HomeMy WebLinkAboutAUGUST 21,1984_2
,-/1....
: ~C;-.' '
25:1022
CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS ARE TAPE RECORDED AND ON FILE
</ :: . I' ':'1. ;- .1.,'.1 ',' i ':. ') r .f .:. '., ' '" "l.: -. "j ,
.;-;';.:{'d.).; .~...'l YJI'.;J;:,,', d. ;~I ':'l..f;-"9r,' (.
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
,j (:'. J_
I _' I'
~ "j ; . 1.: ,~',
" -
:~. ,
M I NUT E S
. . ..- .
~ ':; ,
'" ~(!,,; y~ 1\ ~ l'
.;O~~ '..J.'
l "f ','" C
." ..1. ,. '.
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA
,:, " , a'nd' the '
, ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
~ f'~, . :, ";!' '.:.. . L 'j,' I,:'
1
t~~c r(; ,." ,-,;~ .)...'
~r' J' ~,.-:: ~:: ::', ':,t;
!~; r:~ :f:J.'t:..rl ':ll]'\'f
9j"1:' ~'-J'-' ~',.J"":""l
.,l "2,
.11
'o"j
'1':3'1'
'1" .
: '." 'REGULAR MEETING
',' "
. ':-'1
: j . ,\, ('"j ',J '., "1; ~ _ .:. ,',' l' :......'
";' ~i f,"', ,',,'f ,-".r'August 21.' 1984"
_i:.:-. ["'.::,"" ,'..' '.:': .J .;_
~,,: ,,;::>-':c- ,. .: The' Cfty,Coun-cil'of the City of Arcadia and the Arcadia Redevelopment
"'L'; -i,""= "Agency'met' in'a -regLilar session Tuesday, ALigust 21, 1984 at 7:30 p.m.
in the City Hall Council Chamber.
INVOCATION: Rev. Gladys Johnson, Victory Chapel, Church of the Foursq,ua.re Gospel
2:;-/ ~i :.-.;I....,,~~:;;:,-., ,J;' ~:..:' :.::'.~.. .:'"
01'(PL'EDGE OF"" , , City'AttorneyMicha'el Miller
ALLEG lANCE' ;- , . , ' ,. '
.. ,.' :~,9L7..~A~~ ,,"
-"
I! .~,
PRESENT: Councilmembers Gilb, Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
: ABSENT:" None'" - I " , ,
MINUTE It was MOVED by Counc ilmember Young ;'-'seconded by Counc il member
APPROVAL Pellegrino and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that the minutes
~July '1'0;1984'::' 'of the adjourned meeting Of July 10; '1984 be APPROVED with oriell
" 'July "1'7 , 1984 ~..,- 'correction on, -Pa'ge 5 re 1 a:ti ng', to' fi reworks and the adjouriied "c1!1d
APPROVED~'-' r""cregular meetings'of July'17, .]:g84,tle,APPROVED~ "':.'
;..':..:.,,1 .~I1'.sc<) 'tl GJ."(,~:: ~J t'....<-", (h' I""": :)'~':'-l'l " ,: ..,....~'..-"
',;;', ,:")-,..18 J:-ii;iAYES:P' :COUTlci'lmembersGilb'; l!ojesKhPellegrino, Young and Hannah
; ,.... """ ,,;, ~, :.. 'NOES:":" None. ,;' ' r' ~ b" ,<;, u' '.. ':
'J,I ^:' ',',..;' -ABSENT: "None: ",.: -'1 ",: :l.:, '. ,'..
Z:. '~I(' ,.'~ ..I 1 . " : " .I:'" ~.. ~. - :, -: -: - I) ~., _",
Councilman Lojeski spoke to the outstanding performance of the Santa
Anita'Little League this'year~-- having won the City Championship
and then went on to theJDivision Playoffs ... the first time in
,some thi rty yea rs that thi s.' League went so far. The pl ayers were
;~ .)110.'" in uniform and:r'esponded' when their names were called by Council-
member Lojeski and' received" Certiffcates of Commendati on from
:':';;"'0:: ", . Mayor"HilOriah.' 'The Manager and all-Coaches were introduced and
,2''''U'." "'=honorea:a'lSo," "(list of names ilt'tachM;J
ORD. & RES.
READ BY
r ("1' T'IT[E ONLY', '"
;:
"
-'0 '
In::' ~ r. " ..
~. .~,; c'
',",
-, :....'':.,.
C SISTER. ',:" b
:~iTY ',~5T
".J '.
1
" -\
LI TTL E
LEAGUE
, {'
~~?
~, '} ~' .
RELOCATION
APPEALS BD,
~sf
i,8\ f~~\8
It was MOVED by'Councilmember 'Gil b; seconded by Councilmember Lojeski
and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that all ordinances and
, "'resolutions be read by',:title only,",'
. c'
, "
~:; \
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Gilb, Lojeski', Pel'legrlno, Young and Hannah
None
None
'.1. ,,-I'
" '
." ,
. ,~.... .:":,' '1 ,'. -,
PRESENTATIONS'
..,'
. ~ ' .~,.... ,
'. "',J:i '1 r..
":.':' .
.-, ,,"
Councilmemtler;Gilb presented to Mrs~ Claire Arth a plaque signed
I by 'all 'meinbers'of,the CityCouncii 'for her many efforts~-'ai:complish-
ments and distingulshed'service to'the'Sister City Commission during
'.her-eightyear'tenure'ontheConmission. '" " :':,
- ,',
"
" ,
.': ~ _ ').,:"
OATH OF OFFICE ADMINIST~RE~:., ,', J
..... " .!. u'_, "
The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office to William Kuyper,
Arcadia Relocation Appeals Board. Mayor Hannah welcomed Mr.
Kuyper and presented him with credentials.
8/21/84
-\- -1-
SISTER CITY
r-\?\'
I PROCEDURAL
ORDINANCE
WAIVED
WEED
ABATEMENT
CHARGES
CONFI RMED
I ,)
\ 1/11-
r
l.
PUBLIC
HEARING
(FASHION
PARK
EXPANSION
- DRAFT
EIR
ACCEPTED)
1'?
f 1~1-
t"''"'-. ....
25:1023
The City Clerk administered the Oath of Office to Mrs. Marie Schmitt.
Sister City Commission. Counci1member Gi1b welcomed Mrs. Schmitt
and presented her with credentials.
AWARD - SISTER CITY COMMISSION
Mrs. Ruth Gi1b, on behalf of the Sister City Commission, pre~ented
Mayor Hannah. Members of the City Council and the Citizens of Arcadia.
the awards received by the Commission at the annual convention in
Denver on July 23. The award was given by the Readers' Digest
Foundation to a City with a population of under 50.000 for the
best single project ... the Marching Koala Band from Newcastle. 1
Australia (Arcadia's Sister City). Arcadia also received the
Best Overall Youth Award. Mayor Hannah was joined by Council
Liaison to the Commission, Councilmember Gi1b. in commending the
Commission and expressing appreciation for the fine recognition.
In order to take the following agenda item out of sequence. it was
MOVED by Counci1member Lojeski. seconded by Counci1member Gi1b and
CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that the provision of the
Procedure Ordinance be waived.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Counci1members Gi1b, Lojeski. Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
None
None
The City Clerk noted that the charges by the County Agricultural
Commissioner had been posted and mailed as required and that this
is the time for persons who have objections to such costs to be
heard. There being no objections. it was MOVED by Counci1member
Gi1b, seconded by Counci1member Lojeski and CARRIED on roll call
vote as follows that the list as submitted be CONFIRMED and that
the County Auditor be instructed to enter the amounts of the
respective assessments against the respective parcels of land as
they appear on the current assessment roll.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Counci1members Gi1b. Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
None
None
Mayor Hannah declared the hearing open for consideration and review
of the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the proposed expansion
of the Fashion Park Regional Shopping Center. Purpose of this
hearing is to afford the public an opportunity to comment on the
potential environmental impacts and/or mitigation measures which
may be associated with the proposed project. It was noted that
the Final EIR which must be certifi€d by the City Council will
consist of:
1
1. The Draft EIR with any corrections.. additions or
deletions thereto.
2. Comments received on the Draft EIR.
3. A list of persons, organizations and public agencies
conunenting on the Draft EIR; and
4. The response of the City to significant environmental
points raised in the review and consultation process.
Certifying the EIR should not be construed as approving or dis-
approving the specifi~ project.
8/21/84
-2-
~
l~ (]~ p'Len (~-h' ()n
;J~
-.. -
~. ~
..----j[ c~
~ ~
,
~
"'-
~
((La (/((S \..tr b'h ade _ of
I ALL0 ~j I Iqg~
SA.~ A.~M ALL "5'TAi:2.~
~sy ALL\<;Of-.l (::JIM ~ MAA.~1E.) 515" N. Oll:) ~a,l2D. ~b-SSS6
~VID BDc-~U5 . eLf)..; ~YJ"').J~) 1~.5"{' c4~wooD Av~. &r<;;-700?-_
':J-IM 13AU~ (TOM ~ G@~JA)..20Ie. ElJ.{jt.Js H.... 44b--81 0 I
:,) (')
'AL"EX Dut=a 11:lMt:_Tl-lE"'O 23873 fvllNNC;;QUA, U.RAe. 714 S"'f4-/23'2-
'1ASOkJ ~VI $, L60'e~,J_ ~ SHA~N) .22.7 ELWRA"DO ~~~:~~ __..
13\LL.. \.-tOMA~ (BILL ~"DA,l.Jb:) 1770 N. S#rJA Alvrm. 35"S-2SZS_
~us LAIJD~oS (~U5 ~ Al.1e.oPA) IS2. l.A "Po,en:~ .044/:'-3315"':" _.
-:\ASMJ ~EWLDV~ (t=~)__310"13. oi:kJOA_ . ..q4&-b74_~_._
~M, Pt3o.--rE.-LO__LsAM_ ~_HUE:lJ) I 5"42- ~AL..E _ _!4~5" ::~~~_
10M ~"'f8l.O____ __1'_ ,,____,. __~~_, _,. ___._'!______
..tAM THoMSEJ-.J, (IAr-j ~ cau.~/.J) 2.34 E, rlAVEN3$7~2.73__
:~T _5<::IA~A__L~ r ~~O{) I~&-o AL~ OA%:Sl)12.__3S$"~2~_'lZ..__
! '~eDJ"-.:SM.mL_(A..~LBr~~ ..,Aoo_6.€"J-.:lol~_____._____ ___4.q.~-:1:7,g3__
j13eA1eJ. ~1-)~ (WALLY ~Be}zu,AU/...J'E).2038 8)<J/...l.$ _ "35<;;'0409_
\ '1' :. ,---' .- ,----.--.- - .. -- .--. .-.-.-- . --- .. --, --..- .-------
: ~AI'2.u:s-~-- (<:HU.C.~~ CLEo) .;1..<;; \ WHISF82.JUS 'PILbS. 3S7-6Q7{L
I 1(. <S~~'L(-JO,~~;I;J..AIt,JE)_I2.S-QnN. ~NJr~_44<:;-2'f~~
1-fAlUt.y SJ1.N:iOlAI-..L(AI-JNIC ~ D1c:;s) S l LJ. "FO.eE'S T , 44~ -" 74" ___
.~~ W1LLIJ\,I'v\S _{(I-/A~) 4'3 F 1=Oe..r;s-r 4<17-/82..3__
~AIJ /l6.~= 5A';RsG~~A45 -4'144.
-/oACH_.::::n:>JI:.'\....1SA.U0'---44&-SIOI ,. _ __ .
/l-CJ\2LV!.p_l~/Y\~~__L<))u rv\t-I~r:}.J\)I:Li.::. L!~_
D/JN€ Prll-~ "., ? ::11.>. c. C<t'l. dlO ,.
"
~
,
.!:' ~"
.~
-j
--..,
-;:; \../-l
0_, \
-.;l "2~"
, '~ ~"-u
~ ~- ~ u
., :::; ,-I ~
'Iv. - \.
"~ '^
-& -<j
:l ~
'2 :i: 0.
t ~ ,~
~ ~ ~
d.. q'
" 2 ~
- ~
~R
-<t
::;
::'/
~
"-
Q
~
~
<:
-
-:! -
"J '"
c.o "$ C
r- -
- ~
<J....J -:
(-- ,~ QL
v .::r
~ :r '='
~ ci c
~
~ liY '
(- -i ~
If ~
ll/ \~ '-
:> :::> ,-..J
~ \!J
?i:t ~
D \" ;;:l
- ).:i :ill
~~, "'Z
.:::~
Q
~
,
-~
r-1 ' :
-
~
cL.
I
I
2.
PUBLIC ':,
HEARING'
(Tract No.
43057
'renta ti ve)
APPROVED
p-.
bd; "
5u
3.
PUBLIC
HEARING
(Underground
Ut i1 Hy
Dist.No.9)
REPORT
ACCEPTED
'" (3ql f1
y
.25:1024
During Council discussion, reference was made to the possibility
of having the fire equipment exit through a rear door of the exist-
ing fire station instead of having to merge into the traffic on
Baldwin Avenue. Also concern was expressed about whether or not the
sewer lines would be adequate. The Director of Public Works said
they were, according to investigations. Concern was also expressed
about the increased traffic to be generated by the new stores --
the ingress and egress problem. The Planning Director will have
the consultant recheck the projected peak hour traffic flow,
although it has been determined by the consultant that traffic would
increase, but not to the point where it would be detrimental. All
comments will be handled by staff and responses will be submitted
in writing and incorporated in the final EIR.
It was MOVED by Counci1member Pellegrino, seconded by Counci1member
Young and CARRIED that the hearing be CLOSED. It was further
MOVEO by Counci1member Pellegrino, seconded by Counci1member Young
and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that the report be ACCEPTED.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Counci1members Gi1b, Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
None
None
The Planning Commission at its meeting of July 10 voted 5 to 0 with
two members absent to approve the tentative map of Tract No. 43057
for a fourteen unit residential condominium at 1020 W. Huntington
Drive. Conditions of approval were set forth in the staff report
dated August 21,1984.
Mayor Hannah declared the hearing open and no one desiring to be
heard, the hearing was CLOSED on MOTION by Councilmember Pellegrino,
seconded by Counci1member Young and CARRIED on roll call vote as
foll ows:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Counci1members Gi1b, Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
None
None
It was then MOVED by Councilmember Lojeski, seconded by Counci1member
Pellegrino and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that Council
find that the evaluations of the environmental impacts set forth
in the initial study are appropriate and that the project will not ha'~
a significant effect on the environment and that the Negative Declara-
tion be APPROVED and filed; find that the subdivision with the provi-
sions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the Arcadia
General Plan; that the discharge from the subdivision into the public
sewer system will not violate requirements prescribed by the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board for this region; that the Director
of Public Works be authorized to approve and execute the subdivision
agreement and that the project be approved subject to all conditions set
forth in staff report.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Counci1members Gilb, Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
None
None
Consideration of Underground Utility District No.9 -- Huntington
Drive from Baldwin Avenue to Michillinda Avenue. Pursuant to the
Arcadia Municipal Code, Section 8832.2, the City Engineer sub-
mitted a report concerning this district setting forth the cost to
be borne by the utility company, affected property owners and the
City, as well as an estimate of the time required for completion.
Six properties will incur costs, i.e., 728, 860, 936, 1008, 1020
and 1122-1124 W. Huntington Drive. The properties in this area
would be deannexed from Consolidated Lighting District Zone "A"
and annexed to Zone "C". Because of the current workload of the
various agencies involved, it is not anticipated that the total
undergrounding project will be completed before September 1985.
8/21/84
-3~
t: ~-:::: .-
\..:"l ,J';!
. ~ ~'- ~:~"~"I -\.
il r: -J :; ':.' i ~! -;
~::~J" _:('-'" "I" .~c.."
25 :1025
:.'1"'
. h' ':;"...,' '"'
- I"':
~, -,2 t ,J iI,'
Mayor' Hannah, declared, the; h'ear:frig' open and Jack Barnes, 1200 W.
',Huntington Drive, was adV1S~(('tha't' ther~'will not be any cost
to himiil" this instance. ,'Thomas B:.:.~nHains, 860 W. Huntington
Drive, was advised that his cost will b'!! reduced to about $600.
Jerry Culbertson, 1444 S. California, Monrovia; representing the
Southern California Edison Company, responded to a question by
Councilmember Young -- that with reference to a new condominium
proposed for 1020 W. Huntington Drive -- if construction is started
or completed prior to the Edison's work, the developer will be re-
quired to go underground in order to serve the new building
there would be no other means to serve them.
No one else desiring to be heard, the hearing was CLOSED on MOTION
by Councilmember Lojeski, seconded by Councilmember Young and
CARRIED on roll call vote as follows:
1
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Gilb, Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
Counc il members
None
None
__ '." :'/:i:
,',
'.Or \'
RESOLUTION Councilmember Gilb MOVED to accept {h~ Engineer's Report and that
NO. 5189 Resolution No. 5189, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
ADOPTED OF ARCADIA ESTABLISHING UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. g be
o~ ';.;;:. rY."',CADOP,TED and that the Southern California Edison Company be re-
\,U;i'q"j"':' , quested to pay. the cost of the firs~ 100 feet ~f conduit on private
;, '\'~ property. Motlon seconded by Councllmember LOJeski and CARRIED on
r ' roll call vote as follows:"."" "'; ',\, .
e".' .
,,;1
,",
;..!, :;",
4.
,)1_
AYES:
NOES: ',' "
ABSENT:'
Gilb, Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
Counc il membe rs
None
None
Council adjourned in order to act as the
S} .,. :.'\ ,f:: -j,
ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
5a.
ROLL CI\LL ,
r _ '-':; .
I' "
Sb r,;__l~.' ~, '
MINUTE
APPROVAL
July 10,1984
July 17,1984
5c.
MARKETING
BROCHURE
(Proposals
to be
Requested)
, '~'\
q1 h
f\~
PRESENT: Members Gilb, Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
... ,:ABSENT: None
-~'!;:); ;
, ,),
"!:' The 'Minutes 'of th'e adjourned regular meeting of July 10 and the
meeti'ng (Of July '17' were APPROVED on MOTION by Member Pe 11 egrino,
seconded 'by Member'Yourigiand CARRIED unanimously.
';" ~ ~ ': J:':'. ~: ,"
", r ~ ::.... ::J" i ': ': ~ I,; I ~
,'.
'\' ::.:::
, :-~;"r:".i
In response to Agency's reque'st; 'staf('submitted a report on
obta in i ng proposa 1 s for a brochu're :.t~::'-be '?des j'giied to appea 1 to
professional, corporate and business':'de'ciSion-makers, marketing
managers, developers,' rea ltors, al)d "fina'l)ci,cil". inst itut ions which
_ . ... .a. ~" '. 'I .-'-
have the capacity to affect their'company's"development decisions.
It was felt that 1000 copies would cost between $15,000 and $20,000.
,The! brochure would market the City as a whole as well as the down-
town area and the cost of the work probably should be split between
the Agency and the City. The slides which are currently being used
should also be updated. Member Lojeski would like emphasis placed
in the brochure that the City "wants developers" ... Mayor Hannah
commented, in part, that the amount stated seems exhorbitant and
he could not see spending so much unless the final design warrants
such expenditure.
I
It was MOVED by Member Lojeski, seconded by Member Pellegrino and
CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that staff be AUTHORIZED to
solicit bids for the design and the publication of the City of
Arcadia marketing brochure and that same be presented to Council
for review before being printed.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Agency Members Gilb, Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
None
None
8/21/84
-4-
1
I
25:1026
5d.
APPRAISALS Staff summarized the report concerning obtaining appraisals of
(BECK) four commercial and/or industrial properties in the proposed
AUTHORIZED BBeck development site -- (Arcadia Datsun, Bong, Kiewit, Henderson).
D Th i s i nforma t i on will be of va 1 ue to the deve 1 oper, Beck and
1J Associates, inasmuch as their own acquisition negotiations with
",1;11 these owners depends in large measure on an accurate objective
~I estimation of value of land', improvements, furniture/fixtures/equip-
(,\~ ment and relocation goodwill. Beck has agreed to pay costs for
, these appraisals ($13,750) and the Agency staff and Beck have
. . recommended an appraiser acceptable to both parties.
It was MOVED by Member Lojeski, seconded by Member Young and
CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that the Executive Director
be AUTHORIZED to sign the Agreement for Appraisal Services with
Alan C. Weirick to conduct the appraisal of the land improvements
and furniture/fixtures/equipment ... not relocation goodwill. Fee
for such services to be paid by Beck and Associates. The Agency
will utilize the services of a specialized consulting firm to
appraise relocation goodwill.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Agency Members Gi1b, Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
None
None
5e.
ADJOURNMENT
6.
7.
The meeting adjourned to 7:00 p. m., September 4, 1984.
Council reconvened.
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION
Herb Fletcher, 175 W. Lemon Avenue, referred to the time when the
City entered into an agreement to sell the land to the Granada
Royale Homete1 ... the initial sales price on the land was to be
$1,300,000 ... when the transaction was actually made, the sales
price of the land was $800,000 and at the same time there was a
$500,000 exclusivity clause initiated, so the City basically
received $1,300,000. He feels that probably the County Tax
Assessor picked up the $800,000 as the value of the land for
tax purposes which would mean that Granada had $500,000 worth of
property off the'tax rolls that really should be there. He
suggested that the Council have this looked into.
FREEWAY
NOISE
TRANSCRIPT
ATTACHED
Extensive discussion was held on the noise pollution emanating
from the 210 Freeway. The following persons spoke at length on
the subject of construction of a sound barrier. At the conclusion
of this matter, Mayor Hannah appointed Councilman Lojeski and him-
self to be on the committee with Councilmember Gilb acting as alternate
when one of ~he other councilmembers might not be able to attend a
meeting. Members of the interested citizens will also attend
and members of the City staff. Mr. Van Houten suggested a list of
questions be formulated and he would review them.
1 \ ~
(~').; · .s eo
r t\O\
Persons speaking:
Robert E. Caldwell, 326 Joyce Avenue
Edward Zareh,. 1051 W. Catalpa Road
John Van Houten, Professional Engineer, State
Robert Puckett, 1107 Catalpa Road
8/21/84
-5-
8a.- 8d.
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
SCHEDULED
SEPTEMBER 4
8e.
PUBLI C
HEARINGS
SCHEDULED
SEPTEMBER 18
f.
8f.
LOT CHANGE
2 from 1
Lot
0"'
8g.
MEMBERSHIP
STREET
LIGHT ASS'N
8h.
V' ADVERTISE
FOR BIDS
(RAMPS)
;8i.
RECREATIONAL
FACILITIES
8j.
CONTRACT
AWARD -
Pavement
Markings
io\q~
r \~
25: 1027
CONSENT ITEMS
P~b1ic Hearings were scheduled for September 4 on the following
items:
1. Tentative Map of Tract No. 43371 - 8 unit residential
condominium at 812 S. Sunset Blvd.
2. Tentative Map of Tract No. 43340 - 8 unit residential
condominium at 50-54 Alice St. 1
3. Tentative Map of Tract No. 43309 - 10 unit residential
condominium at 653 Fairview Avenue.
4. Zone Change 84-4 - from R-O to R-1 at 100-182 W. LaSierra
Drive and 105-183 W. LaSierra Drive.
Public Hearings were scheduled for September 18 on the following:
1. Text Amendment 84-5 to add regulations pertaining to the
construction, installation and maintenance of antennas to
the Arcadia Municipal Code.
2. Appeal from the denial of 'the Planning Commission of roofing
material for 805 Coronado Drive.
APPROVED a proposed tentative parcel map to create two lots from
one lot at 141 W. Longden Avenue.
APPROVED the expenditure of $1,350 for 1984-85 membership assessment
to the California City-County Street Light Association.
APPROVED the plans and specifications and AUTHORIZED the City Clerk
to advertise for bids for the construction of wheelchair ramps (Job
No. 554). The project will be funded entirely from SB 821 for
construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and the cost will
amount to $9,882. Schedule calls for bids to be opened on September
11 with the contract to be awarded September 18.
APPROVED the plans and specifications for improvement of recreational
facilities on City-owned property, Job No. 553 and AUTHORIZED the
Purchasing Agent to obtain informal bids on Jobs 553B, 553C, 5530
and that the City Clerk be AUTHORIZED to call for bids on Job 553A.
The work on this project has been sp1 it into four separate projects I
~or b1ddin~ ~urposes. E~timat~d c~st for all work including engineer
lng, lnspectlon and contlngencles lS $70,775. Costs will be approxi-
ma_~_~ly J51,500 from State Recreat i ona 1 Grant Funds with the balance
belng funded from the Park and Recreational Facilities Fund. This
project is categorically exempt from the requirement of the Calif-
ornia Eriv-ironmenta1 Qual ity Act.
ACCEPTED the recommendation and AWARDED the contract for the Traffic
Striping and Pavement Markings Job No. 562 to Orange County Striping
Service, Inc., in the amount of $35,931. Waived all informalities
or irregularities in the bids or bidding process and AUTHORIZED
the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the contract in form approved
by the City Attorney.
8/21/84
-6-
1
1
25:1028
8k. I_~
CONSULTING y~ AUTHORIZED the retention of the firm of HYA Consulting Engineers
ENGINEER / \ for the design of a 24" water transmission main in the amount of
RETAINED y $17,900. The Mayor and City Clerk were AUTHORIZED to execute the
contract in form approved by the City Attorney. "
81.
EQUIPMENT t'.
PURCHASE r
8m.
SCAG -
Short Range
Transit Plan
to?
r \D &'
SG)1
8n.
EQUIPMENT
PURCHASE (. '.
(PUBLIC r
WOR KS )
9.
9a.
NOISE
BARRIER
STUDY
-p1 ,
(' 15 e-
ttD
bb.
CIVIC
, CENTER
(September 4)
9c.
CDBG
PROGRAM
(Urban County
Housing &
Corranunity
Development)
F /31011
~,
AUTHORIZED the purchase of a paper feeder for word processing
machine in the Personnel Department at a cost of $2,835 from General
Revenue Sharing Fund.
APPROVED the Resolution for Performance of Services and Cooperative
Agreement with the Southern California Associatiqn of Governments
and AUTHORIZED the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the resolution
in form approved by the City Attorney. The resolution would provide
an 80% reimbursement to the City for the preparation of the short
range transit plan which will cost a maximum of $52,200. Staff will
be requesting proposals for preparation of the plan in the near
future.
AUTHORIZED the purchase of a 2t ton cab and chassis with hoist and
chipper body from GMC Los Angeles for a total cost of $26,137.85.
This equipment is for the Public Works Department. Funds in the
Federal Revenue Sharing 8udget for 1984-85.
ALL OF THE ABOVE CONSENT ITEMS WERE APPROVED ON MOTION BY COUNCIMAN
LOJESKI, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN PELLEGRINO AND CARRIED ON ROLL CALL
VOTE AS FOLLOWS:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Gilb, Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
None
None
CITY MANAGER
Council received the comprehensive report from J.J. Van Houton
& Associates as authorized by Council on April 3 to perform an
in-depth noise level survey as well as to address the feasibility
of sound wall construction within the City's jurisdictional limits.
This report indicated that the cost could probably exceed
$13,800,000.
During the time for audience participation in this meeting, this
matter was discussed at length with residents near the freeway
and Mr. Van Houten responded to questions. Mayor Hannah appointed
Councilmember Lojeski and himself to a Committee with Councilmember
Gilb as alternate to meet with representatives of the homeowners
and staff to discuss this matter at length, notably funding of
such a project.
The report regarding the selection of an architect for the Civic
Center project was continued until the regular meeting of
September 4,
Council received the report concerning Community Development
Block Grant Cooperation Agreement for City participation in the
Urban County Housing and Community Development Block Grant Program
for fiscal years 1985-86, 1986-87, 1987-88. The three year
qualifi,cation process is based upon statu,tory changes in the
program. Once the Agreement is executed, the City will remain
part of the Urban County for three years. The City Attorney has
reviewed and approved the Cooperation Agreement which is consistent
with the previous agreement signed in 1981.
8121/84
-7-
RESOLUTION
NO. 5191
ADOPTED
tpl-\
y\~
/9d.
WEED
ABATEMENT
CHARGES
10.
/10a.
ORDINANCE
NO. 1794
ADOPTED
110b.
RESOI..UTION
NO. 5188
ADOPTED
/lOC.
I ~ESOLUTION
NO. 5190
ADOPTED
25 : 1 029
Whereupon the City Manager presented, read the title of
Resolution No. 5191 entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM COOPERATION AGREEMENT
FOR FISCAL YEARS 1985-86, 1986-87, 1987-88."
It was MOVED by Counci1member Gi1b, seconded by Counci1member
Pellegrino and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that Resolution
No. 5191 be and it is hereby ADOPTED.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Gi1b, Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
None
None
1
CONSIOERED AND CONFIRMED AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS MEETING. See
Page No.2.
CITY ATTORNEY
The City Attorney presented for the second time, explained the
content and read the title of Ordinance No. 1794, entitled: "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA AMENDING SECTION 9233.12 'OF THE
ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE TO REZONE THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 646 AND
650 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE FROM C-O & D (PROFESSIONAL OFFICE ZONE
WITH A DESIGN OVERLAY) TO R-3 (MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE).
It was MOVED by Counci1member Gi1b, seconded by Counci1member
Pellegrino and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that Ordinance
No. 1794 be and it is h~reby ADOPTED.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Gi1b,
None
, None
Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
The City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the
title of Resolution No. 5188, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR BICYCLE
ANO PEOESTRIAN FACILITIES AUTHORIZED UNDER SB 821 AND DESIGNATING A
BICYCLE AND PEOESTRIAN FACILITIES PROJECT". .
It was MOVED by Councilmember Lojeski, seconded by Counci1member
Young and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that Resolution No.
5188 be and it is hereby ADOPTED.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Gilb, Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
None
None
1
The City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the
title of Resolution No. 5190, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA FIXING THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE REQUIRED
TO BE RAISED FROM PROPERTY TAXES NECESSARY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
1984-85 TO PAY THE INDEBTEDNESS OF THE CITY OR DISTRICTS".
It was MOVED by Councilmember Lojeski, seconded by Councilmember
Young and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that Resolution
No. 5190 be and it is hereby ADOPTED.
AYES;
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Gilb, Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
None
None
8/21/84
-8-
1
1
25:1030
lOd- 101
CLAIMS
DENIED
George Danchi k
'CeCelia H. Perkins
Employers' Casualty Company
State Farm Mutual (Emily Jenkins)
Genstar Mortgage Corporation
Steven Juarez
Ma tt Kang
E. & C. Ricketts
ON RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY,
ALL OF THF ABOVE CLAIMS WERE DENIED ON MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER
PELLEGRINO, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER LOJESKI AND CARRIED ON
ROLL CALL VOTE AS FOLLOWS:
(',
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Gilb, Lojeski, Pellegrino, Young and Hannah
None
None
ll.
12.
LOJESKI
MATTERS FROM STAFF
MATTERS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS
In response to a question, the Director of Public Works advised that
the work of the American Landscape Company has improved with a
commitment from the company that it will continue. Some discussion
was held on better methods -- perhaps retain two contractors and
divide the City... something to think about when the City goes to
bid again. The contract with the American Landscape Company
expires in 1985. As to coordinating the work with that of the
school district, the Director of Public Works explained the
difference in requirements and the District has continued the
same maintenance contractor on the basis of continuing his contract
on a negotiated basis ... they did not go out to bid.
The Planning Director advised that the building inspection of the
Granada Royale Hometel is continuing... there are still some
deficiencies ... a time limit will be placed on completing the
work.
Code/Ethics for City Council... The City Attorney had submitted
a report on such a code which Councilmember Lojeski felt was proper
and necessary. However, it was the consensus of a majority of
Council that it was really unnecessary.
As for providing handrails for the handicapped at the Chamber of
Commerce Building, the City Manager said a report will be forth-
coming but it has been determined that due to Revenue Sharing
requirements, the ramps may have to be put in anyway.
The Director of Public Works explained the status of the improvement
of the roadway on Orange Grove Avenue - Sierra Madre advised that
from accounting their Federal Aid Urban Funds, it appears that they
will not have sufficient funds to do their half of the roadway.
Arcadia is ready to go with its part. Sierra Madre will continue
their efforts with County officials and a meeting with respective
Supervisors may be in the offing. Council will be kept informed.
Non-smoking in public places. Councilmember Lojeski would like to
see Arcadia take a stand on this. Discussion ensued with the
thought that the matter should be referred to the Chamber of
Commerce for discussion with the businessmen of the community,
particularly those in the restaurant business; also that any action
should not be taken during the summer months when so many are out
of the City. As to how Pasadena is getting along with its
ordinance, the City Attorney commented, in part, that he has
discussed this with the Pasadena Deputy City Attorney who advised
that to date there haven't been any perceptible problems, but
that enforcement problems are anticipated. Pasadena has its own
health department and it was noted that Arcadia does not have such
a Oept, and who would do the enforcement? More study is needed.
8/21/84
-9-
25 :1031
GILB
Advised that he has talked with County Supervisor Schabarum
about the upkeep of the County Park and was advised that the
contract will expire in a year and a half -- they will be going
out to bid.
Also was advised that some changes have been made to the design
of the Senior Housing Project on Naomi Avenue; that HUD is now
reviewing the plans and it is hoped to begin by September ...
that HUD is also anxious.
Felt that some way should be made to notify people about matters
coming before the Planning Commission and the City Council.
Suggested a resolution and plaque be prepared for presentation
to Helen Schrader at her retirement reception to be held September
26. A MOTION was made to that effect by Councilmember Gilb,
seconded by Councilmember Young and CARRIED unanimously.
1
HAN NAH'
Referred to the Audit Report on the Area Agency on Aging Contract
and asked for a breakdown on salaries, how many people allocated
and City contributions. The Finance Director will prepare.
The Council entered a CLOSED SESSION, RECONVENED and took action
as foll ows:
~t/<
CITY PINS
PRICE
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION was unanimously CARRIED that the City Pins be sold for
$5.00 each.
The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p. m. to 7:00 p. m. September 4,
1984 in the Conference Room to conduct the business of the Council
and Agency and any Closed Session necessarY to discuss personnel,
litigation matters and evaluation of properties.
ATTEST:
~~-2
. ~-e
Clty ~rk
1
8/21/84
-10-
T RAN S C RIP T
(Insofar as decipherable)
~
, J
FREEWAY NOISE POLLUTION - DISCUSSION HELD ON AUGUST 21, 1984
.1
J
CALDWELL
My name is Robert E. Caldwell. I've lived at 326 Joyce Ave. for the past 28
years. Mayor Hannah, Members of the City Council, Members of the City staff,
ladies and gentlemen, the culmination, now I'm talking the present tense here,
of this engineering study by J.J. Van Houten & Associates and presented to this
audience, which hasn't happened yet, represents the most concrete action that
Arcadia has taken in 16 years towards bringing relief to Arcadia residents who
have become victims of inverse condemnation by the noise pollution from the
210 freeway. The steps leading to thi-s report started over a year ago, when
the then Mayor Lojeski agreed to speak to a group of neighbors in a garageadj~
to the freeway at the end of north Fourth Ave. Over 75 fellow sufferers came ~
to listen and talk to Councilman Lojeski, which without a microphone system
would have been impossible to hear. At the meeting a year ago a petition
signed by over 350 was presented to the City Council asking for help in ob-
taining a sound barrier wall. Spearheaded by Councilman Lojeski, and assisted
by Councilman Pellegrino, with the cooperation of City Manager George Watts,
and Director of Public Works Chet Howard, assistance was given to reach this
goal. In October 1983 Assemblyman Mountjoy was requested by Councilman Lojeski
to sponsor an amendment to the Los Angeles County Transportation Improvement
Program. In February 1984 I and Councilman LojeSki, George, Watts, Chet Howard
appeared before the Highway and Freeway Sub-commirtee. And along with Assembly-
man, Richard Mountjoy made a presentation to the six person committee for funds
to carry out the request of the City Council to obtain funds specifically, at
that time, for a sound-wall from Santa Anita to Fifth Avenue. A recent letter
indicated that we did not qualify, but would be eligible for consideration
next year. Assemblyman Mountjoy told me he would contact Leo J. Trombatore.
Director of Caltrans, when he returned to Sacramento. This he did and ,subse-
quentlya thorough, and longer test was conducted by Caltrans. 'Ae the last mtg.
of the prior council in March, a motion' was made to hi~e the services-of
J.J. Van Houten & Assoc - now several months later we have this scientific
I
-1-
CALDWELL
(Cont'd)
~
HANNAH
ZAREH
WATTS
ZAREH
WATTS
ZAREH
J
detailed report. How it is interpreted is up to you, the members of the
City Council. But as Councilman Dennis Lojeski expressed it, "the problem was
council created and it's up to counc il to solve it'; the problem won't go away".
I'm sure that I speak for others that this report is too complex for anyone
to intelligently make any conclusions in haste. That the report which has been
five months in the making should be digested and discussed with perhaps an
ad hoc committee with two or three councilpersons and staff members meeting
with several interested citizens involved with the attempt to bring relief to
Arcadia citizens suffering from continuous noise originating with the 210 free-
way. Thank you:
Thank you Mr. Caldwell
Ed Zareh, 1051 Catalph Road. I requested, this morning, that we could put a
bar-graph on this projecter, and I don't see it hooked up, I don't know if we
can do it hurriedly or.......
Excuse me do you need an overhead projecter or do you have a clear film?
I have an 8! by 11 bar-graph that's in a transparency.
It's a transparency.......ok.
End of Tel 1
Beginning of Tel 2
Maybe I can get going, to save time if you like, since we have two new members
on Council, I'd like to just quickly state the the criteria to be able to be
funded for a sound wall. One is, that we were established here before the
freeway route was established by 10, 8, 15 years before. Then, we must meet
the noise criteria, and we have to be cost effective. This report that Mr.
Van Houten has dpne, we feel, the noise study shows that, it mentions that it
will fulfill these criteria. On page 2 of his report - if several different
scales of decibels - so we have to be careful which scales we're reading about.
On page 2 of his report he explains the CNEL, which is the Community Noise
-2-
ZAREH
(Cont'd)
Effective Level. On page 4 he states that 65 CNEL scale is a recognized
standard for residential areas. Then in his compilation, on Table 1, he
shows the three different scales, and we can be discussing - it takes a lot
of time, so we're going to take the CNEL, which is the Community Noise Effective
Level, and 20 out of the 24 stations that he tested was 65 or above. Many
people keep asking how come people on both sides of us get walls and we don't
in Arcadia? And nobody has ever come up with that answer, so I went to Ca1trans
and I've got the report of Ca1trans of the traffic starting at west of pasaden~
through Arcadia, through r~onrovia and Duarte. This is the traffic flow 80 -
the average daily traffic annualized. We find, I want to take the first - the
line - let's take the center section there - it says Rosemead and Baldwin -
the traffic per day in 1983 was 149,000 vehicles per day. Mr. Van Houten in
his report shows 153,00 cause he has the 85 readings at that particular station
and each one of the stations through Arcadia has increased 4,000 per day in
one year. Let's take that 149,000 and we're going to compare it to the daily
traffic going through Monrovia where the wall is scheduled to be put up. Our
traffic between Rosemead and 8a1dwin is 13 to 15 percent more per day than
that area that is going to get the wall in Monrovia. And, as Mr. Hannah had
mentioned we talked one time about walls going up - the western part of Pasadena
right near San Rafael - they just put up a wall - less than a nalf a mile long.
And that wall is just finished - I went in that area and looked it over - so
between that area in Pasadena - between Figueroa and Linda Vista which this
wall falls within - the daily traffic annualized is 124,000 units a day. We
are almost 17 percent more then that. Incidently that particular area, I
might add, through the City of Pasadena, I find that Caltrans turned them down,
why? Because it wasn't cost effective, there was only 9 units subjected to
It didn't meet the noise levels - four out of
And it was $32,000 per reSidel
the seven readings were below
just finished. It's hard for u
the freeway - it cost $292,000 for that area.
decibels on the L10 scale - yet that wall had
-3-
ZAREH
LOJESKI
ZAREH
LOJESKI
ZAREH
~LOJESKI
~ ZAREH
GILB
ZAREH
LOJESKI
ZAREH
to understand why we can't do something about this. I don't know - is Mr.
Van Houten here tonight?
Who built that wall? Was that the City of Pasadena,that built that wall?
I think it's
where you were at Councilman.
What was the answer?
It's L A County Transportation Commission - they work in collaboration with
Caltrans - I think, someway. I can't answer that detail.
Catrans said no, and then the Commission said yes?
that
Well, Caltrans said/they, were taking it off their list and that they wanted
it to be reinstated and whatever transpired - there's a lot of paper work
there and I've seen some of it, but it's done, the wall is there.
How long is the wall?
That particular wall only really is effective for 9 residents, less than a
half a mile long, I'm guessing, I didn't exactly run it out.
But to your knowledge the City of Pasadena did not come up with any money......
They did not ,fund that themselves, no sir as far as I know. I asked..... is
Mr. Van Houten here tonight?
GILB Right behind you.
ZAREH
1
~-
Oh, I didn't see you - ok. I would like to have Mr. Van Houten, when he will,
tell us in laymans language, in such a way that the council and we residents
can have a better grasp of how much more this noise level is on the freeway
that we're being subjected to, by his report or whatever, then the 55 decibels
that our City ordinance says we;,can exceed. I want him to give us some kind
of a feel, so we all know how much more that we're actually being subjected to.
And, also maybe to elaborate a little bit on - we say one decibel - I don't
think that has much meaning to many of us, and since we said this is a very
complex thing - a lot of parameters involved and what I'd like to ask, if I
may, that Mr. Mayor, you - Mr. Lojeski or Mary Young or whoever else you want
on the council the staff and Mr. Van Houten - let's have a workshop meeting
-4-
ZAREH
(Cont'd)
HANNAH
ZAREH
HANNAH
with us. We've never had a voice in this and we have a committee that represents
the whole length of the 2.8 miles through Arcadia. And Mr. Bob Caldwell, George
Lewis, Dr. Puckett, Jerry Todd, Wes Wise and myself, we'd like to set a time
and have a workshop meeting.
Ok, we'll poll the council on that after you've finished your presentation, if
there's anything else.
Well, as I say, there's too much involved. I believe I've said about all I
want to say right now.
What's the feeling of the council as to setting up a committee
councilmembers and three citizens to discuss this matter.....
GILB That's fine with me - anything we come up with.
HANNAH
LOJE5KI
HANNAH
,o,po"d of t'O~
Ok - can I have two volunteers for this. I think, really, it should involve
somebody that knows a little something about - I certainly make Mr. Howard an
ex officio member of that committee and I personally don't know that much about
sound barriers. Dennis, you've done probably more work than anyone else on it.
It seems to be my night in the pickle barrel - doesn't it? I got promoted to
something else here earlier in the evening,- that's fine - I'll be more than
happy to - yes. I don't know anything more than' anyone else, except I stood
in the garage and I couldn't hear anybody talking, and you know, it is very
noisy
Well, I'm very sympathetic to the cause and I've examined it from a practical
standpoint and if you're talking about the City of Arcadia coming up with
$12,000,000 then I think we might as well just forget it because it's some-
thing that we would have to put on a referendum and have the entire city vote
on it, and, you can't take an expenditure of $12,000,000 that effects possibly
a thousand people and expect 47,000 people to say 'go with it -
spend the money'. 50 if we go into it from the standpoint that
the City of Arcadia to fund this I think we've been pretty well
-5-
go ahead and I
we're expecti
told that there
HANNAH
(Cont'd)
ZAREH
HANNAH
~ ~REH
GIL8
HANNAH
GILB
I
"--
is no way we can ever recover our money. So I think it has to go to the vote
of the people. Now, if you want to explore other avenues I very definitely
will sit in on that committee.
I think this is why we're requesting a workshop meeting so that we can discuss
these things
Well, Dennis and I will sit in with you and two members and Mr. Howard and
we'll get together with you. Why don't you set it up with Mr. Howard and
we'll get together with you in the next couple of days.
That will be great, thank-you Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Mayor - may I ask a question? Maybe Mr. Van Houten can answer this question.
When the noise level is the highest is that when the traffic is the heaviest?
Why I'm asking the question is because when the traffic is the heavies't:it nlcives
slower. When it's a little lighter it moves pretty fast and trucks move faster.
Is it when the traffic is not quite as heavy that the noise is loudest? Do you
understand my question? What I'm trying to say is - could we get some relief
from the high-way patrol to slow the traffic down if that's a problem? No, I
don't think since they put the cut-off going north to Kern County, over here
where you cut out going over - where they used to go through town and go up
the other way - I'll bet you that your truck traffic has increased 40%, I don't
think there's any question about it.
Councilman Gilb I don't know anything about it, but I did read someplace that
trucks sitting higher from the ground create more problems than automobiles -
that the sound barriers probably would reduce - Dennis can correct me -would
not present as much of a problem as exist when the trucks go by and they may
go by at six o'clock in the morning.
Yes, what I was going to say is - that if there was a different route that the
trucks could find that would be quicker to go to the northern part of the
state you would eliminate a lot of the traffic off of that freeway. They just
found this freeway as a shortcut - seriously. I mean we run a hundred trucks
I know.
-6-
ZAREH
We're not going to be able to not do that ever on an',;nter-state freeway. In
fact it's going to get....
GILB No - but I mean if there's a different route established that would connect up
with the freeway out someplace that would go - maybe up through Canyon Country -
or someplace like that - that's what I'm trying to 'say - where trucks would
be encouraged to go different routes ,that may be shorter that they don't even
know about. We could talk to the trucking association about that. But seriously,
HANNAH
LOJESKI
HANNAH
LOJESKI
this is a short cut that they just found in the last couple of years
are really using it.
Councilman Lojeski.
,od th'y ~
There are some roadways that trucks have been told they couldn't use - for
example the Pasadena Fwy. I don't think a truck can go on that freeway, if I'm
not mistaken, or a bus or something like that.
That's a private freeway owned by the City of Pasadena and the City of Los Angeles
However it happened, you know, and that is the big - the trucks are problems.
The high-way patrol ,creates a problem - when I was on Fifth Ave. where it dead-
ended into the freeway about two o'clock, three o'clock in the morning when
the high-way patrol would pull the speeders on the fwy. over - they pull them
literally into this gentlemens back yard - open the doors - and everything,-
the radios - the red lights and everything else are going. So, there are a
number of those types of things you know, also, that do cause problems. The
trucks are a big major problem on the freeway, without a doubt.
GILB It had to increase the last couple of years since they opened the freeway with'
LOJESKI
a short cut where you don't have to go clear over to San Fernando Road anymore.
As a part of this ad hoc committee, 'do we have any information that goes back to
the beginning of time of the freeway as to what the noise levels were then? And
how they've increased and we've got, I know, in the Van Houten
some projections as to what we can see in the future as far as
study there's I
increased numb
if we had some
of cars and increased noise levels and things like that. And,
-7-
GILB
HANNAH
LOJESKI
GILB
~HANNAH
, GILB
HANNAH
GILB
HANNAH
LOJESKI
HANNAH
LOJESKI
ZAREH
HANNAH
sort of comparison, in other words to see where we were at the beginning, where
we are today and things like that.
Dennis in 1976......
If I may Councilman Gilb - we do have a committee - why don't we just get on with
the committee and then we'll come ,back ,to the council.
I was just thinking - if we could have that for the committee.
We did a study in 1976 - Chet and I went to try and do something about this
once before.
Would you like to sit in on the committee?
I will if you want me to - that's fine.
I'd like to have you sit in on it.
All I know is how trucks make a lot of noise.
Ok, we have a committee...
Dave, I have one more question in regards to that. Have we agreed that t1r. Van
Houten or one of his representatives will be involved in that? And, if so do
we need as a council to appropriate more money because I believe that would
happen, would it not?
Why don't we have our........
How many meetings are we good for Mr. Van Houten?
I believe I'm through then and we'll get together and I'll get with Chet
Howard.
Mr. Van Houten would you give your name and address - we have a question for
you.
VAN HOUTEN I'm John Van Houten, my office is in Anaheim. I'm a registered professional
IANNAH
, OJESKI
'-'
engineer in the State of California.
Thank you. Councilman Lojeski.
Yes, my question is in regards - I don't know if the Council has agreed on this -
whether Mr. Van Houten or one of his representatives would be a part of this
-8-
ad hoc committee, and if he is or his representative is, obviously he's not going
to do this out of the goodness of his heart and are we still on a contractual
basis with you or do we need to appropriate something else?
VAN HOUTEN There would be additional fee required for a workshop. I was to attend one
pUblic hearing - I must apologize for being late, I guess you changed the
agenda.... .
HANNAH No.
VAN HOUTEN No....
Yes,_we_djd_we-moved_this_up to - people talking for five minutes and it was
f
LOJESKI
GILB
,Just that.
at the end at that time.
VAN HOUTEN I had discussed this with staff and it seemed like an appropriate time to show
up and ........
HANNAH
Well, I would suggest if I may that we have our first meeting without Mr. Van
Houten and if we need his services then we'll come back to.....
VAN HOUTEN It might be very efficient to formulate a list of questions - identify what
your concerns are and let us look at it technically
appropriate
to do something.
HANNAH Do you still owe us one public hearing?
VAN HOUTEN Excuse me.
HANNAH Do you still oue us one public hearing?
VAN HOUTEN I don't expect to, no. I might say this from a technical standpoint I feel our
report is quite complete, as a matter of fact the amount of measurement work
We did is far more extensive then anything I'm aware of - that's been done in
Southern California. I don't know that anybody has ever put a 24 hour monitor
out for 7 days at 2 locations, which was part of our - that we included as
Part of our study. We've - the kind of documentation that you have there, I I
think is about as technically complete as I could envision the City would nee
The kind of questions that seem to be left may not be in the area that we have
-9-
HANNAH
lit VAN HOUTEN
_ HANNAH
." VAN HOUTEN
,IANNAH
'''-_I
the expertise in and that is in the specific funding, the available of public
funds to do such a project, and again, for that reason I think you're definitely
right to go to a workshop to..... and it seems to me that's what you need to
resolve.
This may seem like a facetious question, but how does the City of Industry, or
Santa Fe Springs justify 12 to 15 foot walls when they have very few residential -
few dwellings in the city?
Again, that project, if I may......
How does the transportation......
Yes, if I may take a few minutes and address that I'll be happy to do that - I'm
quite familiar with it since I did the noise study for Santa Fe Springs. Santa
Fe Springs - Route 5 and 605 through the City were on the priority list that
Caltrans has developed for the State. So that Caltrans had already identified
those sections of the freeway as candidates for noise walls, however, they
were fairly low on the priority list and at the time that work was undertaken -
which was about 1978 - 79 that it was started. ..the noise barrier walls that
Caltrans would have put in probably wouldn't have been done till late 198~'s -
1990's and possibly even later if I'm speaking of type. As you're probably
aware there is a state law now that allows a city to fund the project and the
State to pay the city back ineffect at such time that that project would have
come up in the normal course of Caltrans' barrier program. So that - and I don't
know the actual dates i nvo 1 ved, but it woul d be expected tha t around. 1990 the
city will be reimbursed for those walls that were built in Santa Fe Springs
using city funds. Now, how they financed that and I presume some long term
financing arrangement is worked out where that money can be paid back at a
later date.
Maybe you glossed over it - but I didn't quite understand - I was under the.
impression that you had to be on the priority list before you could be reim-
bursed.
-IO-
VAN HOUTEN And Santa Fe Springs was on the list.
HANNAH
We are not.
LOJESKI
That's right.
VAN HOUTEN That is my understanding.
HANNAH
So, I just don't want to give a mistaken impression that we can get it back
from the State of California.
VAN HOUTEN That's correct - it's my understanding that your city is not on the list.
HANNAH
GILB
Councilman Gilb.
','m th, g" t", I b"j~
\-
Mr. Van Houten, the funding for the soundwalls comes
doesn't it?
VAN HOUTEN Again, you're getting into an area that I don't have the expertise, but that's
my understanding.
GILB Well, I know - ok - well, I'll tell you that .. What has happened is that
the League of Calif: Cities, when we were trying to do something about this
before, went to the State with a resolution trying to get the diesel fuel
money back to the cities. That's all the Mercedes Benz's running around on
diesel and that sort of thing, not just trucks, but diesel. And the former
administration - me not being a democrat - the former administration was taking
the money for the highway patrol retirement fund and that's what depleted the
funds and what shortened up the money for the repair of the transportation
system. Now, I don't know whether the present administration is putting more
money into those funds, obviously, the costs have gone up because we talked
about this once before, it was 6t to 7 million and you're talking a much
higher figures then that, that's how much. inflation has hit us, but it might
be this present administration is in someway trying to make more funds avail-
able for this type of activity and that would be the way - the only way that
I could see that we could...... when we investigated this in 76' we were so I
far down on the list they wouldn't even talk to us - I mean - and I was on th
regional committee for the Transportation Commission -. they went around to all .
-ll-
GILB
(Cont'd)
these cities and I couldn't even get us on the thinq and I was the chairman
of the Commission.
VAN HOUTEN I'd like to emphasize another point if I may... we're estimating a project that
)
HANNAH
LOJESKI
I
we would consider to be one that would be beneficial, one that would be recognized
as a -,
_~~rr~ significant decrease in the noise in this 12 to l4
million dollar category. We're talking about extremely high walls in comparison
to what is normally built. And, I think my conclusion is I'm not sure that
that's practical - it certainly is not cost effective. The kind of standards
that you would be needing with that project would be much lower noise levels
then are currently being built, being achieved adjacent to new freeways, for
example, or adjacent to freeways in which a developer puts up the homes and is
required by the local jurisdiction to put up walls. So, we're talkino about
some standards here, in my opinion, that if you put up walls in order to get a
recognizable benefit you'd have to put up extremely high walls. You have a
unique topography with respect to the freeway, and some side streets - Colorado
for example, some streets paralleling the freeway that are causing part of the
noise problem. So, I think you've got a rough problem here in terms of imple-
menting something that provides a benefit. I hope that was brought to light
in our study.
Anyother questions? Councilman Lojeski.
The unfortunate part about this, of course, is the State has changed the'
rules of the game as the game has been played, and they've changed the rules
of acceptance. There was a time when the City Council in this City agreed to
pay half of the costs, and I believe - I'don't know - Mr. Gilb if you were on
the council at that time or not - I believe Mr. Saelid even made the motion
to that effect and the council had agreed that they would pay half the costs.
That was the agreement by the State when -that communication was taken back to
the State, unfortunately, the State backed out of it and said, "no we're not
going to do it". So again, the rules have changed - the decibel reading level
-12-
LOJESKI
(Cont'd)
VAN HOUTEN
LOJESKI
HOWARD
seems to have gone up and down like a yo-yo, and it just seems that Arcadia
is always just kind of on the fringe of Whether it's going to be accepted or
not into the program. I noticed in your report you talk at great length about
what seems to be an adequate sound barrier and what doesn't and you alluded
primarily to concrete block walls type of situation, which obviously would be
the most effective. Is there any type of a shrub, tree or anything like that
that could alleviate any type: of noise, I mean - I don't know?
No sir, not with the kind of distances we're talking about here. In order for~
shrubbery, very mature shrubbery to have, to be effective, you need 15 feet of ~
thickness - 20 feet, 30 feet of thickness of very mature material. And, we just
don't have that kind of space available.
I have one more question and that's either to you, Mr. Van Houten could answer
it or perhaps Chet Howard, and that is - any of the results that were gleaned
from this report - do they substantiate or do they create any questions as to
the testing that had been done by the State in these areas previously? In other
words', the tYPlcal question - did the State come in and say, "well, this area
doesn't qualify because it was at the 60 decibel level and all of a sudden we,
you know, your test did it and it proved to be 74 decibel reading, you know,
something of where there was a decrepancy.
I believe Mr. Van Houten could address that - he's looked at the State studies
and there's some areas of discrepancy, but nothing of any significance that I
know of.
VAN HOUTEN Yes, we're right on the edge where we're clearly involved with freeway noise
only. The noise say from Colorado isn't a significant contribution. The levels
are 70 to 71 db - that's that LIO measure you're used to hearing about - 70-71 db.
70 is the standard and where you have Colorado contributing to the level and
you're not being protected by an existing garden type wall - we're measuring I
levels in excess of that up 74-75 db, which are clearly very excessive levels
In my opinion 70 is a very high level - people will complain at 70. So, you
-13-
VAN HOUTEN get into that area of what portion would the state even consider funding when
(Cont'd)
some of the noise is surface streets. The other factor the State is considering
LOJESKI
~VAN HOUTEN
?OUNG
HANNAH
YOUNG
in there is the number of residential units being affected - impacted by the
noise versus the cost and they talk......
Are there any areas of gleaning errors that it would be beneficial, for example,
to take a copy of this study and pass it on to our big brothers at the State
level, and say, "look, you know, we want to get on that list somehow".
Well, I certainly wouldn't discourage doing that, if there is even a glimmer
of hope that it would...... I don't think I could come up with some argument
that would open somebody's eyes - no.
Mr. Mayor.
Councilwoman Young - please.
Yes - I am not sure - does the engine of a vehicle make the most noise or is
it the tires on the payement?
VAN HOUTEN For automobiles at freeway speeds - it's primarily the tire noise. Trucks~it's
YOUNG
the engine and stack noise, at an equivalent height above the pavement of about
8 feet. Cars - we also talk in terms of what we call a medium truck and that's
just about everything but a big semi - and there the source height is about 3
feet off the pavement. So, we're considering all the sources - tire noise,
truck noise, the stack noise, and even a medium truck which puts out a lot of
power at the engine level.
Well, it would seem to me with all the modern technology there is that there
ought to be some way to go at this a different way. Treat the pavement so that
the tire noise is cut down.
VAN HOUTEN Unfortunately cars don't stop very well when they don't make a lot of noise,
10UNG
\. AN HOUTEN
or when they don't make that noise on the pavement they also don't stop too
well when they put the brakes on.
I'm aware of that.
There's been some very extensive studies by the Dept. of Transportation and
-14-
VAN HOUTEN EPA on tire noise, pavement roughness and those factors and - there are quiet
(Cont'd)
tires, but from a practical standpoint that's probably not going to happen.
HANNAH
GILB
Councilman Gilb.
Mr. Mayor I was just wondering what effect this is going to have - this recent
letter we just got - if I read it right, "on August the 8th you'll be pleased
to learn that California Transportation Commission has approved funding on
the 1984 State Highway Program for additional lanes on Route 210 between
t
Rosemead Blvd. and'Azusa.
VAN HOUTEN Now, let's see is that in the City? Help me there.....
YOUNG
LOJESKI
They all go through the City.
Go right through the City.
VAN HOUTEN That will - ok - now, that will help, because.....
GILB Another Lane? ..... Sounds like more traffic to me.
VAN HOUTEN Yes, for this reason.....yes, but for this reason - the current policy of the
State is when a freeway is altered it is then at that point that they are -
GILB
LOJESKI
HOWARD
LOJESKI
HOWARD
LOJESKI
under the current policy, obligated to put up noise barriers to reduce noise.
In other words if they came in and added a lane, I think there you would have
a very definite glimmer....
Well, that's what they say they're going to do.
Are they going to add that lane, Chester~ on the residential side or to the
center
No, it will be the interior shoulder of the roadway. The freeway will not be
widened they'll simply restripe it to utilize the interior shoulder to create
a fifth lane, and......
The interior shoulder, in other words, more towards the center divider - where
the railroad tracks are.
I
That's right.
But really it's not going to impact the residential......
-15-
HOWARD
I'm sure Caltrans would be the first to point out we're not - all we're doing
is changing the traffic operation of the freeway. We're not adding....
VAN HOUTEN Spreading it out.
HOWARD ....adding width.
HANNAH I have one more question - it's a hypothetical question I won't hold you to your
VAN HOUTEN Ok.
answer.
~NANNAH
What are the chances or do you have any concept of what the chances would be
if we sued Caltrans for disturbing our peace of mind, creating an adverse
health situation as a result of the findings that you have? Could we possibly
prevail in a court case on the basis that it's certainly harmful to the people
in the City of Arcadia?
VAN HOUTEN Well, I won't give you my legal opinion on that...
HANNAH
Yes, I'm not asking you to practice law - I just - based upon your findings.
VAN HOUTEN Let me give you a - I think a useful answer on that. The City of Anaheim
gave the task to the City Attorney to in effect take out after Caltrans, if you
HANNAH
I
.~
will, relative to noise barriers adjac~nt to the Route 57 freeway through
Anaheim. The City Council hired a consultant, never gave him the contract but
awarded the contract to a consultant, I'm sure that got to the State immediately.
I was not the consultant, by the way, but I did follow the situation closely,
and the next thing I had heard the Caltrans Board who" decides such things,
had put Anaheim on the list and the noise barriers were built within the next
year or two. And, I don't know - I have no knowledge as to whether that
potential legal pressure had much impact, but....
Would resolve my peace of mind... thank you very much. Mr. Zareth so that -
you want to speak on the subject? Please.... while he's identifying himself
I want to point out to you that we will have three members of the Council
and if you could have three members of the citizens group, and I'll ask Mr. Watts
to apPoint a member of the staff, because if we get this too large then we're
-16-
PUCKETT
HANNAH
PELLE
HANNAH
CALDWELL
not going to accomplish very much. Please......
I'm Bob Puckett, I live at Il07 Catalpa Road in Arcadia -' have been for 29 years.
Just in answer to your question Mr. Mayor - the EPA has published certain
articles and their recommendation is 55 decibels during the day and 45 at
night. Now, we far exceed that. We're 65 to 70 so as far as a legal thing,
the EPA has decided that this is the standard, and I think we have a lot of
reason to suspect that all the things that I have gotten are medical articles
and how this increased noise - it's a toxic waste dump and we all know what (
that is, because every - the cities around here have been fighting that.
But, noise polution is just exactly the same. And, when we have this meeting
I will have a lot of data from the EPA and soforth to show that we far exceed
any acceptable level. Thank you.
Thank you Dr. Puckett. That may be a consideration. Anyone else..... yes.
Instead of whipping a dead horse I'd like to close this off as soon as we can -
direct whoever's on the board - and Ilm sure the 5 of us would be liaison to
that, direct it to the City Attorney and to staff and with Mr. Gilb's connections
in the State of California I'm sure we could put adequate pressure where it's
needed. And, I think that's all the people are asking for, they don't expect
the City to pay the $12,OOO,OOO but they would like to see the effort of
putting some 'pressure on Caltrans from their local representation.
Thank you. Anyone else in the audience that wishes to address the Council?
You've spoken to the Council - is there anyone else? Ok - Mr. Caldwell.
My name is Robert E. Caldwell, 326 Joyce Avenue. I'd like to ask Mr. Van Houten
to explain page 7 in this last paragraph of his recommendation, because I
interpret that - 12 dec~bels - you're talking about 12,800,000 -' that I'm
interpreting as a perfection that would take us back to 1968. What we're
requesting is about 4 to 5 decibels which he reiterates in his maps all the t
way across here that's the standard which would cost $4,200,000 or - at leas
a third of what your stating here. And, there are areas in this that would ,
-17-
,. .
CALDWELL
(Cont'd)
HANNAH
CALDWELL
~
,I
h~
not even require the wall, I'm sure - if you noticed some of the areas that
come in way down below California and on down that area which I don't think
in all fairness is even bein affected by it.
I think it's a good question - I think you should get together with Mr. Van
Houten, discuss'that and give Mr. Zareh the information that you obtain 'and
then he can convey it to the committee when we meet.
Thank you Your Honor.
(NOTE: MAYOR HANNAH AND COUNCILMAN LOJESKI WILL SET IN ON THE
WORKSl-lOP WITH COUNCILMAN GILB AS ALTERNATE: ALSO STAFF
MEMBERS WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE RESIDENTS.)
-I8-