HomeMy WebLinkAboutMAY 1,1984
25:0933
CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS ARE RECORDED AND ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
I ROLL CAll
MISCELLANEOUS
MEDICAL
FACILITY
(PUBLIC
HEARING
MAY 15,1984)
I
I
M I NUT E S
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA
and the
ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
May 1, 1984
The City Council of the City of Arcadia and the Arcadia Redevelopment
Agency met in an adjourned regular session Tuesday, May 1, 1984 at
7 p.m. in the Arcadia City Hall Conference Room.
PRESENT: Council Members Gi1b, Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
ABSENT: None
Staff submitte9-communications from 1) Howard Bong relating to the
development of his property and 2) from Harold Roach offering one
of his sculptures to the City. The first will be considered later
in this meeting and the second will be referred to the Olympic ~-
Commission to ascertain if it would be interested. A letter from
the Deputy Lord Mayor of Newcastle, Australia was distributed to
Counc il .
Council also received letters from residents interested in the
expansion of the medical facility at Lovell and Naomi Avenues.
This matter had been scheduled for a public hearing on May 15
at the request of Councilman Lojeski who was Mayor at the time.
Councilman Lojeski said, "A question has been asked of me, why
I appealed that and I think I can go on record and indicate to
you --- 1) I like to see things run smoothly and easily, but
this maybe doesn't seem like it's going that way. But this is
going to give everyone an opportunity of appearing before one
body and not particularly two. The Planning Commission at
that meeting, if I was reading the minutes right, gave the
inclination that they were going to turn the project down again
which would have meant if the people ,who lived in that area were
going to appear they would have appeared in front of the Planning
Commission, and that meeting, the thing would have been -- just
appealed again, and would have come right back to us and they'd
of had to come right back in here. And I -- for either side -- 1
think that's ridiculous -- I think we can settle it once and for
all and let them appear in front of us. That was my intent on
appealing it-- nothing more and nothing less."
Councilman Gi1b said, in part. that wasn't Or. Holman trying to
work out some kind of a situation with the people and where does
that put him now? ... he was trying to work out some modifications
and according to his letter, he was as surprised as anybody else...
~i11 it come back before the Council in the original form or with
the modification?
Councilman Lojeski then stated, "I really don't know. I under-
stand that he has communicated to -- I'm trying to think of the
gentleman's name -- lives directly across the street and there
was concern of one that the residents'would like to see a widening
of Naomi. They'd like to see some stop-signalling at the inter-
section of Lovell and Duarte. And they were very concerned
architecturally over the design of the rear of the parking
structure, which would be the south side of the parking structure.
And those things seem to have been worked out between those
parties. Now 1 don't -- I have no idea where that's going to end up."
-1-
5/1/84
BUDGET
SESSION
(May 1 7 ,1 984
7 p.m.)
CABLE TV
(NEGOTIATIONS
REOPENED)
(\
6-\
(
CLOSED
SESSION
25:0934
Mayor Hannah asked if he is correct -- that once there has been
an appeal by a Council Member it will be heard? The City Attorney
said. in part, that generally that is correct ... at the appeal
hearing, if anything has been worked out that can be made part
of the record and the Council may act accordingly. If everybody
is happy and it is worked out Council may then go ahead and in
effect affirm that decision .,. but it will be heard ... you do
have jurisdiction at this point.
Councilman Lojeski said, "My intent is not to circumvent the
Planninq Commission in any way, shape or form ... nor circumvent
anything that the citizens would have a right to appeal or a right
to consider. I read the report as staff makin9 recommendation as
to how the project could work ... there seems to be a diver~e piece
of information... staff says it can work, the citizenry says it
can't and the Planning Commission says it can't work.... I would
like some more information on it. Thank you."
I
Councilman Pellegrino suggested holding a joint session with the
Planning Commission on something 1 ike this.'... and noted that
plans are sometimes changed by the time it reaches the Council
and the Planning Commission feels it had never seen the same
project.'.",
"
Councilman Gilb then read portions of a letter written by Dr.
Holman to the residents, in part: "J had planned to delay an
appeal to the City Council until we had a chance to work this out,
however, I was called this mornin9 by someone in the Planning
Commission explaining that at the Council meeting last evening
one of the Councilmen asked that an appeal be made of the Planning
Commission's decision."
The City Attorney explained study sessions may be held on topics
in general but at this point and time there is a specific applica-
tion which was adjudicated by the Planning Commission '" is now
appearing before the Council... it would not be possible to have
a joint session on this matter at this stage.
Be it noted that this hearinq has been scheduled for a public
hea rj n g on May 1 5, 1984. .
Scheduled for Saturday, May 19 at 9 a.m. (THIS LATER CHANGED TO
THURSDAY EVENING, MAY 17, 1984 at 7 p.m.)
Staff asked Council to reopen negotiations with Group W Cable
Television in hopes of reaching a new franchise agreement which
could be brouqht to Council for consideration... they would also
like to solicit informal proposals for a consultant to assist during
the negotiation period. The consultant would be retained by the City
but paid by Group W. It was the unanimous consensus of Council that
staff proceed along the lines of its recommendations.
Corrections were made in the minutes of the regular meeting of April
17, 1984. These will be made a matter of record in the regular
meeting to convene at 7:30 p.m. this date.
The Council entered a CLOSED SESSION, reconvened and adjourned at,
7:30 p.m. sine die.
I
ATTEST:
~~
ity Cl erk
5/1/84
~2~