Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1966 06 15 CC MIN
1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«2943 I REGULAR MEETING OF THE BALDWIN PARK CITY COUNCIL JUNE 15, 1966 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER) 14403 East Pacific Avenue 7:30 P.M. 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 Cali: Present: COUNCILMEN ADAIR, CRITES, GREGORY, MOREHEAD AND MAYOR MCCARON Absont: CITY ENGINEER FRENCH FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL Also Present: CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER NORDBY, CITY ATTORNEY FLANDRICK, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER FOGLE, BUILDING SUPERINTENDENT KALB- FLEISCH, PLANNING DIRECTOR CHIVETTA, FINANCE DIRECTOR DUNCAN, CITY TREASURER PUGH AND CITY CLERK BALKUS Chief of Police Adams arrived at 8:00 p.m.) 00- COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT CITY ENGINEER FRENCH AND CITY ENGR. FRENCH CHIEF OF POLICE ADAMS BE EXCUSED. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY AND CHIEF OF POLICE SECONDED. There were no objections, the motion carried ADAMS EXCUSED and was so ordered by Mayor McCaron. 00- COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF MAY 24, 1966, MINUTES OF MAY 24, AND JUNE 1, 1966, BE APPROVED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. 1966, AND JUNE 1, COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. There were no objections, the 1966, APPROVED AND motion carried and was so ordered by Mayor McCaron. FURTHER READING BE WAIVED 00- i As there were no objections, Mayor McCaron stated that PAYMENT OF BILLS the Payment of Bills would be considered at this time. Councilwoman Gregory questioned the Uniform Allowance for RE UNIFORM ALLOWANCE Reserve Officers commenting that on May 24, 1966, the RESERVE OFFICERS Council had asked for a survey on Reserve Officers. Finance Director Duncan stated that the Uniform Allowance payment was for January 1, 1966 to June 30, 1966; that if there was any change in the allowance it would be effective July I, 1966. Discussion followed but no changes were made in the Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 66-159 ALLOWING CLAIMS RES. NO. 66-159 AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY OF ALLOWING CLAIMS AND BALDWIN PARK DEMANDS AGAINST CITY OF B.PK. QContinued) Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í« 914 Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 15, 1966 Page 2 COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-159 BE APPROVED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, ADAIR, CRITES, GREGORY AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- N05. 1445-1554 INCL., AND 169-170 INCL. PAYROLL PERIOD 5-16-66 THROUGH 5-31-66 RES. NO. 66-159 ADOPTED At 7:38 p.m. Finance Director Duncan left the Council 7:38 P.M. FINANCE Chamber. DIRECTOR DUNCAN LEFT COUNCIL CHAMBER 00- COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY MOVED THAT THE CITY TREASURER'S REPORT CITY TREASURER'S AS OF MAY 3!, 1966, BE RECEIVED AND FILED. COUNCILMAN REPORT AS OF MOREHEAD SECONDED. There were no objections, the motion MAY 31, 1966 carried and was so ordered by Mayor McCaron. RECEIVED AND FILED 00- Mrs. Irene Seymour, 5141 N. Bleecker Street, Baldwin Park, IRENE SEYMOUR, stated she understood that permission had been granted 5141 N. Bleecker St., for the installation of a dog kennel one lot from Joan- B.Pka bridge Street on.Bleecker Street; that this phoperty pbuts an R-I at the rear; that there was nothing but residential all RE CP-77 around; that she, did not thing it;should be granted. Mayor McCaron stated this item would be held In abeyance DISC. LATER IN and discussed later in the meeting. MTG. 00- City Treasurer Pugh stated that she would be out of the CITY TREASURER City from June 19, 1966 to June 23, 1966 attending the PUGH TO ATTEND Society of California Accountants Convention at Las SOC. OF CALIF. Vegas, Nevada. ACCOUNTANTS CONVEN- TION AT LAS VEGAS JUNE 19-23, 1966 00- Councilwoman Gregory gave a report on the League of California Cities Mayor's and Councilmen's Institute May 22-25, 1966, in Monterey. She stated the programing was extensive; that the City would get one complimentary copy of the proceedings and she had taken the liberty of ordering a copy of the proceedings for each of the Council at the cost of $3.00 a copy as soon as they were available. 00- REPORT BY COUNCIL- WOMAN GREGORY ON LEAGUE OF CALIF. CITIES MAYOR'S AND COUNCILMEN'S INSTITUTE MAY 22 25, 1966, IN MONTEREY City Clerk Backus presented an application for a Temporary APPLICATION FOR TEMP. Use Permit submitted by the Baldwin Park Chamber of USE PERMIT SUBMITTED Commerce for a pyrotechnic display on July 4, 1966. BY B.PK. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR PYROTECHNIC DISPLAY ON JULY 4, 1966 r-"+ tniipd) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«2945` Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY MOVED THAT THE APPLICATION FOR A TEMPORARY USE PERMIT FOR THE BALDWIN PARK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR A PYROTECHNIC DISPLAY JULY 4, 1966, BE APPROVED AND WAIVE ANY FEES. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: June 15, Page 3 APPROVED 1966 AYES: COUNCILMEN GREGORY, ADAIR, CRITES, MOREHEAD AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- RESOLUTION NO. 66-169 ESTABLISHING CERTAIN VEHICULAR TRAFFIC RESTRICTIONS RES. NO. 66-169 EST. CERTAIN VEHICULAR TRAFFIC RESTRICTIONS COUNCILMAN CRITES MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-169 BE RES. NO. 66-169 ADOPTED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILMAN ADAIR ADOPTED SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN CRITES, ADAIR, MOREHEAD AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY ABSENT: NONE 00- City Clerk Backus presented an application for a Temporary Use Permit submitted by the First Baptist Church for a car parade to advertise their Vacation Bible School on June 18, 1966 from 11:15 A.M. to 12:15 P.M. Discussion followed. APPLICATION FOR TEMP. USE PERMIT SUBMITTED BY FIRST BAPT1ST CHURCH FOR PARADE IN CARS ON JUNE 18, 1966 COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY MOVED THAT THE FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH APPROVED AFTER ALL CAR CARAVAN BE APPROVED FOR JUNE 18, 1966, AFTER ALL ROUTING ROUTING BY POLICE BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE NECESSARY PROCEDURES HAVE DEPT. AND NEC. TAKEN PLACE. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD SECONDED. There were no PROCEDURES TAKEN objections, the motion carried and was so ordered by PLACE Mayor McCaron. 00- City Clerk Backus presented an application for a APPLICATION FOR Temporary Use Permit submitted by the Baldwin Park Lions TEMP. USE PERMIT Club for a circus at 13932 Ramona Boulevard, a tent SUBMITTED BY B.PK. show with no rides and no side shows, on July 29, 1966; LIONS CLUB FOR that the business license fee would be paid; that they CIRCUS ON JULY 29, had adequate insurance; that it was requested that the 1966, AT 13932 processing fee of $25.00 be waived. RAMONA BLVD. COUNCILMAN CRITES MOVED THAT THE BALDWIN PARK LIONS CLUB MOTION MADE THAT PERMIT BE AUTHORIZED AND THAT THE PROCESSING) FEE BE PERMIT BE AUTH. AND WAIVED. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. FEE BE WAIVED Councilwoman Gregory asked if it could be Inserted in the motion that the Lions Club would take care of the clean up if the circus did not. Mr. Gene Hastings, President elect, Baldwin Park Lions GENE HASTINGS, PRES. Club, stated the cir:;us h;d already issued a check In ELECT, B.PK. LIONS the amount of $150.00 for a clean up bond to be posted CLUB Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«2946 I Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 15, 1966 Page 4 with the City; that the circus called the DeWayne Brothers circus was primarily programed around a childrens show; that the program was on Saturday mornings between 8:00 and 9:00 A.M. on Channel 13; that these people were semiretired and retired professionals; that there were no games or rides; that it was strictly confined to the tent with clown acts, animal acts, trapeze artists and things of this nature. In answer to a question by Mayor McCaron, Mr. Jay Angelo stated there would be small elephants, tigers and the general run of a small circus; that it had been sponsored by various service and fraternal froups In other cities. Mayor McCaron stated there had been objections to circus' at the proposed location; that he would like to make sure there were no objections. Mr. Hastings stated it was planned to have two shows, one at 2:00 p.m. and one at 8:00 p.m. Chief of Police Adams stated in nearly every instance there had been opposition from the apartment to the rear of the property; that he would check the area. Mayor McCaron requested that an investigation be made as to the type of circus and the experience of other cities. With the consent of the second, Mayor Crites amended the MOTION AMENDED motion to include PENDING APPROVAL FROM THE POLICE DEPART- TO INCLUDE PENDING MEAT." APPROVAL FROM THE POLICE DEPT. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN CRITES, GREGORY, ADAIR, MOREHEAD AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- Chief Administrative Officer Nordby reviewed his report REQ. FOR REFUND regarding the refund of a cigarette machine business OF BUSINESS LICENSE license fee at 4725 N. Maine, BoBo's; that a duplicate FEE TO ALL AMERICAN license had been issued to All American Vending, that VENDING $4.80 he recommended that the fee of $6.00 less twenty percent 20%) for administrative services be refunded to All American Vending. COUNCILMAN CRITES MOVED THAT THE LICENSE FEE OF $6.00 APPROVED LESS 20%, $1'.20, THE COST OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE, NET OF $4.80, BE REFUNDED TO ALL AMERICAN VENDORS. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN CRITES, MOREHEAD, ADAIR, GREGORY AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«2947 Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council Chief Administrative Officer Nordby reviewed his report on the Community Recreation Agreement stating that the Park District would contribute $5,000.00 and a super- visor; the School District would contribute $12,500.00 plus the facilities; the City would contribute $6,000.00 plus accounting services; that with the exception of the dates the agreement was identical to the one approved by the Council in the current fiscal year. COUNCiLW©MAAN GREGORY MOVED APPROVAL OF THE AGREEMENT AS RECOMMENDED AND THAT THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN GREGORY, MOREHEAD, ADAIR, CRITES AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Chief Administrative Officer Nordby stated that the City Attorney had drafted an ordinance which would allow an aggrieved person to file a written appeal from the decision of the Fire Chief to the City Council. In answer to a question by Councilman Morehead, City Attorney Flandrick stated this could be considered as an urgency ordinance; that there were a number of cases pending where the parties felt they would like the opportunity to present their case to the Council. Chief Administrative Officer Nordby stated at the moment there were three cases pending; two involved occupancy and the other one includes the ptbcement of fire-hydrants on an existing development. ORDINANCE NO. 457 ADDING SECTION 3101 TO THE BALDWIN PARK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE FIRE CODE URGENCY ORDINANCE) COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 457 BE ADOPTED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, ADAIR, CRITES, GREGORY AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: 14ONE ORDINANCE NO. 458 ADDING SECTION 3101 TO THE BALDWIN PARK MUNICIPAL'CODE RELATING TO THE FIRE CODE COUNCILMAN ADAIR MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 458 BE INTRODUCED AND THAT FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILMAN CRITES SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: Continued) June 15, 1966 Page 5 COMMUN I TY RECREATION AGREEMENT JULY I, 1966 TO JUNE 30, 1967 APPROVED ORD. NO. 457 ADDING SECTION 3101 TO B.PK. MUN. CODE RE FIRE CODE URGENCY ORD.) ORD. NO. 457 ADOPTED ORD. NO. 458 ADDING SECTION 3101 TO B.PK. MUN. CODE RE FIRE CODE ORD. NO. 458 INTRODUCED BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«948 I Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council AYES: COUNCILMEN ADAIR, CRITES, GREGORY, MOREHEAD AND MAJOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- City Clerk Balkus administered the oath to those in the audience desiring to be heard during the meeting. 00- PUBLIC HEARINGS 8:00 p.m. having arrived it was the time and place fixed for a public hearing on Z-291, an application submitted by Harry H. Storwburgh, Agent, for a Zone Change from Zone R-3 heavy multiple residential) to Zone C-2 heavy, commercial) or more restrictive use upon parcels of land located at 13703-13725 Los Angeles Street and 4418 Walnut Street. Proper publication, postings and mailings had been accomplished. Planning Director Chivetta presented a resume stating the Planning Commission had adopted Resolution N6. 66-20 on May 25, 1966, recommending approval of the request from R-3 to C-2. He pointed out the existing zoning on the wall map. TESTIMONY IN BEHALF OF THE REQUEST WAS CALLED FOR BY MAYOR MCCARON. Mr. Harry Strowburgh stated he represented the subject property; that he was very pleased that the Planning Commission did approve of the plan; that they would dedicate the twenty 20) or thirty 30) feet whichever it might be; that when they acquired the property it was requested that they demolish the building which they did; that they anticipated building a nice little center there. TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST WAS CALLED FOR BY MAYOR MCCARON. Mr. Ted Riggs, 19560 Navilla Place, Covina, stated he owned the property located at 4453 No. Merced where the cul-de-sac was proposed to go In In the rear; that he had several questions in regard to the proposed street; one when was this street proposed to go through. Mayor McCaron stated as far as the street improvement, this was just a design; that the question before the Council was whether the property should be rezoned. Mr. Riggs stated he understood the zone change was contingent upon the outcome of the proposed street; that there was a street that was not shown on the map which came through from Walnut approximately in line with Belgate; that the alley was proposed in lieu of a cul-de-sac; that he thought the street should go straight through. Continued) June 15, 1966 Page 6 OATH ADMINISTERED PUBLIC HEARING 8:00 P.M. Z-291, REQUEST FOR ZONE CHANGE FROM R-3 TO C-2 AT 13703-13725 LOS ANGELES ST. AND 4418 WALNUT ST., HARRY H. STROWBURGH PUBLICATION, POST- INGS, MAILINGS RESUME TESTIMONY I N BEHALF HARRY STROWBURGH TESTIMONY I N OPPOSI- TION TED RIGGS, 19560 Navilla P1., Covina BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«29 Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 15, 1966 Page 7 City Attorney Flandrick stated that Planning Director Chivetta had advised that the Planning Commission had conducted a hearing on an amendment to the Master Plan showing a street layout approximately as indicated on the map; that this would be the matter of a hearing before the Council on July 6th. Discussion followed that the width of the alley would be determined by the City Engineer. Mayor McCaron stated that adjacent to this property is C-I property developed to R-I usage and it did not appear there was to be any further development; that across the street on Los Angeles Street one block east the entire block was zoned as C-1 and partially developed to R-3 uses; that this was a further extension of the C-I zoning, in fact this was not only asking for C-I but it was asking for a heavier usage than was in there at the present time; that so far from the testimony heard there had not been any testimony given for justifica- tion for adding to the C-I zoning; that he could not see that It should be extended at the present time unless contiguous to property already developed as C-1) showing there was actual need for more; that it was not spot zoning in a sense inasmuch as It was adjacent to C-I property, but it was adjacent to C-I property with R-1 uses. IN REBUTTAL Mr. Strowburgh stated the City of Baldwin IN REBUTTAL Park had a slogan of going ahead; that when they bought the property about four 4) years ago they anticipated the continual progress of the City; that at that time Baldwin Park did not have the stores in, did not have the widening of the street, did not anticipate possibly the ramp coming off of the freeway; that they felt Los Angeles Street was probably one of the best streets; that his people had developed a good many properties in this area and did not like to have the down grade on zoning; that they had talked to a lot of lending agencies and the first question they asked was how was It going to be zoned. Mayor McCaron asked what was the use that was going to be put on the land that would require C-2 over C-i. Mr. Strowburgh stated they would have to wait until the Council approved the zoning; that there was a difference in C-I and C-2; that the type or the grade of the zoning had a great deal to do with the development of the property in other words could they put the better development In there or the lower. Mayor McCaron stated some of the uses allowed in the C-2 would be too heavy for that area. Mr. Strowburgh stated they would rather have something good on the property rather than something that.was secondary; that before they developed they had to come to the Building Department; that if there was something questionable or that the City did not want the Department would turn them down on a permit. As there was no one else in the audience desiring to speak PUBLIC HEARING either in behalf of or in opposition to Z-291, Mayor DECLARED CLOSED McCaron declared the public hearing closed. Z-291 Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«294'4 i Regular Meeting of the Paldwln Park City Council Councilman Morehead stated at the present time he was in favor of the reclassification with reservation; that he knew of many properties that had changed zoning over a period of years due to speculation purposes; that his reservation was this; that this property was R-3 when the City was incorporated; that it had not bein developed; that Mr. Strowburgh stated he desired tc develop for commer- cial purposes so thereby to insure this development he would make the following motion: COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO RECLASSIFY THIS PROPERTY AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION BE INTRODUCED BY THIS COUNCIL INSTEAD OF AN ORDINANCE TO RECLASSIFY; THIS RESOLUTION WILL INSURE THE f)EVELOPMENT,iN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH THEREIN, WHATEVER" TINE COND I T I ONS SET BY THE COUNCIL OR BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION COULD BE SUCH, AS THIS: THE NECESSARY DEDICATION, INSTALLATION OF ALL IMPROVEMENTS, SUBMISSION OF COMPLETE SET OF WORKING PLANS, AND THE APPLICANT WOULD OBTAIN A VALID BUILDING PERMIT, AND THE APPLICANT SHALL COMMENCE CONSTRUCTION WITHIN ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY 180) WORKING DAYS OF THE DATE OF THE RESOLUTION OF INTENT; AND THAT THE APPLICANT WILL COMPLY WITH ALL MUNICIPAL CITY CODrS OF BALDWIN PARK AS RELATED TO THIS DEVELOPMENT AND THAT UPON COMPLETION OF THIS DEVELOPMENT AND WHEN A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS APPLIED FOR THEN AND ONLY THEN WILL THIS PROPERTY BE RECLASSIFIED AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT. Councilman Morehead stated if the applicant was in agree- ment with the resolution of intention, the some as he would be with a direct positive rezoning he should have no objections to this; that this to him insured the City that Mr. Strowburgh and his associates would do what he told the City that he was going to do; that the time could be changed to nine 9) months or one 1) year. Councilwoman Gregory asked the City Attorney if this was legal and acceptable. City Attorney Flandrick stated the Council had inquired on other occasions concerning this method; that several cities were using something comparable, however they did not go so far as to require the actual improvements as such to be undertaken prior to the, effective date of the zoning; that with that reservation, and he had some doubts concerning the validity of that, however if the applicant had no objection to it, it could certainly be an experimental case if the Council wished to undertake this; that this may be a partial solution to the problem as indicated by Councilman Morehead and Mayor McCaron on past occasions of having properties rezoned and rezoned and still undeveloped and vacant. Mayor McCarron stated as far as he could see the resolution of intent only obligated the City at the present time; that he could see nothing wrong with that. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED Councilman Adair asked for Mr. Strowburghes comments on the motion. Continued) June 15, 1966 Page 8 MOTION MADE THAT RES. OF INTENT TO RECLASSIFY THIS PROPERTY AS REC. BY P.C. BE INTRO- DUCED BY COUNCIL MOTION SECONDED BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š $Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council Mr. Strowburgh stated he had been rezoning for hi:s; people for about twenty 20) years; that he had only had one instance ofthis type; that it was certainly not the idea of his people buying a piece of property demolishing three buildings on it, cleaning up the corner at the request of the City, and then to farm the land or hold it; that this was burying money; that they would develop as fast as they could; that there were times when it was economically impossible to stipulate that in so many months they were going to do this or that; that they bought that corner with the idea of developing it; that it looked as if Baldwin Park had every chance in the world to go ahead; that two or three years ago his people would not have been interested in Baldwin Park but they were now; that right now there were no building and loans putting out m ney for developments so how could they set a time when they could do something; that they were just as anxious to develop that property as the Council was. He stated he was very much disappointed and asked if the Council had faith in that corner and that property; that it would be a tendency for the people next to this property to improve their property if they started to improve. He stated they could not do it in one hundred eighty 180) days; that even one iii year was unreasonable; that they would make an affidavit that they would not ask for another rezoning. Mayor McCaron stated that Mr. Strowburgh could write a letter to the Council at the end of the time period set asking for an extension of time. With the consent of the second Councilman Morehead amended the motion to read THREE HUNDRED SIXTY 360) CALENDAR DAYS". The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, ADAIR, AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: COUNCILMEN CRITES AND GREGORY ABSENT: NONE 00- It was the time and place fixed for a public hearing on ZV-156, an appeal from decision of Board of Zoning Adjustments, an application submitted by American Oil Company, G. H. Sandquist, Agent, for a Zone Variance pursuant to the Baldwin Park Zoning Ordinance No. 357, Section E 1) to allow the erection and maintenance of a free standing fin sign in excess of 100 square feet per sign face area, 600 feet high, in the C-2 heavy commercial) Zone, upon a parcel of land located at 13755 Francisquito Avenue. Proper publication, postings and mailings had been accomplished. June 15, 1966 Page 9 MOTION AMENDED MOTION CARRIED PUBLIC HEARING ZV-156, APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BZA, REQUEST TO ALLOW ERECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF FREE STANDING FIN SIGN IN EXCESS OF 100 SQ. FT. PER SIGN FACE AREA, 60 FT. HIGH, IN C-2 ZONE AT 13755 FRANCISQUITO AVE., AMERICAN OIL CO., G.H. SANDQUIST, AGENT PUBLICATION, POSTINGS, MA I L I NGS Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š $Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 15, 1966 Page 10 I Planning Director Chivetta presented a resume stating the RESUME Board of Zoning Adjustments had adopted Resolution No. BZA 66-22 on May II, 1966, approving the variance limiting the sign height to forty-five 45) feet; that the applicant had appealed to the Council and the Council had subsequently concurred with the Board's recommendations; that the applicant reapplied to the Board; that again the Board approved and limited the sign height to forty-five 45) feet; that the applicant had now appealed the Board's decision on the height t,, the Council; that it was the staff's recommendation that the appeal be denied and that the Council concl!r with the Board of Zoning Adjustments Resolution No. 66-22. He pointed out the map on the wall showing the existing zoning of the area and a plot plan. TE`,T'M0NY N BEHAL L OF THE R7Q'I' ST LAS CALLED 0':), BY 11'MAYO0 i',CCA;ECN. TEST; MONY 11"I BEHALF Ar. G. Sandquist, 741 N. La Breda, lest Covina, G. H. SANDQUIST, stated he was Area Engineer for American Oil Company. 741 N. LaBreda, He read a letter from American Oil Company to the Cov., AREA ENGR., attention of the City Clerk dated May 13, 1966, request- AMERICAN OIL CO. in this appeal. He further stated that flagging was done with the Planning Director and himself in attendance; that the panels were set at forty-five 45) feet, sixty 50) feet and seventy 70) feet; that at each height Mr. Chivetta and he drove the freeway to determine the actual visibility; that the forty-five 45) foot height gave poor visibility and could not be seen in time to make an exit from the freeway; that the seventy 70) feet height did give excellent visibility but it was apparent equal results could be had from a lower height; that the sixty 60) foot height was determined by Mr. Chivetta and himself to be the minimum height Which they could get proper visibility to their customers and permit them to make a safe exit from the freeway; that they believed these factors were paramount in their request for the sixty 60) foot sign height. I n answer to a question by Mayor McCaron, Planning Director Chivetta stated the same identical sign was being requested, including the square footage of both faces, but the height request was seventy 70) foot on the first application and sixty 60) feet on the present application; that he had made a locational check; that he had plotted it on the map, which was being passed to the Council showing the radius from the actual site itself where the sign could be viewed best; that as the Council could see the radius lines progressively extend out from the forty-five 45) foot, the sixty 60) foot and the seventy 70) foot; that, of course, the forty-five 45) foot sign could be viewed and it was depending on where one was at on the freeway as to whether ones visibility was cut off; that the same Was true of the sixty 60) foot and the seventy 70) foot; that it was a distance of one-quarter 1/4) of a mile when the sign could first be viewed; that this would, in his opinion, be adequate. Mir. Jim Bravan, 1560 Otterbein, La Puente, stated he JIM BRAVAN, leased the station from American Oil; that through his 1560 Otterbein, investigation and friends of his if he did not get a La Puente Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š $Í«r-- 2 53 Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 15, 1966 Page II freeway stop he would be subject to a thirty percent 30%) business loss; that at a forty-five 45) foot height one could not see the sign in time to stop; that he would not pick up much business from those persons coming from the east. As there was no one else in the audience desiring to PUBLIC HEARING speak either in behalf of or in opposition to ZV-156, DECLARED CLOSED Mayor McCaron declared the public hearing closed. ZV-156 Mayor McCaron stated it would seem that this would come under the same classification as ZV-150 which was continued from the May 18th meeting; that the Council was waiting for a recommendation from the Planning Commission in relation to the moratorium on service stations; that he believed the Council should have some guidance from the Planning Commission before making a final decision on this case and also on ZV-150. Planning Director Chivetta stated the Chamber of Commerce had set up a meeting with the oil company representatives; that this would be conducted on June 30th; that he suggested the matter be continued to July 6, 1966. Councilwoman Gregory stated it seemed that the Council had had a searching out from the Board of Zoning Adjustments and from the staff on this; that the recommendation was fairly clear; that if the Council allowed a sixty 60) foot or seventy 70) foot sign elevation the Council would be in the same trouble as before with the people of West Covina and Baldwin Park on the Shell sign); that the Council was going to have to clamp down; that either the Council was going to face the irate public or the irate owner of the service station; that the staff and the Board of Zoning Adjustments concur that this wo, I d cause undue trouble; that the background was very specific; that the legislation regarding freeway signs was not expected to take place until 1968. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CONCUR MOTION MADE AND WITH THE RECOfMAENDAT I ON OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUST- SECONDED RENTS AND THE STAFF AND APPROVE ZV-156 AT FORTY-FIVE 45) FEET. COUNCILMAN CRITES SECONDED. Councilman Morehead stated he agreed that this matter should be continued pending the recommendation of the Planning Commission regarding service stations. Councilman Crites asked if ZV-150 was the same station as ZV-156. Mayor hcCaron stated no". As Councilman Crites thought this was a previous request SECOND WITHDRAWN by the same applicant he withdrew his second. The motion died for lack of a second. ACTION DIED FOR LACK OF SECOND COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT ZV-156 BE CONTINUED t!NT I L SUCH TIME AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION GIVES THIS COUNCIL A RECOMMENDAT ION. City Attorney Elandrick stated the public hearing had been closed and asked if the Council wished to take the matter under submission or, since no one had left the room reopen the public hearing and continue it to a future date. Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š $Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 15, 1966 Page 13 of 6,000 square feet instead of 5,000 square feet, requires an interior lot be no less than sixty 60) feet in width instead of fifty 50) feet; a further section proposed minimum unit sizes and would repeal the required open space in an R-I Zone. Section 9553 would clarify the wording regarding the placement SECTION 9553 of buildings on the land. Section 9554 adds a section SECTION 9554 to the Code which would provide for b!!ilding on deep lots which cannot be further subdivided or lot split. He further stated there was an ordinance in the Council's packets that had been recommended by the Planning Commission; that the staff recommended that the Council consider the amendments and either concur to adopt in full or in part. City Attorney Flandrick stated with reference to the additional 1,000 square foot requirement in the required lot area the Commission's proposal was that this 6,000 foot requirement apply only to new lots so as to not create a series of nonconforming lots; that on page 5 of the proposed ordinance) at the very bottom of the page the paragraph with reference to minimum dwelling unit size, apparently there had been several objections that had been raised subsequent to the Commission's hearing and the suggestion would be that the Council consider applying the minimum gross floor area requirement only to new construction; that the Planning Commission did not consider this because it was not raised as such but it was a matter the staff had suggested that some thought be given to. He stated there was one typographical omission and that was that there should be a paragraph seven added on page 6 keeping the present rule that the lot area per dwelling unit shall remain the minimum required lot area. He stated there would be no change but by inadvertence it was not included. He further stated so far as the ordinance was concerned if it was to be adopted in substantially this form with or without amendments the staff would suggest that the Council give thought also to a provision in the ordinance that the additional new regulations be made not applicable to any subdivision or lot split parcel map which had in fact been filed prior to the effective date of the ordinance. Councilman Adair asked what abo t the person who had a fifty 50) foot lot now. City Attorney Flandrick stated if it presently was a 5.000 square foot lot the lot size would not render it nonconforming by reason of that; that the 6,000 square feet would only apply to new development in terms of a new subdivision or parcel map. He further stated that there were conversations at the Commission's hearings on this matter with reference to the deep lot regulations appearing on page 9; that he did not think the Commission had formally resolved as such; that it had been considered and it was something the Council might wish to consider that under deep lot regulations where there was a development pursuant to these regulations he believed it was the Commission's intention, that where there was an interior lot created by reason of a deep lot that the Council may wish to require, if there was a f•~ture street shown on a General Plan or a Specific Plan to the rear, that the house on the rear lot be oriented toward the future street and the same be dedicated. Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«29516, I Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June Of 1966 Page 14 Councilman Morehead stated it was his understanding in the deep lot regulation that the Planning Commission was considering to solve all areas of deep lots, He stated that only two houses were to be allowed and asked what would happen to the remaining deep property, City Attorney Flandrick stated the Planning Commission had given a good deal of thought to that particular paragraph; that at one time three were considered and then it was reduced to two. He stated he had in mind a piece of property 75 x 400; that he understood under the proposed regulations two houses only would be permitted, City Attorney Flandrick stated under these regulations if it were to be the desire of the owner to develop a deep lot situation, there could only be two residential units, Councilman Morehead asked what would happen to the balance of the piece of property, Mayor McCaron asked if he was referring to a piece of property that could not be located on a future street, Councilman Morehead stated no"; that it was his impression that this study was being made in order to provide use of all deep lots; that one requirement he had in mind which he heard was being considered was that the first house would be required to have 6,000 square feet and each 4,000 square foot thereafter would be allowed another house. City Attorney Flandric(c stated first of all if you have a lot of that size that had existing frontage on two streets that individual would have the option first of dividing it into two lots and then developing on each of the lots; that the second possible answer would be to merely alter the Planning Commission's recommendation to provide something similar to what Councilman Morehead suggested, in other words on a lot which was a minimum of 170 feet in depth that It be allowed for the first 6,000 square feet of tot area one dwelling unit and one additional unit for each 3500 or 4000 square feet; that this had been considered by the Commission and rejected, Councilman Morehead asked what was the Commission's recommendation for exceptionally deep lots other than two houses; that according to the minutes he believed Mr. Kallemeyn or Mr, Thomas briefly touched upon the use of all deep property. Councilwoman Gregory stated actually the deep lot problem was reflected in Section 9554 which stated that a specific plan of street pattern be approved; that she thought this had a great deal to do with the building of homes on deep lots. In answer to a question by Councilwoman Gregory, City Attorney Flandrick stated he did not think there would ever be a problem in this deep lot situation with a new subdivision; that he could not conceive of the Planning Commission or the Council approving a subdivision for R-l with lots in excess of 100 or 150 feet in depth; that the proposed regulation would cover the only exist- ing deep tots. Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June,15, 1960 Page 15 Discussion followed wherein City Attorney Flandrick stated in any subdivision the Council controlled the street pattern as well as the lot sizes; and problems could be resolved at the time of the filing of the tentative map; that the purpose of this regulation was to grant relief to people with existing deep lots. Councilman Adair asked what if there was no way to get a street through in the back. City Attorney Fiandrick stated under the Planning Commission's recommendation they would be permitted to have two dwelling units; that this was not a unanimous decision at the Planning Commission level; that several members of the Planning Commission felt there should be some regulation along the line that Councilman Morehead had suggested based on the total number of square feet In the lot. Mayor McCaron stated he would think that any parcel that was long enough and deep enough to accommodate more than two houses.vtou 1 d be able y to have a street pat# ern,. Councilman Adair stated he knew of a lot 60 x 308; that the lot next to it was also 308 feet deep but there was a house built in the middle of the lot. He asked how the individual without any house on the back could. build up his lot. Mayor McCaron stated this would require a review of the area; that every situation could not be covered with an ordinance; that there was a provision In the ordinance for exceptions in case of extreme hardship; that he did not think a case should be called an extreme hardship If It Was possible to put in another street or have access. He asked Mr. Chivetta if he knew of any deep lots 300 to 400 feet deep where i t was not possible to put the street in the rear and have two frontages, Planning Director Chivetta stated that the community was more or less cut up into 1,32 foot frontages by 110 feet deep; that there were very few deep lots in the community where there was not a circulation plan proposed by the General Plan, Councilman Morehead stated at the present time he was concerned with the creation of sixty 60) foot lots; that say-someone had a lot 115 feet deep and had this lot for quite some time, under the new regulations he would not be able to split it into two lots; that to consider sixty 60) foot tots In the creation of subdivisions up to this point he thought this was upgrading R-- development. Mayor McCaron stated basically in the northern portion of the City the lots were 132 ft. TESTIMONY IN BEHALF OF OR IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED TESTIMONY IN BEiiLF AMENDMENTS WAS CALLED FOR BY MAYOR MCCARON. TESTIMONY IN OPPOSI•• TION Mr. Fred Russo stated he was a local realtor; that he FRED RUSSO? REALTOR liked the Items covering the safety features such as limiting the use of garages where they were fire hazards, and the change regarding ambulatory patients, He stated Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 15a, 1966 Page 16 I he was opposed to raising the requirement of square footage in lot sizes. Planning Director Chivetta handed Mr, Russo a copy of the proposed ordinance, Mr. John Baum, 4918 Benham Baldwin Park, stated his lot JOHN BAUM, 4918 was 55 x 182; that he had a three bedroom house In the Bonham, B,Pko front with a single garage attached and a one bedroom house in the rear; that the home In the rear was considered a guest house; that he had purchased the property with the Intention of some day moving into the rear house and retiring there; that there was sufficient room to build on the back house Out as It sat he could not do a thing with It; that Mr. Chivetta had suggested he talk to the Council. Mayor McCaron stated it might fit the proposed regulations excepting for the width. Planning Director Chivetta stated he believed Mr, Baum was In favor of the deep lot regulations but he wanted to know if his property could be used for a deep lot; that he could conform to the proposed regulations of the deep lots as recommended but the driveway width stated twelve 12) feet; that the gentleman had only ten,(10) feet, Mr, Howard S utterfield, 3779 N, Foster, Baldwin Park, HOWARD SUTTERFIELD, stated being a member of the Planning Commission he had 3779 N. Foster, B,f k1 worked on this; that he wanted to first of all say that he thought the Planning Commission was to be complimented for the efforts they had put forth; that they had spent much time debating the various issues; that many of the comments by the Council before opening the public hearing were quite reminiscent of the same problems that the Plan- ning Commission faced; that in most instances the Planning Commission resolved them to the best of their immediate ability; that there would have to be changes from time to time; that he did not think a hard and fast rule could be made that would apply to every property; that there would have to be exceptions made; that he was speaking as a private citizen with no personal property affected by this regula. tion in any way; that he would like to have this as a matter of record;,that he was not here with any personal ax to grind; that his concern was what he considered to be his sincere interest In the welfare of the community of Baldwin Park; that there were factors which he thought were very complimentary and very very helpful and the deep lot section was about as good as it could be stated in hard and fast rules, at least at this point, until there was some experience with it, however he had concern with regard to the sixty 60) foot frontage requirement; that he wanted to specifically share with the Council a few simple calculations based on rather recent subdivisions; that there was one on Badillo Street that he recalled with approximately 173 lots; that these lots had 50 ft, frontages based on the existing regulations; that with the 60 ft, frontage requirement and the 6,000 square foot minimum the potential yield of this subdivision would be reduced by 1/5 for every five lots that could be created; that now it would take the equivalent of the present six lots to create those same five lots with the adoption of this new R-1 regulation; that if you apply this 115 factor to the 173 lot subdivision on Bodillo Street you reduce the Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 1S, 1966 Page 17 lot yield by 35 lots; in a new area, and that subdivision, he thought his $6,000.00 per lot figure was rather realistic; that when he multiplied 35 lots time $6,000.00 he came up with $210#000,00v that this $21 Q, Q 0-,00 bad tG be, spr*ad among 138 future property owners and future citizens of Baldwin Park to the tune of $1521.75, roughly, per dwelling unit; the subdivider could not absorb $210,000.00; that this was a factor that needed to be taken into consideration as to whether it would stymie the orderly development of Baldwin Park; that there had been a 50 ft. frontage minimum and a 5,000 square foot minimum lot size as long as he could remember, he believed since incorporation; that a large percentage of the open space In Baldwin Park had already been developed; that the only thing he knew of comparable to the 173 lot subdivision was the potential off Center and Olive which was still a debatable issue; that the new regulation could adversely affect the eventual develop- ment of that property; that it certainly would from an R..i point of view; that he would hope that it could develop under the present zoning but this may or may not be the case; that there were smaller subdivisions; that if one applied the 1/5 reduction factor to the 35 lots, 7 lots would be lost; 7 x $6,000.00 was $42,000.00 on a now 35 tract sub- division which would then be a 28 tract subdivision; that this $42,000.00 divided among those 28 future property owners would be $1500.00 per dwelling unit that must be absorbed as a result of this increased requirement in land area; that going to a 15 lot subdivision, taking the 1/5 factor out and you lose 3 lots; that 3 times 6 was 18 spread among the remaining 12 property owners we're right back to our $1500.00 per lot; that this would increase building costs, dwelling units, by $1500.00 if the regulation was adopted; that in addition to this he thought the sixty 60) foot minimum frontage was unrealistic in too many instances, because of the present cuts of land and the nature of the small back lot subdivisions put together; that he did not want to go on the record as being opposed to sixty 60) foot frontages; that he thought it was a desirable frontage but he did not feel that this was a realistic trend in our community at this late date; that he asked only that the Council take this into consideration in their deliberation; that this was wrapped up, he agreed, in economics and more and more he got the impression that economics was no factor but this was an unrealistic point of view; that economics was the only factor that was going to effect the development of Baldwin Park; that If it could not be developed economically, It was not going to develop, and this must be considered; that the other main concern that he had was regarding the square footage of dwelling units; that the Planning Commission had also spent considerable time on this; that it had been duly debated and through due process had wound up being a minority of one in opposition to some of these things; that this was fine, he was not here as a Planning Commissioner, but yet at the same time he knew that he could not divorce himself from that respon- sibility; that he thought that economics and buyer demand would determine the size of dwelling unit that was to be built; that he knew what the motive was in this square footage requirement; that we" would like to see larger bedrooms.; that there were cubby holes in the wall all over town that one could hardly get a double bed In; that one could not restrict or upgrade the total square footage and control room size; that it was an unrealistic approach and, In his opinion, this was the primary reason for that section. Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«2 I I Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 15, 1966 Page 18 Mr. John McCoy, 4539 N. Center, Baldwin Park, California Property Brokers, stated he knew the Planning Commission had had many hearings on this although the method of notifying the citizens, he thought, was inadequate; that he did not know how many people that would be concerned would be able to see a little public notice in the Baldwin Park Bulletin; that he thought this concerned many people in Baldwin Park; that In regard to the ordinance under the item roomers" on page 3 he was wondering about requiring additional parking spaces for each roomer; what about elderly people that could no longer drive and were not necessarily in a rest home but were being cared for in a home and were no longer able to drive, that as he read this there would have to be another off street parking space which in many cases would not be possible the way that the houses were built today; that under item 4 under limitations on permitted uses nothing larger than a 3/4 ton pickup would be permitted; that he did not know what was right but he did not think that this was; that they had sold one of their houses on Vineland to a man who had a business I n Ba dwi a, Pdrk; that., to hact,;p o1a y about a ton or ton and half truck that he used in his JOHN MCCOY, 4539 N. Center, B,Pk., Calif. Property Brokers business and drove home occasionally; that if the neighbors wanted to object he would not be able to drive this truck home and it would create a hardship on him; that there were other items that probably should be taken into consideration as well; that as far as big trailers that were parked in driveways, campers, boats, junk cars, and what have you, he did not see anything In the ordinance that would iimit their parking In driveways and to him this was just as objectionable as a one ton truck; that In regard. to the lot size he did not know that he had a great deal to add although they had-developed a tract up on Walnut which pretty well builds up the circumstances of 132 by 300 foot lots and they had to dedicate 10 ft, on Walnut and thirty 30) back feet back on Monterey which left them about two hundred seventy 270) feet; that by the time they put in the half street on one side and then have their tentative in for the other half street it left them 100 ft. depth lots; that they developed these into five 5) lots; that both corner lots were just a little under sixty 60) feet and the interior lots were fifty-one 51) feet; that if they would have had to go to sixty 60) foot lots they would have lost a lot in both of the subdivisions; that he did not think people would pay any more more for a sixty 60) foot lot than for a fifty-one 51) foot or a fifty-nine 59) foot lot or whatever It was; that he thought the sixty 60) foot requirement would be taking away some of the rights of the property owner; that another item he did not see covered was setbacks on cul-de-sac streets they allowed either ten 10) or fifteen 15) feet; that this should be given consideration also. City Attorney Flandrick stated this was presently in another provision of the Code. Mr. McCoy further stated in regard to the building size he was very much against this also because he thought this was dictating what you have to build; that they had built 36 houses and had sold 24; that they had two different four bedroom plans which had about 1303 square feet; that they had had no objections from the buyers as far as room size or that they would like to have more square footage; that he thought they had satisfied customers throughout Baldwin Park; that development costs today were going up and the proposed regulations would further increase costs; that he did not think the people would benefit from it; that regarding the deep lot regulations he would like to Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 15, 1966 Page 19 be in favor of this, so many square feet per unit if you have a lot split, 30,000 square foot, and can't get a street in the back; that a person should be able to put five or six houses on that and ire€p it under the same ownership; that rather than have the property grow up in weeds he thought it would be better to have a house planned on a 5,000 square foot area; that this could be subject to approval as far as plot plan was concerned; that he felt sure there were lots in Baldwin Park that were 15,000-20,000 square feet that would be hurt by this particular ordinance; that as far as the driveway he saw no reason why ten 10) feet would not be ample instead of twelve 12) feet because one could not have two cars on twelve 12) feet anyway; that their subdivision on Walnut had 5,000 square foot lots all around; that because new lots were created they would have to go to 6,000 square feet; that he thought' this was wrong because across the street they would have 5,000 square foot lots; that he thought this would be true several places in Baldwin Park;' that if this were adopted there would be people coming in with variances and requests for changes to go back t: 5,000. Mr. Jack Baker, 4632 Harlan, Baldwin trk eked if JACK BAKER, one had a lot 120 x 200 with four houses on I T 1 d 4632 Harlan, B,Pk, one have to move the houses to get a tot split, Mayor McCaron stated that would have to Le presei tee: to the Director of Planning to determine Just the houses set, how the ground was cut and so forth. Mr. Baker stated if this was passed all lots w Could have to be 6,000 square feet, was this right. Mayor McCaron stated 6,000 square feet minimum; that this only would effect new development and new lot splits. Mr. Baker stated the regulation regarding trucks would put a hardship on people who had a camper with a ton truck. City Attorney Flandrick stated this particular require- ment had been a zoning regulation since 1962. Mr. Gus Nesseth, 4539 N. Center, Baldwin Park, stated that GUS NESSETH, 4539 N. a lot of the testimony he had thought of giving had been Center, B.Pk, given already; that picking up figures that Mr. Sutter field had quoted regarding increase of cost per lot of approx imp to t y $1500.00 plus the extra cos" of the 145 square feet inclti ding their size of a pproximr: tee` of 1305 feet, 1r t 14r and us l g a rotmc? f i gu--a of 10.00 f o; cow: i a a bit of money; that t is would raise th price of a house considerably; that they were trying to build in Baldwin F-"ark a house that a working man can affoi'-d; that at the present time the houses they were building were selling for $19,500.00; that the lending institution required that the person earn in excess of $650.00 per month with no bills or very few bills; that the average buyer earned approximately $650.00; that if they raised the price of houses they would not be able to qualify to buy; that they were having a tough enough time to qualify now; that they were building a good house for the money with a minimum amount of profit; that he had checked i'ts F.H.A. f inancinag and if they or': ir;ied, BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 15, 1966 Page 20 I went to a larger house, a larger lot, it was going to be the entire trend basically to a higher cost house; that he thought there could be an orderly development without raising the requirements at the present time. Mayor McCaron asked what he had in mind regarding an upgrading program. Mr. Nesseth stated he felt they were upgrading by develop- ing back yards and cleaning up trash areas throughout the City on the basis they were doing it now; that it was true that a castle could not be built on a 5,000 square foot lot but one could build a good comfortable home, although the comment had come to him on several occasions that probably the room sizes were not as large as they would like to have them; that they would like to build a big house but they had to stay within the means of the buyers; that he thought they had tried to do a real good job; that if other builders were to came into the area and build approximately the same quality home this would definitely be upgrading; that there were not to many large pieces that could be developed In Baldwin Park; that he thought the largest one that he could think of at the moment, not counting Mr. Neufeld's project, would be about seventy-three 73) lots; that they were not talking about large developments of hundreds of lots; that they were going to be able to develop ten here twelve there and probably only as high as thirty 30) lots. Mayor McCaron asked if Mr. Nesseth had any suggestions as to what an Increase in the lot width would do as far as actual development, as to whether it would Improve the serviceability of the home and the yard, Mr, Nesseth stated they found that the people today were not requiring a one hundred fifty 150) foot lot or one hundred twenty 120) foot even; that they found very few people who were looking for a large lot; that most people today wanted room for a patio, enough area to have a small play area for children, flowers and a lawn. Mayor McCaron asked, on lot depths, were they allowing room for a patio or for a little yard space. Mr. Nesseth stated he did not feet that fifteen 15) feet was adequate for a project of any size; that he thought there were cases where fifteen 15) feet was all that one could give; that again he thought they would be selling these to a certain kind of buyer who would buy a fifteen 15) foot back yard. Mayor McCaron asked if most of the sales had been to people with families. Mr. Nesseth stated their average family had two, possibly three children at the most; that the people who would buy fifteen 15) foot back yards as a rule would not have three or four children because they were looking for a specific use; that there were a lot of cases where they had in excess of fifteen 15) feet of back yard. Mr. McCoy stated on a one hundred foot depth lot there was a twenty 20) foot setback and normally the house was about forty-five 45) feet In depth; that there was an average of twenty-five, 25) to thirty 30) feet as Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 15, 1966 Page 21 far as the back yard was concerned; that he did not think people today wanted a big yard; that there was too much to do in Southern California; that most people would put it into a patio or rock or something to do away with the yard work. IW 6 Hesseth stated one would find that as a whole, back yard and front yard would be a lot better maintained with lawn, etc. If the property was not too large; that here again he thought it was supply and demand; that they had only been selling their houses for ten to twelve weeks; that they had twenty-five 25) sold; that this, he thought, was a pretty good record; that this showed that their houses were in demand and that Baldwin Park was going ahead and progressing; that there were a lot of things in the tproposed) regulations that he thought should be kept but he thought that the sixty 60) foot frontage should not be kept. Mr. Fred Russo stated he was in favor of regulating the zoning and he had checked the ordinance sheet the Planning Director had given him; that he was in favor of almost every issue except those which would retard the highest and most use of the development of the property; that many of the areas that now had chicken coops and rabbit hutches had the prices at that point where they were waiting for the lot value to come up to the point where a developer can get a certain amount of lots in the area so they would sell and subdivided so that the undesirable things could be gotten rid of; that an increase in the lot sizes, and an increase in square footage per lot would postpone this development. Mayor McCaron stated that basically Mr, Russo was speaking on economics. Mr. Howard C. Sutterfield stated the Book of America had just completed an economic survey of the Los Angeles- Long Beach metropolitan area; that from this he got the information that current development in Los Angeles County was seventy-five percent 75%) multiple dwelling units and twenty-five percent 25%) R-l; that this was a very definite trend, He stated his question was what was the motive at this point for 6,000 square foot lots size and sixty 60) foot frontages, who was requesting this and what was it going to benefit and was it actually going to benefit anyone. He stated he certainly had had no one pressuring him to increase lot size and he questioned whether-any of us had had, why after ten 10) years of 5,000 square foot development with approximately 2/3 of the land area deveic:pe3 and 1/3 of it remaining to be developed do we suddenly feel the need to increase lot size. Mr, James Lockwood 4049 Hornbrook, Baldwin Park, stated JAMES LOCKM1 he agreed with some of the previous speakers. He asked 4049 Nornbrook, if the larger lot sizes would mean an increase in the B.M. taxes. Mayor McCeron stated there would not be an increase in rate but in the individual value of the property. A)r. Lockwood stated it was almost impossible to sell a lot with two houses on it unless the property owner was able to get a lot split; that this would increase taxes. Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 15, 1966 Page 22 I I Councilman Morehead stated the only part of the proposed ordinance that he would consider at the present time was the subject which the Planning Commission was directed to study, the deep lot development; that at the present time he respected the current ordinance, except there was nothing for deep lot development; that he thought the Council was going to get more development on deep lots than has been recommended; that in his opinion the only thing that he thought should be changed in the current 2-I zone was a method to permit this development. Councilman Crites stated as he recalled he had made some suggestions at a combined meeting of the various boards and commissions probably a year ago, something on that same general order; that his personal feeling at this point was that there was too much in this ordinance at one time to accept the whole thing en masse; that he had mixed feelings on this too; that the lot size was adequate at 5,000; that the big and overgrown lots that you can't do anything in the world with, were the problem; that the rest of it, he thought was all right; that as had been stated by a number of people the development we have currently going was certainly improving the area; that any time one could take a rabbit coop or a chicken house down and put in a respectable dwelling unit, the area was improving, providing the man next door does not leave a similar mess. Councilwoman Gregory stated she guessed she was a minority of one as Mr. Butterfield stated; that she could not find too much wrong with the proposed amendments; that actually the Planning Commission had done a very fine job with one thought in mind and that was upgrading Paldwin Park; that she had watched other communities and what they had been doing with their demands; that listening to developers was very depressing; that they seemed to relegate Baldwin Park to always be Billy Goat Acres"; that she did not go along with this too much; that she would like to hear from people too on the other hand that would like to live in larger homes; that she thought the reason Covina had grown so and lest Covina was because they had larger lot sizes; that the professional people move out of Baldwin Park, the majority of them, that aldwin Park had been relegated to the dingbats and smaller homes and smaller rooms and all of this; that she thought the Commission was on the right track; that she would like to see them continue; that she agreed with what they were trying to do; that she thought changes could be made and would be made forever after on such a thing as this, but she could not deny their work in this and could not deny their dreams and their hopes for Baldwin Park; that she went along with them. Councilman Crites stated he approved of the Planning Commission's ideas of trying to upgrade the community; that he was not out of harmony with that in the slightest. Councilman Adair stated he thought the Council had wanted mostly a study and recommendation for deep lots. Mayor McCaron stated as far as he was concerned, there were several items that should be restudied; the width, possibly cut down to fifty-five 55) foot and see how that would fit the picture; possible hold the overall footage of the lots to 5,000 feet which would give the Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«295 Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 15, 1966 Page 23 tots just a little bit better depth, possibly on corner lots or reverse corner lots where they have a garage on one side, the setback should be that of the setback of the adjacent home, in other words, right on a corner where there were exactly two homes coming in with a setback of twenty 20) feet that probably should be governed; that there should be a deeper rear yard than fifteen I5) feet; that as far as the square footage was concerned of the buildings themselves he realized it would upgrade the size of some of the rooms; that this was good thinking inasmuch as the jump from a three 3) bedroom dwelling to a four 4) bedroom dwelling showed here as 150 square feet, and from a two to a three there was a 300 square foot jump; that in other words it would appear that the plot behind it is that where there were more people, more bedrooms used and more people living in a home possibly some of the footage should go into the living quarters, the kitchen and the living room and the family room, dining room or other portions as well as just the bedrooms; that this did make sense; that according to some of the testimony he had heard here tonight the maximum on a four 4) bedroom dwelling here from some of the sizes that were being built and sold now as four 4) bedroom homes there was a difference of about 145 square feet; that he did not know whether this would make a difference of 145 added on to all the rooms; that this might make them a little bit more equitable, it might be what some of them like as far as smaller rooms were concerned in a four bedroom home; that whether this was adequate, would it be better to go ahead and say that there should be a minimum sized bedroom it was hard to state, because a person did not know what the occupancy of each room was going to be; that he thought possibly all of these items should be sent back to the Planning Commission with all of the thoughts and all of the testimony that had been given this evening and as much as a lot of the testimony that was given here was not given at the Planning Commission meeting so that they would have had the benefit of what was said; that they could reconsider and resubmit their ordinance with any changes, if any, they wish to make; that he noticed from the Planning Commission minutes they did not have the testimony the Council had; that he suggested that it be resubmitted to the Planning Commission for restudy in its entirety. City Attorney Flandrick stated he would suggest the Council advise the Planning Commission as to whether the Council wished them to rely simply on the minutes of this meeting this evening or whether the Council wanted them to hold another public hearing. Mayor McCaron stated he thought the Council should let them choose the method they wished. Councilman Morehead indicated he concurred with the Mayor. AT 10:15 P.M. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MOTION MADE RECESS FOR TEN MINUTES. Mayor McCaron stated he would like to handle this item before the recess. The motion was withdrawn. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THIS FINAL DRAFT OF THE R-I ZONE ORDINANCE THAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED TO THIS COUNCIL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION BE REFERRED BACK TO PLANNING v WITH THE COMPLETE MINUTES OF THIS SESSION TO BE ADDED TO THEIR TESTIMONY AND LET THEP,1 DIRECT THE TYPE OF MEETING THEY WANT TO HOLD AND PAAKE FURTHER RECOPVENDATIONS TO THIS COUNCIL. COUNCILMAN CRITES SECONDED. There were no objec- tions, the motion carried and was so ordered by Mayor 00- McCaron. 00- MOT I ON WITHDRAWN MOTION MOTION MADE AND CARRIED THAT THIS FINAL DRAFT OF THE R-I ZONE ORD. BE REFERRED BACK TO P.C. FOR FURTHER RECOAWENDAT I ONS TO THIS COUNCIL BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«W Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council It was the time and place fixed for a public hearing on a Short Form 1911 Act for curbs and gutters on the westerly side of Vineland Avenue between Central Avenue and Badillo Street. Proper Postings and mailings had been accomplished. City Attorney Flandrick stated there was one protest on this matter regarding the cost involved in view of their limited income. City Engineer French stated over fifty percent 50;x) of the curbs and gutters were in. As there was no one in the audience desiring to speak in behalf of or in opposition to this Short Form 1911 Act, Mayor MMcCaron declared the public hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 66-160 MAKING FINDINGS AND OVERRULING PROTESTS AND OBJECTIONS AND ORDERING THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STREETS OF THE CITY OF BALDWva'IN PARK TO CONSTRUCT CURBS AND GUTTERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK STANDARD PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS CONFORJ.II NG WITH E'X'ISTING CURBS AND GUTTERS CONSTRUCTED UPON THEM FACING W'JESTERLY SID` OF VINELAND AVENUE BETWEEN CENTRAL AVENUE AND 3ADILLO STREET. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-160 BE ADOPTED AND FURTHER READING BE W:'JAIVED. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN GREGORY, ADAIR, CRITES, MORE HEAD AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- It was the time and place fixed for a public hearing on a Short Form 1911 Act for curbs and gutters on the west side of Big Dalton Avenue between Sierra Way and Clydewood Street. Proper postings and mailings had been accomplished. No written protests had been received. City Engineer French stated over fifty percent 50%) of the curbs and gutters were in. As there was no one in the audience desiring to speak either in behalf of or in opposition to this Short Form 1911 Act, Mayor McCaron declared the public hearing closed. Continued) June 15, 1966 Page 24 PUBLIC HEARING SHORT F071% 1911 ACT CG 1LY SIDE V I NE L AND AVE 3E T';PE FN CENTRAL AVE. AND BADILLO ST. POSTINGS, h ILINGS ONE PROTEST RE S UM,E PUBLIC HEARING DECLARED CLOSED RES. NO. 66-160 RES. NO. 66-160 ADOPTED PUBLIC HEARING SHORT FORM 1911 ACT CG W SIDE BIG DALTON AVE. BETWEEN SIERRA WAY AND CLYDEWOOD ST. POSTINGS, MAILINGS NO WRITTEN PROTESTS RESUME PUBLIC HEARING DECLARED CLOSED BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«2 Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council RESOLUTION NO. 66-161 MAKING FINDINGS AND OVERRULING PROTESTS AND OBJECTIONS AND ORDERING THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STREETS OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK TO CONSTRUCT CURBS AND GUTTERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK STANDARD PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS CONFORMING WITH EXISTING CURBS AND GUTTERS CONSTRUCTED UPON THEM FACING WEST SIDE OF BIG DALTON AVENUE BETWEEN SIERRA WAY AND CLYDEU'OOD STREET. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-161 BE ADOPTED AND FURTHER READING BE WA I VED COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, GREGORY, ADA I R, CR I TES AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- It was the time and place fixed for a public hearing on a Short Form 1911 Act for curbs, gutters and sidewalks on the west side of La Rica Avenue between Ramona Boulevard and Baldwin Park Boulevard. Proper postings and mailings had been accomplished. City Attorney Flandrick stated there were two 2) written protest; one from Isabel L. Christie, 3955 La Rica Street, dated June 13, 1966; and one from Mr. Floyd Bennett. Assistant City Engineer Fogle stated that after further investigation it was recommended that the property owner be obligated only for the installation of sidewalks and driveway approaches and that the City would replace existing curb. He further stated the existing curb had no gutter; that it was not on the proper alignment or grade but apparently at the time it was installed it was installed according to the County's requirements. Mayor MtcCaron asked if this related only to the two protesting. Assistant City Engineer Fogle stated he thought it applied to most of the frontage. Mayor McCaron asked if the curbs were moved back where did that place Mrs. Christie in relation to being able to put the sidewalks in. Assistant City Engineer Fogle stated he would have to check that out; that if he remembered correctly they did build on the property line so it would possibly be a problem. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT ITEM NO. 7 BE CONTINUED TO THE NE'; T REGULAR MEETING. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. There were no objections, the motion carried and was so ordered by Mayor P:cCaron. 00- June 15, 1966 Page 25 RES. NO. 66-161 RES. NO. 66-161 ADOPTED PUBLIC HEARING SHORT FORM 1911 ACT CGS 4'1 SIDE LA RICA AVE. BETWEEN RAMONA BLVD. AND B.PK. BLVD. POSTINGS, MAILINGS 2 WRITTEN PROTESTS CONT'D TO JULY 6, 1966 BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council It was the time and place fixed for a public hearing on a Short Form 1911 Act for curbs and gutters on the east side of Big Dalton Avenue between Channing Street and Stockdale Street. Proper postings and mailings had been accomplished No written protests had been received. Assistant City Engineer Fogle stated over fifty percent 50%) of the curbs and gutters were in. As there was no one in the audience desiring to speak in behalf of or in opposition to this Short Form 1911 Act, Mayor McCaron declared the public hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 66-163 MAKING FINDINGS AND OVERRULING PROTESTS AND OBJECTIONS AND ORDERING THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STREETS OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK TO CONSTRUCT CURBS AND GUTTERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK STANDARD PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS CONFORMING WITH EXISTING CURBS AND GUTTERS CONSTRUCTED UPON THEM FACING EAST SIDE OF BIG DALTON AVENUE BETWEEN CHANNING STREET AND STOCKDALE STREET. COUNCILMAN ADAIR MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-163 BE ADOPTED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN ADAIR, MOREI-EAD CRITES GREGORY AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- It was the time and place fixed for a public hearing on a Short Form 1911 Act, Parcel No. on the east side of Vineland Avenue between Merced and Durness, to hear any protests in regard to the cost for the construction of curbs and gutters. Proper postings and mailings had been accomplished City Attorney Flandrick stated the assessment had been paid. COUNCILMAN MOREFEAD MOVED THAT ITEM NO. 9 BE DELETED FROM THE AGENDA. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. There were no objections, the motion carried and was so ordered by Mayor McCaron. 00- It was the time and place fixed for a public hearing on a Short Form 1911 Act, Parcel Numbers I anc 2, on the east side of Vineland Avenue between Badillo Street and Elstead Street, to hear any protest in regard to the cost for the construction of curbs, gutters and sidewalks. Cont.i nued) June 15, 1966 Page 26 PUBLIC HEARING SHORT FORM 1911 ACT CG E SIDE BIG DALTON AVE. BETWEEN CHANNING ST. AND STOCKDALE ST. POSTINGS, MAILINGS NO WRITTEN PROTESTS RESUME PUBLIC HEARING DECLARED CLOSED RES. No 66-163 RES. NO. 66-163 ADOPTED PUBLIC HEARING SHORT FORM 1911 ACT PARCEL NO. 4, EAST SIDE OF VINE- LAND AVE. BETWEEN MERCED AND DURNESS CG COST POSTINGS, MAILINGS ITEM NO. DELETED PUBLIC HEARING SHORT FORM 1911 ACT PARCEL NOS. I AND 2 EAST SIDE OF VINELAND AVE. BETt°EEEN BADILLO ST. AND ELSIEAD ST. CGS COST BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$Í«2969 Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council Proper postings and mailings had been accomplished No written protest had been received. Assistant City Engineer Fogle stated that Parcel No. I was in the amount of $346.50 and Parcel No. 2, $L1.11.50. As there was no one in the audience desiring to speak in behalf of or in opposition to this Short Form 1911 Act, Mayor McCaron declared the public hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 66-164. MAKING FINDINGS AND OVERRULING PROTESTS AND OBJECTIONS AND CONFIRMING THE REPORT OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STREETS AND THE ASSESSMENT AGAINST THE PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED WHICH FRONTS UPON THE IMPROVEMENTS SO CONSTRUCTED CONSTITUTING A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT A LIEN UPON THE PROPERTY AND ORDERING THE COST OF THE WORK TO BE ENTERED IN THE CURRENT ASSESSMENT ROLL AND ESTABLISHING AN INTEREST RATE ON ALL UNPAID ASSESSMENTS COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-164 BE ADOPTED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, GREGORY, ADAIR, CRITES AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- It was the time and place fixed for a public hearing on a Short Form 1911 Act, Parcel Numbers I and 2, on the east side of Vineland Avenue between Merced Avenue and Cloverside Street, to hear any protests in regard to the cost for the construction of curbs and gutters. Proper postings and mailings had been accomplished. No written protest had been received. City Attorney Flandrick stated that the assessment had been paid on Parcel No. 2. Assistant City Engineer Fogle stated that Parcel No. 2 was in the amount of $109.38 As there was no one in the audience desiring to speak in behalf of or in opposition to this Short Form 1911 Act, Mayor McCaron declared the public hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 66-165 MAKING FINDINGS AND OVERRULING PROTESTS AND OBJECTIONS AND CONFIRMING THE REPORT OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STREETS AND THE ASSESSMENT AGAINST THE PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED WHICH FRONTS UPON THE IMPORVEMENTS SO CONSTRUCTED CONSTITUTING A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT A LIEN UPON THE PROPERTY Continued) i June 15, 1966 Page 27 POSTINGS, MAILINGS NO WRITTEN PROTESTS PARCEL I $316.50 PARCEL 2 $411.50 PUBLIC HEARING DECLARED CLOSED RES. NO. 66-164 RES. NO. 66-164. ADOPTED PUBLIC HEARING SHORT FORM 1911 ACT CG EAST SIDE OF VINELAND BETWEEN MERCED AVE. AND CLOVERSIDE ST. CG COST POSTINGS, MAILINGS NO WRITTEN PROTESTS PARCEL 2 PAID PARCEL 2 $109.38 PUBLIC HEARING DECLARED CLOSED RES. NO. 66-165 BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š $Í«T 2970 I I Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council AND ORDERING THE COST OF THE WORK TO BE ENTERED IN THE CURRENT ASSESSMENT ROLL AND ESTABLISHING AN INTEREST RATE ON ALL UNPAID ASSESSMENTS COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-165 BE ADOPTED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCIL/,,AN ADAIR ECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN GREGORY, ADA! R, CR I TES, t,'\OEEHEAD AND h"AYOR iCCAEON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- It was the time and place fixed for a public hearing on a Short Form 1911 Act, Parcel Numbers r-, 5, 7 and 8, on the east side of Vineland Avenue between Durness Street and the San Bernardino Freeway, to hear any protests in regard to the cost for the construction of curbs and gutters. Proper postings and mailings had been accomplished. No written protests had been received. Assistant City Engineer Fogle stated that Parcel No. 4 was in the amount of $148.05; Parcel 5, $131.25; Parcel 7, $148.05; Parcel 8, $54.03. As there was no one in the audience desiring to speak in behalf of or in opposition to this Short Form 1911 Act, ayor / cCaron declared the public hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 66-166 h%AKING FINDINGS AND OVERRULING PROTESTS AND OBJECTIONS AND CONFIRMING THE REPORT OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STREETS AND THE ASSESSMENT AGAINST THE PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED WHICH FRONTS UPON THE IMPROVEMENTS SO CONSTRUCTED CONSTITUTING A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT A LIEN UPON THE PROPERTY AND ORDERING THE COST OF THE WORK TO BE ENTERED I N THE CURRENT ASSESSMENT ROLL AND ESTABL ISHING AN INTEREST RATE ON ALL UNPAID ASSESSMENTS COUNCILMAN MviOREHEAD MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-166 BE ADOPTED AND FURTHE READING DE WAIVED. COUNCILMAN CRITES SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, CRITES, ADAIR, GREGORY AND MAYOR M"MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- June 15, 1966 Page 28 RES. NO. 66-165 ADOPTED PUBLIC HEARING SHORT FORM 1911 ACT PARCEL NOS. 4, 5, 7 AND 8, EAST SIDE OF VINELAND AVE. BETWEEN DURNESS ST. AND SAN BERN. FREEWAY CG COST POSTINGS, MAIL I FNS NO WRITTEN PROTESTS PARCEL 4 $148.05 PARCEL 5 $131.25 PARCEL 7 $148.05 PARCEL 8 $ 54.03 PUBLIC HEARING DECLARED CLOSED RES. NO. 66-166 RES. NO. 66-166 ADOPTED BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š $Í«2971 Regular Fleeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 15, 1966 age 29 RESOLUTION NO. 66-158 SETTING A TIME RES. NO. 66-158 AND PLACE FOR A HEARING TO DETERMINE SETTING T iMAE AND PLACE W'METHER CERTAIN BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES FOR HEARING TO DETER- CONSTITUTE PUBLIC NUISANCES N-35, N-36, MINE WHETHER CERTAIN N-37, N-38 AND N-39) BLDGS. AND STRUCTURES CONSTITUTE PUBLIC NUISANCES N-35, N-36, N-37, N-38 AND N-39) P.H. JULY 20, 1966 COUNCILMAN CRITES MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-158 BE RES. NO. 66-158 ADOPTED AND FURTHER READING BE JAIVED. COUNCILMAN ADOPTED MOREHEAD SECONDED. The motion carried by the following votg: AYES: COUNCILMEN CRITES, MOREHEAD, ADAIR, GREGORY AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- RESOLUTION NO. 66-157 SETTING A HEARING DATE FOR ANY PROTESTS OR OBJECTIONS TO THE REPORT OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER ON WORK COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 3200 ET SEQ OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK(N-8) COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-157 BE ADOPTED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, GREGORY, ADAIR, CRITES AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- Assistant City Engineer Fogle reviewed a report regarding the final acceptance of Vineland Avenue stating that the project, Gas Tax Project No. 80, had been inspected and found to be satisfactory; that it was recommended that the project be accepted and instruct the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ACCEPT THE PROJECT AND INSTRUCT THE CITY ENGINEER TO FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION. COUNCILMAN CRITES SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN PACREHEAD, CRITES, ADAM, GREGORY AND MAYOR h1CCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE RES. NO. 66-157 SETTING HEARING DATE FOR PROTESTS OR OBJEC- TIONS TO REPORT OF C A.0. ON WORK COM- PLETED UNDER SECTION 3200 ET SEQ OF MUM. CODE OF CITY OF B.PK. NN-8) F.H. JULY 20, 1966 RES. NO. 66-157 ADOPTED FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF VINELAND AVE. GAS TAX PROJECT NO. 80 PROJECT ACCEPTED CITY ENGR. INSTRUCTED TO FILE NOTICE OF COMPLETION 00- BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š $Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council Assistant City Engineer 7--ogle reviewed a report on the initiation of a Short Form 1911 Act for curbs and gutters on the northeast side of Pacific Avenue between Puente Avenue and f`Iayland Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 66-167 DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO CAUSE THE CONSTRUCTION OF CURB.-) AND GUTTERS PURSUANT TC THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 5870 ET SEQ OF THE STREETS AND 1-11 GI-f:'/AY` CODE OF TIIE STATE CT CAL I FORi`! A June 15, 1966 Page 30 INITIATION OF SHORT FORM 1911 ACT N'E SIDE PACIFIC AVE. BETWEEN PUENTE AVE. AND MAYLAND AVE. NO. 66-167 DECLARING INTENT. TO CAUSE CONSTRUC- TION OF CG PURSUANT RC PROVISIONS OF SECTION 5870 ET SEQ OF STS. AND H I GHWAYS CODE OF STATE OF CALIF. P.H. JULY 20, 1966 COUNCILMAN ADA!R MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-167 BE ADOPTED AND FURTHER READING BE u A i I'ED COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONNDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN ADAIR, GREGORY, CRITES, 1<i4OREHEAD AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- Assistant City Engineer Fogle reviewed a report on the initiation of a Short Form 1911 Act for curbs and gutters on the southeast side of Pacific Avenue between Ardilla Avenue and Mayland Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 66-168 DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO CAUSE THE CONSTRUCTION OF CURBS AND GUTTERS PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 5870 ET SEQ OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNCILMAN hAOREHEAD MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 66-168 BE ADOPTED AND FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN AOREHEAD, GREGORY, ADA I R, CR I TES AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- Assistant City Engineer Fogle reviewed a report regarding the release of bonds for Tract 30159 stating that the off-site improvements had now been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications with the exception of minor cleanup; that it was recommended that Continued) RES. NO. 66-167 ADOPTED INITIATION OF SHORT FO;PW1911 ACT SE SIDE PACIFIC AVE. BET1;'E, N ARDILLA AVE. AND MiAYLAND AVE. RES. NO. 66-168 DECLARING INTENT. TO CAUSE CONSTRUC- TION OF CG PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS OF SECTION 5870 ET SEQ OF STS. AND H I GHVJAYS CODE OF STATE OF CALIF. P.H. JULY 20, 1966 RES. NO. 56-168 ADOPTED RELEASE OF BONDS TRACT NO. 30159 BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š $Í«2973 Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council the improvement bonds be released and all cash deposits be held until all the cleanup and the centerline ties are completed. Councilman Morehead stated he had reason to believe that the trees had not been planted on Benbow or Norco. Assistant City Engineer Fogle stated that there was enough money in the cash deposit to cover this item; that they would be planted before the cash deposit was released. COUNCILMAN CRITES MOVED THAT THE BONDS FOR TRACT NO. 30159 BE RELEASED AND ALL CASH DEPOSITS BE HELD UNTIL ALL THE CLEANUP IS COMPLETED AND THE CENTERLINE TIES ARE COMPLETED. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN CRITES, MOREHEAD, ADAIR, GREGORY AND PAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- ORDINANCE NO. 455 AMENDING THE ZONING h W OF SAID CITY, AND REZONING CERTAIN HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM ZONE R-3 TO C-2 ZONE CASE NO. Z-290) COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY MOVED THAT FURTHER READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 455 BE WAIVED. COUNCILMAN CRITES SECONDED. There were no objections, the motion carried and was so ordered by Mayor McCaron. COUNCILW01,141 GREGORY MOVED THAT ORDINANCE NO. 455 BE ADOPTED. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN GREGORY, ADAIR, CRITES, MOREHEAD AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- Councilman Morehead stated he was concerned with the property at Francisquito, Maine and the freeway; that this was some twenty-five 25) to twenty-eight 28) acres that was rezoned some time ago to C-2A; that it was rezoned to C-2A to control the development; that recently the Board of Zoning Adjustments had granted zone variances 2) on this property; that since the C-2A had only been on the property for a short period of time he thought the City was setting a precedent in granting zone variances here; that possibly the property should be reclassified; that if the zone variances continued to come in the purpose for which the C-2A was created would be defeated; that possibly a moratorium should be considered for either variances Continued) June 15, 1966 Page 31 BONDS RELEASED CASH DEPOSITS HELD UNTIL ALL CLEANUP IS COMPLETED AND CENTERLINE TIES ARE COMPLETED ORD. NO. 455 AMEND. ZON. MAP OF SAID CITY, AND REZONING CERTAIN HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM ZONE R-3 TO C-2 ZONE CASE NO. Z-290) FURTHER READING OF ORD. NO. 455 WA I VE D ORD. NO. 455 ADOPTED RE PROPERTY AT FRANCISQUITO, MAINE AND FREEIWJAY C-2A ZONE CASE NO. Z-195) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š $Í«2974 I Regular fleeting of the Baldwin Park City Council or conditional use permits until such time as the Planning Commission and the Council decide whether or not C-2A was not the proper zoning. Councilman Crites asked if this was the property that a gentleman in the audience had recently indicated that about 75%% to 80% had been bargained for for a major development. Councilman Morehead stated according to his research this was not true. Councilman Adair stated he understood some property owners were asking $2.85 a square foot for the property. Mayor McCaron stated Planning Director Chivetta had suggested the possibility of a zoning overlay over the entire property; that this was not an area that needed rehabilitation; that if there was any type of development for the benefit of the City of Baldwin Park itself it should be a type of development that would be regional in scope and would draw from the entire area rather than trying to depned on the area immediately around for its trade; he further stated perhaps the Council could instruct the Planning Director and City Attorney to bring back a study and recommendation in regard to an overlay zoning. Planning Director Chivetta stated there were actually three 3) variances approved in the last eighteen 18) months; that one was for the property on the south corner of Erancisquito and Maine, 3090 Maine Avenue; that the one prior to this one was flr. Perlin's located on Baldwin Park and Tracy where he had an acre of ground but was adding to a nonconforming use; that the third one approved was null and void because the appli- cant never exercised the conditions of the variance. He stated that the argument brought forth each and every time was that because of economics that the developer could not pull together an acre of land to develop. City Attorney Flandrick cautioned the Council not to get into the facts of the variance case. June 15, 1966 Page 32 Geoffrey Markell, 4544 Landis, Baldwin Park, stated GEOFFREY MARKELL, he would like to encourage the Council to set a precedent 4544 LANDIS, B.PK. because if any applicant comes in and proves a hardship and no one testifies against the application, it was difficult for the Board of Zoning Adjustments to make a decision. COUNCILMAN EIOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPEAL MOTION MADE AND THE DEC ION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS IN ZV-158 CARRIED THAT COUNCIL TO THE CITY COUNCIL. COUNCIL!1OE"SAN GREGORY SECONDED. APPEAL DECISION OF The motion carried by the following vote: BZA IN ZV-158 TO CITY COUNCIL AYES: COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, GREGORY, ADAIR, CRITES AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š!$Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council City Attorney Flandrick stated that he and Planning Director Chivetta would give the Council a report on some feasible problems relating to an overlay zone for this and all other C-2A zoned properties. Councilman Morehead asked how could the C-2A be handled to where the Board of Zoning Adjustments would not consider anymore variances or conditional use permits. City Attorney Flandrick stated there would have to be a change in the Municipal Code; that he did not see how the Council could stop this; that as a matter of fact he was not even certain that the Council would want to in terms of some of the existing developments in that zone, for example, if someone wanted to expand a nonconforming use and the Code had been amended they would not be permitted to do that; that the Council had control over the action of the Board. Mayor McCaron stated that some arrangement should be made to convey the Council's thoughts to the Board of Zoning Adjustments. 00- Mayor McCaron stated there was one item brought up this evening concerning a variance for dog kennel in a residential section on Joanbridge and Bleecker; that even though it was M-1 Zone, it was adjoining residential property. MAYOR MCCARON MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS IN CP-77 TO THE CITY COUNCIL. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MAYOR P,ICCARON, COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, ADAIR, CRITES AND GREGORY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 00- In answer to a question by Councilman Crites, City Attorney Flandrick stated the attorney for Mrs. Igna had just received from the District Court of Appeals his ninth consecutive thirty 30) day continuance; that this would expire on June 23rd; that he would make another motion for dismissal at that time. 00- Chief Administrative Officer Nordby stated the meeting with Supervisor Bonelli on the park situation was scheduled for Monday, June 20, 1966, at 9:30 a.m.; that he had material to review with the Council and suggested that the Council adjourn to June 16, 1966, in the afternood. AT I 1 20 P V- COUNC I LMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE C I TY COUNCIL ADJOURN TO JUNE 16, 1966, AT 4:00 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CH,NIBER OF THE CITY HALL. June 15, 1966 Page 33 CITY ATTY. AND PLAN. DIR. TO GIVE COUNCIL REPORT ON OVERLAY ZONE FOR C-2A PROPERTIES RE CP-77 MOTION MADE AND CARRIED THAT COUNCIL APPEAL DECISION OF BZA IN CP-77 TO COUNCIL RE LITIGATION IGNA MTG. WITH SUPER- VISOR BONELLI ON PARK SITUATION SCHEDULED FOR MONDAY, JUNE 20, 1966 AT 9:30 A.M. A,MOT ION MADE Continued) BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š"$Í«Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council June 15, 1966 Page 34 The motion was withdrawn. MOT ION 171 THDRAIVN 00- i Mayor A1cCaron stated that he and Councilman Crites MAYOR MCCARON AND would be out of the City on July 6, 1966. COUNCILMAN CRITES TO BE OUT OF CITY JULY 6, 1966 City Attorney Flandrick stated it would be requested that the adjourned meeting of June 16, 1966, be adjourned to June 22, 1966; that there was a hearing set for June 22, 1966, for the extension of the moratorium on service stations. 00- AT 11:30 P.M. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CITY ADJ. AT 11:30 P.M. COUNCIL ADJOURN TO THURSDAY, JUNE 16, 1966, AT 4:00 P.M. TO THURSDAY, JUNE 16, IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY HALL. COUNCILWOMAN 1966, AT 4:00 P.M. GREGORY SECONDED. There were no objections, the motion IN COUNCIL CHAMBER carried and was so ordered by Mayor A1cCaron. OF CITY HALL 00- THELMA L. BALKUS, CITY CLERK APPROVED: July 20 1966. Date of Distribution to City Council July 15 1966. Date of Distribution to Departments July 13 1966. BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š#$Í«REGULAR MEETING OF THE BALDWIN PARK CITY COUNCIL JUNE 15, 1966 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER) 14.03 East Pacific Avenue 7:30 P.M. I 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. FLAG SALUTE Roll Call: Present: COUNCILMEN ADAIR, CRITES, GREGORY, MOREHEAD AND MAYOR M CCARON Absent: CITY ENGINEER FRENCH ROLL CALL Also Present: CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER NORDBY, CITY ATTORNEY FLANDRICK, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER FOGLE, BUILDING SUPERINTENDENT KALB- FLEISCH, PLANNING DIRECTOR CHIVETTA, FINANCE DIRECTOR DUNCAN, CITY TREASURER PUGH AND CITY CLERK BALKUS Chief of Police Adams arrived at 8:00 p.m.) 00- AT 11:30 P.M. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CITY ADJ. AT 11:30 P.M. COUNCIL ADJOURN TO THURSDAY, JUNE 16, 1966, AT 4:00 P.M. TO THURS., JUNE IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY HALL. COUNCILWOMAN 16, 1966, AT 14.:00 P.M. GREGORY SECONDED. There were no objections, the motion IN COUNCIL CHAMBER carried and was so ordered by Mayor McCeron. OF CITY HALL 00- THELLMA L7. BA LK U 5, CITY CLERK DATED: JUNE 16, 1966 TIME: 7; 3c) A.M. BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1966 06 15 CC MIN HÄ—@¸— 1 Š$$Í«REGULAR MEETING OF THE BALDWIN PARK CITY COUNCIL JUNE 15, 1966 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER) 1403 East Pacific Avenue 7:30 P.M. I 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. FLAG SALUTE Roll Cal I: Present: COUNCILMEN ADAIR, CRITES, ROLL CALL GREGORY, MOREHEAD AND MAYOR M CCARON Absent: CITY ENGINEER FRENCH Also Present: CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER NORDBY, CITY ATTORNEY FLANDRICK, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER FOGLE, BUILDING SUPERINTENDENT KALB- FLEISCH, PLANNING DIRECTOR CHIVETTA, FINANCE DIRECTOR DUNCAN, CITY TREASURER PUGH AND CITY CLERK BALKUS Chief of Police Adams arrived at 8:00 P.M.) 00- CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS CONTINUATION OF P.H. I. ZV-156, Appeal from decision of Board of Zoning CONT'D TO Adjustments, An application submitted by JULY 20, 1966 American Oil Company, G. H. Sandquist, Agent, for a Zone Variance pursuant to the Baldwin Park Zoning Ordinance No. 357, Section E 1) to allow the erection and maintenance of a free standing fin sign in excess of 100 square feet per sign face area, 60 feet high, in the C-2 heavy commercial) Zone, upon a parcel of land located at 13755 Francisquito Avenue 2. ZV-150, Continued from May 18, 1966) CONT'D TO Appeal from denial of Board of Zoning JULY 20, 1966 Adjustments, An application submitted by Richfield Oil Corporation, William Kalinak, Agent for a Zone Variance to vary with the Baldwin Park Zoning Ordinance No. 357, Section 9601, sub- section E to allow the erection and maintenance of a free standing sign in excess of 100 square feet of sign face area and 55 feet in height in the C-I neighborhood commercial) Zone upon a pareel of land located at 13011 Garvey Avenue 3. Short Form 1911 Act West side of La Rica Ave. CONT'D TO between Ramona Blvd. and Baldwin Park Blvd. CGS) JULY 6, 1966 00- THELMA L. BALKUS, CITY CLERK DATED: JUNE 16, 1966 TIME. 5=3o A.M. BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 $Í«x;.954 l Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council Count i I man P,",orehead withdrew his motion. CO!..'IdC' i_P",AINN G'MOREEHEAD MOVED THAT THE PUBL I C HEAR I NG ON Z`1'-I56 BE REOPENED. CO NC I U'AN CR I T'ES SECONDED. There were no objections, the motion carried and was so ordered by 4layor McCaron. COH'NC I LVAN PMIOREHEAD MOVED THAT ZV-156 BE CONTINUED TO J''LY 20, 1966. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES COUNCILMEN MOREHEAD, ADA I R, CR I TES AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: COUNC I LVIO1`,1AN GREGORY ABSENT: NONE 00- CO!'NC' L&IAN P:10REH-EAD MOVED THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING) ZV-150 BE C0NT i NIJED JNT I L JULY 20, 1966. COUNC I LMAN ADA 1 R SECONDED. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES COUNC I L P,iEN MOREHEAD, ADA I R, CRITES, GREGORY AND MAYOR MCCARON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NON- 00- It was the time and place fixed for a public hearing on The proposed amendments to the Baldwin Park Municipal Code relating to R-I Zoning Regulations. Proper publication, postings and mailings had been accomplished. Planning Director Chivetta presented a resume of the case stating the Planning Commission for many months had been considering amendments to the R-1 Zoning Regu_':Ia- tions; that the outcome of their st'dy was an ordinance which they felt wou.uld effectuate proper planning principles and remove ambiguities now existing in the R-I zoning regulations; that the Planning Commission realized there would be considerable controversy over their recommended amendments but they were of the opinion that there must be a starting point for any project; that although some persons may proclaim that the amendments were inequitable and were discriminatory such claims were basic humanistic claims and were not unusual when laws were to be enacted, therefore they shop-old have no bearing on the suggested amendments; that basically the R-I Zoning Regulations were the same as existing under Ordinance No. 357 with a few exceptions. He stated the exceptions were as follows: Section 13,551 subsection 4 c) would add that if a garage was used for a real estate office and standard doors not instal l ed a bond would be required to insure adequate garage door installation. Section 9551 subsection 6 would clarify the term roomers"; that this was necessary due to the infiltration of ambulatory persons into the R-I area in violation of a convalescent home conditional use permit req,irement. Section 9552 requires a lot area Cont i nu.ed) June 15, 1966 Page 12 MOT I ON lV I THDRA N D.H. ON ZV-156 REOPENED P.H. ZV-156 CONTINUED TO JULY 20, 1966 F.H. ZV-150 CONTINUED TO JULY 20, 1966 PUBLIC HEARING AMENDMENTS TO B.PK. h%UN. CODE RE R-I 7ONING REGULATIONS PUBLICATION, POSTINGS MAILINGS 1ESUP IE SECTION 955I SECTION 9552 BIB] 39576-U01 1966-U02 06-U02 15-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9994-U03 FO116938-U03 DO117000-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 5/7/2008-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06