Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1966 01 05 CC MIN1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«2,q 2. REGULAR MEETING OF THE BALDWIN PARK CITY COUNCIL CITY HALL COUNCIL CHHMOER) 1440.) Last Pac i f c Avenue in accordance with Section 2703 of the Municipal Code the City Council met in open meeting at 7:00 p.m. in the Conference Room for an informal session with the staff to be informed on regular agenda items. The City Council of the City of Baldwin Park met in regular session at the above place at 7:30 p.m. Councilman Adair led the salute to the flag. Roll Call: Present: COUNCILMEN ADAIR, GREGORY, MCCARON, MOREHEAD AND MAYOR CR ITES Absent: NONE Also Present: CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER NORDBY, CITY ATTORNEY FLANDRICK, BUILDING SUPERINTENDENT KALB- FLEISCH, PLANNING DIRECTOR CHIVETTA, FINANCE DIRECTOR DUNCAN, CHIEF OF POLICE ADAMS, CITY TREASURER PUGH AND CITY CLERK BAL.KUS 00- City Clerk Balkus presented a letter from Griegorian Disposal Service, 2024 North Durfee, South El Monte, dated December 10, 1965, stating their application for a rubbish license had been denied and asked that the application be reconsidered and approved. Councilman Morehead stated it was his understanding that the City had issued all of the commercial licenses that the Code allowed; that this application was received after the present licenses had been renewed. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE LETTER BE RECEIVED AND FILED. COUNCILMAN MCCARON SECONDED. There were no objec- tions, the motion carried and was so ordered by Mayor Crites. 00- City Clerk Backus read in full a letter from Charles A. Mueller, 917 South Glendora Avenue, West Covina, dated January 2, 1966, requesting a sixty 460) day extension on N-2; and a letter from Hazel Sutton) Clark, 4170 North Cogswell Road, El Monte, dated January 4, 1966, requesting an extension until January 9, 1966, on N-3. Chief Administrative Officer Nordby recommended that the City proceed as the resolution called for. City Attorney Flandrick stated if the Council should consider the granting of the request it might be on the basis of whatever period of time the Council set providing that the individuals deposit with the Chief Administrative Officer a bond to insure that demolition would be com- pleted within thirty 30) days. Discussion followed wherein Chief Administrative Officer Nordby stated there were three weeks in which the work could be accomplished before the contractor actually would do the work; that they had adequate time yet to abate the nuisance. JANUARY 5, 1966 7:30 P.M. FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL LETTER FROM GRIEGORIAN DISPOSAL SERVICE, 2024 N. Durfee, So. El Monte REQUESTING COMMER- CIAL RUBBISH LICENSE RECEIVED AND FILED REQUEST FOR EXTEN- SION OF TIME N-2 REQUEST FOR EXTEN- SION OF TIME N-3 Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE LETTERS BE RECEIVED AND TABLED. COUNCILMAN MCCARON SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, MCCARON, ADAIR, GREGORY AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- January 5, 1966 Page 2 RECEIVED AND TABLED Councilwoman Gregory reported on the December 9th meeting of ESGVP COMMITTEE the East San Gabriel Valley Planning Committee meeting stating MEETING DEC. 9, 1966 that there were fifteen street name changes considered; that number one on the list was that Maine Avenue and STREET NAME CHANGES Pacific Avenue be renamed to Cameron Avenue; that Puente CONSIDERED Street and Root Street to be renamed Puente Street. She MAINE AVE., PACIFIC stated it was requested that the Council discuss this AVE. TO CAMERON matter so that she could take the Council's recommenda- AVE. Lion to the Planning Committee. PUENTE ST. AND ROOT ST. TO PUENTE ST. Planning Director Chivetta placed a map on the wall which MAP PLACED ON WALL indicated the proposed changes. INDICATING PROPOSED CHANGES Mayor Crites agreed with the proposed change on Puente Street and Root Street to Puente Street, however he stated there was already a Maine Street that was continuous from the south end of town on through the center of town and up to the north and this would be a peculiar version of re- naming~t-o lose the City of Baldwin Park's identity by changing the name of two or three streets and which would go under an underpass and lose their identity in another city as another Main Street; that part of this street had been renamed before. Planning Director Chivetta stated it was the consensus of opinions of the Planning Directors at the subcommittee meeting to recommend to the parent committee, The East San Gabriel Valley Planning Committee, that certain street names be recommended for change and that the parent committee would in turn vote on these and then recommend to the County the possibility of a change in the names; that some of the street names under consideration were Ramona, Badillo, San Bernardino Road, Amar, Torch, Puente, Hacienda and so forth; that the streets which affected Baldwin Park were Pacific to Cameron and Maine to Cameron and Puente-Root to Puente; that the consensus of opinion was that Root itself should be changed to Puente and that Pacific Avenue should be changed to Cameron because Cameron came in from a southerly direction down through the City of Industry and should go through to Arrow Highway as Cameron to complete the total picture as one continuous street name; that it would be his recommendation that Maine stay as was and Pacific stay as was and perhaps Cameron changing to Pacific in the southerly direction; that the most logical street name to be changed would be Root Street and that street only to Puente; that this matter was coming before the Planning Commission on January 6, 1966, for their recommendation to go back to the parent committee. Councilman McCaron stated the recommendation for the street name change from Root to Puente had been made quite a few years ago; that the recommendation just made would appear to be what was most feasible at the present time, changing Root only and having the others remain as they were. Councilman Morehead stated, in his opinion, that Root to Puente was the only change that should be considered at the present time. Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«2684 I Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council Councilman McCaron stated it would seem that further study should be made on Puente itself because the street went north and south and east and west; that this should be studied by the regional committee. Planning Director Chivetta stated the Planning Commission had the entire City under study at the present time for possible changing of street names and house numbering; that it was a matter of a few months before a recommenda- tion could be made to the Council; that possibly there would be a Puente Street and a Puente Avenue. Councilman Adair stated he was in accordance with Council- man Morehead. COUNCILMAN MCCARON MOVED THAT THE CONSIDERATION OF CHANGE OF NAME OF ROOT STREET TO PUENTE STREET BE ACCEPTED AT THE PRESENT TIME. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD SECONDED. There were no objections, the motion carried and was so ordered by Mayor Crites. 00- City Clerk Balkus administered the oath to those in the audience desiring to be heard during the meeting. 00- City Clerk Backus announced that the hour of 8:00 p.m. having arrived that it was the time and place fixed for a public hearing on CP-62, an appeal from the decision of denial of the Board of Zoning Adjustments, an applica- tion submitted by Jeanette N. Heidtke purchaser of the property) for a Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Section 9472, subsection 16, to allow the construction and use of a Guest Home for the Aged upon the property located at 3156 Paddy Lane, in the R-I single family residential) Zone. City Clerk Balkus stated that proper publication, postings and mailings had been accomplished. Planning Director Chivetta presented a resume of the case and stated the Board of Zoning Adjustments had adopted Resolution No. BZA 65-69 on November 10, 1965, denying the request; that it was recommended that the Council concur with the Board's decision. He pointed out the map on the wall showing the existing zoning of the area. TESTIMONY IN BEHALF OF THE REQUEST WAS CALLED FOR BY MAYOR CRITES. January 5, 1966 Page 3 MOTION MADE AND CARRIED THAT CON- SIDERATION OF CHANGE OF NAME OF ROOT ST. TO PUENTE ST. BE ACCEPTED AT PRESENT TIME OATH ADMINISTERED PUBLIC HEARING 8:00 P.M. CP-62, APPEAL FROM DENIAL OF BZA, REQUEST TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF GUEST HOME FOR AGED AT 3156 PADDY LANE IN R-I ZONE, JEANETTE N. HEIDTKE PUBLICATION, POSTINGS MAILINGS RESUME TESTIMONY IN BEHALF Mr. Milton Hadley, Attorney, 14304 East Ramona Boulevard, MILTON HADLEY, ATTY., Baldwin Park, stated he was representing Mrs. Heidtke; 14304 E. Ramona that the purpose of the appeal before the Council for Blvd., B.Pk. consideration was to make two statements in correction; that the applicant sought only to have four people as a REPRESENTING MRS. maximum in the home; that she was licensed for four people HEIDTKE only; that the notice stated this was for the construction of a guest home; that there would be no structural changes in the residence at all; that since the matter had been heard by the Board of Zoning Adjustments Mrs. Heidtke had circulated a petition in the area. He read the petition from twenty-four 24) residents stating they did not object to a guest home for four 4) ambulatory residents. He filed PETITION HANDED the petition with City Clerk Balkus. He requested that the TO CITY CLERK permit be granted and that it be nontransferrable; that Mrs. REQUESTING THAT Heidtke had had prior experience; that she was a Navy Hospital PERMIT BE GRANTED- Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«2695 Regular Meeting of, the Baldwin Park City Council-, January 5, 1966 Page 4 Corpsman; that she had experience in caring for her mother; that she was the sole support of her sixteen 16) year old son and herself; that she had been with°`the Los Angeles Police Department for a number of years and because of a minor health problem she was unable to continue in that capacity and had been released by the Department; that this would provide income and a business where she could stay home and watch her child and still provide a very valuable service to the population of L'o's Angeles County and particularly aged residents; that this was highly favored by the Bureau of Aged Persons of Los Angeles County; that they sought to have small establishments rather than larger establishments; that they felt that the aged residents were more satisfied in local small homes; that this home would be adequate for the purpose for which it was licensed; that it had been inspected by the Bureau and the Fire Department and the license had been issued; that Mrs. Heidtke had been a resident in Baldwin Park for ten 10) years; that this use would not be detrimental to any parties in the area; that this was a dead end street and the home was located toward the end of the street; that there would be no additional burden upon the facilities of the City such as Police Department or Fire Department by reason of granting a nontransferrable conditional use permit; that this use would be a real asset to the community; that Mrs. Heidtke was in the audience and would be happy to answer any questions. In answer to a question by Councilman McCaron, City Attorney Flandrick stated it would be permitted as a home occupation except for the requirement of a conditional use permit. Councilwoman Gregory asked if the license by the County took into consideration the housing of four adults and how this was to be accomplished. Mr. Hadley stated the immediate plans were to have no more than two gentlemen in the home presently; that at some later time there would be four gentlemen, two to a bedroom the third bedroom being for Mrs. Heidtke. He stated the grounds were completely fenced; that there was a patio. In answer to a question by Councilman McCaron, City Attorney Flandrick stated normally any type of permit would run with the land, however, the applicant had requested the permit be issued to her personally and it could be composed on that basis indicating that it was a request of the applicant. In answer to a question by Councilman McCaron, Planning Director Chivetta read Section 9551, subparagraph 6, regarding roomers and boarders. He further stated that two parking spaces would have to be provided in addition to the two already provided, a total of four; that further the Hospital Planning Association in their model ordinance recommend against licensing of resthomes or boarding homes for the aged in the R-l, R-2 and R-3 zones within any community. In answer to a question by Councilman McCaron, Planning Director Chivetta stated this was basically the same application that was presented to the Board of Zoning Adjustments; that an error had been made as to the number of persons to reside on the premises; that the Department of Social Welfare would require that no more than two persons reside in one bedroom. In answer to a question by Councilwoman Gregory, Planning Director Chivetta stated the application was not'for the construction, it was to permit a guest home in en existing residence. Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«656 Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council Discussion followed regarding parking; wherein Planning Director Chivetta stated possibly ample parking could be provided by putting a cover over the present driveway making a carport. Mr. Hadley stated this was a semicircular driveway; that the applicant could comply with the parking requirements without any structural changes by the alignment of cars on the driveway. in answer to a question by Councilman McCaron, Mr. Hadley stated the applicant had no definite time limit for the use in mind, As there was no one else in the audience desiring to speak in behalf of or in opposition to CP-62, Mayor Crites declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Morehead stated some four or five years ago this property was rezoned from A-I to R-I that the lots were fifty 50) by one hundred 100); that the houses in the tract were approximately 1400 square feet; that they were only designed for single family residences. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CONCUR WITH THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS AND DENY CP-62. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, GREGORY, ADAIR, MCCARON AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- City Clerk Balkus announced that it was the time and place fixed for a public hearing on N-4, to determine whether certain premises, and buildings and structures constitute a public nuisance at 3154 Athol Street. City Clerk Balkus stated that proper postings and mailings had been accomplished. City Attorney Flandrick passed to the Council pictures of the property at 3154 Athol Street taken by Special Enforcement Officer Palmer and stated that Mr. Palmer had compiled a series of documents relating to this case indicating the nature of the notices by mail and the ownership of the property; that there was a comment from the Health Department as well as the Fire Department indicating the dangerous nature of the structure; that Building Superintendent Kalbfleisch had examined the structure and his comment was that it was structurally unsafe; that in addition to the structure there was also a shed and miscellaneous debris as shown by the pictures; that the staff's recommendation to the Council was that the Council declare this entire property to be a public nuisance within the meaning of the Municipal Code. As there was no one in the audience desiring to speak in behalf of or in opposition to N-4, Mayor Crites declared the public hearing closed. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECT THE PRESENTATION LATER ON THE AGENDA OF A RESOLUTION DECLARING THIS PROPERTY TO BE A PUBLIC NUISANCE. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, ADAIR, GREGORY, MCCARON AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE oa January 5, 1966 Page 5 PUBLIC HEARING DECLARED CLOSED CP-62 MOTION MADE AND CARRIED THAT COUNCIL CONCUR WITH BZA AND DENY CP-62 PUBLIC HEARING N-4 3154 Athol St. POSTINGS, MAILINGS PUBLIC HEARING DECLARED CLOSED N-4 MOTION MADE AND CARRIED THAT COUN- CIL DIRECT PRE- SENTATION LATER ON AGENDA OF RES. DECLARING THIS PROPERTY TO BE PUBLIC NUISANCE BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«1- 116 9 Regular Meeting of the Baldwln.P`ark City Council City Clerk Balkus announced that it was the time and place fixed for a public hearing oh`N-5, to determine whether certain premises, and buildings and structures constitute a public nuisance at 4642 Bresee Avenue. City Clerk Balkus stated that proper postings and mail- ings had been accomplished. City Attorney Flandrick passed to the Council pictures of the property at 4642 Bresee taken by Special Enforce- ment Officer Palmer and stated that Mr. Palmer had compiled a series of documents relating to this case indicating the nature of the notices by mail and the ownership of the property; that there was a comment from the Health Department as well as the Fire Department indicating the dangerous nature of the structure; that City Engineer French and Building Superintendent Kalbfleisch had also submitted reports to the Council Indicating that the building in its present condition was structurally unsafe as well as an obvious fire hazard to the surrounding area and the building itself; that the property was examined this afternoon and was in the same condition as shown by the pictures; that the posted notices were still on the property; that the staff's recommendation was that the Council declare this entire property to be a public nuisance within the meaning of the Municipal Code. Discussion followed that there was a shed to the rear of the main structure which should be demolished. As there was no one in the audience desiring to speak in behalf of or in opposition to N-5, Mayor Crites de- clared the public hearing closed. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECT THE PRESENTATION LATER ON THE AGENDA OF A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR THE ABATEMENT OF THIS NUISANCE. COUNCIL- WOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, GREGORY, ADAIR, MCCARON AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- City Clerk Balkus announced that it was the time and place fixed for a public hearing on N-6, to determine whether certain premises, buildings and structures constitute a public nuisance at 3738 Merced Avenue. City Clerk Balkus stated that the proper postings and mailings had been accomplished. City Attorney Flandr`ick ptated that the nuisance at 3738 Merced Avenue had been abated. Chief Administrative Officer Nordby presented photographic evidence that the property had been cleared. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DISMISS THE PROCEEDINGS AS TO THIS PROPERTY. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. Discussion followed regarding the structure to the rear wherein Special Enforcement Officer Palmer stated the rear parcel was a legal lot split on which there was a new home. January 5, 1966 Page 6 PUBLIC HEARING N-5 4642 BRESEE AVE. POSTINGS, MAILINGS' PUBLIC HEARING DECLARED CLOSED N-5 MOTION MADE AND CARRIED THAT COUNCIL DIRECT PRESENTATION LATER ON AGENDA OF RES. CALLING FOR ABATEMENT OF THIS NUISANCE PUBLIC HEARING N-6 3738 MERCED AVE. POSTINGS, MAILINGS MOTION MADE AND CARRIED THAT COUNCIL DISMISS PROCEEDINGS AS TO THIS PROPERTY Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council The motion carried by the following vote: MOTION CARRIED Councilwoman Gregory reported on the December 2, 1965, League of California.Cities Meeting stating that the staff might be interested in a number of State wide meetings which the League would be conducting; that most of the meetings would be two day training institutes as follows: 00- i February 23-25 City Managers Conference in Coronado Discussion on various types of fin- ancing such as money management, leases, assessment districts and subjects of current interest May 23-25 AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, GREGORY, ADAIR, MCCARON AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Mayors and Councilmen Institute in Monterey For newly elected Mayors and Coun- cilmen to discuss their legal duties and responsib'ilitie's as well as duties of their administra- tive officers 269 January 5, 1966. Page 7 REPORT BY COUNCIL- WOMAN GREGORY ON LEAGUE OF CALIF. CITIES MTG. ON DEC. 2, 1965 FEBRUARY 23-25 CITY MANAGERS CONFERENCE IN CORONADO MAY 23-25 MAYORS AND COUNCIL- MEN INSTITUTE IN MONTEREY March 30-April I City Attorneys Conference in Palm Springs MARCH 30-APRIL I Devoted to new court decisions CITY ATTORNEY'S CONFERENCE IN PALM SPRINGS April 27-29 City Clerks Meeting in Long Beach APRIL 27-29 Discussions on record management, CLERKS MEETING IN election law procedures, public LONG BEACH relations, effective use of personnel and data processing She further stated that there would be a legislative LEGISLATIVE CON- conference in Washington Q.C. sponsored by the National FERENCE IN WASH. League in March; that legislative policies would be D.C. SPONSORED discussed. BY NATIONAL LEAGUE IN MARCH In answer to a question by Councilwoman Gregory, Chief Administrative Officer Nordby stated that the Dorn Initiative had been withdrawn; that the League was more interested in the broad nature of the preemption problem. 00- Regarding Resolution No. 66-3, City Attorney Flandrick stated that the City Engineer's recommendation was that the Southern California Edison Company be the designated contractor to install the facilities as they need to be installed and to supply energy for the system. Resolution No. 66-3 was read by title as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 66-3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK DETERMINING THAT THERE IS ONLY ONE CONTRACTOR CAPABLE OF SERVING THE STREET LIGHT- ING DISTRICT IN ACCORDANCE WITH DIAGRAM AND PLAN, AND ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENT TO BE CARRIED OUT BY SUCH CONTRACTOR" RES. NO. 66-3 DETERMINING THAT THERE IS ONLY ONE CONTRACTOR CAPABLE OF SERVING STREET LIGHTING SYSTEM WITHIN B.PK. STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT IN ACCORDANCE WITH DIAGRAM AND PLAN, AND ORDERING IMPROVE. MENT TO BE CARRIED OUT BY SUCH CON- TRACTOR Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park-'Cit'y Council City Attorney:Ftandrick stated if this resolution was adopted the Council would be presented with a contract from the Edison Company indicating the terms, costs and so forth; that all of these were rates set by the Public Utility Commission. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-3 BE APPROVED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. Councilwoman Gregory asked if the contract would be on a long or short term basis. City Attorney Flandrick stated he had not seen the contract; that it seemed to him it was on a yearly basis; that the contract would be submitted to the Council before it was signed on behalf of the City. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, GREGORY, ADAIR, MCCARON AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- City Attorney Flandrick stated that the City Engineer had now progressed to the point with the Maine Avenue Project that the City was now ready for the acquisition of right- of-way; that Council approval had been received for the obtaining of Title Reports and appraisals of the property to be acquired. Resolution No. 66-5 was read by title as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 66-5 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK, FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST, CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE ACQUISITION OF THE FEE INTEREST IN AND TO CERTAiN REAL PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC STREET PURPOSES AND ALL USES APPURTE- NANT THERETO MAINE AVENUE)" COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-5 BE APPROVED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, ADAIR, GREGORY, MCCARON AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- City Clerk Balkus stated it was recommended that the City purchase some tax delinquent lands for street purposes at the cost of $1.00 for each parcel plus advertising costs being Parcels 844, 845 and 904. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY MOVED THAT THE CITY OF BALDWIN-PARK PURCHASE THE TAX DELINQUENT PROPERTIES, PARCELS 844, 845 AND 904, AND SO INSTRUCT THE CITY CLERK AND THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY PAPERS TO ACCOMPLISH THIS. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD SECONDED. The motion carried Continued) January 5, 1966 Page 8 RES. NO. 66-3 ADOPTED CONTRACT TO BE SUB- MITTED TO COUNCIL BEFORE SIGNED ON BEHALF OF CITY MAINE AVE. PROJECT RES. NO. 66-5 FINDING AND DETER- MINING THAT PUBLIC INTEREST, CONVEN- IENCE AND NECESSITY REQ. ACQ. OF FEE INTEREST IN AND TO CERTAIN REAL PROP- ERTY FOR PUBLIC ST. PURPOSES AND ALL USES APPURTENANT THERETO MAINE AVE RES. NO. 66-5 ADOPTED REC. PURCHASE OF TAX DELINQUENT LANDS FOR STREET PURPOSES PARCELS 844, 845 AND 904 MOT I ON MADE AND CARRIED THAT CITY PURCHASE TAX DELIN- QUENT PROPERTIES PARCELS 844, 845 Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^ Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN GREGORY, MOREHEAD, ADAIR, AND CITY ATTY. TO MCCARON AND MAYOR CRITES PREPARE NEC. PAPERS NOES: NONE TO ACCOMPLISH THIS ABSENT: NONE 00- City Clerk Balkus presented a claim against the City submitted by Alfred C. Van Haink. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CLAIM OF MR. ALFRED C. VAN HAINK BE DENIED AND REFERRED TO THE INSURANCE CARRIER AND ARTUKOV I CH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. COGJidC l L!^1Or',AN C'{EGORY SECONDED. There were no objections, the motion carried and was so ordered by Mayor Crites. January 5, 1966 Page 9 AND 904, AND SO INSTRUCT CITY CLERK CLAIM AGAINST CITY ALFRED C. VAN HAINK DENIED AND REFERRED TO INS. CARRIER AND ARTUKOVICH CONSTRUC- TION CO. 00- City Clerk Balkus presented a claim against the City CLAIM AGAINST CITY submitted by Mrs. A. M. Cranston. MRS. A. M. CRANSTON COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CLAIM OF MRS. A. M. DENIED AND REFERRED CRANSTON BE DENIED AND REFERRED TO THE INSURANCE CARRIER TO INS. CARRIER AND AND THE CONTRACTOR. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. There CONTRACTOR were no objections, the motion carried and was so ordered by Mayor Crites. 00- City Clerk Balkus stated that a generel membership meeting LEAGUE OF CALIF. of the League of California Cities would be hold in Arcadia CITIES MTG. IN on Thursday, January 20, 1966, and that confirmation of those ARCADIA THURSDAY attending had been requested. JAN. 20, 1966 Councilwoman Gregory and Chief Administrative Officer Nordby indicated they would be attending. 00- City Clerk Balkus read Resolution No. 66-2 by title as RES. NO. 66-2 follows: SETTING A TIME AND RESOLUTION NO. 66-2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A HEARING TO DETER- MINE WHETHER CERTAIN BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES CONSTITUTE PUBLIC NUISANCES" Chief Administrative Officer Nor dby stated this would set a public hearing for six properties for February 2, 1966, at 8:00 p.m.; that it was his recommendation that the resolution be adopted and the hearing be held to deter- mine whether or not the locations constitute public nuisances; that photographic evidence would be presented at the public hearing. PLACE FOR A HEARING TO DETERMINE WHETHER CERTAIN BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES CON- STITUTE PUBLIC NUISANCES P.H. FEB. 2, 1966 N-7 13135 FAIRGROVE ST. N-8 4236 CENTER ST. N-9 13629 L.A. ST. N-10 4641 MERCED AVE. N-II 4642 N. MAINE AVE. N-12 1327 VIRGINIA AVE. Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^ Í«22O1 Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council COUNCILMAN MCCARON MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-2 BE APPROVED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MCCARON, MOREHEAD, ADAIR, GREGORY AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- Chief Administrative Officer Nordby recommended that the position of Utility Man be reclassified to Maintenance Man effective January 15, 1966. He stated at the time the budget was prepared for this fiscal year the pay for this position was set considerably higher than the individual who now held it was drawing; that there would still be a surplus in this particular account at the end of the year; that the intention was to place the individual in the first step of the position and six months later to advance as he normally would to the second step. City Attorney Flandrick stated if the Council approved the recommendation a resolution would be submitted at the next Council Meeting making this effective as of January 15, 1966. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY MOVED THAT THE POSITION OF UTILITY MAN BE RECLASSIFIED TO MAINTENANCE MAN EFFECTIVE JANUARY 15, 1966. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN GREGORY, ADAIR, MCCARON, MOREHEAD AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- Chief Administrative Officer Nordby presented Ordinance No. 438 relating to house moving and relocation permits stating that the Planning Commission made certain recommendations; that the City Attorney drafted the ordinance; that following the procedure used in Ordinance No. 422 this would grant the responsibility to the Chief Administrative Officer; that in some instances the ordinance could be changed for example in the filing of the application; that the relocations involved more than one department; that to effectively coordinate these departments and direct them to proceed to the inspection of property and final recommendations there must be some- one who had jurisdiction or authority over each person involved; that also involved were departments outside the City's jurisdiction; that, in his opinion, the best con- tact could be made through his office for that purpose. Councilwoman Gregory stated it was her understanding that the reason the City had issued the moratorium was to strengthen the ordinance the City was presently operating under; that in her opinion, the ordinance did not belong with the Administrative staff; that this ordinance did not give the strength needed; that 7900 c) should be Building Superintendent; d) City Engineer and e) Planning Director; that in every place where the Chief Administrative Officer was mentioned it should be Building Superintendent; that in Section 7902 she would prefer that the b) should include a complete description of the building or structure being moved, designate its type, construction material, age, size and any other pertinent information that might be required January 5, 1966 Page 10 RES.. NO. 66-2 ADOPTED REC. BY C.A.O. THAT POSITION OF UTILITY MAN BE RE- CLASSIFIED TO MAIN- TENANCE MAN EFFECTIVE JAN. 15, 1966 RES. TO BE SUBMITTED AT NEXT COUNCIL MTG. APPROVED ORD. NO. 438 RE HOUSE MOVING AND RELOCATION PERMITS Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^ Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council January 5, 1966 2.Page II by the Building Superintendent; that somewhere in the ordinance it should be stated that three 3) copies of application were required; that regarding Id) the Planning Commission had recommended a filing fee and processing fee of $75.00 but perhaps the Finance Department should study this further; that the personnel who would be involved and the gas mileage could be taken into consideration; that an application for a move through the City again should be under the Building Superintendent with a copy to the Director of Public Works and to the Chief of Police; Section 7906 d) a) should state that four photographs should be submitted and the photographs shall be 8 x IO inches in size; that re- garding Section 7907, d) b) any shack would be compatible with two more shacks; that, in her opinion, some wording such as shall be of no less value than those buildings and structures already in the area" and that the structures to be relocated would upgrade the standards of the area" should be inserted; that in Section 7907 c) the words before Certificate of Occupancy is granted" should be added; Section 7907 d) the third paragraph contradicts Section 7907 c) on the previous page and made an ambiguity because it was totally wrong and against policy; that the Council was the only body who, on the appeal of an appli- cant, may waive curbs, gutters and sidewalks; that Section 8105 declared that an applicant can deposit cash or an instrument of credit only if the Building Official deter- mines facts proving such an action feasible; that the decision should be with the Council. Councilwoman Gregory further stated that the applicant should have one hundred twenty 120) days from issuance of permit to completion taking care of the building to be set down on the new foundation and all aspects in- cluding sidewalks, curbs and gutters; that there should be a penalty clause of $5.00 a day until completion; that she did not like the appeal to the City Council; that, in her opinion, the decision should rest with the City Council; that the'old ordinance was good in many ways and took the burden of decision from the staff; that she did not believe the new ordinance giving all authority to the Chief Administrative Officer was good; that Mr. Nordby had already expressed the wish for an assistant; that the Council would be risking additional taxation of the people if and when the Council was asked to add more personnel to the already growing family; that this was going to be something that could not be avoided anyway in other departments; that she was sure the Council realized that the revision of the ordinance must designate those who would be responsible for accepting applications for relocations; that she did understand this ordinance and had studied it and felt the Building Superintendent was the logical man to accept or reject the applications for relocations; that he, together with the Director of Public Works, would check out the buildings to be relocated and make the recommendation to the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission in turn would make their recommendation to the City Council for final decision; that the City Council should act on it whether the Planning Commission rejects or accepts the relocation; that she felt strongly that the Council should put first things first; that it was the Council's responsibility to carry the burden of decision; that she knew Mr. Nordby might argue that it would be saving time with this ordinance but she did not take the responsibility of this office with any idea of cutting corners at the expense of good leadership or good planning; that the City had obtained and was paying for services of people in the depart- ments and although she disagreed with them very heartily at times she valued and relied on their judgments; that she believed she had pointed out reasons why she sincerely hoped the Council would consider what was before them and reject it; that there was no short cut for City officials to dis- patch their duties and likewise there was no short cuts for Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^ 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^ Í«Regtr Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council C.A.O. Office; that probably all of the items that might need to be included had not been included; that these could be added and modifications made. Councilwoman Gregory stated by the appeal sections it had been taken away from Planning and the Council; that a re- location came under Planning and it should be brought to the attention of Planning. Chief Administrative Officer Nordby stated it should be brought to the attention of the Planning Director at the outset; that he had no objection if the Council wanted to become involved or the Planning Commission. In answer to questions by Councilman Morehead, Chief Administrative Officer Nordby stated any inspections pre- ceeding the issuance of a relocation permit should be a coordinated effort in the form of a team and a coordinated report made prior to the issuance of a relocation permit; that he still had the authority over the Department Heads and it could be coordinated whether or not the C.A.O. in fact was designated; that he had no objections to the change in terminology. Councilman Adair stated he would like to see the one hundred eighty 180) days for completion changed to one hundred twenty 120) days. Discussion followed regarding the penalty clause. Councilman McCaron stated he thought there should be some- thing whereby the completion could be forced such as a bond to cover the costs of a contractor coming in to complete the work. City Attorney Flandrick suggested that Section 7907, sub- paragraph d), on page 3 could be reworded; that this was the part that required a bond to insure the building was completed in the manner proposed; that he suggested it be rewritten so that it provided first for the time situation for completion; that if not completed the bond would pro- vide that the bonding company would in fact complete it; that this would take care of the structural problems; that in addition to a faithful performance bond there should be a cash deposit as suggested for curbs, gutters and side- walks because this was something the City could do; that he would recommend against any provision that the City go in and complete the building; that regarding the penalty clause he thought the bond would take care of that aspect; that the liquidated damage clause could be put in but only when there was a contract and the City did not really have a contract with anyone on a relocation permit. Discussion followed regarding Section 7907 b) wherein City Attorney Flandrick stated he would not suggest using the language that any building that was moved in would have to upgrade the area; that compatible" at least had a defini- tion in Planning; that it was a value judgment no matter who made it. Councilman Adair stated that the Planning Commission should view the structures to be relocated. Further discussion followed wherein City Attorney Flandrick stated the scope could be widened in Section 7907 b) by saying compatibility in terms of adjacent uses as well as the community as a whole". Chief Administrative Officer Nordby recommended that this ordinance be withdrawn and resubmitted incorporating the thoughts of the Council. January 5, 1966 270 Page 13 Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«2iMIDS Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City.,Coundil Discussion followed that the present moratorium expired on February 18, 1966. City Attorney Flandrick asked if it was the consensus that, the processing would be in the same manner as at the pre- sent time or on the administrative level. Councilwoman Gregory stated she had indicated her opinion that the processing should be taken care of in the same manner as at the present time. Councilman McCaron stated, in his opinion, it should be set up for appeal to the City Counicil. Councilman Morehead stated'he had indicated his opinion. Councilman Adair stated he thought the Council was over- loaded with everything going to the Council. Mayor Crites stated, in his opinion, the Council did not need to get involved in moving structures through the City; that in the relocations of structures in general the Building Superintendent, Planning Director, and the Superintendent of Public Works culd make up practically all of the staff recommendations and make them to the Planning Commission; that if the Planning Commission con- curred with the staff it should be a mere detail of issuing the permits; that a few teeth were needed such as the time limit, bond to insure completion and Certificate of Occupancy given when the conditions were completed; that he did not see any reason for the Council to get so terribly involved in every one of these things; that he felt this was the position of the Planning Commission to plan satisfactorily for the City; that building judgments ought to be left to the Building Department as recommenda- tions to the Planning Commission; that the Council should be the source of appeal. Councilman Morehead stated he could consider the comments of the Mayor along with what he had heard this evening. Discussion followed that the Planning Commission had not seen the ordinance as presented to the City Council this evening; that the Planning Commission had made recommenda- tions and there were sections in the ordinance that covered the Planning Commission's recommendations; that the Planning Commission had commented that there should be a $75.00 fee for filing and no appeal fee; that they did not make a specific recommendation on the administrative aspect. City Attorney Flandrick stated the ordinance would be with- drawn, rewritten and submitted to the City Council at the next regular meeting. 00- City Engineer French reported on the review of angle park- ing on the north side of Ramona Boulevard between Bogart Avenue and Robin Avenue stating that all indications were that the angle parking was doing the job that it was in- tended to do; that,the majority of the through traffic was going on south Ramona Boulevard; that the accident rate was virtually the same as before; that the severity of accidents had lessened; that it was the recommendation of the staff that the experiment be continued. Discussion followed that there was much heavier traffic on the south side of Ramona Boulevard than there was before. January 5, 1966 Page 14 ORD. TO BE RE- WRITTEN AND SUB- MITTED AT NEXT REG. MTG. REVIEW BY CITY ENGR. OF ANGLE PARKING ON NORTH SIDE OF RAMONA BLVD. BETWEEN BOGART AVE. AND ROBIN AVE. REC. THAT EXPERIMENT BE CONTINUED Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«I Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council As there were no objections, Mayor Crites declared the report accepted and filed with thanks. 00- City Engineer French reviewed extensively his report on the policy towards the development of Select System of Streets as a project and recommended the adoption of a new policy which would allow the maximum use of the City's gas tax revenue and maximum benefit to the City as a whole in that the City could concentrate on traffic flow. He stated, as an example, the City was presently preparing plans on the widening of Los Angeles Street from Maine Avenue to the easterly City boundaries; that under the present policy the City would spend approximately $23,000.00 for right- of-way and $45,000.00 for construction making a total cost of $68,000.00; that this would be obtaining enough right- of-way to put in the curbs and gutters, not the sidewalks; that compared with the proposed policy the construction cost would remain $45,000.00; that if everyone dedicated the right-of-way to the City the right-of-way dedicated would be valued at $46,200.00 which would mean that the City would have provided the matching credit to the State and make it eligible for the project to be completed. In answer to questions by the Council, City Engineer French explained that when condemning for right-of-way the City had been condemning just enough to get the curbs and gutters installed and not condemning the parkway area; that this was the difference in the cost; that this meant the right- of-way acquisition, if the City condemned for the parkway area on this particular project, would cost twice as much; that if the people donated the right-of-way they would donate the full parkway area; that the whole thing would be eligible for matching; that the State did not draw a line between the curb area and the parkway area; that this would allow the City twice as much credit for matching; that one project would cost $45,000.00 of State Gas Tax Money and no money from the General Fund; that the other project would cost $68,000.00 of State Gas Tax Money and the City would have to provide an expenditure of $34,000.00 of funds other than Gas Tax, General Funds, Subdivider contribution or some contribution somewhere in the City. City Engineer French stated there would be property owners that did not want to do this and these sections would not have curbs and gutters; but they would be graded out and would drain; tnat this would not interfere with the proper traffic movement; that when the people got Building Permits they would be required to put in the curbs and gutters at no expense to the City. Councilman McCaron asked if the 1911 or 1913 Act could be used if over 50% was improved. Discussion followed that the City had the right-of-way to the curb line but not the area for the sidewalk; that curbs and gutters could be put in and coordinate the two for complete development. City Engineer French stated that it could be scheduled that where the people would not donate the land the City could condemn and then Short Form. City Attorney Flandrick stated he had seen this overall policy work magnificently in a number of cities; that he concurred with the City Engineer with one cautionary corrment, as the City Engineer pointed out, that the City would never have a situation where everyone would dedicate the property; that possibly the City would get 20% or 30% dedication. Continued) January 5, 1966 27018 Page 15 REPORT ACCEPTED AND FILED REPORT BY CITY ENGR. ON POLICY TOWARDS DEVELOPMENT OF SELECT SYSTEM OF STREETS AS PROJECT AND REC. ADOPTION OF POLICY WHICH WOULD ALLOW MAXIMUM BENEFIT TO CITY IN THAT CITY COULD CONCENTRATE ON TRAFFIC FLOW BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council January 5, 1966 Oro 07 Page 16 COUNCILMAN MCCARON MOVED THAT THE POLICY BE TRIED ON THE FIRST PROJECT BUT IF IT MEETS WITH A DISMAL FAILURE THEN WE CAN GO BACK TO THE OTHER SYSTEM. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. The motion carried by the followivote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MCCARON, ADAIR, GREGORY, MOREHEAD AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE A6SENT: NONE 00- City Engineer French reviewed his report on a request for additional condemnation in regard to Tract No.'29417 stat- ing that the City had condemned a sewer easement to provide service to the area north of Tract No. 29417 Igcated on Adour Lane off of Center; that the easement wa$ acquired from Grace to Adour Lane across the property ovned by Mr. Benson and Mr. Baca; that due to an error on the part of the developer's agent a portion of the sewer was constructed outside of the ten 110) foot easement; that the developer, Mr. Henry Levin, had not been able to reach a mutual under- standing for the solution of this problem with the affected property owner; that on November 17, 1965, Mr. Levin requested that the City condemn the additional ease- ment area necessary for the protection of the sewer in its present location; that he offered to pay the cost for the additional three 3) foot easement; that he had reviewed the problem both from a paper standpoint and in the field; that it was his opinion that the development of this tract had caused an access problem to the property owners on Adour Lane which was also a part of the tract; that it was also his opinion that if the sewer problem was to be solved by acquisition of additional right-of-way he thought that the access problems to the people along Adour Lane should be considered; therefore, he recommended that the City Council take the following action on Mr. Levin's request: that the City Council agree to the initiation of condemna- tion for a sixty 60) foot wide street across the Benson and Baca property so as to have the sewer constructed within the dedicated street and eliminate the necessity of a.storm drain across these properties; that with this he would assume that the City would provide the necessary paving; that he felt it would be unjust to have the property owner pay for the condemnation and also improve; that two lanes of paving could be provided across. this area; that this action, if approved by the Council, would provide a secondary means of access to the people on Adour Lane and also solve Mr. Levin's problem; that they did not have firm appraisals on the property but it was estimated that the cost of acquisition of this property would be $5,000.00; that it was very safe to say that Mr. Levin did not agree with this recommendation; that he only wanted to pay for an additional three 13) feet; that Mr. Levin felt strongly this was not his responsibility and this was an unjust recommendation; that Mr. Milak, Mr. Levin's representative, was in the audience. Mr. Paul Milak, 1046 East Meda, Glendora, stated he had discussed with Mr. Levin the funds available for the condemnation; that whereas the condemnation recommended by the City Engineer was desirab,II, they felt they would like to adhere to the original sdMevision agreement which re- quired only that the sewer it placed in the easement, proper barricading and cleanup; that he would not go into the problem and who caused the problem but they would go into the solution; that the solution he thought was what he had recommended originally, the dedication of three 3) feet and the construction of the storm drain; that if the Council saw fit to accept the recommendation of the MOTION MADE AND CARRIED THAT POLICY BE TRIED ON FIRST PROJECT BUT IF MEETS WITH DISMAL FAILURE THEN WE CAN GO BACK TO OTHER SYSTEM REPORT BY CITY ENGR. RE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL CONDEMNATION RE TRACT NO. 29417 PAUL MILAK, 1046 E. Meda, Glendora Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council January 5, 1966 Page 17 2708 I City Engineer they were in a position only to contribute an equal amount to the cost of the storm drain plus the cost of the additional easement which he estimated to be around $1200.00 to $1500.00 total. In answer to a question by Councilman McCaron, Mr. Milak stated the storm drain would be underground but very shallow. Councilman McCaron asked if the Council condemned this for a street would this be considered condemning to aid a subdivision. City Attorney Flandrick stated not actually; that there was a public interest obviously in taking Grace Street through; that what was being requested apparently was that the subdivider through Mr. Milak was indicating that if the Council would do this to solve his problem which was incidental to the street situation that they would be willing to contribute toward the total project. Councilman McCaron stated that in time the property owner would have to dedicate if he wished to develop. City Attorney Flandrick stated he had discussed this pro- blem with Mr. Benson and that he was sure Mr. Benson had no intention in the near future of developing that property for that reason. Councilman McCaron asked what was the purpose of making the dedication other than to allow a little more access. City Engineer French stated he was basically thinking of the people on Adour Lane. Discussion followed wherein City Engineer French stated if the Benson and Baca property had developed they would have had two means of access; that there was a house in the way of the street; that Adour Lane was dedicated twenty-five 25) foot on one-half; that assuming that the dedication was completed on twenty-five 25) feet it would leave a forty-five 45) foot lot; that to accomplish a lot split Mr. Benson would have to come before the Board of Zoning Adjustments; that Mr. Benson and Mr. Baca were not aware of his recommendation tonight; that they were aware of the problem and knew what the street pattern was in the area and what was going to occur some time or another; that they knew Grace was going to go through and Adour Lane would go through; that any condemnation was going to make Mr. Benson unhappy; that it would probably make him less unhappy if the City would take the entire sixty 60) foot because it did give him a lot split and he would gain by this; that Grace Street was a narrow street eighteen 18) feet wide. Mr. Milak stated there was fourteen 14) foot of paving. Councilman Morehead stated, in his opinion, there was actually no solution unless Mr. Benson's property was damaged. Councilman McCaron stated he was not in favor of forcing a developer to buy additional dedication as in this case where the people who own the Benson and Baca property would have to dedicate on their own if they wished to develop in the future; that for proper development they would almost have to go together; that Benson and Baca might consider if they would accept the funds to be con- tributed toward this that they might dedicate this at the present time and the only thing it would be used for would be possibly a graded ditch through there for drainage and not open up Adour Lane for the traffic from Grace until Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council January 5, 1966 21,09 Page 18 such time as it could stand the traffic; that this way it would be adding additional traffic to just those few houses that were being served by it at the present time; that in case he did not wish to dedicate it all just go ahead and put in what was necessary, acquire the additional footage for right-of-way of the sewer and the drainage and then leave it up to them for the future. Mr. Milak stated there were seven 7) houses on that particular street. In answer to a question by Councilman Morehead, City Engineer French stated because of the subdivider's agent the sewer was constructed outside the easement; that it was the subdivider's responsibility that the sewer was con- structed outside of the easement; that there was a ten 10) foot easement; that the subdivider could put that sewer within the easement; that he had ten 10) feet to work in to get this sewer within the easement; that when this sewer originally went in discussions were made with Benson and Baca and they agreed to allow the contractor some latitude in piling his waste material on their property so that they could put the sewer within the easement, but this was only a temporary thing, a construction type easement; that now the sewer had been built and it was outside the 10) foot easement; that the subdivider was now limited to work within the ten 10) foot to get the sewer recon- structed if that was what it took; that this meant a very difficult construction problem for the subdivider who was responsible; that the City had bonds; that the bonds had not been released. In answer to a question by Councilman McCaron, City Engineer French stated that the subdivider had installed the sewer line. In answer to questions by Councilman Morehead, City Engineer French stated it was his understanding the sewer in Center Street was not supposed to be constructed on the center line as part of 62-A-1; that it was constructed on the center line of 62-A-I putting it six 6) feet out of the location; that when the subdivision engineer staked it he did not check the exact location of the sewer in Center Street; that bit, plans were taken off of the plans prepared by Ivor Lyons which showed the sewer to be constructed six 6) foot off of center; that he did not check to see if the sewer was six 6) feet off, he started, went in and the entire error came up; that this man had to establish the center line of Adour Lane and Center and if he had looked he would have known. Mr. Milak stated it was lack of coordination between the sewer district plans and the developer's plans; that the subdivision engineer failed to reduce the total footage on Adour Lane corresponding to the change in the location on Center Street, six 6) feet. We further stated that he had attempted to put in the storm drain three 11311- times; that each time he was stopped; that the reason he was stopped was because the sewer problem had to be corrected or solved. City Engineer French stated the sewer contractor that put this in did not want to talk about getting the sewer con- struction within the ten 10) foot easement; that this was going to be expensive. Mr. Milak stated it would probably be twice as much as the cost of the easement would be. Further discussion followed wherein City Attorney Flaadrick stated the sewer line had not been accepted by.the City. Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CONDEMNATION OF ADOUR LANE AND GRACE AVENUE BE TABLED. Councilwoman Gregory asked if it was reasonable to make a motion that either Mr. Levin or the bonding company be contacted. There was no'discussion). Mr. Milak stated he believed it could be reconstructed but it would be expensive; that, in his opinion; the City had some responsibility in this inasmuch as they do the same things in sewer districts, they condemn easements for property owners and the fact that this developer had al- ready sold the property; that the City would be doing it for the property owners, not the developer anymore. Councilman McCaron stated the City was involved in condemn- ing the first ten 10) foot easement; that he could not see why the City could not enter in and condemn the additional footage needed to put it within the easement and also require that the drain be put in and leave the property of Benson and Baca as it was until such time as they wanted to do something with it. The motion died for lack of a second. Further discussion followed. City Attorney Flandrick stated there were seven 7) homes located on the far side of Adour Lane which obviously had the problem of the narrow street; that if there were to be an assessment district or a condemnation, either one, created that would take the entire width of Grace and the remaining portion required for Adour Lane the City would have to acquire all of the Benson property seven 7) feet in width for approximately one hundred eighty 180) feet in depth; that if these people in the tract were concerned enough about living on the narrow street there was a possibility if the City was willing to make a contribution to the district and Mr. Levin was willing to make some con- tribution also to that extent, to acquire that entire area and create both of the streets, the majority of the expense being spread on those seven properties plus the Benson and Baca property north of Grace; that perhaps this would be a partial solution. COUNCILMAN MCCARON MOVED THAT THE CITY ENTER A CONDEMNATION PROCEEDING TO ACQUIRE THE ADDITIONAL FOOTAGE NECESSARY FOR THE SEWER EASEMENT AND THAT THE SUBDIVIDER INVOLVED, IN THIS CASE,..MR. LEVIN, BE ASKED TO PROVIDE THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM ACROSS THE BALANCE OF THE PROPERTY AND LEAVE THE PROPERTY AS IT IS UNTIL SUCH TIME AS BENSON AND BACA WISH TO DEVELOP THEIR PROPERTY, MR. LEVIN TO PAY ALL COSTS OF THE CONDEMNA- TION. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MCCARON, ADAIR, GREGORY, MOREHEAD AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE City Attorney Flandrick stated a condemnation resolution would be prepared and submitted to the Council. 00- City Engineer French reviewed his report on an engineer for Jerry Avenue 1911 Act Improvement stating that the Council at the last meeting had appointed lega'l'counsel Continued) January 5, 1966 Page 19 MOTION MADE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF SECOND MOTION MADE AND CARRIED THAT CITY ENTER CONDEMNATION PROCEEDING TO ACQ. ADDITIONAL FOOTAGE NEC. FOR SEWER EASE- MENT AND THAT SUB- DIVIDER INVOLVED BE ASKED TO PROVIDE DRAINAGE SYSTEM ACROSS BALANCE OF PROPERTY AND LEAVE PROPERTY AS IT IS UNTIL SUCH TIME AS BENSON AND BACA WISH TO DEVELOP THEIR PROPERTY, MR. LEVIN TO PAY ALL COSTS CONDEMNATION RES. TO BE PREPARED REC. BY CITY ENGR. RE ENGINEER OF WORK JERRY AVE. Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council January 5, 1966 Page 20 and adopted a resolution for proceeding; that five 5) AVE. 1911 ACT engineering firms had submitted proposals, Lampman and IMPROVEMENT A/D 66-I: Associates, Harold L. Johnson, Engineering, Kenneth I. Mullen, Consulting Engineer, W. J. Lockman, Civil Engineer, and Walsh-Forkert-Hutchison Civil Engineers, Inc.; that they were all highly qualified firms more than qualified to provide all of the services requested; that the Council had seen the brochures; that he recommended that Walsh- Forkert-Hutchison Civil Engineers,lnc. be engaged in accordance with their proposal; that this firm had been employed by the City previously and their services had always been more than satisfactory. City Clerk Balkus read Resolution No. 66-6 by title as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 66-6 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK APPOINTING AN ENGINEER OF WORK FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 66-1" COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-6 BE APPROVED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, GREGORY, ADAIR, MCCARON AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- City Clerk Balkus asked that Ordinance No. 433 be withdrawn from the Agenda. There were no objections. 00- City Clerk Balkus read Ordinance No. 434 by title as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 434 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK AMENDING THE ZONING MAP CF SAID CITY, AND REZONING CERTAIN HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM ZONE R-3 TO ZONE C-2 ZONE CASE NO. Z-282)" COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 434 PASS SECOND READING AND BE ADOPTED AND THAT FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, ADAIR AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: COUNCILMEN GREGORY AND MCCARON ABSENT: NONE City Clerk Balkus read Ordinance No. 434 in its entirety. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 434 BE ADOPTED AS READ. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: RES. NO. 66-6 APPOINTING ENGR. OF WORK FOR ASSESS- MENT DISTRICT 66-I RES. NO. 66-6 ADOPTED ORD. NO. 433 WITHDRAWN FROM AGENDA ORD. NO. 434 AMEND. ZON. MAP OF SAID CITY, AND REZONING CERTAIN HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM ZONE R-I TO ZONE R-2 ZONE CASE NO. Z-282) ORD. NO. 434 READ IN ITS ENTIRETY ORD. NO. 434 ADOPTED AS READ Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, ADAIR AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: COUNCILMEN GREGORY AND MCCARON ABSENT: NONE 00- Chief Administrative Officer Nordby recommended that Ordinance No. 436 be withheld until the next regular meeting. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 436 BE WITHHELD UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. There were no objections, the motion carried and was so ordered by Mayor Crites. 00- Resolution No. 66-7 was read by title as follows: RESOLUTION NO.. 66-7 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK FINDING AND DETERMINING THE EXISTENCE OF A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE SAME ABATED CASE NO. N-4, 3154 ATHOL STREET)" COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-7 BE APPROVED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILMAN MCCARON SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, MCCARON, ADAIR, GREGORY AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- Resolution No. 66-8 was read by title as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 66-8 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK FINDING AND DETERMINING THE EXISTENCE OF A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE SAME ABATED CASE NO. N-5, 4642 BRESEE AVENUE)" COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-8 BE APPROVED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, GREGORY, ADAIR, MCCARON AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- City Clerk Balkus read Resolution No. 66-4 by title as follows: January 5, 1966 Page 21 ORD. NO. 436 WITHHELD UNTIL NEXT REG. MTG. RES. NO. 66-7 FINDING AND DETER- MINING EXISTENCE OF PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING SAME ABATED CASE NO. N-4, 3154 ATHOL ST.) RES. NO. 66-7 ADOPTED RES. NO. 66-8 FINDING AND DETER- MINING EXISTENCE OF PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING SAME ABATED CASE NO. N-5, 4642 BRESEE AVE.) RES. NO. 66-8 ADOPTED RES. NO. 66-4 APPOINTING DIR. Continued) Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«2713 Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council January 5, 1966 Page 22 RESOLUTION NO. 66-4 OF CIVIL DEFENSE AND SETTING AMT. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF OF COMPENSATION THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK APPO;NTING FOR SAID POSITION A DIRECTOR OF CIVIL DEFENSE AND SETTING THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION FOR SAID POSITION" COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-4 BE APPROVED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, GREGORY, ADAIR, MCCARON AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Mayor Crites stated that Civil Defense Director Joe Pierce had resigned for business reasons; that Harry Eugene Hastings had been appointed to this position; that Mr. Hastings had been involved in Civil Defense affairs very actively for some time. 00- At the request of Councilman Morehead, Chief of Police Adams related the incidents of an accident which had con- vinced Councilman Morehead that the bumpers on the police cars were worth their expense. 00- Mayor Crites presented a letter of resignation from E. A. Cannady, member of the Board of Zoning Adjustments to become effective as soon as a replacement could be appointed or at the Council's pleasure. Mayor Crites filed the letter with the City Clerk. Councilman Morehead stated when the resignation was accepted a letter of commendation should be sent to Mr. Cannady signed by the Mayor. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ACCEPT THE RESIGNATION OF E. A. CANNADY FROM THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS WITH REGRET. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. City Attorney Flandrick stated if the motion carried that would mean that the resignation was accepted as offered; that Mr. Cannady would serve until a replacement was appointed. There were no objections, the motion carried and was so ordered by Mayor Crites. 00- Mayor Crites stated that inasmuch as there were two Planning Commission offices expiring February I, 1966 that the Council consider making some presentations of candidates to these posts or replacing the present holders of the offices along with the presentations of candidates to the Board of Zoning Adjustments. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL REAPPOINT MR. CAPRONI AND MR. GERALDI TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: Continued) RES. NO. 66-4 ADOPTED HARRY EUGENE HASTINC APPOINTED CIVIL DEFENSE DIRECTOR RE ACCIDENT INVOLVIN( BUMPERS ON POLICE CARS LETTER OF RESIGNA- TION E.A. CANNADY, BZA MEMBER MOTION MADE AND CARRIED THAT COUNCIL ACCEPT RESIGNATION OF E. A. CANNADY FROM BZA WITH REGRET TWO PLANNING COMMISSION OFFICES EXPIRING FEB. 1, 1966 MOTION MADE AND CARRIED THAT COUNCII REAPPOINT MR. CAPRONI AND MR. Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«2714 I Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, GREGORY, ADAIR, MCCARON AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT MR. ROBERT LARSON, A RESIDENT OF THIS CITY FOR TWENTY-FIVE 25) YEARS, BE APPOINTED TO THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS IN REPLACE- MENT OF MR. E. A. CANNADY. Councilman Morehead stated he had spoken with Mr. Larson and that Mr. Larson stated he would serve with vigor if appointed. Discussion followed that this matter should be held over to the next regular meeting; that the other Council members had names to offer. The motion was withdrawn. Mayor Crites stated the Council might consider this in the Executive session. 00- City Clerk Balkus stated the candidates for Council for the April 12, 1966, election, could submit a candidate's state- ment if they wished; that possibly the candidates should file with the Finance Director at the time their nomination papers were filed a fee in the amount of $75.00 to cover the cost of printing, handling and mailing of the statement. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT ALL THOSE NOMINEES FOR ANY OFFICE OPEN AT THE NEXT GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION WHO DESIRE THE STATEMENT OF INFORMATION AS OUTLINED BY THE CITY CLERK BE REQUIRED TO DEPOSIT A FEE IN THE SUM OF $75.00 WITH THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO DEFRAY THE COST OF THAT AT THE TIME OF FILING THEIR NOMINATING PETITION. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. In answer to a question by Councilman McCaron, City Attorney Flandrick stated that the Code Section that was added to the Election Code permitted the City to bill the candidate; that presumably the $75.00 would defray at least a majority of that cost; that any unused amount could be refunded; that the Statement of Information was not required, it was at the candidate's option. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, GREGORY, ADAIR, MCCARON AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- City Clerk Balkus read Resolution No. 66-I by title as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 66-1 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK ALLOWING CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK" Continued) January 5, 1966 Page 23 GERALDI TO P.C. MOTION MADE RE APPOINTMENT TO BZA MOTION WITHDRAWN RE STATEMENT OF INFORMATION CANDIDATES FOR COUNCIL FOR APRIL 12, 1966 ELECTION MOTION MADE AND CARRIED THAT ALL THOSE NOMINEES FOR ANY OFFICE OPEN AT NEXT GEN. MUN. ELECTION WHO DESIRE STATEMENT OF INFORMA- TION BE REQ. TO DEPOSIT A FEE IN SUM OF $75.00 WITH DIR. OF FINANCE TO DEFRAY COST OF THAT AT THE TIME OF FILING THEIR NOMINATING PETITION RES. NO. 66-I ALLOWING CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST CITY OF B.PK. GENERAL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS NOS. 759-814 AND 147-148 INCL. PAYROLL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS NOS. 2847- 2976 BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 01 05 CC MINHÄ—@¸—0^Í«2'715 Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council January~5, 1966 Page 24 COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-I BE. RES. NO. 66-I APPROVED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILMAN MCCARON ADOPTED SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, MCCARON, ADAIR, GREGORY AND MAYOR CRITES NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- City Attorney Flandrick stated City Engineer French and him- REQUEST FOR self requested an Executive Session to discuss problems EXECUTIVE SESSION that had come up in connection with the court proceedings TO DISCUSS PROBLEMS for the Maine Avenue acquisition. IN CONNECTION WITH CT. PROCEEDINGS FOR MAINE AVE. ACQUISI- TION 00- AT 11:39 P.M. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY MOVED THAT THE CITY RECESS AT 11:39 P.M. COUNCIL RECESS FOR TEN MINUTES AND RECONVENE IN EXECUTIVE RECONVENED AT 11:49 SESSION. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD SECONDED. There were no P.M. objections, the motion carried and was so ordered by Mayor Crites. 00- At 12:35 a.m. the Council reconvened in-regular session. 12:35 A.M. COUNCIL RECONVENED IN REG. SESSION 00- AT 12:36 A.M. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CITY ADJ. AT 12:36 A.M. COUNCIL ADJOURN. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. There were no objections, the motion carried and was'so ordered by Mayor Crites. 00- IVORY D. C TES, MAYOR APPROVED: February 2 1966. THELMA L. BALKUS, CITY CLERK Date of Distribution to City Council January 28 1966. Date of Distribution to Departments January 31 1966. BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 Í«3 egular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council January 5, 1966 Rage 12 good planning; that relocations were too important, too close to people and to controversial to delegate to the sole thinking of one man; that she would like to have the ordinance given some thought, put some teeth in It and have it presented again. Councilman Morehead stated, in his opinion,-the-reason the moratorium was issued was to.upgrade,the relocation ordinance and put some teeth in.it that he was not strongly for a ten year age limitation on buildings be- cause there were buildings that could be located in this City that were far older.than ten 10) years, however, he was expecting some age limitation set and if it had been within reason he would have probably agreed with it; that there should be a set time in the ordinance for the build- ing to be brought up to Code after being relocated; that, in his opinion, there were not too many changes that should be made in the present ordinance to have what he thought the Council intended to have in the first place, just a few sharp teeth added to what there was and leave the responsibilities where they were; that it seemed to him the Chief Administrative Officer's Office was well burdened with current work, and if he were the Chief Administrative Officer and knew that the City had a real good relocation ordinance he would want to turn it over to the Building Superintendent, Public Works Director, Planning Commission and to Council just as the current ordinance provided for. Councilman McCaron stated he thought the ordinance stated that the Chief Administrative Officer would be authorized to delegate the work in this instance; that, in his opinion, all the Chief Administrative Officer had in mind was to more or less delegate what had to be done in relation to house moving permits and issue the final order from the report given to him by whoever he delegated the work to. He further stated that he would agree that possibly the ordinance should be a little bit more specific in time limits and in what had to be done; that he did not disagree with the manner in which it was to be handled because the Planning Commission and the Council did not pass on the style of the new homes built, and this in essence would be the same thing; that if there was a few more teeth in the requirements, maybe a few more items such as Mr. Morehead mentioned, that this would make the ordinance stronger. Councilwoman Gregory stated she had talked with representa- tives from seven other cities in this valley; that this was proper procedure Council making determination) as far as local government was concerned. Discussion followed. Chief Administrative Officer Nordby stated, in his opinion, the Council fully realized that when the designation of the C.A.O. was included in this ordinance it did not mean that the C.A.O. would personally conduct all of the moves in- cluded; that this came under the delegation of powers; that it had been his impression the Council would prefer not to become involved in what'he thought was an administra- tive matter to begin with; that the City had a professional planner; that the City had an Engineer and a Building Superintendent; that it was recognized that the Council had always the final authority; that they had complete authority to make the final decision; that it was not intended to re- move any authority from the Council; that the C.A.O. was not a Building Official or an Engineer but he was a coordinator; that full use of the officials mentioned by Councilwoman Gregory was made; that he had suggested one change be made so that the filing of the application would not be in the Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 01-U02 05-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO116939-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/5/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06