Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutCity Council_Minutes_1967-06-20_Regular 1967C O U N C I L M I NUT E S CITY OF TEMPLE CITY TEMPLE CITY CALIFORNIA JUNE 20, 1967 INITIATION: 1. Mayor Beckley called the regular meeting of the City Council to order at 7:45 P. M. Invocation was given by Pastor A. R. 2. Hagen, of the Seventh Day Adventist Church, 9664 Broadway, 3. Temple City. Mayor Beckley then led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 4. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmen- Briggs, Harker, Merritt, Tyrell, Beckley ABSENT: Councilmen -None ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Koski, City Attorney Martin, Public Works Director Pizzorno, Planning Director Dragicevich, Traffic Engineer Envall 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular meeting of June 6, 1967. Councilman Briggs moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of June 6, 1967, as mailed, Councilman Merritt second ed, and the motion carried with:Counciiman Harker and Mayor Beckleyy abstaining due to their excused absence from this meeting. PRESENTATION OF MISS TEMPLE CITY AND TWO PRINCESSES, Mr. Ted Stortz, President, of the Jun.i:or. Chamber of :Commerce, at this time presented MISS TEMPLE CITY (Judy 'Coe) and her two PRINCESSES (Cindy Aaron and Vicki Payne) to the City Council. Mayor Beckley welcomed them and congratulated them upon becoming representatives of Temple City. Miss Coe thanked everyone for the honor bestowed upon her in naming her MISS TEMPLE CITY. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARING: 7 :30 P. M. APPEAL FROM PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION: Re Abatemen :t of Nuisance, 6329 Sultana Ave,, Leiland R. Shaw, Owner (Resolution No. 67- 255PC) Mayor Beckley declared the Public Hearing opened. City Attorney Martin stated this was an appeal from the Planning Commission decision whereby in their Resolution No. 67 -255PC they made a finding that the premises at 6329 Sultana Ave. do constitute a nuisance under Ordinance No. 66 -178, and that four nuisances do exist as set forth in their Resolution. Mr. Shaw appealed the Planning Commission decision to the City Council. Planning Director Dragicevich presented pictures of the sub- ject property to the Council taken in January and May of this year which Mr. Shaw has seen. The permit to construct a single family residence at this address was issued Oct. 6, 1948. Partial construction including electrical and plumbing work was done between 1948 and 1953. All building permits expired March 5, 1953. The same status of the property was in existence on March 7, 1967, 182 years after original building permit was issued. This property came to the attention of the City in March, 1966, At various meetings with Mr. Shaw he indicated he will complete the construction and the main reason for delay was the tight money market and "a matter of economics ". January 16, 1967, a petition was presented to the City signed by 13 property owners in the immediate neighborhood, claiming this property has created problems in the neighborhood relative to unsightliness, difficulty in selling the properties, and a hazardous situation for children in the area, and strongly Council Minutes, June 20, 1967, page 2 urging enforcement of existing laws to require completion of the construction. A Public Hearing was held before the Planning Commission on April 25, 1967, to determine the existence of a public nuisance. At this time the Commission considered all relevant evidence and testimony and determined that a public nuisance did exist and recommended means of abatement as set forth in their Resolution No. 67- 255PC. An appeal to the City Council from their decision was filed with the City Clerk on May 16, 1967. Mr. Dragicevich advised the conclusions of the Planning Commission were based upon pictures, city staff reports, evidence of neighbors at the Planning Commission Hear- ing, and Planning Commissioners familiar with the property. He advised the Council the pictures presented to the Council were received as evidence at the Public Hearing before the Planning Commission. Councilman Tyrell moved to receive these pictures as evidence, Councilman Briggs seconded, and the motion was carried unanimously. The City Attorney stated that any of the neighbors wishing to concur with the comments of the Planning Director could do so at this time. C. J. Stewart, 6323 N. Sultana Ave., stated he and his neighbors were in agreement with the findings of the Planning Commission. City Attorney Martin asked if he felt the building to be a hazard to safety, health and public welfare and Mr. Stewart advised he did. The City Attorney asked if he considered the property construction involved caused property depreciation for the neighbors and if it interfered with the normal enjoyment of his property and Mr. Stewart replied in the affirmative to both questions, and also that he considered it hazardous to children. Also that young people gathered there and this has been going on for the past 16 years. He felt the only solution was comple- tion of the house. Leiland Shaw, 8951 E. Bentel Ave., Rosemead, owner of the proper- ty involved, advised the Council he wanted to complete the house but could not do so in the time allotted. City Attorney Martin advised there were two issues before the Council, (1) whether the house constitutes a nuisance, and (2) if so what can be done to correct it. He asked Mr. Shaw if right now the property is a nuisance. Mr. Shaw stated it was not, and it would take him 6 months to complete the house. In addition to this time he would have to submit plans and get approval from the Building Department, and a permit which he estimated would require another month, and he requested time until the end of February, 1968, to complete the house construction. City Attorney Martin asked the City Manager if the City Council should so decide if he had a recommendation as to phasing this out. The City Manager advised status reports could be made to the Council that would insure completion. The City Manager questioned Mr. Biddlecomb of the Building Dept. regarding necessary time to correct the plans as submitted and was advised it could be done in about a week, and it would take a week to get the plans checked, and if manor corrections were required two weeks would be a fair estimate. Mr. Biddlecomb also advised that if pursued by a contractor the building could be completed between 45 and 60 days total time including plan review. City Attorney Martin asked Mr. Shaw how long he figured it would take to get the plans ready to which he replied about three weeks Councilman Merritt commented 30 days for plans and 6 months to complete, and with neighborhood wanting the house completed he would like to see Mr. Shaw get the time and complete his house. Council Minutes, June 20, 1967, page 3 Councilman Briggs referred to the time already consumed and the building still incomplete and asked Mr. Shaw regarding the financial status of the property and as it was unencumbered questioned Mr. Shaw about borrowing money to complete the house. Mr. Shaw advised under existing circumstances he could not get a loan. He also stated it would cost him about $5,000. to complete the building if he does the work himself. Councilman Tyrell questioned Mr. Shaw regarding his allegations in his appeal to the Council as follows: 1. alleged an inadequate hearing before the Planning Commission, and asked upon what facts the statement was based. Mr. Shaw stated it was on the end of the agenda following a lengthy variance public hearing and there was not sufficient time for him to present his case. Councilman Tyrell stated his hearing encompassed approximately 2 hrs. and Mr. Shaw said his portion was about 20 minutes. Councilman Tyrell asked if he alleged the hearing inadequate in any other aspect and Mr. Shaw advised not at the moment. 2. alleged determination was made on false and inadequate evi- dence. Councilman Tyrell asked Mr. Shaw if he called witnesses on his behalf and if he had an opportunity to close the argument after other witnesses testified and Mr. Shaw stated he did. 3. Councilman Tyrell asked Mr. Shaw how the hearing was not in conformity with facts at the time of the Planning Commission hearing and he advised the determination was made on facts existing prior to the hearing and did not exist at the time of the hearing. Councilman Tyrell asked Mr. Shaw what due consideration was not given as far as the Planning Commission was concerned and Mr. Shaw said "No further comment ". 5. Councilman Tyrell asked in what respect he felt the decision of the Planning Commission was vague and Mr. Shaw said it did not state any time when the six months allowed by them for completion would commence nor when that order became final. Councilman Tyrell stated there was a certain appeal period and it would be final at the end of the appeal period. Mr. Shaw stated the recommendations and findings of the Planning Commission was only a recommendation to the Council for them to make the decision. Mayor Beckley advised him this was not a true statement as the variance is final unless appealed to the Council. 6. :Councilman Tyrell asked in what regard the Planning Commission decision uninterpretable and Mr. Shaw answered basically on when the six months period starts to run. 7. Councilman Tyrell asked on what facts he had to indicate that the ordinance in olved was improperly enacted and Mr. Shaw advised this will be determined on matter of discovery. Councilman Tyrell stated that at this time you have no basis but this door can be left open. 8. Councilman Tyrell asked how the ordinance was inapplicable and Mr. Shaw advised from a matter of legality. Councilman Tyrell asked Mr. Shaw in what regard other than those stated he considered the action of the Planning Commission was in violation of his due process. Mr. Shaw stated he had the right to raise the constitutionality of the law at any time. Council- man Tyrell stated he had alleged they acted without due process and the Council has the ':right 'to know how he felt his right to due process has been violated. Mr. Shaw stated since the time of the hearing he had repaired the roof, had cut weeds and there was no possibility of fire hazard, most of the weeds have been removed and the rest stacked for removal, scaffolding has been removed and given away, he stated he was holding the smaller type of wood for his fireplace, he had done nothing to the build- ing as the permit has expired. Mr. Shaw requested the opportunity to complete the building of the house by the end of Febr., 1968. Council Minutes, June 20, 1967, page 4 Councilman Tyrell addressed the Mayor stating for the purpose of Broadhead vs Temple City, he wished to state while the witness was still there that he had viewed these premises in the event he desires to ask any questions, and a part of his decision might be based upon this. Mayor Beckley stated he had been there a number of times over the past two years. City Attorney Martin asked Mr. Shaw if he had any further evi- dence and as there was none he asked him if the Council changed the abatement process as follows if he would agree: 1. that within 30 days to remove debris and unusable building materials; and 2. that all scaffolding and platforms be disposed of; and 3. that the building be boarded up so not accessable to minors; and 4. that instead of 6 months you are required to obtain a building permit, and to complete the buildings and struc- tures in conformity with the City's building and zoning regulations and obtain a certificate of occupancy therefore, all to be accomplished in the 8 months period ending Febr. 29, 1968. Mr. Shaw agreed that these requirements were acceptable to him and he would do the best he could and he did not wish to modify the conditions as outlined, which he would have to do to protect his present investment. Councilman Tyrell asked Mr. Shaw if he considered this an adequate hearing. Mr. Shaw did not come forward and Councilman Tyrell re- quested the record show that the applicant did not desire to go back to the microphone. Mr. Stewart, 6323 N. Sultana Ave., stated he felt the time re- quested by Mr. Shaw should be granted to Febr. 29, 1968, to allow him to complete his house. Mr. Sam Rogers, 6314 Sultana, suggested that a completion bond be furnished by Mr. Shaw. Mr. Branson, 6317 Sultana, stated he concurred with the findings of the Planning Commission and he would go along with the extend- ed time reluctantly as he felt the whole thing was a stall. Mrs. Hazel Zeliff, 6351 Sultana, stated the neighborhood mothers were concerned about the safety of their children. Mr. George Zeliff, stated he would go along with the 8 mo. period but felt the neighbors would like some assurance of the completion of the buildings. City Attorney Martin asked Mr. Shaw if he wished to respond. Mr. Shaw stated he had made his position clear and that he cannot complete it without the 8 month extension. Also that he intended to have the plastering and fireplace work done for him. Councilman Merritt asked Mr. Shaw if he would be adverse to post- ing a completion bond and Mr. Shaw stated he was not in a finan- cial position to do so. Councilman Briggs asked him if he would or would'not put up a bond and Councilman Tyrell stated no bond- ing company would bond under the circumstances. City Manager Koski asked Mr. Biddlecomb if he could outline a phasing out of the construction. Mr. Biddlecomb of the County Building Dept., advised it would consist of re- testing of the plumbing, the rough plumbing has been approved, the rough electrical wiring and rough framing work should be completed within 30 to 45 days once construction is started, the rest would be completing plastering, fixtures, cabinets, etc., which could be done in the balance of the time. W. J. Rexin, 9520 Garibaldi, felt Mr. Shaw should get a loan and complete the building. Councilman Tyrell stated he could not get a loan when doing his own construction. Council Minutes, June 20, 1967, page 5 No one further came forward to speak. Councilman Tyrell moved to close the public hearing, Councilman Briggs seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. The City Attorney advised the Council had two decisions to make, (1) whether or not a nuisance does exist, and (2) what the order of abatement shall be. Councilman Tyrell asked if this was a trial de novo, and the Council can reject or adopt any portion of the abatement conditions imposed by the Planning Commission and the City Attorney advised this was the case. Councilman Tyrell moved to find the premises to be a public nuisance and to order the nuisance abated except that the time order be extended until Febr. 29, 1968, with the following con- ditions: 1. that within 30 days all debris, and unusable building materials be removed from the premises; and 2. that all scaffolding and platforms be removed from the premises except as used during continuance of construction; 3. that the buildings and structures be boarded up so as to deny minors or other persons access thereto; and 4. that the owner shall keep the premises in such condition that it will not harbor rats, vermin, and other nuisances that would be a hazard to safety, health and public welfare; 5. that the owner shall forthwith obtain a building permit within 30 days and shall before Febr. 29, 1968, complete the buildings in conformity with our building ordinance regulations and obtain a certificate of occupancy which shall be conclusive of this completion; 6. that a report be made to the Council that permits for all of the buildings issued in 30 days, and completion of all rough construction in 75 days; and 7. that failing to comply with these conditions within this period of time that the buildings be demolished, Councilman Briggs seconded, and the motion was carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen- Briggs, Harker, Merritt, Tyrell, Beckley NOES: Councilmen -None ABSENT: Councilmen -None Councilman Harker stated he was in favor of the motion but wished to state it was based entirely upon the evidence submitted at this hearing and the Planning Commission minutes. The City Attorney advised this completes this hearing and a Resolution containing all conditions and requirements will be prepared for the next Council meeting. Reports will also be made to the Council in 30 days re the permits, and in 75 days re the rough construction work. PUBLIC HEARING: 7:30 P. M. APPEAL FROM PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION: Variance Case #67 -222, Ralph G. Sproul, 4800 Baldwin Ave. Mayor Beckley declared the public hearing opened. Planning Director Dragicevich reported the denial of the re- quest bf the applicant was based primarily on sub - standard parking spaces, the City requiring 92 ft. minimum width and the plan submitted shows spaces being 8.3 ft. and 8.9 ft., and also that the proposed use of the property as a restaurant might cause a traffic problem. All other conditions recommended were acceptable to the applicant. The Commission was concerned about the traffic situation on Baldwin Ave. and Lower Azusa. Councilman Tyrell noted that it was alleged in the appeal that the City Traffic Engineer stated this will not be a problem. Traffic Engineer Envall stated he did not feel it would be a problem. Councilman Tyrell asked the Traffic Engineer what significance is going to be had by shortly narrower parking Council Minutes, June 20, 1967, page 6 spaces, and was advised only problem would be opening and closing doors. Robert Marks, 721 Thayer Ave., Los Angeles, stated he was the pro- posed user of the property, and that he had agreed to all recom- mendations of the City staff for development of this property. The property is quite small due to property taken on both sides to widen the streets. The proposed restaurant is not a drive -in but an order restaurant. They have other restaurants which have less than 92 ft. parking spaces and they, do well there, but if the Council deems it necessary they would accept 10 parking spaces rather than the 11 proposed and required by the square footage of the building. He presented a picture of the proposed building for the Council to inspect. Ralph Sproul, 2905 Allenton Ave., Hacienda Heights, Calif., stated he was the owner of the property at 4800 N. Baldwin Ave., which was leased for 25 years for a service station, and with the street widening he lost the lease of the oil company which caused him considerable hardship as he is dependent on this. income. Under the circumstances with a tenant that will be a credit to the community and felt that a few inches in parking should not stand in the way of this development, and without granting this it would work a hardship on him. Mr. Edwards, 4828 Baldwin Ave., felt it a dangerous corner and not enough land for the proposed development. Ernest A. Vroman, stated his property surround the Sproul prop- erty and he felt it a traffic problem and the circumstances here are unfortunate and he wanted to go on record as opposing. He suggested the City condemn the property and then go on and de- velop the whole corner. Mr. Vroman also stated it had been brought out they would have four employees which would take 4 of the parking spaces. No one else came forward to speak. Councilman Harker moved to close the public hearing, Councilman Merritt seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. Councilman Harker stated there appeared to be much concern relative to egress and ingress traffic, and you would have that no matter what is done, and our Traffic Engineer has stated that it would not create a problem. Councilman Briggs did not feel there was adequate space in that area for this development so he was against it. Councilman Merritt was of the opposite opinion and did not feel that parking was that great a problem, and stated with consider- able plant employment in the area that it might develop more walk -in trade than drive -in. He would approve the reversal of the Planning Commission decision. Councilman Tyrell stated that the issue of adequate parking spaces for customers and employees is solved as he has adequate spaces, and that the turning issue could be cured by elimination of one space. With adequate parking spaces and proper zoning there is not much basis for denial, and if developed in accor- dance with the law the Council should grant it. Our traffic consultant states the traffic problem would be no more than any other business would have. Councilman Briggs stated there were not adequate spaces either way in accordance with the development. Council Minutes, June 20, 1967, page 7 Councilman Tyrell moved to grant the appeal based on the con- dition the appellant construct in accordance with the Planning Commission recommendations, Councilman Harker seconded, and the motion was carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen - Harker, Merritt, Tyrell, Beckley NOES: Councilman- Briggs ABSENT: Councilmen -None City Attorney Martin stated the action is not final until the Resolution is adopted at the next Council meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: 7:30 P. M. SIDEWALKS: Baldwin Ave., east side be- tween La Rosa and Green St. Mayor Beckley declared the public hearing opened. Public Works Director Pizzorno stated the petition for side- walks was signed by 62.6% of the property owners. Mayor Beckley asked if anyone wished to speak for or against this improvement and no one came forward to speak. Councilman Merritt moved to close the public hearing, Council- man Tyrell seconded, and the motion was unanimously carried. Councilman Merritt moved to find the project to be in public interest and instruct the Supt. of Streets to cause the work to be done, Councilman Tyrell seconded and the motion was un- animously carried. PUBLIC HEARING: ASSESSMENTS: 7:30 P. M. CURB, GUTTER & SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS: A. Garibaldi, north side between Oak & St. James, 6102 Oak Ave., assessment in the amount of $192.25, Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk. B. Garibaldi, north side, between St. James & Primrose, 9517 Garibaldi, assessment $188.61, Curb, Gutter & Driveway Approach. Public Works Director Pizzorno presented the above proposed assessments and recommended Council approval. Mayor Beckley declared the public hearing opened on Items ,.A & B. No one came forward to speak for or against. Councilman Tyrell moved to close the public hearing, Councilman Merritt seconded, and the motion was carried unanimously. Councilman Merritt moved approval of Item A, assessment :. and to direct that the property be so assessed, Councilman Tyre(' seconded, and the motion was carried unanimously. Councilman Tyrell moved to approve the assessment on Item B and to direct that the property be so assessed, Councilman Merritt seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. 6 ORDINANCE NO. 67 -236: 2nd read. Personnel Ordinance City Attorney Martin presented Ordinance No. 67 -236 for second reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE. CITY, CALIFORNIA, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 3.5 TO ARTICLE II OF THE TEMPLE CITY MUNICIPAL CODE, ESTABLISHING A PERSONNEL SYSTEM. Councilman Tyrell moved to waive further reading of Ordinance No. 67 -236 and to adopt, Councilman Harker seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. 10 PM: Mayor Beckley declared a two minute recess at this time. Council Minutes, June 20, 1967, page 8 7. SET ASSESSMENT HEARINGS: A. Lower Azusa, south side, from alley east of Temple City Blvd. to Ellis Lane, curb, gutter & driveway approach: 9634 -36 Lower Azusa $276., 9640 Lower Azusa $276., 9650 Lower Azusa $1045.45 B. Arden Dr., west. side, 950 Ft. north of La Rosa, to 400 Ft. north of La Rosa: curb, gutter & driveway approach: 5125 Arden $310.21, 5135 Arden $344.65, 5143 Arden $234.90, 5149 Arden $228.85, 5155 Arden $234.90. C. Woolley, both sides, from Sultana to Livia, curb, gutter & driveway approach: 9059 Woolley $119.20, 9067 Woolley $249.75, 9073 Woolley $238.70, 9079 Woolley $203., 6332 Sultana $355.63. Councilman Briggs moved to set Items A, B, and C for public hearing on July 18, 1967, at 7:30 P. M., Councilman Harker se- conded, and the motion was unanimously carried. PRESENTATION OF PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF TENNIS COURTS AT LIVE OAK PARK The Public Works Director presented the plans and specifications to the Council for the construction of tennis courts at Live Oak Park and he explained them in detail. Also Engineer Krelle presented different aspects of the plans. Considerable discussion followed regarding the proposed plans and the lighting. Coun- cilman Merritt moved that the courts as proposed be installed with the addition of four light standards„ two on each side of the center court, Councilman Harker seconded, and the motion was carried unanimously. 9. ANNUAL CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALKS AND RELATIVE WORK. The Public Works Director presented the above specifications for Council consideration. Following discussion Councilman Merritt moved to approve and to authorize going to bid for the contract, Councilman Briggs seconded, and the motion carried un- animously. 10. APPROVAL OF FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROJECT #8001: Authorizing Flood Control District to proceed with construction on storm drains under project #8001, and granting petmission to occupy and use public streets in the City to construct, operate and maintain said installation. The Public Works Director presented the above request for Coun- cil approval and advised he was concerned with the schedule of work and did not want this done during the Christmas season, that the City does have control and the staff function is to protect the interest of the City. Councilman Tyrell moved to approve and grant permission as requested, Councilman Harker seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. 11. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: Meeting of June 13, 1967. A. AMENDMENTS TO TEMPLE CITY ZONING CODE. Recommend amend- ments to Subsections (1) (c) of Sections 409, 509, 610 & 710 of Temple City Zoning Code relative to location of accessory structures on the rear third of an interior lot. B. Recommend change of zone from C -M to C -2 on northerly side of E. Las Tunas Dr. between Oak Ave. and Clove.rly Ave., Lots 1 through 21 inclusive, Tract #8526. Planning Director Dragicevich presented the above recommenda- tions of the Planning Commission. The City Attorney stated Item A is deferred due to the first reading of the new zoning ordinance to be held at this meeting. Councilman Tyrell moved to set Item B. for public hearing on July 18, 1967, at 7:30 P. M., Councilman Merritt seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. Council Minutes, June 20, 1967, page 9 12. PROPOSED ANNUAL CITY BUDGET, FISCAL YEAR 1967 -68 City Manager Koski presented the proposed annual City Budget for the fiscal year 1967 -68. Councilman Tyrell moved to adopt Resolution No. 67 -749 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY ADOPTION THE CITY BUDGET AND APPROPRIATING REVENUE OF THE CITY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1967 -68, Councilman Briggs seconded, and the motion was unanimously carried. 13. RESOLUTION NO. 67 -747: appointing temporary personnel, Recrea- tion Dept. The City Manager presented Resolution No. 67 -747 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY APPOINTING TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES. Councilman Tyrell moved to adopt Resolution No. 67 -747, Councilman Briggs seconded, and the motion unanimous- ly carried. 14. EXERCISE OF OPTION FOR PURCHASE OF LOT 643 TRACT #6561: Re Agreement with Temple City Parking Associates, option to be ex- ercised before July 10, 1967. City Manager requested authorization to open escrow on the above property in accordance with the Agreement in the amount of $13,750. plus 1/2 of escrow charge, and for authorization to draw the warrant required. Councilman Merritt moved to so authorize, Councilman Tyrell seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. 15. ORDINANCE NO. 67 -237: 1st read. Curfew Ordinance The City Attorney explained the County had recommended adoption of a uniform curfew ordinance and he presented Ordinance No. 67-237 for 1st reading AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY AMENDING SECTION 4242 OF THE TEMPLE CITY MUNICIPAL CODE, ES- TABLISHING A JUVENILE LOITERING LAW APPLICABLE TO PERSONS UNDER THE AGE OF EIGHTEEN YEARS. Councilman Tyrell moved to waive further reading of Ordinance No. 67 -237, Councilman Briggs se- conded, and the motion carried unanimously. No further action was taken as this was the first reading of the ordinance. 16. TRAFFIC COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: MEETING OF JUNE 7, 1967. A. Item 6. TEMPLE CITY MALL, REVISED VEHICLE MOVEMENTS: Recommend following modifications to traffic flow for new parking lots and mall: (1) south side Las Tunas Dr. between Cloverly & Primrose make north -south alley to Workman Ave. one way south- bound. (2) north side Las Tunas Dr. between Camellia & Kauffman, make north -south alley one way northbound to Woodruff. (3) north side Las Tunas Dr. between Temple City Blvd. & Camellia make north -south alley northbound. to Woodruff. B.: Item 8.:..CLOVERLY AVE. & WEDGEWOOD AVE. Parking restriction. Recommend placement of 40 ft. red curb markings west side of Cloverly commencing, 19 ft. north of north curb line of Wedgewood Ave. to point 20 ft. northerly thereof, which will provide 20 ft. red curb markings'north and south of driveway adjacent to St. Lukes School. C. Item 10. 4351 TEMPLE CITY BLVD. Parking restriction. Recommend 10 ft. red curb markings be placed north of southerly drive, and north and south of northerly drive at 4351 Temple City Blvd. Traffic Engineer Envall presented the above recommendations. Following discussion Councilman Tyrell moved to approve Item A, Councilman Briggs seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. Councilman Harker moved to approve Item B, Councilman Tyrell seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. Council Minutes, June 20, 1967, page 10 Councilman Briggs moved to approve Item C, Councilman Tyrell seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. 17. RESOLUTION NO. 67 -748: Warrants & Demands City Manager Koski presented Resolution No. 67 -748 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY ALLOWING CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $13,942.13, Demand Nos. 9738 through 9788. Councilman Tyrell moved to adopt Resolution No. 67 -74$, Councilman Briggs seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. 18. COMMUNICATIONS: City Manager Koski presented a letter from John Marshall refer - ing to the Planning Commission meeting of June 13 at which time the Commission denied him an extension of time on a variance which had expired on May 10, 1967. Building plans were filed on Apr. 10, and he was advised after checking by the Building Dept. that they did not have the lot split resolution due to the fact that the affidavit of acceptance of conditions had not been filed with the City by the applicant. Mr. Marshall did file this acceptance with the City on May 11, one day after the variance had expired. Mr. Marshall, 214 Le Roy Ave., Arcadia, spoke in favor of his request for a time extension on the Variance. City Attorney Martin explained that he did not accept the con - ditions so no permits could be granted by the Building Dept. The Variance was granted May 10, 1966, requiring the rights to be exercised in a one year period of time and that the applicant accept the conditions. The year had already expired before the conditions were accepted. The legal ruling would be that the variance cannot be extended and that the Council take no action and the Planning Commission be upheld in their decision. The Council discussed the situation and complied with the ruling of the City Attorney and advised Mr. Marshall to re -apply for the variance. 19. TIME FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK: Mrs. Adams, 10948 Daines Dr., requested removal of an oak tree which had damaged the water line and threatens the gas and sewer lines which are also under the tree. She stated the tree is a hazard to people driving out of the driveway and is locat- ed on the property at 10936 Daines Dr. and is over 15 yrs. old. Public Works Director Pizzorno presented a picture of the tree to the Council and stated the gas .system is approximately 15 ft. away, the tree is in good condition and under present City policy trees in good condition cannot be removed unless under a City project. It is close to the driveway approach and at the time of the installation of the curb and gutter applicants should have asked for a permit to remove the tree. The tree is not on City property. Mrs. Adams advised the request is for the City to remove the tree. The City Attorney asked the Public Works Director if he found the tree to be a traffic hazard and was advised he did not at this time and that the removal cost would be about $100. Mrs. Bauder, 10936 Daines Dr., stated this tree is definitely a hazard. Mayor Beckley made the motion based or the fact that it is not a hazard to the City, and to the City policy and recommendation from the staff that it is not a hazard, that the City provide her with a permit to remove the tree at any time she so desires, Councilman Harker seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. Council Minutes, June 20, 1967, page 11 20. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS: Public Works Director Pizzorno presented the Agreement from the First Western Bank for their pro rata share of the improvement of their parking lot in the sum of $4834.15, and requested Coun- cil acceptance and execution. Councilman Tyrell moved to in- struct the Mayor and City Clerk to sign on behalf of the City, Councilman Merritt seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. Councilman Briggs asked about the kennels and the City Manager advised Mr. Shook has not taken out a permit. The City Attorney stated on July 11 he will file a default. City Attorney Martin presented the new zoning ordinance No. 67-238 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR SAID CITY. Councilman Tyrell moved to waive further reading of Ordinance No. 67 -238, Councilman Harker seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. No further action was taken as this was the first reading of the ordinance. City Manager Koski presented Resolution No. 67 -752 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY SUPPORTING THE CONCEPT OF NON - DIVERSION OF MOTOR VEHICLE AND GASOLINE TAX FUNDS. Councilman Tyrell moved to adopt Resolution No. 67 -752, Councilman Briggs seconded, and the motion was unanimously carried. Mayor Beckley presented Resolution No. 67 -750 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY COMMENDING CRAIG R. SCHOENBAUM, U..S. ARMY, AND EXPRESSING THEIR DEEP CONCERN TO HIS FAMILY. Councilman Tyrell moved to adopt Resolution No. 67 -750, Councilman Briggs seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Beckley presented Resolution No. 67 -751 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY EULOGIZING GERALD C. STELLE, AND EXPRESSING CONDOLENCES TO HIS FAMILY. Council- man Briggs moved to adopt Resolution No. 67 -751, Councilman Tyrell seconded, and the motion was unanimously carried. Councilman Tyrell moved copies of Resolutions No. 67 -750 and No. 67 -751 be sent to the parties involved, Councilman Briggs seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Beckley presented two letters addressed to our two U.S. Senators urging them to use all their influence to win the war immediately in Viet Nam to save the lives of our young people. Councilman Merritt moved to approve the letters to the Senators, Councilman Tyrell seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. The Chief Deputy City Clerk requested authorization of a warrant for room deposits to have a block of rooms reserved for the League of California Cities Conference in San Francisco, Oct. 15 -18. Councilman Tyrell moved to authorize the warrant for the block of rooms, seconded, and carried. It was agreed that the reservation request be made for the San Francisco Hilton Hotel. 21. ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Tyrell moved to adjourn to the regular meeting of July 18, at 7:30 P. M., Councilman Briggs seconded. and the motion carried unanimously. Council adjourned at 11 :35 . P. M. The next regular meeting of the City Council will be July 18, 1967, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 5938 Kauffman Ave., Temple City, at 7:30 P. M. ATTEST: ✓ L, City ClerK cLe„, Mayor