HomeMy WebLinkAboutMARCH 15,1994_2
I
I
o IIO..~~O
OJ IS? V
36:0077 c.~
CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS ARE TAPE RECORDED AND ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY
CLERK
INVOCATION
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
MINUTE I,
APPROVAL
(Feb.22,1994)
(Mar.l.1994)
ORD. & RES.
READ BY
TITLE ONLY
A.Y.S.O.
GOLD MEDAL
TEAM
WINNERS
CIRAULO
(Change in
Agenda
Order)
M I NUT E S
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA
and the
ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 15, 1994
The City Council and the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency met in a
regular meeting at 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, March 15, 1994 in the City
Hall Council Chambers.
Cantor David Julian, Temple Shaarei Torah
Donna Butler, Assistant Community Development Director/Planning
PRESENT: Councilmembers Fasching, Lojeski, Margett and
Ciraulo
ABSENT: Councilmember Harbicht
On MOTION by Councilmember Fasching, seconded by Councilmember
Margett and CARRIED, Councilmember Harbicht was EXCUSED.
On MOTION by Mayor Pro tem Lojeski, seconded by Councilmember
Fasching and CARRIED, the minutes of the February 22, 1994 study
session and the adjourned and regular meetings of March 1, 1994
were APPROVED,
It was MOVED by Councilmember Margett, seconded by Mayor Pro tem
Lojeski and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that ordinances
and resolutions be read by title only and that the reading in
full be WAIVED.
PRESENTATION
Mayor Ciraulo welcomed the A.Y.S.O. Area C Champions and
Commissioner Pat Gibson. Mr. Gibson stated that these te'ams have
won gold medals in the entire San Gabriel Valley. They are the
best soccer players in their age groups out of 10,000 children
in the Valley, He also introduced the coaches and the teams,
LEAGUE TEAMS - Girls Division 4 - Roadrunners; Coach Tom Romano -
Girls Division 5 - Lightning; Coach Allen Gillespie. SECTION
ALL STARS - Girls Division 4 - Krazy Kleats; Coach George Lopez -
Girls Division 5 - Red Hots; Coach Bill Hurley. AREA ALL STARS
- Girls Division 5 - Fireballs; Coach Dennis Moody, REGIONAL ALL
STARS -Bovs Division 4 - Chiefs; Coach Ram Kumar -Girls Division
~ - Flames; Coach Neil Conrad - Girls Division 5 -Magic; Coach
Steve Kennedy. The Mayor's Certificate of Commendation in
recognition and appreciation of outstanding achievement was
presented by Mayor Ciraulo to each member of the teams and their
coaches.
Mayor Ciraulo explained that, due to the fact that one of the
public hearings on tonight's agenda will be lengthy, Council has
approved moving other items on the agenda ahead of the public
hearings,
1
3/15/94
2.
3.
4.
0':>1"-""--")
/liS P
36:0078
Public Hearing Commercial and Industrial Recycling
(Considered at a later point in the meeting. See page 6)
Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit for an Inert Landfill at
12321 Lower Azusa Road, and a Final Environmental Impact Report
for said Conditional Use Permit and Plan - Rodeffer Investments
(Considered at a later point in the meeting, See page 8)
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION
Johanna Hofer, 875 Monte Verde Drive, inquired, with regard to
Agenda Item 8, City Manager. how much it has cost the City to
retain technical legal cable consultants, past and present.
Mayor Ciraulo noted that Council is receiving her comments only I
at this time. She disagrees with the proposal to spend over
$200,000 to proceed with cable television equipment for the City ,
Council chambers. It is her opinion that approval of
specifications and bids should be delayed until after the
election next month, With regard to Agenda Item 9, City
Attorney, Resolution No. 5776, approval of an Albertson's Market,
Mrs. Hofer thinks that seismic studies should be made before the
City adopts this item. The City should also be prepared to
construct sidewalks for public safety in this area near Live Oak
Avenue because the proposed market is near residentially zoned
property, and there is the possibility of accidents and law suits
against the City. Mrs, Hofer read a copy of a letter she had
written to Los Angeles District Attorney Gil Garcetti relating
what she considered to be lack of concern about public safety on
the part of the City of Arcadia by not promptly inspecting the
Santa Anita Race Track for earthquake damage after the last
earthquake.
"
Antonio Alluilar, read a statement from Assemblywoman Hilda Solis,
Chairwoman of the Select Committee on Ground Water Contamination
and Landfill Leakage. "Honorable Mayor and Members of the City
Council: My name is Hilda Solis. I represent the 57th - 70th
District which encompasses the City of El Monte. As a
Representative for the City of El Monte, I am very concerned for
the welfare of the residents, Although, the City of Arcadia has
legal jurisdiction over the proposed Rodeffer landfill project,
virtually all environmental and public safety impacts affect the
residents of the adjacent El Monte neighborhoods. On December
10, 1993, I conducted a hearing held by my Assembly Select
Committee on ground water contamination and landfill leakage
which examined the subject of the Rodeffer landfill project. I
was disappointed that the City of Arcadia chose'.not to
participate in the hearing. However, during the course of the
testimony which was received, Mr, William Lockman of the civil
engineering firm of Lockman & Associates presented a feasible
alternative to the Rodeffer landfill project as described in the
final EIR. I have reviewed the final EIR for the Rodeffer
landfill project as distributed on March 2, 1994 and was
disappointed that the analysis of the project alternative as
generally outlined by Mr. Lockman has not been given any further
serious consideration by the author of the final EIR. I believe
that the City of Arcadia should reconsider the analysis of this
project alternative as included in the final EIR, I also believe
that a review by the City of Arcadia of the transcription of the
testimony of the December 10, 1993 Select Committee would be of
great benefit. I can provide a copy of the transcript to the
Council, In view of the manner in which the public participation
in the planning and review of the Rodeffer landfill project has
been conducted, I am convinced that certain fundamental changes
in the process need to be made. Some of the deficiencies which
I have perceived in the process associated with the Rodeffer
landfill project provide an illustration of why consideration of
my Assembly Bill 2679 is necessary at this time. AB 2679 will
attempt to give the City of El Monte more control over the fate
I
2
3/15/94
I
I
5.
Sa.
ROLL CALL
5b.
ADJOURNMENT
6.
FASCHING ~
(Mid-year
Financial
Report
Available)
MARGETT
(National
Empowerment
Television)
7.
36:0079
of the Rodeffer quarry by allowing the City to share decision
making power with the City of Arcadia."
The City Attorney noted that the reason no Arcadia Councilmember
appeared at the Solis hearing was because of the scheduled public
hearing this evening regarding the proposed Rodeffer landfill.
It would have been legally inappropriate for any of the
councilmembers to have been present, and they were under legal
advice to that effect. A letter explaining this had been
directed to the Mayor of El Monte.
CITY COUNCIL RECESSED IN ORDER TO ACT AS THE
ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
PRESENT: Agency Members Fasching, Lojeski, Margett and Ciraulo
ABSENT: Agency Member Harbicht
On MOTION by Agency Member Fasching, seconded by Agency Member
Margett and CARRIED, Agency Member Harbicht was EXCUSED.
The meeting adjourned to 7:00 p. m., AprilS, 1994,
CITY COUNCIL RECONVENED
MATTERS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS
Councilmember Fasching noted that the mid-year financial report,
which was submitted several weeks ago, was very descriptive of
the City's present budget situation. He would like to see copies
of this report available at the City Clerk's office for
interested Arcadia citizens who might like to obtain a copy.
Councilmember Margett noted that he has requests from some
residents that the local cablevision company carry the national
empowerment television. He presented the address and telephone
number to be contacted in order to receive a kit containing
instructions. This would be a wonderful thing to offer the
citizens.
CONSENT ITEMS
7a. )'Q0e4fJ "",'l
C I P DESIGNATED June 21, 1994 as the date established for adoption of
CONSIDERATION the Capital Improvement Program by the City Council.
MOVED TO
6/21/94
7b.
()... '-j() . 1 I
7c, J') ;,.)-
CONTRACT
AWARD -
EXHAUST FUME
VENTILATION
SYSTEM
(Fire Station
No.1)
Considered separately (see page 4)
Jtl
APPROVED non-compliance with the specific bid process of the City
of Arcadia because of a sole source situation, and AWARDED the
contract for the purchase and installation of the exhaust fume
ventilation system at Fire Station No. 1 to Air Clean Systems of
Pomona in the amount of $26,598.
3
3/15/94
7b.
CONTRACT
AWARD -
ELECTRICAL
LOAD BANKS
(Water
Div.)
O.:s'IO .30
WO
8.
36:0080
CONSENT ITEMS 7a. AND 7c, WERE APPROVED ON MOTION BY MAYOR PRO
TEM LOJESKI, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARGETT AND CARRIED ON
ROLL CALL VOTE AS FOLLOWS:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Fasching, Lojeski, Margett and Ciraulo
None
Councilmember Harbicht
In response to questions from Councilmembers, staff explained
that these electrical load banks are for use by the Water
Division to start up the generators on a regular basis. The four
generators are used to pump water during power outages or
emergencies.
It was MOVED by Councilmember Margett, seconded by Mayor Pro tern
Lojeski and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows to ~
contract in the amount of $38,828.00 for the purchase of four
electrical load banks to Duthie Power Service.
I
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Fasching, Lojeski, Margett and Ciraulo
None
Councilmember Harbicht
CITY MANAGER
8a. & 8b. Consideration of recommendation to retain technical/legal cable
RETAIN consultants, Because of significant cable issues facing the
TECHNICAL/ City, including franchise renewal, franchise "change of control",
LEGAL and the impacts of the 1992 Cable Act; and given the technical
CONSULTANTS & and legal complexity of these issues compounded with the unknown
CITY CO~CIL requirements of positioning the City of Arcadia for the future
CHAMBERS' "information highway", City staff recommended retaining expert
IMPROVEMENT legal/technical assistance. Communications Support Group (CSG)
PROJECT - is a leading Southern California cable consultant who would be
SPECIFICATIONS able to assist staff in the technical negotiation process. The
& ADVERTISE City has used CSG for other technical cable related advice
FOR BIDS relating to rate regulation and upgrading the council chambers.
(APPROVED) CSG, in conjunction with legal counsel, would be able to assist
O'iSIO _ _10 City staff in better positioning the City to renew a multi-year
franchise agreement with Telecommunications, Inc. (TCI) and
0'.30 -1\" secure appropriate conditions for the future. CSG, with
appropriate legal counsel, under supervision of the City
Attorney, would also be able to provide excellent technical
advise with regard to the Cable Act, could intervene on behalf
of the City with the FCC, and could provide direction with
respect' to TCI corporate maneuvers, The City Attorney
recommends retention of the firm of Richards, Watson and Gershon.
They have worked closely with CSG, and can provide the required
expertise to supplement their services and address certain
specialized legal issues,
In July, 1993, the City Council retained Communications Support I
Group (CSG) to provide technical assistance in upgrading the City
Council chambers to improve the quality of the cablecasting of
the Council meetings, The first phase of the project has been
completed, and the Council has the opportunity to progress to the
next phase, CSG has prepared plans and specifications in order
to advertise for bids on the equipment, CSG anticipates that the
equipment purchase and installation should cost approximately
$210,600. Funds are available from the Capital Outlay fund, and
any funds that can be recaptured from the cable franchise will
be offset against the total cost.
It was MOVED by Councilmember Fasching, seconded by Mayor Pro
tern Lojeski and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows to RETAIN
the professional services of Communications Support Group, Inc,
for technical cable related advice, which includes the potential
,
4
3/15/94
I
I
9.
9a.
REVISED
AGENDA
FORMAT
FOR CITY
COUNCIL
MEETINGS
(TO BE RET.
TO COUNCIL
4/5/94)
OlIO dJ.e'
t,
9b.
RESOLUTION
NO. 5776
(ADOPTED)
O>~O-IO
36:0081
establishment of a government access channel in Arcadia, not to
exceed $33,500; and APPROPRIATE an additional $12,000 for the
specialized legal services of Richards, Watson 6. Gershon; APPROVE
the City Council Improvement Project, and ENDORSE CSG option lA
to purchase and install audio/visual cablecasting equipment, and
AUTHORIZE staff to advertise for bids to purchase and install
said equipment.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Fasching, Lojeski, Margett and Ciraulo
None
Councilmember Harbicht
CITY ATTORNEY
On April 1, 1994 the City Council will be affected by the revised
Brown Act with regard to the agenda format for City Council
meetings, The City Attorney presented sample formats 1 and 2 for
Council consideration. Format No. 2 is most consistent with
current procedure, and allows for specifically agendized
preliminary items such as "questions from Council regarding
clarification of agenda items". Councilmember Fasching suggested
that the "closed session" segment be scheduled at the end of the
meeting, and the "Matters from Elected Officials" segment earlier
in the meeting, Mayor Pro tem Lojeski suggested that should a
closed session be necessary prior to discussion of an agenda
item, he would like to see the agenda be flexible enough to
schedule it during the meeting, The City Attorney agreed that
this could be done, The City Attorney items can be moved up on
the agenda also. Mayor Ciraulo agreed with Councilmember
Fasching and Mayor Pro tem Lojeski regarding their suggestions.
Councilmember Margett suggested that time be allotted to make
sure those people who appear for lengthy public hearings are
accommodated most efficaciously. Council DIRECTED the City
Attorney to return to the April 5, 1994 meeting with the revised
agenda format,
The City Attorney presented and read the title of Resolution No,
5776: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA,
CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 93-008 TO CONSTRUCT
A 50,547 SQUARE FOOT ALBERTSON'S MARKET WITHIN 100 FEET OF
RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY AND A 2,800 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT
WITH OUTDOOR SEATING LOCATED WITHIN A 5,934 SQUARE FOOT MULTI-
TENANT BUILDING AT 232 AND 300 LIVE OAK AVENUE.
It was MOVED by Mayor Pro tem Lojeski, seconded by Councilmember
Margett, and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that Resolution
No. 5776 be and it is hereby ADOPTED.
Councilmember Fasching commented that although he will vote to
adopt this resolution, it is his opinion that consideration
should be given to some type of ingress/egress onto Lynrose
Avenue to provide better traffic flow, Councilmember Margett
also noted that he is in agreement with Councilmember Fasching,
and with Item No, 17 of the Resolution No. 5776, "the Planning
Division and Public Works Department shall review the traffic
situation on Live Oak Avenue and, if possible, an alternate left
turn mechanism shall be explored at the corners of Live Oak
Avenue and Third and Fourth Avenues", This would also facilitate
traffic flow, especially with regard to the delivery trucks,
entering and leaving the market premises,
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Fasching, Lojeski, Margett and Ciraulo
None
Councilmember Harbicht
5
3/15/94
10.
2.
PUBLIC
HEARING -
COMMERCIAL/
INDUSTRIAL
RECYCLING
PROGRAM - RE-
INTRODUCTION
ORDINANCE
NO. 2000 -
AGREEMENT
ClTY/ZAKAROFF
RECYCLING
SERVICES
(APPROVED)
o{f{).O ..:10
1010-10
36:0082
MATTERS FROM STAFF
None
In response to State mandated solid waste diversion goals, the
City has developed a commercial/industrial recycling program
requiring participation and cooperation by the business
community. The California Integrated Waste Management Act (AB
939) requires cities and counties to divert 25% of their waste
from landfills by 1995 and 50% by the year 2000. The City
adopted a source reduction and recycling element which identified
how the City will comply with'the Act. The SRRE identifies a
commercial/industrial recycling program as one such diversion
program. At the January 4, 1994 City Council meeting, the
Council approved the Agreement with Zakaroff Recycling Services
for a Commercial/Industrial Recycling Program, introduced
Ordinance 2000, and adopted Resolution 5762 setting the rates for
this program. Prior to the second reading and adoption of
Ordinance No. 2000, the City was presented with the concerns of
Browning Ferris Industries (BFI) regarding several aspects of the
proposed program, Staff recommended continuing final adoption
of Ordinance 2000 until the concerns presented by BFI could be
thoroughly reviewed. After review and evaluation by the City
Attorneys of Arcadia, Duarte and Monrovia, City staff and
Zakaroff Recycling Services, all parties believe that the
proposed amendment and agreement before Council this date, and
Ordinance No, 2000 are sufficient to carry out the intents of the
program. Additional details of the program are outlined in the
March IS, 1994 staff report and Ordinance 2000,
I
Mayor Ciraulo declared the public hearing OPEN.
~ In Favor
Jerrv Newman, Zakaroff Recycling Services, 11377 West Olympic
Blvd., Los Angeles, stated, in part, that this program, in many
ways is breaking new ground and creating something in the state
that will be a model for recycling for the future. He proceeded
to answer Council's questions and explained in considerable
detail that the system by which AB 939 is operating at this time
has changed from a generation basis, which means how much the
City can report of the amount of waste and recyclable materials
being generated from a given user or operation to a disposal
based system. So now the state is going to judge the City by
what the disposal companies, the landfills, and the transfer
stations are going to report to the state, Zakaroff'r as the
City's agent, will be taking on the responsibility of trying to
make sure that we can check the records the City is getting from
the generators against those the City is getting from the
disposal sites. The means of doing this is to actually check the
waste stream on an ongoing basis. They establish a waste audit
which means that they know what they are reporting, and they have
a contractual responsibility to the City which other companies I
may not have. Zakaroff will come in and go through the waste on
an ongoing basis so the records can be maintained and checked
against the disposal companies, as well as against the recyclers
and generators, The City is authorizing Zakaroff to go out and
make sure that the City's goals are being accomplished,
Councilmember Fasching said he feels that all persons privileged
to pick up recyclable commercial waste in the City of Arcadia
should have the same responsibility as Zakaroff has in reporting
to Council the amount of recyclable material picked up, which
the City can credit against the AB 939 mandate, He questions
why the City has to have an outside agency doing the policing at
a considerable cost to the City.
Mr. Newman said Zakaroff will be protecting the City's interests
as well as their own in creating a program that operates
6
3/15/94
I
I
36:0083
optimally. Unless they have the ability to ensure that optimum
performance, they cannot accomplish the task.
In ODoosition
Johanna Hofer, 875 Monte Verde Drive, stated, in part, that in
her opinion this consideration of the commercial and industrial
recycling program should be postponed until after the election
so that the new Council may have the opportunity to review these
items. Also it is her understanding that Newco's bid was lower
than that of Zakaroff Recycling Services. She has been satisfied
with Newco's services, Also, the City Manager informed her that
there are no other major public hearings to be held in the
immediate future, and that the most important issues facing the
new Council will be the budget and the revitalization issue.
No one else desiring to be heard,
MOTION by Mayor Pro tem Loj eski,
Fasching and CARRIED,
the hearing was CLOSED on
seconded by Councilmember
Councilmember Fasching noted that Council can review this
agreement with Zakaroff in four or six months to see how it is
working out.
ORDINANCE It was MOVED by Councilmember Fasching, seconded by Mayor Pro tem
NO. 2000 Lojeski, and CARRIED on roll call vote as follow to RE-INTRODUCE
(RE-INTRODUCEDX>rdinance No. 2000: .. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
o fj,,2t;J N,J ~~TYADo:r:c~*' 3CA;~F~~*ER AMlEN~:N~~~~C~~~ ~pI~~ C~~
I()/O I() PROVIDE REGUlATIONS FOR A COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL RECYCLING
PROGRAM"; RESCIND the action of January 4, 1994 adopting the
agreement for services with Zakaroff; and APPROVE the new
Agreement for Collection of Recyclable Materials from Commercial
and Industrial Properties with Zakaroff Recycling Services,
RECESS
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Fasching, Lojeski, Margett and Ciraulo
None
Councilmember Harbicht
At 8:30 p, m. Mayor Ciraulo announced a RECESS,
City Council Meeting then RECONVENED at 8:45 p.m.
The Regular
3.
PUBLIC Consideration of Conditional Use Permit 92-003 (including the
HEARING - Operations Plan) and a Reclamation Plan for an Inert Landfill at
C.U.P. 92- 12321 Lower Azusa Road and a Final Environmental Impact Report
003 (Including for said Conditional Use Permit and Plan (Applicant Rodeffer
Operations Investments).
Plan) &
RECLAMATION
PLAN FOR
INERT LAND-
FILL -
12321 LOWER
AZUSA ROAD &
FINAL ErR
(Rodeffer
Investments)
(APPROVED)
(:~-!?O-J.:.s
Os"
, I
Donna Butler, the Assistant Community Development
Director/Planning presented the staff report, "The 85 acre site
was annexed to the City of Arcadia in 1957. In 1958 a special
use permit was approved by the Arcadia City Council to allow sand
and gravel extraction, The quarrying operation began in 1967 and
was discontinued in 1990. Operation continued until aggregate
depletion and groundwater intrusion rendered it economically
infeasible to use the site as a quarry, During this period of
time more than 10 million cubic yards of sand and gravel were
removed from the quarry. It is estimated that the quarry pit is
between 150 and 165 feet deep, and contains approximately 1.1
billion/gallons of standing water. Currently the bottom of the
quarry is under approximately 40 feet of water. The site is an
abandoned quarry that State statue requires to be reclaimed to
a useful condition. It is not a lake. The water level in the
quarry fluctuates with the ground water table as can be seen in
the 1991 aerial and the 1993 aerial which are on display this
evening, It is estimated that 10 million cubic yards of inert
materials will be required to fill the quarry to its pre-1967
7
3/15/94
36:0084
surface elevations, and will take approximately eight to twelve
years to completely fill.
"In December, 1992, Rofeffer Investments filed an application for
a reclamation plan and conditional use permit including an
operations plan for the proposed inert landfill on the site.
This application is before the City Council at this time because
the City is required by law to process both the reclamation plan
and the conditional use application which was submitted by
Rodeffer Investments, The City is not the applicant, but the
lead agency responsible for processing the EIR and reclamation
plan and conditional use permit.
"The primary objectives of the project are: 1) to stabilize the
quarry slopes to reduce hazards to public health and safety I
consistent with both State and local requirements; 2) to reclaim
the property to a usable condition consistent with the City of
Arcadia's General Plan and zoning regulations; 3) to comply with
the requirements of the City of Arcadia as contained in the
Mining Permit and Reclamation Plan adopted June 5, 1979; and 4)
to comply with the California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act.
"The reclamation plan will fulfill the requirements of the
California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act, which is commonly
called SMARA, and the requirements of the City of Arcadia
contained in the Mining Permits and Reclamation Plan ordinance,
The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act declares that the
reclamation of mined lands is necessary to prevent or minimize
adverse effects on the environment and to protect the public
health and safety. The objectives of SMARA include: 1) assure
adverse environment effects are prevented or minimized and that
mined lands are reclaimed to a usable condition which is readily
adaptable for alternative land uses; and 2) that residual hazards
to public health and safety are eliminated,
"The Arcadia Municipal Code states, in part, 'that the
reclamation of mined lands is necessary to prevent or minimize
adverse effects on the environment and to protect the public
health and safety.' In addition, one of the perquisite
conditions is: 'That adverse environment effects are prevented
or minimized and that mined lands are reclaimed to a usable
condition which is readily adaptable for alternative land uses' .
"The applicant is also proposing and requesting approval of
conditional use permit 92-003 and the related operations plan.
The operations plan proposes the inert landfill orily, and
describes the inert landfill operations including a detailed
description of all major steps, tasks, requirements,
restrictions, precautions and activities involved in the
operation of a solid waste inert landfill. It includes material
quantity, haul generation, inspection and testing procedures,
acceptable fill material, search and identification of potential I
waste sources, on-site operation procedures, security procedures,
visual buffering improvements, reclamation and regulatory agency
involvement and implementation schedule.
"Rodeffer intends to lease the site to Roadway Construction,
Inc., who will operate the inert landfill. The landfill will
accept only those materials permitted by Waste Discharge
Requirements issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board
and the Solid Waste Facility Permit issued by the California
Integrated Waste Management Board. These materials would consist
primarily of uncontaminated roadway materials, including soil,
rock, gravel and concrete. No organic or toxic materials are
permitted,
"For an estimated 220 days a year, approximately 150 loads of
permitted materials may be hauled to the site per day; for
approximately 55 days per year, 300 loads of permitted materials
8
3/15/94
I
I
36:0085
may be hauled to the facility; and for only 30 days per year a
maximum of 600 loads of permitted materials will be hauled to the
site. All trucks will access the site from the San Gabriel River
Freeway, most of them from within 35 to 40 miles of the project
site. No trucks will travel on residential roads in the City of
El Monte.
"All material transported to the landfill will be broken up at
the excavation site so that all material will fit into 12 inch
lifts, On all large excavations, laboratory testing of soils will
occur prior to excavation and visual inspection will be performed
prior to transporting the inert material to the proposed site,
Any material found not to be inert will be rejected at the
excavation site and not transported to the landfill, All on-site
field testing at the landfill will be performed by employees
hired by and responsible to the City or other assigned
jurisdiction, There will be no rock crushing at the landfill
site,
.
"The entrance to the landfill will remain on Lower Azusa Road,
Landscaping along Lower Azusa Road will provide screening of the
operations, There will be multiple stacking lanes on site where
a visual inspection and gas inspection are performed.
Additional inspections will be performed at the tipping area,
No material will be tipped directly into the ground water, Any
material found not to be inert will be rejected. Provisions for
handling rejected material are described in the Draft EIR and
the Final EIR, The hours and days of operation are from 7:00
a.m, to 5:00 p. m., Monday through Friday and 8:00 a. m. to 5:00
p,m. on Saturdays, To reduce fugitive dust, all active work
areas and on-site roadways will be watered at least twice a day,
Also, exposed stockpiles will be either covered, enclosed,
watered twice daily or have a non-toxic soil binder applied to
them.
"The Operations Plan notes that the proposed landfill will be
conducted as a grading project as opposed to a typical landfill
operation. After thorough inspection of materials, fill will
occur in lifts that will be compacted to a minimum compaction of
90 percent. Since the actual fill sequence is weather dependent,
both a dry-fill condition and wet-fill condition scenario were
evaluated in the EIR,
"Groundwater monitoring will be initiated as part of the proposed
project. Under the direction of the City, a system of test wells
will be installed upgradient immediately next to the project site
and existing downgradient wells will be tested to ensure that
groundwater quality is nat being' jeopardized by the proposed
project. The Regional Water Quality Control Board will determine
the location and the number of monitoring wells required and the
frequency of testing.
"Prior to project operations, groundwater upgradient and
downgradient of the site will be collected and analyzed to
provide a baseline for existing groundwater quality that flows
through or under the proposed project site.
"The site is currently designated Industrial in the City's
General Plan and is zoned M-2 which is Heavy Industrial. No
permanent long-term land use is proposed at this time, nor is it
considered as part of the proposed project. Any assumptions for
future uses of this site would be speculative as this project
itself is anticipated to take at least eight to twelve years.
Under the current zoning designation, future development of the
property would be subject to the conditional use process and will
require additional environmental review,
"Several State and local
authority over the project.
Arcadia, which has approval
agencies will be responsible for
These agencies include the City of
authority over the conditional use
9
3/15/94
36:0086
permit and reclamation plan; the City Council is the defined
decision making body for purposes of certifying the final
Environmental Impact Report, and approving the Reclamation Plan
and conditional use permit, Regional Water Quality Control Board
for the Los Angeles Region has permit authority for all
landfills in assuring complying with State law. and also has
permit and regulatory authority for discharge of storm water
associated with construction and any other activities on the
site, The California Integrated Waste Management Board has
review and approval authority over the landfill as well, The
South Coast Air Quality Management District has review and permit
authority for operations of the landfill and ensures compliance
of all applicable rules and regulations. The Los Angeles County
Department of Health Services has permit approval authority for
the proposed landfill to ensure compliance with all conditions
set forth in the permit.
I
"The following outlines the project's environmental process and
analysis: Based upon an initial study prepared on this project
in February 1992 and again in April of 1992, the City determined
that an Environmental Impact Report was necessary. The initial
studies identified the following potential significant adverse
impacts that could possibly occur as a result of the proposed
project.
"Earth The project proposed has the potential for soil
disruptions, changes in topography, increases in soil erosion and
the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards. The
proposed project may result in substantial air emissions. The
proposed project may affect drainage patterns, the amount of
surface water in the pit, the quality of water in the pit, alter
groundwater flow or change the quantity of groundwaters. The
proposed project could change the diversity or number of plants
in or near the site. The proposed project could change the
number or diversity of animal species, The proposed project
could increase existing noise levels or expose people to severe
noise levels, The proposed project could generate additional
vehicular movement, impact existing transportation systems and
possibly increase traffic hazards. The proposed project could
impact public facilities such as roads.
"After those were identified, the first Notice of Preparation
was circulated on February 28, 1992. A revised Notice of
Preparation was circulated for 30 days on April 15, 1992, to
interested and responsible agencies, organizations and
individuals. The Notice of Preparation described the City's
intent to prepare an EIR for the proposed project and requested
comments regarding its content. Responses were received from
sixteen interested persons and agencies. On March 11, 1992 a
scoping meeting was held in the City Council Chambers which
allowed the public an opportunity to comment on the Draft EIR.
Notices of the meeting were sent to all property owners within
a 300 foot radius of the subject property as well as all persons I
who had submitted post cards to the City requesting notice of all
public meetings (approximately 800 persons). Thirty-five persons
attended the meeting and eleven persons spoke, On August II,
1993, the Notice of Completion was circulated providing for a 45
day review period of the Draft EIR from August 11 through
September 24, 1993. A public hearing was held before the
Planning Commission on September 14, 1993 on the Draft EIR (DEIR)
and the project (C.U,P, 92-003) and the Reclamation Plan for the
Rodeffer Quarry, Public Hearing notices were mailed on August
20, 1993 to 800+ persons requesting notice of the project and
everyone within a 300 foot radius, The purpose of the hearing
was to review and receive public testimony on the Draft EIR,
Reclamation Plan and conditional use permit, and to transmit the
Commission's record and recommendations in resolution form to the
City Council.
10
3/15/94
I
I
36:0087
"It is stated in the staff report and at the Commission's public
hearing that the City Council would be the final decision making
body for purposes of certifying the final environmental impact
report and approving the reclamation plan and the conditional use
permit including the operations plan. The Planning Commission
on October 12, 1993 voted 5 to 0 to adopt Resolution 1504 which
expressed the Commission's comments to the City Council on the
Draft Environmental Impact Report, and Resolution 1503 expressing
the Commission's comments and recommendation to the City Council
regarding the Conditional Use Permit and Reclamation Plan.
"During the 45 day review period, the City received written
comments from seventeen interested agencies and persons, and both
written and oral comments received during the public hearing
before the Planning Commission. These comments have been
included in the Final EIR, The written responses to comments
were sent to all public agencies on March 3, 1994, per Public
Resources Code 21092,5, On February 17, 1994, the Public
Hearing notice regarding tonight' s hearing was sent to all
property owners within a 300 foot radius of the subject site as
well as all interested persons and agencies (approximately 800+
notices) .
I,
"The final Environmental Impact Report includes the Draft EIR,
comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR either
verbatim or in summary, a list of persons, organizations and
public agencies commenting on the draft EIR, and the responses
of the Lead Agency to substantive environmental comments raised
throughout the public review process, The Final Environmental
Impact Report (FEIR) addresses all potentially significant
adverse impacts and mitigation measures to avoid or
significantly lessen the significant impact, The mitigation
measures are included in the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting
Program, and are included in the conditions of approval for the
project, One of the impacts which was a controversial issue was
based upon the groundwater contamination, The major concerns
were that the "inert material" will contain contaminated
materials that will get into the water table, and the ability of
the City to guarantee that this will not happen. Responses
regarding groundwater quality and protection are set forth in the
Draft EIR. In addition the following mitigation measures are
recommended, If during groundwater monitoring, downgradient
groundwater quality exceeds both the Waste Discharge Requirements
(WDR) limits and up gradient groundwater quality, groundwater
shall be extracted and cleaned until downgradient groundwater
quality meets the WDR limits and upgradient water quality.
Leachate from stockpiled reject materials may contaminate the
groundwater, and as a result the mitigation measure is to cover
and store stockpiles on a nonpermeable surface and remove
rejected stockpiles weekly. The project description itself
limits the fill to inert materials which are defined in the
operation plan as soil, rock, gravel and concrete, This will be
included in the monitoring plan, and we propose that this be
monitored.
"All significant adverse impacts can be mitigated to a level of
insignificance, with the exception of Air Quality, Site access
improvements involve covering approximately 54,000 square feet
of an existing unpaved road with asphalt. This construction-
related activity would take place in two separate phases. Phase
1 is the preparation of the area which would occur over three
days. Phase 2 includes asphalt delivery. pouring and paving
activities which is anticipated to take two days, In regard
to air quality, the draft EIR identified significant unavoidable
PMlO, which is particulate matter under 10 microns in diameter
or fugitive dust air quality impacts during the two-day Phase 2
construction period. To mitigate the PMlO emissions to
insignificance, the current number of 45 trucks delivering
asphalt per day will be limited to 15 trucks per day, and Phase
11
3/15/94
36:0088
2 construction will be extended from two days to six days of
activity.
"The air contaminant emissions from the operational phase of the
proj ect will exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management
District's threshold levels for nitrogen oxides, reactive organic
compounds, and PM10 emissions, resulting in unavoidable adverse
impacts, Over 80% of the nitrogen oxides emissions, and over 90%
of the project's total reactive organic compounds and PM10
emissions would result from on and off-site truck movement, i.e.,
grading and landfill equipment as well as on and off-site truck
travel. There are no single or combination of mitigation
measures available to reduce the project's emissions from truck
movement to a level of insignificance, However, we are still
recommending adoption of the mitigation measures to lessen the
impact.
I
I
.
"The Draft EIR concludes that cumulative air quality impacts are
significant with or without implementation of the proposed
project, These significant impacts to air quality result from
mobile source emissions, There are no directly applicable
mitigation measures available to reduce emissions from mobile
sources, aside from ensuring that vehicles are in proper running
condition. The following mitigation measures would partially
ameliorate the air quality impacts from post project as well as
cumulative projects, This will be to discontinue operations
during Stage II smog alerts. Maintain all vehicles and
equipment in proper tune and use the BACT on construction
equipment, including retarding timing, Section 1509 of the CEQA
guidelines notes, in part, that if an impact cannot be mitigated
or reduced to an acceptable level, the City Council is required
to make a statement of overriding considerations noting the
specific reasons to support its action ba~ed on the final EIR
and/or other information in the record, In other words, the
Council must balance the legal, technical, economic and other
considerations vs, the project's impact on air quality, including
human impact, and find that the project's benefits override the
adverse environmental effects. The primary objective of this
project is to comply with both the State Surface Mining and
Reclamation Act and Chapter 5, Part 1 of the Arcadia Municipal
Code relating to Mining Permits and Reclamation Plans. Another
objective is to reclaim the site to a stable condition.
"There are also economic benefits to reclaiming the property,
including property tax revenues to the City. If this p~oject is
not approved, the City is not satisfying the legal requirements
under both the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act and the Arcadia
Municipal Code.
"CEQA and case law require the lead agency to examine a
reasonable range of alternative to the project itself, including
the "no project" alternative. The DEIR addresses the following I
alternatives: No project alternative - under this alternative,
the quarry will not be used as an inert landfill, and the site
will remain in its current condition, Slope stabilization with
some reclamation - under this alternative, it is estimated that
approximately 3 million cubic yards of material would be required
to stabilize the slopes along the west bank next to the
residential property and would take approximately 3 years to
fill. The banks would be regraded to no more than a 2:1 slope
(25 degrees), Fill would be compacted and graded for slope
stabilization. After the slopes are stabilized, fill activities
would cease. Another alternative is groundwater recharge basin
this alternative involves using the quarry as a dedicated
spreading basin for groundwater recharge. The quarry slopes
would be filled, compacted and graded for stabilization as with
the slope stabilization with some reclamation alternative.
However, the pit would not be completely filled. A conveyance
system transporting water to the pit to increase the volume of
12
3/15/94
I
I
36:0089
water in the spreading basin would be necessary to make this
option viable, Watershed protection measures would also be
required to ensure the water in the basin does not become
contaminated by off-site sources, In addition, a water agency
or operator would have to buy the property to use the site as a
groundwater recharge basin., This alternative also requires
approval from other agencies including the Regional Water Quality
Control Board, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Main
San Gabriel Basin Watermaster. Also, obviously the City did not
consider one of the other alternatives that is often (inaudible)
off-site locations because the objective is to fill this
abandoned quarry.
"In staff's opinion, the alternatives considered have significant
weaknesses and/or do not achieve some of the project's
objectives, These are outlined in the Draft and Final
Environmental Impact Report. In addition to the above
alternatives which were set forth in the Draft EIR, the following
alternatives were recommended: excavation of the existing land
bridge that separates the Rodeffer site from the Livingston
Graham property to the north for the purpose of creating one
contiguous lake. And another alternative suggested was to
consider the partial reclamation of the quarry pit to be
eventually used as a recreational area. Partial reclamation was,
in fact, evaluated as part of the slope stabilization with some
reclamation alternative and the groundwater recharge basin
alternative, Eventual use of a recreation area was not examined
because eventual use of the quarry is not part of the project.
"CEQA requires a lead agency to adopt a monitoring program for
mitigation measures that are adopted or made conditions of
project approval to mitigate significant effects.
.
.
"The reporting or monitoring program must ensure compliance with
mitigation measures during the life of the project, If mitigation
measures have been requested by an agency that has jurisdiction
by law over natural resources affected by the project, then the
lead or responsible agency may request that agency to prepare a
proposed monitoring or reporting program for those mitigation
measures. The monitoring program identifies who will be
responsible for monitoring the progress of the mitigation
measures adopted by the City, when and how often the monitoring
shall be done, and a discussion of monitoring and reporting
procedures, The City Council must adopt a mitigation monitoring
and reporting program if it wishes to approve the project. The
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been included in
this report.
"As noted earlier in the report, the Planning Commission reviewed
the Draft Environmental Impact Report, the Reclamation Plan and
the conditional use permit. The Commission's comments have been
forwarded to the City Council in Resolutions 1503 and 1504, which
are included as part of this report, The Commission did not
review the comments and responses set forth in the Final
Environmental Impact Report or the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Plan. The Commission made a finding that the
mitigation measures set forth in the Draft EIR should minimize,
the significant adverse environmental impact with the exception
of air qual i ty. The Commiss ion further recommended in its review
of the alternatives identified in the Draft Environmental Impact
Report that there be more analysis regarding the use of the site
as a groundwater recharge basin, and why the use of the site as
a water discharge basin was not considered an acceptable
alternative. This alternative has been thoroughly discussed in
the Final Environmental Impact Report.
"A letter has been filed by William Ross, Special Counsel for the
City of El Monte, requesting that the public hearing, "if held
and opened, be continued to a date certain in the future or
continued in the first instance to allow for meaningful public
13
3/15/94
36:0090
participation on the complex issues associated with the project" .
"The City Council should make separate findings and motions on
the Environmental Impact Report, Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program, Conditional Use Permit and the Reclamation
Plan.
"With regard to the Final Environmental Impact Report, Based upon
the Council's review of the Final EIR, the Planning Commission's
review and recommendations, testimony presented at various public
hearings, and all other information provided during the decision
making process, the City Council must make the following
findings: 1) that the Final EIR for the Rodeffer Inert Landfill
has been completed in compliance with CEQA; 2) that the Final
EIR was presented to the City Council of the City of Arcadia and I
that the Council reviewed and considered the information
contained in the Final EIR prior to approving the project; 3)
that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into the project which mitigate or avoid the
significant effects on the environment, including the categories
of geological resources and seismicity; surface water and
groundwater quality; biological resources; traffic and
circulation including (inaudible) impact, and noise; 4) also,
the Council shall recognize that certain mitigation measures
are the responsibility of other agencies, 5) that the project
alternatives examined in the Final EIR are infeasible as they do
not meet the defined project objectives; (6) that despite the
incorporation of mitigation measures to reduce impacts relating
to air quality, there remain unavoidable significantly adverse
impacts upon air quality, which could include cumulative impact,
Having balanced the substantial legal, technical and economic and
other considerations against the project impact on air quality,
the Council finds that the project benefits override the
identified significant adverse environmental effects; 7) that the
Environmental Impact Report reflects the independent judgment of
the City; and 8) that all documents and records which constitute
the records and proceedings thus far, are currently located in
the Planning Division of Arcadia City Hall, 240 West Huntington
Drive, Arcadia.
"As a motion, the City Council should direct staff to prepare the
appropriate resolution setting forth the Council's findings
including a statement of overriding considerations and decisions.
In regard to the mitigation monitoring and reporting program,
the City Council should make the finding that the mitigation,
monitoring and reporting program complies with the req~irements
of CEQA and for a motion to adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program. In regard to the Conditional Use Permit, in
order to approve the Conditional Use Permit, the City Council
should make the following findings: 1) that the granting of the
Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public
health and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements
in such zone or vicinity, subject to the conditions of approval I
set forth in this report, and the conditions set forth in the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; 2) that the use
applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which
a Conditional Use Permit is authorized; 3) that the site of this
proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said
use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading,
landscaping and other features required to adjust said use with
the land and uses in the neighborhood; 4) that the site abuts
streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry
the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use; and 5) that
the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely
affect the comprehensive general plan.
"The conditions of approval shall include all mitigation measures
adopted by the Council as part of the certified Final EIR, and
the conditions of approval set forth in the staff report. As a
motion, the City Council should direct staff to prepare the
14
3/15/94
I
I
36:0091
appropriate resolution for adoption at its next meeting
reflecting the Council's action and recommendation on the
conditional use permit in relation to the required findings for
the conditional use permit, the sufficiency of the conditions
imposed and other related issues.
"Reclamation Plan - The Surface Mining and Reclamation Plan
notes: "The lead agency's review of reclamation plans submitted
pursuant to subdivision (b) or of financial assurances pursuant
to subdivision (c) is limited to whether the plan or the
financial assurances substantially meet the applicable
requirements of Sections 2772, 2773 and 2773,1 and the lead
agency surface mining ordinance adopted pursuant to subdivision
(2) of Section 2774, but in any event the lead agency shall
require that financial assurances for reclamation be sufficient
to perform reclamation of lands remaining disturbed."
"The City Council should direct staff to include in the
Resolution for the conditional use permit a finding that the plan
substantially meets the requirements set forth in Sections 2772,
2773 and 2773.1 of SMARA and Chapter 5 of the Arcadia Municipal
Code relating to Mining Permits and Reclamation Plans and as per
Condition 9 of the Conditions of Approval, the applicant shall
be required to provide said financial assurances, the amount of
which will be determined by the City of Arcadia.
"This does conclude the staff report. The City Attorney would
like to add a statement for the record regarding the City
Council's tour and view of the Rodeffer site. "
't
In response to a request from Mayor Ciraulo, Ms, Butler stated,
"as noted in the staff report, this project -- this site is not
a lake. As can be seen from the photographs, I think that best
illustrates the site. You have groundwater which fluctuates
significantly during dry seasons and wet seasons. And I think
it's just more importantly the purpose of this is that we are
here to act on an abandoned quarry. We are required by State law
to, as lead agency, process the application, and the
environmental impact report, I think that answers most of the
questions",
The City Attorney stated, "I would like the record to reflect
that on February 11, 1994, the City Council convened for a
regular meeting at 8:30 a, m. at City Hall and then at
approximately 8:45 a, m. the Councilmembers who are present this
evening went to the Rodeffer quarry site in the presence of Ms,
Butler, the City Attorney, and City Manager to view that site.
They entered the site. They viewed the site, They asked a few
questions of the staff. Ms, Butler gave a partial report on the
history of the site comparable to the report she gave this
evening, at least the beginning of that report. There are
minutes for that particular meeting, so I would like the record
to reflect the tour and view of the City Council at the site on
February 11, 1994."
Citv of El Monte Mavor Patricia A. Wallach stated, in part, that
no where else in the entire San Gabriel Valley are there plans
to operate a landfill so close to residential districts. If this
project is approved by the City of Arcadia, there will be a
landfill operating in the midst of our communities, She feels
that Arcadia has not given sufficient consideration to the
William Lockman alternative of reclaiming the quarry as a water
park. She requested that this public hearing be continued until
after the Arcadia City Council can be satisfied that alternatives
to the project have been thoroughly and adequately explored.
William Ross, City of El Monte Special Counsel, stated, in part,
that they would find it legally futile to exhaust the doctrine
of administrative remedies under either public resources Code 21,
Section 21177, for the case law with respect to the two permit
15
3/15/94
36:0092
actions before the Arcadia City Council given the short period
of time to integrate that analysis into the consideration of
meeting the burden of proof for both a C.U.P, and a reclamation
plan. He suggests an alternative -- that the record be kept open
for further comment or that the matter be continued to a certain
date and time in the future. He would like to reserve the right
to introduce subsequent evidence on the sufficiency of the Final
Environmental Impact Report, should a continuance not be granted
for review of what can minimally be stated as a very complex
proceeding, issues of evidence and matters of controversy.
Marlene Fox, Project Manager for Rodeffer Investments, 2031
Orchard Drive, Suite 200, Santa Ana Heights, CA, stated, in part,
that the original application was filed by Rodeffer Investments I
for the C.U.P for the inert landfill, the reclamation plan and
the operations plan on December 9, 1991. This process has been
going on for a great length of time since the spring of 1992,
subsequent to the filing of the application. That is pertinent
to the request by the City of El Monte for a continuance in that
they are arguing that they haven't had the Draft Environmental
Impact Report in sufficient time to review the material therein.
Ms, Fox reviewed the lengthy process through which Rodeffer
Investments has engaged with the City of Arcadia, and pointed out
that the City of El Monte has been a party to the process from
the beginning, They have had their experts on board and aware
of the information since the spring of 1992. In spite of this,
at every hearing, a continuance is requested by the City of El
Monte arguing that they haven't had sufficient time. There is
no reason for a continuance at this time, and it is requested
that Council reject the request.
\
The City Attorney noted that the California Department of Fish
and Game has also requested a continuance, Ms. Fox replied that
she re~eived by fax today a copy of a letter written on March 15,
1994 by the California Department of Fish and Game. Ms. Fox
reviewed the information that had been submitted to, and
responses from the California Department of Fish and Game. She
noted that the date of the public hearing has been noticed since
February -- a forty-five day public review period, during which
there were no comments from Fish and Game, until the one page
letter received today. She noted that the first name cited for
carbon copy of Fish and Game's letter is Assemblywoman Solis.
In view of the Assemblywoman's introduced legislation, perhaps
this is more than coincidence. It is just one more attempt for
delay, Ms. Fox believes that they are precluded at this time
from submitting their comments. The CEQA guideli'1les for
interpretation of the California Environmental Quality Act
provide that the lead agency has no obligation to respond to
comments from a public agency that are not submitted in writing
by that public agency in a timely fashion. She does not believe
that it would be justified to continue the hearing on the basis
of that request.
I
William Ross, stated, in part, that there is a difference between
the adequacy of notice of an application on file since 1992 and
the adequacy of availability of staff analysis on which the
doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies applies that
was only made available on Friday evening. He also noted that
there is a difference between notice under CEQA to the Department
of Fish and Game and the obligation to consult with a trustee
agency,
Mar~aret Soha~i, Special Counsel, stated, in part, that legal
argument from both counsel has been heard regarding exhaustion
of administrative remedies. Should this matter go to court, it
would be up to the judge to decide as to what comprises the
administrative record, It is the City's position that it has
complied with procedural due process and given complete notice,
She pointed out that all public agencies, pursuant to the staff
16
3/15/94
I
I
36:0093
report, have had the draft responses to comments since March 3.
1994.
Ci tv of El Monte Councilman Ernie Gutierrez, 11708 Cherrylee
Drive, El Monte, stated, in part, that he lives about 2,000 yards
from the pit. He is concerned about the amount of money being
spent by both El Monte and Arcadia for attorney's fees and court
costs in trying to iron out this problem. He feels that
representatives of the two cities should sit across from each
other and start spending the money for our youth instead, He
thinks that Arcadia and El Monte should be working in cooperation
to develop the finest lakes, aquatic parks, fishing facilities
rather than paying the money to the attorneys.
In response to questions from Councilmember Fasching regarding
the letter from the Army Corps of Engineers, Ms. Sohaei responded
that the Army Corps of Engineers had been noticed twice to make
sure that the law was complied with. They can request a
reevaluation if they want to, if it's appropriate, and if they
determine whether or not they have jurisdiction over the site.
The City Attorney commented that there is a question of whether
they have jurisdiction, so he would not say that the letter from
the Army Corps of Engineers could obviate going on with the
proceeding this evening, Ms. Sohagi pointed out that the
procedure followed is the procedure that is dictated by the
California Environmental Quality Act. Councilmember Fasching
noted that taxpayer money is not being spent on this process; the
City is being reimbursed by Mr. Rodeffer. In response to a
question from Councilmember Margett, Ms. Butler responded that
the draft Environmental Impact Study contains no comments from
the Corps of Engineers regarding the possible use as a flood
control basin.
"
It was MOVED by Councilmember Margett, seconded by Mayor Pro tem
Lojeski and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows to DENY the
continuance of the public hearing for consideration of
conditional use permit 92-003 (including the operations plan) and
a reclamation plan for an inert landfill at 12321 Lower Azusa
Road, and a Final Environmental Impact Report for said C.li.P. and
Plan.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Fasching, Lojeski, Margett and Ciraulo
None
Councilmember Harbicht
Mayor Cirualo declared the public hearing OPEN.
In Favor of the Proiect
Marlene Fox stated, in response to questions from Councilmembers
Fasching and Hargett, that she has recently been in contact with
executives of the Livingston-Graham Company, a subsidiary of
Hanson Industries, which is an international corporation
headquartered in Walnut Creek, California. Livingston-Graham
are the owners of the site that is just beyond the land bridge
of the Rodeffer site. The executives of this company had no
knowleuge of any proposal to acquire the Rodeffer property or to
become involved with the Rodeffer property to combine the
properties for a recreational water facility or any other
purpose. Livingston-Graham operates under a conditional use
permit mining sand and gravel the same as Rodeffer did. They
have over twenty years to go on their conditional use permit,
The only interest they would have in the Rodeffer property would
be for mining any aggregate that exists there. Ms. Fox has a
copy of a letter from Livingston-Graham addressed to
Assemblywoman Hilda Solis wherein Livingston-Graham advised her
that they were concerned with what they had read in the
transcript of the December 10, 1993 Solis hearing, and Mr,
Lockman's letter that appears in the final EIR, They wanted the
17
3/15/94
36:0094
record to be corrected, that they had not had any conversations
with Rodeffer or anyone else, and were not promoting a
recreational body of water between the two properties. Their
real interest in the San Gabriel Valley is in the mining of the
aggregate. They have a reclamation plan which was originally
filed in the late '70s and has recently been modified to possibly
turn the area into a recreational body of water. However, that
might or might not happen sometime in another twenty to twenty-
five years. In response to a question from Councilmember
Margett, Ms. Fox said that Livingston-Graham finds the
alternative interesting,
Dr, Dennis William. President, Geoscience, 1326 Monte Vista
Avenue, Claremont, made a brief presentation regarding landfills
in an effort to address some of the concerns and correct some of I
the misconceptions that the public has, He noted that
consideration of the Rodeffer pit as one of the alternatives as
a recharge facility would be a poor choice. The proposed
Rodeffer inert landfill is much stricter than other inert
landfills in the area. It will be more of a grading operation,
not anywhere similar to a Class III municipal solid waste
landfill, Also, California Class III landfills are regulated
much more strictly than inert landfills as the wastestream may
include soluble and decomposable material, The Regional Water
Quality Control Board staff has indicated chac true inerc
landfills do not pose a relacively high risk Co groundwacer, In
summary, based on review of che documents, Geoscience finds that
there will be no significant adverse impacts to groundwater
qual icy in che San Gabriel Basin due Co operacion of che proposed
Rodeffer inerc landfill,
.
I
Steve Sasaki, WPA Traffic Engineering, 680 Langsdorf Drive,
Fullerton, presented a review of the traffic patterns, and
traffic impacts which would result from this proposed project,
as well as an oucline of possible mitigation measures. He also
presenced a preliminary cost estimace of $300,000 for the
mitigation measures.
Philil) Buchiarelli, Geologist, 1470 South Valley VisCa Drive,
Diamond Bar, stated, in parc, that the slopes around the site are
unscable. With specific condicions, it is also possible chac a
larger scale failure could occur. It is his opinion that the two
best methods which can be implemented to eliminate che problem
of slope inscability are: 1) to buttress the slope by grading
fill at the bottom to present a two-to-one slope. Again
particularly on the west side because that is the side that has
residences, which would be of most concern, we would piace fill
along the bottom to construct a two-to-one slope. 2) Another
option obviously is filling the pit, which would completely
eliminate the problem,
Marlene Fox, stated, in part, that there was a recent proposal
before the California Integrated Waste Management Board to I
prohibit new solid waste landfills, and the lateral expansion of
existing solid waste landfills in the San Gabriel Basin.
However, this was not ratified by the State Water Resources
Board, so in effect it was not adopted. The California
Integrated Waste Management Board stated in a letter (which is
in the transcript) that inert landfills are needed, and they
should not be prohibited in the los Angeles Basin or the San
Gabriel Basin because when inert landfills are prohibited, the
inert materials are forced to go to the Class III waste
landfills. It is the State's position that there is a shortage
of Class III solid waste landfill capacity, Ms. Fox also called
attention to the danger at this site because of the slopes;
because of the stability; because of the exposed storm drain.
She referred to a incident involving two seven year old boys who
fell into the Rodeffer pit and had to be rescued by the Sheriff's
Department helicopter,
18
3/15/94
I
I
"'I.
36:0095
In OPDosition to the Proiect
Johanna Hofer, 875 Monte Verde Drive, stated, in part, that she
thinks this dormant quarry should be left to fill up with water
and give us a large lake for fishing, boating, etc.
Mike Gomez, 12118 Hemlock Street, El Monte, stated, in part, that
this proposed landfill will destroy the neighborhood, affecting
air, water, plant life, animal life, noise, transportation,
traffic, and public services. He is solidly against converting
the Rodeffer site into a landfill,
Jeff Sevmour Superintendent, El Monte City School District, 3540
Lexington Avenue, El Monte, stated, in part, that he would like
the Council to consider the adverse effect the air contamination
-- dust, airborne spores, molds, pollutants, etc, -- will have
on the children in the area, particularly those children who are
handicapped and medically fragile.
Robert Larr, 4315 North Durfee Road, El Monte, stated, in part,
that he is concerned that if the conditional use permit is
granted there will be many violations, He understands that the
Rodeffer operation has been guilty of violations of their
conditional use permit in the past.
Darlene PODe, Vice President, Sterling Mutual Water Company, 4218
La Madera, stated, in part, that Rodeffer has not proven to be
an honorable company in the past, She is greatly concerned about
the number of heavy trucks traveling back and forth and the air
contamination by dust.
4
Bob Brown, Aroma Drive, West Covina, stated, in part, that he
does not believe the Environmental Impact Report comes close to
meeting the requirements of the law regarding disclosure to the
public of what the real alternatives are. According to the
California Constitution, the public owns the water and they have
the right to use the voids and the natural soil, and any voids
created by man can be usurped by the public for storage of water
as long as it is in the natural course of the river, The EIR
doesn't present that alternative. Council has a responsibility
to protect the public's assets, and to look after the public
good, not just the good of the City of Arcadia. He does not feel
there has been proper disclosure on the part of the City of
Arcadia because he has not seen the EIR.
Howard Owens, 12031 Cherrylee Avenue, El Monte, stated, in part,
that he is concerned about how the material taken to the Landfill
is to be inspected. He also expressed concern about possible
contamination of the groundwater and what the City of Arcadia
will do if that should occur, Also, will the Arcadia Police
Department make sure that none of the trucks drive through El
Monte and into the quarry?
David Schmidt, 12018 Hemlock Street, expressed concern for his
son who has asthma and will be adversely affected by this
project,
Terrv Keenan, 12050 Hallwood Drive, El Monte, stated, in part,
that this project is still a dump. He also cited violations by
the Rodeffer company in the past. He has no confidence that
Rodeffer will check the material aboard all those trucks, He
does not agree that those trucks will only have a 1 percent
detriment to the traffic at Lower Azusa and the 605 Freeway,
He called attention to possibility of people contracting a fatal
disease from airborne particulate, valley fever, as a result of
the dust contamination.
Gene Reed, 1511 South Cambury, Arcadia, stated, in part, that
he has a great concern about the traffic impact from the 605
Freeway to Lower Azusa Road which at the present time is
19
3/15/94
36:0096
difficult. Also, there is a steep slope on that offramp and a
\
90 degree angle of turn at the approach of the top of the offramp
which will present problems for heavily loaded trucks.
Ann Emmons, 12121 Cherrylee Drive, stated, in part, that she is
also concerned about the trucks and also addressed the steep
freeway offramp. She also noted that the children who fell into
the Rodeffer pit had crawled through the wall which has never
been repaired. She also expressed her concerns about
contamination of the drinking water.
John Wallstrom, 3361 Nevada Avenue, El Monte, stated, in part,
that we are all neighbors and should meet and confer with the
City Councils rather than become involved in expensive
litigation,
I
Henrv Velasco, 12118 Hemlock, El Monte, stated, in part, that
he is also concerned about water contamination. If postponing
a decision saves one child, it will be well worth it. He also
expressed concern about the truck traffic.
John Chu, 12036 Hemlock Street, expressed concern about
regulation and inspection of the materials that are to go into
the landfill. What will happen to soil that is contaminated with
oil? It would be a moral and right decision to deny this
project.
I
I
Bob Barri~an, West Covina, stated, in part, that his parents live
two blocks from the pit, and he owns property downstream of the
pit. He is concerned about concrete that has been a roadway at
a construction site, This material has been subject to gas
spills, transmission fluid, any kind of fluid that comes out of
automobiles. If that material is dumped into the landfill,
eventually it will be washed into the water supply,
Jack Thurston. Vice Mayor, City of El Monte, 4734 Helmgate Drive,
El Monte, stated, in part, that he is concerned about the air
pollution, groundwater contamination and traffic, Call it what
you may, this is a dump site. This area has enough problems
without adding more.
Mark Sullivan, 12166 Hemlock, El Monte, stated, in part, that
Rodeffer and the City of Arcadia have been terrible neighbors.
Thirty years ago Rodeffer and the City of Arcadia began a rock
quarry operation within a hundred feet of El Monte residents.
The City of Arcadia did nothing to supervise this projEct over
the years, Now Rodefffer is trying to push through a'plan to
fill the gaping hole with somebody else's waste. The noise, the
dust, the traffic, the smoke will be unbearable, property values
will decrease. There is nothing in the C, U. p, about sanctions
if Rodeffer does not comply with the terms of the C.U,P, Since
Rodeffer created the problem, he should fix it by hauling in fill
dirt, not fuel and oil absorbed cement chunks.
I
Dorene Moore, 9816 Flarity, Temple City, stated, in part, that
she is concerned about the possibility of methane gas produced
at this proposed landfill. This is a very serious matter, Some
dumps are still producing methane twenty or thirty years later.
She is concerned that this dump will be over a riverbed where
there are no natural barriers. Any liners in place would crack
in the event of an earthquake. Also, there is no way of knowing
who will be dumping materials into the landfill, There are
people who are known to be toxic dumpers. She thinks there is
a possibility that within the next ten years the EPA will ask
that the dump be turned into a hazardous waste dump. She thinks
the Rodeffer past project records should be checked into.
Laurie Gasoara, 1258 Hemlock Street, El Monte, stated, in part,
that she played in the rock quarry as a child and has seen the
30
3/15/94
I
I
36:0097
degradation of the area, She has two small children and is
concerned about the environmental and health impact on her
family.
Harold Johanson, Community Development Director, City of El
Monte, stated, in part, that he is setting forth some comments
and suggestions specifically regarding the conditional use permit
and the conditions of approval of the conditional use permit. He
also added some historical comments regarding the 1957 resolution
granting a special use permit for development of the Rodeffer
pit, and the seventeen conditions of approval included in that
use permit, and examples of lack of enforcement. Several
conditions involved the entrance enhancement program and
landscaping and other improvements along Lower Azusa Road. He
would suggest Council approval be required of the final entrance
enhancement program, and of all landscaping and improvement plans
for the frontage, He also suggested the reconstruction of Lower
Azusa Road in the vicinity of the 605 freeway, and no ingress to
or egress from the site from or to the west on Lower Azusa Road.
He also suggested that the conditional use permit hereby granted
shall expire and be of no further force and effect twelve years
from the effective date hereof. Another condition that has been
found to be beneficial is that compliance with all conditions
shall be formally reviewed by the Arcadia Planning Commission one
year from the effective date of this conditional use permit and
each year thereafter. He also suggested that a security guard
be stationed on the property, and that the property not be
utilized for storage or repair of trucks or other vehicles and
storage not be permitted for any type of equipment on the
property.
II
William Ross, Special Counsel, stated, in part, that the April
1992 report indicated, with respect to public services, that the
project would have no effect on fire protection, police
protection, parks, or recreation activities, Statutory actions
taken by the legislature beginning in the fall of 1992 effected
a change in the method of local government finance so as to
affect the availability of those types of services. The comment
in the EIR is inadequate because it does not indicate what
response time would be applicable for the nearest Los Angeles
County apparatus to the project site, or whether the project site
will be served by the City Fire Department or subject to an
automatic or mutual aid agreement with the Los Angeles County
Fire Department, Also, there is no indication what hazardous
materials unit of which department or government agency would
respond if such material were to be encountered. Mr. Ross also
pointed out that the waste checking procedure is based on visual
inspection, and use of screening instruments such as an organic
vapor analyzer, This method would be ineffective in screening
soils contaminated with nonvolatile organics or minerals.
Therefore, there is not a firm commitment to performing an
analytical method to ensure inertness of accepted waste. Also,
according to the California Integrated Waste Management Board
there should be an analysis of risk to human health. The
response indicates these are not needed. If there are to be
employees on site to mitigate the effects of the project,
including the identification of hazardous waste, then an
emergency response preparedness plan and an injury prevention
plan are required. Contrary to the response, there is no
exemption under CEQA for the failure to analyze those two plans.
The volume of truck traffic and on-site earth-moving equipment
and air toxins associated with diesel fuel combustion will be
present, such as formaldehyde, benzene, etc, which will have a
significant effect on the surrounding community. Requirement of
analysis of those pollutants should have been included in the air
quality analysis. Also, it is stated in the EIR that the
subsequent use of the reclaimed quarry site is not part of the
project, but this response specifically indicates that a
vegetation plan will be developed as mitigation, In addition,
there is the issue of consistency with the general plan for both
21
3/15/94
36:0098
the reclamation plan and the C. u. P. Also there should be a
formal presentation of financial condition or requirement of a
performance bond for the construction of curbs, gutters, and
sidewalks.
In Rebuttal
Marlene Fox, Project Manager for Rodeffer Investments, responded,
in part, to comments concerning Dr. Williams and his association
with Azusa Western, which was to point out the environmental
degradation from that landfill. Rodeffer Investments does not
at this time, nor has it ever had any other inert landfills or
any other kind of landfills, so there is no record to talk about.
All the trucks will be owned and drivers will be employed by
Roadway, so they will be able to enforce the route plans. She I
also referred to an application filed by the City of EI Monte for
a general plan amendment, and zone change whereby they seek this
land use entitlement on the Rodeffer properey, For environmental
assessment, they refer repeatedly to the EIR that has been
prepared by the consultant to the City, She did not feel it co
be appropriate at this time for interpretation of whether or not
that is lawful. If they refer to the EIR CO support the
application, they can't have too many concerns with it, In
addition, this application is for partial use of the property
for residential purposes, and to accomplish that, the pit would
have to be filled. She agrees with Planning Commission Clark
that this is an existing condition, it is a hazard in many way,
and there is a state law that says something has to be done about
it. The question is how can we bese rectify that problem in
attempting to minimize the negative impaces on the environment
and the neighborhood.
.
I
Bob Lacoss, PDS West, 22982 El Toro Road, Lake Forest, stated,
in part, with the reclamation that might be possible, there would
only be a small sliver of a lake at high water, and none at all
at low water, He explained in detail the proposals for hauling,
inspecting, tipping and compacting the landfill material,
including the testing and monitoring procedures.
Steve Sasaki, WPA Traffic Engineering, 680 Langsdorf Drive,
Fullerton, outlined in considerable detail, the congeseion
management program, including the freeway analysis. The total
peak hour trips for the project under worse case conditions are
120, which get divided as they come to the freeway 60 in each
direction; this falls well below the ISO-trip guideline for the
study area, Essentially, it doesn't meet any of the study area
criteria for the congestion management program impacts"
No one else desiring to be heard, the hearing was CLOSED on
MOTION by Councilmember Fasching, seconded by Councilmember
Margett and CARRIED.
At the request of the City Attorney, Ms, Sohagi and Ms, Butler I
presented an overview of the monitoring plan which sets forth all
the conditions and the ways in which the City will be responsible
for insuring that all the conditions set forth in the staff
report, as well as the mitigation measures that are part of the
environmental impact report, will be implemented. This includes
information as to who is responsible for handling the monitoring,
who will be reporting to the City, how ofeen the City will be
reviewing the reports. Also described was the mitigation
monitoring report form which will be required to accompany each
of the mitigation measures, The purpose of the mitigation
monitoring plan is to assist the City to ensure that all of the
conditions in the staff report and the mitigation monitoring
measures are complied with.
Pamela Hanna, Barton-Aschman Associates, 199 South Los Robles,
Suite 770, Pasadena, reported that they prepared the traffic and
22
3/15/94
I
I
36:0099
circulation section of the draft EIR, and subsequently the Final
EIR. She discussed mitigation measures Nos. 1, 2, and 3,
Table 1 of the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program. The
project is responsible for mitigations 1 and 2; however, 3 is
not a project related mitigation. 4-1 is to add lanes to the east
and west approach to the north and southbound lanes of the I 605.
4-2 is to prepare a signal optimization study. 4-3 is a measure
to add an additional exclusive right turn lane on the south
approach to the offramp at Lower Azusa Road. This is not
required by the applicant; it is for the reduction of traffic
impacts due to cumulative traffic. With regard to the concern
of El Monte residents about trucks traveling on their streets,
Ms. Hanna pointed out that the operator of the landfill will have
complete control over the number and routes of the trucks that
go to the site. The safety issue has been addressed and there
should be no queuing or problems on Lower Azusa road.
Brian Ferris, Engineering Science, 199 South Los Robles Avenue,
Pasadena, stated, in part, that the air quality section of the
EIR was prepared under his direction. He stated that the threat
of valley fever in the surrounding community is probably quite
small. The comment from the South Coast Air Quality Management
District was that health analyses are not normally done for
criteria air contaminants which were analyzed in the
environmental impact report. In commenting on the diesel
exhaust, if one looked at VOC emissions from trucks in isolation
at the site, those levels of emissions would actually be below
the threshold levels, and are not ordinarily considered to
constitute a health risk,
II
Jav Officer, Engineering Science, 199 South Los Robles, Pasadena,
stated, in part, that he has received information about a
landfill that is located fairly close to Rodeffer. It is in
Irwindale and their discharge specifications included things like
asphalt, The Rodeffer pit will have more stringent requirements
on the material that they will accept -- more stringent than that
which the Water Quality Board allows for inert landfills. With
regard to the question of noise, with the implementation of all
the mitigation measures that are listed in the final EIR, the
landfill operations are expected to comply with the 55 DBA
residential noise regulation for the City of Arcadia and for the
City of El Monte, These standards are those set forth for an
area with single-family residential homes,
Brent Mivazaki, Engineering Science, 199 South Los Robles Avenue,
Pasadena, Project Manager for Engineering Science for preparation
of the EIR, addressed the question of the feasibility of
utilizing the site for a flood control basin. This is not
feasible because of a number of environmental impacts associated
with trying to implement such an alternative. The slopes would
have to be surfaced to protect them from erosion; otherwise a
major storm event could wipe out the slopes and impact the
residential areas to the west aa well as Lower Azusa Road. But
in stabilizing the slopes, the existing pit would have to be
significantly filled which would decrease the amount of volume
available for flood control to a point where it would not be
effective.
Ms, Sohagi and Ms. Butler then reviewed some of the technical
changes in the EIR.
Councilmember Margett summed up the objectives of the applicant
which are to stabilize the pit slopes, reclaim the property and
reuse it to the General Plan, fulfill the requirements of the
California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act, ensure that
adverse environmental effects are prevented, ensure that
production and conservation of minerals are encouraged and
ensure that there are no residual hazards, He does not believe
that property values will decline, once the fill has been brought
up to proper specifications in ten to twelve years, On the
23
3/15/94
36:0100
contrary, he would think the open pit would decrease property
values. Also, he does not think the residents have to be
concerned about the quality of water that is delivered by any of
the purveyors in the San Gabriel Basin to their constituency.
He feels the suggestion that the representatives of cities of
Arcadia and El Monte meet and confer about this project is an
excellent one, There will be no way that methane gas can be
generated out of the inert fill. Stopgap measures are going to
be implemented at the source, the dump site and the tipping area.
Councilmember Margett would like to do more research on the noise
element and the consistency of the plan for the EIR, as well as
the financial security of the people doing this project. With
regard to the proposal to establish an aquatic park, he thinks
that the City of El Monte should contact Rodeffer. It is
doubtful that any private entrepreneur would come in and do such I
a project. The County does not have the money, nor does the City
of Arcadia. The City of El Monte might have the option of buying
the property from Rodeffer and undertaking such a project if it
is fiscally possible,
"
Councilmember Fasching commented, in part. this open pit presents
a problem that has to be solved in some way, It would take three
years of filling to bring the slopes to where they would be
acceptable from a grade standpoint. After that, there would
still be a big hole in the ground. He disagrees with the
statement that this landfill will be in the middle of the cities.
It will be a joint project on the border of the two cities, and
the fill material can be transported by the freeway without
traversing through the streets of Arcadia and El Monte. In
response to Councilmember Fasching's questions, Mike Renner, Vice
President of Roadway Construction, stated, in part, that his
company has been in business twenty-three years, They will be
doing the hauling of inert material to this project, and the
drivers/operators will work under his direction, He also
commented that there are big excavation projects ongoing; Roadway
now has a contract with the Metro Rail Project. Councilmember
Fasching continued by saying that strict controls can be effected
in a better manner than was done in the past, particularly in
view of all the requirements that are in place, as well as the
different agencies involved. Something has to be done because
of the slopes, and he is inclined to think that this may be the
best answer,
In response to a request from Mayor Pro tem Lojeski, Ms. Fox
addressed the issue of the requested continuance. She pointed
out there have many meetings and conferences on this matter over
the years, No one has offered to buy the property; it is still
owned by Rodeffer Investments, and by rights and by law Rodeffer
is entitled to make this application, Rodeffer has walked every
step of the way that staff has required and then some, Tonight
Rodeffer has presented a lot of evidence. Ms. Fox has no idea
what a meet and confer between the two cities would accomplish.
It doesn't affect the application; it is not going to change the I
fact that El Monte has filed an application for a General Plan
change and a zoning amendment on the Rodeffer property. This
applicant is not going to develop a lake there; it is not
possible. The applicant has to comply with Arcadia's laws, but
is also subject to the State Mining and Reclamation Act, It is
subject to all of the other requirements dealing with water
problems in the State of California and in the San Gabriel basin.
Rodeffer opposes a meet and confer because they don't think it
would accomplish anything. They think they are entitled to a
decision, and respectfully request that Council make a decision
this evening. This would not preclude discussing conditions of
approval. They have no objections to some of the conditions
suggested by Mr. Johanson. However, they are opposed to a
continuance, and request a vote this evening,
Mayor Pro tem Lojeski said that his questions had been answered
by Ms. Fox, He also commented that he has sat on Council and
24
3/15/94
I
I
.
.
10.
MARGETT
(In Memory
of Jim
Peabody)
36:0101
heard about Rodeffer longer than anyone else on the Council; he
was involved in the Council when the first concept of filling
the pit was discussed. It was a very untimely situation because
of the problems being experienced at that time with the BKK
landfills, Fortunately, what he is hearing tonight is very
different, He has listened to the testimony both at the
Planning Commission hearing and tonight's hearing, and
appreciates the concerns and the testimony from the El Monte
Council and citizens. There are requirements by law to fill that
pit, He was down there and saw how the walls had caved in on one
side of the pit. All the problems have been taken under
consideration and he thinks they are being addressed about as
well as we are going to get them addressed. He agrees there is
nothing to be gained from another meet and confer. He is ready
to support what is before Council this evening.
Mayor Ciraulo stated that all the rock quarries that surround the
area under consideration are going to have to be filled at some
time. He does not think there is more to talk about, The
continuance has been denied, and he is prepared to vote on the
proposal at this time.
It was MOVED by Mayor Ciraulo, seconded by Mayor Pro tem Lojeski
and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows to APPROVE the Final
Environmental Impact Report for Conditional Use permit 92-003
(including the Operations Plan) for an Inert Landfill at 12321
Lower Azusa Road, with findings; DIRECT staff to prepare the
appropriate resolution setting forth the same including the
Statement of Overriding Considerations and Decisions; and ADOPT
the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program with findings,
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Fasching, Lojeski, Margett and Ciraulo
None
Councilmember Harbicht
It was then MOVED by Mayor Ciraulo, seconded by Mayor Pro tem
Lojeski and CARRIED on roll call vote as follow to APPROVE
Conditional Use Permit 92-003 for an Inert Landfill at 12321
Lower Azusa Road, with findings; DIRECT staff to prepare the
appropr.iate resolution reflecting the City Council's action and
recommendations on the conditional use permit in relation to the
required findings for said CUP, the sufficiency of the conditions
imposed and related issues; DIRECT staff to include in said
resolution for the conditional use permit a finding that the
Reclamation Plan substantially meets the requirements set forth
in Sections 2772, 2773 and 2774.1 of SMARA and Chapter ,5 of the
Arcadia Municipal Code relating to Mining Permits and Reclamation
Plans, and as per Condition 9 of the Conditions of Approval, the
applicant shall be required to provide said fim.ncial assurances,
the amount of which will be determined by the City of Arcadia
and APPROVAL of the Reclamation Plan,
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Fasching, Lojeski, Margett and Ciraulo
None
Councilmember Harbicht
NOTE: A verbatim transcript has been prepared of this Public
Hearing.
HATTERS FROM STAFF
None
ADJOURNMENT
Councilmember Margett: "I want to adjourn tonight's meeting in
memory of a good friend of mine, Jim Peabody, who was a long time
resident of Arcadia and passed away on March 11. Jim and his
wife, Frances moved to Arcadia in 1948. They resided in a home
25
3/15/94
MARGE!!
(In Memory
of Fred
Gansen)
LOJESIU
(In Memory
of Ruth
GeraJ.dine
Zareh)
ADJOURNMENT
(Mar.Z2.1994
5:30 p.m.)
ATTEST:
/ J
Alford.
36:0102
which he built for them in 1949. Jim and Frances have three
sons, Greg, Tom and Gary; daughter, Susan and nine grandchildren.
Jim was employed by a construction company. He was involved
with the Boy Scouts and Holy Angels Church. Jim was cared by
many and will certainly be missed."
Councilmember Margett: "I would also like to adjourn this
meeting in memory of Fred Gansen. He also was a long time
resident of Arcadia. He passed away February 25. Fred was
dearly loved by his wife of fifty- two years, Mary. He was a
loving father to Nancy Durell of Bellview, Washington and
grandfather to Chris and Jeff. Fred was a member of the Los
Angeles Rotary Club, Fred was a caring family man, and he will
be greatly missed."
Mayor Pro tern Loj eski: "I was very surprised to read of the
death of the wife of a gentleman we have seen before us many
times. Ruth Geraldine Zareh was the wife of Ed Zareh; mother of
Mary Lynn Bussell; also survived by step-daughters, Eleanor Ann
Hanks and Suzanne Eileen Axt; seven grandchildren; three great-
grandchildren; and one brother, Services will be held on
Thursday, March 17 at 11:00 a. m. in the Church of the Hills,
Forest Lawn - Hollywood Hills. In lieu of flowers, contributions
may be made to the Arthritis Foundation. I am sorry to have to
report this to the Council, I would like to adjourn this meeting
in memory of Ruth Geraldine Zareh."
At 2:20 a.m" March 16, 1994 the meeting ADJOURNED to 5:30 p.m.,
March 22, 1994 in the Conference Room of the City Hall Council
Chambers, for an Adjourned Regular Meeting (Study Session) to
conduct the business of the Council and the Redevelopment Agency,
and any Closed Session necessary to discuss personnel, litigation
matters or evaluation of properties.
'm1U~~~-/7
Mary B. Y ng, May
26
3/15/94
I
I