Loading...
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