Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - September 25, 2006 - CC, Special MeetingCITY OF AZUSA MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SPECIAL MEETING MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2006 — 7:30 A.M. The City Council of the City of Azusa met in special session at the above date and time in the Azusa Auditorium, 213 East Foothill Boulevard, Azusa. Call to Order Mayor Chagnon called the meeting to order. ROLL CALL Roll Call PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: HARDISON, CARRILLO, HANKS, ROCHA, CHAGNON ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ALSO PRESENT: Also Present City Attorney Randolph, City Attorney Martinez, City Manager Delach, Assistant City Manager Person, Captain Streets, Economic Development Director Coleman; Hsu, Public Information Officer Quiroz, City Clerk Mendoza, Deputy City Clerk Toscano. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Pub Part ' Mr. Jorge Rosales addressed Council stating that he has not seen announcements regarding J. Rosales Grand Openings, City Hall in Motion on the City web sites and other public places. He Comments announced that the City Hall in Motion will be held at Los Lobos 211 Newburgh Street. He repeated the information in Spanish. A. Cruz Ms. Andrea Cruz addressed Council expressing her offense regarding language used at a Comments former meeting regarding the Gun Club and the term "drop dead date". She also stated that the Gun Club is willing to put up sound barriers and asked why they were not allowed to make Updates those changes in order to allow them to continue in business for another 60 years. Chagnon REPORTS, UPDATES COUNCIL BUSINESS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS -STAFF Updates Mayor Chagnon announced that the developers for Foothill Shopping Center will be hosting an Chagnon update meeting, tomorrow, September 26`h at 7 p.m. at the movie theater. Comment Mayor Chagnon abstained from participation In the following due to a conflict of interest. Chagnon abstn JOINT PUBLIC HEARING - Mayor Pro -Tem Rocha opened the joint Public Hearing stating that Rocha opened It is being held to discuss the proposed 2006 Eminent Domain Amendment to the Amended joint Public and Restated Merged Central Business District and West End Redevelopment Projects and Hearing related documents. He explained that the City Council and Redevelopment Agency are 2006 Eminent ' separate legal entities under state law and in this case the members of the City Council also sit Domain as members of the Redevelopment Agency which shall be referred to as the "Agency". He Amendment explained how the Public Hearing would be conducted. City Manager/Executive Director Delach provided a brief history of the City, the 1999 General F. Delach Plan process, goals outlined; better retail opportunities, Citizens Congress, its vision for the Comments City of Azusa and the evolution of the Gold Line project, the need for the use of Eminent Domain and opportunity to add to the retail base within the City. Economic Development Director Coleman addressed the Issue stating that the purpose of the B. Coleman Public Hearing is to consider the approval of various resolutions and an ordinance approving Comments the 2006 Eminent Domain Amendment Central Business District and the West End Project Areas of the Merged Plan. The process began on June 26, 2006, when the Agency authorized staff to take the necessary steps to pursue an amendment to the Merged Pian. Prior to any approval it is necessary for the Agency and the City Council to hold a public hearing and receive public testimony prior to making a decision. He formally thanked Redevelopment Senior Accountant Roseanna Jara, George Britten and staff of RSG, Sherry Fuller, John Oshimo of GRC Consultants, I(evin Randolph of BBI( and Assistant City Manager Person. He stated that the project is an Amendment to Redevelopment Plan. He showed slides, stating that the project would be 44 non-residential parcels for a period of twelve years that would be subject to the authority. He referred to Exhibits identifying parcels contained in the report which was now a smaller area then had originally been considered for the establishment of eminent domain which was reduced from 72 to 44. He stated that the changes were a result from Input received from residents and property owners at the September 7, 2006, public community meeting, which approximately 70 Interested residents and property owners attended. During that meeting, a number of requests were made to withdraw property from the area that would be subject to eminent domain. Based on an evaluation of these requests in light of the overall purposes of the amendment, the staff revised its recommendation and reduced the number of parcels that would be subject to eminent domain. He stated that included in the recommendation was that the 400 and 700 blocks of North Azusa and the north side of Azusa between Azusa and Alameda not be included in the eminent domain amendment and various other properties. City Clerk Mendoza submitted Exhibit A, affidavits of mailing to taxing Agencies, Exhibit B, V. Mendoza affidavits of mailing to property owners/businesses directly affected by the Plan Amendment, Proof of Exhibit C. affidavit of mailing to property owners/businesses not affected by the Plan Publications Amendment and Exhibit D. affidavit of joint Public Hearing Notice Publication published on September 7`h, 14th and 21" of 2006, into the public record. Mr. George Britton of RSG addressed the issue stating that the amendment builds on various G. Britton activities, and also the following blighting conditions: unsafe buildings, deterioration and RSG dilapidation, substandard design, incompatible land use, existence of parcels and development Comments of different sizes and shapes, and depreciated values; he stated all can be found in section B of the staff report. He stated that with regard to CEQA, the amendment is identified and defined as a project; GRC Consultant have prepared an evaluation of the potential environmental Impacts of the amendment and found that there would be no significant Impacts based on the amendment. The draft negative impact was prepared and circulated for review and comment by other public agencies as well as the public. He stated that eminent domain is an Important tool that is needed to eliminate blight in the projects and implement the General Plan and vision documents. He entered the following Into the public record: the Report to City Council, Exhibit B, the text Table C, the parcel Exhibit F, written objections Exhibit G and the Negative Declaration Exhibit H. Economic Development Director Coleman clarified letters received as follows: there were four B. Coleman letters received from Fred Raab, Mary Ellen Raab Ross, Andrea Cruz, Dr. Martin Halbern, and Clarifications the Saye Family Trust. Mr. John Oshima of GRC Associates who performed the Environmental Analysis responded to J. Oshima CEQA issues brought up by Andrea Cruz: who brought up questions on the aesthetics, cultural GRC Associates resources and land use, he stated that the project Is an amendment to the Redevelopment Response Plan, to allow the agency to acquire the property to use in eminent domain, It is not a development or a land use project and the agency does not know the type of the scale of development project that will go in those areas, those issues will go through another environmental study and it will depend on the aesthetics, cultural resources and land uses at ' that time. City Clerk Mendoza advised that a letter has been received from Joseph and Catherine City Clerk Santoro, property owners of 816 N. Todd Ave, requesting that there property be removed Comments from the list of eminent domain properties. Public Testimony Testimony Mr. Jorge Rosales addressed the Public Hearing with one comment: the Health and Safety J. Rosales Code Section 333390, which is State Law says that no city shall exercise any eminent domain Comments until there is a redevelopment plan or land use plan In place and that there are no plans in place in both areas. 09/25/06 PAGE TWO Ms. Carol Wybe, one of the owners of 930 N. Todd, addressed the issue stating that the C. Wybe business on the property is not providing retail, but is providing people with jobs; she Comments expressed concerns regarding the prospect of eminent domain hanging over this property and that it is devaluing it. She expressed opposition to the City acquiring her property through the use of eminent domain. She asked if it is possible to exclude her property, when will that decision be made and will they be sending written notices and if the City Council votes for eminent domain, will Proposition 90 negate that decision? (New Century Marble) City Manager/Executive Director Delach responded stating that the City will send written Delach notices of Council and Agency Board actions tonight and Proposition 90 would impact the Response decision regarding Redevelopment Plan or eminent domain and staff has already recommended City Council/Agency that the properties be removed and they have been. Ms. Catherine Tressell on behalf of Ronald and Federick Tressell, requested that the properties C. Tressell located at 766 N. Todd, and 765 N. Loren Ave, requested that both those addressed be Comments removed from the list of eminent domain properties. (Azusa Pipe and Tube Vending and A Fab Welding and Fabricating) Mr. Richard Emerson, owner of 824 Todd, 825 N. Loren, requested that the property be taken R. Emerson off of the list of properties In the eminent domain area. (CAE aluminum excursion plant) Comments Dr. George Vagenas, representing property 832 N. Azusa, Maloy Smoke House, requested to G. Vagenas remove property from list of eminent domain properties. Comments Mr. Tom Carroll, business owner of Tomco products at 741 N. Coney, he is not included but T. Carroll close to the designated area listed in the eminent domain area. He stated that he is frightened Comments by this and the fact that a Government can tell you what to do with your property; he wanted to communicate his feelings to the Council. Ms. Andrea Cruz, owner of business located at 730 N. Azusa Avenue, Regent Primetime— A. Cruz Reality, addressed the issue stating that she heard from the consultants that after tonight Comments properties may be removed from the list but may be put back on; she stated that she is still on ' the negative environmental impact list. She stated that If the City wishes to do the same In the future, she is already on the list and is concerned if the time comes when she wishes to sell her property she would have lost market value and will need to make a disclosure. She expressed concern regarding he Rosenow contract and that it had been assigned to Tierra West. Further, she stated she noticed and error and wanted to know if it was corrected. She expressed frustration regarding the choice of eminent domain as a first choice to deal with the property and not negotiations, that 44 properties is not a limited number of parcels, and lastly with regard to the 19 resolutions of eminent, she asked if they went back 100 years which would be an average of 5 properties per year, and now there are 44 properties in one year. Mr. Britton responded to a question of Ms. Cruz, stating that the APN # for the property she asked about was 8608027004; she stated that there was no such property with that number. Councilmember/Director Hanks clarified to Ms. Cruz that eminent domain was not being Imposed at this time and she stated that she understood it wasn't. Ms. Jenny Avila addressed the Hearing stating that she too has had problems with APN #'s J. Avila . and has had to pay out money to correct errors. Comments Discussion was held regarding the assessors map and the possibility of typographical errors, Discussion and that under Redevelopment Law staff is entitled to use the last equalized assessors roll but, more importantly that the property owners were provided notice of the Public Hearing. Mr. Jide Alade of 706 N. Azusa, addressed the Hearing stating that he too has heard that J. Alade although he has removed his property from the list of eminent domain, they can be added Comments ' back and he submitted a letter stating that he would like his property removed from the list. Mr. Johnny Lambrech, owner of 401 S. Irwindale, addressed the issue stating that eminent J. Lambrech domain will include all the properties in both districts, not just listed property, not true about Comments eminent domain not being used, he stated It's not a tool, It's a weapon. Ms. Dorothy Hand, property owner of 717 N. Loren, addressed the issue and asked that her D. Hand property be removed from the list and expressed her opposition to eminent domain. Comments (Sterling Auto Body) 09/25/06 PAGE THREE Mr. Fred Raab owner of businesses 135 East Foothill Blvd addressed the Issue stating that his F. Raab tenants have put a lot of money into their businesses. He stated that he had asked that his Comments property be taken off the list, but that was for 2006; he said it could be placed back on the list In 2007, or 2008, or that different reasons could be used to put the business back on the list and it's impossible to do business when eminent domain is on the document. He stated that having weeds in front of their property shouldn't be a reason to take property, and also not having parking is not an issue. He voiced his opposition to eminent domain in general and stated that It should be used as a last resort. He stated that the City is driving them out of business, further that he just recently retrofitted his buildings. Ms. Mary Ellen Ross representing property at 135 Foothill addressed the Issue talking about M. Ross the power of eminent domain, stating that it has a lethal effect on the negotiation process for Comments the people. She stated that some of the vacant blighted lots were created and owned by the City. Dr. Martin Halburn of 826 N. Azusa addressed the issue stating that he would like to have the M. Halburn property removed from eminent domain. Comments Ms. Catherine Riley owner of 816 N. Todd requested that their address be removed from the C. Riley list of eminent domain. (Citywide Sheet Metal) Comments Mr. Jerry Martinez of 819 N. Loren, the American Legion, requested that it be removed from J. Martinez the list of eminent domain and that they area nonprofit group and the Government does not Comments- have omments.have the right to take their properties. Mr. Cuauhtemol Luna, on behalf of Geoff Wagner, property owner, who reside in Colorado, owns the property at 803, 809, 811 N. Loren, requested that the property be taken off the list. He stated that the list says those properties are vacant, but the property at 803 N. Loren is leased by the State of California, Air Quality Control, and at 809 N. Loren is being leased also. He stated that the four buildings are on rectangular shaped properties and if they take 809 N. Loren, the properties will cause an odd shape. Mr. Chuck Davis of Watt Genton Associates, one of the selected developers for the Downtown North Development, addressed the Public Hearing stating that after they looked at area they suggested they didn't have tools, to have a successful project; he talked about the 1033 exchange, through eminent domain, grants 3 full years, and he stated that he has heard the message very clear, many property owners do not want to participate. They will move forward on their commitment to downtown. C. Luna Comments C. Davis Comments Mr. James Buchanan owner of 805 N. Eighth Street stated that he would like his property J. Buchanan removed from the list of eminent domain. Comments Mary See owner of 718 and 738 N. Loren advised that they wished to be excluded from the M. See amendment. Comments Mr. Mike Lee addressed the issue stating that eminent domain is like a dictatorship; he M. Lee encouraged all to vote for Proposition 90. Comments Mr. Dan Kanes owner of 440 N. Azusa stated that he has been removed from the list and D. Kanes urged Council to give the City back to the people and would like to stay off the list. Comments Mr. Art Morales addressed the public hearing stating that the subject of eminent domain is A. Morales dangerous. He talked about Mr. Hamien of Boat City and how the business became Sav-on Comments Furniture. He expressed his opinion regarding City Hall. Moved by Councllmember/Director Hardison, seconded by Councilmember/Director Hanks and Hrg clsd unanimously carried to close the public hearing. City Councllmembers/Boardmembers offered final comments and reiterated the need for retail Additional In the downtown area and the tool of eminent domain, the misconceptions regarding eminent Comments domain, the option to opt out and the 1033 exchange, the various ways the Government uses It's power to make civilization work, the positive momentum that is currently in the City and the need for it to continue with the growth that the community has expressed that it wants. Mayor Pro-Tem/Director Rocha expressed his concerns regarding plans for the areas listed as proposed for eminent domain. Economic Development Director Coleman responded stating that there are plans for the Downtown North and no apartments planned for the area. 09/25/06 PAGE FOUR Question and answer session ensued between Councllmembers/Directors, Staff, Consultants Questions ll_ and City Attorney/General Counsel regarding November election impacts, the 1033 letter, Answers Proposition 90 and It's affect on eminent domain, Gold Line parking, etc. Moved by Councilmember/Director Hardison, seconded by Councilmember/Director Hanks and joint Mtg unanimously* carried to adjourn the joint meeting and convene as the Redevelopment Agency. Adjourned The time was 9:39 P.M. Director Hardison offered a Resolution entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF AZUSA ADOPTING THE Res. 06-R37 NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PERTAINING TO THE ADOPTION OF Neg Dec THE PROPOSED 2006 EMINENT DOMAIN AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED EIR REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE MERGED CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND WEST END 2006 Eminent PROJECTS. Domain Moved by Director Hardison, seconded by Director Hanks to waive further reading and adopt. Resolution passed and adopted by the following vote of the Agency: AYES: DIRECTORS: HARDISON. CARRILLO, ROCHA, HANKS. NOES: DIRECTORS: NONE ABSENT: DIRECTORS: NONE ABSTAIN: DIRECTORS: CHAGNON Director Hanks offered a Resolution entitled A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF AZUSA APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE 2006 EMINENT DOMAIN AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE MERGED CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND WEST END REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. Moved by Director Hanks, seconded by Director Hardison to waive further reading and adopt. Resolution passed and adopted by the following vote of the Agency: AYES: DIRECTORS: HARDISON, CARRILLO, HANKS NOES: DIRECTORS: ROCHA ABSENT: DIRECTORS: NONE ABSTAIN: DIRECTORS: CHAGNON The Redevelopment Agency recessed and the City Council reconvened at 9:40 P.M. Councilmember Hardison offered a Resolution entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PERTAINING TO THE ADOPTION OF THE PRPOSED 2006 EMINENT DOMAIN AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE MERGED CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND WEST END PROJECTS. Moved by Councilmember Hardison, seconded by Councilmember Hanks to waive further reading and adopt. Resolution passed and adopted by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: HARDISON, CARRILLO, ROCHA, HANKS. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: CHAGNON Councilmember Hanks offered an Ordinance entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE 2006 EMINENT DOMAIN AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE MERGED CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND WEST END REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. 09/25/06 PAGE FIVE Res. 06-R38 Appvg 2006 Eminent Domain Amendment Res. 06-C83 . Neg Dec of EIR 2006 Eminent Domain 1" Rdg Ord 2006 Eminent Domain 1 THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CONVENED JOINTLY TO DISCUSS Convened joint]) THE FOLLOWING: CRA/City CLOSED SESSION Closed Session Moved by Councilmember Hardison, seconded by Councilmember Carrillo and unanimously* carried to recess to Closed Session at 9:43 P.M., to discuss the following: Mayor Chagnon abstained from the following due to a conflict of interest: Chagnon abstn REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (Gov. Code Sec. 54956.8) Real Prop Address: 802 North San Gabriel Avenue, Azusa, CA 91702 Negotiation Negotiating Parties: Lyle A. and Mary A. Moritz, Trustees 802 N. San Hagop K. and Christine M. Kouyoumdjian Gabriel Agency Negotiators: City Manager Delach and Assistant City Manager Person Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (Gov. Code Sec. 54956.81 Real Pro Address: 809 North Azusa Avenue, Azusa, CA 91702 Negotiation Negotiating Parties: Conrad Diaz, Jr. 809 N. Azusa Agency Negotiators: City Manager Delach and Assistant City Manager Person Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (Gov. Code Sec. 54956.8) Real Prop Property Address: 100 East Foothill Blvd, Azusa, CA 91702 Negotiation Negotiating Parties: Mr. Wayne Fletcher and Mr. Jim Yenyo 100 E. Foothill Agency Negotiators: City Manager Delach and Assistant City Manager Person Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of payment The City Council and Agency Board Members reconvened at 10:50 p.m.; there was not No Reports reportable action taken in closed session. It was consensus of City Council and Agency Board Members to adjourn. TIME ADJOURNMENT: 10:51 P.M. CITY CLERK 61 NEXT RESOLUTION NO. 06-C84. (Council) NEXT RESOLUTION NO. 06-1139. (Agency) 09/25/06 PAGE SIX Adjourn