HomeMy WebLinkAboutJANUARY 19,1971_4
I
I
19:7768-L
FOLLOWING IS A TRANSCRIPT OF THE TAPE RECORDED ,STATEMENT OF
COUNCILMAN EDWARD L. BUTTERWORTH
FASHION PARK
JANUARY 19, 1971
"I want to say on behalf of the Council that we are very grateful to those who
testified. We are especially grateful to the organized groups - the proponents and
opponents - who presen~ed their cases in a very efficient manner and saved us a con-'
siderable amount of time and certainly their preparation reflected considerable
preparation and attention to the details of this vexing problem. And again like the
other Councilmen, I want to thank those of you who have written. Your letters were
not filed. They were read and they were considered by me and by the other Councilmen.
I think in the light of the very intense feelings that we have on this matter we are
all grateful for the temperate language and the gentlemanly conduct which did prevail
at these particular meetings. On the other hand I think it is also fair to say that
the Council has allowed everyone to talk about as long as they had anything to say,
and while I think this may have prolonged the hearings we all felt that it was
important that everyone would have a full and fair opportunity to present their views.
And needless to say our gratitude goes to Mr. Cozad and his staff, and to the City
Clerk, Mrs. Van Maanen, for their diligence and their labor in amassing a prodigious
amount of information and made it available. I suggest that probably everyone of
us had in excess of 2,000 to 2,SOO.pgges.6f information.
"r read in the Los Angeles Times Sunday morning that some unknown person or persons
stated or at least held the belief that this zoning application has been '~reased"
all along and presumably in favor of Santa Anita. In my opinion such a statement
in the absence of some evidence to support it is beneath contempt and brings into
question the moral values and standards of anyone who would hold such a belief in
this community - again in the absence of some evidence to support it. I want to say
very clearly Mr. Jack Saelid's name was mentioned in this article and I want to
particularly say that I am not referring to this very distinguished citizen who
expressly in that article had disavowed holdingiany such intent. I say that because
I couldn't stand to have any misunderstanding on this. But I would say this, that
in the absence of some supporting evidence it is my opinion that it is this kind of
statement that destroys or at least undermines the democratic process at a time when
we are trying to tell our young people that this is the best means yet that we have
discovered for menro govern themselves. I hope very much that you people in this
community, if you hear somebody begin to pass this information, if there m no
evidence to support that, that you will treat it with the contempt which it deserves.
It is impractical to comment upon all of the observations that have been made. They
all deserve an answer. The time does not permit. There are some that I would like
to reflect upon.
"Needless to say, the financial health of the company, if indeed it is allowed, will
guarantee the continuation of racing while the defeat of the proposal might bring it
to an early conclusion. There was contrary testimony that Santa Anita is in excellent
financial health. It is my opinion that the financial posture of Santa Anita has no
relevancy to the application for a change of zone or a conditional ~e permit. The
condition of the applicant's balance sheet, whether he has made or lost money last
year or the last ten years, does not have any relevancy to the merits of this appli-
cation and in my judgment I view this testimony as irrelevant.
"I note that both the proponents and the opponents have taken the position publicly
that individual Councilmen are politically obligated to vote for their viewpoint
because each has represented to the voters that he supports the concept of Arcadia
as a community of homes. The proponents have told us that the burden of property
taxation is becoming intolerable; that residential living is best in a community
that is balanced between commerce and homes: that additional tax revenues from
Fashion Park will release homeowners from an increasing burden of taxation. The
opponents say that when three Councilmen ran for Council positions last April each
represented he would support the concept of Arcadia as the City of homes; that
citizens campaigned for Councilmen on that. basis; that the three of us who were
elected last April are obligated to vote against Fashion Park because of these
political commitments.
EDWARD L. BUTTERWORTH
1-19-71
- 13 -
19: 7768-M
"The fact of the matter is that. during the elections last April, I and the other
elected councilmen stated publicly on repeated occasions that we would not take a
position on Fashion Park; that we had not heard the evidence; that none of us would
prejudice our right to make a decision either for or against the project and after,
and only after, we heard the evidence and considered the matter in the light of the
evidence. I stated this publicly on repeated occasions, and I am not committe~~nor,
at least in my opinion, is any other Councilman committed politically to vote either
for or against Fashion Park. It is true that an ordinance enacted some thirty-five
years ago provided that portions of the race track zoned '5' would revert to an R-l
zone; however, there is no~hing unusual about a City Ordinance so providing es-
pecially where a special use permit is permitted; but to read into this Ordinance a
1936 or 1937 covenant or commitment of the Council - to return this land to R-l
irrespective of time, or future conditions - to read into this Ordinance the intent
by a City Council thirty-five years ago to control or freeze land use I think is I
perhaps something else. I respect very highly the judgment of those persons who
have urged this position. I do, and I have ~elied on the judgment of those men, but
to me, this particular construction of that Ordinance is a violent construction. The
City Attorney of Arcadia agrees with my interpretation. Zoning is a matter of current
interest to the people and to the community. A Council in 1935 could no more prejudge
a matter in 1971 than this Council can prejudge a matter in the year 2005 --- least
of all attempt to bind the Council at that time. Zoning is contemporary by nature
and zoning must be judged in the light of circumstances as they exist at the time of
an application for zoning.
"The question has been posed as to whether or not Fashion Park will be successful.
When new businesses come into Arcadia the Council does not make a financial analysis
normally to determine if the business will be successful. The Council has heretofore
taken the position that a businessman knows his own business and W2u1d not be seeking
to engage in business if it were going to be a losing proposition. I think this
assumption should be valid in the instant case where a corporation, and those who
finance it, are willing to invest millions of dollars on the success of this venture.
Additionally, an impar ~i.l economic analyst employed by the City Council has given
testimony that the San Gabriel Valley is, in his opinion, commercially underdeveloped;
that there is a need for an additional shopping center or centers in the San Gabriel
Valley; that Fashion Park from a financial standpoint would be enormously successful
and if it is not established in Santa Anita it will be successful in another community.
I simply cannot ignore that testimony.
"I and my colleagues have been concerned about the effect Fashion Park might have on
the existing business community. There has been conflicting testimony, but perhaps
one underlying fact of American economic life should not be entirely forgotten.
Mr. Arth indeed has commented on it:arid I agree with what he said. We live under a
system of free enterprise. Competition is an inherent and integral part of this
sy~tem.: Competition is an economic fact of life, and many times a very rough.eco-
nomic fact of life. The importance of competition to our entire national economy is
recognized by the Sherman Anti-trust Act and related laws on a Federal level, and the
Cartright Act in California. Under this system, which has its basis in law, existing
bus.inesses are not accorded p61itiq~l or economic sanctuary because they happen to be
in an area or in a business first. If a new business venture wishes to enter a
community, it is permitted and encouraged to do so, for it is only in this way that the
consumer can be protected against the ev~ls of monopoly and be assured that he will
receive the best available product at the lowest possible price. When any business I
first entered this community of necessity it took business away from someone and I do
doubt that if Fashion Park is permitted into this community there will be a time when
a newer shopping center somewhere is going to take business away from Fashion Park.
Fashion Park will then have to sharpen its business operations, meet this competition,
provide better products at better prices, or go out of business. Where a political
institution such as a City Council provides an economic sanctuary for existing
businesses per se and for that reason along by that act rejects the theory and meaning
of free enterprise it deprives the people themselves of the fruits and benefits of the
competitive sy~tem. However, apart from this, the preponderance of evidence, at least
to me, suggests there will be few, if any, businesses that will terminate because of
Fashion Park. The Council's own economic advisor, Mr. Anderson, has suggested that
Fashion Park will have little affect on the downtown area as a whole, and indeed one
of the downtown businessmen testifi€d that in hJ." ,,judgment Fashion Park would hav'e' ,"
nothing but a beneficial effect.
EDWARD L. BUTTE&~ORTH
1-19-71
- 14 -
I
"!
I
';,
~.:,.I" " ~ ;:,"
19: 7768-N
flAs to West Arcadia the preponderance of evidence indicates to me at least that the
businessmen who compete directly with the services and products to be offered by
Fashion Park wil~'feel the effect of this competition for two or three years, but
this testimony from the City's own experts suggests that these businesses will regain
their economic position by the third year or before and that thereafter their
business positions will be enhanced. Testimony of the City's own experts indicates
that Fashion Park will be a regional shopping center and will draw people from a
wide area; that non~residents will discover West Arcadia and the downtown area and
will begin to shop there; that business lost to Fashion Park will be recovered and
more by the introduction of buyers from the regional area into the local business
community. I want to say without any mistake that the downtown, and West Arcadia
businessmen and tneir businesses are important to this Council. They are important
to the community and their economic health is important to us. But to me the pre-
ponderance of evidence indicates that they can survive the effect cr the competition
of Fashion Park and in a relatively short time forge ahead of their present economic
pos~tion.
"My greatest concern in this matter has been the effect that Fashion Park might have
on the Rancho and Village residential areas. And to me, as it was to Councilman
Arth, this is the crux of the matter. In my opinion aLleast; the majority of the
residents of a city have no right "to impose an intolerable burden upon a small area
of the city simply because the majority will receive some benefit from this burden.
This is not my idea of majority rule, or the way we want to run this city. All
segments of the city are entitled to be 'protected and most assuredly this applies to
the Rancho and Village areas which constitute one of our very finest residential
areas. Because this has been my prime concern I have paid special attention to the
evidence that was deduced, in this area. I reached these basic .conclusions: First,
a great part of the Rancho and Village area with windin~, meandering streets will
largely be unaffected by either the freeway or by Fashion Park... This was the
thinking of Simon Eisner, the author of the proposed General Plan. This conclusion,
however, does not apply to the residents who live on Hugo Reid and adjacent streets
who most certainly will be affected. I will touch on that in just a moment. There
are residents of this area who, with all sincerity feel that if Fashion Park is allowed
to become a reality it will literally change their life style and ruin the residential
area. If there were evidence to prove this point, or if there was even a probability
on this point, I would not hesitate to vote against the proposal. But I don't believe
that a dispassionate, objective analysis of the evidence will indicate that Fashion
Park will change the life style of the Rancho and Village residents. The City's own
experts have testified, and one's own observation will confirm, that there is a
'substantial buffer between the proposed location of Fashion Park and the R-l residents
in the Village and Rancho. The tire and battery departments have been moved to the
eastern portion of tnelFashion Park complex by the Planning Commission. Between Fashion
Park improvements there is a substantial parking area, Baldwin Avenue itself, a line
of apartment houses, a'nd then R-l property.
"There is another most important fact that I hope will be recognized. Hugo Reid is
now a through street between Michillinda and Baldwin and it presently carries a
volume of traffic. There are some 12,000 trips a day in the Rancho-Village area
from the residents themselves. A serious traffic situation will arise on Hugo Reid
Drive, but wholly apart from Fashion Park and because of the offramps~and 'the
underpasses of the freeway at Michillinda and Baldwin. During our hearings witness
after witness testified that the traffic problem involving the Hugo Reid residents
particularly on the adjacent streets will arise because of the underpasses and
offramps of the freeway and not because of Fashion Park. Even if Fashion Park does
not become a reality this City must undertake traffic controls to protect Hugo Reid
residents and those on adjacent streets to the end that this area will have a minimum
of inconvenience from this freeway. Mr. Eisner, the author of the City's,proposed
,General Plan, testified that Fashion Park, in his judgment, would aggravate the
traffic problem created from the freeway alone by approximately 15 percent, and the
City's independent traffic consultant testified that Fashion Park's contribution to
the traffic problem would be less than 25 percent. Six or seven different methods
of traffic control have been suggested by City's experts and staff. There is no
doubt,:that any kind of a traffic control on Hugo Reid will cause inconvenience to
the Rancho and Villrge residents if it inhibits their ability to drive along Hugo
Reid east to Baldwin and then to turn north or south on Baldwin; but it bears
repeating that this situation will exist wholly apart from Fashion Park. In all
EDWARD L. BUTTERWORTH
- 15 -
1-19-71
19: 7768-0
fairness to the entire city, this situation should be, and hopefully will be,
recognized by the residents on Hugo Reid whose welfare is my concern and the concern
of my colleagues on this Council. Substantially all of the experts employed by the
City as well as the City's own staff have concluded that plans can be devised to
adequately control traffic on Hugo Reid.
"The financial rewards to theCity and to the school district are not the sole
answer to this matter; but that substantial new tax revenues will flow to both the
school district and to the City of Arcadia admits of little doubt. The overwhelming
evidence compels this conclusion. Additionally, Fashion Park, should it become a
reality, will at least according to the evidence which was produced at all the
hearings, be of very little expense to the City.
"It has been argued and with some merit that should the law distributing sales tax
revenue based on the place of sale be changed and the sales tax be distributed
geographically or on a basis of population, that the sales tax revenues arising out
of Fashion Park would~be lost. This is quite possible. A change in the apportion-
ment of the sales tax could occur at any session of the legislature. However,
legislation changing sales tax revenues has been before the California Legislature
for a number of years. To the best of my knowledge, there is no immediate prospect
for a change in the law. Under the circumstances I think it must be accepted as a
calculated risk. Even were a change to be brought about, it is unlikely that the
community which generates the sale would lose all of the sales tax revenue...
Probably the worst that would happen would be the diversion of a portion only of the
sales tax revenue on a geographic or population basis. Further, a change in the law
would have no effect on the substantial increase in property tax revenues that would
accrue to the School District as well as to the City.
I
"A number of witnesses have testified with sincerity and very deep feeling about the
environmental problems facing California. They take the position that the Santa
Anita property should be maintained as open space for the benefit of the community.
The need for open space--more parks, more recreational area, is obvious to thinking
citizens. Pauline Koch, the environmental witness, who testified for the opponents,
recommended that Santa Anita Park, all or in part, be developed into an urban farm.
The proposal seemed bizarre when I first heard it, but on reflection I accepted her
testimony as having a degree of merit. But we get to this fundamental question: At
whose expense shall open space be preserved, and at whose expense shall we develop
an urban farm as recommended by Mrs. Koch. Is the City prepared to buy this 70 acres
at a cost of five or ten million dollars or more in order to maintain open space.- I:
have heard no one make that suggestion - and if not, can we sterilize land on the
basis that the community needs open space without paying compensation to the owners.
In the absence of compensation I would look upon such action as a form of confis-
cation of private property. If the City has the power to sterilize land of a large
landowner it has an equal power to sterilize the land of the homeowner and small
landowner. If I owned a piece of property and a political agency told me I could
hold title to it, and pay taxes on it, but I couldn't develop it because the City
needed open space I would not only be unhappy, I would seek redress under the 5th
and 14th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States. I want my fellow
citizens to have all the open space possible in this community, but we are going to
have to pay for it, and the City certainly does not have the financial resources to
buy this property.
"I reject the proposal that Council should not consider rezoning any part of the I
Turf Property until'racing ceases and it can then consider appropriate zoning for
the entire area. The proposed General Plan of Mr. Eisner protects residents with
respect to the future USe of the balance of the race track property by recommending
residential use for the balance of the property and more particularly garden
apartments. I don't myself particularly care what Santa Anita might have in their
mind or what surreptitious pl?ns they might have if any. We have a general plan and
if a Council remains faithful to this general plan, as I think it will be obligated
to, the balance of this property is going to be devEloped for R-l with particular
emphasis on garden apartments. To me no useful purpose is served by saying that
Santa Anita must develop itself a plan for the future use of the property before
any of it can be rezoned.
"I have been told that Arcadia should take the "San Marino approach", that we don't
want a balanced community but rather a residential community and that it is worthwhile
- 16 -
EDWARD L. BUTTERWORTH
1-19-71
I
I
:'", ;-,. ",
.-.-.' .
19:7768-P
to pay additional taxes. Mayor Pro Tem Helms touched upon this point and I agree
with his conclusions. From a personal standpoint this approach appeals to me. If
I had only my own wishes to consider, this is the point of view that I think I
might take. But as a public servant, it is my obligation to vote not according to
my personal prefer~nce but to vote in a manner responsive to the will, or to what
I think is the will of the majority of the people. This raises the question as to
whether' or not Arcadia shall be a community of only the well-to-do or rich, or a
place where retired people on fixed incomes" or those on modest incomes can also
maintain homes and send their children to school without incurring tax burdens that
cannot be sustained. Assuming there is no change in the law apportioning sales
taxes or major changes in' property tax laws, on a very conservative analysis Fashion
Park will return a million dollars a year in additional taxes to this community with
every indication that this amount will increase substantially, This is a material
consideration to me if we are to have a balanced community, if men and women of
modest means are to be able to make their homes in this community.
"I want to say that there are a great many arguments that have been made by the
opponents that have merit. Anyone who can look at this objectively must conclude
that this is not a black and white matter. There are equ'ities on both sides of this
question and under the circumstances a councilman must balance those equities and
come to a conclusion which he thinks is just and fair and responsive to the will of
the electorate. To support the opponents I would have to ignore nearly all of the
expert testimony which has been offered in this case including independent experts
hired by the City to give independent advice to the City Council. I would have to
ignore the recommendations of the professional staff of the'City and the Planning
Commission which voted unanimously for the project, as well as the recommendations
of Mr. Simon Eisner, the expert who has prepared the tentative General Plan.
Frankly, this I cannot do.
"I am giving conditional approval at this time to the application for rezoning and
the conditional use permit. Among the opponents to Fashion Park are many who have
not only been friends of long standing, but more important, people whose judgment
I respect most highly, and depend upon, and have frequently followed. I hope they
will do me the courtesy of believing that I act out of conviction and with equal
sincerity even though they disagree and perhaps bitterly disagree with my decision.
But no Councilman is worth his salt and has no business sitting on the Council if he
hasn't the courage to vote his belief and conviction, irrespective of other
circumstances that may give him personal distress. I know that my colleagues have
the same attitude and have voted in the,same spirit.
"I want to make it clear at this time that my approval of the application for rezoning
is conditional. I shall not hesitate to reverse my vote prior to the enactment of
an ordinance unless I can be satisfied on several matters, including, but not limited
to, the assurance that Santa Anita will complete this project as represented and in
its entirety; secondly, that the major department stores will be of a quality commen-
surate with the standards of this community. I prefer that this be made a part of the
ordinance, but if it cannot be made a part of the ordinance, and I am not satisfied
on this matter, then I want assurances from Santa Anita about the quality of the
tenants, and I want the City to be consulted in this area and to have a voice in this
matter. Traffic control on Hugo Reid to say the least is an indispensable condition
to the approval of this project not withstanding the fact that the vast majority of
the traffic problem arises out of the freeway rather than Fashion Park. There are
other matters that I will not go into. This will be a sine quanon to my approval of
the Ordinance.
"Let me conclude with this: It has been my belief that this matter should be
presented to the voters for their ratification one way or the other. Section 1103 of
the City Charter reserves to the people the right of initiative and referendum. In
a project of this magnitude I think it is right that the community should have a
voice in the final decision. And frankly, I regret very much that this matter could
not have been put to the electorate at the general election in November. I urge very
strongly that this be done. I am satisfied that the losing side - in this case it
may be the opponents - have the capacity to obtain the necessary signatures upon a
petition for a referendum. This being so, I see no reason to put them or any part
of the electorate to the expense and to the effort of obtaining the necessary
EDWARD L. BUTTERWORTH
1-19-71
- 17 -
19: 7768-Q
signatures on a petition. Instead I favor the setting of a special election as
soon as possible to the end that a prompt and final decision can be made by the
people. Nothing short of an election in my opinion will ever satisfy this commu-
nity. It would be my,hope that this election could be combined with the School
Board election in April assuming that this meets with the approval of the School
Board. The e~penses of the election could then be miqimized, and the people could
be assured of a broader vote than if a special election is set for Fashion Park.
Gentlemen this is how I feel about this matter and how I will vote at this time."
EDWARD L. BUTTERWORTH
1-19-71
- 18 -
I
I
19: 7768-R
In conclusion Mayor Butterworth directed this comment to Counci 1: "Let
me say, so there is no misunderstanding.. .this is my own thinking...
there has been no consultation with my colleagues.. .the majority of you
may not be agreeable to this and I do not want to have this presented in
any senSe other than that; It is something that is up to you and your
action on the matter. II
I
Council held brief discussion on: the merits of placing the matter uefore
the electorate and it was the consensus of Council that such procedure
would give to the voter the opportunity to express his opinion without the
burden of getting the matter on the ballot by one group or the other; that
the citizens now have the benefit of Council's consideration of the evidence
and that it appears that there would be a referendum almost regardless of
the outcome of Council's decision.
MOTION
CALLING AN
ELECTION
It was then MOVED by Counciaman Helms that a Special Election be called
for April 20, 1971, for the purpose of submitting a proposition to the
voters relative to Fashion Park and that the School Board is hereby
requested to consolidate said Special Election with its regular School
Board election to be held on the same date, all subject to formal reso-
lutions ratifying the effect of this motion, and the City Clerk is directed
to promptly transmit a copy of this motiQn to the Arcadia Board of
Education. Motion was seconded by Councilman Arth and carried on roll call
vote as follows:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Considine, Hage, Helms, Butterworth
None
None
HEIGHT OF
OFFICE
BUILDINGS
In order to provide staff with the thinking of Council in connection with
the application of Santa Anita Consolidated, Inc., for permission to
construct two 12 story office buildings on the subject site, the following
observations were submitted:
I';?~I' Councilman Arth stated in part that he favored denying the application and
referred to the action of the Planning Commission in its denial of more
than 8 stories; that if at some future date the Commission initiated action
to permit an expanded height limit Santa Anita could then move ahead as
construction on the buildings would probably commence later in the develop-
ment anyway.
J~
Councilman Helms stated in part that he was not in favor of the office
buildings and supported the recommendation of the Commission in its denial
of the buildings at more than 8 stories. He felt that the project is
purported to be a shopping center and by adding office buildings a pattern
may be set for the future and expressed concern with this possibility. He
would like to study this phase more carefully before making a firm
commitment.
I
Councilman Hage stated in part that in order to make the center successful
he could not see where the office buildings would be a detriment to the
center or to the surrounding area, However, he did not believe a case
has been shown that there should be a special height regulation and would
support the existing 'H' Special Height requirement.
Councilman Considine stated in part that in his opinion the office
buildings could contribute both to the City and the Center and felt they
would be a great adjunct to the development. He preferred not to commit
himself on the height level until he was convinced as to what is really the
economic height level; that he has been concerned for some years in that
regard because the downtown area has not been able to develop any buildings
within the 8 story limit.
1-19-71
- 19 -
TillE, B~T~Y
AND ACCESSORY
STORES
/ /~#I
19:7768-S
Mayor Butterworth stated in part that he was against 10 or 12 story
buildings; that in his opinion there is a great difference between high
rise residential and high rise commercial.. the former has many problems
with taxation, costs to the community, problems of density.. whereas
high rise buildings do not; that if the City is going to headquarter
businesses it is going to be necessary to house them. He also referred
to the inability of the downtown area to get started in this area. He"
stated he would support 8 story buildings at the present time; that if
Santa Anita felt this would not be economical he then would be opposed -
that if Santa Anita felt it would be economical he would then support two
8 story buildings.
The majority of Council indicated their support of the Commission in its
granting approval for the TVA stores with the exception of Councilman
Arth who stated he would be against them, but commented that many of his
original objections have been removed now that the location has been
changed.
I
Council concurred in the observation of Councilman Arth - that it had
arrived at its decisions independently from matters discussed at public
hearings and meetings - that there had not been any other meetings or
exchanges of views on the matter and that nothing had been predetermined.
I
1-19-71
- 20 -
HEARING
Undergrounding
Utility
Lines
.:/, (/44-;
I
RESOLUTION
NO. 4178
ADOPrED
19: 77,69
Proposed underground installation. of overhead utility lines on a portion
of Michillinda and Sunset Avenues. It was noted that prior reports on
this subject had indicated that the cost of this under grounding on
Michillinda Avenue would be borne by the County of Los Angeles; that four
properties on Sunset Boulevard between Balboa and Michillinda would be
affected and that there would be costs incurred to the property owners
thereof. (See report dated January 15, 1971).
Mayor Butterworth declared the hearing open and Mrs. 'William Appel,
1049 Panorama Drive; member of the Arcadia Beautification Commission,
spoke in favor of the"proposed undergrounding. No one else desiring to
be heard the hearing was CLOSED on MOTION by Councilman Considine,
seconded by Councilman Hage and carried unanimously. During the deliber-
ations considerable discussion was held on requiring the property owner
on Columbia Road whose properties back into Sunset Boulevard to assume the
total cost. It was the consensus of Council that they be required to pay
50 percent of the basic cost. Whereupon it was MOVED by Councilman Arth,
seconded by Councilman Helms and carried on roll call vote that the City
Attorney prepare an appropriate ordinance for the creation of the under-
ground utilities in said area and that the City bear one half the cost of
the three properties located at 509, 515 and 521 Columbia Road.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen
None
,None
Arth, Considir>e, Hage, Helms, Butterworth
The City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the title of
Resolution No. 4178, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA
ESTABLISHING UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO.4."
~ It was MOVED by Councilman Helms, seconded by Councilman Arth and carried
on roll call vote as follows that the reading of the full body of
Resolution No. 4178 be waived and that same be ADOPrED.
HEARING
STREET LIGHTS
NORMAN AVENUE
3. I':I<<I~
,/
I
HEARING
(C. U.P.)
APPEAL
DENIED
P"Vp
. .....
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Considine, Rage, Helms, Butterworth
None
None
Consideration of petition of residents and property owners on Norman Avenue
between Holly and El Monte Avenues for improved street lighting. It was
noted by staff that the requested system would cost $39.95 per month but if
it were placed in a lighting maintenance district the City's cost would be
reduced to $18.97 per month with the annual cost to the property owner
approximately $12. No installation costs are involved. The petition was
signed by 26 property owners and one non-owner resident,and represents 61.9
percent of the 42 parcels in the,block.
Mayor Butterworth declared the hearing open and no one desiring to be heard
the hearing was CLOSED on MOTION by Councilman Hage, seconded by Councilman
Considine and carried unanimously.
It was then MOVED by Councilman Hage, seconded by Councilman Helms and
carried on roll call vote as follows that staff proceed with the installation
of street lights in conformance with the petition.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Considine, Hage, Helms, Butterworth
None
None
Appeal of John Abell from the decision of the Planning Commission in its
denial of his application for a conditional use permit to allow the
construction of a service station on his property at the northeast corner
of Foothill Boulevard and Santa Anita Avenue.
1-19-71
- 21 -
YOUTH
COMMISSION
;7
J ); J/ / 9
,
COMMENDATION
FIRE DEPT.
, I 1
;.1.., : (,,.
WORK
ACCEPTANCE
(Santa Clara
Bridge)
" 1/
II /1',://
19:7770
Mayor Butterworth declared the hearing open and Robert Gee, 205 Hacienda
Drive, expressed his opinion; that there were already too many service
stations in the subject area; that three such facilities should be
sufficient.
Edward D. Nuehoff, attorney at 2485 Huntington Drive, San Marino, spoke on
behalf of the,applicant. He read the conditions upon which the City
'staff recommended approval of the permit, but it was noted that the
Planning Commission voted against the application. He continued that
Mr. Abell entered into a 5 year lease agreement with the Mobil Oil Company
some time ago; that the property has lain dormant for a good many years...
there is no demand for C-2 zoned property...that this is the first good J
opportunity to enter into a lease ~nd~asked for reversal of the decision
of the Commission.
I
Discussion ensued on property between the subject site and that farther
east on Foothill Boulevard and it was Mr. Neuhoff's contention that the
owner of those two small lots would be better ,off with a service station
at the corner than with, for instance, a two story building which would
box in their property.
The resident at 726 N. Rodeo Road felt there is already an over abundance
of service stations and that ingress and egress to the facility would
create traffic hazards.
L. F. Schweiner, 1121 Oakwood Drive, (first .residence north of Foothill
Boulevard) also objected to'a service station...that they are noisy and
that residents suffer now from those already in the area,
No one else desiring to be heard the hearing was CLOSED on MOTION by
Councilman Considine, seconded by Councilman Hage and carried unanimously.
Following further deliberations it was MOVED by Councilman Hage, seconded
by Councilman Considine and carried on roll call vote as follows that,
based on the proximity of residences to the subject site and the land-
locking of the other properties adjacent thereto, the decision of the' '
Planning Commission in its Resolution No. 720 be sustained, and the the
appeal be DENIED.
AYES: Councilmen Considine, Hage, Helms, Butterworth
NOES: None
ABSTAIN:Councilman Arth, due to his business affiliation.
ABSENT: None
Council received advice from the Youth Commission that member Nancy
McComsey has resigned and that Patty Bronte has replaced her. It was
MOVED by Councilman Hage, seconded by Councilman Helms and carried unani-
mously that same be officially received and that Miss Bronte be formally
recognized as a member of the Commission.
Mayor Butterworth ordered FILED a commendation on behalf of the Fire
Department and its efforts and accomplishments in extinguishing a recent
fire at 1026 W. Huntington Drive.
I
On MOTION by Councilman Considine, seconded by Councilman Helms and
carried on roll call vote as follows the work as completed by the Stones
Construction Company in Job No. 331 - Santa Clara Bridge and Equestrian
Tunnel was ACCEPTED and final payment was AUTHORIZED in accordance with
the terms of the contract.
,
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Considine, Hage, Helms, Butterworth
None
None
1-19-71
- 22 -
LANDSCAPING
AWARD OF
CONTRACT
(Napolitano)
d q-/5Ii
, -
~ '
,
I
PATROL CARS
(Bids to be
taken) ~;-;
~ /,.~/:
P: G6'.R< .....
. 1;'
19:7771
The City Manager explored bids received for the combined landscape
maintenance (city and school) and noted that'the company submitting the
low bid for maintenance of city beautified areas did not bid on the
combined area; that the bid for only city areas would amount to a net
savings to the City in the amount of $3,300 --- less than that currently
being paid to Duke's Landscape Service, and ';'ade recommendation for the
award of contract. It was'MOVED by ,Councilman Arth, seconded by
Councilman Helms and carried ,on roll call vote that the recommendation
of staff be accepted and that a contract be entered into with the firm
of Napolitano in the amount submitted by that company as BASE BID B; that
any irregularities or informalitiei in the bids,or bidding process be
waived; that all other bids be rejected and that,the'Mayor and City Clerk
be and they are hereby AUTHORIZED to execute a contract in form approved
by the City Attorney.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Considine, Hage, Helms, Butterworth
None
None
The City Manager explained that the County of Los Angeles has informed
the City that it is unable to extend to the City participation in its
bid program this year; that the low bidder on its law enforcement vehicles
would not agree to provide the same offer to cities. Staff will proceed
to call for bids from dealers within the area.
CITY SEAL ./J The artist's sketch of a proposed 'new City Seal was ACCEPTED by Council
fl7 j? I: ~;t and it was MOVED by Councilman Arth, seconded by Councilman Helms and
u: t,gf" > 'M . carried on roll call vote that $300 be' authorized for payment to the
artist - funds from Council Contingency Account. The sketch will now be
professionally prepare'd.
NATIONAL LEAGUE
OF CITIES
MEMBERSHIP
/
Cl :?,w. ~G.
I
ORDINANCE
NO. 1423
ADOPrED
pJC(j1.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Considi~e, Hage, Helms, Butterworth
None
None
It was the consensus of Council that the City should become a full fledged
member of the National League of Cities which would assure the City of a
vote at its Conferences. 'Whereupon it was MOVED by Councilman Arth,
seconded by Councilman Hage and carried on roll call vote as follows that
the City join the subject League at an annual fee'of $150. The 1971-72
Budget will refl~ct.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen'Arth, Considine, Hage, Helms, Butterworth
None
None
It was further MOVED by Councilman Hage, seconded by Councilman Arth and
carried on roll call vote as follows that the budget for the ensuing fiscal
year reflect sufficient funds for the Council as a whole to attend the
annual conference of the National'League of Cities.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
~ounc~lmen Arth, Considine, Hage,. HeJms, Butterworth
None
','
None
The City Attorney presented for the second time, explained the content and
read the title of Ordinance Na:-1423, entitled:, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA AMENDING THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE TO
REZONE CERTAIN PROPERTY AT 235 EAST FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FROM PR-l TO C-2."
It was MOVED by Councilman Helms, seconded by Councilman Hage and carried
on roll call vote as follows that the reading of the full body of Ordinance
1-19-71
- 23 -
PALMISTRY
J.. ~2.
, .J
It,...I) ",1-<</;/;:
/1,. ..
/J__'__
ORDINANCE
NO. 1422
INTRODUCED
--
RESOLUTION
NO. 4176
ADOI'rED
(.../
RESOLUTION
NO. 4177
ADOPTED
t/
19: 7772
No. 1423 be waived and that same be and it is hereby ADOPTED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, 'Considine, Hage, Helms, Butterworth
None
None
Reference was made to a proposed ordinance prohibiting palmistry business
in the City and to the report pertaining thereto. John Arkley, 33 E.
Huntington Drive, spoke at length concerning and on behalf of his client,
Barney Todorovich, who had made application for a business license to
operate a studio at 141 E. Huntington Drive for palmistry readings. He
noted that the applicant did not have any adverse record; that he and his
family had been in the subject business for over 40 years in the San
Bernardino area; is at present in the La Habra area. He noted other
countries given to this type of activity, and in answer toea.question
stated in part that to his knowledge only the County of Orange did not
have a prohibitory ordinance at,the present time.
I
It was the consensus of Council that should this permit be issued others
would follow; reference was made to instances where local persons had been
victims of fraud; that they did not want to hue to answer for-wqat'could
be the result of this type of activity. All agreed that any decision to
probibit palmistry in the City would not be brought about because of
anything derogatory as to the applicant; that his reputation and record
were excellent.
The City Attorney then presented Ordinance No. 1422, explained the content
and read the title of Ordinance No. 1422, entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA ADDING CHAPTER 7 TO ARTICLE IV OF THE
ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO FORTUNE TELLING."
It was MOVED by Councilman Considine, seconded by Councilman Arth and
carried on roll call vote as follows that the reading of the full body of
Ordinance No. 1422 be waived and that same be and it is hereby INTRODUCED.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Art~, Considine, Hage, Helms, Butterworth
None
None
The City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the title of
Resolution No. 4176, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ARCADIA SUPPORTING THE CITY OF HAWTHORNE'S REQUEST THAT SURPLUS
MILITARY AIRCRAFT BE USED IN FIGHTING FOREST FIRES."
It was MOVED by Councilman Hage, seconded by Councilman Considine and
carried on roll call vote as follows that the reading of the full body of
Resolution No. 4176 be waived and that same be and it is hereby ADOPTED.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
\
Councilmen
None
None
Arth, Considine, Hage, Helms, Butterworth
I
The City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the title of
Resolution No. 4177, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ARCADIA DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE A PORTION OF LIVE OAK
AVENUE AND HEMPSTEAD AVENUE AT THE SOUTHWEST INTERSECTION OF SAID STREETS."
It was MOVED by Councilman Hage, seconded by Councilman Considine and
carried on roll call vote as follows that the reading of the full body of
Resolution No. 4177 be waived and that same be and it is hereby ADOPTED.
1-19-71
- 24 -
PROCEDURAL
ORDINANCE
WAIVED
I
RESOLUTION
NO. 4179
ADOPTED
J..-17/
CHICAGO
PARK
~
LEGISLATION
.-
EXECUTIVE
SESSION
RECONVENE
and
ADJOURNMENT
I to
DATE CERTAIN
19:7773
Council indicated its desire to have reviewed a plot plan in this matter.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Considine, ,Hage, Helms, Butterworth
None
None
Hearing scheduled for February 2, 1971.
In order to consider the following matter, it was MOVED by Councilman
Arth, seconded by Councilman Helms and carried on roll call vote as
follows, that the provisions of the Procedural Ordinance be waived:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Considine, Hage, Helms, Butterworth
None
None
The City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the title
of Resolution No. 4179 entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ARCADIA URGING THE STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION TO LANDSCAPE
THE FOOTHILL FREEWAY BETWEEN SANTA ANITA AVENUE AND MICHILLINDA
BOULEVARD IN 1972."
It was MOVED by Councilman Arth, seconded by Councilman Helms and
carried on roll call vote as follows that the reading of the full body
of Resolution No. 4179 be waived and that same be and it is hereby
ADOPTED.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Considine, Hage, Helms, Butterworth
None
None
The Planning Director advised that work has now commenced on the soils
study relating to the northwesterly corner of Chicago Park.
Discussion held on consideration currently being given to off-track betting
and other sources of revenue from similar activities by certain State
Legislators. It was the consensus of Council that the City Attorney
prepare a resolution opposing any such legislation. Council will consider
same at a forthcoming regular meeting.
Council entered an executive session with the City Manager at 11:15 p.m.
At 11:30 p.m. Council reconvened, scheduled an adjourned regular meeting
for the purpose of studying Fashion Park on Wednesday January 27 at 7:30
p.m., and ADJOURNED to said date.
!LJ 7(Jj~-
Mayor
ATTEST:
~~4::~~~
Christine Van Maanen
City Clerk
1-19-71
- 25 -