Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJANUARY 11,1994 I I 36:0015 0110 _ ';-0 O(I/rl/ CC CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS ARE TAPE RECORDED AND ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK ROLL CALL CLOSED SESSION O{({)-VO 1. LIBRARY EXPANSION PROJECT 07..30-70 M I NUT E S CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA and the ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING (WORK SESSION) January 11, 1994 The City Council and the, Arcadia Redevelopment Agency met in an Adjourned Regular Meeting (Work Session) on Tuesday, January 11, 1994, at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers Conference Room. PRESENT: Councilmembers Fasching, Harbicht, Lojeski, Margett and Ciraulo The City Attorney announced a Closed Session "to discuss the case of Arcadia versus Superior Signal, under Government Code Section 54956.9," At 5:32 p,m. the Council entered the CLOSED SESSION, ADJOURNED and RECONVENED the Work Session at 5:47 p.m. Staff reported that since the January 4, 1994 Council meeting, there have been subsequent meetings with various Councilmembers, the architects, the construction manager, and staff to refine the earlier Library expansion design to incorporate suggestions made by Councilmembers. Alternatives suggested were a new mansard roof. new wall material, eliminating some landscaping, and modifications to the entryway. The Community Development Director explained that the goal at this evening' s meeting is: A) a decision regarding the exterior architecture, so that timing of the project may stay on schedule; B) to attempt to finalize the interior finishing materials . The Community Development Director introduced Charles Walton of the architectural firm of Charles Walton Associates, who presented elevations and renderings of both designs of the proposed building. He compared the new drawing, which incorporates trellises, brick work, glass, and mission tile roofing in a mansard style, with the previous drawing originally proposed. Costs for the additional work are: brick work, $76,000; roof work, $58,000; and extensions to the entrance, $46,000 -- for a total of $180,000. A discussion ensued, with Councilmembers' questions being answered by representatives of Charles Walton Associates. Mayor Pro tem Lojeski expressed satisfaction with the added aesthetics, especially considering the prominent location of the Library. Councilmember Harbicht would be satisfied with the Library design without the added work. He would prefer to see the $180,000 applied to interior necessities. He pointed out that the Library Board is trying to put together a fundraiser to raise money to pay for interior work and furnishings, which are estimated to cost $600,000 to $700,000. Councilmember Fasching favors the straight-line look of the original design. He would prefer to have the $180,000 spent on the interior facilities. The City Librarian stated that there is approximately $240,00 set as ide in the Capital Improvement Budget for Library furnishings, However, since the $240,000 has not yet been approved by Council, plans were made to go ahead with fundraising, In answer to Councilmember Margett's question as to total cost for the project, excluding the interior, the City Librarian stated Council approved $4,935,278 at its September 7, 1993, meeting, which included some -1- 1/11/94 36:0016 optional items which would have to be done during construction, Councilmember Margett would like to "go first class" on the exterior and also be able to do the interior, but was concerned that costs were getting exorbitant. Mayor Pro tern Lojeski commented that in his opinion the first design drawing does not look like a library and has a very dated look. As far as expenditure of money is concerned, he reminded Council that significant money was spent in construction of the Community Center to give it a first-class look. Mayor Ciraulo stated that, although financial considerations are important, he agrees that a Library at such a prominent location in the City should be visually attractive. He likes the added brick work, trellis, and mansard roof, and feels it is more in keeping with the design of other newly constructed buildings in the City, such as the Fire Station and the Community Center. He prefers the second, refined design. It was MOVED by Mayor Pro tern Lojeski, seconded by Mayor Ciraulo, and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows to proceed with Option A on the exterior elevation. The Community Development Director clarified that, if Council preferred Design A, bids could be received with the understanding that there is the option to delete the mansard roof, the brick work and trellis, and go back to Design B. Depending on the amount of money Council wanted to spend, the optional items could be added or deleted. Mayor Pro tern Lojeski agreed to amend his motion to include the aforementioned bid process. Mr. Walton explained that to do the type of bidding process with options, his company must prepare the drawings for both the base bid and the alternates, including contract documents, and addendum sheets for going out to bid. The fee charged the City for this work will be at a rate of 8 percent of the construction cost of $180,000, or $16,000. If it was decided not to proceed with the alternates, his company would get 80 percent of the $16,000, or approximately $14,000 for developing the alternate drawings. The Community Development Director suggested that, in view of the additional charge for the architect's extra work, Council authorize negotiation of the fee and include it as part of the motion, AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers Lojeski, Margett, and Ciraulo Councllmembers Fasching and Harbicht (For reasons so stated) None 2. REVISION OF MUNIC. CODE WITH REGARD TO 2ND-STORY INTERIOR CONSTRUC- TION (Text Amd. to be initiated) OS-VO- d:;: Staff presented a flow chart describing procedures that modification applications go through. Administrative modifications are handled by staff in-house. If the applicant is in a homeowners' association, plans must be approved by the association prior to their being considered by the City, Review by the Modification Committee involves a public hearing, The, Planning Commission becomes involved upon appeal from the Modification Committee, also with a public hearing process. The City Council considers any appeal or referral from the Planning Commission, Fees and time restrictions were described, as detailed in the flow chart, Staff explained that a situation recently arose whereby a new homeowner encountered a problem with the restrictive nature of the City's Zoning Ordinance relative to second-story additions, The homeowner suggested the City consider revising its Zoning Ordinance. Council is being presented with information tonight and being asked if Council desires to effect any changes. The Community Development Director outlined the City's process of examining modifications through review by staff, Modification Commi ttee, Planning Commission, and City Council, The applicant in the situation being addressed tonight was proposing conversion of an existing attic space. He received approval from the homeowners' association, and the City's modification procedure -2- 1/11/94 I I I I 3. CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATE INFORMA- TIONAL MEETING & POLICY /0..30 ~o AGENDA FORECAST O//O-:JO N.s;;> 36:0017 was explained to the applicant's architect, However, a problem arose when the architect did not convey the information to the applicant. When the applicant brought his plans to the City, he was upset to learn that he would need a modification prior to submitting the plans for plan check. The matter is now at the point of being heard before the Planning Commission tonight as a modification. However, due to the aforementioned events, the applicant decided to request a change in the City's Zoning Ordinance. Staff explained that prior to 1990, second-story modifications and yard modifications were considered at the committee level. In 1990 the City Council adopted an ordinance that revised several setback requirements and also referred side yard modifications with regard to second-story additions to the Planning Commission. At that time the City was reviewing concerns from some residents regarding large homes which were being built.- The issue being brought before Council is whether or not Council may wish to change the modification process. The applicant felt that it was very bureaucratic and not very flexible. Staff suggests that a code amendment could be considered to allow certain "minor" second. story projects to be processed by staff, subject to appeal to the Planning Commission. It was MOVED by Councilmember Fasching that no change be made to the Municipal Code. Councilmember Harbicht requested a discussion before seconding the motion. A lengthy discussion followed, including consideration of how applications for minor projects might be handled. Councilmember Fasching MODIFIED his MOTION to state that if there is no exterior change the application may be handled by the Modification Committee. Councilmember Harbicht seconded the motion. It was determined this motion was DIRECTION to staff. A text amendment to change the Zoning Code will be initiated. In an effort to be consistent in the information provided to all City Council candidates, staff has suggested the City conduct a candidates' informational meeting to be held in late January or early February. All department heads would be present to answer questions, and distribute information. It was also suggested that candidates' requests for information be funneled through Cindy Rowe's office rather than individual departments. The intent was that any information requested and received by a candidate would be provided to each of the other candidates. During discussion of the matter, Councilmembers expressed the opinion that the open forum for candidates as suggested is a good idea. However, it may not be in the best interest of candidates if each were informed of the others' questions. Doing so may be an invasion of their privacy by making known what issues they might wish to use in their campaign strategy. After further discussion, it was the consensus of Council that a candidate's right to ask questions directly of a department head should not be interfered with. It was also agreed to go forward with plans for the candidates' meeting. The City Clerk will be the coordinator of the meeting. The City Manager advised Council of the draft of a procedure whereby future agenda items will be listed on the back of the current agenda, This is being suggested as a means to give Council an idea of items which might be presented at the next regular Council meeting and any work sessions which might be scheduled. The agenda forecast is intended to be used as a guideline, subject to changes if circumstances occur that are not anticipated when the agenda is prepared, It was the consensus of Council that the agenda forecast would be helpful to them, -3- 1/ll/94 , 36:0018 Council reviewed the topics scheduled to be covered at upcoming meetings. Due to the fact that Michael Freedman will not be able to attend the work session scheduled for January 25 to discuss downtown revitalization, that meeting was rescheduled for January 24. Midyear budget review will be discussed at the work session set for February 8, along with a review of health insurance if time permits. CLOSED SESSION 0110- 'I 0 "'~f> The City Attorney announced a Closed Session "pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 to discuss the potential acquisition of property at the north or east side of the Santa Fe Railroad tracks between Santa Clara and La Porte west of First, commonly referred to as the Catellus property, There will also be some general personnel matters discussed. It ADJOURNMENT At 7:18 p,m. the City Council entered the CLOSED SESSION, I RECONVENED and ADJOURNED at 11:10 p.m. to 7:00 p,m., Tuesday, January 18, 1994, in the Conference Room of the Council Chambers for an Adjourned Regular Meeting, and to conduct the business of the Council and Agency and any Closed Session necessary to discuss personnel, litigation matters or evaluation of properties, ATTEST: ~AD C~-J< J . Alford, y Clerk I -4- 1/11/94