Loading...
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