Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOCTOBER 21,1958 I.ocm. PLEDGE ROLL CALL MINUTES HEARING (Harvey) ~~ HEARING (Treichler) t 1~~ 4~4 M I NUT E S CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 21, 1958 The City Council of the City of Arcadia, California met in regular session in the Council Chamber of the City Hall at 8:00 P.M. October 21, 1958. The Invocation was offered by Rev. Bennie C. Flint of the First Baptist Church of Arcadia. Mayor Phillips led in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. PRESENT: Councilmen Balser, Jacobi, Reibold, Phillips ABSENT: , Councilman Camphouse Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of October 7, 1958 was continued to the next regular Council meeting. Mayor Phillips declared the hearing open on the request of Mrs. Rose Marie Harvey, 8858 Camino Real, San Gabriel, California, for a permit to conduct door to door solicitation for Real Silk Company products. The City Clerk advised that there were no communications received regarding this matter; the requested solicitation hours were from 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 and evenings by appointment. Mayor Phillips then inquired if anyone in the audience desired to ~e heard in favor of or in opposition to the said application. No one desiring to be heard Councilman Jacobi moved that the hearing be closed, which motion was seconded by Councilman Reibold. Councilman Jacobi further moved that the Council approve the request of Mrs. Rose Marie Harvey and grant a permit to the applicant to conduct the business therein outlined upon the conditions therein contained. Councilman Reibold seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. ~ Mayor Phillips declared the hearing open on the request of Mr. Harvey D. Treichler, 1036 S. First Avenue, Arcadia, for a permit to conduct door to door solicitation for Fuller Brush Company products Mondays through Saturdays, 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., and evenings by appointment. The City Clerk advised that there were no communications received regarding this matter. The applicant being present, addressed the Council, stating that he has been employed by the Fuller Brush Company since 1935; that he is the district supervisor for said company and will have four men working the Arcadia area; that as set forth in his application, the salesmen work on an appointment plan including evenings. To Councilman Balser's query as to whether he was familiar with the ordinance prohibiting solicitation at dwellings posted with a no solicitors sign he answered that he was so aware. 1. 10-21-58 A&.42G (Hearing Treichler Continued) - , t'i -t'_, HEARING (Zone Change Wise) 1 Lft/ 3 HEARING ( Zone Change) I ~:\ It Whereupon Councilman Balser moved that the hearing be closed. Councilman Jacobi seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. Councilman Balser further moved that Council approve the request of Harvey D. Treichler, the applicant, and grant a permit to said applicant to conduct the business therein outlined upon the conditions therein contained. Councilman Reibold seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. Hearing on Planning Commission Resolution No. 312, recommending the granting of the application of Sherwood E. Wise for a change of zone from Zone C-2 to Zone R-3 on certain property south of Huntington Drive and west of Fourth Avenue. I The City Clerk read section 2 and section 3 of said Planning Commission resolution which stated in part that the subject property was once the southerly portion of a lot facing Huntington Drive which was divided, leaving subject property with no access to a street except through a lot facing Fourth Avenue; that said access lot and subject property were both zoned R-3 until the adoption of Ordinance No. 1000, when subject property was changed to Zone C-2. That section 15.1 of Ordinance No. 760 states that no property in a more restricted zone shall be used for ingress to or egress from property in a less restricted zone, other than for purposes permitted in such more restricted zone, thus leaving subject property with no street access except through residential property. Mayor Phillips then declared the hearing open and inquired if anyone in the audience desired to speak in favor of the zone change. Mr. Sherwood E. Wise, 17 South Fourth Avenue,addressed the Council, stating that he was the applicant, and reiterated in substance the information contained in said Planning Commission Resolution No. 312. No one in the audience desiring to speak in opposition to said recommended zone change, Councilman Reibold moved that the hearing be closed. Councilman Jacobi seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. Councilman Reibold further moved that the Council approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 312 recommending the granting of the application of Sherwood E. Wise for a change of zone from Zone C-2 to Zone R-3 on certain property south of Huntington Drive and west of Fourth Avenue. Councilman Jacobi seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. Mayor Phillips declared the hearing open on Planning Commission Resolution No. 310, recommending change of zone from Zones c-o and D to Zone R-3 on the rear portion of property located at 728 West Huntington Blvd. The City Attorney commented that the proposed reclassification concerns property included in a resubdivision, the balance of which subdivision is already zoned R-3 and all of which subdivision is proposed to be developed to R-3 uses; that in recommending the approval of the subdivision the Planning Commission recommended the institution of the within proceedings to insure the uniform development and use of the entire tract. I Mayor Phillips inquired if any communications had been received in the matter, to which the City Clerk replied that there had been none received. He then inquired if anyone in the audience desired to speak either in favor of or in opposition to the proposed zone change. 2. 10-21-58 (Hearing Zone Change Con t inc,ed) 1.) .}.? I HEARING (Setback Line) ,14 v,'1 . 1"1 Ij'J 1 f~.;'l.'" . . _ :X"::.tI'WU No one desiring to speak Councilman Reibold moved that the Hearing be closed. Councilman Balser seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. Councilman Reibold further moved that the recommendation of the Planning Commission as embodied in their resolution No. 310 be approved. Councilman Balser seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. Mayor Phillips declared the hearing open on change of setback line on a portion of the south side of Huntington Blvd. between Baldwin Avenue and the west City limits from 50 feet to 35 feet. The City Clerk advised that no communications had been received. Councilman Reibold commented that approximately 95% of the property owners had signed a petition requesting the setback and that he concurred in the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve the requested setback. Whereupon Mayor Phillips inquired if anyone in the audience desired to speak either in favor of or in opposition to the setback change. No one desiring to speak Councilman Jacobi moved that the hearing be closed. Councilman Balser seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. Councilman Jacobi further moved that the Council approve the recommendation of the Planning Commission and that the setback on the south side of Huntington Blvd. between Baldwin Ave. and the west City limits be changed from 50 feet to 35 feet. Councilman Balser seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. MATTERS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY ORDINANCE No. 1031 (Adopted) I:~:'~::l!:D I The City Attorney presented for the second time, discussed and read the title of Ordinance No. 1031, entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 8-C OF ORDINANCE NO. 726 OF SAID CITY." He added that the sole effect of this amendment is to change the wording with reference to the required setback of animals in relation to streets, and changes the present wording of the ordinance from "75 feet from any public street" to read: ".. .within seventy-five (75) feet of the front lot line.....of any lot or parcel of ground." so that the corner lots will be in the same relative position as interior lots with reference to the keeping of animals. Councilman Balser moved that the reading of the full body of Ordinance No. 1031 be waived. Said motion seconded by Councilman Jacobi and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Balser, Jacobi, Reibold, Phillips NOES: None , ABSENT: Councilman Camphouse Councilman Balser further moved that Ordinance No. 1031 be adopted. Motion seconded by Councilman Reibold and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Balser, Jacobi, Reibold, Phillips NOES: None ABSENT: Councilman Camphouse 3. 10-21-58 11.;121 ORDINANCE No. 1032 (Adopted) IND~XED 1 "i:^':' RESOLUTION No. 3072 lllDL:;':;D 1- c ORDINANCE No. 1033 CDjl/1'O The City Attorney presented for the second time, discussed and read the title of Ordinance No. 1032, entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, RECLASSIFYING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN SAID CITY AND ESTABLISHING THE SAME IN ZONES C-2, P, R-3 AND D." He added that this is the property at the southeast corner of Baldwin and Las Tunas, commonly referred to as the Stogsdill property; that it has been the subject of hearings before both the Planning Commission and the Council; that Council's determination was made in July as to the C-2 and PR-3 zoning; that Council had requested the Planning Commission to institute proceed- I ings to likewise place it in Zone D. That the hearing was completed at the Council meeting of October 7, 1958 and the above ordinance introduced in accordance with Council's determination. Councilman Reibold moved that the reading of the full body of Ordinance No. 1032 be waived. Said motion seconded by Councilman Jacobi and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Balser, Jacobi, Reibold, Phillips NOES: None ABSENT: Councilman Camphouse Councilman Reibold further moved that Ordinance No. 1032 be adopted. Motion seconded by Councilman Jacobi and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: NOES: ABSENT : Councilmen Jacobi, Reibold, Councilman Balser Councilman Camphouse Phillips The City Attorney then presented, discussed and read the title of Resolution No. 3072, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DETERMINING AND ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AT THE CORNER OF BALDWIN AVENUE AND LAS TUNAS DRIVE IN SAID CITY IN ZONE D (ARCHITECTURAL OVERLAY) IN ADDITION TO THE BASIC C-2, R-3 AND P (PARKING) ZONING APPLICABLE THERETO. " He added that this is a companion to Ordinance No. 1032 and imposes the architectural restrictions under the D Overlay just adopted with respect to the property. Councilman Jacobi moved that the reading of the full body of Resolution No. 3072 be waived. Motion seconded by Councilman Reibold and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Balser, Jacobi, Reibold, Phillips NOES: None ABSENT: Councilman Camphouse I Councilman Jacobi further moved that Resolution No. 3072 be adopted. Said motion seconded by Mayor Phillips and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmen Jacobi, Reibold, Councilman Balser Councilman Camphouse Phillips The City Attorney suggested that action on the next item on the agenda, Ordinance No. 1033, be held until the tender of the deed upon which the zoning was predicated. 4. 10- 21- 58 ORDINANCE No. 1034 (Adopted) lNn:C:XED I RESOLUTION No. 3071 lNDEX3D I " 441:2.8 The City Attorney presented for the second time, discussed and read the title of Ordinance No. 1034, entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, RECLASSIFYING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF DUARTE ROAD FROM R-l TO R-2." He added that this is the property owned by and immediately adjacent to the Church of the Good Shepherd; that this was one of many parcels under consideration by the Planning Commission upon which a report was made, a hearing held and the entire subject taken under advisement; that this is a single area as to which there were no conditions imposed except the dedication of the property required for the widening of Duarte Road, and the deed therefor now having been tendered, that it would be in order to adopt said ordinance. Councilman Jacobi moved that the reading of the full body of Ordinance No. 1034 be waived. Motion seconded by Councilman Balser and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Balser, Jacobi, Reibold, Phillips NOES: None ABSENT: Counc ilman Camphouse Councilman Jacobi further moved that Ordinance No. 1034 be adopted. Motion seconded by Councilman Balser and carried on roll call vote as fo llows : AYES: Councilmen Balser, Jacobi, Reibold, Phillips NOES: None ABSENT: Councilman Camphouse The City Attorney presented and read the title of Resolution No. 3071, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING A ZONE VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING Kr 1208 SOUTH SIXTH AVENUE." The City Attorney explained that this Resolution is the result of hearings held before the Planning Commission and the City Council on application of W. H. and F. G. Seimer for construction of an additional dwelling on the front portion of the property. The relief requested is that which had been granted by modification which expired by non-usage at the end of six months; that the resolution as drawn follows the wording of the minutes of the last regular Council meeting. Councilman Reibold moved that the reading of the full body of Resolution No. 3071 be waived. Said motion seconded by Councilman Jacobi and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Balser, Jacobi, Reibold, Phillips NOES: None ABSENT: Councilman Camphouse Councilman Reibold stated that with reference to Section 5 of said Resolution, clarification is indicated. As it reads "and upon the further condition that the applicant offer to dedicate for street purposes in the form and manner approved by the City Attorney the easterly 30 feet of the above described property for the opening and extension of Encino Avenue upon the same terms and conditions as have been or are imposed upon other owners of property similarly situated." That he interprets this section to mean that in essence the applicants are being asked to give 30 feet of their property without cost which in due course would be used as a part of the street; that if he is correct he would be opposed to that particular section. 5. 10-21-58 .... , '?'i1~,!j:.(lo "'X~,.,.,v (Resolution No. 3071 Continued) 1 !"l~ The City Attorney stated that this is not only what the Resolution says but is also the effect of the wording; however, it is not a present dedication but an offer to dedicate at the time tn~ rest of the property required for the southerly extension of EnciAo Avenue is either already dedicated or made available in the same manner as suggested here; that under this proposal or wording of the resolution not only would the applicants not be paid for their 30 feet but they would be required to deposit a sizeabJp. sum of money for the improve- ment of Encino Avenue and the opening, extension and imp~ovement of Camino Grove Avenue. Mayo~ Phillips stated that he did not want to penalize the applicants I or anyone else; that he would not object to some change in the word- ing as long as there is assurance that the street can and will go through in an orderly development of Encino Avenue and its correllary, Camino Grove Avenue, off Sixth Avenue. Councilman Reibold stated that if the applicants were agreeable to selling at a figure, one that is not completely unreasonable, would it not be possible to exempt them from the setback requirements which would automatically come with a street going through, the consensus bei,n~ t.hat there was no reason for monev being deposited at this time. Councilman Jacooi made reference to property being presently sold off at between 18 and 20~ a square foot. Councilman Reibold stated that in his opinion there are two considerations: a valuation of the 30 feet, and the other is what could be called severance damage to their existing business which is completely at the rear line of their property; that if the applicants were agreeable to selling the 30 feet for that amount at such time as the orderly processes require, and then whatever legal steps are necessary could be taken to permit them to continue their poultry operation until 1961. Councilman Balser agreed and stated that he was desirous of seeing the the $treet go through; that he had never felt the applicants should dedicate at this time because in his opinion they should have the oppo~tunity to derive income from it the same as the other people who would be part of the subdivision. The City Attorney pointed out that if the Seimers dedicate the property and a street does go through and if no further condition be attached, then there would be no basis for requiring them to contribute to the cost of the Camino Grove Extension for the simple reason that their property would abut a public dedicated street; that if the proposal made by Councilman Reibold is pursued further that he would recommend a condition that in any application for a lot split in the future that they should comply with the same conditions as are made applicable to anyone else in the event the area develops by lot splits as distinguished from the development by subdivision. I In answer to Councilman Reibold's query regarding a subdivision, the City Attorney explained that a subdivision is actually a matter of agreement; the price must be right before the subdivider receives the property that is required; the Planning Commission and Council have already indicated that there shall be no further subdivision or lot splits in that area, unless the street goes all the way to the present westerly terminus of Camino Grove Avenue and Camino Grove be extended westerly to the next north and south street; that by past declarations of the Council and Planning Commission, Camino Grove would have to be part of the subdivision in order to obtain approval, if the area develops by way of subdivision; that technically every subdivision is a series of lot splits, but all at one time, and the cont~ibution toward the opening of Camino Grove Avenue when done by a subdivision is a matter of computation; that the division of property by subdivision is more orderly only because you have the recorded map in the recorder's office and all deeds thereafter are by reference to lots in the recorded tract as distinguished from metes and bounds desc~iptions of portions of former subdivisions. 6. 10-21-58 (Seimer Continued) t) III I RESOLUTION No. 3073 CO/lJ'rID RESOLUTION No. 3074 -1 " . I iJ ~'T<<~ ,"} ~:-:J.(uu ., Mr. and Mrs. W. H. Seimer, the applicants, addressed the Council. Councilman Reibold asked the applicants if they would be willing to sell the 30 feet on the rear property line providing they would not be required to set back the rear property line until January, 1961. They replied that they would be most willing. Councilman Reibold suggested the possibility of the applicants placing a value on the land in question. The City Attorney stated that the chicken equipment could not be relocated on the balance of the property under the present ordinance. Councilman Reibold suggested that the applicants give the matter some thought and discuss it with the City Attorney after they have decided on a figure for adequate compensation. Mayor Phillips was of the opinion also that this is the way for this matter to be resolved, with Councilman Balser in accord; therefore same will be held over until the next regular meeting affording time for the City Attorney and the Seimers to work out the details. The City Attorney stated that Resolution No. 3073, next on the agenda, being a companion to Ordinance No. 1033, he suggested that it likewise be held for the same reason. The City Attorney presented, discussed and read the title of Resolution No. 3074, entitled: "RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, CALLING FOR SEALED BIDS ON BONDS TO BE ISSUED TO REPRESENT UNPAID ASSESSMENTS UPON LANDS IN VEHICLE PARKING DISTRICT NO. 1 OF SAID CITY." He added that slightly less than 50% of the various assessments in parking District No. 1 were paid in cash; that the next step is to call for bids for the purchase of the bonds representing the balance of the unpaid assessments; that that is the purpose and effect of Resolution No. 3074; that upon the sale of said bonds the City will then have been totally reimbursed for the moneys advanced in the completion of Parking District No.1. Councilman Jacobi inquired as to whether the money that has been collected has gone back into an account of the City; to which the City Attorney replied that under the Vehicle Parking District Act of 1943 all moneys first received must be used to reimburse all advances of the City; that in this particular proceeding all moneys received both by voluntary cash payments and the proceeds of the bonds, which are the subject of Resolution No. 3074, will go forward toward the reimbursement of all moneys advanced. That this is automatic under the Ac t . Whereupon Councilman Jacobi moved that the reading of the full body of Resolution No. 3074 be waived. Motion seconded by Councilman Reibold and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES:' Councilmen Balser, Jacobi, Reibold, Phillips NOES: None ABSENT: Councilman Camphouse Councilman Jacobi further moved that Resolution No. 3074 be adopted. Said motion seconded by Councilman Reibold and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Balser, Jacobi, Reibold, Phillips NOES: None ABSENT: Councilman Camphouse 7. 10-21-58 Ji"'"\3.o\l -:u.-:.L .,a.. (Resolution No. 3074 Continued) I!:~:. -: ORDINANCE No. 1036 CO/J,'Q ORDINANCE No. 1035 (Introduced) Ill:JL~._;) 7 'If '-I The City Attorney then stated that upon the sale of the bonds, the issuance of the bonds and the receipt of the money therefor, the proceedings for the formation and improvement of the property with- in Parking District No. 1 will be completed. Thereafter, the lots will be operated by the Board of Parking Place Commissioners of Vehicle Parking District No.1, at least until such time as the Council may care to consolidate the two districts already formed and any other districts that may be formed. That the Council can make one Board of Parking Place Commissioners to operate all the lots, but that it is not his recommendation that Council consider such an amalgamation at this time because the interests in the two districts are not sufficiently similar at the present time to warrant that type of action. That in the future it may be deemed necessary or advisable to cause revenue to be produced within the district to handle such maintenance charges as will in the future arise; that that can be done by either charging for the use of the facilities or the levying of whatever tax within the district is necessary to pay for the cost of operation and maintenance. That experience indicates that such a revenue producing action is not necessary in the early years of the district because all of the facilities are new and there is no appreciable cost of upkeep. He also pointed out that the same final proceedings with respect to Parking District No. 2 are in the course of preparation by the Staff and Assessment Engineers and they will follow in the same sequence as has occurred in District No.1. I Ordinance No. 1036 will be re-introduced at the November 5, 1958 Council meeting. The City Attorney explained that when it is possible for him to do so, in proceedings where there has been no opposition expressed at any stage, he attempts to have prepared in advance the ordinance required therefor; that although this might be construed as a prejudgment of the issues, it must be remembered that zoning proceedings can take as long as five months, and he feels that it helps to have an ordinance ready on those issues as to which there have been no controversy whatsoever. That for that reason he had prepared in advance the ordinance changing the setback on Huntington Drive inasmuch as there has been absolutely no opposition and almost 100% request for such change. He thereupon presented, discussed and read the title of Ordinance No. 1035, entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 257 OF SAID CITY BY ADDING SECTION 1-Q THERETO." Councilman Balser moved that the reading of the full body of Ordinance No. 1035 be waived. Motion seconded by Councilman Reibo1d and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Balser, Jacobi, Reibo1d, Phillips NOES: None ABSENT: Councilman camphouse I Councilman Balser further moved that Ordinance No. 1035 be introduced. Motion seconded by Councilman Jacobi and carried on roll call vote as follows: ' AYES: Councilman Balser, Jacobi, Reibo1d, Phillips NOES: None ABSENT: Councilman Camphouse 8. 10- 21- 58 LOT SPLIT No. 217 (Tentative and Final) .44b , I ZONE VARIANCE (Kovenan) ,^ -.-f~"j BID RESULTS (Telephone Alarm System) ,.-'1.1 COUNCIUIAN CAMPHOUSE 2 1 I ", '" '" r..-:) ~~0t1w >-"\.:',;r Planning Commission recommendation for tentative approval of lot split No. 217 requested by the Camden-Wilshire Company, 320 Topaz place, subject to the filing of a final map by a registered engineer. Councilman Balser moved that the Council accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission and grant tentative approval of Lot Split No. 217 subject to the specified condition as stated above. Council- man Reibold seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. The Director of Public Works advised that the condition specified for said lot split No. 217, to wit, filing a final map by a registered engineer, had been complied with and recommended that final approval be granted. Whereupon Councilman Balser moved that the recommendation of the Director of Public Works be accepted and that Lot Split No. 217 be given final approval. Said motion seconded by Councilman Reibold and carried unanimously. Planning Commission Resolution No. 313 recommending granting zone variance to permit the installation and use of mechanical equipment in an existing hand-operated auto laundry at 1414 South Baldwin Ave. Inasmuch as time for appeal has not elapsed, Mayor Phillips ordered the matter placed on the agenda for the next regular Council Meeting of November 5, 1958. The following bids were received for the installation of conduit and pede, cals for a telephone fire alarm system: Steiny & Mitchell Allen Engineering Co. Sherwin Electric Service $ 9,553.00 15,832.00 16,705.00 Engineer1s estimate 15,500.00 Recommendation of the Director of Public Works that the City Council award the contract for the installation of the fire alarm system to Steiny and Mitchell, Incorporated, Los Angeles, in the amount of $9,553.00. Councilman Camphouse arrived at the Council meeting at 9:01 P.M., having attended a Library Board meeting. Councilman Jacobi moved that the Council approve the recommendation of the Director of Public Works and that the contract for the installation of conduit and pedestals for a telephone fire alarm system be awarded to low bidder Steiny & Mitchell in the amount of $9,553.00; that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute a contract in accordance therewith in form approved by the,City Attorney; that all other bid deposits be returned, and that the Council appropriate from the unappropriated surplus of the General Fund to a Capital Outlay Project the amount of $9,553.00 to finance this construction. Councilman Camphouse seconded the motion and it was carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Balser, Camphouse, Jacobi, Reibold, Phillips NOES: None ABSENT: None 9. 10-21-58 ~ ~~33 EASEMENT (L. A. County) lHDE;~ED ) f'~~~ , TRAFFIC SIGNALS (Request for Extension of Time) J:l'IDEXED ~ "'-< f',~'t-'- ' LOT SPLIT No. 155 (Final) 1 ,.\\ The Director of Public Works advised that a request had been received from the County of Los Angeles, Department of Real Estate and Property Management, for an easement for riding and hiking trail purposes ~'.n~ a portion of City-owned property lying on each side of Live Oak Avenue at the Santa Anita Wash; that the strip of land over which the easement is requested lies entirely within the present Flood Control right of way. He continued that the County has contracted with the Corps of Engineers and the contractor for construction of an equestrian underpass at this location, and it will be constructed in conjunction with the present Flood Control contract. Recommendation of the Director of Public Works that the City Council authorize the execution of the easement document for the County of Los Angeles for the purposes above mentioned. I Councilman Camphouse moved that the Council accept the recommendation of the Director of Public Works and that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute an easement to the County of Los Angeles, in form approved by the City Attorney, for a riding and hiking trail over a portion of City owned property lying on each side of Live Oak Avenue at the Santa Anita Wash, said strip of land lying within the present Flood Control right of way. Councilman Jacobi seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. The Director of Public Works advised that Fischbach and Moore, Contractors for the traffic signals on Huntington Drive, have requested a time extension on their contract to revise the completion date to November 28, 1958; that this will give them adequate time to complete the project and to make the ten day test period as required by the specifications. He added that the reasons for the time delay were due to the long distance truck strike which delayed the delivery of the luminaire poles, and some delay in the wiring of the controllers for Holly and Baldwin Avenues; that these controllers were quite complicated and a very detailed check had to be made before they could be delivered. That it was therefore his recommendation that the Council allow the extension in time to complete this project to November 28, 1958. Councilman Balser moved that the Council accept the recommendation of the Director of Public Works and that Fischbach and Moore, contractors for the traffic signals on Huntington Drive, be granted a time extension on their contract to revise the completion date to November 28, 1958 in order to complete said project. Councilman Reibold seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. The Director of Public Works advised that on May 21, 1957 Council granted tentative approval for the division of property at 23 West Norman Avenue, owned by Dell Marie Dodge; that the conditions of approval included the removal of certain buildings, and the construction of a new driveway and garage for the existing dwelling; 'that all of the conditions have been met except the construction of the new driveway and the garage; that the applicant now has a sale for both lots; that the purchaser of the improved lot has taken permits for the driveway and garage, and has filed a letter with the Department agreeing to complete the construction within 90 days; and that the applicant requests final approval of the lot split be given so that the escrow with the purchaser can be completed. I Councilman Reibold moved that Council grant final approval to Lot 'Split No. 155 - Dell Marie Dodge, 23 West Norman Avenue. Councilman Jacobi seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. 10. 10- 21- 58 j" REFUND REQUEST , (Jones ~ \-\' :; I iil "r. 1 r '".l2"~c)'" Request for authorization to refund the unused portion of investigation fee deposited by Marvin C. Jones in the amount of $18.00. Councilman camphouse moved that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to refund the sum of $18.00 to Marvin C. Jones, 14575 Valley Vista Boulevard, Sherman Oaks, being the unused portion of his investigation fee of $25.00 deposited with the City in connection with his application for a business permit to install five skill game machines in the Santa Anita Bowling Alley. Said motion seconded by Councilman Balser and carried on roll call vote as follows: / AYES: Councilmen Balser, Camphouse, Jacobi, Reibold, Phillips NOES: None ABSENT: None AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION (Stogsdill) '>j'} J (City Attorney) (,J ti (Superior Court) (L. A. County Flood Control District) I r~8 ~ ~ Mr. Ralph D. Stogsdill addressed the Council, stating that as he had arrived late at the meeting, after Ordinance No. 1032 and Resolution No. 3073 appearing on the agenda had been passed, he would appreciate being informed as to Council's action on these two matters. He was informed by Mayor Phillips that both the Resolution and the Ordinance had been adopted. The City Attorney reported that he had attended a meeting in Pasadena regarding the proposal to create seven Superior Court Judicial Districts. He explained that Arcadia is involved only to the extent that it woula " remain under the same Court that it now has located in Pasadena;"that the City, however, is not entirely within the district and thaf he took the liberty of stating that he felt certain that the Council would not oppose the proposed plan but would request that all of the City if possible be included within the one district. He further explained the proposed program of creating Superior Court Judicial Districts each having full jurisdiction, and for a more even distribution of judges and the case load. Whereupon Councilman Balser moved that the Council instruct the City Attorney to advise the Administrative Officer of Los Angeles County that it is the opinion of the City Council that their proposal has merit and that to the extent po~sible and feasible all of the City of Arcadia be included within one judicial district. Councilman Jacobi seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. The City Attorney stated that two requests from the Los Angeles County Flood Control District should be presented to the Council in order that the Staff might be guided in further negotiations involving matters of policy. The first matter was the September 12, 1958 request of the Flood Control District for acquisition of a portion of the City-owned property presently under lease for the golf course involving a portion of the property designated as future parking space in the lease. A map of the area was demonstrated to the Council, Engineer Lortz explaining that it was not certain for what purpose or reason the Flood Control District desired the property. The Mayor asked the Staff to ascertain the purpose and reason of the acquisition and report back to the Council at its forthcoming meeting. The City Attorney likewise presented the October 9, 1958 request of Los Angeles County seeking use of the 50-foot berm around the southerly and southeasterly portions of the gravel pit on the city-owned property west of Peck Road. It was pointed out that the proposed trail would come extremely close to the houses immediately south of the proposed trail and would interfere with the intended use of the easterly portion of the property for vehicular parking and access. The Mayor requested the Staff to apprise the County of Los Angeles of the foregoing objections and to suggest a realignment of the trail along the westerly and northerly portions of the city-owned property. 11. 10- 21- 58 ~ !l '~:35 ~~. CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE (Region I Workshop) II:D:"~G:;D CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE (CS&IWA) Ill;:;:;.;..::...D COMPLETION OF WORK (Traffic Signals at Baldwin & Live Oak) ~IJD~XLD Request of the City Manager Pro Tempore that Captain Jim Hayes, of the Police Department, and Assistant Director of Civil Defense for the City of Arcadia, be authorized to attend the Region I Workshop at Bakersfield on October 22, 1958; that this will entail the use of a city vehicle (Police Unit #71); that the purpose of this Workshop is discussion of Surplus Property and Matching Funds. Councilman Reibold moved that Captain Jim Hayes of the Arcadia Police Department be authorized to attend the Region I Workshop at Bakersfield on October 22, 1958; expenditures to be substantiated by an itemized expense account upon his return. Said motion seconded by Councilman Jacobi and carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Balser, Camphouse, Jacobi, Reibold, Phillips NOES: None ABSENT: None I Request of the Director of Public Works for ratification of the attendance by Roy N. Miller, Bernard Brumley and Leonard Bellin, of the California Sewage and Industrial Waste Association meeting October 18, 1958 in San Diego; that funds for this purpose were appropriated in the 1958-59 Division Budget. Councilman Camphouse moved that the attendance by Roy N. Miller, Bernard Brumley and Leonard Bellin of the California Sewage and Industrial Waste Association meeting October 18, 1958 in San Diego be ratified; that they be commended for their willingness to go on a Saturday, and that they be reimbursed their necessary expenses, within the budgetary category, upon filing of itemized expense accounts approved by the Manager. Councilman Jacobi seconded the motion and it was carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen Balser, camphouse, Jacobi, Reibold, Phillips NOES: None ABSENT: None The City Attorney commented that if attendance at certain conferences are specifically mentioned in the budget councilmanic action is not required; that the approval of the City ~Ianager and Department Head suffices; that as a matter of policy, however, it is a good idea that the Council at least be informed of this type of expenditure so that the people will know the purposes for which the money is expended and the benefits they derive therefrom. The City Manager Pro Tempore advised that the Traffic Signal installation at the Baldwin and Live Oak Avenue intersection has been completed for quite some time and that under date of October 23, 1957 the County of Los Angeles invoiced the City for its share of the construction costs in the amount of $1326.08,representing 25% of the total cost of the installation; that this was in accordance with an agreement dated August 16, 1956 between the County of Los Angeles and the City of Arcadia. He continued that a review of the records does not indicate that the City has appropriated the necessary funds for payment of said invoice. I That based on the above it is his recommendation that the City 'Council appropriate the sum of $1326,08 from the Council Contingency Account and authorize payment of said invoice. Mayor Phillips stated that before Council moves to authorize payment of said invoice from Council Contingency Fund that the matter be held over and a report made to the Council at its next meeting as to the status of the Traffic Safety Fund Account. 12. 10-21-58 ~\ ARCADIA DEMOCRATIC CLUB ~sf IHD:;::XED I WATER RATES '79;J" 1? I .' tt.. : n,A'tr~ ~"'::..:.uh.J The City Manager Pro Tempore advised that permission had been requested by Mr. Edward J. Christy, 1801 7th Place, Arcadia, on behalf of the Arcadia Democratic Club 25th Congressional District, for a motorcade to travel through the City on Saturday, November 1, 1958 approximately between the hours of 6:00 and 8:00 P.M. Councilman Jacobi moved that the Council grant permission to the Arcadia Democratic Club 25th Congressional District for a motorcade through the City of Arcadia on November 1, 1958, at the approximate hours of bet~een 6:00 and 8:00 P.M.; said permission, however, being subject to the approval of the Arcadia Police Chief and the City Manager as to itinerary and such other conditions as are necessary. Motion seconded by Councilman Balser and carried unanimously. The City Clerk read a letter from Mr. Wade Williams, 114 South First Avenue, Arcadia (on file in the office of the City Clerk) protesting increased water rates, his personal water bill and Telephone Franchise. Mayor Phillips inquired of the City Clerk as to whether a copy of Mr. Williams' letter had been sent to the newspapers, as he had read it in an evening newspaper. The City Clerk replied that it had not been released through her office. Miss Martha Coutant, a represent- ative of the Monrovia News Post, being present in the audience, addressed the Council and stated that a copy was sent to her paper by Mr. Williams. Councilman Reibold stated as follows: "I think this is the second time we have had the opportunity of helping Mr. Williams with one of his problems. As I recall, the last time he appealed to this Body for assistance was one time when he was having some difficulty with one of his subdivisions and I believe we were successful then in working out a satisfactory solution, and I would hope that maybe I could in a small way answer some of the questions that he raises with respect to his water bill and maybe comment a few words on some of the other questions that he raises. "I investigated his water bill, and it is true, as he says, his bill for the last period was $28.86. It so happens that that covers a 70 day period by virtue of the billing dates involved. ,However, I think the important figure to compare it with is not his, if I remember correctly, the bill that he compared it with was $13.26 which he says was his last bill, and I guess he was just so busy he overlooked the one that really was the last one and that was the one for June and July, which was $17.10. The bill that he referred to was actually his April-May bill. "In 1957 his usage was 21,000 cubic feet and in 1958 it was 21,500 cubic feet. He has a lot which is 123 x 198 and it is rather interest- ing to note that this water which he used is equivalent to about 10~" over his entire lot. On the old basis I calculated out his water bill and it turned out to be $19.42 which, if my arithmetic is correct, is a 48.5% increase. The bill that he compared it with or could have compared it with is actually for a shorter period, of only 51 days. "I am glad that he brought this to our attention because I think' maybe we have not, from the Council level, gone far enough in re- stating what we are attempting to do in our Water Department. It costs money to do these things. I think other cities have already found this out and just as a matter of comparison I took his $28.86, bill and I found out that had he lived in Whittier that his bill would have been $53.75; if he had lived in San Marino it would have been $43.20; in Pasadena it would have been $39.54; in Alhambra $34.45, in Duarte $32.55, in South Pasadena $30.58, 13. . 10-21-58 1>1 ':3"" '::u.;.""J.C ~ and it looks as if he has two places to go to save a 'buck' - one, Sierra Madre for $27.10 and the other Monrovia for $26.96. "It is true that we have raised the water rates a significant amount. We have raised them on the average that they will produce between 40% and 50% more revenue, and, as you men know, our receipts for water sales last year were in the order of $500,000.00. We were barely breaking even. "The Montgomery report calls upon us to spend in the next twelve years $2,700,000.00 in new capital expenditures. These expenditures are for additional reservoirs, additional pipelines and additional wells, and for an additional pressure zone. This rate increase produces $211,000.00 more revenue per year which we expect to use to finance I this program. To give you some idea of the magnitude of these expenditures, our current assets, (gross assets not depreciated assets) in the Water Department are $3,900,000.00. We are adding to that $2,700,000.00, and I might point out in passing that this does not provide for a source for outside water, only facilities with which to distribute the water that we now have available to us from the San Gabriel Basin and the Raymond Basin. "Now some people will argue that maybe what we should have done is not raise the rates of the water but we should have gone to a bond or we should have put it in the tax rate. Personally I believe that it is fundamental that the person who uses the water should pay for it, and I think it would be poor financing to shred that $2,700,000.00 expenditure back upon our tax base. There are several reasons. For example, the largest water user that we have in the City of Arcadia is the Los Angeles County Park which, in 1957 used 12,701,000 cubic feet of water for which they paid us $10,306.00. Another large user, (the Los Angeles Turf Club is the next largest user but since they are not in this consideration I will omit that amount) the Arboretum, used 6,335,100 cubic feet of water. When you add those together you find that out of a total production, or total sales I should say, out of the total sales in 1957, which amounted to 485,976,300 cubic feet, that 19,036,800 went to the Los Angeles County and for that they paid a total of $15,488.00. Now had we spread these additions back upon the tax base they would not have had to pay one single cent of the increased capital facilities, and yet they used 3.92% of the total water sold in the City of Arcadia. "I think we are on sound ground. The rates are high but I dare say that had the mains been emptied, like they were in some of our memories, Mr. Williams would have had not time to write in prose, but would have simply stuck to the facts and complained bitterly about the lack of water, because a lot of people did it when we were up against that and we are trying to produce a continuing water supply and I think we are doing it at a very reasonable cost. "I cannot let go by unmentioned the matter of the franchise. There seems to be a growing misunderstanding in probably what may have been I the result of an examination of the book which the League of Women Voters put out, which showed that the gas and electric companies paid franchises while the telephone companies were not paying such franchise. If I may, I would like to read a little statement that I prepared here because I think it is important that this is clearly understood: 'In 1905 the State Legislature enacted a statute which had the effect of offering the telephone companies the right to use the public streets and highways for telephone lines. The purpose of the statute was to encourage the development of statewide communications. Arly telephone 14. 10-21-58 4438 company that accepted the franchise obtained the right to use the streets and, at the same time, assumed the obligation to render communications services. This right has been held by the courts to be effective throughout the State of California except in certain cities which had freehold charters in 1905, such as Los Angeles, Pasadena and San Diego in our area here. "Therefore, the company does not need local franchises in other cities and does not have them in Arcadia, or Alhambra, Glendale, Burbank, San Gabriel, etc. since these cities did not hold freehold charters in 1905. I 'The question has sometimes been asked why gas and power companies are required to obtain local franchises, while telephone and telegraph companies are exempt. The answer to this question is that historically the state has been interested in encouraging the growth and development of statewide communications because their value to the state's development is determined by their scope. Power and gas facilities need not be statewide to make their valuable contribution. But less someone think that the telephone companies, and I use the word plural because within the city limits of Arcadia there are two telephone companies (California Water and Tel., and Pacific Tel), and together they have a combined assessed valuation of $2,121,000.00, and they pay taxes for their properties held within the city limits of Arcadia in the amount of $153,331.00, an amount which, when compared to the total taxes paid by the gas and power companies who also use the city streets, together with their franchise payments, is a greater amount, that other amount being $146,000.00.' "t think just one other point which is of interest and is not generally known, the assessed valuation of public utility property, and this is all public utility property, is equal to 50% of the market value as determined by the State Board of Equalization. The assessed valuation of common properties, that is other than utility property, is 23.7% of the market value as found by the County Assessors, and that is a statewide average. I think actually our own County is a little higher than that. What that says in simple English is that dollar for dollar of cost the utilities are being taxed actually a little higher rate because of the relationship of the market value. "Well, I hope Mr. Mayor, that maybe this will be of some value in putting Mr. Williams' mind at rest, maybe we have helped him again." I Mayor Phillips stated: "I might add that as recently as 1954, under the old Alderman report, the County Water Department was not paying its own way and capital outlay was being made at the expense of the advalorem tax rate and none of the reserves refunded. These have all been accomplished within our memory. So it isn't all a one way street. Also the papers carried here the other day the news which we have all been expecting for years, that the lower basins are going to sue now for adjudication of the upper San Gabriel and Raymond Valley Basins. This will determine the exact amount of water that we will be allowed to pump and we may be faced quicker than we think with finding another source for water in order to supply our own needs. It's a tremendous problem, this water, problem, that you just don't toss around lightly. It takes a lot of thought and a lot of doing." Councilman Reibold added: "Those of us who attended the water meeting, learned some months ago that our basin is in pretty heavy overdraft, in spite of this exceedingly heavy rain. It 15. 10-21-58 ,~ '3,;11 -:ii:"::1: tV PETITION 1~;J:j. '-""D .......t...... p;&I>l..,. RECREATION COMMISSION r/se FIRE STATIONS (Dedication Program) ~S~ is interesting to note that this year when we had just about twice as much rain as we had last year we have actually produced less water even though the year before we had some 200 or 300 more meters." Councilman Camphouse stated: "I wish to conunent on the part of the letter that refers to franchises; the inference is 'so this was the law in the State of California, that these telephone companies do not pay a franchise, and the inference would be then that well, change the law!' but I think all, even Councilman Reibold, will respect the ability and the knowledge of the City Attorney of Los Angeles, who is probably one of the experts in the matter of rates, and certainly saved the taxpayers of Los Angeles a lot of money on rates. Cases vs. gas company vs. telephone company have been pursuing this subject for a I long time attempting to get more franchises from the telephone company, and he has probably sustained the only legal defeat that I can recall in recent years even to such extent that I think he was reprimanded by the Supreme Court of the State of California, so I don't think that we are dilitory in our efforts." The City Clerk advised that a petition had been presented to her office late that evening, signed by seven property owners at addresses set forth in said petition, which stated in part that they would like the Council to reconsider the placing of "planned residence on the property located at the northeast corner of Third and Longden". That the planned residence caused the middle lot being improved for Mr. Van Buskirk to become a key lot from both sides, placing him between two garages. The Director of Public Works explained the situation, after which Mayor Phillips ordered the matter referred to Staff to investigate. Councilman Camphouse referred to the Minutes of the Recreation Conunission wherein it was reflected that an agreement of negotiations had been entered into with the Conununity Facility Planners relative to the second state of development of the Wilderness Area; that he had noticed many items had been set forth. The City Attorney commented that each stage must progress under a separate contract. Councilman Camphouse further stated that he has heard many conunents on the wonderful development thus far; that he is bringing it up at this time so that it will not be overdeveloped; that he has asked the Director of Public Works to duplicate the reconunendation of the Conunission and submit copies to all of the Councilmen for their study; that permanent rest rooms should be made available and possibly some grading relating to the ball field, but that he is of the opinion that they should move slowly. Mayor Phillips conunented that the Recreation Conunission does not have Ithe right to direct the Conununity Facility Planners to go ahead on any particular phase; that the reconunendation is directed to the Council and they in turn so advise the Community Facility Planners. Councilman Camphouse emphasized that it is not his desire to curtail the necessary requirements, but wants to be kept' apprised of developments before conunitments are made. I Councilman Camphouse suggested that since the new Baldwin Avenue Fire Station is now occupied the time has come for the Staff to consider a dedication program encompassing both the Baldwin Avenue Fire Station and the Central Fire Station soon to be completed; said program to include those people who had actively participated in the attainment of said fire stations, such as former councilmen, former Fire Chief Nellis, and the like. Mayor Phillips agreed that this was a timely suggestion. Councilman Reibold added that it might be well to have such a program include open house at both stations. Councilman camphouse also suggested that the Council would welcome suggestions and recommendations from the Staff as to 16. 10-21-58 (Resolution No. 3068) " . ~J, I 4-4~') the disposition of the old Baldwin Avenue Fire Station property. The Director of Public Works advised that the Fire Chief is now working on such an event. Councilman Camphouse inquired as to the status of Resolution No. 3068 relating to the protested traffic lines on Huntington Drive in the area east of Second Avenue to Fifth Avenue, and was informed by the City Attorney that a fully executed copy of said resolution, which was adopted by the Council October 7, 1958, had been transmitted to the State Division of Highways by the City Clerk on October 14, 1958, and that it was too early to anticipate any reaction by said Division, but that if a contact has not been made within the next week or ten days he will pursue the matter further. The City Manager Pro Tempore added that at a meeting of the Chamber of Commerce on October 16, 1958 several members of the Division had been present and the above matter had been discussed at some length, and that a communication was to be sent from the Chamber of Commerce to the Division of Highways in support of said Resolution No. 3068. Whereupon Councilman Camphouse commented again on the hardship imposed on the businessmen in the said area due to the intermittent barrier' safety zone divisions on Huntington Drive and stressed the importance of keeping the matter alive. (L. A. County Councilman Camphouse suggested that the Staff contact the Los Angeles Humane Society)County Humane Department at Baldwin Park to alert them to the fact that there seems to be a great number of dogs running loose on 'Arcadia INDEXED streets. (Sound System) INDEXED (Mayor Phillips) INDEXED (Rezoning on Duarte Road) I INDEXED /IS P '. ADJOURNMENT Councilman Camphouse recommended that a microphone be purchased that can be used by anyone explaining maps and the like posted on the bulletin board in the Council Chamber. He suggested that it be one that can be worn around the neck to enable the free use of the hands~ and added that this recommendation stemmed from the fact that he had heard'many protests regarding the inability of the audience to hear the person standing at the bulletin board. Mayor Phillips stated that he had received letters from Mr. Herb Herzenberg, Chairman of the City Liaison Committee, commending the City Manager, Fire Department and other citizens for their help during the recent disaster, and from the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors also commending the City for its help during the Monrovia fire. Mayor Phillips stated that he thought it would be well for the City to be represented at the dedication of the Los Angeles County Courthouse at 10:30 A.M. Friday, October 31, 1958, and added that he had received an invitation for a seat reservation to said dedication and would give it to the City Clerk for anyone who might 'wish to use it. Mayor Phillips stated that at the meeting (October 17, 1958) with the Planning Commission the matter of the rezoning of Duarte Road on the north and south sides was discussed; that the zoning of the church property has already been handled; that there is another area that is relatively close to a solution which has been pending for a 'number of years, being the property on the north side of Duarte Road that backs up to the property abutting Fairview Avenue. That the general consensus is that an Arcadia street be cut through the back, but that it was a case of equity that it not be entirely charged to the property fronting on Duarte Road; and that he would like the Staff and the planners to talk with Mr. Pearson, Mr. Zorg and others of the original application to see if something can be worked out and a report made at the next Council meeting. Councilman Reibold moved that the meeting adjourn. Councilman Jacobi seconded the motion and it was carrie~unanimously. ~&f}Lur ~~~ ~~ . -7;4 ; -i / - City Clerk 17 10- 21- 58