HomeMy Public PortalAboutCity Council_Minutes_1988-03-01_Regular 19881
1
CITY OF TEMPLE CITY
CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
MARCH 1, 1988
INITIATION:
1. CALL TO ORDER:
Pursuant to the Agenda posted on February 26, 1988 Mayor
Gillanders called the meeting of the City Council to order
at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, March 1, 1988.
2. The invocation was given by City Manager Karl Koski.
3. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Mayor Gil -
landers.
4. ROLL CALL:
Present:
Absent:
Also Present:
Councilmen- Atkins, Froehle, Swain,
Councilman - Dennis •
City Manager Koski, City Attorney Martin,
Community Development Director Dawson, Parks
& Recreation Director Kobett, Public Works
Coordinator Peterson, Julie Estrada of the
Temple City Times and a representative of the
San Gabriel Valley Tribune.
Gillanders
Councilman Atkins moved to excuse Councilman Dennis with
cause, seconded by Councilman Froehle and unanimously car-
ried.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilman Swain moved to approve the Consent Calender as
recommended, seconded by Councilman Atkins and unanimously
carried.
A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular meeting of February 16,
1988.
Approved as written.
B. RELEASE OF WATER BOND, PARCEL MAP 17278 - 5444 BALDWIN
AVENUE -
City Council approved and accepted the work completed at
5444 Baldwin Avenue of the installation of a Water
System and exonerated surety bond.
C. REQUEST FROM TEMPLE CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT TO HANG
BANNER FEBRUARY 29, 1988 TO MARCH 21, 1988 -
Council confirmed the authorization of the hanging of
the banner across Las Tunas Drive announcing the upcom-
ing Temple City High School musical for three weeks
beginning February 29 to March 21, 1988.
D. RECOMMENDATION FROM PARKS AND. RECREATION COMMISSION AT
THEIR REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 18, 1988 -- REQUEST FOR
USE OF FACILITIES AT LIVE OAK PARK BY SEQUOIA UNION
SCHOOL DISTRICT.
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 2
City Council approved the request of the Sequoia Union
School District for the usage of the facilities at Live
Oak Park on April 28 and April 29 subject to insurance
requirements.
E CDBG 14TH YEAR COST SUMMARY.
Council approved the 14th Year Allocation and 1988 -89
Summary for the Community Development Block Grant Pro-
gram.
F PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION FROM THEIR REGUALR MEETING OF
FEBRUARY 23, 1988.
City Council received and filed the memo outlining
action taken by the Planning Commission at their regular
February 23 meeting.
G. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES: KEVIN FORBES
Council reviewed the claim for damages received against
the City, denied the claim and referred it to JPIA.
H. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -2767: APPROVAL OF PAYMENT OF BILLS
City Council adopted Resolution No. 88 -2767 approving
claims and demands in the amount of.$97,512.37.
6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
A. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION
DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87 -891 AND ZONE VARI-
ANCE 87 -894 AT 9123 -25 LAS TUNAS DRIVE (APPLICANT /OWNER
- JOHN RICCI)
City Manager Koski provided background information
stating this matter had been continued from the City
Council meeting of February 16, 1988. The applicant has
submitted a letter requesting that this appeal hearing
be continued until April 15, 1988. This date falls on a
Friday which is not a regularly scheduled City Council
meeting date. If the City Council wishes to continue
this item as requested, the Hearing date should be set
for April 19, 1988. As previously explained the subject
application is for a Conditional Use Permit to subdivide
an existing commercial unit into four (4) smaller units
and a Zone Variance from the minimum required three (3)
parking spaces per unit. Planning Commission denied
this request at their meeting of January 12, 1988.
Councilman Atkins moved to continue this item as
requested by applicant to April 19th City Council meet-
ing, seconded by Councilman Froehle and unanimously
carried.
B. ORDINANCE NO. 88 -627 (2ND READING): CODE AMENDMENT
MAKING IT UNLAWFUL TO MAINTAIN "GRAFFITI" ON PRIVATE
PROPERTY
City Manager Koski provided background information
stating that at their regularly scheduled meeting of
February 16, 1988, the City Council completed 1st read-
ing of an Ordinance to make it unlawful to maintain
"graffiti" on private property. Again, it is worth
reiterating that in most instances property owners are
very cooperative in removing "graffiti ". However, it
has been the City's experience, and the experience of
other cities, that if "graffiti" is not removed in a
timely fashion there tends to be a proliferation of such
vandalism.
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 3
Councilman Swain moved to waive further reading and
adopt Ordinance No. 88 -627, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY ADDING SECTIONS 4270,
4271, 4272, 4273 AND 4274 TO THE TEMPLE CITY MUNICIPAL
CODE PERTAINING TO GRAFFITI, seconded by Councilman
Froehle and unanimously carried.
7. NEW BUSINESS:
A. PUBLIC HEARING: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF
C.U.P. NO. 88 -902 AND ZONE VARIANCE NO. 88 -905 AT 4510
TEMPLE CITY BOULEVARD (ERNESTINE PEREZ)
City Manager Koski provided background information
stating that the applicant is requesting a Conditional
Use Permit to allow the operation of a take -out restau-
rant and a Zone Variance for five (5) parking spaces
because of the change in use from a market to a restau-
rant. The site is located at the southeast corner of
Temple City Boulevard and Lower Azusa Road. The pro-
posed restaurant would be situated in a 720 square foot
unit within a 12,156 square foot shopping center. The
property is zoned C -3 and currently provides 23 parking
spaces. The site is substantially sub - standard in terms
of meeting the City's current parking standard. If the
entire 12,156 square foot building were utilized for
general commercial purposes, the. Zoning Code would
require 48 parking spaces. Previously, the commercial
unit was used as a market which apparently sold prepared
food as an incidental function. Although the proposed
take -out restaurant is rather small, the Planning Com-
mission felt that it would further contribute to an
already congested parking situation.
Mayor Gillanders declared the public hearing open and
invited anyone wishing to address the City Council on
the matter to come forward at this time.
Ernestine Perez, 629 S. Catalina, Pasadena, stated she
felt there was a discrepancy in the number of parking
spaces behind the building. It is her contention that
she does not wish to become a big restaurant but wishes
to remain a neighborhood kitchen. The majority of her
clients are take -out although she does have three tables
in her facility. The parking situation has not been a
problem thus far.
As no one else wished to address the City Council on
this matter, Councilman Froehle moved to close the
public hearing, seconded by Councilman Atkins and unani-
mously carried.
Councilman Atkins stated that he has had the occasion to
visit the location due to visiting another business
there once or twice a week and indicated he has never
had any problem parking. It is his opinion that from
his perspective this business would not have a negative
impact on the neighborhood and would be in favor of
granting the Conditional Use Permit and the Zone Vari-
ance.
Councilman Froehle stated that there is a discrepancy
between the number of parking spaces Mrs. Perez indi-
cates are available and the number of parking spaces
staff has indicated are available. However, there are
five additional spaces available on the street which
could be utilized for Mrs. Perez's use. Councilman
Froehle concurred with Councilman Atkins.
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 4
Councilman Swain indicated that it should be made clear
that this business is a restaurant and not a
delicatessen or fast food place. It is her opinion that
each case must be reviewed individually with regard to
the recently adopted Ordinance which controls the subdi-
vision of small buildings in relationship to parking.
Mayor Gillanders concurred with Council and inquired if
Mrs. Perez understood the Conditions of Approval.
Mrs. Perez indicated she did understand the Conditions
of Approval.
Councilman Swain moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 8b -2769,
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE
CITY APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88 -902 AND ZONE
VARIANCE 88 -905, A REQUEST BY ERNESTINE PEREZ TO ALLOW
THE OPERATION OF A RESTAURANT WITH THREE (3) PARKING
SPACES IN LIEU OF THE REQUIRED FIVE (5) PARKING SPACES
LOCATED AT 4516 TEMPLE CITY BOULEVARD, to be reveiwed by
City Council in six months, seconded by Councilman
Froehle and unanimously carried.
8. COMMUNICATIONS:
9. TIME FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK:
Mr. Lucas, 5921 N. Agnes, stated that beginning Friday,
February 19th deliveries were beginning to be made starting
at 10 P.M. at the McDonalds immediately behind his house.
Additionally, the maintenance workers are beginning to clean
the outside areas of McDonalds anywhere from 2:00 a.m. to
4:00 a.m. and are creating alot of noise.
William Bretz, 5116 Myrtus, stated that recently the Con-
cerned Residents Association of Temple City was formed and
he was appointed as spokesperson to address some issues to
the City Council regarding the proposed Redevelopment Pro-
ject Block "A ". It is the opinion of this association that
although there has been input to the Council and CRA Agency
members this input has been ignored, therefore, a petition
with a list of demands was presented to each of the Council
members (the original is on file in the City Clerk's Office)
and a response within 10 days was requested.
Roberta Hoffman, 8803 E. Elm, stated she lives across the
street from the Redevelopment Area Block "A" and is a member
of the Concerned Residents Association of Temple City and in
reviewing the information received would like to make the
following objections:
1. A new Environmental Impact Report has not been pre-
pared taking into consideration the previous pro -
jects which have been completed in relationship to
increased traffic and noise.
2. The loss of low to moderate housing in the commu-
nity and the destruction of trees, plant life and
the increase of smog and pollution.
John Roughan, 8817 Elm Avenue, stated he was opposed to the
Redevelopment of Block "A" and agrees with the two previous
speakers.
Faye E. Lee, 8824 E. Elm Avenue, stated the residential
property owners in Block "A' were not given proper notifica-
tion when CRA project for Block "A" was amended in 1986.
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 5
Michael Hoffman, 8803 E. Elm Avenue, concerning the February
2, 1988 meeting, the residents objected to the treatment of
the senior citizens who attended the meeting. It is his
opinion that the Council and the Agency members seemed to
prolong the hearing intentionally. Mr. Hoffman entered his
objection to the Redevelopment Block "A" and the relocation
of the senior citizens in that area.
Wendy Roughan, 8817 Elm Avenue, stated she was opposed to
the Redevelopment Project of Block "A" and does not wish to
see the senior citizens relocated and does not wish to live
near a shopping center.
Kenneth G. Strobel, 5806 N. Muscatel Avenue, stated he was
opposed to the Redevelopment Project Block "A" due to the
negative affect it will have on the senior citizens who live
in that immediate area.
Sherry Passmore, P. 0. Box 1332, Concerned Citizens of
Temple City, Citizen Advocates, Inc. and C.A.N. (Citizen
Action Network), stated she wished to register the objection
of the Citizens Advocates, Inc. to the proposed project and
on behalf of C.A.N. wished to register the objection of the
destruction of single family residences and the encroachment
of commercial and retail into the residential areas. She
stated that after reviewing the documents which were re-
ceived, it was her opinion that they were incomplete. She
stated she felt there was some possible illegal actions
taken in amending the Redevelopment Plan in 1986 since in
order to do an amendment in a Redevelopment Plan the same
procedures must be followed as in adopting an original plan.
Within that framework she stated she had a few public re-
quests;
A. A Relocation Plan
B. The Neighborhood Element of General Plan
C. Who the Relocation Appeals Board is for the Project
Area.
D. Is there a Project Area Committee formed, if not since
the Project Area Committee affects low and moderate
income residents the request was made that one is
formed.
E. Request that documents be reviewed by the City Attor-
ney or the CRA Director to find out what the status is
of the zoning and the General Plan in relationship to
the Redevelopment Plan, since it appears to be incon-
sistent. To adopt a Redevelopment Plan one has to
state that it was consistent with the General Plan and
the zoning of the City. The Redevelopment Plan
adopted in 1972 did not state this.
F. What is the current designation of the property within
Block "A" of the Redevelopment Plan.
G. It appears that when the amendment was adopted in 1986
the procedures were incomplete and should the Agency
wish to redecide about going through with this project
that the Agency would comply with existing state laws.
RECESS TO CRA:
At this time the City Council recessed to meet as the Temple
City Community Redevelopment Agency; approved the Minutes of
the February 16, 1988 meeting, ratified property acquisition
settlement and adopted Resolution No. CRA 325, authorizing
payment of bills. The Minutes of the Agency are set forth
in full in the Agency's records.
RECONVENE AS CITY COUNCIL:
10. ACTION ON REQUEST BY CRA:
None
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 6
11. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS:
A. CITY CLERK'S ASSOCIATION ANNUAL CONFERENCE APRIL 27 -30,
1988, LAKE ARROWHEAD
City Manager Koski stated that authorization is
requested for Mary Willford to attend the subject con-
ference on April 27 -29, 1988 which is a budgeted item.
Councilman Atkins moved to approve the attendance of the
Mary Willford to City Clerk's Association Annual Confer-
ence April 27 -29, and authorize the necessary expendi-
tures seconded by Councilman Froehle and unanimously
carried.
12. ADJOURNMENT
On motion by Councilman Froehle seconded by Councilman
Atkins the meeting of the City Council adjourned to a study
session at 8:30 p.m. and discussed the following items:
1. ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD MEDIAN LANDSCAPING - PRELIMINARY
DESIGN
After a presentation by Roy Kato, City Council referred
the matter to their Budget Review Study Session.
2. RAILROAD CROSSING RUBBER MATS
After reviewing the material, Council referred the
matter to staff for preparation of plans and specifica-
tions and presentation at the next regular City Council
meeting.
3. SECTION 8 - RENTAL HOUSING
Following a short review and discussion, this matter was
referred to the next City Council meeting for action.
The study session was concluded at 8:50 P.M.
The next regular meeting will be held on Tuesday, March 15,
1988 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber, 5938 North
Kauffman Avenue, Temple City
ATTEST;
Chief ty City. jerk
1
1
1