No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOCTOBER 4,1977_2 22:9329 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS ARE TAPE RECORDED AND ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK I INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL MINUTE APPROVAL HEARING (Land Use) NOVEMBER 1 HEARING (ZONE CHANGE) NAOMI AVENUE (NOVEMBER 1) if f: 11!)r.J ,rl I HEARINGS SCHEDULED ONE-WAY ALLEY NOVEMBER 1 MODIFICATIONS Noticing Procedures NOVEMBER 1 TRACT NO. 33832 Tentati ve Map APPROVED I (0 I)' 0, ~lil' \. v A 'III II MINUTES CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 4, 1977 The City Council of the City of Arcadia, met in regular session on Tuesday, October 4, 1977 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the Arcadia City Hall. Rev. Leslie G. Strathern, Arcadia Congregational Church Council Member Margett PRESENT: ABSENT: Council Members Gilb, Lauber, Margett, Parry, Saelid None On MOTION by Council Member Margett, seconded by Council Member Parry and carried unanimously the minutes of the regular meeting of September 20 were APPROVED. Council Member Gilb did not vote as he was out of the country at the time. Planning Commission Resolution 995 approving a land use permit to develop industrial buildings at 124 N. Second Avenue. Mayor Saelid declared the hearing open. No one spoke at this time. The hearing was then CONTINUED to the regular meeting of NOVEMBER 1 (at the request of the applicant). APPEAL from Planning Commission Resolution 1008 recommending denial of a zone change from R-l to R-3 at 645 Naomi Avenue and from R-l and R-2 to PR-3 at 645-671 Naomi Avenue (north side of street). Mayor Saelid announced that the appellant had requested a continuation to November 1. The City Clerk read the communication from the attorney for the appellant advising that they could not be present at this meeting and asking for a continuation. This request was received on September 30. Mayor Saelid then declared the hearing open for those who could not attend the next meeting. Oscar Kraft, 630 W. Duarte Rd., stated in part that he has been endeavoring to purchase some of the land in question for a client. The property would be used for commercial purposes and he will be able to attend the next meeting. THIS HEARING WAS THEN CONTINUED TO NOVEMBER 1, 1977. Mayor Saelid announced dates for public hearings on the following items: Request for a one-way alley between Huntington Drive and Wheeler Street, east of First Avenue. NOVEMBER 1 Planning Commission Resolution No. 1011 recommending approval of a Text Amendment (77-4) amending the noticing procedures for modifications. NOVEMBER 1 The Planning Commission recommended approval of the tentative map of Tract No. 33832 which would create a condominium at 930-932 W. Duarte Road, subject to conditions outlined in the staff report dated October 4, 1977. The Department prepared a Negative Declaration for this project. 10-4-77 - 1 - TRACT NO. 33833 Tentative Map APPROVED (), fu0C j /, I ' ,/.1:;;- i' \kf\l~0 XiECREATION . COMMISSION (PARK SITE) NOVEMBER I RECESS COUNCIL RECONVENED 22:9330 It was MOVED by Council Member Lauber, seconded by Council MemberGilb and carried on roll call vote as follows that the Negative Declaration be APPROVED and FILED and that Council finds the project will not have a significant effect on the environment; that the tract is consistent with the General Plan and that the waste discharge from the tract will not result in a violation of the existing requirements set forth in the Water Code; that the Director of Public Works be authorized to sign the Subdivision Agreement and that the tentative map be and it is hereby APPROVED subject to all specified conditions. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Council Members Gilb, Lauber, Margett, Parry, Saelid None None The Planning Commission recommended approval of the tentative map of I Tract No. 33833 which would create a condominium at 452-464 W. Huntington Drive subject to conditions outlined in the staff report dated October 4, 1977. The Department prepared a Negative Declaration for this project. It was MOVED by Council Member Parry, seconded by Council Member Margett and carried on roll call vote as fsllows that the Negative, Declaration be APPROVED and FILED and that Council finds the project will not have a significant effect on the environment; that the tract is consistent with the General Plan and that the waste discharge of the tract will not result in a violation of the existing requirements set forth in the Water Code; that the Director of Public Works be authorized to sign the subdivision agreement and that the tentative map be and it is hereby APPROVED subject to all specified conditions. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Council Members Gilb, Lauber, Margett, Parry, Saelid None None Council received the communication from the Recreation Commission asking Council to give further consideration to the acquisition of property in the southwest section of the City for a neighborhood park. It was MOVED by Council Member Margett, seconded by Council Member Lauber and carried unanimously that staff investigate possible sites in the subject area and submit a report to Council at the November 1 regular meeting. Council recessed at 8 p.m. in order to act as the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency. Council reconvened at 8:10 p.m. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION II v Mrs. Johanna Hofer, 875 Monte Verde Drive, referred to the item relative to another neighborhood park and said in part that there are sufficient parks within the city along with the County park and felt Council should concentrate on bringing an auditorium to the City; that as yet she has not noticed any sizeable amount of funds for such a facility and that a moratorium should be placed on parks; that the youth of the community need an auditorium. I Herb Fletcher, 175 W. Lemon Avenue, referred to an agenda item concerning a request for a median opening at 859 W. Foothill Boulevard. He objected to using taxpayer's money to provide an opening to benefit only a few residents. He did not have any objection to opening up the median but felt if it is reconstructed it should be at the total expense of the residents who requested it who did not lodge a complaint at the public hearings on the matter. l Bill Connelly, Arcadia Business Association, referred to an agenda item concerning a one-way alley between Huntington and Wheeler east of First, and stated in part that he has contacted those in the area 10-4-77 - 2 - , ,," .fl~J;V~Lrj.4J~C~R ..., ;&.v.H-.L~_C!-.t!-~ "....,b.. -" ORDINANCE 1615 10- 4-77 te lex in .. 369 pg 6 ~ Would you like to read the title then we'll have the gentleman ., GILB I Mayor, nfter you read the title I would like a brief history of this - been looking all thru the minutes I ~ould like to kno~ what prompted this - its a pretty detailed Ord. & I would like to be brought up a little bit - all of a sudden we got an Ord. & I'd like to kno~ ho~ ~e got it. SAELID It was prompted close to a yr ago - when we were having problems with some of the news racks -- actually extending into the public rlw, principally in front of the P.O. LAUBER I remember some discussion. GILB Then out of that there's been nothing discussed this whole yr until this Ord. .. LAUBER We had it the last mtg. GILB That's ~hat I've been looking for. CVM Item on back page, only LIBERTO I can read the title & then give Council Some background on this particular Ord. \ \ vi:\ Ord. 1615 -- amending section 6439 of the AJ1C penaining to unattended newspaper racks. C ,\/ U ~0 The City Council has before it the Ord. & on the Ord. you will note the words that \/' have been added or changed in the existing Code have been underlined so that the words you see that are not underlined are presently in our Code. And, the request ~as moreorless of a 2 point request. The request ~as 1) to regulate the time, place & manner of newsracks on our sidewalks in a fashion or in a manner that was more restrictive than in the manner that they are presently being regulated. The reason for that request is depicted by some photos that I have of the news racks that presently exists on City sidewalks, which photos were distributC'd to thc CityCouncil nt thc lnst mtg. You wiUnote that the newsracks are in somewhat disarray on the City sidewalks - you ~ill note that they could pose a definite obstruction to pcdestrians in many instances (passed photos). You win also note the newsracks are of many different he had the phots at the last mtg. in width - vary in the types of supports they have - numerous ~wavs. (In. nos. to Hrs. Lauber I S ques t. . '" those tonite are cOPies~. the Ord. does require varieties - vary in height - vary vary in appearaD~~ -_vary in many /, o LIBERTO_cont GILB LIBERTO GILB LIBERTO GILB LIBERTO GILB LIBERTO LAUBER LIBERTO LAUBER {, ( 7f NK'IiSRACKS Ord. 1615 10-4- 77 telex #2 .. 450 pg 7 that all existing racks on the street be of what is called the K-Jack Model 100 Mini views or its equivalent. That's the type of rack that you see in this photo ~ . . . . Does everybody make that kind of a rack or does just one guy make it. I can't ans. that quest. Mr. Gilb - whether they do or not that's the type of rack we advise the Council approve - if .equivalent type racks are made they will also be approved. Hold it - I don't care whether you advise the Councilor not - if there is just one guy making this rack is what I'm asking - I don't see how you can make an Ord. that everybody has to buy a rack from one guy...& put him in business. Mr. Gilb, if the Council doesn't want that rack, Council doesn't have to put it in the Ord. I understand that - but what you're saying is - they have to be a K-Jack type I asked if one person makes this rack - or do other people - or is it a style. . - - There is a gentleman here from the K-Jack Co. - perhaps he can ans. that qucst. better than 1. First we're - I think we ought to hear the gentleman who asked to be' heard - we'll of ask that quest. when he gets here then - that's onelmy quest. Ies the middle photo We said we were willing to accept, at least the Mayor did, I went out looking ae others this week - the only different are the legs, really. Let me point out some of the differences - the racks in the middle are the racks we are recommending be approvcd in the Ord. - thc rcason we are recommcnding that rgck you'll notice there is only one pedestal for that rack. That pedestal is egsy to sweep around - if you would have the other it has 4 legs for each rack .. possibility of debris, papers co llec t ing under those legs - harder to sweep under easier to tr ip 'o'ler - that's the reason we recommend the middle photo rack. Is there an abatement period. ,We addressed ourselves to some sort of relief for (~ those who have this new one - only it has a different type of leg. There are 7-- I I ( ( ; I. NI.;wSf{Al.i., - Orel. 1(,1', 10-4-77 telex #2 .. "12 .. pg B LAUBER-cont ne~lfnes on Duarte Rd. just like this one - brand ne~ ones. they are very nice. LIBE:RTO As far'as' the racks out there presently,our indications are that the newspapers of cours~, can use those racks in other cities - they don't have to throw the ~ . racks out there out..they can slmply use them somewhere else. The middle racks are the ~acks the Ord. spec~fies to be used or its equivalent. I LAUBER LIBERTO GILB LIBERTO PARRY SAELID LIBERTO SAELID PARRY LIBERTO LAUBER BILL 'lie lasco Cir. Hgr. for Arc. Trib. I d idn' t 'realize we had come to that consensus. That was in the draft ord. I had sent to the Council the last mtg. & I circulated those photos at the last mtg. in add'n. to the photos that you have in your hand. II According to this K-Jack is an Engr. Co. that manufactures these - he doesn't II mfg. a style called K-Jack - mfgs. a product called K-Jack. I' K-Jack 190 mini-views is the style you see in the middle. , Under thJ proposed Ord. you have or the equivalent - under the Ord. there isn't d f .11.. f h' h . 1 . h d . h i i I any e 1n1t1on 0 W at t e equ1va ent 15 - W 0 etcrmlncs w at s cqu va ent. Or equivllent to the satisfaction of the PIng. Dir. The Bus. Lic. Of cr. makes that determination. .....Bob Sullivan. lin Later onlthe proposed Ord. you say 'newsrack shall have wood grain panels & the ! mouhts snaIl be painted gloss black' ... 'all newsracks on the mounts must be the same: type' .. so really you're saying all must have a,b,c,d,e,f, or else I they would not be equivalent. I . I I thlnk the gentleman from K-Jack can probably tell you better than I what is availabll - if you would like to question him. I ~ I would like to talk with the man from thc Trihune first. I had ani opportunity to get this Ord. - I don't know, in one respect there, previously I think ~hen you put an Ord. before the Council I , the interested parties, in this case if it hadn't been for \ I aSSume Mr. Sanford from K-Jack would be here tonite & that I here & you would have gone thru the Ord. & some comments may have been raised about , this butlin the end you would agree what he's ~resenting is very nice so I would I ,3 a newsrack Ord., you did notify lIelen Schrader I would V would~all that would be v VELASCO-cont SAELID llEIASCO '~ U: T:If) ! J I (' ( 7f. NEWRACKS - Ord. 1615 10-4-77 telex #2 .. 584 pg 9 ( assume that you would say that's neat - well go ahead & do this. There are some I ! ,p, W' here I would like to ~xception to & go from that point - in ans. to the K-Jack Engr. Co. ,- they do put up a rack - the one they're asking for is the Model 100 items which is a mini-view - K-Jack's most expensive rack - you're asking for1bhat (grade?) its an add'l. $10.50, I believe .., of course, if you look on the back of your the cost of Ord. you have a break,lown of It his particular rack.. now there are other mfgrs. of racks that put out a rack similar to the rack that K-Jack puts out - but K-Jack I , probably has the best business aroundhere being in Gardena - there is another company I over in N.I Hollywood, Nat'l. News Fed that can duplicate exactly what K-jack puts outl.J they also put up pedestals - you'll also find that the rJ/ rimes is in the business of mfg. their own style mounts now & I'm certatn they will take great excJption with some of this if they were aware of the fact that this Ord. was comi~J before the Council tonite. Taking the Ord. as such, I would likc to take Some of items that we might possibly tak e objection to & thenfrom that point I'll be seated. If we go to Item #9 ... it says (on pg 3)"newsracks shall be placed adjacent & parallel to a wall of the bldg. & not more than 6" from the wall unless the City determines that place near a bldg. is not s,uitable~ Our comment here is this: if a situation would occur where we had a row of racks that sat up against a bldg. & were 6" apart - It would make it quite difficult to do any work on racks .. unfortunately these racks receive Jver the yr quite a bit of damage thru juvenil~ & adults & what have you - somebody is always looking for a way to make an extra dollar, I guess - our racks arc continually heing damaged - it is my recommendation on this particular item here tllat it should be 18" - that would allow us - if we had to get behind the rack - to repair the rack we could get behind it - if you put 6" - we would have to get on our back to take the whole unit off inorder to repair it. I recommend 18" if the Lack were damaged we could repair it. Mr. Velasco, that's to allow you access to the rack from the back? Th at's correc t. if 10 11~(' thl"' T'llhl i,.. r/t,~ f"r Vf'll1r ('\~.," ...1nrlr~hnn? VElASCO GILB LIBERTO LAUBER VELASCO SAELID LIBEJl:TO SAELID ( 7f. NB,SRACKS Ord. 1615 10-4-77 telex #2 .. 663 pg 10 ( At the present point of your Ord. - you're going to put up style mounts to begin with your'e asking us to - especially Arc. Tribune - you:re asking uS to put up the best mounts available - that K-Jack puts out, a wood grain model - actually Model 97 which is a smaller rack would satisfy almost every newspaper with the exception of LA Times, which has a big paper & would have to take it -- Model 97 is a cheaper rack - I can't think of any paper outside of the Times that would need to use the mini-grained 100 - but your Ord. is requesting that we put in I , the best item that K-Jack mfgs. or a similar company. , Jack, I,think either you're misunderstanding or I am - if this Ord., as written , , I has to be &It from the wall - he can't work on the back of the equipment. I can't understand that - other cities have put in the &" requirement - the 18" that Mr.Velasco is asking for is inviting children on skatebds, bicycles or whatever who attempt to ride between the walls & racks - if you leave an 18" gap... . Do they open, Mr. Velasco, from the front... i You have a lock - you ha~e to pull off the back covcr - yrnhavc your coin box behind so - in my case unfortunately I'm about 1/' or 5" too small I have to stand on my tiptoes to reach over to pullout the coin box -- I happen to go over to look at the rack at the Thrifty Drug on 1st & Htg. - you'll see if you have ~o repair that rack - this is on Thrifty property - it is not on public propert~ but it is awfully close - - as long as your putting the Ord.___ I doubt very much with th~ location oE th~ racks th~t we'd h~vc th~t problcm - but it is a point my management thot I should bring up, fur your consideration. Thank you for bringing it up '.' Mr. CA, is this drafted in such a manner that it applies only to racks that are on public property? Not private property? That's correct, Mr. Mayor, the Ora. only requires stylized racks to go on pub. property - there are aspects that control private property'but make reference to it for other purposes that we haven't gotten into yet. I guess my point is - I favor getting them as close to the edge of the public rlw -- " SAELID-cont VEIASCO SAELID VEUSCO SAELID VEIASCO or .J.. ( 7 f. NEWSRACKS - ORD 1615 10-4- 77 telex #2 .. 733 .. pg 11 as far back from where people are going to want to walk as we can possibly do so. 'Racks placed on private property - that's somebody else's problem - not the, City's - we have enuf of our own. You're making the Ord., sir, I'm just raising the point - you can do what you feel This only applies to p'ublic r/w. d ., Ok - next item - #20 - all newsracks on the mount must be of the same type - its our feeling, especially the A~c. Trib. I do have at this time 11 pcs. of equip. on City streets in various locations-which we have a license from the City these racks & we don't need really the mini-100 - we can do just as well I 97 which looks just as attractive which sets on a mount but your Ord. to p lac~ with the is stating that we should have the K-Jack 100 or its equivalent. Is that the same rack you're using thruout the City,as most of the papers are? No - the majority of them have private property because of the installation - the way it was set ~p there we were led to believe that on private property we had to put model 100 on - but we are slowly getting away from that & wherever our private prop. someone asks for a styled mount we can put on a 97 - we have 97's in front of }illrie Calendar - its on private property - but if you look at Highland Oaks Liquor there is~mount there has a 97 - 97 is attractive & all due respects to }Ir. Sanford we can purchase a 97 that does have a wood grain & is painted olive green - its a wood grain strip - Nat'l. News(bin) puts this out but K-Jack doesn't - we're asking from our consideration for theArc. Trib. why we have to go with the Modcl 100. From the aesthetic value - that's fine - but this vould be a new installWion so thercfore we [eel we could adequately present our product with a 97 instead of 100 - & at the same time save the Co. some money. If we needed a 100 that would be one thing - coming out twice a wk - we dan l t - but we do need representation \.,rherevcr there is a rack because we do fortunately sell newspapers. That's one of our obj. on Item 20 ... Item 23: its says: ~ in the event that a vendor no longer decides to vend in a specific location - one months notice must be given to the Bus. Lie. Ofer. prior ;;., ;( ( 7 f. NElo/SRACKS - 1615 Ord. 10--4-77 tt1ex #2 .~ 817 .. pg 12 VEIASCO-cont h h' " . f ' . f f f & h f to~moval of t e mac 1ne. We think - 1 we re 1n ront 0 a ca e t e ca e goes out of business or say its a bus. that changes their type of bus. - we're not selling newspapers - then why should we have to wait 30 das. to remove our equip? Yet, the Ord_ says we must keep it there 30 das. - yet, if we go a little farther along if we don't put papers in the rack for 7 das. - I think it says that we'll end up - you 'can remove the rack but if you want the rack put back on we'll have to pay a ~$10 inspection fee - we feel if we have to vacate locations just a notificati, I to .the, b,us. ofc. would be sufficient instead of having to wait 30 das. before we can Then you get down to 25: " it says all newsracks shall be K.:.Jack - equip. remove pU,r I ' M.. . I lnl-Vlews . . 1 " or lts equlva ent. S;\ELID I wonder if we might have CA respond to with the thinking behind 23. - LIBERTO Yes - I would like to state fnr the record that on Sept. 19, 1977 -Mr. Wheeler of the Star News called me & we went thru each & every point that Mr. Velasco is bringing up tonite. Mr.Wheeler represented to me that he is representing the Arc. Trib., the Star News & the SGV Trib. I asked him to put his comments in writing - he did not do so - I,asked Mr. Velasco, when he came Lnto my ofc. yesterday why he hadn't done so - so we could save the Council time on these issues I explained to Mr. Wheeler on the paint of l-mos. notification - you have to start with the basic premise - the news racks are obstructio~to the public rlw - we have pedestrians on that rlw & that's what the sidewalks were blt. for) they were not blt for the construction of newsracks to be placed therE, however the law recognizes that newsracks have a right to be placed, however-, it also recognizes the City has not only .:t right but an obligation to see to it that they do not propose a danger to pedestrians. One of the reasons require the same rack on one mount so that you ha~a level top to all the racks - you dont have one rack sticking up & the next one sticking down where someone could jab their arm or run into it ~vith their shoulder or any number of things - that's why you require the same racks, on the same mount. By the same token = on the 30 day notice, if you allow Mr. Velasco to remove a rack from the 7 /" \. r '-I.. 7[. NEWSl\ACI,., - Ord. 16l', 10-4-77 telex #2 .. 985 .. pg 14 vELASCO-cont if we're left out. LIBERTO That only relates to the pedestals - that doesn't relate to the number of racks. As I understand it - the number of pedestals you have doesn't determine the number of racks you have, and as a consequence, here in this #27 - the Bus. Lic. Of cr. - may determine that you may have too many pedestals along the sidewalk for one reason or another but that may not limit the number of racks - you would still VELASCO have 30-ft location. I If I re~d the Ord. or your interpretation it would indicate that a pedestal belongs to one rack - now, granted that K-Jack & others do put out mounts where I you have .2 pedestals where you have maybe 5 or 6 units that can be placcd on ~ I 2 pedestals - are you talking about that or are you talkin~ about a pedestal for each rack - therefore you are still faced with the same problem, as I see it - you have so much space & somebody is toing to determine who is going to be there & who isn't. Our quest. is how is the ) determination going to be Ord. ii/I -/1488 -priority at any made - you did have in : I your old Ord. it sa id Particular location if necessary shall be given on a one rack to a newspaper . I basis & to newspapers which carry current news of a genIi character pubLished , , daily - that such newspapers published semi-weekly - then weekly - then to " others - that seems to me that might be a more fair way to do this but this was not picked up from your Old. Ord. LIBERTO In my disc'ussion with Hr. Hheeler a great amt. of his concern arose out of his not understanding the Ord. in its entirety & how it operates. . This is one of the rcason~ I asked [or his written comments bec3usc 1 was going to respond to , him back in writing. In terms of the pedestal locations it is simply to locate the pedestals that are fixed in concrete. It may <1):fect the number of racks possibly, ~n the otherhand)not necessarily. I wouldn't think you would have a concern in that respect. (;ILB Mr. Liberto, who was notified of this - all the people involved - the IA Times _ g GILB-cont LIBERTO GILB LIBERTO GILB I.IBERTO GILB! SAELID GILB SAELID LIBERTO SAELID ( if. NEWSRACh., - Ord. ifi 1 ~ 10-4-77 telex #2 .. 065 .. pg 15 ( all these people on the lists - The Herald Exam. - the Trib. - Christian Science.. No, they were not. You mean just the guy who made tbe racks was notified? No - Mr. Wheeler of the Star News rec'd the copy of the Ord. Just a minute, plse - don't these people have to be notified if it involves them.. its going to cost them a lot of money to pull somc of these racks out - I don't know - but I never heard of writing an Ord. without notifying the people it was effecti.ng. If Council wants a pub. hrg. - Council can surely set one. I'd rather have a pub. hrg. than have an Ord. rammed down my throat that people haven't eHen had a chance to talk about. I don't know what the rest of the Council thinks but I have to tell you that nobody was even notified that this Ord. was coming up & it effects some 15 people on this list. I"m sorry, Councilman Gilb, you should have read your pkt. - because it was scheduled: for consideration tonite - it was brought up two wks ago. , Wait a minute - I didn't say I didn't know it was brought up - I'm saying the people its effectingweren't even notified. I agree with you - it should go to a pub. hrg. - I think in fairness to staff who has worked on this - what we're trying to do I think is obvious to each member of the Council - we're trying to eliminate the problcm of the City with respect to newsracks extending out allover the sidewalks - menace even worse than flowcr carts - in tcrms of where people are trying to walk. I think one oE the roasons, Hr. Gilb, is the bct that most of the racks that are on the sidewalks presently pose a menace to pedestrians presently, & constitute a danger & possibly a liability & a lot of the racks out there do not presently comply with the Code. they are in violation of our City Code. and I think it was felt that it was urgent that an Ord. of this nature be presented quickly. Let me suggest this - Chas. you mentioned a study session - I think probably if we take the Ord. that's proposed - the comments of ~lr. Velasco - review it - q SAELID-cont LAUBER LIBERTO GILB I LAUBER GILB SAELID TINGLEY ~~t:t) .r '>.. 7f. NEWSRACKJ - ORD. l61~ 10-4-77 telex IIi.. 129 pg, 1,6 ( notify the people who have racks & who will be 4ffected by this - that we are considering such an Ord. & go to the study session on it. I have one further step - I would like to see something similar - a colored pix of the other manufacturers - so we're not limited to just this K-Jack model so ,I think there should be a comparable type. The reason that K-Jack model was used is the fact that Palm Springs & Beverly Hills both have K-Jack models Miniviews 100 ., They are Ivery wealthy people. Its attactive - but we've been informed tonite that there is a comparable one I so perhaps the Ord. could be worded as such that you know it could be one or , I two different manufacturers. I was loo~ing at the lst pg. herc - they have to get their permits from the City Mgr. - have to prove their insurance to the City Atty. - & the Bus. Lic. Of cr. is the big bad wolf. It doesn't make sense - I'm ju'st telling you what I think - when this, gentleman gets finished telling you what he thinks is wrong with it - the I'd like to tell you alllthings I 'd like to have explained to me..that's why I think we should go to a study session - I can't possibly vote on this Ord. antil all the people involved Mr. Tingley, has worked on this ... Mr. Velasco had a few comments & a few ques t. - one had to dea 1 wi th h is fear I that with the space limitation that he would not - the Arc.Trib.}would not be able to get their racks on the street lo a preferable location. lIe brought up some quest. in ttlC old Ord. abollt priorities in ncwsrnckR. Olle o[ tIle reasons th~t that certain section of the old Ord. was not included in this JP Ord. because in a Superior Ct.decsion, last April, a Superior Ct. Judge struck " down the Glendale Newsrack Ord. on that specific issue ofpriority location. The Glendale Ord. had priorities in their Ord. & the Qudge felt that was unconstitution,1 v on space. 'We did not want to have any problems with tile courts - so tile priority section was ta~en out. On the other hand, we do have in Sec. 21 - 'each vendor may (1' TINGLEY LIBERTO GILB TINGLEY GILB TINGLEY GILB TINGLEY GILIJ ( 7f. NI:.lo1SRACI\.i - Ord. 161~ lr'l-4-77 telex #2 " 213 .. pg 17 ( . C/ . If have no more than 2 machines in anyone location - in some instances - depending . upon space available the vendor may be limited to a single installation. This is to allow every person - or every magazine - every vendor in Arc. to have the option to have their magazine at any location they wish. The 30 ft. limit, Mr. Liberto & I felt waS quite adequate to provide for every machine in Arc. I As a matter it was increased to 30 ft from 20 ft. (Mr. Tingley is a legal intern in my ofc, ).hO worked on the newsrack Ord. II Mr. Tingley, on 7c. - it says: the location - shall may contain one or more lawfully maintained news racks but not more than can be placed & maintained in accoraance { section. Now. who makes that decision if that space has enuf for 5 news- with this , I racks - & you have 15 people including - how would you do that if you have a ne~ location? How would you decide who got the 5 racks? OK - for one thing a location is 30 ft. in length - 30 ft in length Mr. Lcberto & I decided it would be plenty enuf space to include every magazine - 15 magazines. The racks are only 20" in width. And all those locations are 30 ft? I'm just saying if you had a location with 15 ft & you could only get 7 in there - are there any locations like that around town? the And, who picks/seven? The locations would be chosen on a lottery basis - we draw a number for the available locations. In other:words what I'm saying - it could actually happen - if there's room for maybe 5 - one guy in town may never get a rack if he doc"n't draw the rif;ht number. R igh t? The fact is, I think, if you go thru the Ord. & you check the sites you'll find there's will be no problem of anybody being left out of the City of Arc. I think you'll find also, ~lere will be~enty of space available for all racks - what we're trying to do is clear up a hazard that exists - we1re trying to create a uniformity of appear3nce & make Arc. a nicer placeto live. I understand what you're saying - was there any time given for abatement - you know this is not a cheap item for somebody in town who has to pick up every news rack /1 G!LB-cont SAELID (;;118 SAELID TINGLEY LIBERTO GILB LIBERTO SAELID LAUBER SAELID MARGETT SAELID GILB LIBERTO GILB LIIlERTO GILB LIIlERTO GILB LIBElITO f ,\. f 1 ... 7 f. NEl-lSRACKS - Ord. 161 ~ 10-4-77 telex #2 ..317 .. pg 18 & go out & buy a new one. Excuse me - I wonder if we couldn't take this up in the study session & get your carry concerns Lnto staff so they can be considered rather than/it on this evening. Mr. T,iberto asked this gentleman to come up I did - I thot he wanted to respond to ... I wanted to respond to Mr. Velasco's fears. There isn't going to be any abatement until all the newspapers have an .opportunity to get together '& get their stylized racks on the mounts. There isn't going to be any m~ss enfo~ccment program - you have to realize there isn't any enforcement going on!right now. , I understand that. You must also realize we're increasing the space by 1/3 - 33-1/3%. The point towards abatement that I made last time was that somebody might have gone out & got a different type of a base mount for the same basic type of display case & we "ouldn' t want them to have to throw out $95 investment to buy another $100 device. But there are some in town I think they ought to throw out without any period of abatement at all. That's what we should come up with. Let's work that out when we get to the study session. Are we having a study session inviting some of those who are interested in this? I think they should be? Can we notify people in time. Do we have to notify all 15 people on this list? Do you want to notify all 15? I just asked if we have to. No, I ans'd. that quest. about 5 min. ago. No you diiln't. Oh, yes I. did. I said there was no legal requirement to notify the newspapers. I __ii" .{ J ;:"-",l.I You mean to te 1-1-- tLs'l't no t ify the LA Times - they aren't go ing to Come out here with an atty. & say this has to do ,with them & they're entitled to be notified. They're not legally. /-::}, SAELID LAUBER PARRY LAUB ER LIBE!l:TO GILB SAELID LAUBER { I ~~ 7f. Nm,SRACKS - Ord. 161: 10- 4-77 telex #2 ..393 .. pg 19 What's Council's pleasure - we don't have to notify anybody on this matter - we have the power to control the distribution of the newspapers in terms of how they're displayed. MY' that would be for info only & people in the street could give us their side of if - I'd like to invite about 3 of the popular newspapers - which 3 they are I don't care - I donlt have any preference. Saying 3 popular ones - I think you're discriminating & saying these are the popular newspapers ... You could do it from a lottery basis. If you're going to notify one - you'd better notify all of them. If you don't notify the Christian Science Monitor - you're going to have a religious people out there. Can we notify newspapers wnth major circulation in the area? By lotte~y, howeverJits no concern to me except I want some input from the profession itself..the business. I STUDY SESSION SET 1.. OCT. 13th... 4 p.m. SAELID LIBERTO LAUBER LIBERTO U\UBER LIBERTO lAUBER LIBERTO Can we s~y notification to the newspapers with major circulation in this area. That is a debateable quest. I would say notify all of them or don't notify any. Why? Because if you want to be fair. like Mr. Gilb indicated that we should- then we're going to have to give everybody notice - they've all got racks in the City - they're all going to be effected & they're all going to have to pay muncy. We want Input, tho - they'll prubnbly nIl have pretLy lII11ch lhe Hllllle [nCu, l would think. a sheet Council has/before it of each newspaper & number of racks caell has in the City & where those racks arc located. I think bv the physical size might be one of the problems - you know, the lit Times, not the circulat'i'bn,' the physical size of the paper should be ...' to I should point outlthe Council'- there has,been a tremendous amt. of litigation over newsracks - quite a bit -.& there's a case coming out maybe, on the average ,....f ,.....,,..,.., ,....~,......... ,....t-l..,....... ~,......'_l, ~... ,,_..~.___l._ ...... E t /' ~\~ 7 f. NE\oISRACKS - ,16 15 Ord. 10-4-77 telex #2 .. 893 pg 13 LIBERTO_cont middle of 7 racks or even remove a rack on the end - you're going to have a mount 'sticking out that could pose danger to a pedestrian & the City needs that so 30 days, to find another newspaper that wants to put their rack there -/that rack won't be taken out by that newspaper that wants to remove it. Again, it relates to a safety factor - that's the reason for the 30 das. I grant Mr. Velasco that we can remove , I in thel ~iddle , I a raCk on 5 das. written notice if we want to - if we remove a rack of a mount or at the end of a mount we may be creating a dangerous condition on our sidewalks - we're going to think twice before we take it off VELASCO of there;. I \oIho is I M~. ! He is evidently the Circulation Dir. of the Star News. Cqrporation The Arc. Trib. is owned by the Knight-Riddcr / & as such he is my immediate Wheeler, again? SAELID LIBERTO supv. - when I was informed of this I went to the City Clk - I was able to get a copy of what was read las t wk. & I took it to Pas. & I am told that Mr. Wheeler did spea~ with Mr. Liberto - they raised, I think, basically the same objections over the ,telephone - at least I was told this - it was only hearsay so I can't prove it as fact but I was told they took each item & discussed it with Mr. Liberto & requested or suggested that some of these changes be made, but apparently from what they' tell me it comes out the same way as it was proposed without any of the may have changes that he/recommended - he admits he did not send in written comments but the mere fact that this is the reading of the Ord. I was asked to come out here tonlte as the representative of the Arc. Trib. & to make our comments on this. I guess we're down tel #27 ,/ it says the Hils. Lic. OfCL will dctcrmlnc the number of pedestals co be placed II at eAch location. Our quest. then is - in the Ord. it states thelI'will be, I think, 30 linear feet of r"ck space -- our quest. is this: how does the Bus. Lie. DEer. determine who will be rcprcscntnd on the particular 10cationsthat thp_ CLty "ill have available or where "e are presently. It would seem to me that you're putting.quit~ a responsiblity on one' person to determine where the racks should be & who should be there.. ,Its our feeling there what /'1 GILB LIBERTO LAUBER LIBERTO PARRY GILB SAELID PARRY 'GILB LAUBER GILB , , . " -( 7f. NEWS RACKS - ORD 1615 10-4- 77 telex #2 .. 507 pg 20 You mean people got hurt or ... No - the newspapers have sued the Cities who have adopted the Ord. This is what Gilb is talking about. So I say we notify them all. MOVED to notify them all. Second, the NOTION carried unanimous ly. All listed on the sheet. INCLUDED in Notion - Study session Oct. 13th at 4 p.m. And I would like to invite pub. input of anyone who shows up. This K-Jack - are there others like it - or does he have it patented or ... maybe there aren't others. I ., Velasco says there are. Is he here? Gal SANFORD - Sales Rep. for K-Jac~.. ...... Indecipherable ..... /6 .! FOOTHILL MEDIAN f; /371 I , ' --t 1....,. 22:9331 ~nd mo~~ 9~ them are in f~~Rr Rf tn~ ~l~ey, and perhap~ in~t~~! ! traffic light at Wheeler and ftrst du~ to the traffic g~~~:a~~d because of the post office. Mrs. Lucinda Grant, 5434 N. El Monte Avenue, referred to a problem she has encountered in the parking lot of a restaurant at 13 E. Live Oak Avenue (Pie King). She asked Council to investigate to see if something could be done to alleviate the situation caused by the manner in which the parking stalls are laid out. Council received the staff report prepared in response to a requeat for an opening in the median which blocks the residences on a frontage road at 859, 861 and 863 W. Foothill Boulevard. The median is under construction at the present time. Two of the residents had appeared before Council on September 20 asking that the median not be con- structed at this particular location or an opening provided. The report dated October 4 indicated that there are numerous locations where residential, multiple family residential and commercial traffic circulation are equally or more drastically affected due to the medians on roadways and it is an inescapable part of a project of this nature that private driveways are blocked. This, of course, forces a change in driving habits and homeowners must make a right turn and proceed to the nearest median opening at which point they may safely make a U-turn to proceed in the opposite direction. Dr. Charles McMonigle, 861 W. Foothill Boulevard, reiterated his concerns and his request for a change in the median to provide ingress and egress to the homes of the private roadway which services 3 families with 11 licensed drivers and 12 automobiles. He said further in part that it has become a detrimental inconvenience and in response to an inquiry as to whether or not he would be willing to bear some of the cost of a change Dr. McMonigle said it wasn't his responsibility but he would be willing to negotiate but could not speak for the other families. Considerable discussion ensued and Councilman Gilb stated in part that he talked with some of the residents in the area recently and they are not asking for left turn lanes.. they are asking that the 35 feet be taken off the median which would leave 108 feet. He recited the pattern of driving in order to make a U-turn which is not very safe in his opinion... In response to Mr. Gilb's inquiry the Director of Public Works said it would take an estimated cost of $3500 to make the requested change in the median, and in the interest of safety Councilman Gilb felt that some consideration should be given these homeowners. He recalled that in the interest of safety for the residents in another area of the City that Council installed a safety measure at no expense to the homeowners. Councilman Margett submitted in part that he has empathy for the residents but could think of other locations where similar situations exist and felt those homeowners could also request an opening in the median. He noted that the contract has been let; the work is nearing completion and he could not see what could be done at this time. Councilman Parry said in part that in driving Foothill Boulevard he could see where there might be problems as it is a narrow street, however, construction is progressing and he did not feel the plight of Dr. McMonigle is unique and noted that most families have two or more cars. He noted the reduced speed limit on Foothill which he hopes will slow the traffic and if it is later proven that it should be reduced further that can be done; that in his opinion the fact that the median is there does not necessarily make for a dangerous situation, that when the median was voted in by Council it was for the safety factor. Council Member Lauber stated in part that living off Foothill Boulevard 10-4-77 - 3 - OLD RANCH RD. (traffic) , / NOVEMBER 15 V DANCE PERMIT NOVEMBER 15 TRACT NO. 33337 APPROVED POLICE-ON- CAMPUS PROGRAM / ORDINANCE NO. 1609 ADOPTED I -1 22: 9332 she is familiar ~ith it and waS rather receptive to the plight of the subject three residents until she received the staff report and then she was reminded of the many public hearings'held on this and all other medians; that even in the commercial areas the businessmen felt a median would be detrimental but once it was in and they became accustomed to the change in driving habits it was felt that it upgraded the area. She did not see where Council could open up the median for 3 residents when there are many others in a similar situation. She felt the project should proceed and perhaps after a period of time if the residents find it an impossible situation something could be worked out. However, she submitted that she might be receptive to a compromise. Ruth Holdens, 1701 S. Mayflower, referred to the median on Live Oak Avenue which she felt was dangerous, however, it is different than Foothill because there are side streets and alleys which drivers may use. Ted Lubeshkoff, 501 W. Foothill, said there should be openinga in the median for private roads, Councilman Gilb felt something should be done to provide the requested ingress and egress for safety reasons and MOVED to grant the request for an opening in the median. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Mayor Saelid stated in psrt that the median in question is only 8 feet wide and Foothill Boulevard itself is not as wide as other streets where medians have been constructed. However, many public hearings have been held on this matter, residents were aware of the pending construction and even though Dr. McMonigle did not attend these meetings it is unfortunate to have this come up after the work is almost completed. Even if Dr. McMonigle were willing to pay for the opening he wondered what would happen if the other 37 residents wanted to pay for openings. Rather than open up 37 additional openings for ingress and egress to the various driveways he suggested that Council address itself to controlling and enforcing the speed limit on Foothill so the residents could make reasonable U-turns. He asked that the Police Department follow through on this. Although he was not in favor of the median in the first place he noted that the work is proceeding and if no action is taken at this time he would recommend against the request. Public Hearing scheduled for November 15 on the request for land- scaped traffic control islands on Old Ranch Road. CONSENT ITEMS: ( Public Hearing scheduled for November 15 on the request for a dance permit for the Arcadia Dome, 19-21 Morlan Place. (This may be withdrawn prior to the date scheduled.) The final map of Tract No. 33337, 4 unit condominium at 594 S. Third Avenue was APPROVED. I On MOTION by Councilman Gilb, seconded by co~cilman Parry and carried on roll call vote as follows the agree~ent with the Arcadia Unified Schoel District for the Police-en-campus program for the fiscal year 1977-78 was APPROVED. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Council Members Gilb, Lauber, Margett, Parry, Saelid None None The City Attorney presented for the second time, explained the content and read the title of Ordinance No. 1609 entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO RECLASSIFY SANTA ANITA SCHOOL AND EPISCOPAL CHURCH AT 1900 SOUTH SANTA ANITA AVENUE AND 1881 SOUTH FIRST AVENUE RESPECTIVELY FROM R-2 TO R-l 7,500." It was MOVED by Council Member Parry, seconded by Council Member 10-4-77 - 4 - ORDINANCE NO. 1610 ADOPTEV I ORDINANCE NO. l6ll ADOPTED I ORDINANCE NO. 1612 ADOPTED 11/' I ORDINANCE NO. 1614 INTRODUCED ORDINANCE NO. 1615 DISCUSSION ONLY 22:9333 Margett and carried on roll reading of the full text be call vote as follows that the further waived and that the same be ADOPTED. , AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Council Members Gilb, Lauber, Margett, Parry, Sae1id None None The City Attorney presented for the second time, explained the content and read the title of Ordinance No. 1610 entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO RECLASSIFY LONGLEY WAY SCHOOL AT 2601 SOUTH LONGLEY WAY FROM R-2 TO R-l 12,500." It was MOVED by Council Member Margett, seconded by Council Member Lauber and carried on roll call vote as follows that the further reading of the full text be waived and that the same be ADOPTED. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Council Members Gilb, Lauber, Margett, Parry, Sae1id None None The City Attorney presented for the second time, explained the content and read the title of Ordinance No. 1611, entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO RECLASSIFY PORTIONS OF 646-650 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE FROM C-O TO R-3." It was MOVED by Council Member Lauber, seconded by Council Member Parry and carried on roll call vote as follows that the further reading of the full text be waived and that the same be ADOPTED. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Council Members Gilb, Lauber, Margett, Parry, Saelid None None The City Attorney presented for the second time, explained the content and read the title of Ordinance No. 1612, entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA AMENDING THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING TO ARTICLE I, CHAPTER 5, SECTIONS 1500 and 1501 RELATING TO INELIGIBILITY FOR LICENSES, PERMITS AND EMPLOYMENT FOR CRIMINAL CONDUCT AND AUTHORIZING THE USE OF CRIMINAL HISTORY INFORMATION RELATED HERETO." It was MOVED by Council Member Margett, seconded by Council Member Parry and carried on roll call vote as follows that the further reading of the full text be waived and that the same be ADOPTED. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Council Members Gilb, Lauber, Margett, Parry, Saelid None None The City Attorney presented for the first time, explained the content and read the title of Ordinance No. 1614, entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO RECLASSIFY DEVELOPED MOUN1l\.INOUS AREAS IN ARCADIA FROM R-l AND R-l 10,000 & D TO R-M RESIDENTIAl MOUNTAINOUS SINGLE FAMILY ZONE AND R-M RESIDENTIAL MOUNTAINOUS SINGLE FAMILY ZONE & D." It was MOVED by Council Member Parry, seconded by Council Member Lauber and carried on roll call vote as follows that the reading of the full text be waived and that the same be INTRODUCED. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Council Members Gilb, Lauber, Margett, Parry, Saelid None None The City Attorney presented a proposed ordinance which would if adopted amend the Arcadia Municipal Code relating to unattended 10-4-77 - 5 - RESOLUTION NO. '4665 ADOPTED GO., ,- \ 'J \ J \ RESOLUTION NO. 4666 ADOPTED / RESOLUTION NO. 4667 ADOPTED I CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE 22: 9334 newsracks throughout the city. Considerable discussion held on this matter and a TRANSCRIPT HAS BEEN PREPARED AND IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. During this consideration Bill Velasco, Circulation Manager for the Arcadia Tribune, submitted concerns about the contents of the proposed ordinance and Cal Sanford, sales representative for K-Jack Company (newsracks) addressed himself to the ordinance. It was the consensus of Council that this matter warrants a study session and it was MOVED by Council Member Parry, seconded by Council Member Margett and carried unanimously that a study session be held at 4 p.m. October 13 and all newspapers listed on the memorandum from the City Attorney be so advised. The City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the title of Resolution No. 4665, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL r; OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA RATIFYING AND REAFFIRMING ACTION TAKEN BY THE CITY COUNCIL UNDER RESOLUTION NO. 4656, LETTING A CONTRACT FOR THE WIDENING OF BALDWIN AVENUE NEAR HUNTINGTON DRIVE WITHOUT ADVERTISING FOR BIDS, AND AWARDING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT FOR SUCH WIDENING." I It was MOVED by Council Member Gilb, seconded by Council Member Parry and carried on roll call vote as follows that the reading of the full text be waived and that the same be ADOPTED. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Council Members Gilb, Lauber, Parry, Saelid None Council Member Margett, due to his business affiliation None The City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the title of Resolution No. 4666, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA CHANGING THE NAME OF LA SALLE STREET IN THE CHICAGO PARK AREA TO GOLDRING ROAD AND MYRTLE STREET IN THE CHICAGO PARK AREA TO KARDASHIAN AVENUE." It was MOVED by Council Member Margett, seconded by Council Member Parry and carried on roll call vote as follows that the reading of the full text be waived and that the same be ADOPTED. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Council Members Lauber, Margett, Parry, Saelid Council Member Gilb None The City Attorney presented, explained the contant and read the title of Resolution No. 4667, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND DENYING A REQUEST FOR TWO INDUSTRIAL UNITS ON A SUBSTANDARD PARCEL AND DENYING MODIFICATION APPLICATION M 77-118 FOR SUBSTANDARD LOADING SPACE AND SUBSTANDARD STREET SIDE AREA LOADING DOOR COVERAGE ON THE FIFTH AND SIXTH LOIS EAST OF PECK ROAD ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF LA SALLE STREET." 1 It was MOVED by Council Member Margett, seconded by Council Member Parry and carried on roll call vote as follows that the reading of the full text be waived and that the same be ADOPTED. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Council Members Gilb, Lauber, Margett, Parry, Saelid None None The City Attorney submitted a draft of a Conflict of Interest Code for specified commissions and boards along wiJh departments which 10-4-77 - 6 - I MARGETT ,/ GILB / GILB v/ LAUBER / 1 LAUBER,/'/ APPOINTMENTS t/ COUNCIL CHAMBER j-:':'f:';'."lt..",'{' ,,-1.'" ,.~> , " .. ~, 22: 9335 are required to file economic disclosure statements. This is pursuant to ~he Political Reform Act of 1974. He explained the contents of the report dated September 23 and advised that the codes should be adopted by February 7, 1978. He suggested public hearings be held for all departments on the same date. The hearings should be held no later than January 31, 1978. lt was MOVED by Council Member Gilb, seconded by Council Member Parry and carried on roll call vote as follows that the specified boards, commissions, departments and divisions thereof shall approve a Conflict of lnterest Code after noticed public hearings no later than January 31, 1978; that the submitted Model Conflict of Interest Code be used; that the submitted Procedure and Guidelines for specifying "designated" employees of each department or division, be approved. . AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Council Members Gilb, Lauber, Margett, Parry, Saelid None None Advised that the Sr. Babe Ruth Baseball Team from the San Gabriel Valley area, six of whom are from Arcadia, were in the playoffs in Owensborough, Kentucky in August and came back with the championship. Council concurred in his suggestion that an appropriate commendation be presented to the team. Was advised in detail on the reasons for which the so-called Newman Avenue matter (General Plan designation for the zoning of the area bounded on the north and east by the Foothill Freeway, on the south by La Porte and on the west by Santa Anita Avenue) had been scheduled for another public hearing. (See minutes of September 20.) The procedure seems cumbersome and at the suggestion of Council Member Lauber the City Attorney will prepare the appropriate resolution deleting the requirement that such matters must go back to the Commission for Council consideration. Recited some of the highlights during his recent sojourn to Arcadia's Sister City, Newcastle, Australia. Councilman and Mrs. Gilb were guests of the Mattara Festival and they brought back warm greetings. At the suggestion of Council Member Lauber an appropriate commendation will be presented to the Foothill Committee which has worked so diligently for so many years to make the journeys to the Hollywood Bowl Symphonies such enjoyable occasions. Advised that the entire Youth Commission will attend the next regular City Council meeting (October 18). On MOTION by Council Member Lauber, seconded by Council Member Gilb and carried on roll call vote as follows the following appointments were made to the Recreation Commission. Terms to expire June 30, 1981. Martha Bermingham Marilyn Stoke Christopher Mcquire 455 Sharon Rd. 1040 Hampton Rd. 1729 Wilson Av. The Acting City Manager advised on progress being made in landscaping, air conditioning, etc., for the new Council Chamber. 10-4-77 - 7 - EXECUTI VE SESSION RECONVENE and ADJOURNED TO DATE CERTAIN At 10:30 p.m. Council adjourned to an executive session. 22:9336 Council reconvened at 12:30 a.m. October 5, 1977 to Thursday October 13, 1977 at 4 p.m. in the Council Chamber to hold a study session on newsrack regulations. ATTEST: Mayor ~~ City Clerk - 8 - 10-4-77 I 1