desirable with regard to public utilities and public and commercial facilities and at
rents or prices within the financial means of the families and persons who might be displaced
from the Project Area, decent, safe and sanitary dwellings equal in number to the number of and
available to such displaced families and persons and reasonably accessible to their places of
employment. This finding is based upon the provisions of the Amendment which require that
families and persons shall not be displaced prior to the adoption of a relocation plan pursuant to
CRL Sections 33411 and 33411.1, and that dwelling units housing persons and families of low or
moderate -income shall not be removed or destroyed prior to the adoption of a replacement
housing plan pursuant to CRL Sections 33334.5, 33413 and 33413.5.
i). The finding and determination required by CRL Section 33367(d)(9) is not
warranted by the Amendment because the Amendment does not affect the boundaries of the
Project Area.
j). The finding and determination required by CRL Section 33367(d)(10) is not
warranted by the Amendment because the Amendment does not affect the boundaries of Project
Area. The City Council previously found and determined in the Original Ordinances,
respectively, that inclusion of any lands, buildings, or improvements which are not detrimental to
the public health, safety or welfare is necessary for the effective redevelopment of the entire area
of which they are a part, and any such area is not included solely for the purpose of obtaining the
allocation of tax increment revenues from such area pursuant to CRL Section 33670 without
other substantial justification for its inclusion.
k). The elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the Project Area could not
reasonably be expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone, or by
governmental action, or both, without the aid and assistance of the Commission. This finding is
based upon the existence of blighting influences, as identified within the Report to the City
Councils prepared for the Original Ordinances.
1). The finding and determination required by CRL Section 33367(d)(12) is not
warranted by the Amendment because the Amendment does not affect the boundaries of the
Project Area. Furthermore, The City Council previously found and determined in the Original
Ordinances, that the Project Area is predominantly urbanized as that phrase is utilized in CRL
Section 33320.1.
m). The Commission, working with engineering, planning, housing and other City
officials as appropriate and necessary had previously prepared a projects and programs list for
the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan outlining projects and programs that will be necessary to
eliminate blighting conditions within the Project Area. Each of those listed projects and
programs were projected to cost an amount of money that was projected to be allocated to the
Commission in accordance with CRL Section 33670. Based upon projections of tax increment
growth within the Project Area and in accordance with the permissible time that the Commission
. may collect tax increment pursuant to Section 33670 and in conjunction with other financing
sources available to the Commission, the Commission found that the time limitation and the
limitation on the number of dollars to be allocated to the Commission that are contained in the
Redevelopment Plan were reasonably related to the proposed projects to be implemented in the
Project Area and to the ability of the Commission to eliminate blight in the Project Area. The
Amendment does not change the projects and programs or the fiscal time limitations outlined in
the Redevelopment Plan as amended.
Section 3. The City Council is satisfied that permanent housing facilities will be
available within three years from the time residential occupants of the Project Area, if any, are
displaced, and that pending the development of such facilities, there will be available to any such
displaced residential occupants temporary housing facilities at rents comparable to those in the
City at the time of their displacement. This finding is based upon the City Council's
determination that no persons or families of low and moderate income shall be displaced from
residences unless and until there are suitable housing units available and ready for occupancy by
such displaced persons or families at rents comparable to those at the time of their displacement.
Such housing units shall be suitable to the needs of such displaced persons or families and must
be decent, safe, sanitary and otherwise standard dwellings.
Section 4. One written objection to the Amendment was filed with the City Clerk before
the hour set for the hearing on the Amendment and there were no written and oral objections
presented to the City Council at the hearing. In the case of written objection received from
Project Area property owners, occupants and affected taxing agencies having been responded to
in writing, all such objections are hereby overruled. The response by the legislative body is
attached herewith as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein in its entirety, with all findings and
conclusions adopted by the City Council by this reference.
Section 5. The Addendum to the Final EIR for the Amendment, a copy of which is
included within the Report to the City Council and on file in the office of the Commission and in
the office of the City Clerk, has been duly reviewed and considered. The City Council approves
the Addendum to the Final EIR which was completed in compliance with the provisions of
CEQA and State and local guidelines issued thereunder, and that the City Council has reviewed
and considered the information contained in the Addendum and the Final FIR prior to deciding
whether to approve the Amendment. The City Council finds that the Addendum reflects the
independent judgment of the City Council as to the environmental effects of the Amendment.
No impacts have been identified in the initial environmental study due to the scope of the
Amendment as previously described. Potential environmental impacts that could be caused by
the Amendment have been previously evaluated within the Final EIR prepared for the West
Covina Redevelopment Project Area. All activities undertaken by the Commission and/or the
City pursuant to or in implementation of the Amendment shall be undertaken in accordance with
the mitigation measures and monitoring program within the Final FIR prepared in connection
with the West Covina Redevelopment Project Area which the Project Area is a part, and the
Commission shall undertake such additional environmental review or assessment as necessary
under law at the time of the proposed implementation of such activities.
Section 6. The Redevelopment Plan, as adopted by Ordinance Nos. 1928, 1964 and
2106, is hereby amended as set forth in the Amendment attached hereto. As so amended, the
Redevelopment Plan is hereby incorporated herein by reference. The Executive Director of the
Commission is hereby authorized to combine the Redevelopment Plan for Amendment No. 3 to
the West Covina Redevelopment Project, as amended by the Third Amendment, into a single
document, when filed with the City Clerk and the Secretary of the Commission, shall constitute
the official Redevelopment Plan for Amendment No. 3 to the West Covina Redevelopment
Proj ect.
Section 7. In order to implement and facilitate the effectuation of the Amendment herein
approved, this City Council hereby: (a) pledges its cooperation in helping to carry out the
Amendment, (b) authorizes and directs the various officials, departments, boards, and agencies
of the City having administrative responsibilities in the Project Area likewise to cooperate to
such end and to exercise their respective functions and powers in a manner consistent with
redevelopment of the Project Area, (c) stands ready to consider and take appropriate action upon
proposals and measures designed to effectuate the Amendment, and (d) declares its intention to
• undertake and complete any proceeding necessary to be carried out by the City under the
provisions of the Amendment.
Section 8. The City Clerk is hereby directed to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to
the Commission, whereupon the Commission is vested with the responsibility for carrying out
the Amendment.
Section 9. The City Clerk is hereby directed to record with the County Recorder of the
County of Los Angeles a statement that proceedings for the redevelopment of the Project Area,
pursuant to the Third Amendment, have been instituted under the CRL.
Section 10. The City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a copy of the statement
recorded by the City Clerk pursuant to Section 9 of this Ordinance, a copy of this Ordinance, and
a map(s) or plat(s) indicating the boundaries of the Project Area, to the Auditor -Controller and
Assessor of the County of Los Angeles, to the governing body of each of the taxing agencies
which receives taxes from property in the Project Area, and to the State Board of Equalization,
within thirty (30) days following the adoption of the Amendment.
Section 11. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify to the passage of
this Ordinance and to cause the same or a summary thereof to be published in a newspaper of
general circulation, which is published and circulated in the City.
Section 12. If any part of this Ordinance or the Amendment which it approves is held to
be invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of
this Ordinance or of the Amendment, and this City Council hereby declares that it would have
passed the remainder of the Ordinance or approved the remainder of the Amendment if such
invalid portion thereof had been deleted.
Section 13. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after
adoption.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15"' day of June 2004.
Mayor Michael L. Miller
ATTEST:
City Clerk Janet Berry
I, JANET BERRY, CITY CLERK of the City of West Covina, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance was regularly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the I" day of June, 2004. That, thereafter said Ordinance was
duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 15th day of June, 2004
by the following vote:
AYES: Herfert, Hernandez, Sanderson,,Miller
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Wong
City Clerk, Janet Berry
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
•"I� lu�
C-4 Atto •ney A rod Alvarez-Glasman
EXHIBIT A
City of West Covina
Memorandum
TO: Andrew G Pasmant, City Manager
and the City Council
FROM: Christopher J. Chung
Redevelopment Director
DATE: May 26, 2004
SUBJECT: Written Objection Submitted by Mr. Melvin H. Cavanaugh, Jr. property
owner of 1122 Azusa Canyon Road to Amendment Number Three (3) to the
West Covina Redevelopment Project Area
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council review Mr.
Cavanaugh's request;
1) Approve the written findings prepared by the CDC Staff
in response to Mr. Cavanaugh's letter;
2) Overrule the objection raised by the property owner of
1122 Azusa Canyon Road, West Covina and deny the
request; and
3) Direct the CDC to send Mr. Cavanaugh a letter
notifying him of this decision.
DISCUSSION:
The Community Development Commission (CDC) of the City of West Covina has proposed
adopting Amendment No. Three (3) to the existing Redevelopment Plan for the West Covina
Redevelopment Project Area.
The only purpose of this proposed Amendment is to extend eminent domain authority for an
additional twelve (12) years within the Project Area (an authority the CDC currently possesses
which is due to expire in 2005). No amendments are proposed for the expansion of the Project
Area's boundaries or any other aspect of the Existing Plan,
On May 11, 2004, the Community Development Commission received the attached letter from
Mr. Melvin H. Cavanaugh, Jr., the property owner of 1122 Azusa Canyon Road, requesting that
this property be excluded from the project area at this time. This letter is considered an objection
Exhibit A
0
Andrew G. Pasmant, City Manager
May 26, 2004
Page 2
as defined in Section 33364 of the California Community Redevelopment Law (CRL). The City
•Council, at the joint Public Hearing conducted on May 18, 2004, received this letter and referred
the objection to the staff for review. The City Council did not recommend the exclusion of this
property from the project area.
Per Code Section 33363 of the CRL, a legislative body is required to respond in writing to any
written objections received pertaining to adoption of an amendment to a Redevelopment Plan.
The City Council directed the CDC Staff to duly answer the objection in writing.
After reviewing the content of Mr. Cavanaugh's letter the CDC Staff recommends against
excluding this property from the Project Area for the following reasons:
1) The CDC does not have any plans to use eminent domain in the Project Area to acquire
any property, including Mr. Cavanaugh's property;
2) The CDC has outstanding debt in the form of tax increment bonds. All properties within
the project area are generating tax increment revenues. These revenues are pledged to
retire outstanding bonds. To remove property from the Project Area compromises the
economic base of the CDC;
3) The exclusion of selected properties will result in a "checkerboard" effect which would
make administration of the Project Area much more difficult and complex. The removal
of the Cavanaugh property would begin such a process and would establish an
unfavorable precedent;
4) As noted above, the CDC currently does not contemplate any acquisition of property
within the Project Area, however, the life of the Project Area extends to 2028 and there is
a possibility that in the future plans will change,
5) Most importantly, even though the property presently may not be blighted and may be up
to Code, the exclusion of property could limit the CDC's ability in the future to
accomplish its goals to eliminate blight and maintain the integrity of the Project Area;
6) Furthermore, in the event that the CDC decides to acquire any properties within the
Project Area, there are ample protections built into State Law to protect property owners
and tenants.
Conclusions
Despite Mr. Cavanaugh's sincere request to have his property excluded from the West Covina
Redevelopment Project Area, it is not in the long term best interests of the CDC to grant this
request. To do so will a) make administration of the Project Area more difficult, b) negatively
impact the financial structure of the Project Area, and c) set an adverse precedent for the future. It
is therefore recommended that the City Council take action to deny Mr. Cavanaugh's request,
Exhibit A
0
Andrew G. Pasmant, City Manager
May 26, 2004
Page 3
•and adopt recommendations I through 3, inclusive, as set forth in the Recommendation section
of this report set forth above.
4�L-'&
Chris opher Vaung
Redevelopment Director
Exhibit A
0
ATTACHMENT NO.2
AL-r,&RBZ-GLASM..9.W & COLVla�r
�.RNO LO '1. gLVaRCL-O LAS�AN
ALTO PN ETS AT LAW OF COUNSEL
""5 MARJIL C-SSO
ROCLR
N. BgPegN Cq A-rmuc
RI CH.A. L. 40n1'R E
SUITE IQSD
NICH.Ll
J OA^�Nn o.
COVINA. CALIFORNIA PI791
TNEODOME J. SMITH 9[
TELEPHONE (G2CI BSB-5131
Linn R. ELLIOTT
NnTTNC`^' N. DOgnaN
cACSIMILE IOLB) 658-S9T9
gLFREO J. SHINE, JR.
111.N OVRnK
CSq E.-ZCgRnTC
CY AL.fnCO
7uncl,2004
Mr. Melvin Henry Cavanaugh, Jr.
1849 Nottingham Lane
San Dimas, California 91773
Re; Property located at 1122 Azusa Canyon Road, West Covina, California
Dear Mr. Cavanaugh:
Your letter of April 29, 2004 has been directed to my office to provide a response.
At the May 18, 2004 City Council meeting, your letter was presented to the City Council
and the Community Development Commission ("CDC").for review and consideration. After
due consideration and evaluation, the City Council and CDC has elected not to exclude the
property located at 1122 Azusa Canyon Road, West Covina, California from the Project Area
under consideration. Your property has been within the West Covina Redevelopment Project
Area since 1993. All properties previously within the project area are intended to remain in the
project area with. no exclusions. The City and CDC have no present intention of condemning
your property.
The City and CDC values property owners like yourself and your efforts to provide a
productive property which enhances the community of West Covina. The documents adopted by
the City Council and CDC at its June 1, 2004 meeting are included for your records. If you have
any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact rzty office.
Very truly yours,
ALVAREZ-G.LASMAN & COLVIN
IPol .t . A var : GI an
A City of West Covina
AMAG/cy
Enclosures
0
•
is
P-111611vi'l VF .- . pa-vartaury/c, R j ' ` ` I ' E 1
• �layta ,`Rae avaitaua/t.
'04 APR 33 P3:3-4
ufY»:�1.
April 29, 2004 RECEIVED
West Covina
Mr. Andrew Pasmant, City Manager MAY 11 2004
City of West Covina
1444 West Garvey Avenue Community Development
West Covina, CA 91793 Commission
Re: The Redevelopment Plan for the West Covina Redevelopment Project
Dear Mr. Pasmant:
I understand that a twelve year extension for eminent domain authority in the West Covina
redevelopment project area is under consideration. As the owner of a parcel of property in this area
which is located at 1122 Azusa Canyon Road, West Covina, more particular described on Exhibit
"A" attached hereto, I am requesting that this propertybe excluded from the project area at this time
for the following reasons.
The property has been in the family for several decades and there is no intention of selling it. In fact,
it is our desire to keep the property in the family for many more decades. The property is not in a
blight condition and it is maintained in a proper manner, e.g. buildings were recently repainted and
reroofed. The property produces income from a commercial lease which has a ten year agreement
with additional five year options with a quality tenant. Lastly, this parcel is directly adjacent to
property which is not in the project area and both of these areas are not suitable for the creation of
affordable housing.
In this real estate climate, it simply does not make economical sense for us to be in the project area.
Your assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated. If you or your staff have any questions,
please do not hesitate to contact me at (562) 940-0278.
Regards,,
22
Melvin Henry uCa g ii Ir.
ISO ^ io6G7rglmrx Berne t-5ram<'ginuo f Wal, io * 9l779
EXHIBIT "A"
• That part of Lot 4, in the West Half of the Northwest Quarter of
Section 16, Township I South, Range 10 West, San Bernardino
Meridian, according to the official Plat of the survey of said land on
file in the Bureau of Land Management, in the City of West Covina,
described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the North Line of East Ramona
Boulevard, also known as San Bernardino Road (66 feet in width),
with the East Line of Azusa Canyon Road (60 feet in width); thence
along Azusa Canyon Road North I Degrees 08 Minutes East 140.0
feet to the true point of beginning; thence South 88 Degrees 52
Minutes East a distance of 170.0 feet; thence North 1 Degrees 08
Minutes East a distance of 250.0 feet; thence North 88 Degrees 52
Minutes West 170.0 feet; thence South 1 Degrees 08 Minutes West
250.0 feet to the true point of beginning.
More commonly known as 1122 North Azusa Canyon Road, West
Covina, California_
Assessor's Identification No. 8435-015-003.
END OF EXHIBIT "A"
0