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