Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutCity Council_Minutes_1965-04-29_Regular 1965A D J O U R N E D M E E T I N G P U B L I C H EAR I N G C I T Y C O U N C I L TEMPLE CITY CALIFORNIA APRIL 29, 1965 INITIATION: Mayor Harker called the adjourned meeting of the City Council to order at 7:30 P. M. and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmen - Merritt, Nunamaker, Tyrell, Harker ABSENT: Councilman- Dickason ALSO PRESENT: City Attorney Martin, Attorney Kramer of O'Melveny & Myers, Engineers Krelle & Lewis, and City Manager ;'doollett The Mayor announced the hour of 7 :30 o'clock P. M. having arrived, this is the time and place fixed for the hearing on the assessment filed in the matter of Vehicle Parking District No. y1 of the City of Temple City City Clerk Woollett then presented to the Council the affidavits of mailing and publication of notice of filing the assessment. The City Clerk then presented the assessment roll to the Council. Attorney Kramer of O'Melveny & Myers stated a petition was filed in April, 1964, for formation of this Vehicle Parking District. Subse, quently in June, 1964, a hearing was held on the question of whether to be formed or not. The Council over -ruled what protests there were and ordered the improvements as proposed. During the time elapsed to the present the City has been acquiring; parcels for parking and within the past few months acquisition has been completed. The City Council directed the Assessment Engineer and Superintendent of Streets to pre- pare the assessment of costs and to spread on all lands included within the District. The purpose tonight is to determine that the proposed assessment has been spread fairly and in proportion to benefit. City Attorney Martin stated the purpose is to determine whether the total assessment costs to be spread has been spread by the Assessment Engineer fairly and equitably for benefits to be received. That is the sole purpose. In hearing protests and points of fact the procedure wil be as follows: 1. the persons responsible will explain the total and basis for the spread will be presented to the Council and to the aud- ience, 2. then written protests will be read in full. Persons wishing to amplify written protests may be heard, 3. then oral protests will be heard. Questions may be asked, 4. each one will complete points of fact without interruption, and each will be given full opportunity to be heard, 5. please speak from podium and give name and address to clerk. State what you think assessment should be and if spread fair- ly or unfairly. The Supt. of Streets, Mr. Woollett, and the Assessment Engineer, Mr. Krelle, were then sworn in by the City Attorney. Mr. '.'oollett in ans- wer to questions by Attorney Kramer stated the assessment was prepared and spread under his direction, and that in his opinion the assessment has been spread upon the lands in the District subject to assessment in proportion to the benefits to be derived from the proposed acquisition and improvement. Mr. Krelle stated he, prepared the assessment, signed it, and believed it spread fairly and in proportion to benefits to be derived. ;Assessment Engineer Krelle explained how the assessments for this Park- ing District were spread. Consideration was given to area of each par- cel in the District for proximity of facilities, number of spaces that would be available and business potential of various parcels in the Dis- trict. Keeping these in mind it was felt the greatest benefit accrued to be those fronting on Las Tunas Dr. between Camellia and the southwest corner of Las Tunas Dr. and Cloverly. Those rated 100%. Those on Las Tunas Dr. between Camellia and Kauffman with a limited number of parking spaces were rated 75 %. Those parcels fronting on Temple City Blvd., a large number of spaces are being provided at this time because of the depth of these lots. On these lots they felt that 65 ft. should not be assessed because that provides some parking on their own properties. These parcels were rated 80% for the front 110 ft. or 50% overall. 731 Council Minutes, April 29, 1965, page 2 The City Clerk then read in full written protests filed as follows: 1. Leonard J. & Katherine Altmayer, 10642 El Poche, El Monte, Lots 624 and 625, Parcel 48, strongly protesting assessment of $3773. 2. Mara Topich, 1755 Sharon Place, San Marino, Lots 571 and 572, Par- cel 24, $4743.20 and Parcel 29,$1778.70, protested amount stating it was too high compared to market value of property. 3. Jennie M. Beckwith, 777 E. Valley, Apt. 153, Alhambra, Lots 620 and 621, Parcel 46, $3773., was in favor of parking but opposed to the amount of the assessment. 4. John K. Asder, 310 W. Foothill Blvd., Arcadia, Lot 617, Parcel 43, $1886.50, stated he provides a parking area in the rear of his building and strongly protested any assessment on his property. 5. John Shaw, 5816 Temple City Blvd., Lot 591, Parcel 41, $1886.50, protested as he furnishes parking for his building and felt the benefit to his property would be zero. 6. Mullendore and Notrica, Attys. in behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Henry R. Latham, owning property at 9626 and 9628 Las Tunas Dr., Lots 569 and 570, Parcel 25, $4743.20, protested amount of assessment due to being a greater distance from the facilities than any one place in the block. The following then spoke in behalf of their written protests: Mr, John Shaw, and Mrs. Jennie Beckwith. Mayor Harker then asked if any person present wished to make an oral protest. The following came forward to protest orally: 1. Dr. Homer Hendrickson, 5825 Temple City Blvd., who stated he was al for parking but protested the spread of the assessment on the basis the benefits are not equal on Temple City Blvd, but the assessment spread is equal down to the end of the District, and he felt it could be spread on a sliding scale, He felt it fair that he help but not to the amount he has been assessed. His lot is 60 ft. deep, Lot 619, Parcel 45, $1885,40. 2. George Reel, 5021 Temple City Blvd., Lot 618, Parcel 44, stated he could park 12 cars back of his building without any ,trouble. He is willing to go along on some assessment but felt $1086,50 out of line, Mayor Harker asked if any other person present desired to be heard at this time in connection with this assessment, and no one else came for- ward to speak at this time. Attorney Kramer asked the Assessment Engineer to comment on the protests, Mr. Krelle stated that Las Tunas Dr. between Cloverly and Camellia, (Zone 1) received the greatest benefit and were rated 100 %. Las Tunas Dr. between Camellia and Kauffman (Zone 2) has one small parking lot and should be somewhat reduced so were rated 75 %. On Temple City Blvd. because of the depth of the lots and the owners could provide some park- ing, the rear 65 ft. was not assessed in any manner, and the frontage was assessed approximately 80% facing on Temple City Blvd. Mr. Krelle advised between Camellia and Kauffman the proposed plan will only pro- vide 22 parking spaces. On Temple City Blvd. and east of Primrose, which will effect property on Temple City Blvd., there will be provided 82 parking spaces. He stated there were only six protests submitted out of 49 proposed. The Mayor and Councilmen questioned the Assessment Engineer in detail regarding the spread of the assessments as proposed and discussed at length the individual properties concerning availability of facilities and need for them, particularly relating to the properties on Temple City Blvd. Various means of spreading the assessment were discussed Fully. Councilman Nunamaker moved to instruct the Assessment Engineer to pre- pare for presentation to the Council another diagram for consideration to start assessments at $1000. for lots at the south end of the District on Temple City Blvd., and increase $100. a lot progressively northerly, for eight lots on the west side and seven lots on the east side of Temple City Blvd., the amount decreased on these lots to be added to Las Tunas Dr., Camellia to Kauffman (.one 2) and Las Tunas Dr. between the southwest corner of Cloverly miles Tunas & Camellia (Zone '1) 732 1 1 1 Council Minutes, April 29, 1965, page 3 recognizing the spread already made on Las Tunas Dr. at 75% on Zone 2 and 100% on Zone 1. Councilman Merritt seconded the motion, roll call vote to carry the motion as follows: AYES: Councilmen- Merritt, Nunamaker, Tyrell, Harker NOES; Councilmen -None ABSENT: Councilman - Dickason Mr. Henry flatters, 9560 Las Tunas Dr., asked if the assessments were changed on Las Tunas, if the property, owners would be so notified. :attorney Kramer stated there is no legal requirement to send out new notices, and advised the law provides that the Council has power to change without sending out new notices. Councilman Tyrell moved to continue this hearing until the next meet- ing of the City Council, May 4, in the Council Chambers, at 7:30 P. M., Councilman Nunamaker seconded, and carried. City Attorney Martin stated the hearinc has been continued until May 4, 1965, at 7 :30 P. M. The motion for a new diagram is not re- spreading but for Council to study. The Council may decide on the original spread or re- spread or something new. This completes the matter of the Hearing on the District tonight. City Manager`i!oollett requested the Council set a pre- zoninc, hearing before the Mannino Commission on the property between Callita and Em- peror for May 11, 1965, at 7:30 P. M. Councilman Tyrell so moved, Councilman Nunamaker seconded, roll call vote to carry as follows: AYES: Councilmen- Merritt, Nunamaker, Tyrell, Harker NOES: Councilmen -Hone ABSENT: Councilman- Dickason Councilman Tyrell moved to adjourn to the regular adjourned meeting of May 3, 1965, at 7:30 P. M. in the Council Chambers, 5933 Kauffman Ave., seconded and carried. Council adjourned at 9:10 P. M. ATTEST: 733