HomeMy WebLinkAboutNOVEMBER 24,1970
I j
,
CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS ARE TAPE RECORDED AND ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
.
I
I
INVOCATION
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
FASHION PARK
HEARING
-f- /1f:) I"
NOTE
1
PROPONENTS
(SULLIVAN)
(LAMBIEL)
(WILSON)
19:7751
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 24, 1970
The City Council met in an adjourned regular session on November 24,
1970, at 7:30 p.m.,in the Foothill Jewish Temple Center, 550 South
Second Avenue.
Rev. Leslie G. Strothern, Arcadia Congregational Church
Councilman Don W. Hage
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Considine, Rage, Helms, Butterworth
None
On behalf of the City Council and the citizens of the community,
Mayor Butterworth expressed appreciation to Rabbi Sofer and the
Temple for making available its excellent facilities for the
hearing on Fashion Park.
He then reaffirmed the procedure as outlined by Mayor Pro Tempore
Helms at the November lO public hearing and noted that the subject
matter is indeed the most important which has come before Council,
and the community is entitled to the thoughtful, careful and
serious deliberations of Council.
, '
CONTINUED - Planning Commission Resolutions Nos. 7l2, 713 and 715
concerning action taken on the application of the Santa Anita
Consolidated Ltd., l) Zone change from R-l to C-2 H & D on property
on the northeast corner of Huntington Drive and Baldwin Avenue,
2) Denial of its request for permission to construct two l2 story
office buildings - this decision has been appealed by the applicant
and 3) Granting a Conditional Use Permit to allow automobile accessory
service centers to be located in the proposed regional shopping center.
PRESENTATIONS ARE HEREINAFTER SUMMARIZED. FULL TEXT AND TESTIMONY ARE
TAPE RECORDED AND ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK.
Edward J. Sullivan, l538 Highland Oaks Drive, spoke as a resident
and a local businessman in part - that as yet he has not talked with
anyone opposed to the center - almost everyone he has encountered
felt it would be to the best interest of the community as it would
favorably affect the economic and tax situation - that along with the
freeway it would enhance property values and he believed it would
help other businesses in the downtown area.
Leo Lambiel, 952 Palo Alto Drive, spoke briefly in favor of the
proposed development and felt it would add to the esthetics of the
community and sustain the tax rate.
Alfred W. Wilson, l007 Portola Drive, spoke in favor as he thought it
would be an asset to the City as a whole.
11- 24-70
- 1 -
(BLACK)
/,/""
,
./} ~,,4.... t ,_'
r. , J/.
(BELLIN)
(MULLER)
(BOLLER)
(SPURGEON)
(KELLER)
(BEVERLY)
(GORJANS)
OPPONENTS
(LEAVITT)
19 :775l (a)
Louis Black, 414 Columbia Road, stated in part that he resides one
block from the May Company and close to the traffic generated thereby
and has not seen any of the traffic problems which were thought would
be created if the May Company were located on Michillinda between
Huntington Drive and Sunset Boulevard. He was in favor not 'only because
of the economics which is indicated by his tax bill but for the benefit
of the City.
Jayne Bellin, 832 W. Huntington Drive, noted that when there is progress
there is change. She felt there is much Fashion Park can bring in pres-
tige, beauty, convenience and increased revenue and felt petty personal
problems should be put aside; that now is the time to put the property
in question to its best use which in her opinion would be the subject
development.
.,11., Mo11", 161 ,.1.",. "'0', ....' ." .,.,.,., .; . '.0.' m.'.', III
stated in part that tourism is one of the largest activities in the state
and in the present dwindling economy the City must look to the future and
referred to Pasadena with its new Hilton Hotel and others; that his
business is going to be very competitive and that a more interesting
approach must be made to the tourists. He noted the 5% occupancy tax
which would increase to the City and with reference to the proposed employ-
ment of an Economic Developer which the City Council has authorized, he
felt Fashion Park is offering what is being sought through increased
revenue from the proposed center. He asked for favorable consideration.
Ardene Boller, 50 N. First Avenue, stated in part that during his 35
years in the City he has known of many planned developments which did
not materialize for lack of funds; that the subject one is the most
exciting one the City has been offered and was convinced it would be
of benefit to the entire City and boost the downtown area in particular.
Henry Spurgeon, ll27 El Monte Avenue, stated in part that Fashion Park
seems to be a very desirable development and that the l2 story office
buildings should be permitted; that high rise buildings would help
the economy and are attractive and lend prestige; that to deny a
zoning which is timely would be to risk development in the future as
urbanization is inevitable; that when the air pollution problem is
solved mountains will once again frame the City and asked Council not
to overlook the opportunity.
R. W. Keller, llOl Catalpa, felt the proposed development would be a
credit to the City; that in his opinion the largest argument would be
traffic which could be solved through planned control; that the same
opposition was voiced when the May Company application was being con-
sidered; that the tax structure will benefit and urged favorable
consideration.
John Beverly, 626 Fairview Avenue, associated with the race track
jockeys and the horsemen, was concerned with the reference to the
survival factor of the track unless some new source of income were
forthcoming; that his livelihood would be affected in the event
the track were to close; that he would rather lose the portion of
land now devoted to the training track; that he sees an opportunity
to retain racing in the city if Fashion Park is approved.
1
James Gorjans, 212 Cabrillo Road, felt the anticipated traffic in the
Village area would not become a problem and was not too concerned in
that regard; that he was however concerned with property valuations
and could not see where Fashion Park would bring about property de-
preciation and would hope that it would have the opposite effect.
No one else desiring to speak in favor at this time, Mayor Butterworth
called for those in opposition.
Charles Leavitt, resident of the City of Chino, and current President
of the Horsemens' Benevolent and Protective Association, stated in part
that there are good arguments on both sides; that there is one concept
he hopes Council will keep in mind - does it want to see racing con-
tinued at Santa Anita or does it want a shopping center...the fact that
- 2 _ ll-24-70
, '
d,..,l I
.-t- . '/:' ~.t- "",.:>:'"'
'- ~.;j7
\ '.f"_,
.'
(ERDMAN)
I ,':,! .r J'_
(CARD)
..
,~ :' Of I 'c
. - -,.
1
. ~
"
, ;1'
"f'"",
rf. . ~., .,.....
~
19:775l (b)
the officials of ~he track have declared the training track and its stalls
surplus with no plans for replacing it is to him an indication that it is
the beginning of the end of racing in this City. He referred to the remarks
of Mr. Strub that racing will continue as long as it is economically feasi-
ble and the most economically feasible step would be to construct a shopping
and residential complex on the property. In conclusion he commented that
there are vacancies in the downtown and West Arcadia business districts
now and suggested. helping those already here.
H. Richard Erdman, 818 Monte Verde Drive, President of the Rancho Santa
Anita Residents Association, reported on a poll taken of its members -
the result was 225 against and 62 in favor of the shopping center as
planned, and stated in part that it is his personal opinion that it is
a good idea but a bad plan. He referred to the promise of a high class
C shopping center and yet at the same time an application is involved for
an automobile accessory service center which, in his opinion, is incon-
sistent. He noted that the applicant has not made known which stores
~re to locate in the center and at this stage it is unknown just what the
traffic situation will be; that with the freeway the traffic pattern will
have to be reconstructed and asked Council to develop such a pattern before
. any approval of the total plan...that agreements are better than promises.
In conctusion he stated further in part that'if the complex were located
on the opposite side of the track it would be to the advantage of the
residents and that should the track cease to exist and it became low
density housing, it would be more logical to have the center on the
opposite' side and on behalf of the association urged Council to deny the
application as presented.
Michael Card, 816 Victoria Drive, representing a majority of the members
of the Santa Anita Village Association, explained the procedure in taking
a poll of the members to determine those against and in favor of Fashion Park;
o~ of 450 homes~ 190 ballots were returned opposed,9l in favor; he reviewed
SOme of the comments made on the ballot when returned for tabulation - those
against were generally very strong in'their feelings for a variety of
reasons - those voting in favor qualified by saying they were not in favor
of the high rise office buildings. He continued that the development would
make Arcadia a focal point and is contrary to the historical philosophy of
a city of homes; the high rise structures would represent a major step
in changing the lifestyle of the community and would set a precedent for
additional high rise; a sharp increase in traffic would affect Hugo Reid
Drive and Old Ranch Road in particular and would create a hazard for the
children in the area.
W~th reference to increased sales volume he was of the opinion that
Fashion'Park would have a significant effect on other merchants within
the City and he did not think shoppers from the peripherial boundaries
would shop anywhere but in the mall, all of which would tend to degrade
the West Arcadia Hub and compound the difficulties already experienced
in the downtown area. Careful studies by,the Architectural Review
'Board of the Association hav~ indicated that shopping centers of the
proposed type bring about a sharp increase in the crime rate of the
area; mall developments are typically meeting places for undesirable
elements and in many cases the residential areas adjacent thereto are
also, affected.
,With reference to increased revenue for the city and Ithe schools, he
st~ted' in part that there is no assurance that sales tax revenue will
continue to be allocated by the State to the point of purchase rather
than to the point of need...a change of allocation appears to be very
Possible...and that there are no assurances that the balance of the
race'track property will not be developed with high density apartment
projects which would negate t~e' advertised tax benefits.
'.' ~ "
In conclusion
'03.$ a suburban
ltving within
living here;
Mr. Card urged.Council to preserve the City's heritage
residential community; to maintain the quality of
the City which many residents cite: as their reasons for
and to' deny the subject resolutions.
- 3-
11-24-70
(ROYSHER) ,',
,,/ / Vj?I.''/
- /' (/ I
PLAN
ORGANIZATION
(MOSCARET)
(PEARCE)
(MOSCARET)
(CLARK)
19 :775l (c)
Mrs. Hudson Roysher, l784 S. Santa Anita Avenue, expressed concern about
the traffic and noted how it has increased since the completion of the
freeway to Santa Anita Avenue; that there will be more as it is continued
farther west. She mentioned two aspects of the problem to which there is
no price tag,..the first is the vast amount of uninterrupted open space
in the heart of the City and the second is the unique sense of community
spirit which exists among the property owners in the Rancho and Village,
which areas are a cross section of the bes~ type of stable, dedicated
homeowners and unlike many communities which are nothing more than bedroom
service areas for the urban center, totally lacking in involvement with
local affairs. She referred to the Arboretum, Race Track, City Hall,
Hospital, County Park, Chamber of Commerce, Schools, Churches and other 1
facilities the like of which she had only seen abroad in a similar
community - and cautioned that there is danger of losing the priceless
heritage of the city.
Gene Moscaret, 1125 Encanto Drive, explained how the organization "PLAN"
came into being - that it was aLmost a reaction situation to endeavor to
meet the needs of the residents and its members feel deeply about the
proposed project - that they will try to get their message across and
when they have done all they can within the bounds of good sense it then
becomes the burden of Council. He explored the background and profession
of each of the speakers and submitted that the problem is not immediate -
it is the long range - the plan - the looking ahead now - because once
the decision has been made it is cast in stone. Presentatio~s on behalf
of "Planll ensued.
Charles Pearce, 936 Volante Drive, (Real Estate Division of a major oil
company) spoke concerning the statement of the applicant that Fashion Park
is essential to the financial welfare of Santa Anita Consolidated, Ltd.,
and submitted a summary of operations which he said appears to portray a
healthy condition; that there is nothing in the report which indicates
that any type of shopping center is essential to the future success of
the corporation. He then referred to some of the contents of the afore-
mentioned report (on file in the office of the City Clerk ) - income
before Federal income tax increased by more than l5 percent over the
prior year, however, the lO percent Federal surcharge which was effective
for the entire year reduced net income by $242,000 or 25~ per share - that
1969 was an outstanding year and through the years it has proven to be
a sound investment for its long-time shareholders and observed that the
original share valued at $5,000 would be valued at approximately $200,000
on today's market - that the Corporation has paid its stockholders almost
34 million dollars in dividends since 1935.
He continued that the Corporation has reached an agr~ement to acquire
Robert H. Grant Company (real estate development) which will have a 24
percent interest in the race track - that said agreement permits the
Grant Company to obtain additional shares based on a favorable performance
record over a 5 year period, which eventually could give that company 39
percent of Santa Anita. He stated in part that the result of this is 1
that the effective control of Santa Anita would change from the present
situation and would become a real estate company; that the ambitions
and plans for a real estate development company concerning the race track
could vary tremendously from the historical situation.
Mr. Moscaret read a telegram from Jockey John Sellers, Director of the
Jockey's Association, urging Council to deny the application as in his
opinion it would mean the end of racing in the City. Mr. Moscaret
expanded on the concern of the horsemen that the loss of the training
facilities and introduction of the shopping center would inevitably
bring forth the demise of racing as a tax generating revenue to the
conununity.
Mrs. Everett Clark, 324 N. Old Ranch Road, (former teacher and mother),
stated in part that before her family moved to the community they investi-
gated many cities and chose Arcadia because of its fine homes, excellent
schools and business scaled to serve the residents. When she first heard
of the proposed project she attended meetings with interest, but careful
attention to the plans dimmed her hopes that the development would enhance
life in the City - that she has heard that an increased tax revenue would
- 4 - ll-24-70
/, //7/7
, ,~ . .." . -, r
I
(NICHOLSON)
, ,
(BACKUS)
1
19:775l (d)
"
support and nurture that way of life - but a multi-million dollar
regional shopping center with towering high rise office buildingsU,
attracting thousands of cars belies the values it claims its
revenues will subsidize...She expressed concern about taxes but does
not see where in the long run the proposal could succeed in reducing
them.
J"
Mrs. Clark stated further in part that it would increase traffic
problems in an area where children either walk or ride bicycles in
the streets; that their safety is being compromised for increased
revenue to the City. In conclusion she stated in part that she
supports the orderly expansion of the local retail centers as the
needs of the community dictate. ..that she opposes rezoning R-l land
for another commercial enterprise... that change and its' direction
must and can be controlled...that development should be sought which
would reaffirm and enrich the values which undergird the City rather
than to erode them and that the subject proposal will not serve this
end.
Leo Nicholson, 958 Hugo Reid Drive, (registered civil and professional
engineer with the State) stated in part that he had been asked by PLAN
to evaluate the traffic problems which would be generated if Fashion
Park were to develop; that he had reviewed the traffic analysis pre-
pared'by Gruen'& Associates and the Santa Anita Fashion Park traffic
analysis prepared by Linscott Association. With reference to Baldwin
Avenue he noted that before it was closed, about 6000 cars used the street
north of Huntington Drive - that when the freeway opens the traffic
pattern will change - the large volume patterns will be north-south.
The east-west pattern will diminish slightly then am in time revert
back to its present volume. The Gruen report estimated that in 1976
when the freeway has been open for a few years, 25,600 cars per day
would USe Baldwin Avenue between Huntington Drive and Colorado Boule-
vard. If Fashion Park is approved there would be 9,600 more cars - a
total of 35,200 cars per day... which means that about 35 percent of the
traffic,would be generated by Fashion Park. He hoped the estimates are
correct but it is not uncommon to guess wrong in traffic studies and
referred to the case of the Santa Monica Freeway which was supposed to
carry l60,000 to l70,000 cars...it is now carrying over 260,000. He
submitted and quoted from newspaper and magazine articles indicating
that traffic increases as sales increase - that even on a Sunday, when
all stores 'are closed, as many as 75,000 window shoppers have visited a
center. In conclusion he stated in part that in his opinion if Fashion
Park is a success more building would go into the track and traffic
would then double.
, .~
Robert A. Backus, 816 Balboa Drive, (Marketing engineer) asked Council
to'preserve the pride of ownership by retaining the City's suburban
residential characteristics; that this is the true goal. He expressed
concern with progress in the city, the changes taking place and those
proposed; that it is impossible to have progress without change, however,
progress implies a goal which is the basis of his concern. He propounded
the following. Does the requested zone change and Fashion Park itself
mean progress? Is urbanization the goal? Isn't pride of ownership the
difference between suburban and urban atmospheres.. .the latter does not
induce"the feeling of pride. What will be the effects of a zone change,
with its Fashion Park, on the future of the race track property when
racing is no longer profitable? He noted that Mr. Contini commented
recently on the lack'of proper planning for the future...who referred to
it a~ a crime of omission.
He continued by referring to city taxpayer's money which has been used
to purchase land in the downtown area for the purpose of high rise office
building construction - that is it progress to allow high rise office
buildings in Fashion Park which would, virtually eliminate the need for
11- 24-70
- 5 -
,,'
vi, I }-/'/
RECESS
(KOCH)
(GLEASON)
'l9:775l (e)
same in the downtown location. With reference to air pollution and traffic
congestion, two of the main problems, he stated in part that the City
Manager has stated the City is taking steps toward solving these problems
by the conversion of city vehicles to natural gas. Is it progress then
to add 20,000 more cars per day to the problem? He noted that about 35
years ago Pasadena decided its goal was to become a high quality regional
center to serve the San Gabriel Valley. They accomplished the goal at a
tremendous price in urbanization and resulting blighted residential areas
where property values have reached new lows. Pasadena now admits it was
a mistake on the part of city planners at that time. He questioned if
Arcadia will follow Pasadena in this regard. He concluded by asking
Council to disapprove the zone change application and stop the urbaniza-
tion of the City.
Following a 5 minute recess, the meeting reconvened at 9: lO p.m.
1
Mrs. Pauline Koch, l206 S. Gramercy Place, Los Angeles, (Assistant to
the Urban and Regional Planning Professor at the University of Southern
California) referred to articles (filed with the City Clerk) concerning
the impact growth and its consequences with relation to increase in all
city services as well as adding to the air, noise and traffic pollution,
heighten congestion of population and increase the crime rate within the
City. She felt there has been no evidence that the tax base will be
broadened. That should Fashion Park become a reality the City'would
Cease to be a residential community with much open space. She mentioned
possible other uses for the property, such as an urban farm, and urged
Council to preserve the natural beauty and to seek creative alternatives.
William Gleason, 90l Monte Verde Drive, (Corporate Loan Officer) stated
in part that the residents are being asked to accept a change in their
lifestyle because the assets of Santa Anita are not earning a return on
the investment as deemed appropriate by stockholders. That the point has
been made that the subject land is surplus to racing operations and while
advisors to the City suggest another more desirable location on track
property it is said this would inconvenience the track. He referred to
supporting information in which the applicant estimates there will be
2 or 3 department stores in the proposed mall and noted that there are
already 27 stores in the retail trade area serving San Gabriel Valley.
That it has been said Robinson's, Bullock's and Magnin's would locate
in the center, but that it is unlikely to him because of proximity to
their other stores. He noted a recent marketing research study which
pointed out that 88 percent of the consumers surveyed, including Los
Angeles and Orange Counties, continue to patronize stores in which they
have previously shopped...Arcadia lies well within the trade area served
by the Pasadena stores which have recently completed an exhaustive study
prepared by the Economic Research Association which indicates that another
major department store could be supported and justified in that City and
they are taking steps to encourage,its development. He explored the
record of retail sales in Arcadia for 1969 and referred to supporting
information in the hands of Council at this time. He felt that because 1
of Pasadena's identity as a retail trade center the consumers would, in
any event, return there to shop and was of the opinion that there has
not been any really good support presented as to the need for the subject
cent er.
He continued in part that the trend during the last 20 years has been
away from regional centers and more toward the suburban stores, i. e.,
Robinson's, Bullock's and the like in the valley...that it is now being
said this trend is changing...the applicant is seeking to do something
decidedly different that what has been done here in the past. If un-
successful the residents would suffer the consequences. He asked
Council to request statistical support used in the studies made by both
the Real Estate Research Corporation and Economic Research Corporation
concerning concentration of customers and where they shop.
11- 24-70
- 6 -
J:' \ ~.
f( / ~(~~J'
I
19 :775l (f)
Ii: r
He returned iri comment to the possibility of another major department
store locating in Pasadena, which if developed, could impair the
projected growth of the subject center and referred to downtown Los
Angeles which by 1973 will have most of the high quality shops --
and, considering the freeways, consumers. will find that area as accessi-
ble as Arcadia. It is the contention of PLAN that there is no demon-
strative need for Fashion Park. That while taxes have increased
significantly in the last 10 years personal income has risen even faster;
the illustration of the benefits to the city that are proposed to be
forthcoming from the shopping center - versus a residential development -
does not provide for a shopping center by itself. This should be
emphasized he stated because the high rise buildings would account for
a significant pprtion of the increase in property tax. He referred to
the Larry Smith & Associates' study of the economic loss and benefits
however no provision is made for the tremendous increase in property
values and related taxes which would result with a development into a
residential community - that if as suggested new homes were constructed
on Santa Anita land, the West Arcadia and downtown business sections
would greatly increase in value occasioned by the need of expanded
retail and consumer services.
In conclusion he stated in part that the information submitted with the
request supports the application and dismisses the full effect such a
development would have on residents; that the projections are highly
optimistic and it was his belief that the City would realize substantially
greater benefits from a residential development of the subject property
than for the retail trade. He urged Council to disapprove the application.
(CAMPBELL) Robert Campbell, 316 Cabrillo Road, (Engineer with the Edison Company)
referred to a brochure released by the applicant indicating various
benefits to the City including convenience of shopping, increase in
property. values, city and school revenue, etc., He stated in part that
", a realtor with no interest in the City had told the Village Association
that the proposed development would bring increased traffic and parking -
using residential streets - and would make the area much less desirable
and would tend to depreciate property values. Mr. Campbell felt the
track is not in a financial bind, nor is the city due to this and former
City Councils holding the tax rate at a low level. He continued in part
that the proponents naturally will present the most favorable factors
and referred to the assessed valuation' of the property in question; that
if the development is approved there will be pressure for further
'commercial zoning and that growth is not necessarily a .Jactor in the
reduction of taxes; He expressed concern that the crime rate would
increase' and the cost of police protection per capita, and that it is
difficult for him to see how there would be any improveme~t in the
'tax situation; that any savings which have been proposed may eventually
'disappear leaving the problem of ecological environment.
. .......
(CULVERWELL) Mrs. Joseph.Culverwell, l032 Hampton Road, ~Housewife and mother) stated
in part that she feels the development would lead to the destruction of
the city and what' it stands for.. .that this Council, was elected because
of its platforms which included low density population growth, exclusion
of high rise development, perpetuation of the residential image of the
city and referred to the ordinances which Council has adopted to protect
,the residential zoning. She referred to the struggle against air,
noise and water pollution; that if Council believes in these things it
could not approve the project...property val~es.remain high in the
community because the rural atmosphere has been maintained, schools
,are excellent and there is room to stretch. She concluded by asking
Council to defend what is here now; that the elected officials are
being counted On to stop the spread of commercialization because the
ruinization of a city cannot be justified by using an economic basis as
a yardstick.
1
11-24-70
- 7 -
(SAELID)
/
1,
, ,
I
/ .,
( STECK)
19:775l (g)
Jack Saelid, 82l Balboa, (Xerox Corporation official) stated in part
that he is proud of the community, and what Council is now considering is
just not simply another application for ~ shopping'center; that its
decisions will determine whether it is still committed to maintaining
a residential community or whether the city will now become a noise,
smog-bound, traffic congested city - and another victim of urban over-
development at the hands of self-serving developers. He referred to
Mr. Contini's remarks pertaining to crimes in planning - failure to
plan ahead,
He continued in part that the applicant is asking Council to decide
on the future of only 65 acres out of a total of 400 acres of land -
that the applicant has claimed he does not have a master plan for
the total acreage when in fact plans do exist but are kept secret;
that he has always maintained the applicant is attempting the first
of a number of phases for the total redevelopment into a Century City
type complex and once it has obtained the zone change very little could
be done, consistent with good planning, to prevent development of the
remainder into similar usage. He felt this to be the reason the
applicant did not choose to place the development elsewhere on the
property where it would be less of a detriment to residents.
1
Mr. Saelid then displayed a projectural depicting the overall devel-
opment of the entire 400 acres and felt it was clear evidence that
recent planning has been done for the total parcel. He observed in
part that it was distasteful to reveal the drawing in this manner
but felt the applicant has repeatedly denied there was any such plan.
In conclusion he asked Council to insist on the whole truth in the
matter; that the residents are entitled to nothing less; that it
could not continue to justify the destruction of the city considering
only economics and neglecting the human values. (Upon inquiry Mr.
Saelid did not reveal the source of the drawing but suggested con-
tacting Gruen & Associates).
Emil Steck, 83l San Simeon Road (Attorney) referred to Section 9267.l.60
of the Zoning Ordinance wherein it is declared "that all of the area con-
tained in the corporate limits of the city is preeminently suited to
residential purposes - together with such related commercial and light
industrial uses necessary to serve the immediate need of th,e residential
area" which translates into this ultimate question - the extent to which
the residents and businessmen of the community must inconvenience them-
selves in order to enable one citizen of the community, who has taken
millions of dollars out of the city, to supplement that income from a
supplemental use of his property. He submitted that the Santa Anita
Consolidated financial statement to its stockholders shows that every
$5000 share of stock since 1935 has produced $200,000 in stock dividends
and $l70,OOO in cash dividends, a return on the investment of 7400 per-
cent or 23l percent annually over the 32 years the track has been
operating. Mr. Steck stated further in part that he feels the State 1
Legislature has treated Santa Anita well and in his opinion would so
continue.~.racing days have been doubled - there are increased purses,
but for every increased purse, Santa Anita will be able to take out of
the bettor's share a like amount; that Santa Anita is not in need - it
is not coming before Council as a citizen seeking an original use of
land.
He continued in part that Santa Anita told the Planning Commission in
a letter dated August 8, 1970, that it ,does not have a master plan
for the development of the property beyond Fashion Park, however, he
submitted that in 1965 Santa Anita tried to acquire Louis Lesser Enter-
Prises, a firm engaged in real estate development, but the two groups
could not get together; that in 1966 Santa Anita made a loan of one
million dollars to the Santiago Development Company, engaged in real
estate development in Santa Ana, with Santa Anita to receive 25 percent
11-24-70
- 8 -
1
1
(APPEL)
19:775l (h)
of the profits, and in 1970 Santa Anita obtained Corporations Commissioner
approval for a plan of reorganization with the Robert H. Grant Corporation,
solely a real estate developer, under which Grant may obtain l50,000 shares
of Santa Anita Preferred stock, later convertible to 600,000 shares of
common stock. Since 1969 there were only 950,369 shares of Santa Anita
Common stock outstanding and that the impact of this deal is obvious. He
read from a 1969 report of Santa Anita to its stockholders (on file in
the office of the City Clerk) wherein it was stated that "Southern
California real estate has long been a primary asset of this Corporation
and will become increasingly important to Santa Anita's operations in the
fugure. Our most valuable property is the 400 acres which compromise
Santa Anita Park."
Mr. Steck stated further in part that the disadvantages to the residents
are obvious - noise, traffic, air pollution, crowds (which will not go
home as the racing crowds do now). Why should the residents or the
businessmen be inconvenienced to enable Santa Anita to make more money
when it is already one of the most affluent corporations and the best
managed in the State. He referred to an article in the local newspaper
that Council should not take over long in approving the project and
noted that the newspaper would stand to receive benefits in the form of
increased advertising revenue. With reference to the speculation that
Fashion Park would bring in revenue for both city and schools without
adding more children, he stated in part that population density increases
school children, but the same density increases shopping business and as
soon as Santa Anita supplies the high rise apart~ents to promote the
dense population, school taxes will rocket to the disadvantage of the
single family dwelling owner.
In summary he stated in part, that Santa Anita does not need the proposed
development; that its intentions are cloudy at best - that it must be
concluded that it has other far reaching plans for real estate develop-
ment - that it is a legal gambling establishment, one which makes money
from people who want to gamble, and submitted that it should not be
permitted to make money from residents of the City who do not wish to
gamble on the future valuation of their homes, especially when Santa
Anita refuses to reveal all of its plans. That no property owner should
have the right to burden his neighbors with two major uses of his property
especially when he has and is making so much money out of the original
use. He asked Council to deny the entire application and that in fairness
to all no further similar application should be considered until total
plans for a single related use of the entire property are submitted. (In
answer to a question Mr. Steck stated in part that his information is
drawn from an examination of public files).
Mrs. William Appel; l049 Panorama, stated in part that the contemplated
stores are not really high quality especially with the inclusion of
automobile accessory service centers. That the Center would only draw
business from the local merchants. The shopper would probably not
leave the mall area and go elsewhere to shop and referred to the size
of the proposed parking lot. She felt residents OWe something to the
local stores which have extended themselves many times in community
service and felt the possible tax savings would be a poor return for a
general downgrading of the commercial and adjoining residential districtso
advised that Council would continue to hear from the
next regular meeting - December l, 1970, at 7:30 p.m.
time, and adjourned the)J;;:;e/2~
~;;:b~ >~ ~~
City Clerk
Mayor Butterworth
opposition at its
same place - same
~
- 9 -
11- 24-70