HomeMy Public PortalAboutCity Council_Minutes_1988-03-15_Regular 19881
1
1
CITY OF TEMPLE CITY
CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
MARCH 15, 1988
INITIATION:
1. CALL TO ORDER:
Pursuant to the Agenda posted on March 11, 1988 Mayor Pro
Tem Froehle called the meeting of the City Council to order
at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, March 15, 1988.
The invocation was given by Reverend Charles Woodworth,
First United Methodist Church, 5957 N. Golden West.
3. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Mayor Pro
Tem Froehle.
4. ROLL CALL:
Present: Councilmen- Atkins, Swain,- Froehle
Absent: Councilman- Dennis, Mayor Gillanders
Also Present: City Manager Koski, City Attorney Martin,
Community Development Director Dawson, Public
Works Coordinator Peterson, Julie Estrada of
the Temple City Times and a representative of
the San Gabriel Valley Tribune.
Councilman Atkins moved to excuse Councilman Dennis and
Mayor Gillanders with cause, seconded by Councilman Swain
and unanimously carried.
Councilman Mary Lou Swain requested the meeting be adjourned
in memory of Nona Desy, a resident of Temple City who has
been active within the community for many years. Nona and
her husband owned Desy Printing located in Temple City, was
active for many years in the Campfire girls and was past
President of the Quota Club of Temple City. She was cur-
rently the Secretary /Treasurer of the 25th District of Quota
International and was very active with both the Chamber of
Commerce and the Camellia Festival.
PROCLAMATION
Mayor Pro Tem Froehle presented a Proclamation to Dr. Joseph
Hadeed, of the San Gabriel Valley Crisis Evaluation Center
in recognition of their 5 years of outstanding service to
the residents of the San Gabriel Valley and Temple City.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilman Atkins requested Item 5.I. be removed from the
Consent Calendar; Councilman Atkins moved to approve the
remainder of the Consent Calender as recommended, seconded
by Councilman Swain and unanimously carried.
A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular meeting of March 1, 1988.
Approved as written.
of t
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 2
B. SET PUBLIC HEARING - ASSESSMENTS FOR STREET LIGHTING
IMPROVEMENTS 5300 BLOCK OF LOMA AVENUE, SOUTH OF OLIVE
STREET (Pursuant to Chapter 27, Improvement Act of 1911,
Streets and Highways Code) -
City Council set public hearing for Street Lighting
Improvements, 5300 Block of Loma Avenue, South of Olive
Street for April 5, 1988.
C. ACCEPTANCE OF INSTALLATION - STREET LIGHTING IMPROVE-
MENTS CLOVERLY AVENUE, OLIVE STREET TO BLACKLEY STREET
(Pursuant to Chapter 27, Improvement Act of 1911,
Streets and Highways Code) -
City Council accepted the installation of street light-
ing and approved annexation of area to Assessment Dis-
trict Zone A.
D. MISCELLANEOUS CONCRETE REPAIR & INSTALLATION OF WHEEL-
CHAIR RAMPS (VARIOUS LOCATIONS) -
City Council approved the specifications and authorized
staff to solicit bids for the Public Works Maintenance
program for wheelchair ramps, curbs and gutters.
E. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION FROM THEIR REGULAR MEETING OF
MARCH 8, 1988 -
City Council received and filed the memo outlining
action taken by the Planning Commission at their
regular meeting March 8, 1988.
F. COUNTY REGISTRAR RECORDER - JUNE 7, 1988 PRIMARY ELEC-
TION REQUEST TO USE LIVE OAK PARK FACILITIES AS POLLING
PLACE.
City Council approved the use of Live Oak Park on June
7, 1988 as a polling place for the Primary Elections.
G. SECTION .8 HOUSING PROGRAM -
Council approved the City's participation in the Section
8 subsidized housing rental program.
H. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -2768: EMPLOYMENT OF BUDGETED PERSONNEL
City Council adopted Resolution No. 88 -2768 approving
the appointment of budgeted personnel.
J. RESOLUTION NO. 88 -2770: APPROVAL OF PAYMENT OF BILLS
City Council adopted Resolution No. 88 -2770 approving
claims and demands in the amount of $190,403.37.
I. DOCUMENT COPYING FEE SCHEDULE -
Councilman Atkins stated that he felt the majority of
the cost of reproduction of documents was in the staff
time utilized in locating the information the resident
requested. Therefore, it was his opinion that the cost
should be $1.00 for the first page with each additional
page at $.05.
Councilman Swain concurred with Councilman Atkins.
Councilman Atkins moved to approve the fee of $1.00 for
the first page and $.05 for each additional for copying
of documents, seconded by Councilman Swain and unani-
mously carried.
1
1
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 3
6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
None
7. NEW BUSINESS:
A. PUBLIC HEARING: APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 45817 AT
5808 CLOVERLY STREET (APPLICANT /OWNER - RALEIGH OVERSEAS
INDUSTRIES, INC.)
City Manager Koski provided background information
stating that the applicant is requesting approval for
development of eight (8) residential condominium units.
A Conditional Use Permit was previously approved for
this project. The subject site is designated for High
Density Residential on the City's recently amended
General Plan and is zoned R -3. The lot is 100' x 175'
for a total area of 17, 500 sq. ft. Based upon density
restrictions, up to nine (9) dwelling units could be
developed on the site. The proposal is for 8 units,
with two levels of living area over a semi- subterranean
garage . The project does comply with all of the City's
zoning requirements for this area.
Mayor Pro Tem Froehle declared the public hearing open
and invited anyone wishing to address the City Council
on the matter to come forward at this time.
Engles Chen, 600 W. Main Street, Alhambra, stated that
this project will enhance the area and was previously
approved by the Planning Commissioners.
Caroline Olson, 5717 Agnes, statea sne was opposed to
this project due to the increase in traffic which, in
her opinion, is already a problem. She felt the pro-
perty could be remodeled as a single family dwelling and
should be left as such.
Richard Maoli, 5835 Primrose, stated he was in agreement
with Caroline Olson and feels the traffic is especially
bad on Cloverly. Additionally, he requested an explana-
tion from the Council regarding the inconsistency of
downzoning property owners and yet allowing private
entrepreneurs come into the City.
Councilman Swain responded by stating that when the
General Plan was being reviewed this particular area on
Cloverly and Oak was discussed. Prior to the General
Plan Amendment this area was R -3 and C -1, which was a
mixture of commercial and high density residential. The
Council felt the commercial designation was inappropri-
ate and discussed the potential of an R -2 zoning. A
petition was presented to the Council by the people who
live in the neighborhood which covered a four (4) block
area, and wished an R -3 zoning. The Council responded
to the resident input by designating the two block area,
between Workman and Las Tunas on Cloverly and Oak
Avenue, R -3. Many of the lots in this specific area are
already developed to R -3 density.
As no one else wished to address the City Council on
this matter, Councilman Swain moved to close the public
hearing, seconded by Councilman Atkins and unanimously
carried.
Councilman Atkins stated that since the residents in
this particular area wanted the R -3 zoning and the
surrounding properties are developed, in many cases, at
least to this density he finds no reason to deny this
project. / r 7G
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 4
Councilman Swain concurred with Councilman Atkins and in
addition, stated that this project meets the building
and density code therefore, can see no reason to deny
this project and would be in favor of approving the
Tentative Tract Map at 5808 Cloverly.
Councilman Atkins moved to approve the Negative Declara-
tion and the Tentative Tract Map 45817 at 5808 Cloverly,
seconded by Councilman Swain and unanimously carried.
B. PUBLIC HEARING: APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
88 -898 AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO 46067 AT 9547 GARIBALDI
(OWNER - LOUIS & JOSEPHINE PIEROTTI)
City Manager Koski provided background information
stating that the applicant is requesting a Conditional
Use Permit and Tentative Tract Map to allow development
of eight (8) detached residential condominium units. The
subject site is designated for Medium Density Residen-
tial on the City's General Plan and is zoned R -2. The
subject site is rectangular in shape, having a lot width
of approximately 105' and a length of approximately 300'
for a total area of 31,663 square feet. The proposed
project consists of two -story detached dwelling units on
a single lot. The project complies with all of the
City's zoning requirements.
Mayor Pro Tem Froehle declared the public hearing open
and invited anyone wishing to address the City Council
on the matter to come forward at this time.
Ming -Nang Chen, 600 W. Main Street, Alhambra, stated
i.haL. this property is very interesting in that it ib
surrounded by R -1 and R -3 zoning. The proposal is for
eight (8) single family condominiums and he felt it
would enhance the neighborhood.
As no one else wished to address the City Council on
this matter, Councilman Atkins moved to close the public
hearing, seconded by Councilman Swain and unanimously
carried.
Councilman Swain stated that this property was the
beginning of the General Plan amendments. She indicated
that it is almost the same density as the single family
residence that faces Primrose. It looks like a good
project since the condominiums look like individual
homes where they are not connected or stacked. Council-
man Swain indicated she would be in favor of the Condi-
tional Use Permit and Tentative Tract Map.
Councilman Atkins indicated that he concurred with
Councilman Swain and the density is not too far out of
line with the surrounding properties. The original
request was for 17 units and the developer has made
every effort to improve the project. The project does
meet the code requirements and he cannot find any reason
to deny the project.
Mayor Pro Tem Froehle concurred with the Council.
Councilman Swain moved to approve the Negative Declara-
tion, Conditional Use Permit 88 -898 and Tentative Tract
Map 45817 at 9547 Garibaldi, seconded by Councilman
Atkins and unanimously carried.
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 5
C. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS TO PERMIT THE
SUBDIVISION OF LARGE SIZED R -1 ZONED LOTS-
City Manager Koski provided background information
stating that during the General Plan revision and subse-
quent rezonings, a number of requests were made to the
City to consider permitting the division of large sized
R -1 zoned lots. The Planning Commission has been study-
ing the matter since October 1987. In November a joint
study session was conducted with the City Council rela-
tive to this matter. On February 9, 1988, the Planning
Commission adopted a Resolution recommending certain
code amendments to allow the subdivision of large sized
R -1 zoned lots. It is recommended that such unique
subdivisions be governed by the following specific
criteria:
1. No existing lot shall be subdivided into more than
two lots.
2. Each subdivision shall be subject to the approval of
a Parcel Map.
3. The original existing lot to be subdivided shall
have a street frontage of at least 70 feet but less
than 100 feet.
4. Each subdivision shall be limited to the creation of
no more than one flag lot, with a minimum street
frontage of 15 feet.
5. A minimum of 7,200 square feet of lot area shall be
provided per newly created lot, exclusive of any
"pole" portion of a flag lot.
Mayor Pro Tem Froehle declared the public hearing open
and invited anyone wishing to address the City Council
on the matter to come forward at this time.
Donald Roberts, 4938 Glickman, stated he was in agree-
ment with the proposed ordinance. His lot is 100' x
236'and indicated he would prefer a private driveway for
the second lot.
Dan Carmichael, 5429 Baldwin Avenue, stated he was also
in agreement and did not have any preference with regard
to a private drive or an easement. He did state,
however, that some properties may have a problem with
the second drive and still meet the frontage require-
ments.
Paula Van Orden, 5429 Baldwin Avenue, indicated she is
in agreement with the proposed amendment however, she
would like to request an expansion of the criteria to
include R -2. In addition, she requested the Council
review the driveway criteria, as it was her opinion that
due to the requirements needed, many people would be
prevented from utilizing this amendment.
Mayor Pro Tem Froehle stated that the minimum lot re-
quirement of R -1 is 7200 sq. ft. If Council permitted
R -2, the lot size requirement is 3600 sq. ft. which is
half the size of R -1. The Council feels this would
create a higher level of density which is not desired in
an R -1 area. Mayor Pro Tem Froehle indicated that at
the conclusion of the public hearing the Council would
discuss the driveway issue.
Charles Henne, 4846 N. Heleo, stated that his property
has two units on it but if he divided his property there
wouldn't be enough room to have a driveway between the
wall and the house. It currently is a 12' driveway to
the rear. He is in favor of the proposed code amend-
ments.
�r . 0
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 6
Diane Messier, 4834 Heleo, stated her property has been
in the family since 1946 and she would be in favor of
the code amendment.
Tricia Bogle, 5127 Golden West, stated that she had
spoke in favor of this amendment at the Planning Commis-
sion meeting due to the standards which she felt were
very good. Ms. Bogle indicated she is in favor of the
separate driveway versus the easement situation.
Linda Bradle, 4929 Heleo, stated she was in favor of the
code amendment. It was her opinion that although the
easements were not a bad situation, the people who tend
to own their property tend to take care of it.
Joe Braun, 9532 Olive Street, stated he owns two lots
which are side by side, one which is in excess of 21,000
sq. ft. and the other which is in excess of 32,000 sq.
ft. His disappointment is a result of the fact that he
may only add one additional house on each lot. It is
his contention that the proposed amendment only posi-
tively affects the lots which are 14,400 sq. ft to
16,600 sq. ft. There are 450 parcels which exceed the
14,400 sq. ft. category which constitutes 5% of all the
R -1 lots.
William Bretz, 5116 Myrtus, indicated that although he
has no problem with the proposed amendment he lives on
property which utilizes an easement and it has created
problems.
As no one else wished to address the City Council on
this matter, Councilman Atkins moves zo dose the public
hearing, seconded by Councilman Swain and unanimously
carried.
Councilman Atkins stated he does not feel comfortable
with the flag lot concept for a couple of reasons, not
the least of which was that this was one of the main
issues when Temple City was incorporated. It was his
opinion that in the big picture he doesn't feel this
would affect that many lots and believes there is a
market for large lots.
Councilman Swain stated that she was not particularly in
favor of flag lots either, however she does feel that
some of the lots are so large that some residents do not
know what to do with the remainder of their lot. She
indicated that this ordinance would allow the City to
have some control over what is done with these lots. The
easement versus the flag lot with a dedicated driveway
is the issue she is concerned with. If a lot is very .
large and very wide there is no problem with a dedicated
drive, however, the lots that are just slightly over the
required width will run into restrictions.
Mayor Pro Tem Froehle indicated he is not a strong
supporter of flag lots however, some relief needs to be
given to residents who have 16,000 sq. ft. lots. He
stated he would be in favor of this relief with certain
conditions; 1) each lot would have to be 7200 sq. ft.,
not inclusive of the driveway, so that it maintains the
same R -1 standards as other places in the City, 2) he is
not in favor of easements due to the potential problems
which could be incurred in the future. Mayor Pro Tem
Froehle suggested that due to the fact there was some
disagreement as to the content of the proposed ordi-
nance, the ordinance be introduced by title only and
discussed further at the 2nd reading when a full Council
was present.
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 7
Councilman Atkins moved to approve the Negative Declara-
tion and introduce by title only Ordinance No. 88 -629,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE
CITY AMENDING SECTIONS 9119 (L) AND 9333 OF THE TEMPLE
CITY MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO LARGE R -1 LOT SPLITS,
seconded by Councilman Swain and unanimously carried.
D. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS RELATING TO
MINIMUM LOT WIDTH AND SIDE YARD REQUIREMENTS FOR MULTI-
PLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS -
City Manager Koski provided background information
stating that the subject code amendments would establish
a consistent mimimum lot width of 50' for both condo-
miniums and apartments in the R -2 and R -3 Zones. Cur-
rently the Zoning Code requires 80' of lot width for
two -story condominiums but only 50' of width for two -
story apartments. This change would bring about a
consistency in our current code requirements. Addition-
ally, this code amendment would reduce the required side
yard requirements for a single story structure to 5'.
Two -story structures will continue to be required to
provide a 10' side yard setback for the first story and
a 15' side yard setback for the second story. Also
included in the proposed code amendments is a "cleanup"
item to change the definition'of an apartment to be
synonymous with a multiple family dwelling and to fur-
ther expand upon the definition of a multiple family
unit. The proposed code amendments would eliminate
existing inconsistency between condominium and apartment
standards, would allow for the "practical" development
of 50' wide lots by reducing the side yard requirement
to 5' for single story structures and would create an
incentive for building "single story' rather than 'two
story' developments.
Mayor Pro Tem Froehle declared the public hearing open
and invited anyone wishing to address the City Council
on the matter to come forward at this time.
Louis Bald, 9658 E. Longden, stated that if you have a
mandate of 10 feet on the lower level this does not
leave much footage for building. Mr. Bald also inquired
as to whether this recommendation could be relaxed for
apartment ownership rather than condominiums so that you
could build up to 5 ft. sideyard setback for two - story.
As no one else wished to address the City Council on
this matter, Councilman Atkins moved to close the public
hearing, seconded by Councilman Swain and unanimously
carried.
Councilman Swain indicated that one of the problems that
the City has is the 50' lot width. Ideally these would
not be in existence and are currently not allowed. These
lots that are in R -2 zones were being developed primar-
ily as apartments rather than perhaps a more desirable
condominium development because they were allowed to
build closer to the side yard and there was an 80' width
requirement for condominiums. She stated that even in
the areas that are in the R -2 zone, allowing a 5' set-
back is too close for taller two -story buildings. She
indicated she is in favor of the 10' sideyard setback
for the first story, 15' sideyard setback for the second
story and 50' lot width requirement for condominiums.
Councilman Atkins stated that he believed this ordinance
is a definate step in the right direction therefore, he
is in agreement with Councilman Swain.
Mayor Pro Tem Froehle concurred with Council and indi- 1C-n(,‘
cated that this applies to R -2 and R -3 lots also.
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 8
Councilman Swain moved to approve the Negative Declara-
tion and introduce for 1st reading by title only Ordi-
nance No. 88 -630, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY AMENDING SECTIONS 9110, 9113,
9350, 9352 AND 9563 OF THE TEMPLE CITY MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO MINIMUM LOT WIDTHS AND SETBACKS FOR R -2 AND
R -3 USES, seconded by Councilman Atkins and unanimously
carried.
E. RAILROAD CROSSING RUBBER MATS -
City Manager Koski provided background information
stating that at the study session on March 2, 1988, the
City Council reviewed the possible need for railroad
crossing rubber mats at the Lower Azusa Road and the
Encinita Avenue crossings of the Southern Pacific Rail-
road. The Council also viewed a video presentation
provided by one manufacturer of such mats. The City
Council agreed that the mats would be a great improve-
ment and that staff should proceed with a formal bid
process to obtain rubber mat materials for installation
by railroad maintenance crews. Cost estimates range
from a low $12,000 for Encinita Avenue alone to a high
estimate of $53,600 for both crossings.
Councilman Swain inquired as to whether Prop A funds
could be used for this project.
Councilman Atkins stated that no Prop A funds could be
used for street improvements, however that is an issue
California Contract Cities will be taking up.
Councilman Atkins moved to approve specifications and
authorize the solicitation of bids, seconded by Council-
man Swain and unanimously carried.
F. SKATEBOARD ORDINANCE -
City Manager Koski provided background information
stating that for the last several months the Traffic
Commission has been working on the problems associated
with individuals riding skateboards on sidewalks in the
commercial shopping areas. In January the Commission
held a study session which was open to the public to
discuss intensively the various ramifications of and the
need for such an ordinance. At its February meeting,
the Commissioners consolidated various points and opin-
ions into one draft resolution. At its March meeting,
the Traffic Commission voted to recommend approval and
adoption of the ordinance amendment by the City Council.
Significant features of the ordinance are as follows:
1. Skateboards are included in the definition of
"wheeled toys" which would also include wagons,
skates, tricycles, etc., but not bicycles which are
defined elsewhere.
2. The ordinance prohibits riding wheeled toys on
sidewalks in the commercial areas but does not
prohibit this riding elsewhere.
3. The ordinance prohibits riding any wheeled toy in an
"unsafe manner" on any public property at any time.
4. The ordinance prohibits leaving unattended wheeled
vehicles on sidewalks where they may be pedestrian
safety hazards and a nuisance.
5. The ordinance provides several levels of enforcement
as deemed necessary by the police officer, and it
provides penalties for adults violating the ordi-
nance. Confiscation and impounding of wheeled toys
is also provided as a way of stopping the violations
__ immediately.
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 9
The Commission also suggests that if the City Council
adopts this or a version of this ordinance that it
should be widely publicized in the schools, the newspa-
pers, the stores and possibly even be posted in the
commercial zones. This problem has been going on for
some time and is brought to the attention of the City on
a fairly frequent basis.
Councilman Atkins stated that it is unfortunate there
is a need for this type of ordinance and he would be in
favor of its adoption.
Councilman Swain indicated she concurred with Councilman
Atkins. She also stated that one of the penalties which
is being considered for a citation is the attendance at
Bicycle Court on Saturday mornings with one parent. It
was her opinion that this stipulation would help involve
the parents in curbing this type of improper use of
skateboards.
Mayor Pro Tem concurred with the Council and added that
there be an education program and signage. Addition-
ally, he would like to see press information and flyers
distributed to the local schools.
Councilman Atkins moved to approve the Traffic Commis-
sion recommendation including the education program and
introduce for 1st reading by title only Ordinance No.
88 -628, AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMPLE CITY AMENDING ARTICLE III, CHAPTER 3 OF THE
TEMPLE CITY MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO RULES AND
REGULATIONS FOR USE OF WHEELED TOYS ON CITY STREETS,
seconded by Councilman Swain and unaninmously carried.
8. COMMUNICATIONS:
A. LETTER FROM THE CITY OF HOPE'S FIRE WORKS CHAIRMAN
REQUESTING MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT RE: FIREWORKS
City Manager Koski provided background information
stating that a letter was received from City of Hope
Chairman Millie Costa, requesting a change in the
Muncipal Code for the retail sale of Safe and Sane
Fireworks. The substance of the modifications and
additions requested were that applicants would pay a fee
of 5100 and the maximum number of permits issued in any
calender year would be limited to 12. The Council was
given a copy of the Alhambra City Fireworks Ordinance
which was recently changed to limit the number of fire-
works permits to 14 and it was noted that Monterey Park
has set a limit of 15 fireworks stands.
Councilman Atkins stated that he felt Mrs. Costa's
suggestion was based on the fact that since many of the
City's in the area no longer permit the sale of safe and
sane fireworks, the people selling in those cities are
looking for new locations to sell fireworks and would be
moving in on the established charitable sales organiza-
tions in communities such as ours.
Councilman Swain indicated that in the Temple City
Fireworks Ordinance it is already stated that only
Temple City based organizations may be granted a permit.
In any event, Council can not take action on this re-
quest due to the fact the situation needs to be
researched and the City Attorney needs to draft an ordi-
nance for review.
Councilman Swain moved to refer to staff this request,
seconded by Councilman Atkins and unanimously carried.
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 10
9. TIME FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK:
Tricia Bogle, 5127 Golden West Avenue, stated that she is
really not in favor of splitting the lots but has heard alot
about it over the last few years therefore, thought it was a
foregone conclusion. She had only wished to support the
ordinance as it had been written. In addition, she wanted
to express her dislike of the current play equipment that is
used at Temple City Park. She preferred the older equipment
and felt it was much more sturdy and inquired as to the
reason for replacement.
City Manager Koski responded by indicating the reason the
old equipment was replaced was due to fact the play area was
reduced in size and located in a different area and the old
equipment did not fit according to current playground stan-
dards.
Joe Braun, 9535 Olive, stated that in reference to the
zoning code amendment regarding the division of large lots,
he would like the City Council to consider a certain square
footage per residence.
Charles Henne, 4846 N. Heleo Avenue, stated that he felt
there were only two choices, 1) to utilize the lots in a
reasonable manner by having two houses, or 2) letting the
back yards go and become overgrown with weeds or use as
storage.
Larry Kelly, 6209 N. Ivar, stated that he realized the
railroad crossing over Temple City Boulevard belongs to El
Monte and the City has encouraged the railroad by mail to
make necessary repairs on the street. He wished to state
his anger at the fact the railroad has not responded to this
request. He requested the address of the railroad so the
citizens of Temple City could write to the railroad and
express their dissatisfaction with the condition of the road
and the lack of service.
Councilman Swain responded by indicating the Santa Fe Rail-
road which runs to the north of the area, none of which is
in Temple City, has been very cooperative and Southern
Pacific has been known to be very uncooperative, move very
slowly and at their own desired pace.
Bill Bretz, 5116 Myrtus Avenue, stated he was attending the
meeting in order to talk in favor of some property owners on
Elm Street that face the possibility of acquisition of their
property by eminent domain. There was an editorial in the
Temple City Times which brought up issues regarding the use
of outsiders in the residents organization and Mr. Bretz
pointed out that as the City utilizes the services of out-
side consultants, such as Mr. Martin and Port & Flor, the
organization also needs consultants to help in areas in
which they are not knowledgable. Additionally, he requested
an answer regarding the apparant loan from the City to the
CRA and the fact that the Agency did not make the required
interest payments to the City in 1987 and 1988.
Michael Hoffman, 8803 E. Elm Avenue, stated he was still
opposed to the Block A Redevelopment. He also indicated
that at the last City Council meeting a letter with a peti-
tion was given to the Council and they were told at that
time that a reply would be given in 2 weeks and would like
to know the status of that reply. In addition he wished to
know how the citizens could put a item on the Agenda.
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 11
City Manager Koski stated that late today he had received a
response to the questions from Mr. Tom Parrington and he
would be reveiwing the response and giving it to Mr. Martin
for his review. A report would then be given to the Coun-
cil. With regards to the placement of an item on the Agenda,
all that is needed is a letter to the City Clerk stating the
item and the date you would like the item to be on the
Agenda.
Faye E. Lee, 8824 El Elm Avenue, stated he had served in the
U.S. Navy and now 43 years later he feels his freedom is
being denied due to the fact that a shopping center is being
forced on the residents of Temple City.
William Bretz, 5116 Myrtus Avenue, stated that the people
would like to convince the CRA that maybe they don't need
this project and the only way to show that is to voice their
opinions now even though they keep being told that no deci-
sions have been made yet. It is the opinion of the resi-
dents that the time to let the Agency know how they feel, is
now and not after the decision has already been made.
John Roughan, 8817 Elm Avenue, stated he was opposed to the
Redevelopment of Block A. He inquired as to what was going
to happen with the area which is already vacant, as there
have been children on that property starting fires. Addi-
tionally, how did this project even beg.in since he received
no notification until a neighbor came by and informed him of
what was going to transpire.
City Manager Koski responded by indicating that the area Mr.
Roughan was referring to will be fenced, graded and a mate-
rial to reduce dust will be applied. To answer the second
question, the property acquisition and the clearing of the
property was initiated in 1986 with the adoption of a sche-
matic plan for development. When the Design for Development
was approved (the property owners were noticed), offers
were made and the acquisition proceeded. There were two
residents who did not wish to sell, they were Mr. Ramirez
and Dr. Coleman.
Bill Stout, 6033 Camellia, stated he was a concerned citizen
regarding the Block A Redevelopment Project. He inquired as
to why the Agency decided to utilize a small section that is
taking 21 homes away from the people and would it be finan-
cially worthwhile to take that section, in other words would
it pay for itself to add that section to the rest of Project
A.
Councilman Swain indicated that this smaller addition to
Project A is being studied and reviewed as to the feasibil-
ity of utilization and whether it will be too costly or not.
She re- emphasized that no decision has been made to buy any
property.
Maynard Horace, 9472 Olemas Street, inquired as to who the
developer is for this project.
Mayor Pro Tem Froehle stated that there is no developer for
the project at this point. However, there were some people
who came in with some architectual designs and indicated
what could go into the location. The Agency gave these
people approval to show what this location would look like.
City Manager Koski stated that there were about 30 develop-
ers interested and request for qualifications went out to
all thirty (30) and sixteen (16) were received back. After
further analysis that number was reduced to four (4). The
four are; 1) Ranier Fund, 2) Champion Development, 3) Arnold
Pacific and 4) Gemtel. These are all the developers who are
still in the running and ultimately it would be one of these
four who would do the project, however, no one has been "` °62-
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 12
selected yet.
Roberta Hoffman, 8803 E. Elm Avenue, stated she had a few
questions regarding the issue Mr. Bretz brought up regarding
the Temple City Redevelopment Agency owing the City money on
a loan from the City which was made in 1985. If the Agency
owes money to the City then why is it spending money to
acquire property and relocate residents on Elm and Reno? Is
there any way that the loan could be paid to the City so
that this area could be saved?
City Manager Koski indicated that the funds which are being
uitilized by the Agency for the acquisition are CDBG and
these funds cannot be used to repay the loan to the City. In
response to the second question, Mr. Koski stated that the
Agency's whole source of funds are being used to pay off the
bonds with a nominal repayment to the City of approximately
$47,000.00 per year.
Sherry Passmore, P O. Box 1332, stated that she feels it is
imperative that correct information be given not only to the
citizens of Temple City but also to the City Council. She
indicated that what Mrs. Hoffman was refering to was the
$703,000.00 loan from the City's General Fund to the Rede-
velopment Agency and according to the City's financial
statements, that money is being held with the California
State Treasurer.
City Manager Koski indicated that the information Ms.
Passmore was questioning was based on incorrect assumptions.
Mayor Pro Tem Froehle stated that based on the confusion, it
would be in the best interest or all involved for Ms.
Passmore to meet with the City's auditors to review and
answer all questions regarding the City's and the Agency's
Statement of Indebtedness and Financial Audit. He invited
Ms. Passmore to make an appointment after the end of the
evening so this issue may be resolved quickly.
RECESS TO CRA:
At this time the City Council recessed to meet as the Temple
City Community Redevelopment Agency; approved the Minutes of
the March 1, 1988 meeting, approved sign modification for
United Savings Bank and adopted Resolution No. CRA 326,
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
11. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS:
A. LOS ANGELES COUNTY HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN -
City Manager Koski provide background information stat-
ing that a letter was received from the Department of
Public Works requesting the Council to make known the
fact that a series of public hearings would be held and
the location closest to Temple City would be West Covina
and that hearing would be on April 5, 1988. Should
there be any public comment then that would be the time
to voice it. Basically, the request was to bring this
notice to the public attention.
Council Minutes, March 1, 1988 - Page 13
Councilman Swain moved to receive the fact sheet and
make all information available to the public and get the
dates of public hearings to the newspapers for publica-
tion, seconded by Councilman Atkins and unanimously
carried.
12. ADJOURNMENT
On motion by Councilman Swain, seconded by Councilman Atkins
the meeting of the City Council was adjourned in memory of
Nona Desy at 10:15 p.m. The next regular meeting will be
held at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber, 5938 North
Kauffman Avenue, Temple City.
ATTEST:
1
1
Chief Deputy Cit
1
1
1G -051