Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes - 2008/04/15 - RegularCOMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TEMPLE CITY, CALIFORNIA REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 15, 2008 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Wilson called the Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting to order at 8:25 p.m. in the Council Chambers located at 5938 Kauffman Avenue, Temple City. 2. ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: Member - Gillanders, Vizcarra, Wong, Capra, Wilson Member -None ALSO PRESENT: Executive Director /Agency Counsel Martin, Assistant Executive Director Lambert, Agency Secretary Flandrick 3. CONSENT CALENDAR Ms. Wong moved to approve the Consent Calendar, seconded by Mr. Gillanders and unanimously carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Member - Gillanders, Vizcarra, Wong, Capra, Wilson NOES: Member -None ABSENT: Member -None ABSTAIN: Member -None A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approved the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 1, 2008, as presented. B. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. CRA 08 -937 — APPROVAL OF PAYMENT OF BILLS Adopted Resolution No. CRA 08 -937, a RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY authorizing payment of bills. 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS — None 5. NEW BUSINESS A. FA ?ADE IMPROVEMENT AT THE TEMPLE CITY MARKETPLACE (BLOCK A) Executive Director Martin stated that Susan Lew, the property manager for the Temple City Marketplace located at the northwest corner of Rosemead and Las Tunas (Block A) has applied for a Facade Improvement Program grant. Her plan is to repaint the entire shopping center, and the low bid would be approximately $70,000 to do so. Susan Lew, Property Manager for Temple City Marketplace, addressed the Agency concerning proposed improvements to the Center including painting of the whole center, stonework at the base of columns, repaving of the entire parking lot and landscaping. She stated she applied for a facade improvement grant for the improvements and asked the Agency for consideration of helping with some of the expense. She submitted renderings of the color scheme and indicated she had submitted quotes for the painting. Ms. Lew answered questions from the Agency Members, stating she planned to do the painting and stonework first. Agency Minutes April 15, 2008 Page 2 Vice Chairman Capra stated the facade improvements seem to be only the painting and stonework, and painting is considered to be maintenance, not an improvement to the facade. Mr. Gillanders agreed, stating painting has traditionally been considered as maintenance. A facade improvement would involve a change in the outside shape. Only the stonework could be considered as a facade improvement. In response to Ms. Wong, Assistant Executive Director Lambert stated ninety percent of grant applications involve major facade improvements, sometimes signs and awnings. The City did approve one center repainting, but that was an exception. Chairman Wilson agreed with Mr. Gillanders' comments that possibly the stonework is a change for improvement, but the painting is not really a change to the appearance. The improvement should be a major changeover. Ms. Lew stated it would take approximately $1 -2M to do a major facade improvement and the budget is a challenge. She submitted the painting quotes, but did not submit the bids on the stonework which is approximately $28,000. She planned to repave the parking lot in within the next 6 months, but wished to start the painting and stonework right away and then the paving this summer. Mr. Vizcarra said, considering the location and the way it looks now, it might be worth investing a little to get this center looking more like the 21st century. He felt the painting and the stonework would help and he thought the Agency should help out. Vice Chairman Capra agreed that the center definitely needs improvement, but he would like to see a good faith agreement in writing that something will be done to the parking lot this summer. Ms. Lew stated it was not necessary to put it in writing; she was committed to getting the work done. In response to Chairman Wilson, she indicated she would bring conceptual drawings of the landscaping back to the agency for feedback. Executive Director Martin stated the consensus is that painting does not qualify, but the stonework will, and if improvements are made to the parking area by written agreement, the Agency will give consideration. Agency Members continued discussing the request. Jerry Jambasian, Temple City businessman, reminded the Agency that the previous Council gave Ms. Lew over $100,000 for sign improvements and it was over 6 months to 1 year before it was completed. The clock included in the improvements is not showing the correct time and maintenance has not been ongoing. He would be in favor of the stonework qualifying for the grant, but would ask for a bond, as Ms. Lew has a habit of not following through. Chairman Wilson concurred, adding that not too long ago, Ms. Lew promised she would put $100,000 toward fixing up the center. Ms. Lew stated the monument sign and pylon sign work was delayed by the contractor selected by the former City Manager. She almost had to sue the contractor who overcharged and was very unprofessional. She did mention she wanted to put $100,000 in the center last year when she came before the Council to ask for a variance for use of space for restaurant use, but it was not approved. 1 1 1 Agency Minutes April 15, 2008 Page 3 Executive Director Martin reiterated the consensus to be that ordinary painting is not considered a facade improvement, but if the painting and the stonework were done and a written agreement submitted to repave the parking lot, then the Agency /City would consider an appropriate contribution. Ms. Lew indicated she would sign the painting contract tomorrow to start right away to be completed within 8 weeks and would start selecting for a paving contract. She submitted 4 bids for the painting contract, with $70,000 being the lowest bid. Vice Chairman Capra summarized the Agency Member's consensus that painting is considered maintenance. Ms. Lew is proceeding at her own risk and once she gets all of the improvements completed, she may bring this matter back and the Agency will consider any appropriate contribution at that time. 6. COMMUNICATIONS — None 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS — None 8. UPDATE FROM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 9. MATTERS FROM AGENCY MEMBERS — None 10. CLOSED SESSION — None 11. ADJOURNMENT The Community Redevelopment Agency meeting was adjourned at 8:56 p.m. ATTEST: Agency Sectary 1 Chairman