Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutCity Council_Minutes_1989-09-19_Regular 19891 1 CITY OF TEMPLE CITY CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 1989 INITIATION: 1. CALL TO ORDER: Pursuant to Agenda posted on September 15, 1989, Mayor Froehle called the meeting of the City Council to order at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday, September 19, 1989. 2. The invocation was given by Reverend Jim Brown, Seventh Day Adventist, 9664 East Broadway. 3. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Mayor Froehle. 4. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Atkins, Breazeal, Gillanders, Swain and Froehle Also Present: City Manager Koski, City Attorney Martin, Community Development Director Dawson, Public Works Coordinator Peterson, Parks & Recreation Director Kobett, Temple City Times Staff Writer Estrada, Pacesetter Staff Writer Holtzclaw and SGV Tribune Staff Writer Medve Councilmember Atkins requested the meeting be adjourned in memory of Senior Building Inspector Joe Henchey. Mr. Atkins said Mr. Henchey had a great reputation with contractors and many Temple City residents were very fond of Joe. 5. CONSENT CALENDAR: Councilmembers Breazeal and Gillanders requested Items B and C be removed for comments. Councilmember Gillanders moved to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar as submitted, seconded by Councilmember Atkins and unanimously carried. A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular meeting of September 5, 1989 Council approved the Minutes of the regular meeting of September 5, 1989 as submitted. City Council Minutes, September 19, 1989 - Page 2 D. ADDITIONAL HOLIDAY LIGHTS FOR TREE IN TEMPLE CITY PARK - Council authorized staff to install additional lights on tree in Temple City Park for public display during the Christmas Season at an estimated cost of $1,300.00 and amend the adopted budget accordingly. E. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT: CDBG EXCHANGE OF FUNDS, WESTLAKE VILLAGE - Council approved the amendment to Agreement for Community Development Block Grant Program Exchange of Funds and authorized the Mayor to execute said Agreement with the City of Westlake Village. F. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES: KWOK -FAI CHU Council denied claim and referred to JPIA. G. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS FROM THEIR REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 12, 1989 - Council received and filed. H. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -2903: APPOINTMENT OF PERSONNEL - Council adopted Resolution No. 89 -2903 approving the em- ployment of budgeted personnel. I. RESOLUTION NO. 89 -2904: APPROVAL OF PAYMENT OF BILLS - Council adopted Resolution No. 89 -2904 approving claims and demands in the amount of $178,443.00. B. ACCEPTANCE OF BID - PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF BUS BENCH SHELTERS PHASE II, PROJECT 89 -3 - Councilmember Gillanders questioned if these were similar to what was previously purchased and installed. He was concerned because the lighting is unreliable. Councilmember Breazeal expressed similar concern. City Manager Koski replied that a new improved solar light- ing system will be installed on these and the others will be replaced as needed. C. EMPTYING OF ON- STREET TRASH RECEPTACLES - Council accepted proposal from Pro Landscaping for bi- weekly emptying of all on- street trash receptacles at bus stops and other street locations at a cost of $1.00 per container per emptying. 1 1 1 City Council Minutes, September 19, 1989 - Page 3 Councilmember Breazeal questioned whether bi- weekly empty- ing of the trash containers was often enough. He noted in several areas of the City they were overflowing. City Manager Koski answered that in some areas, particu- larly on Rosemead Blvd. they need to be emptied every two or three days. This program will be supplemented with City staff. Councilman Gillanders thought this was good news that they required emptying so often. It indicated to him that everyone is using them and they should make sure they are dumped as required. Councilman Atkins remarked that the Pro Landscaping pro- posal was for semi - weekly emptying. If the City adds additional emptying, we will have to pay for it. He felt perhaps the bid should be quoted on a per unit basis. Councilmember Swain moved to approve Items B and C as discussed, seconded by Councilmember Atkins and unanimously carried. 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: A. BLOCK "A" COMMERCIAL PROJECT - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 89 -2, ZONE CHANGE 89 -1013 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 89 -1012 - As background, on September 5, 1989, Council conducted a public hearing and voted to approve a General Plan Amend- ment, Zone Change and Conditional Use Permit to allow a promotional retail shopping center at the northwest corner of Las Tunas Drive and Rosemead Boulevard. This project has been extensively evaluated in the Environmental Impact Report which was certified on January 3, 1989. Councilmember Gillanders moved to adopt Resolution 89 -2900, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 89 -2 TO REDESIGNATE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IDENTIFIED ON THE ATTACHED MAP LABELED EXHIBIT "A" FROM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL; introduce for first reading, by title only, Ordinance No. 89 -656, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY APPROVING ZONE CHANGE NO. 89 -1013 TO RECLASSIFY CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD REDEVELOP- MENT PROJECT AREA AND PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF ELM AVENUE BETWEEN RENO AVENUE AND ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD KNOWN AS THE "DEVELOPERS PARCEL" FROM R -3 TO C -2; and adopt Resolu- tion No. 89 -2905, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 89 -1012 TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD AND LAS TUNAS; seconded by Councilmember Swain and unanimously carried. City Council Minutes, September 19, 1989 - Page 4 7. NEW BUSINESS: A. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 89 -991, ZONE VARIANCE NO. 89 -992 AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 47724 AT 5076 -5078 SERENO DRIVE (FAN) - City Manager Koski said the applicant proposes to develop five condominium units on an R -2 zoned lot. The proposed development is not in conflict with current building mora- toriums, the F.A.R. is .498 and the proposed development is consistent with all development standards. A variance is required because the Zoning Code specifies that a driveway may not exceed 300', and in this case the subject parcel consists of approximately 397 feet of depth. It is an existing parcel of land, therefore, the variance request was considered reasonable. Because of the lot depth, each condominium unit is required to be improved with automatic interior fire sprinklers. Planning Commission approved this proposal at their August 22, 1989 meeting. Councilmember Gillanders noted that the floor plan did not show any closets for two bedrooms and asked if this met the code? Mayor Froehle declared the public hearing open and invited anyone wishing to address Council on this matter to come forward at this time. Engles Shen, 600 Main Street, Alhambra, representing the applicant and Engineer on the project, answered Council - member Gillanders' concern about closets and assured Coun- cil each bedroom had a closet. Perhaps it was left off the drawing. He has read all staff's conditions and concurred with all of them. As there was no one else who wished to speak on this item, Councilmember Breazeal moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Councilmember Atkins and unanimously carried. Councilmember Swain asked Battalion Chief Eynon of the Los Angeles County Fire Department if they had a problem with the long driveway, which is almost 400' long. Battalion Chief Eynon, stated he is not up on the latest Code. However, if suspect, it will be picked up when the plans are submitted for inspection. The sprinklers may be accepted in lieu of access. Mayor Froehle remarked that the Fire Department has proba- bly looked at this and asked for sprinklers as a mitigation measure. 1 1 1 City Council Minutes, September 19, 1989 - Page 5 Community Development Director Dawson said there is a turn - around on the lot for vehicular access and each unit would have sprinklers as well as the garages. Councilman Gillanders felt it is a peculiar lot and they did a commendable job in engineering it. He assumed there would be closets. He had a concern about the adjoining property as there were no weep holes cut in the wall and /or any arrangement for adequate drainage. On the whole, he felt it was an excellent job and will be an asset. Councilmember Atkins moved to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 89 -991, Zone Variance No. 89 -992 and Tract Map No. 47724 at 5076 -5078 Sereno Drive, to include the Minutes and materials from the Planning Commission as part of the record of Council's public hearing; and approve the Nega- tive Declaration; seconded by Councilmember Breazeal and unanimously carried. 8. COMMUNICATIONS: NONE 9. TIME FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK: Bob Pitts, 5312 Degas, expressed his disappointment at the article in the Temple City Times and said he is an advocate of the sign ordinance for the downtown area. He felt Council has not addressed this subject to the general public. He did read the conditions of the sign ordinance would be relaxed because of the Pomona litigation. Additionally, he said other cities were standing by their ordinances and he wanted to know what course of action Council was going to take. Mayor Froehle replied that the sign ordinance is on the Agenda and will be discussed later in the meeting under Matters From City Officials. Jack Hill, 5931 Kauffman, discussed a problem with the Temple Gardens Restaurant on Las Tunas in the way they are handling their garbage. They are putting it in the dumpsters and at- tracting flies, maggots and creating a horrible odor. It runs into the driveway and cars are carrying it all over town. It is an unhealthy situation. Mayor Froehle said this condition has already been reported to the Health Department. City Manager Koski stated this is a continuing problem with Temple Gardens as well as Papa Joe's. It may be necessary to require both businesses to put trash container units on their own property. Members of Council felt this is a property nuisance and Council should move on it. This type of violation could cause serious sewer problems. City Council Minutes, September 19, 1989 - Page 6 Lucinda Grant, 5434 El Monte Ave., agreed with previous state- ments by Jack Hill. She also has observed these problems and was concerned about them causing possible health problems to the adjacent businesses and residents. She felt Council should get busy with this problem immediately. RECESS TO CRA: At 7:55 P.M. the City Council met as the Temple City Community Development Agency; approved the Minutes of the regular meeting of September 5, 1989; adopted Resolution CRA 89 -378, a Resolu- tion finding and determining the public interest and necessity for acquiring and authorizing the condemnation of certain real property within the Rosemead Blvd. Redevelopment Project; and adjourned to an Executive Session to review the current status of the E.I.R. litigation. 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. LETTER FROM SOUTH EL MONTE RE: HOME MORTGAGE INTEREST DEDUCTION - City Manager Koski referred to a letter received from the City of South El Monte, together with their Resolution 89 -2959, expressing their opposition to the recent National League of Cities' position on the home mortgage interest deduction. Councilmember Breazeal requested this item be put on the Agenda and returned for discussion. Councilmember Breazeal expressed his concern that it would create a hardship on homeowners to maintain their homes and for the people who depend on this exemption. He supports the position taken by South El Monte. Councilmember Swain agreed with Councilmember Breazeal. Mr. Breazeal will be the voting representative at the League's Annual Conference, and any action taken by Council should be voted accordingly by Councilmember Breazeal. Councilmember Atkins agreed and expressed his amazement that the League would even consider this type of recommen- dation to alter a traditional American exemption for home- owners. Councilmember Gillanders moved to support the City of South El Monte's position, seconded by Councilmember Breazeal and unanimously carried. 1 1 1 1 1 City Council Minutes, September 19, 1989 - Page 7 B. REVIEW CURRENT STATUS OF LITIGATION RE: COMMERCIAL SIGN REGULATIONS (FOREIGN LANGUAGE) - City Attorney Martin said this is one of those situations where there is no satisfactory answer. The town is sub- stantially divided. There was substantial support for the adoption of this Ordinance even though there were reserva- tions expressed by him at the time that there were some misgivings as to the Constitutionality of the Ordinance. He conceded finally because it had never been tested and he could only indicate that he had doubts but there was no precedence on which to base his opinion. The questionable features of this type of Ordinance is whether it interferes with freedom of speech, which is a Constitutional guarantee, that people may communicate and may communicate in the language they understand each other. There is no legal way to stop that. The other defect is the arbitrary figure of 50 %. He felt 50% was arbitrary in that it had nothing to do with what the City was trying to accomplish but just a figure. His third objection has been that it restricted Asiatic languages but did nothing to restrict Spanish, German, French or any other language that was in the English characters and he found this could possibly be discriminatory. However, the Ordinance was adopted in this City and several other cities, including Pomona. Pomona was sued recently and their Ordinance was declared to be invalid for the three reasons stated above. The decision was handed down in mid -July. He wrote a letter to Council advising them of the decision in Pomona by the Federal District Court in Los Angeles, which is our Dis- trict Court and binding upon us, that Pomona had lost their Ordinance and recommended Council 1) immediately stop enforcement of our Ordinance until there is a final deter- mination in this matter and 2) that they all study the Ordinances to see if their is any substantial difference in the Ordinances which could be defended and 3) study alter- nate Ordinances which might accomplish some of the same things but would avoid the problems in the Pomona case and to talk to Pomona as to whether they were going to appeal the case. He missed the August 1st meeting where this was discussed but he understood Council basically agreed with the memorandum and ordered the City Manager to stop en- forcement of the Ordinance until they reviewed further and discussed with the City Attorney upon his return. At the last meeting they had received a communication from the representatives of the Plaintiff in that case and they did not regard our position of stopping enforcement satisfac- tory in that they felt it still had a chilling effect, particularly to those who were not familiar with the proce- dures and might shy away from it because they did not know we had stopped enforcing it. It was indicated at that time City Council Minutes, September 19, 1989 - Page 8 that until we knew if Pomona would appeal or not we pre- ferred to stay on that position and not actually repeal the Ordinance. City Manager Koski said he did contact the City Attorney's office in Pomona and was advised the City Council had determined not to take any appeal action. He also spoke with Kathryn Imahara, who is present this evening, about the position the City was taking and she requested to be on the Agenda. Mayor Froehle asked for clarification and questioned whether enforcement of the Ordinance is still suspended and City Manager Koski replied it is and enforcement has been suspended since August 1st. Attorney Martin said he has discussed this with the City Manager and Ms. Imahara but it has not been discussed with Council as to what their recommendations would be or if they are going to accept them. He reminded Council that all Councilmembers have taken an oath to defend the Con- stitution of the United States as it may be interpreted from time to time by the various courts of the land. He personally was disappointed Pomona did not appeal, but if they had, he felt they would have lost. Kathryn Imahara, 1010 South Flower Street, Los Angeles, representing the Asian Pacific American Legal Center and the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, said the posi- tion of the Plaintiffs at this point is that they are willing to work with the City Council, as they did with Monterey Park, to put together an Ordinance which meets the needs of the City and can withstand the constitutional challenge. Their position now is that the Ordinance as it stands is unconstitutional as reiterated by the Federal District Court. She recommended the City Council rescind the Ordinance as it stands and they would be willing to work with them to put something together. Councilmember Breazeal said it was his understanding that they have no objections to Paragraph B of the Monterey Park Ordinance requiring a generic description of the business. Ms. Imahara said the Ordinance as it now stands in Monterey Park is that there be some English on each sign, a generic description of the business. This seemed to be a compro- mise that everyone could live with. 1 1 1 1 City Council Minutes, September 19, 1989 - Page 9 Councilmember Atkins referred to the letter sent from Ms. Imahara and Mr. Toma in which they used the term the exis- tence of the law (meaning Council's) serves to chill the exercise of free speech. He is an elected representative and he finds he is trying to make a decision under the threat of the law and he finds it equally chilling. Quite frankly, with the Federal Law suit hanging, he is reticent to make any statement at this point. Councilmember Gillanders felt the same way as Councilmember Atkins and stated he does not deal too well with intimida- tion. He finds it is outside the parameters of profes- sional conduct. However, his personal opinion at the moment is he would like to see Council retain the Ordinance until there is a suitable alternative. Desist from en- forcement of it but not to remove it until there is an acceptable replacement. Councilmember Swain asked Attorney Martin if it would be possible to set a complete moratorium on all permanent signs for businesses until this matter is settled, with the provision that they could put temporary interim signs up. She agreed with Councilmember Gillanders that they should take no action at this time as far as the Ordinance is concerned. They have publicly and by vote declared they are not enforcing the Ordinance and it is posted in City Hall. She requested Council to consider putting a complete moratorium on signs until this matter is settled. City Attorney Martin said he doubted if the plaintiff would object to a content neutral type of ordinance that doesn't impact one group more than another. If you want to ban signs, they don't care. Councilmember Breazeal agreed with Councilmembers Swain and Gillanders. He felt the concept of a chilling effect is at best a weak argument when, in fact, staff is not enforcing that particular ordinance. Because of the litigation, he felt he would prefer discussing this in an Executive Ses- sion. Mayor Froehle started with the admonishment by the City Attorney that they did take an oath to defend the Constitu- tion. He wanted the record to show that the entire City Council is in agreement that the suspension of the existing ordinance is in effect and will remain in effect until the issue is resolved. He thought, however, it was premature for Council to rescind the ordinance. There are other things they must look at: 1) Pomona lost their case in court but he's not that knowledgeable on why they lost it; He understands an invitation has been made to the Pomona Counsel to meet in Executive Session with Council so they can learn the legal issues involved; 2) he felt they should review some alternatives; and 3) he felt staff should meet City Council Minutes, September 19, 1989 - Page 10 with the representatives of the ACLU and Asian Pacific American Legal Center and see what a compromise ordinance would be. If Councilmembers would like a moratorium that is something else that needs to be addressed. Mayor Froehle also wanted on record the fact that in the face of the litigation they were facing no one on Council is deny- ing the Asian American Legal Center's request. All they are saying is they do not have all the facts to make a judgment at this time. City Attorney Martin then made a few statements regarding court procedures. There are various court levels; Superior Court, Court of Appeals, California Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court. Attorney Martin explained how you could win at all levels and end up in the Supreme Court and loose everything there in a 5 -4 vote - no matter how many previous court victories you had. Councilmember Swain moved to meet with Counsel for the City of Pomona to discuss the legal aspects, to have staff and the City Attorney meet with Robin Toma of the ACLU and Kathryn Imahara of the Asian Pacific American Legal Center to see what the compromise Ordinance would be and to look into other alternatives; seconded by Councilmember Breazeal and unanimously carried. Councilmember Swain moved that in the interim they allow businesses to use some sort of temporary signage for their businesses such as window signs or banners, subject to the guidelines contained in the sign ordinance regarding size, coverage, etc.; seconded by Councilmember Gillanders and unanimously carried. C. CALIFORNIA CONTRACT CITIES FALL SEMINAR - VENTURA, OCTOBER 27 -29, 1989 - The 1989 -90 budget approved by Council provides funds for the City Council to attend the California Contract Cities Association Annual Fall Seminar in Ventura on October 27 -29, 1989. Councilmember Gillanders moved to approve attendance by Councilmembers at the California Contract Cities Associa- tion Annual Fall Seminar in Ventura on October 17 -29, 1989; seconded by Councilmember Swain and unanimously carried. Councilmember Atkins referred to correspondence from the City of Pasadena regarding the distribution of property tax with the County of Los Angeles. He would like Council to take some action on this matter. 1 1 1 1 1 1 City Council Minutes, September 19, 1989 - Page 11 Councilmember Atkins also referred to the SCAG Census program. SCAG is taking the position everyone should be counted and he agreed with this. But questioned if this should be done with reapportionment in mind. Councilmember Atkins also referred to a memo received on Property Resale Inspection Program and he requested that be put on the next Agenda. Councilmember Gillanders discussed Bruce Brown, President of the Shire when the Sister City Program was initiated. He is celebrating his 70th birthday on October 31st and the City of Hawkesbury and people from Canberra are planning a party. Considering Bruce Brown's activities regarding our City, Councilmember Gillanders requested a Proclamation be sent to be read at his birthday party. Councilmember Swain remarked on coverage in the news on the proposed 1/2 cent on sales tax for transportation purposes. The Grand Jury has been instructed to investigate RTD and LACTC for overruns and delay in work -in- process. Councilmember Swain again mentioned the area around Ralphs Market and the fact that it is a property nuisance. The shrubbery is uncut and transients are sleeping under the shrubbery and in couches, etc. by the collection container. She felt something should be done to clean up this area. Mayor Froehle remarked to Council that the City's new Code Enforcement Officer started this week. 12. ADJOURNMENT: At 8:33 P.M. Councilmember Atkins moved to adjourn the meeting, in memory of Senior Building Inspector Joe Henchey, seconded by Councilmember Gillanders and unanimously carried. The next regular meeting of the City Council will be held on October 3, 1989 at 7:30 P.M. in Council Chambers, 5938 North Kauffman Avenue. MAYOR