This is the time when any member of the public may bring a matter to the attention of the Commission that is within the scope of duties assigned to the Commission. The Ralph M. Brown Act limits the Planning Commission and staff's ability to respond to comments on non-agendized matters at the time such comments are made. Thus, your comments may be agendized for a future meeting or referred to staff. The Commission may discuss or ask questions for clarification, if desired, at this time.

Royall Brown addressed the Commission regarding the sale of the condominiums built by Pacific Communities. He expressed his opinion that the sale of the units would be beneficial to the City of West Covina.

This is the time for the public to comment on any item on the Consent Calendar. As Consent Calendar items are considered routine in nature, they are normally enacted in one motion. The Chairperson may remove a questioned Consent Calendar item for separate action.

You are encouraged by this Commission to express your views on any matter set for public hearing. It is our procedure to first receive the report of the Planning staff, then to ask for public testimony; first from those in favor of the matter, followed by testimony from those in opposition to it, and, if there be opposition, to allow those in favor, rebuttal testimony only as to the points brought up in opposition. To testify on a matter, you need to simply come forward to the lectern at the appropriate time, give your name and address and make your statement. In addition, please sign in on the sheet provided at the podium so it will facilitate preparation of our minutes. Do not be concerned with your possible lack of experience in public hearings. We are interested in what you say, not your level of expertise as a public speaker. After a hearing has been closed, you may not further speak on the matter unless requested to do so by a member of the Commission.

Planning Associate Ron Garcia presented the staff report. During his presentation, Mr. Garcia told the Commission that this site currently belongs to Los Angeles County but would be maintained by Valencia Heights Water Company. In addition, he told the Commission that conditions of approval included a condition requiring a landscaping and irrigation plan for the site. Further, he explained that since the construction of the well would be a 24-hour-a-day operation, the applicants would be notifying property owners and residents of the area.

Commissioner Rozatti asked what the hours of operation would be for the construction of the well.

PROPONENTS:

Dave Michalko, General Manager of Valencia Heights Water Company, spoke regarding the construction of the well. He told the Commission that this site was located near the I-10 Freeway and that the noise level would not exceed the freeway noise. In addition, he told the Commission that the anticipated construction would take approximately three weeks. During the majority of the construction, the hours of construction would be from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m., as allowed by the West Covina Municipal Code. He added that the only exception would be for a period of approximately one week while drilling the well, which would require 24-hour a day operations.

OPPONENTS:

No one spoke in opposition.

Chairman Sotelo closed the public hearing.

There was a discussion by the Commission regarding the conditions of approval and the landscaping of the site. Mr. Michalko stated that the property was currently under the control of Los Angeles County and Valencia Heights Water Company hoped to acquire it in the near future.

Commissioner Rozatti expressed her concern for residents in the area because a portion of the construction would require that it be carried on for 24 hours a day for several days. Mr. Michalko stated that residents would be notified well in advance of the drilling. He also stated that temporary housing would be provided if the noise disturbed any residents.

Commissioner Redholtz expressed his support of the project. However, he wanted to be certain that the conditions of approval requiring the landscaping and fencing of the property would be complied with. Commissioner Fisher agreed that this is a good use for the site and concurred with Commissioner Redholtz regarding the landscaping. In addition, Commissioner Fisher suggested that additional landscaping be provided on the site.

It was the consensus of the Commission that the project be approved, subject to all conditions of approval.

Motion by Stewart, seconded by Fisher, to adopt findings as recommended by staff. Motion carried 5-0.

Motion by Stewart, seconded by Fisher, to waive further reading of the body of the resolution and adopt Resolution No. 08-5259, approving Conditional Use Permit No. 07-16. Motion carried 5-0.

Principal Planner Jeff Anderson presented the staff report. During his presentation Mr. Anderson told the Commission that the Design Review Subcommittee had reviewed the proposed addition. He also reviewed the Subcommittee recommendations and stated that the applicants had incorporated the recommendations into their design. He further stated that staff was recommending that the applicants reduce the square footage of the proposed addition to make it more compatible with the existing neighborhood. Mr. Anderson told the Commission that staff was recommending that this matter be continued.

Commissioner Fisher asked staff about the lot size, in comparison to other lots in the area.

PROPONENT:

Greg McLean, representing the property owners, stated that they were willing to accept staff’s recommendation to reduce the square footage of the proposed addition.

OPPONENTS:

Desiree Cabana, Joanne Wilner, Royall Brown and Lloyd Johnson spoke in opposition to the project. Ms. Cabana addressed the Commission regarding the proposed square footage of the addition. She stated her opinion that the additional square footage would make the home much larger than others in the area, which would be out of character for the existing neighborhood.

Mrs. Wilner, Mr. Brown and Mr. Johnson agreed with the comments made by Ms. Cabana. Mrs. Wilner also expressed her opposition to allowing the residence become a two-story house.

Mr. McLean suggested that the best way to address the concerns would be to allow him time to redesign and resubmit new plans.

Chairman Sotelo closed the public hearing.

There was a discussion by the Commission regarding whether the redesigned plan would require a review by them. In addition, the Commission considered various options to reduce the square footage of the proposed home.

It was the consensus of the Commission that the second story should be reduced to approximately half the size of the first story. The Commission also concurred that the second story would not be out of character for the area, since there are other two-story homes in the neighborhood.

Motion by Fisher, seconded by Redholtz, to table this matter until further notice. Motion carried 5-0.

(1)

STUDY SESSION

ART IN PUBLIC PLACES ANNUAL PLAN

The review of an annual plan for City-initiated artwork. The review includes estimated budget and suggested artwork or programs.

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission provide comment and direction as appropriate.

Planning Director Doug McIsaac presented the staff report. During his presentation, he recommended that the Commission adopt an annual plan. In addition, he informed the Commission that staff was anticipating that approximately $40,000 would be deposited into the Art in Public Places fund through in-lieu fees paid by developers.

Mr. McIsaac also recommended that the Commission consider adopting a pre-qualified artists list for future art projects. Further, Mr. McIsaac identified possible locations for City-sponsored art projects.

Leslie Elwood, Art In Public Places consultant, told the Commission that she was available to answer any questions and guide them through the process of establishing the approved artists list and the adoption of an annual plan.

There was a discussion by the Commission regarding the process to establish the approved artists list, and a possible temporary art project on Glendora Avenue to bring attention to the Art In Public Places Program. The Commission also discussed the process to adopt an annual plan.

During the discussion the Commission also considered other possible locations in the Civic Center and the Lakes area, the temporary art project program, and advertising of the art projects sponsored. Commissioner Redholtz stated his opinion that temporary art projects could have a positive effect on local businesses by attracting people who would then patronize local businesses. Commissioner Rozatti agreed and suggested that temporary art projects be changed on a quarterly basis.

Joanne Wilner spoke to the Commission regarding other possible locations where public art projects could be displayed. In addition, she suggested that the City consider a program where utility boxes would be covered with art, which would also discourage graffiti on utility boxes. Ms. Wilner expressed her support of temporary art projects and the adoption of an approved artists list. Further, Ms. Wilner suggested that the park fund be replenished prior to using the Art In Public Places in-lieu fund for any other purpose.

Commissioner Redholtz suggested that perhaps a West Covina Arts Festival on Glendora Avenue be considered as a way to generate business for the businesses in the Lakes and on Glendora Avenue. He also suggested various ways to advertise art displays within the City of West Covina.

At the end of the discussion, staff suggested that the matters discussed by the Commission be provided to the Commission at a later date for adoption. The Commission concurred with that suggestion.

This is the time when any member of the public may bring a matter to the attention of the Commission that is within the scope of duties assigned to the Commission. The Ralph M. Brown Act limits the Planning Commission and staff's ability to respond to comments on non-agendized matters at the time such comments are made. Thus, your comments may be agendized for a future meeting or referred to staff. The Commission may discuss or ask questions for clarification, if desired, at this time.

This is the time when any member of the Commission may bring a matter to the attention of the full Commission that is within the scope of duties assigned to the Commission. Any item that was considered during the public hearing portion is not appropriate for discussion in this section of the agenda. NO COMMISSION ACTION CAN BE TAKEN AT THIS TIME. If the Commission desires to discuss an issue raised by a resident or take an action, the Commission may vote to agendize the matter for the next meeting. The Commission may discuss or ask questions for clarification, if desired, at this time.

Commissioner Redholtz spoke regarding opening of Big League Dreams and status of Quail Ridge shopping center.

Chairman Sotelo spoke regarding Big League Dreams opening, 24-Hour Fitness opening and the opening of a new bridal shop in the area.

Commissioner Fisher requested that garage sizes be placed on a future agenda for discussion.

This is an oral presentation of City Council matters and actions of the listed meeting which are in the Commission’s area of interest.

Motion by Rozatti, seconded by Stewart, to adjourn the meeting at 8:25 p.m. Motion carried 5-0.