HomeMy WebLinkAboutJULY 17,1990
I
I
" 1/:;-';""
Olli?o
32:0169 111,f!
CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS ARE TAPE RECORDED AND ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY
CLERK
ROLL CALL
NW CORNER
PROJECT
(Htg. Dr. &
Second Ave.)
()o~O -'1':0
1/ W COI\ f/i,t':J
H & H
DEVELOPMENT
M I NUT E S
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA
and the
ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
(REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STUDY SESSION)
JULY 17, 1990
The City Council and the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency met in
an Adjourned Regular session at 5:30 p. m., July 17, 1990,
in the Conference Room of the City Hall Council Chambers and
immediately convened as the Redevelopment Agency.
PRESENT: Members Ciraulo, Fasching, Gilb, Harbicht and
Young
ABSENT: None
In April of 1989 the Agency released a Request for
Qualifications for the 162,000 square foot Northwest Corner
Project. Qualifications were received from ten developers,
eight of whom were selected to submit proposals for the
project. Two developers, WLA/Arcon and the Chandler Group
submitted proposals which were subsequently rejected; Chandler
on procedural grounds, and Arcon for low land price offered
and proposed use. In February 1990, the Agency released a
revised RFP for the project adding several Agency incentives
and special correspondence to those developers who had worked
with redevelopment agencies; Kaiser Foundation Health Plan and
H & H Development returned proposals. On June 16, 1990, W.
M. Hamilton of Kaiser informed staff that they had decided not
to proceed with the project. Therefore, H & H Development's
proposal, and supplemental documents relating to and
clarifying the proposal, was the only proposal submitted by
staff to the Agency at the July 3, 1990 meeting, also a
detailed analysis of the concerns of staff with regard to this
proposal. At that date, July 3, the Agency determined that
the request to consider the H & H Development proposal for the
Northwest Corner Project be CONTINUED to this date, July 17,
1990, to hear a presentation from Mr. Hanzo of H & H. The
July 17 staff report includes additional detail in connection
with H & H Development and a Remarketing Plan for the subject
site.
PRESENTATION
Mr. Charles Hanzo, H & H Development, displayed conceptual
renderings of the proposed building for the site and
explained, in part, that because of time limitations, the
renderings had been prepared by an artist since there was not
enough time to involve the architect. This produced,
according to Mr. Hanzo, some architectural imbalances which
can be addressed by the time they get to the planning stage,
. or resolved by a design review committee ... there are, he
noted, different architectural styles incorporated in the
renderings. Mr. Hanzo briefly explained the proposed traffic
plan for the project, which is a major concern. The tenants
of the building would enter the four-story parking structure
from Santa Clara. The main idea of the traffic pattern is to
1
7/17/90
32:0170
keep the flow of traffic more on Second Avenue and Santa Clara
and north to Colorado, said Mr. Hanzo. The parking structure
would be four levels above ground and one level below ground
with 1021 parking spaces. Mr. Hanzo pointed out the proposed
uses for different areas on the rendering and explained the
color key in response to Council's observations and questions;
such as landscaped areas in a certain color; driveways in
yellow, etc. The building, he explained, faces the
intersection of Second Avenue and Santa Clara to permit a view
of the mountains from the office area; the proposed building
will be eight stories; the tall windows on the face of the
building at ground level were depicted as three stories tall;
the parking structure was drawn as a terraced building with
each level set back from the level beneath it.
Mr. Hanzo went on to present a chart of the team he proposes
to bring together for the project; O. K. Earl Corporation as
architect/engineer/general contractor; the John Alle Company
as leasing agent; Builders Control Services Company, control
and disbursement of funds; the McLaren Company for the EIR;
Barton-Aschman, traffic study and analysis; Mr. Lee Erwin
Shackelford, Sr. and banking associates, funding
source/investor. Mr. Hanzo estimates the project will be
completed in 1 - 1 1/2 to 2 years after the close of escrow.
I
In connection with issues in the staff report, Mr. Hanzo
distributed his report to the Agency in response to these
issues. Further, as background experience, he noted that he
was employed at Jet Propulsion Lab and worked as a team member
on the Ranger Series and a team member on the Apollo and
Mercury programs. His last tenure was with the Resdel
Engineering firm in Arcadia ... responsible for two major
projects ... the defense industry was also mentioned as a part
of past career experience before becoming an electrical and
then a general contractor. All of these past career positions
have been team oriented, he noted.
In response to Chairman Young's question, Mr. Hanzo stated
that none of his other projects as a contractor/developer in
Southern California have been full projects or as large as the
NW Corner project. He offered to supply the Agency with
addresses in the Pasadena and Los Angeles areas of other
projects he has completed. Agency Member Harbicht expressed
the concern that he has, in considering any project, is "can
the developer perform?" Part of that concern is finances...
Mr. Shackelford, the financial investor in the proposed
project, has expressed his interest in just two letters
(copies included in the July 17, 1990 staff report), written
in a style of English that he is not too familiar with ...
also a letter ostensibly from a bank in Paris, France. Member
Harbicht questioned the Notary seal at the bottom of each page
of these letters. Mr. Hanzo responded that the Notary seal
had nothing to do with the bank letter itself, which was given
to H & H by the investor ... the H & H Notary just stamped his I
seal by Mr. Shackelford's signature signifying that H & H had
received the signed letters. Member Harbicht stated, in part,
that it looks like an attempt to give the letters some sort
of legitimacy. Mr. Hanzo went on to explain the financial
documentation which would include the source of Mr.
Shackelford's investment funds. He stated that he was
expecting a FAX to arrive "before the hour is out" ... which
would provide additional documents to support the bank
institutions that Mr. Shackelford is connected with. Further
exchange occurred with respect to Mr. Shackelford's position
as the financial investor in the project.
Member Fasching inquired of Mr. Hanzo whether he had
determined if he could lease all the space in the proposed
building and if a letter of intent or interest existed from
the Panda Inn Restaurant? Mr. Hanzo responded that the Panda
2
7/17/90
32: 0171
Inn was committed to go into the project; he feels reasonably
sure that they can lease all the spaces; they will have no
debt service on the project because it is going to be a
syndicated project and Mr. Shackelford is making those
arrangements right now. Mr. Shackelford must to go Paris and
sign the documents for the release of funds to come into
Builders Control. In response to Member Fasching's inquiry,
Mr. Hanzo said that he, Mr. Hanzo, will hold a 30% title in
the project after completion.
I
Carol Walker, Vice-President, John Alle Company, the leasing
agents, spoke briefly of the Alle Company's latest successful
leasing of a 300,000 square foot building, and other possible
leasing opportunities expected. It is Ms. Walker's opinion
that the slow-growth initiative in Pasadena will bring large
user tenants to Arcadia when the square footage is taken in
Pasadena.
I
Referring to Mr. Shackelford, Member Gilb pointed out that the
Agency did not know much about him except the Agency had
copies of letters he had signed; the letters had no headings;
anyone could have written them. If the project should get
started and Mr. Shackelford withdraws, where would this leave
the Agency? Member Gilb questioned if the O. K. Earl Company
and the other companies involved are satisfied with the
proposed financing for the project? Who would pay for the
traffic studies needed to get the project started ... who puts
the money up-front? These companies have to be sure that
there is a Mr. Shackelford and that he has all of this money
in Paris. They need to know that they are gong to be paid.
Mr. Hanzo responded that he was not sure that they are
satisfied with the proposed financing arrangement; in any
ease, no one will move on the project until the money is in
Builders Control. Further, in answer to Member Gilb's
supposition, the City Attorney/Agency Counsel responded that
if the Agency gives Mr. Hanzo the right to go ahead and start
the project and the money does not come through, by the terms
of the agreement, the agreement would be canceled. Mr. Hanzo
declared that the monies would be transferred and blocked for
the project and Builders Control would be the protector of the
funds; a tentative schedule of funding has been set up.
Member Gilb stated that in previous projects the Agency always
had a document from a lending institution that stated they
would finance the project should it proceed; this signed by
an officer of the lending institution. Mr. Hanzo noted that
he did provide the Agency with the bank's annual report and
the names of the bank officers. Member Gilb reminded Mr.
Manzo that the Agency represents the people of the City of
~rcadia; these are open meetings and the information is open
to the public, this in reference to a letter from the bank Mr.
Shackelford is connected with, with the name of the bank and
the signature covered over. Mr. Hanzo responded that staff
had seen the original. In answer to the Agency's further
questions of Mr. Shackelford's involvement and the banking
institutions, Mr. Hanzo, stated, in part, that Mr. Shackelford
was not a money broker working on a commission; he wiil not
retain ownership; the Paris bank would be "working a
syndication with the bank"; the inter-bank, made up of 17
banks in Europe, will actually do the funding; Shackelford has
bank guarantees to support this through syndication; this
"gets us out of this debt problem, or debt ratio", and "being
able to fill it up and meet the debt commitment every month".
~fter completion, the title to the project will be 60% to Mr.
Shackelford's company "Overlord headquartered in Los
Angeles and financed by European money". Staff noted that Mr.
Shackelford's letter suggested he had an office in Cypress ...
a motel on the third floor. Mr. Hanzo replied that Mr.
Shackelford is now located in Los Angeles in the general area
of New Hampshire and Wilshire. Mr. Hanzo informed the Agency
also that Mr. Shackelford originally came from New York. In
J
7/11/90
32:0172
reply to staff, Mr. Hanzo stated that 10% of the title to the
project upon completion will belong to Sam Masuda of Pacifico
International, located at Sixth and Normandy in Los Angeles,
who had brought them all together.
A discussion ensued between staff and Mr. Hanzo around the
issue of debt service payments versus Mr. Hanzo's explanation
that, upon completion, the project would be bought out by the
syndicate. Mr. Hanzo explained his position by comparing this
process with buying stock. Income is derived from the stock,
and, of course, the income is really going back to the
shareholders. This, he stated, is "probably the best way to
look at it for the method that is set up here". In response
to other questions from staff, Mr. Hanzo replied that, Great
Western Bank will be a conduit for the funds; that he has
never before had a contractual relationship with the O. K.
Earl Corporation, or with the John Alle Company, or with
Barton-Aschman. Further, that as a developer, not an
electrical contractor, he has never completed a whole project
where he has built an office building. With this, Mr. Hanzo
explained his involvement with the City of Duarte in a large
redevelopment project for which he did receive an ERN;
however, due to other requirements, the matter "somehow died
along the way".
I
Referring again to the FAX transmission expected this evening,
Mr. Hanzo explained that he was attempting to receive the
confirmation by Coldwell Banker that the funds were there, in
addition to a Great Western Bank document stating the funds
are available for this project in the Paris bank until after
a French holiday period, after which Mr. Shackelford must go
to France and sign the final documents. Further, Mr. Hanzo
explained that, although Mr. Shackelford is in Los Angeles,
he had injured his ankle and could not be at the meeting this
evening. . .
Member Fasching stated, in part, that he likes the project:
some modifications are needed to the architecture; he respects
Mr. Hanzo's reputation and his position in Pasadena for the
last 30 years. His concern is that, while Mr. Hanzo' s
endeavors are honorable and the project makes a lot of sense,
the Agency has no clear-cut definition in hand of any
financial ability to go ahead with the project, although he
has a nice team assembled ... all of whom have to be paid.
Further, at this point in time, he could not vote to give' him
the right to negotiate on this project as it stands.
Member Harbicht offered his assessment of the H & H financing
plan for the project. The Agency has received a couple of not
very well written letters from Mr. Shackelford with no printed
letterhead on the stationery... he typed his letterhead
this from someone who is talking about coming up with $47
million. The Agency has a copy of a letter to Mr.
Shackelford, supposedly from a bank... the bank's name is I
blocked out and the signature of the person who signed the
letter is blocked out. The letter does not mention the amount
of money that Mr. Hanzo has been talking about. All there is
in the letter is, " somebody saying we can advise that 3 or .
4 projects would be agreed for immediate acceptance". The
Agency does not know what the projects are, or know that
Arcadia's project is one of those projects mentioned; or
whether he is talking about $10,000 projects, $10,000,000
projects, or in the case of the project under discussion, a
$40,000,000 project. Member Harbicht stated he would never
vote to go ahead with this proposal on such flimsy evidence
of financing... if Mr. Hanzo can cure that, he may consider
it. Mr. Shackelford is a little too ethereal for him to
believe until he gets a whole lot more evidence than the
Agency has now. Mr. Hanzo asked the Agency what amount of
time would he have to try and resolve this financing issue to
4
7/17 /90
32:0173
the Agency's satisfaction? Member Gilb commented that unless
he receives a lot more information of who Shackelford is ...
his background, experience and what he has done, he would not
even consider this proposal. He noted that, yes, Mr. Hanzo
does have a good team put together, and he agrees with Member
Harbicht's assessment of the'financial investor. Further, in
re9ponse to Member Gilb's question, Mr. Hanzo's business
address is located on Rim Road, Hastings Ranch, which is his
home.
I
In response to Member Harbicht' s suggestion, a discussion
ensued around the question, Hwhat kind of a project would the
Agency like to see on the NY Corner site1H Member Fasching
stated, in part, that he does not see anything wrong with the
proposed project itself. Member Ciraulo was concerned more
with the size of the H & H proposed building, which would
completely overwhelm the neighborhood. Moreover, would the
entrance and exit of traffic from Santa Clara cause an
enormous strain on First Avenue and Santa Clara where there
is no traffic signal, only a stop sign that causes some
problems ... coming out on Second Avenue will cause problems
and there is not close direct access to the freeway.
Mr. Gibson, of Barton and Aschman, referring to traffic
studies in that area, stated, in part, that the NY Corner of
Huntington and Second is a very sensitive corner. It controls
the whole Huntington corridor. It is the weak link in the
whole system. The only way to make the traffic work for that
site is to emphasize Santa Clara as a way to get to Santa
Anita, then to the freeway. To make this traffic plan a much
more attractive alternative route, Second Avenue and Santa
Clara and First Avenue and Santa Clara, should be signalized.
Further exchange of ideas ensued regarding the traffic flow
and density, Mr. Gibson stating that they have not studied a
project as large as H & H has proposed on this corner, and
could not tell the Agency what is workable right now, but if
this area is redeveloped, Santa Clara has to be an important
street.
I
Referring to the entire proposal, the City Manager pointed out
that from staff's standpoint and the Agency's concerns, the
number one concern is the financing. Beyond that, they are
also concerned with the size of the building and density on
this piece of property. Moreover, the office vacancy market
in Arcadia and the immediate area is severely depressed and
will stay depressed for a while, regardless of what Ms. Walker
of the John Alle Company said. There is a lot of vacancy in
Pasadena. The second greatest concern of staff is the design
of the proposed H & H building, this is a major problem...
there are at least four architectural styles, maybe more, all
of which, in staff's opinion, are inappropriate for Arcadia
and, in particular, that corner. Staff would strongly
recommend, if the Agency wishes to pursue the proposed
project, that it be totally redesigned. Referring to the
traffic circulation, the proposed density on that corner is
totally unacceptable, it will create horrendous traffic
problems for the City.
Chairman Young commented that an 8-story building is too big
for that corner; the design can be worked out, but, something
on a smaller scale. Mr. Hanzo replied that they had
considered a smaller building, but with the land costing them
$25 a square foot, as they now propose, they must go up. If
the building is lowered to 4 or 6 stories, as suggested by
staff, they would have to recalculate the offer for the price
of the land.
Further discussion on the traffic; the use of Santa Clara as
the entrance and exit for the project. First Avenue as a
major street for traffic flowing to south Arcadia from Santa
5
7/17 /90
32:0174
Clara. Additional discussion ensued of the size of the
building as compared to the Towne Center Building.
Andy Krappman of the O. K. Earl Corporation, offered his
observations, stating, in part, there is much to be done in
terms of a market feasibility study; a specific plan and a
redesign of the proposed H & H building. He reminded the
Agency that they only have one proposal to consider, although
the opportunity was offered to others. He understands, from
staff, that the base the Agency has to deal with is about $32
a square foot in terms of the land ... cost of acquisition and
administration, and the like, so the Agency has a write-down.
There is a delicate balance in all of this area; he suggests
that the Agency might want to attach some conditions and time
schedules to an approval of the concept of the project that
would require financing ... incremental financing first, a I
step- by-step process, so that the Agency could get to a
project that somebody could write a real commitment letter
for. No one will write a commitment letter for a project that
is not even designed and is not even conceptually approved as
to size by the Agency. Further, Mr. Krappman stated, in part,
the Agency may want to consider getting escrow funds ... if
Mr. Hanzo could provide some escrow funds to cover the market
feasibility study, the traffic study and the preliminary
architectural studies that would be brought to the Agency.
Further, he noted, the Disposition and Development Agreements
have all sorts of time tables and design approvals ... similar
items could be built into the exclusive agreement to negotiate
that might allow this proposal to go a step further. Right
now, Mr. Schacke1ford would be committing to an undesigned
project.
The Agency then opened up a brief discussion in connection
with the anticipated FAX that would verify Mr. Shackelford's
commitment of the funds to finance the project. Member
Harbicht commented that the Agency would need more assurance
than this FAX that the money is available ... Mr. Kinnahan
then explained the process beginning with the ERN which will
have a six month declaration which leads to a DDA and so
forth. This to remind the Agency that if Mr. Shackelford has
the funds, he should not be asked to FAX or wire the $42
million ... Mr. Kinnahan went on to state, in part, that
notwithstanding the fact that the Agency may have, in fact,
financing from Mr. Shackelford, he still has some very serious
concerns of the overall capacity of H & H Development to
manage a project of this size; even if the money is available,
and even with this management team. Mr. Hanzo has never built
an office building ... he has never done one. Moreover, if
Mr. Hanzo is going to experiment with the Agency's land, and
Agency revenues in land sale proceeds, he would rather this
happen on a much smaller project than this one. Further, that
is a very big ,project on a prime corner and the chances of
success, given'Mr. Hanzo's experience, are somewhat mixed.
In closing the discussion of the H & H Development proposal, I
Agency Member Fasching commented to Mr. Hanzo that, with the
team he has brought together, and no debt, he would not be
worried about Mr. Hanzo' s ability to manage the building,
because Mr. Hanzo will not have to pay mortgage payments.
However, the Agency should proceed ... go ahead with other
considerations regarding this property. Further, the door is
still open for H & H to come back whenever he has everything
put together with Mr. Shackelford and so forth. Member Gilb
questioned this. Mr. Hanzo responded that the agreements are
in place in connection with Mr. Hanzo's managing the project
and returning Mr. Shackelford's investmwent to him with a
profit. Further, Member Fasching noted that Mr. Shackelford
will own 60% of the project. After a brief discussion on this
same point, Chairman Young thanked Mr. Hanzo for his
6
7/17/90
I
I
<
.<l;:....:.~~,
32:0175
presentation, and staff submitted a recommendation to the
Agency for a motion.
MOTION
It was the MOVED by Member Gilb, seconded by Chairman Young
and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that the Agency
REMARKET the site with an open listing, with a 3% maximum
commission.
Member Harbicht opened the discussion asking the Agency to
consider, in general, what would the Agency want on this site?
What does the Agency want in Arcadia? Do they want to start
building 8-story office buildings in Arcadia. Members
Harbicht, Young and Ciraulo all agreed that they do not want
an 8-story building on the site or want to change the
character of Arcadia forever by building any buildings that
large. Member Harbicht continued on, that he was talking
about not just the height of the building, but what does the
Agency want Arcadia to be? A town of high-rise central core
. .. or to stay as it is now? Does the Agency want density in
town? Growth? Traffic and everything that comes with that
with whatever benefits providing jobs and all of that?
Or does the Agency want Arcadia to stay, basically, a
community of homes with the central business and the
commercial aspects of town being a relatively minor part? He
would opt for the latter. Chairman Young said she did not
want Arcadia to become another Pasadena, on a smaller scale.
Member Harbicht agreed, and asked the Agency what was their
vision for Arcadia? Referring to the 8-story Towne Center
building on Santa Anita, he stated, in part, that he was not
involved in that decision. If he had been on the Council at
that time, he does not know what he would have done .., but
he is aware of what the reaction of the residents has been to
that building. The people of Arcadia are not looking for
growth ... he is not either, nor does he wish to bring more
people to Arcadia to live or work here. He is happy with the
City the way it is, and does not want to see an 8-story
building on this site ... if it takes longer to payoff the
property, then it just takes longer, but the character of the
community will be retained which is far different than if an
8-story building is built on this site or anywhere else. If
this Agency is going to put an 8-story building on this site,
then, philosophically, the Agency is saying that they are
accepting 8 -story buildings. Member Ciraulo agreed, and noted
that the character of the City would be changed forever and
he is not sure that he would want to do that. Member Harbicht
commented that if the Agency is going to go out for additional
proposals or try to market the property through brokers, then
the Agency should provide some guidance.
Member Fasching basically agreed, but added that he is looking
at the geographical area that the Agency is dealing with...
that particular corner, perhaps a 4 or 6-story building, based
on the economics of the property. should be there. A 7-story
hotel is already on the northeast corner, this is not the same
as putting this building in the heart of town at Baldwin and
Huntington. Huntington and Second is in a very heavily
commercial populated area extending all the way east.
Member Ciraulo said he believed an 8-story building would
completely overwhelm that area. . . maybe a scaled down version
would .be more acceptable. Member Fasching mentioned the
Gribble 4-story building. . . which is a fairly large building.
Member Ciraulo thought a 4-story building on this site would
fit in well because the railroad trestle is there, which would
hide almost two of the stories. Member Harbicht and Chairman
Young agreed with the 4-story concept. Member Fasching said
he would like to see renderings of 4 and 6-story buildings and
consider the geographical location also ... he agreed that he
did not want to see something there that would change the
character of the City. Member Ciraulo suggested that the
7
7/17 /90
,>
>
32:0176
"fI't,,'-liA
Agency should give better defined direction for tna1 stte to
:-t',~,f~-;:. j
potential bidders .... just exactly what the Agency',wourd want
or not want. Give them some parameters and say, "within these
guidelines, this is what we would like to see", so bidders do
not waste their time and spend money needlessly making
presentations to the Agency -- this is only fair.
The concept of marketing the property through a broker was
discussed. Staff mentioned that it is unusual for
redevelopment agencies to do this -- not very many cities do
so. Staff is making this recommendation because of the
difficulty in marketing this site. It is a difficult site and
a difficult time, noted Member Harbicht. Member Fasching
asked the Agency if the price given to the brokers would be
based on the square foot value of the land? Staff answered
that no price is contemplated now because it is a function of
what would be built on the land .., an 8-story building could
pay more than a 4-story building. Much discussion ensued in
explaining why a redevelopment project could not be marketed
the same as a home or other commercial properties. Staff
explained this would be an open listing; that the marketing
effort is of an unusual nature. The Agency cannot commit to
a deal until there is a joint public hearing with the City
Council and environmental documents filed. This is very
unlike a normal broker listing where the broker brings an
offer in and it is accepted and the first one in the door may
be accepted. In this arrangement the Agency could receive 4
or 5 proposals and negotiate with all of them and whoever the
Agency strikes the deal with is the broker that gets the
commission into that equation goes the size of the
building; what type of use. Member Harbicht noted that the
Agency has always done this ... the Agency accepts proposals
and the proposal includes the price. Staff commented that
certain proposals generate more income than others, and so
they can pay more for the property. Retail projects or
restaurants, offices or mixed combinations could each pay a
different price. In the discussion Member Harbicht explained
that basically this listing is far different than a normal
listing with a realtor. The broker in this redevelopment
project would come in with the offer, which, if the Agency is
interested, then triggers an Exclusive Right to Negotiate for
six months; and then triggers a DDA for another four months;
and then a sale. This could be viewed as experimental in that
brokers are not used to working that way in having to go
through a nine month period of negotiations, and get into
specifics as to what will be b~ilt; what is the architectural
design; or what color it is going to be. As far as giving a
broker some guidance as to what the Agency is looking or, it
would be fair to say... something in the neighborhood of $25
or $30 a foot higher for some kinds of projects or
potentially lower for others ... depending on the desirability
of the project. Also, give them some guidance as to what kind
of a project the Agency is looking for.
I
Member Cilb restated the MOTION to remarket the property with
an open listing with a 3% maximum commission and a roll call
vote was then taken:
I
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members Ciraulo, Fasching, Gilb, Harbicht and Young
None
None
Staff will bring a draft of the listing statement back to the
Agency for any additional parameters the Agency would like to
put on, besides the 4-story limit, to be discussed again
before staff finalizes the listing.
",
At 6:57 p. m. the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency ADJOURNED.
CITY COUNCIL CONVENED AT 7:00 p. m.
8
7/17/90
r-
I
I
1
RODEFFER
QVARRY
(July 3
Pub.Hrg.
Transcript)
IJ~-(~- -is;/
tl<.ul) ,:'-1 I r.:...
/liSP
LA CO
ANIMAL
CONTROL
o Lf/o -30
/I (JIII1I)l c.oN1;.:.o I-
210 FREEWAY
SOUNDWALLS
C ,; S (; - (, 0
SO" M D,ljA I.LS
EMINENT
DOMAIN
COUNSEL
SGVSW JOINT
POWERS AUTH.
CLOSED SESSION
ADJOURNED
ATTEST:
32:0177
PRESENT: Councilmembers Ciraulo, Fasching, Gilb, Harbicht
and Young
ABSENT: None
Attorneys Ross & Scott, representing the City of El Monte,
have requessted a transcript of the July 3 Public Hearing
proceedings before the City Council of the Rodeffer
Reclamation Plan, and also request that the charges of
approximately $464 for same be waived. The City Attorney
stated that the law clearly provides that they are to pay for
the transcript, provided for in the Government Code and in the
Code of Civil Procedures. The City Clerk, in response to
staff's question, said, that the attorneys had requested the
transcript and the charge is very minimal for the time
involved to transcribe and proof the transcript. The City
Attorney added that the transcript is part of the record that
Ross & Scott will use on appeal when they file a law suit
involving, perhaps, the City and Rodeffer, so the charges are
legally upon them. It was the consensus of Council that
before Ross & Scott receive the transcript, the City will bill
them for the service.
The City Manager provided Council with additional material
concerning the County Animal Care and Control policy of
selling animals for research purposes. Robyne Harrington
phoned that she will be at the meeting tonight to address the
Council. Also, Rita Burney phoned, she will not be'present
tonight but she requests that Council pass a pet protection
resolution to protect all the pound animals who were all pets
once and should be protected from that use also.
Caltrans will hold a public hearing to receive input from
residents on the proposed changes to the 210 Freeway through
Arcadia. A newspaper article was brought to staff's attention
which reports that someone from Caltrans has stated that there
may not be enough money available to put sound walls up
immediately if Caltrans does widen the 210 Freeway for the
diamond lane. The City's position is that the sound walls go
in simultaneously with any improvements along the freeway.
With Council's approval, Public Works Director, Joe Lopez,
will attend the public hearing and make this presentation to
Caltrans.
The City Attorney introduced Mr. Stoever of the law firm of
Oliver, Stoever, Barr and Vose, Los Angeles. Staff is
recommending that OSVB be retained as the Agency redevelopment
eminent domain counsel, ABA Agenda Item 3c. The Council
greeted Mr. Stoever.
Referring to the request for Arcadia to join the San Gabriel
Valley Solid Waste Joint Powers Authority, Agenda Item 5g,
Councilmember Gilb questioned the possible method the
Sanitation District could have used to decide which cities
were in each group. Staff reponded that the groupings may
have something to do with the various Sanitation Districts
each city is in. The City Manager added that it does not make
too much of a difference as long as Arcadia is in a fairly
large group, so that the cost can be spread as much as
possible for the City's part of the plan.
The City Manager requested a Closed Session before the Regular
Meeting this date.
At 7:12 p. m. Council entered the CLOSED SESSION, RECONVENED
AND ADJOURNED sine die at 7:30 p. ~,
~'fI;i/~-:r-
Mary B oun, yor
...... -----
-
9
7/17/90
~.-.)J~
J . Alford, y Cle~