Loading...
CC - 09-28-93APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING CITY OF ROSEMEAD DATE _2_L- E• - ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 28, 1993 BY e The Regular Meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Bruesch at 8:03 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. The Pledge to the Flag was led by Councilmember Taylor. The Invocation was delivered by City Treasurer Foutz. ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS: Present: Councilmembers Clark, Taylor, Mayor Pro Tem Vasquez, and Mayor Bruesch Absent: Councilmember McDonald - Excused APPROVAL OF MINUTES: AUGUST 24, 1993 - REGULAR MEETING MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 24, 1993, be approved as submitted. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez No: None Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. - None I. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE A. Ezekiel Rodriguez, 7842 Hershey Street, discussed the possibility of a left-turn pocket on Del Mar Avenue at Hellman Avenue. B. Vanny Hong, 8606 Ramona Boulevard, requested information regarding a permit to expand her home and was referred to the Planning Department. C. Juan Nunez, 2702 Del Mar Avenue, reported problems with the plastic striping on Garvey and Graves Avenues. The following item from the Consent Calendar was taken out of order in deference to those in the audience. CC-A EXPANSION OF BUS PASS SUBSIDY PROGRAM TO INCLUDE FOOTHILL TRANSIT (FT/RTD) BUS PASSES MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that the Council approve an expansion of the current senior/handicapped bus pass subsidy program to include a $6.00 subsidy of Foothill Transit (FT/RTD) passes. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez No: None Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. II. PUBLIC HEARINGS An explanation of the procedures for the conduct of public hearings was presented by the City Attorney. The City Clerk then administered the oath to all those persons wishing to address the Council on any public hearing. item. CC 9-28-93 Page #1 A. A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST FROM SANDY NG TO CHANGE THE UNDERLYING ZONING DESIGNATION FROM P (PARKING) TO C-3 (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL) FOR FUTURE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2737, 2737 1/2, AND 2739 DEQUINE AVENUE (ZC 93-196) AND INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 738 The Mayor opened the public hearing. Sandy Ng, representing the owner, gave the background on this project and asked for Council's approval. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. The following ordinance was presented to the Council for introduction: ORDINANCE NO. 738 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD APPROVING A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM P TO C-3 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2737-39 DEQUINE AVENUE Mayor Bruesch asked about the zoning of the property to the north, stressed the need for buffer properties, and stated his intention to vote no on this project. Councilmember Clark ascertained that no plan was contemplated at this time. MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR that Ordinance No. 738 be introduced on its first reading and that reading in full be waived. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Vasquez No: Bruesch Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. Mayor Bruesch stated his opposition to rezoning residential properties to commercial usage but did not require that the ordinance be read in full. B. A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CONSISTING OF SEVEN (7) SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED DWELLINGS TO BE CONSTRUCTED AT 7629 AND 7637 GRAVES AVENUE, ROSEMEAD. AT THE HEARING, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER: AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO GRANT A VARIANCE FROM THE 1-ACRE SIZE STANDARD FOR THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE AND FOR APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 51586; THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A ZONE CHANGE FROM R-2 TO P-D (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT); AND THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION THAT HAS BEEN PREPARED PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT The Mayor opened the public hearing to those in favor of the project. A. Carolyn Ingram Seitz, PO Box 784, Westminster, CA 92638, and representing the applicant Rosemead Country Estates, summarized the project and asked the Council to deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Planning Commission. Ms. Seitz noted that this project was only slightly less than the City's one acre requirement and that was because of the lot sizes and shapes; is consistent with the General Plan; meets the required floor area ratio; its density is consistent with other properties previously approved by the City; and the change of zone will allow for the smaller lot development of single family detached homes. CC 9-28-93 Page #2 B. Benson Wu, 1506 Camino Lindo, South Pasadena, and representing the limited partners, gave the background of this project, citing numerous delays over the past five years; that this was very close to the City's requirements and asked permission to proceed. C. Wenny Lee Young, 2434 W. Main Street, Alhambra, and representing the general partners, presented an artist's conception of the project and stated that this partnership felt victimized and abused by the system. Ms. Young added the opinion that this project was being impeded by unreasonable demands being made by the appellant, Dolly Leong and her representatives by trying to have her property included with this project. Ms. Young also stated that her organization is not interested in working with Ms. Leong any longer. That many attempts had been made to deal with her equitably to no avail but that Ms. Leong was not interested in paying a proportional share of the costs. Ms. Young concluded by asking the Council to consider this request on its own merit and not to be swayed by the inclusion of the appellant's request to be included as a condition for that approval. At this time, those in opposition were invited to speak. A. Bonny Garcia, 500 Citadel Drive, Suite 390, Los Angeles, 90040, attorney for the appellant, Dolly Leong, testified that this project should be denied because it would effectively landlock properties owned by his client, alluding to the City's liability should this project be approved. Mr. Garcia stated that Ms. Leong had offered to pay for a portion of the construction of a private street that would then be shared but did not feel she should have to share in the cost of acquiring an adjacent parcel of land that would facilitate the formation of that private street unless she would also be allowed to share in the profits of the homes that would be sold because of that parcel's acquisition. Mr. Garcia asked that this project be approved conditionally, subject to approval of a plan which Ms. Leong had in process and which would benefit all the parcels. Mr. Garcia also conceded that Ms. Leong is somewhat of a character in the City and that she should not be penalized for that. Dolly Leong stated for the record that she had a quitclaim to the parcel referred to as "landlocked" and known as 7665 Graves Avenue, including the back parcel. Councilmember Taylor stated it appeared that Ms. Leong had effectively landlocked her own property by not choosing to remove an existing home on the front lot. B. Juan Nunez, 2702 Del Mar Avenue, asked about the wall that would be constructed at the rear of the project, that three homes would be built over a flood control system, and who would be responsible for the maintenance of the storm drain. Speaking in rebuttal, Ms. Seitz stated that Dolly Leong had had ample time to submit plans of her own for consideration and did not do that; that Ms. Leong has the same opportunity to gather additional properties in the future as had Rosemead Country Estates; and asked that this case be decided on its own merit and approved as such. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Robert L. Kress, City Attorney, stated that considerable time had been available for the two parties to come to an agreement but that this did not seem possible. Mr. Kress stated that the Council might want to consider its P-D policy by downsizing the acreage needed for a P-D development and if that was the Council's desire, this project would be covered, adding that several P-D projects of less than one acre had been recently approved by the Council. If Council were so inclined, this would require a zoning code and general plan amendment and could be completed and ready for Council approval within 90 days. Mr. Kress did not believe that it would be possible for the Council to mandate an agreement that would require these two parties to agree on a project as Mr. Garcia requested. Mr. Kress cited Government Code 66474.9 regarding the addition of a hold harmless condition to the approval of the tract map that would protect the City if these two factions end up in litigation. CC 9-28-93 Page #3 • Mayor Bruesch summarized the Council's options as 1) uphold the Planning Commission decision; 2) reverse the Planning Commission decision; 3) approve the project with the inclusion of a hold harmless condition; or 4) defer the item and direct staff to begin preparation of an ordinance to amend the size of the P-D developments. Councilmember Taylor asked that his remarks be entered verbatim as follows: "I'm opposed to sending it back to staff to change the size. This has been in effect for roughly eight years, now and if by just changing it one lot smaller, and I'm just using a proportionate figure, going from one square acre down to three quarters of an acre. Basically, if you had four of those lots put together, they're fifty something feet wide by 190 or whatever it may be, an acre is 217 feet square, 217 by 217, and by cutting it down to .75 (3/4 of an acre) you're narrowing it down to where you've got to get a driveway or a street between them and basically you (could still) end up with what you would have in (small back yards). This particular lot is a poor example and it's very unique that we have this one tonight, after eight years this has been the roughest one, and if we take it down to .75 you'll never get the (exact 75%) someone will come in with 72 percent of an acre, or 69 percent of an acre, that's really not the issue. The issue is the landlocking of it and the how should I say, the thought that it might be landlocked. I disagree with that, I don't believe that's the issue. I've got other oppositions to it as I've had in the past. You put in four bedroom, two story homes, and you look at the back yard setbacks. You've got ten foot on the lower one on the right side, I think it's ten foot and fifteen foot. You get up on the three at the top of the page right there, they're fifteen foot, seventeen foot, seventeen foot on the two outside ones. I've got...we had a similar project to this where on the same street, just two blocks apart, one of them went in under P.D., one went in under R-1. The R-1 had to have 6,000 square feet, the one under P.D. had to have 4500 square feet and we had an ordinance passed a couple of years ago where we were going to require the 25-foot back yard setback and then if there was additional bedrooms, four or five bedrooms, they would have to go out another ten feet. So, my biggest problem is the setbacks, ten and fifteen feet. That's why I really can't vote for this tonight." Mayor Bruesch asked if Mr. Taylor would deny and reverse the decision of the Planning Commission and Mr. Taylor continued "No. That's unfair because this is called situation ethics. How many times have I been voted down four to one up here, almost without exception in eight years, that's never been an issue of reversing the others, the ones that were made reference to here, Mrs. Leong's property, she got a P.D. less than an acre and then through the eight years this has happened so I'm not going to use it as a scapegoat and say no, we'll reverse it and send it back, that isn't fair. Because all of a sudden after eight years we get into a sticky issue and I'm not going to make such a motion and penalize Mrs. Young and the Rosemead Country Estates project." Planning Director Peter Lyons explained the difference in the setback requirements of the R-2 zone and this P.D. project. Councilmember Clark stated there was no basis for Mr. Garcia's remarks regarding the personality of Dolly Leong, adding that just six months ago a very similar project was approved for Ms. Leong on Mission Drive. Mrs. Clark stated that the documentation presented by the appellant had alluded that granting a variance such as this one could be considered to be illegal and if that were the case, then the one approved for Ms. Leong could also be considered to be illegal, that Ms. Leong's parcel was slightly smaller, that more homes had been allowed and that the homes themselves were larger. Mrs. Clark failed to see the reasoning behind this challenge of illegality when Ms. Leong had actually taken advantage of the process when it was to her advantage, that if in fact this variance would be illegal, if her case would stand up in court. Mrs. Clark referred this suggestion to the City Attorney and Mr. Kress responded that it would be addressed in a Closed Session with the Council if any litigation is threatened. Councilmember Vasquez said it was a shame that the two parties had been unable to agree on a solution and agreed with Mr. Garcia that the City should not be placed at risk and stated the preference of approving the project with the hold harmless condition. CC 9-28-93 Page #4 • 0 Ken Gross, 900 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90017, attorney for the applicants, stated he would need to discuss such a hold harmless agreement with the City Attorney. Mr. Kress stated that a formal resolution approving the variance and the tract map would be presented at the next meeting and the hold harmless language from the Government Code would be included and shared with both Mr. Gross and Mr. Garcia prior to that meeting. Mayor Bruesch stated that he did not appreciate the City being placed between two litigants. MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK that the decision of the Planning Commission be upheld with the added condition that the applicant agree to a hold harmless agreement, protecting the City from litigation. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Bruesch, Vasquez No: None Absent: McDonald Abstain: Taylor The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. Councilmember Taylor asked the record to show that "I am not opposed to the rights of these owners to build on their property. As I stated my objections as they've been in the past have been to the size of the lot and the setbacks. So, it's no reflection on either party that I didn't vote no on it for that reason." A 15-minute recess was called at 9:50 p.m. and the meeting was reconvened accordingly. III.LEGISLATIVE A. RESOLUTION NO. 93-45 - CLAIMS 6 DEMANDS The following resolution was presented to the Council for adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 93-45 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $482,920.31 NUMBERED 7105 THROUGH 7252 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR that Resolution No. 93-45 be adopted. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez No: None Absent: None Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. B. RESOLUTION NO. 93-46 - APPROVING PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. 003 WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE FY 1992-93 ASPHALT CONCRETE OVERLAY The following resolution was presented to the Council for adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 93-46 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD APPROVING PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. 003 WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 1992-93 ASPHALT CONCRETE OVERLAY ON VARIOUS STREETS CC 9-28-93 Page #5 0 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that Resolution No. 93-46 be adopted. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez No: None Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. Mayor Bruesch asked for a memo regarding what percentage of the total overlay project this represented., C. RESOLUTION NO. 93-47 - DENYING AN APPEAL BY EARL SCHEIB FOR A ZONE VARIANCE The following resolution was presented to the Council for adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 93-47 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD DENYING ZONE VARIANCE 93-257 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4013 TEMPLE CITY BOULEVARD, ROSEMEAD MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that Resolution No. 93-47 be adopted. Vote resulted: Yes: Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez No: Clark Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. D. ORDINANCE NO. 736 - APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE ANGELUS AVENUE SENIOR CENTER, A 50-UNIT LOW-INCOME SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING COMPLEX TO BE LOCATED AT 2417-55 ANGELUS AVENUE, ROSEMEAD (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 93-1) - ADOPT The following ordinance was presented to the Council for adoption: ORDINANCE NO. 736 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2417-2455 ANGELUS AVENUE, ROSEMEAD Juan Nunez, 2702 Del Mar Avenue, asked if this plan could have been designed without the need for.this variance. MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK that Ordinance No. 736 be adopted. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Bruesch, Vasquez No: Taylor Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. Councilmember Taylor asked the record to show that "my no vote was we had discussed this previously and I believe that the project is too large for the site. I had mentioned this during our Housing meeting." CC 9-28-93 Page #6 • • E. ORDINANCE NO. 737 - AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 729 REGARDING THE CITY'S TRIP REDUCTION AND TRAVEL DEMAND MEASURES - ADOPT The following ordinance was presented to the Council for adoption: ORDINANCE NO. 737 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD ADOPTING TRIP REDUCTION AND TRAVEL DEMAND MEASURES IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS 65089 AND 65089.3 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that Ordinance No. 737 be adopted. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez No: None Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. F. RESOLUTION NO. 93-48 - CLAIMS & DEMANDS The following resolution was presented to the Council for adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 93=48 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $776,690.56 NUMBERED 7254 THROUGH 7349 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK that Resolution No. 93-48 be adopted. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez No: None Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. G. RESOLUTION NO. 93-49 - TRANSFER OF PRIVATE DRAIN NO. 1604 TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY FOR MAINTENANCE PURPOSES The following resolution was presented to the Council for adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 93-49 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO ACCEPT ON BEHALF OF SAID DISTRICT A TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE OF STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS KNOWN AS PRIVATE DRAIN NO. 1604 IN THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD FOR FUTURE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND IMPROVEMENT, AND AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE THEREOF MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK that Resolution No. 93-49 be adopted. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez No: None Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. CC 9-28-93 Page #7 E H. RESOLUTION NO. 93-50 - APPROVING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF NOT TO EXCEED $34,000,000 AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF ROSEMEAD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 TAX ALLOCATION BONDS, SERIES 1993A AND NOT TO EXCEED $3,200,000 AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF ROSEMEAD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 TAXABLE TAX ALLOCATION. REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1993B This item was deferred to the next regular meeting. Councilmember Taylor requested that when this item is returned a list of the interest payments be included plus the net proceeds. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR (CC-A HANDLED AT AND CC-L REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION) CC-B MEMBER CC-C AUTHOR VALLEY CC-D EXTENS TREE M IN WATER OF MEETING AND CC-G TO CONTINUE MEMBERSHIP IN THE SAN GABRIEL TION OF CITIES OF AGREEMENT WITH EVANS TREE SERVICE FOR STREET CC-E APPROVAL OF SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZATION TO SEEK BIDS FOR ROSEMEAD DEFERRED LOAN PROGRAM FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9752 LOFTUS DRIVE CC-F APPROVAL OF SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZATION TO SEEK BIDS FOR THE ROSEMEAD HANDYMAN GRANT PROGRAM, 50th BID PACKAGE CC-H AUTHORIZATION TO ATTEND ANNUAL NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES CONFERENCE IN ORLANDO, FLORIDA, DECEMBER 2-5, 1993 CC-I APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZATION TO SEEK BIDS FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS TEMPLE CITY BOULEVARD AT MARSHALL STREET AND AT LOFTUS DRIVE CC-J ENGINEERING PROPOSAL FOR CITY-WIDE SPEED ZONE SURVEY CC-K RECEIVE BIDS AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR ROSEMEAD RESIDENTIAL REHABILITATION PROGRAM, 49th HANDYMAN BID PACKAGE TO GEARON BUILDERS IN THE AMOUNT OF $24,375.00 CC-M AUTHORIZATION TO REPLACE CHRISTMAS DECORATIONS ON VALLEY BOULEVARD AND GARVEY AVENUE CC-N RECEIVE BIDS AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF FORD CLUB WAGON AND TWO (2) FORD RANGER TRUCKS TO PRESTIGE FORD IN SAN GABRIEL IN THE AMOUNT OF $41,212.00 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM BRUESCH that the foregoing items on the Consent Calendar be approved. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez No: None Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. CC-G EXTENSION OF AGREEMENT FOR BUS BENCH MAINTENANCE Juan Nunez, 2702 Del Mar Avenue, asked if cleaning the sidewalks was included. Jeff Stewart, Assistant to the City Manager, explained that this was not in the contract but that the contractor would steam clean the sidewalks on request. CC 9-28-93 Page #8 C~ 9 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER TAYLOR, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that the Council approve a one-year extension of the Bus Shelter Maintenance Agreement with DAVE Systems at the current rates effective September 1, 1993. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Vasquez No: None Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. CC-L RECEIVE BIDS AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR DEFERRED LOAN PROGRAM FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8633 NORWOOD PLACE TO GEARON CONSTRUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $26,695.00 Councilmember Taylor stated his intention to vote no on this item because of the funding. MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM VASQUEZ that the Council authorize the City Clerk to receive and file all bids; accept the bid and award the contract to Gearon Construction, low bidder, for a contract amount of $26,695.00; authorize staff to enter into a contract with the owners and contractor; and reject all other bids. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Bruesch, Vasquez No: Taylor Absent: McDonald Abstain: None The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. Councilmember Taylor asked the record to show that "my no vote is not against the applicants but against the funding method." V. MATTERS FOR DISCUSSION & ACTION - None VI. STATUS REPORTS - None VII. MATTERS FROM OFFICIALS A. MEMBERSHIP IN THE 710 FREEWAY COALITION Mayor Bruesch explained why he had asked this item to be placed on the Agenda. Councilmember Taylor stated that he would have to vote no on this item. There being no objection, this item was tabled. B. ANNUAL LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES CONFERENCE Councilmember Clark asked that this item be deferred to the next regular meeting. C. MAYOR BRUESCH 1. Reported that there is still a problem with overflow parking from Diamond Square on Saturday and Sunday and staff was directed to investigate. D. COUNCILMEMBER CLARK 1. Announced that there would a Fourth of July parade committee meeting on October 6, 1993, at 6;00 p.m. CC 9-28-93 Page #9 E. COUNCILNEPMER TAYLOR 1. Asked if the graffiti had been removed from the City's entry sign on Garvey Avenue. VIII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE Juan Nunez, 2702 Del Mar Avenue, asked if the Council would be taking a position on Proposition 172 and was informed that this was not in the Council's purview. IX. CLOSED SESSION A. LITIGATION - OPERATING INDUSTRIES The Council recessed to a closed session at 10:25 p.m. and reconvened to open session at 10:38 p.m. The Council met in Closed Session for the purpose stated on the Agenda and received a report from the City Manager and the City Attorney. No action was taken. There being no further action to be taken at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 10:39 p.m. The next regular meeting is scheduled for October 12, 1993, at 8:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted: ce ~l j' y Clerk CC 9-28-93 Page #l0