Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPTEMBER 1,1987 29:0274 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ARE TAPE RECORDED AND ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK I t/ INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL MINUTE APPROVAL (Aug.18 ,1987) (APPROVED) ORD. & RES. READ BY TITLE ONLY CLOSED SESSION I M I NUT E S CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA and the ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 1,1987 The City Council and the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency met in a regular session, September 1, 1987 at 7:30 p. m. in the Arcadia City Hall Council Chamber. Dr. Charles M. Olsen, Arcadia Presbyterian Church Councilmember Dennis A. Lojeski PRESENT: Councilmembers Chandler, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Gilb ABSENT: None On MOTION by Councilmember Lojeski, seconded by Councilmember Harbicht and CARRIED, the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 18, 1987 were APPROVED. Councilmemb€r Young was not present at the August 18, 1987 Council Meeting and did not vote on the Minute approval. It was MOVED by Councilmember Harbicht, seconded by Councilmember Chandler and CARRIED that Ordinances and Resolutions be read by title only and that the reading in full be waived. CITY ATTORNEY "I have two announcements; one concerning the Closed Session -- the, I City Council and the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency met in a CLOSED SESSION this evening pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 to give instructions to the City's negotiator regarding negotiations with Rick Smith concerning the north side project in the vicinity of Third Avenue and Santa Clara. Additionally, the Council and Agency will be adjourning to a CLOSED SESSION at the conclusion of this evening's regular meeting, again pursuant to Government Code 54956,8,. to give instructions to the City's negotiator regarding negotiations with the Department of General Services concerning the Armory property adjacent to City Hall and also concerning the Nissan property at 333 East Huntington where we are negotiating with Bruce Low and his attorney, Jules Sanford. t'One other announcement concerns agenda item 8a., the urgency ordinance. This requires a reading in full, however, I have determined that consistent with the City Charter, an alternative is for me to make available for any member of the audience copies of the ordinance and then to summarize the ordinance when it comes up this evening and that would be substantially in compliance with the Charter requirement. This ordinance has been read in full on two or three other occasions so I propose to make the ordinance available for anybody who wants to read it -- either read it before it comes up at 8a. tonight and then I will just summarize it when it comes up unless the Council overWhelmingly desires me to read the ordinance in total, I think we can do it this way this evening if ,that would be permissible." (Consensus of Council to agree) ~/1/87 -1- 1. PUBLI C HEARING DESIGN REVIEW (M-87-71 45 La Porte Street )' (APPROVED) i)- ~ ,1- '\ ?rq r \ 29:0275 Mayor Gilb announced that item 4c, - Design Review for the Mobil Gas Station at 5 W. Huntington Drive has been withdrawn. Item 6a. - Petition for Street Lights, hearing will be on October 8, 1987. On October 15, 1987 the City Council approved M-85-119 - a request to construct an industrial building on a site containing 7,682.5 squa re feet in 1 i eu of 15,000 square feet at 45 La Porte Street. I This project also received Design Review approval from the'Arcadia Redevelopment Agency. Due to problems, the applicant has completely changed the design and retained a new designer. During this time, the approval expired. This applicant now proposes to construct a two-story 3,900 square foot industrial bui~ding. Nine parking spaces will be provided on the site. Ingress and egress will be from the 'alley to the north. The building will cover 36% of the lot; a maximum lot coverage of 60% is allowed. This proposal will meet all code requirements except for the minimum lot size. It:is Planning Department opinion that there is a hardship by reason of ~~rrounding development. It is also the Planning Department opinion that the development of this project on a 7,682.5 square foot lot would be an appropriate development and would not be detrimental to the surrounding area or inconsistent with the uses and code require- ments of ,the M-l zone with the exception of the lot area requi rement. Councilmember Harbicht inquired, as a general question, if this type of ,request did not come before the Council rather frequently. Perhaps this zoning requirement should be changed. Staff replied it was true. OriginallY it was hoped that two or more of the lets in the area would be combined for such developmer,ts, but this has not occurred very frequently. Council had at some time past decided to leave the zoning as it was and just hear each individual case and make a decision at that time for each one. Councilmember Young noted that the offer to purchase adjacent property had been made two years previously. Mayor Gilb declared the hearing open, and Charles E. Boggs, 61 E. Foothill Blvd. (Classic Builders Corp.) was present to answer questions. He replied to Councilmember Young's question to the effect that the owner, Benny Joseph, was most anxious to purchase the apartment bvild- ing next to his property, but it just had not worked out. Mayor Gilb inquired when construction was scheduled to begin. Reply was that it would begin as soon as possible because'Mr. Joseph wants to move his own business into the building ... it is not being built just for speculation. No one else desiring,to be heard, the hearing was CLOSED on MOTION by Councilmember Young, seconded by Councilmember Lojeski and CARRIED. I It was then MOVED by Councilmember Chandler, seconded by Council- member Harbicht and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that M-87-71 be APPROVED; that Council finds that the request would secure an appropriate improvement, prevent an unreasonable hardship due to surrounding developments and the subject site's location which prohibit the acquisition of additional land, or promote uniformity of develop- ment and find that the design conc~pt plans are in compliance with the Arcadia Design Review criteria, and MOVE for approval subject to the conditions of approval set forth in the staff report dated September 1,1987. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers Chandler, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Gilb None None 9/1 /87 -2- I I 2. c 3. 4. 4a. ROLL CALL 4b. MINUTE APPROVAL (Aug.18,1987) (APPROVED) 4c. AGENDA ITEM WITHtlRAwN AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION 29:0276 Ed Zareh, 1051 Catalpa, thanked Council for their letter to Ca1trans about the sound wall. Information was that they were going to contact Arcadia by October. He felt that in the meantime, perhaps Arcadia should do 80me homework. The report that Gordon Bricken and Associates presented was a very good report. Arcadia has several options in dealing with Caltrans. He thought perhaps the City should start some of the engineering work, either inhouse or outside and perhaps also some of the legal work to be prepared for Caltrans' response to the report. It was Council 's feeling that perhaps this was premature and if Caltrans feels the City is taking action, it may do nothing at this time ... October is not that far off ,and it might be wiser to just wait and see what happens. Mr. Zareh noted that in various meetings Council was concerned about the noise of a single transformer or the noise of a helicopter that might land only once ,in a while; whereas the people in his area lived day after day with noise levels that were far above levels permissible by Code. This is not fair. Herb Fletcher, 175 W. Lemon, spoke again to the matter he had brought up at a previous Council meetin9 as to the possibility of the Rodeffer property becoming a dump or landfill... thought that Council sometimes has to make very important decisions under pressure and, since this was one of those important decisions with far-reaching consequences, possibly Council should give this some thought and perhaps some discussion could take place among Council members as to what might be the best things to do in the future. Also, think about the possibility of industrial buildings being constructed in the area and what type of industrial buildings as well as what kinds of ,businss would be pemitted to occupy such industrial buildings. There is the problem of preventing water contamination from whatever might eventually go into that area. Noted that the City of Irwindale has a mining tax and has made a lot of money in this matter from the gravel pits; Arcadia has not had such a tax and has gotten nothing from their gravel mining. CITY COUNCIL RECESSED IN ORDER TO ACT AS THE ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PRESENT: Members Chandler, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Gilb ABSENT: None On MOTION by Member Chandler, seconded by Member Lojeski and CARRIED, the Minutes of the meeting of August 18, 1987 were APPROVED. Member Young was not present at the August 18, 1987 meeting and therefore did not vote, Design Review - 5 West Huntington Drive (Mobil Gas Station) I,tem withdrawn from agenda by applicant. d-CI 4d. :v DESIGN q1 Design Review - 400 East Hllntihgton Drive (Bennigan's Restaurant) REVIEW ~,~ (S & A Restaurant Corporation, Gloria Reed) Proposed construction (400 E.~ of a 7,357 square foot re~taurant on the South Side Redevelopment 'Huntington Project (Stanley Gribble's Arcadia Gateway Centre). Staff report Dri ve) presented. (APPROVED) -3- 9/1/87 " 4e, liESIGN REVIEW (45 East La Porte Street) (APPROVED) ~ 1)- /1- "I ^-~ \ ,r y 4f., PARTIAL REPAYMENT OF AGENCY LOAN ,&'. LOANiiACl< (APPROVED) ,,1 \'J- ? 29 :0277 Bill Daniels, 12404 Park central Drive, Dallas, TX was present ,to answer questions. MeMber Lojeski inquired about the landscaping if it would include mature type of landscaping. Mr. Daniels replied they were at the present awaiting the decisions about the overall landscaping plans by the Gribble Developers, but that Bennigan~s would cooperate with whatever landscaping requirements the City had. Member Lojeski also inquired about a small door on the left side of the building. Mr. Daniels replied that was a fire door and I was a requirement. That door will be obscured by a winding sidewalk and shubbery as much as possible in conformance with the Code. Staff noted that as a further requirement, the trash enclosure should be connected to the sewer system if it were under the same roof as the restaurant. It was MOVED by Member Young, seconded by Member Harbicht and CARRIED'on roll tall vote as follows that the Agency approve this Design RevieW with the conditions that the project comply with all zoning and building codes as established or modified by the City; tHat final approval is subject to compliance with requirements of the City Departments as listed in staff report dated September 1, 1987,; and that the Design Review be in effect for one year per Reso1ution,ARA-126. AYES: NOES: ABSENT; Members Chandler, Harbicht. Lojeski, Young and Gi1b None None Design Review - 45 East La Porte Street (Benny Joseph). Proposed construction of a 3,900 square foot light manufacturing building and parking lot (Discussed in Agenda Item 1. See Page 2.) Staff report presented. It was MOVED by Member Lojeski, seconded by Member Young and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that the Agency APPROVE this design review subject to the conditions that the project comply with all zoning and building codes; that final approval is subject to compliance with requirements of ,the City's Departments; that the Agency approve the Owner Participation Agreement, subject to approval by the Agency General Counsel; and that the Design Review be in effect for one year per Resolution No. ARA-126. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Members Chandler, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Gi1b None None Arcadia Redevelopment tax increment funds can only be used to repay I debt. The tax increment fund as of June 30, 1987 has a cash balance of $1,251,405.01. It is recommended that the Agency Board bnd City Council take formal action to pay back this amount and that the City Council, in turn, loan the same amount from the Capital Outlay Fund to the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency Project Fund. It was MOVED by Member chand1@r, seconded by Member Harbicht and CARRIED on roll call vote,B~ follows that the tax increment fund of ,$1,251,405.01 be paid ba=k to the Capital Outlay Fund; in turn the same amount of $1,251.405.01 be loaned from the Capital Outlay Fund back to the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency Project Fund in order for the Agency to use this money to further pay expenses and buy property according to,the directives of the Agency Board. Both actions to be effective June 30, 1987. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Members Chandler, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Gilb None None 9/1/87 -4- 634) (Jv -( CONTRACT ~ AWARDED the contract for purchase of a Street Sweeper to Nixon-Egli AWARD - ~~ Equipment Co. of Santa Fe Springs which met all bid requirements. STREET ~', Funds in the amount of $73,500,00 are available from the Capital SWEEPER Outlay Fund. All informalities or irregularities in the bids or bidding process were waived and the Mayor and City Clerk were AUTHORIZED to execute the contract in form approved by the City Attorney. 49, ADJOURNMENT 5, , 6. I j6a. HEARING SCHEDULED STREET LIGHTS (Oct.S,19S7) j6b. REPLACEMENT OF STREET TREES BID CALL (Job No. 633) 6c. I TRAFFIC . STRIPING & PAVEMENT MARKINGS BID CALL (Job. No. 6d. 6e. CONTRACT AWARD PURCHASE / OF FUEL (, () ./ fV f I 29:0278 The meeting adjourned to 7:00 p. m., September 15, 1987. , CITY COUNCIL RECONVENED CONSENT ITEMS SCHEDULED for October 8.,1987, a public hearing on the matter of installation of street lights on Naomi Avenue from E1 Monte Avenue to Santa Anita Avenue. APPROVED plans and specifications and AUTHORIZED the City Clerk to advertise for bids for replacement of street trees on Live Oak Avenue and Las Tunas Drive - Job No. 633. The estimated cost of this project is $25,000 which will be funded from Capital Outlay Funds. APPROVED plans and specifications and AUTHORIZED the City Clerk to advertise for bids for painting traffic striping and pavement markings on various streets throughout the City, Job No. 634. Funds in the amount of $38,000 are available in the Public Works operating budget to cover the cost of contracting and materials for this work. AWARDED the contract for purchase of gasoline and diesel fuel to Gasco Gasoline. Inc. on an open purchase order not to exceed $120,000 requested on an as needed basis. Funds are budgeted in various Fund Accounts for this purchase. All informalities or irregularities in the bids or bidding process were waived and the Mayor and City Clerk were AUTHORIZED to execute the contract in form approved by the City Attorney. 6f. HOLY ANGELS APPROVED the reduction of the fee per amusement machine from FIESTA, - $30. to $5. for the Holy Angels Church Fiesta. October 23, 24 AMUSEMENT & 25, 1987. FEE . p~, f'" REDUcTION f1. tv e,n ~ 6g. " ' PARTIAL: I REPA YMENT ' OF AGENCY LOAN & LOAN BACK APPROVED the use of the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency tax increment fUnd of $1,251 .405.01,to repay the City Capital Outlay Fund; in turn, the same amount of ,$1,251,405.01 to be loaned from the Capital Outlay Fund back to the A~cadia Redevelopment Agency Project Fund in order for the Agency to use this money to further pay expenses and buy property according to the directives of the Agency Board. 9/1/87 -5- 7. 7a. GARDEN VIEW NURSERY REMOVAL FROM ANOAKIA SCHOOL PROPERTY (Request for Time Extens ion) (APPROVED) .- , r. {)(lI(1 'l~;o. . 1, 00. f ' ~(\ 8. 8a. URGENCY ORDINANCE ./ NO. 1871 (ADOPTED) 8b, j ORDINANCE NO. 1870 (ADOPTED) 29:0279 ALL OF THE ABOVE CONSENT ITEMS WERE APPROVED ON MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER LOJESKI, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HARBICHT AND CARRIED ON ROll CALL VOTE, AS FOLLOWS: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Counci1members Chandler, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Gi1b None None I C!TY MANAGER On August 4, 1987 the City Council denied a proposed text amendment which would have permitted plant nurseries in residential zones with an approved conditional use permit. Denial of this text amendment required the Garden View plant nursery operating on the Anoakia property to vacate the premises. On August 5, the Planning Depart- ment notified Mr. Meah1, owner of Garden View Nursery, that the plant nursery operation must be removed from the Anoakia property by August 24, 1987. Mr. Meahl has found another location, however, he indicates it will take him a month to get the other property in order and water delivered to it and an additional 2 - 3 months to remove all stock and clean up the property. Mark Meah1, 261 W. Carter, Sierra Madre, owner of Garden View Nursery, was present to answer questions and reiterated that he is moving the nursery, but for reasons outlined in the above paragraph, he is requesting a three month time extension. It was MOVED by Counci1member Young, seconded by Councilmember Lojeski and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that Mr. Meah1 be granted a 3 month time extension to December 1, 1987 for the removal of the Garden View Nursery from the Anoakia School property. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Counci1member Chandler, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Gi1b None None C!TY A HORN EY The City Attorney presented, summarized and read the title of Urgency Ordinance No. ,1871, entitled: "AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, IMPOSING A 45'DAY MORATORIUM ON THE CONSIDERATION OF, AND PROHIBITING LAND- USE, BUILDING, LICENSES AND PERMITS OF ALL APPLICATIONS FOR ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENTS DURING THE INTERIM PENDING A STUDY OF ZONING PROPOSALS AND REGULATIONS REGARDING SUCH USES". I It was MOVED by Counci1member Chandler, seconded by Counci1member Harbicht and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that Urgency Ordinance No. 1871 be and it is hereby ADOPTED; AYES: Counci1members Chandler, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Gi1b NOES: None ABSENT: None (Copies of the Ordinance were available for public p'erusa1.) The City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the title of ,Ordinance No. 1870, entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, AMENOING SECTIONS 3420' AND 3421.1 OF THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO SWIMMING POOL FENCING REQUIREMENTS ANO DELETING SECTIONS 3425 AND 3426 OF THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO SWIMMING POOL COMPLETION BONDS". 9/1/87 -6- I 'tl I 8c, RESOLUTION NO. 5371 (ADOPTED) ~J ~t./ r 9. HEARING SCHEDULED APPEAL (Sept. 15,1987) 10. LOJESKI .' \:' " HARBICHT 29:0280 It was MOVED by Councilmember Harbicht, seconded by Council- member Young and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows that Ordinance No. 1870 be and it is hereby ADOPTED. ' AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers Chandler, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Gilb None None The City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the title of Resolution No. 5371, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE' CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SUPPLEMENT NO. g TO AGREEMENT NO. 07-5131 (MODIFICATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEMS - DUARTE ROAD - SUNSET BOULEVARD TO SECOND AVENUE - JOB No. 577), PROGRAM OF LOCAL AGENCY FEDERAL AID URBAN SYSTEM PROJECTS, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SUCH REVISION". It was MOVED by Councilmember Lojeski, seconded by Council- member Young and C~RRIED on roll call vote as follows that Ordinance No. 5371 be and it is hereby ADOPTED. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers Chandler, Harbicht, Lojeski, Young and Gilb None None ',,, MATTERS FROM STAFF SCHEDULED another public hearing on an appeal filed by Mr. and Mrs. Kevork Belikian from the denial of the Planning Commission on their request for a variance to allow the removal of an existing unit and to rebuild a new one at 1118 S. Sixth Avenue. MATTERS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS Was advised that a response has not been received from Converse Environmental on the letter which was included in the Council Newsletter packet of August 27. Councilmember Lojeski said, in part, that the letter was fine -- he would have preferred it, personally, to be a lot stronger because he felt they really blew what they were supposed to define for us. Mayor Gilb agreed. "In Sunday's newspaper one of the Planning Commissioners was quoted as saying that, 'From now on, he's not going to vote .. he's going to vote NO on multiple developments on 50 foot lots'. And, I'd like to discuss this becauSe I'm concerned about a couple of elements in that. By way of background, I'd like to talk just a little bit about how authority flows here ... how policy is made. The people elect the City Council; the City Council establishes policies for the City, that is, within the guidelines within which this:Cityj;s going to run and the kinds of things we want to accomplish ... and then we appoint a City Manager who, in turn, hires employees to help carry out those things. We also appoint Commissioners because we can't,do all of these things, so we have citizens who help us, within the policies we layout. And I think it's important to understand what the Commissioners' roll is and, at least mY understanding of what the Commissioners'roll is ... and I think it's something like when the President of ,the United States -- he sets our foregin pol icy ... and he sets the,guidelines within which we're going to operate our fO,reign pol icy, but he appoints a Secretary of State to carry out what those guidelines are ... and the Secretary of State may offer advise to the President -- he may argue with him about what those -7- 9/1/87 29: 0281 9uidelines are going to be, but he doesn't at some point say, 'I don't agree with your foreign policy, so we're going to do it my way', because at that point I think the President would say, 'Well then, I'll get another Secretary of State who can take care of it and do it the way I want it done or at least stay within the policy guidelines'. "And I think that that's a little bit of what we have here -- we're the elected officials so it's up to us to set policy and the I Commission acts in our stead within those broad policy ~uidelines ~.. and I'm not saying that the Commissioners shouldn't be giving advice -- I think that it's very right and proper that any Commissione or the Planning Commission as a group, might say to the City Council, 'We don't agree with this particular policy that you have and we think that you should review it and ... maybe, and here are our reasons and maybe you should change it' and I think that's, you know, a very proper function of the Commission. But, I don't think it's a proper function of the Commission or a Commissioner to change the policy... and this particular thing on 50 foot lots is something that we discussed specifically with the Commission a year ago. And we sat down in a meeting with the entire Planning Commission and the entire Council and they had a number of things that they wanted to discuss with us. One of them was this question of 50 foot lots and multiple family developments because they were getting requests ... and we,discussed that with them. And it's my recollection at that time that we recognized that on a 50 foot lot you could put in, with a variance, three units ... either an apartment building or a condo- minium. If the developer were to combine two 50 foot lots and have a 100 foot lot, he could put in ten units. So the net result was that if we discouraged these 50 foot lots -- we were actually encouraging denser development ... and so it was the feeling of the Council at that time that we didn't want to discourage multiple family develop- ment on 50 foot lots because the alternative was denser development. We also felt, at that time, that the fact that they were having to come for variances gave us some leverage to effect certain things such as architectural improvements ... which, of course, we now have, subsequent to that because we passed on ordinance on that. And it was my feeling at that meeting that the Planning Commission was pleased to have been given that direction -- to know what the Council policy was and some of them were relieved because there were a lot of questions in their minds as to how they should treat these things. "And, so I guess one of the things that disturbs me is that to have a Commissioner saying that he's going to vote NO on these, is essentially contrary to the Council policy... if, in fact, the Council still feels'ltrhat way. The second part of it that concerns me is that all of these requests for variances are public hearings and it's, I incumbent on everyone of us and every member of the Planning Commissio to come into a public hearing with an open mind because that's the purpose of a public hearing -- is to give each and every person who wants to come before the Planning Commission or the City Council an opportunity to state the reasOns that they fee) they should be granted a variance and to have those reasons considered and then to make up your mind whether those reasons are good and valid reasons or whether you're going to reject those reasons. So, we can't preclude the possibility that someone is going to come before us and say, 'These are my reasons', and that we're going to say, 'Yes, we agree with those reasons'. So I'm concerned on the two aspects and I guess what I'd like to discuss this evening is: 1.) Is the Council still of a mind as it, was a year ago, that we don't want to discourage multiple family development on 50 foot lots. And, if they are, then I think we should communicate this ,once again to the Commission and to the Commissioners individually that we feel that this is in the best interest of the development of those particular areas." 9/1/87 -8- I I GILB CHANDLER HARBICHT GILB 11, , ~ 29:0282 "I a9ree ... but with ai 1 due respect to the press .., they blow thin9s out of proportion and sometimes a little remark makes,tbe headlines around here, you know, and it's so unimportant to the real business of the Council, I don't know whether it was just a casual remark that the Commissioner made or how -- but in readin9 the minutes they asked: 'Well, if you said you were going to vote against this, why are you voting for it now?' and the Commissioner said, 'Well, I didn't want to hold the project up because we're short one Commissioner', or something to that effect. But as far as your question as to the policy of the Council, I still believe in the policy that we had at that time of that meeting." " "If you'll recall in our discussion in the original meeting with the Planning Commission -- at one time it had been four allowed on a 50 by 100 foot lot. It had since been reduced to three and it was found that three was a nice tidy package. Additionally, if we go with that, assuming that the Planning Commission rejects all those three unit jobs in spite of how we feel, I feel that we should stick with the three units. The next step then is down-zoning it from R-3 to R~l, which ... I don't know if anyone is going to go in there and put in a nice home on a 50 by 100 foot lot. The General Plan also concurs with the three unit development. So, I have not changed mY feeling on it and I certainly hold the same feeling as we had when we held the meeting that night." "I just might comment that I'm not afraid that the Planning Commission is going to deny all of these and I don't see this as a confrontation at all. I just think that maybe it needs some c1arification:arid 'the-faCtthati"we're talking about policy and the implementation of policy. That's where my concern is." Suggested the Council communicate the Council's feeling back to the Planning Commission ... that this is a desirable type of develop- ment. Counci1member Young adjourned the meeting in memory of Jeanne Saunders who was a 37-year resident of Arcadia. She was killed in an automobile accident in New Mexico last week. She was a 30- year friend of Counci1member Young. Mrs. Saunders was very active in local community affairs. She was a life member of the Assistance League of Ar.cadia; a Member of the Board of Trustees of the Arcadia library; she was secretary of the Creative Arts Group in Sierra Madre. She was a qraduate of UCLA and a member of Delta Delta Oe1ta Sorority and was recently honored as a 50-year member. From 1981 - 84 she served as public reiations officer for the Arcadia Unified School District. She is survived by her husband, John, known as Jack; children, Sherry J. Saunders-Rees and her husband,Joseph M. Rees of Washington, O.C.; John H. Saunders and his wife, Janet of La Mirada; Susan M. Saunders of Alameda; three grandchildren, Ryan and Shelly Saunders and Patrick Rees; and her brother, Charles P. de Garmo"of Ma1ibu. Services to be held September 2 at St. Edmunds Church, San Mar,i no. Mayor Gi1b adjourned the meeting in memory of Bob Trowbridge, secretary of the Newcastle, Australia City Council who died August 27, 1987. Mr. Trowbridge was also the secretary-treasurer of ,the Newcastle Sister City Commission and once visited Arcadia with the Koala Band. Mr. Trowbridge greeted Arcadians who visited Newcastle. He is survived by his wife, Valda and a son. 9/1/87 -9- 29:0283 ADJOURNMENT (SEPT.15,1987 7:00 p.m.) Council adjourned to a CLOSEO SESSION at 8:35 p. m., reconvened and adjourned immediately thereafter at 9:30 p. m. to 7:00 p. m., September 15, 1987 in the Conference Room to conduct the business of the Council and Agency and any Closed Session, if any, necessary to discuss personnel, litigation matters and evaluation of properties. ~ I Mayor ATTEST: , ----- ~/i~~ Christlne Van Maanen, City Clerk I ,9/1/87 -10-