Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNOVEMBER 7,1989_2 31:0226 CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS ARE TAPE RECORDED AND ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK I INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL MINUTE APPROVAL (Oct. 17, 1989) (APPROVED) ORD. & RES. READ BY TITLE ONLY CLOSED SESSION I KINNAHAN '\" \\ Y \9-q1/): . M I NUT E S CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA and the ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGULAR MEETING NqVEMBER 7, 1989 The City Council and the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency met in a regular session at 7:40 p. m., November 7, 1989 in the Arcadia City Hall Council Chamber. Rev. Bob Johnson, Arcadia Presbyterian Church Recreation Director, Jerry Collins PRESENT: ABSENT: Councilmembers Gilb, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Chandler None On MOTION by Councilmember Gilb, seconded by Councilmember Young and CARRIED, the Minutes of the Adjourned and Regular Meetings of October 17, 1989 were APPROVED. Councilmember Lojeski ABSTAINED since he was not present at the October 17, 1989 meeting. It was MOVED by Councilmember Young, seconded by Councilmember Harbicht and CARRIED that Ordinances and Resolutions be read by title only and that the reading in full be waived. CITY ATTORNEY The City Attorney announed that "the City Council met in a CLOSED SESSION pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) to discuss the following cases: Glisson vs. Arcadia; Juarez and Corrigan vs. Arcadia; the Workman's Compensation case of Brannum vs. City of Arcadia. Additionally, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b) (1) the City Council will be adjourning to a CLOSED SESSION at the conclusion of this evening's regular meeting to discuss the situation involving potential litigation. Finally, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8, the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency met in CLOSED SESSION this evening to give instructions to the City's negotiator Pete Kinnahan, regarding the following property: the property belonging to the Richter Trust at 148 E.~Hpn~~~ton Drive; property belonging to the heirs of Frank Martinez at ~~. Second Avenue; property belonging to Petra Duenes at 109 N. Second Avenue and property belonging to Ysidoro . Duenes, 105 N. Second Avenue. These matters were discussed in CLOSED SESSION. Pursuant to that discussion, Mr. Kinnahan has an announcement to make:1I "The Arcadia Redevelopment Agency AUTHORIZED the acquisition of the follow- ing properties: the Richter Trust handled by Wel}s F~~_ Bank, at 148 E. Huntington Drive, the heirs of Frank Martinez at ~~~:Second Avenue; Petra Duenes at 109 N.Secopd Avenue and Mr. & Mrs. Ysidoro Duenes at 105 N.Second Avenue. They AUTHORIZED the Agency to begin acquisition and complet the acquisition of these properties and to. AUTHORIZE the Executive Director to execute all documents related thereto." 11/7/89 -1- ARCADIA FAMILY WEEK 1. PUBLIC HEARING (Bldg.Cdde Amend.Ch,9 Reg.for .Reduction of Earth- quake Hazards (APPROVED) ~~~ 31:0227 PRESENTATION I Mayor Chandler presented a Proclamation declaring the week of November 19 - 26, 1989 as Arcadia Family Week to Le Anne Hutchings, Coordinator of Arcadia Family Week. Mrs. Hutchings accepted the Proclamation with appreciation and noted that copies of the Proclamation would be distributed to the Church, Community and School Officials present tonight. Consideration of Text Amendment 89-006 concerning regulations for reduction of earthquake hazards in existing buildings. The City is required by State law to identify and mitigate hazards associated I with unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings. By January 1990 the City is required to (1) identify all URM buildings that are potentially hazardous; (2) Develop and implement a mitigation program to reduce the hazard; (3) Submit information on potentially hazardous buildings and hazard mitigation programs to the Seismic Safety Commission. The City has recently completed its survey of potentially hazardous buildings ~g has sent notice of preliminary findings to the property owners along fW1th_a copy of the proposed regulation, :-\ ~Councilmember Lojeski noted that State and Federal buildings are exempt; .:City buildings are not; he felt it is a shame that these agencies do not include themselves in this effort. Councilmember Lojeski inquired if most . . 'of the buildings referred to are in the downtown area, Staff replied there are about 16 or 17 buildings and most of them are in the downtown area. There are four such buildings at Anoakia School; none of which are classroom buildings. Mention made of the County building, Hugo Reid'.Adobe. Mayor Chandler declared the hearing open. , Bill Connolly, 21 South First Avenue, stated, in part, that he had received. such a letter regarding hazardous buildings and a copy of tte the proposed regulations, He was present to ask some questions. He inquired how the City determined which buildings were to come under these new regulations. Staff replied, firstly, by observation and, secondly, by checking permanent records the City has on those buildings which appear to be constructed of unreinforced masonry, A masonry building built in 1928, for instance, would probably not be reinforced unless. that was done at a later date, in which case the owner can submit engineering data to show that it has been reinforced. The building would then be exempt. City records going back to that period would not state whether or not there was reinforcing. However, there are methods of checking this in the build- ing itself, Mr. Connolly then inquired how the occupancy was determined in relation to the high risk factor, Staff replied this would be done using the same definitions set forth in Section 3302(a) of the Building Code and would be the number of occupants in a building over a period of time; perhaps over a 24 hour period of time, Mr. Connolly then inquired about the regulation stating a building would be of low risk if occupied only 20% of the time; if a building could just be left standing for a long I period of time without the repairs, Staff said it is doubtful this woul occur over a long period of time. Mr, Connolly then inquired about a situation where a building official has determined that the building is of high risk; appeal to the City Council is permitted but is to be accompanied by a filing fee. He did not think this to be right if the building official's decision is proven to be unfounded at the appeal, Staff replied it will be up to Council as to whether or not there will be a 'fee and the amount, Mr, Connolly also noted that there are a limited number of contractors able to perform this type of reinforcement; since many, many buildings will require such reinforcement, perhaps this time- table is not realistic. No one else desiring to be heard Councilmember Young, seconded by the hearing was CLOSED on MOTION by Councilmember Gilb and CARRIED. ~ 11/7/89 -2- ~ ,I 1 2. PUBLIC HEARING (APPEAL PLAN.COMSN. APPROVAL C.U.P.89- 015 (P.C. Resol. 1422) (300 E. Htg,Dr.) ?,.GUP o. 31:0228 It was then MOVED by Councilmember Lojeski, seconded by Councilmember Gilb and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that staff be DIRECTED to prepare the appropriate ordinance for introduction, Councilmember Harbicht noted that this is required by law and the City must move ahead with it. The question is, should this be a specific law. He felt Mr. Connolly's comment about filing fees is a good one. He felt it should be left in the ordinance but when it comes time to set the fee,perhaps we should consider setting it at 0; there is a small number of buildings affected. Councilmember Gilb noted that the fee can be waived in any event. Councilmember Lojeski noted that if the matter were to be appealed and the City was wrong, a refund could be made. The City Manager stated that the fees would eventually be set by resolution by the City Council, so if the Council decides not to set fees, such a resolution would just never be brought forward, Roll call vote was then taken on the earlier MOTION by Councilmember Lojeski, seconded by Councilmember Gilb: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers Gilb, Harbicht. Lojeski, Young and Chandler None None On October 3, 1989, Councilmember Lojeski appealed the Planning Commission's approval of Conditional Use Permit 89-015 to construct a 9,200 square foot restaurant with parking modifications at 430 East Huntington Drive (Arcadia Gateway Centre) in order to allow Council the opportunity to review the proposed project. This project was 'approved by the Planning Commission at its September 26, 1989 meeting with specific conditions to mitigate potential parking problems on the site. The applicant has indicated that he would prefer not to be bound by Conditions Nos. 5 and 6 of the Planning Commission's Resolution; these deal w~th maintaining a certain vacancy factor within the area around the restaurant and about reserving 4.000 square feet within the office building -- not leasing that space until it is shown that there will not be a parking problem. The applicant has submitted a revised plan which contains several changes. In the area to the east of the proposed Olive Garden Restaurant, 3 spaces were removed; to the south of the restaurant they propose to narrow.the existing compact parking spaces from 8'6" to 8'0" in width and in doing so, they pick up two spaces; and the space to the east of the restaurant and adjacent to the bank property they will do the same thing -- reduce the compact spaces by 6' each to provide one additional space in that area and then along the property line between the bank property and Cigna Bldg. to the south they will change the full size spaces to compact spaces and pick up an additional four spaces. Also, in the parking structure, by going to 8' wide compact spaces, they will pick up about three additional spaces; to the south of the Cigna Bldg., again by reducing the size o~,the compact spaces from 8'6" to 8' they pick up 2 additional spaces. In reply to a question from Councilmember, Gilb staff said that the Code allowed 8' wide compact parking spaces. All the .changes result in a net increase of 9 spaces. The Planning Department does not believe there should be any reduction in the size of the spaces in the area which is in close proximity to the restaurant because the extra 6" will make it a lot easier for patrons to get in a out of their cars, and in and out of t~e spaces, Also that the spaces close to the Cigna Building should not be reduced in size because that will facilitate getting in and out of csrs for the patients of the medical facility, In reply to a,question from Councilmember Harbicht staff replied that based on the modification already made regarding the compact spaces and putting in a larger restaurant, there would be approxi- mately 24 spaces deficit. It was noted that compact cars are not always parked in compact spaces nor larger cars parked in the larger spaces. Mayor Chandler declared the public hearing open. 11/7/89 -3- . ~,. ,..t <~ .. 31:0229 -.-' George Grosso, Arcadia Gateway Associates, Irvine,CA, stated, in part, that on the previous site plan, with the modification approved to go to 25% compact spaces, there were 179,298 sq. ft. which was 4.61 per 1,000 ratio; this site plan shows 181,298 sq. ft. and the additional spaces all to the restaurant. There is a credit of 8 stalls; however on the previous site plan, 179,298 sq. ft., there were 823 cars on site; in this site plan there are 836 cars which is increase to that site plan of 13 cars. With the 8 credit, gives total of 21 cars which wpuld basically be a 32 car ratio and because of the larger restaurant, would be 11 short. The plan that was approved in January or February of this year showed 823 cars; this site plan shows 836; taking into consideration the 8 discussed previously, by eliminating the one restaurant use in the retail and putlg the office in the retail, that's 21 automobiles which makes 11 short on 32 originally discussed. He is asking to raise the ratio from 25% to 3 on compacts and by adding these cars to the site they stay at the 4.61 1,000 ratio originally approved with the Barton-Aschman traffic report support. In reply to a question from Councilmember Harbicht, changing the ratio from 25% to 30% creates 13 spaces including the 1 found on the site. These were created by reducing the spaces from 8'6" to 8'0"; full size spaces are 9'0". Mr. Grosso went on to say that there is a problem with respect to General Mills, the owner of the proposed Olive Garden Restaurant, concerning two conditions in the Conditional Use Permit Section outlined in the Planning Commission Resolution. By revising the site plan, they have been able to find the additional parking spaces which will keep it at 4.6 per 1,000 ratio by granting the 30% compact allowance instead of 25%, as approved. This alleviates any grey area down the line with respect to the 4,000 square foot withhold and how and who calculates whether there is a parking problem there at night or in the daytime at lunchtme ... that's the only time there would be a problem. It is hoped that the restaurants will be successful. It is requested that if this is going to 30% allowance, that Item 5 in the Resolution be withdrawn. They do not know how that could be resolved at any point in time that they would be notified that they were in violation. Also there is a problem with Item No.8, which could mean the suspension or revocation of the Conditional Use Permit. They will have in excess of a two and one-half million dollar investment in the restaurant and they can not have that cloud hanging over them. If this request is granted, it is requested that they do not have the 4,000 sq. ft. withhold; that Item 5 be struck; and that Item 8 be struck. The City has control under Item 7, by acceptance of the conditions of approval of the C.U.P 89-015. Also they will keep the agreement made not to put another restaurant use in the retail; however there is also a problem with the request that they never put retail in the proposed office portion. Five or ten years hence when one of the leases expires, the best use might be a retail user. The City Attorney noted that any Conditional Use Permit can be suspended or revoked, but presumes appropriate notice to the parties and an ability to appeal it at a hearing before any final action is taken, so Section 8 is not as drastic as it appears. The owners are accorded notice and due process of law. Mr. Grosso responded that when dovetailed with Item 5, it is more ominous. In response to a .. 'question from Councilmember Lojeski, Mr. Grosso responded that the Olivel Garden would be the restaurant on the site. Staff noted that the condit a1 .use permit, if approved, goes with the property; no~.with a specific use at some point, however, the design would come before the Redevelopment Agency. Mr. Grosso inquired if the C.U.P. could specify the number of . .seats such a restaurant could have. The City Attorney responded it would be difficult; the C.U.P. is basically land use. Mr, Grosso said they are involved in a lease with the Olive Garden Restaurant. Councilmember Lojeski thought his concern had been answered. Counci.lmemberhY(;ung"li(;t.e'd~ that she appreciated Mr, Grosso I s attempt to bring a first class restaurant here. She can't object to the 8' parking spaces since they are in the Code. However, she has some .of the same concerns. If anoth~i_restaurant.were on that. location, would that require another C.U.P.?:" 'Staff replied,!his would be it for whatever comes assuming the new restaurant operated under the same conditions. Mr. Grosso reiterated tha~tha restaurant will be owned by General Mills; they will have a.iarge investment; it is not likely they will walk away from it; there is a possibility that in the future the name of the 11/7/89 -4- 31:0230 " . restaurant might be changed. Mr. Grosso also reiterated that combining C.U.P. Item 8 with Item 5 makes it difficult to work with. He is requesting that Item 5 be struck and that they will not have the 4,000 square foot withhold in the office building. Item 8 is acceptable; Items 5 and 6 are not. Councilmember Lojeski noted that 4,000 sq. ft. in a 60,000 sq, ft, building represents a 94% occupancy. No one else desiring to be heard, the hearing was CLOSED bn MOTION by Councilmember Lojeski, seconded by Councilmember Gilb and CARRIED. I Councilmember Lojeski commented that he had appealed the Planning Commission decision because of the parking deficiency. The Agency and Cduncil have agreed to lower the requirements. He was not pleased with this but was not aware that according to the City Code, a compact parking space could be only 8' wide. He has no problem with what Mr. Grosso has brought to Council as far as the revised plan. He was not pleased with ~he section relating to the Planning Department making periodic surveys -- he is not sure that is a workable solution. He would not like to see restrictions on the restaurant that would enable a Council in the future to change hours, etc. As to the matter of the 4,000 sq. ft. vacancy, he would not object to deleting that requirement. He would like to see some traffic problem which would show that this center and new restaurant are successful. He had no problem with the 8' wide parking spaces and agrees to the 4.61 to 1,000 ratio. Councilmember Young agreed with Councilmember Lojeski that having met the 4.61 ratio, the project should go ahead and she would like to see it finished and be successful. If the building is not always 100% rented, there should be no problem with that condition. She agrees with the proposal. Councilmember Harbicht noted that there is a tremendous increase in compact spaces -- 30% from 20%. There is no enforcement that compact cars park in the compact spaces; any car may be parked in them, so they are actually just little parking spaces. Originally, the compact spaces were to be 8'6", now they're 8'0". It is a matter of does the City want 12 additional spaces or 12 fewer spaces but better quality' .spaces. He would rather give relief for the restaurant with regard to the number of parking spaces and have a higher quality parking lot than making them squeeze them up to meet an arbitrary number of spaces. As far as Item 5 on the Planning Commission resolution, he is not in favor of putting in an ongoing enforcement clause; it should be settled now. Even if it were a solution, it would be putting a burden on the staff and an air of un- certainty for the tenants. As for Item 6, setting aside the 4,000 sq. ft. of unleaseable area, he does not feel that makes good economic sense. Therefore, he agrees that Items 5 and 6 should be removed; he would like to stay with the higher quality spaces and give up 12 of them. I Councilmember Gilb noted that there are so many larger vehicles now -- some of them take up more than one space. Maybe it is a good idea to make them wider. Some people seem to practice "defensive parking" by taking two smaller spaces. Older people have trouble getting in and out of cars in the smaller spaces. He agrees with Councilmember Harbicht. Councilmember Lojeski has measured parking spaces: in the Arcadia Parking District compact spaces measure 8'6"; at the Holiday Inn they are 8'0"; at the pizza facility and the movie theatre at Huntington Oaks they are 7'6" or below. Councilmember Young thought where people run into the bigg~st problem with space size is at a market where they are putting groceries in a car;. ~<?,r.:.people. getting in and out 8' is probably adequate. C~u~dlme~ber L?j.~s~r:s.a'!.d ,if; 8.'.6" is wha~J the~, sho!,ld be, then the Code sliould' be.. changed: t<;>. .8:'.;~";, ho~ev.er, , the,'pr!'sent. Code allows the 8' spaces. Councilmeinber' You,ng: w~lUld. like.. to see this pro] ect move ahead, so perhaps Council ,should give the .variance. She would like to see the Code changed. Councilmember Lojeski'noted that where they are picking up the extra park- ing spaces is in the'area south of the bank building; north of the Cigna Building -- not a particulariy high impact area. The all day parkers will probably be.;located in. that area in the small spaces. They are also picking up parkingi8pa~es ~n the parking structure; which is basically for 1117 /89 -5- . 'J , '/ -'. ,':: : :~ . ; ). . t' ~. ~ .",. : -::") . i~' k ~.\ 31:0231 the all day workers. The highest impact area would be south of the restaurant. 6" does not make that much difference. If the restaurant is successful, at certain periods of the day it will be busy; other times not. He does not want to see developers being granted reduced parking requirements -- he can see one such reduction but not two or more. Mayor Chandler noted that compact space is supposed to be 25% not 30%. Council- member Young said she would rather have someone drive in a parking lot and find a compact space than find none at all. It was MOVED by Councilmember Harbicht that Conditional Use Permit 89-011 be APPROVED, and that from the Planning Commission Resolutions, Items 1; 3, 4, and 7 be included with additional condition that the current parki plan be the parking plan that is used, which includes 25% compact spaces includes the 8'6" spaces. Councilmember Lojeski requested the motion be in two parts; Councilmember Harbicht withdrew his motion. It was then MOVED by Councilmember Harbicht that the current parking plan which is 25% compact spaces; that the compact spaces be 8'6"; and that to be a condition, be APPROVED. This was seconded by Councilmember Gilb. Councilmember Lojeski questioned: if the condition could be greater than the Code reads. The City Attorney answered that Council can be more restrictive if they wish. If the owners need more parking spaces in the future, they could come back for a modification. Roll call was then taken on the above MOTION: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers Gilb, Harbicht and Chandler Councilmembers LOjeski* and Young None * Because of reasons stated above; he thinks parking is most important. Councilmember Harbicht then MOVED that Council APPROVE this ,Conditional Use Permit 89-015 including from the Planning Commission Resolution Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 8 and include also the provision just approved; that the Negative Declaration be APPROVED and FILED and staff DIRECTED to prepare an appropriate resolution. Mayor Chandler inquired if the developer would have a problem leaving Item 8 in the motion. Mr. Grosso said it was no problem. Councilmember Gilb seconded the MOTION and roll call taken: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers Gilb, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Chandler None None I 3. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION Chen-Houng Kuo, 1826 Seventh Place, stated, in part, that he was present this evening to ask Council's help in dealing with some troublesome neighbors ... a great deal of noise, teen age .parties, etc. He has spoken to them, given written notice, and even called the police. When the police arrive, they are quiet for a short period of time, but after the police depart, the noise is resumed. His neighbor, Mrs. Juanita Reidell,183l Seventh Place, planned to speak tonight on the same subject, but was un- able to attend the meeting. She sent a letter instead, which was read by the City Clerk: 11/7/89 -6- I 4. 5, 5a. ROLL CALL 5b. MINUTE APPROVAL (Oct, 17, 1989) (APPROVED) 5c. DESIGN REVIEW TIME EXT'N (45 La Porte St.) (APPROVED) 1- ').-q ~ \f-q1/ I 31:0232 "I live across the street from the Courtright's at 1831 Seventh Place. I have not called the police, but have reasons to. I have lived here for thirty-five years and have ignored the noise again and again at the neighborhood parties, but the gypsy camp across from me has been a constant problem for the last five months, I support Mr. Kuo as does my neighbor on the south, Mrs. TiPPY,who has called the police. I shall be pleased to appear any t~me to give details of my frustration." The City Attorney asked that the information be left with his office, so that steps can be taken to remedy the situation. Council also noted that the Chief of Police was present and requesteq that he also look into the problem. CITY COUNCIL RECESSED IN ORDER TO ACT AS THE ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PRESENT: ABSENT: Agency Members Gilb, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Chandler None On MOTION by Member Gilb, seconded by Member Young and CARRIED, the Minutes of the meeting of October 17, 1989 were APPROVED. Member Lojeski ABSTAINED since he was not present at the October 17, 1989 meeting, Resolution No. ARA-126 establishes a one year approval period for any Agency Design Review approval. Mr. Benny Joseph obtained Agency approval of his proposed industrial project at 45 La Porte Street on September I, 1987. On October 23, 1989, the Applicant's plans were transmitted to the Economic Development Department for final approval prior to issuance of a Building Permit. As the one year time period within which to draw a permit has expired, Mr. Joseph has requested a time extension. Staff has reviewed the plans received on October 23, 1989 and compared them to those originally approved in September, 1987. The current plans are consistent with those previously seen and approved by the Agency. It was MOVED by Member Lojeski, seconded by Member Gilb and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency AUTHORIZE an extension of the Benny Joseph Design Review for the proposed project located at 45 La Porte Street for a period of one year (until November 7, 1990). AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Members Gilb, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Chandler None None 5d, RESOL. OF Pursuant to Resolution No. ARA-143 , staff has transmitted a notice of this' NECESSITY hearing and the Agency's final offer to acquire the Zahir/Younaei property INSTITUTING to the owners. The owners have stated that the~gency's offer is much EMINENT too low and state they have a buyer willing to pay significantly above DOMAIN the Agency's appraised value and offer price. Staff feels that the PROCEEDINGS conditional purchase price exceeds the fair market value of the property (Za~r/Younaei based upon the Agency's appraisal and recommends proceeding with considera- Property) tion of the Resolution of Necessity. In compliance with the California (APPROVED) Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, staff has conducted a full - and adequate review of environmental impacts associated with the acq~isition I of the Zahir/Younaei property, On April 13, 1989, the Agency, pursuant to California Redevelopment Law and ARA Resolution No, ARA-lO, provided Owner/Tenant Participation Opportunities to the owners of the Zahir/Younaei property. No reply was received and the time period for reply expired May 15, 1989. Since no participation agreement was reached during the '-\"\ 1'\ ~1 ;z. f Ii- 11/7/89 -7- RESOLUtION NO. ARA-144 1~i\ \' \'d-- 91/1" RESOLUTION NO. ARA-144 (ADOPTED) 5e. SOILS 01 CONDITION r<' WARRANTY ~Oi. EXECUT' N X\ (Kiewit-East . -Northside Proj ect) (APPROVED) 31:0233 period in which the opportunity was offered, the Agency determined that the opportunity was no longer available to the owners of the Zahir/Younaei property and directed staff to solicit proposals from eight developers responding the the Agency's Request for Qualification. Two proposals have been received by the due date, October 27, 1989. The Assistant City Manager for Economic Development then presented and read the title of Resolution No. ARA-144, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY OF THE ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, INSTITUTING THE COMMENCEMENT OF EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY FOR REDEVELOPMENT PURPOSES (ZAHIR/YOUNAEI PROPERTY)". I A hearing only for the parties claiming a possessory interest in the property was opened by Chairman Chandler. Mike Ludecke, Century 21 Ludecke, 610 N.Santa Anita Avenue, stated, in part, that they represent the buyers and the sellers on this particular property. They were not aware that there was no reply from the owners of the property. They have an accepted offer from a developer and are going to escrow. This developer intends to develop an office building or a medical building on this property. He is requesting a postponement in order to work this out and make a proposal in conjunction with what the City wants to do with the redevelopment of this particular parcel. The Assistant City Manager for Economic Development responded that the Agency had received no written response from the owners; they have been in contact verbally. Mr. Ludecke said they were in the offer/acceptance stage and then became aware of these proceedings in progress. The Assistant City Manager for Economic Development responded that he could not share the ongoing negotiations and the fact is, the Agency has been dealing with the owners and have made offers that have not been successful to date. Therefore, the Agency tonight is considering adoption of corldemnation action. Mr. Ludecke requested a postponement. The Assistnat City Manager for Economic Development replied that the Agency, as part of its formal process under Redevelopment Law and the Redevelopment Plan, is required to seek owner participation opportunity. Pursuant to those legal require- ments, the Agency has done that; the owner declined. Therefore the Agency has gone ahead with Requests for Qualifications from developers and has selected eight developers for that particular corner; and has prepared and sent to the developers Requests for Proposals for that entire corner. The deadline date was October 27, 1989. The Agency has received two proposals for the entire corner and the Agency staff is now in process of reviewing these proposals prior to submitting them to the Agency for review, From staff's point of view, the request for postponement is coming very late in the process to the point where the Agency is moving well ahead of such proposals from the owners. Staff's recommendation istnat the Agency proceed with the consideration of the Resolution of Necessity tonight. In response to a question from Mr. Ludecke, staff gave a brief outline of the time frame concerning this redevelopment and noted also that one of the I developers who submitted a proposal already had a prospective tenant for the site. Chairman Chandler declared the hearing CLOSED. It was then MOVED by Member Lojeski, seconded by Member Young and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that Resolution No. ARA-144 be and it is hereby ADOPTED. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Members Gilb, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Chandler None None The two Disposition and Development Agreements between the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency and Emkay Development Company require that the Agency deliver "clean" soil for Emkay to build upon. The Agency (and the City with respect to the November 17, 1987 DDA) is required to execute and deliver to the developer a Soils Condition Warranty prior to close of escrow. To date, the City Manager/Executive Director has signed 11/7 /89 -8- r 1~57 - ?7 I Sf. AMEND. NO. 2 DDA - ARA & STANLEY w. GRIBBLE & ASSOC. (APPROVED) r lJ.-qry-)<2J I Sg. ADJOURNMENT 6. 7, 7a. HEARING SCHEDULED (Nov, 21, 1989) 31:0234 Soils Condition Warranties for Parcels I, 2, 3, D and the S6uplantation properties, A warranty has not been signed for the remaining parcel (Kiewit- East). The Chandler Group has requested that the City Council/Redevelop- ment Agency provide a copy of the resolution authorizing the City Manager/ Executive Director to sign the Soils 'Condition Warranties. The Resolution has been reviewed and approved by the Agency Special. 'Counsel and Agency Counsel/City Attorney, The Assistant City Manager for Economic Development then read the title of Resolution No.ARA-145, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE ARCADIA REDEVELOP- MENT AGENCY RATIFYING THE EXECUTION OF THE SOILS CONDITION'WARRANTIES FOR THE EMKAY DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMEI!'TS (11/17/87 and 1/5/88)"; It was then MOVED by Member Harbicht, seconded by Member Gilb and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that Resolution No. ARA-145,.he and it is hereby ADOPTED, AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Members Gilb, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Chandler None None The original Disposition and Development Agreement for the Souths ide , Project requires the developer to complete construction of Parcel D within two years after .the close of escrow (11/10/87). Although Stanley W. Gribble and Associates have been acting in good faith in their efforts to find a restaurant tenant, they do not yet have a signed:lease for the Parcel, and have requested a time extension of one year. Staff and Agency Special Counsel, Steve Deitsch, have reviewed this request and concur that a one year extension is justified. Amendment No.2 to the DDA was therefore developed to grant the one year extension, and at the same time protect the Agency by setting forth specific remedies in case the Developer does not substantially complete construction of Parcel D within the one year extension period. The main points of Amendment No. 2 are outlined in staff report dated November 7, 1989. In reply to a question from Member Harbicht, staff explained in detail the "Adjustment of Initial Disposition Price", Item 4, staff report dated November 7, 1989, It was then MOVED by Member Young, seconded by Member Harbicht and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency APPROVE Amendment No. 2 to the Disposition and Development Agreement by and between the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency and Stanley W. Gribble and Associates, and AUTHORIZE execution by the Executive Director, subject to minor revisions approved by the Agency Counsel and Executive Director. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Members Gilb, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Chandler None None The meeting ADJOURNED to 7:00 p, m., November 21, 1989, CITY COUNCIL RECONVENED CONSENT ITEMS PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 21, 1989 to adopt 1988 editions of the Uni~orm Building, Unifo~_ Plumbing, Uniform Mechanical, Uniform Housing Codes and 1987 National Electric ~qde, including all changes additions and deletions as manda~ed by the State of California. 11/7/89 -9- l" 7b. HEARING SCHEDULED (Nov. 21, 1989) 7c. CONTRACT AWARD (Tree Maint. Proj. Var. Sts. - Job No. 660) t,}~ y. f)~ 7d. EQUIPMENT PURCHASE (Water Meters - Neptune Water Div.) (Public Works) , [~t ~AZ f' D 8. 9. 9a. ORDINANCE NO. 1915 (ADOPTED) /1 '!'Ie C\.:?r ~: t--~ 31:0235 PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 21, 1989 to consider appeal to Planning Commission's decision to the City Council filed on October 31, 1989 by Yee-Horn Shuai, an attorney, on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Ching Huei Lin, property owners, 1150 Fallen Leaf (MC 89-074). AWARDED contract to the low bidder, United Pacific Corporation, in the amount of $77,540.00 for the trimming/topping of 720 trees, Job No. 660. Funds in the amount of $84,225.00 have been budgeted in the 1989-90 Public Works budget to cover the cost of engineering, inspection, I contingencies and the contract amount. All informalities in the bid or bidding process to be waived. The Mayor and City Clerk are AUTHORIZE to execute a contract in form approved by the City Attorney. Councilmember Lojeski inquired if there is a reason why the bids for this job were considerably higher than the estimate. Staff explained that the estimate provided was based on the estimate of the work done last year. Judging trimming of the trees is very difficult -- it is not like a normal public works project. In this case, staff judged incorrectly. Councilmember Lojeski inquired if Public Works had used United Pacific Corp. before. Staff replied they had a few years ago. They feel there is no problem with United Pacific. AWARDED contract for the purchase of Wacer Meters to the low bidder, Neptune Water Division, Schlumberger Industries, Inc., in the total amount of $50,320.68. Funds for the purchase of the water meters are budgeted in Water Division Fund FY 1989-90 in the amount of $50,000. An appropriation is not requested for the additional $320.68 as the Water Division may not purchase the entire bid amount and is not obligated to do so under the contract. ALL OF THE ABOVE CONSENT ITEMS WERE APPROVED ON MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER GILB, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER YOUNG AND CARRIED ON ROLL CALL VOTE AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers Gilb, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Chandler None None CITY MANAGER It was MOVED by Councilmember Gilb, seconded by Councilmember Young and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that Don Gathers be appointed to the Senior Citizens' Commission to fill out the term of Mel Thiele to June 30, 1991; and that Pat Loechner be appointed to the Senior Citizens' Commission to fill out the term of Al Citro to June 30, 1990. I AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers . None None Gilb, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Chandler , CITY ATTORNEY The City. Attorney presented, explained the content and read the title of Ordinance No. 1915, entitled, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA APPROVING ZONE CHANGE Z-89-003, ADDING AN "H" (HIGH RISE) OVERLAY TO THE EXISTING CPD-l ZONING DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 324 N. SECOND AVENUE". It was MOVED by Councilmember Gilb, seconded by Councilmember Young and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that Ordinance No. 1915 be and it is hereby ADOPTED. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Gilb, None None Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Chandler 11/7/89 -10- 9b. RESOLUTION NO. 5508 (ADOPTED) f \j, 91 ' P 7 I 9c. CLAIM OF C. ' YOUNG-SOaK ~ ' KIM & JOANNA YUMI KIM (DENIED) 9d. y'. CLAIM OF J. FAKEHANY (DENIED) 10. 11. LOJESKl (Throwaway Advertising Material) 31:0236 The City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the title of Resolution No. 5508. entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE ARCADIA CITY COUNCIL RATIFYING THE EXECUTION OF THE SOILS CONDITION WARRANTY FOR THE EMKAY DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (11/17/87)". It was MOVED by Councilmember Harbicht, seconded by Councilmember Young and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that Resolution No. 5508 be and it is hereby ADOPTED. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers Gilb, Harbicht, None None Lojeski, Young and Chandler On recommendation of the City Attorney, the claim of Young-Sook Kim and Joanna Yumi Kim was DENIED on MOTION by Councilmember Gilb, seconded by Councilmember Harbicht and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers Gilb, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Chandler None None On recommendation of the City Attorney, the claim of J. Fakehany was DENIED on MOTION by Councilmember Lojeski, seconded by Councilmember Gilb and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers Gilb, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Chandler None None MATTERS FROM STAFF None MATTERS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS Noted throwaway advertising materials left on his auto and at vi his home. He is sure that staff notifies people responsible for this sort of advertising about Arcadia regulations, but it seems to keep appearing. Is this not in violation of some litter law? And if so, why not go after them? The City Attorney responded that they may be in violation of more than one ordinance, but the informa- tion has to get to the enforcement body, either the City Attorney or Business License. Usually an initial warning is given. Legal action can be taken if repeated. (Earthquake V In the last City Newsletter there was a nice article written about the Preparedness) earthquake preparedness program. He suggests that in the future the elected body be included in such sessions. Ifcommunications..ere down in an emergency and staff not available, during non-working hours, some- one would have to take charge. The Councilmembers would, hopefully, be around the community; they should be informed and instructed as to the ongoing functions. He feels he needs to know what his responsibilities would be from the City's standpoint. I (Htg. Dr. & First Av. Paving) / Councilmember Lojeski stated, in part, that he understands that CDBG grant money has been used in the downtown area for brick paving. The intersection of Huntington Drive and First Avenue was to be finished after the development there was completed. Staff replied that this matter will come back to Council. It has to do with the reconstruction of Huntington Drive, as well as the redevelopment on the North side of Huntington Drive. 11/7/89 -11- LOJ ESKI (Parkfng J Codes) HARlllCIlT (Parking Spaces) (Cily .; Newsletu;:r) (Arcadia Beautiful Samsn. - No. of Hemb"rsj 31:0237 Councilmember Lojeski aiso requested staff to look at and readdress the parking codes in the City, in terms of what the requirements are in other communities compared to Arcadia; are we appropriately addressing, for example, restaur:ltlt requirements -- square footage VB. seating? Is the requirement [or medical and dental too severe at 6 per 1,000? Should we even have compact spaces? j Agreed lhat he would be interested in seeing a staff rcport on the compact parking question. I Asked who put togcther the City Ncwslettcr and was answered that staff did this; various departments contribute articles pertaining to their responsibilities. Councilmember Harbicht complimented staff on an excellent job. Alex McIntyre can take credit for contributing a great deal tu the last Newsletter. j Councilmember Ilarbicht reported that the Arcadia Beautiful Commission would like to increase the size of the Commission; currently at seven members; recently reduced from eleven to nine to seven. He is not in favor of this increase. Their reasons for the increase request is that they have some labor intensive duties they undertake in connection with the Arcadia Beautiful Awards. He told the members that perhaps they could recruit help with this project, perhaps an ad hoc subcommittee. Council- members Gilb and Yl>ung agreed the number should remain at seven. J (S. F. Re 1 j e f He commended the Fixe IJepartment for their contribution to the earthquake Contrif)IJticJfl) relief fund in San Francisco. (Boarded-up Bl dg, - .j Htg.Dr. ) GILB ~ (Earthquake Preparedness) (Size of Homes/Lots Text. Amend.) ~s\' On Huntington Drive, north side of the street between First .and Second Avenues, there is a building with scaffolding and boarded-up doors. Staff noted that thIs is the Landsperger building which was damaged in the earthquake. Staff has been in contact with the owner and they are alnlost finished with the structural improvements and will begin tIle cosmet.ic improvements soon. Councilmember Harbicht said the plans for this building arc great, but the City is spending a lot of money in the downtown area and has he en successful in getting some of the other businesses to upgrade; this one looks terrible. He would like to see this project move allcad. Commended staff on the work done on the earthquake preparedness program. Hoto/ever, if the earthquake had been here instead of San Francisco at 5:07 p. m., nonc of them would have been in town. The City Manager replied that the heart of the emergency staff is here and on duty 24 hours a day -- the immediate response is made by the Police and Fire crews ... these people are trained and prepared. Also, in an emergency, there would be an automatic recall... everybody would try to get back to the City. In reply to Councilmember Young's question, the proper response for the Council would be, as soon as family is safe, to try to get to the EOC with the rest of the top management team. Council- member Gilb wondered if people in the community were making their own preparations. The City Hanager noted that a Fire Battalion Chief or a Police Lieutenant would probably be tunning the emergency operation for the first several hours. I With respect to material from the Planning Director re. building size vs. lot area, requested report. The Planning Director responded that they are getting plans for large residences on small lots. Even though they comply with Code some of them are quite large. Perhaps there should be some regulations establishing a graduated-type scale for Arcadia so that the maximum total floor area would be tied to the size of the lot. It was MOVED by Councilmember Young, seconded by Councilmember Gilb and CARRIED to DIRECT staff to prepare an appropriate text amendment for a public hearing before the Planning Commission. Those plans already in plan check will be granted permits. 11/7 / 89 -12- HARBICHT GILB I (Memory of Melvin E. Thiele) LOJESKI (In Memory'; of Vasilius Halkas) 12. ADJOURNMENT (Nov. 21, 1989 - 7:00 p.m.) ATTEST: I 31:0238 Councilmember Harbicht noted that when this came before the Planning Commission previously, several meetings were held with developers and realitors, etc. and eventually tabled; perhaps a study session should be held for anyone interested. Staff noted that the Planning Commission hearing should be noticed in the newspaper along with other coverage and Planning should also contact other interested parties who spoke to the issue earlier. .;"1 would like to close the meeing tonight in memory of Melvin E. Thiele, beloved father of Susan Tyler and Gary Thiele, who passed away October 22, 1989 at the age of 80. He was recently appointed, as a matter of fact, last June, by the Arcadia City Council to the Senior Citizens' Commission. He was very active in the Arcadia Senior Men's Club arid the Arcadia Friendship Club. He also served as a volunteer for the American Red Cross, Meals on Wheels program, as well as many other related programs. Cremation was planned and he was buried at sea. In lieu of flowers, memorial gifts are asked to be sent to the American Red Cross. So, along with Doctor Lojeski, I would like to close the meeting in memory of Mel Thiele." "I would like to adjourn tonight's meeting in memory of Vasilius Halkas, the father of Kay Fryer, one of our City employees. Mr. Halkas was a restauranteur for many, marly years in Santa. Barbara. He was well over 100 years old and, I understand, he was a native of Greece and at the time of his passing, he was living in Yuba City and I think appropriate other information as it comes forth can be added to the minutes, but I would like to add him, also, to adjourn tonight's meeting in his memory". At 10:00 p. m., the meeting ADJOURNED to a CLOSED SESSION, RECONVENED and ADJOURNED at 10:lS'p. m. to 7:00 p. m., November 21, 1989, in the Chamber Conference Room to conduct the business of the Council and Agency and CLOSED SESSION, if any, necessary to discuss personnel, litigation and evaluation of properties. A Alford, 11/7/89 -13-