December
9, 2006 Meeting
Preparation
E-mail
note was
sent to each member who has provided a contact e-mail address.
Susan Chu and
Laura Ellersieck phoned
other members on the
phone contact list.
Acknowledgments
Susan Chu brought baked goodies.
Attendees
9
members
Meeting
Agenda
Items:
- self-storage on Edison land update
- ice rink on Monday's council agenda
- pre-plan review of development at SMV and Foothill also on
council agenda
- planning for next year, incl. membership outreach & our
election
- planning for council candidate visits?
- temporary parking permits via internet
- anything
else attendees wish to discuss
The meeting began about 11:23 am
- self-storage on Edison land update
- The
developer has put their proposals on hold for rework and expects to
submit a new proposal in about 6 months. Reportedly they will no
longer submit plans for self-storage on what is currently the Persson's
property. Reportedly Persson's has asked Edison to extend their
temporary entry permit (their license agreement expired in Dec 2005),
but do not know whether that has happened. Attendees report the
1/2 off clearance sale at Persson's continues.
- ice rink on Monday's City Council
agenda (Dec 11, Item 5B3)
- probably
will mostly be discussed in Finance Committee and late in council
- projected
cost now 16.2 million. Claims cost increase is due to rise in
construction costs plus site issues involving difficulty accessing
utilities, discovery of uncompacted soil condition and the development
of foundation design, methane gas mitigation and Leed compliance
requirements". "Leeds" has to do with energy efficiency.
- says
the plans have been changed
- reducing
spectator seating to 325 (175 and 150) or 300 (175 and 125) from
500. Claims this
won't impact revenue.
- "volume
of structure has been reduced". (Now listed as 62,000 sq ft
instead of 65,000)
- says
these changes are expected to save $2 million
- asking
for extra allocation of money for the architect to modify the plans
- changing
financing
- to
get $3 million instead of $2 million from the Pasadena Civic Center.
- to
use all $13.2 million they claim the revenue projections support
- authorizing
expenditures based on the expectation of future authorization of
issuance of up to $15 million in revenue bonds
- indicates
that the whole thing is very interest rate and revenue sensitive and
could easily lead to city having to subsidize by as much as 10 thousand
to almost 300 thousand a year for each of the first 5 years
- No
indication of how the building's plans are expected to be changed from
what we've seen previously. Could the reduction in seating indicate the
building will be narrowed, allowing space for the access road without
Edison land? There is an indication they had to deepen
the
footings, presumably because of the "uncompacted soil condition" (given
the location, why would they have thought it had been compacted?)
- council
is supposed to approve a management
agreement with PISC for 10 years
- pre-plan review of development at SMV
and Foothill also on Council agenda (Dec 11, Item 10A)
- likely
to be very late in the meeting
- informational
only report. Council has no actions to take at this time except
potential to request additional process steps
such as review by commissions that would not ordinarily do so
- 166,536.98
square foot (3.823 acre) parcel
- two
buildings:
- a
237,706 (excluding the garage) square foot, 212-unit residential
building (including the 15%
inclusionary housing requirement)
- 60 feet (4 stories) tall
- 339 parking spaces in a semi-subterranean
parking structure
- "contemporary design aesthetic of the
residential building complements the design of the Stuart
Pharmaceutical Building"
- approximately
40,000 square feet of performance and supporting space including office
space.
- expect to get parking for this in MTA
parking structure
- historic
Stuart Pharmaceutical Company building requires that the project be
developed in a manner that is consistent with the Secretary of the
Interior's Standards for Historic Preservation.
- An
environmental "Initial Study" is being prepared. Expected
potential
environmental impacts include traffic, historic preservation, and air
quality. If it is determined an EIR is required, that would add 6
months to a year to the project schedule.
- There
will be a Development Agreement, which will be reviewed by the Planning
Commission and must be approved by the City Council
- The
project will be reviewed by the Transportation Advisory Commission
- There
are actually two lots involved and a lot line adjustment will be
necessary to support the requested density
- An
Expressive Use Permit (E.U.P.) is required for the proposed theater, a
Minor Conditional Use Permit is required
to allow a commercial use of more than 15,000 sq. ft. in a Transit
Oriented Development, and a Minor Conditional Use Permit is required
for shared parking. These will all be heard in one hearing,
expected
in February.
- The
project will go to the Design Commission for both a concept review and
a final review. These are expected in May and June '07.
- planning for next year, incl.
membership outreach & our
election
- It
has already been last February since our last flyer distribution
(that was the newsletter). And March since our election. We
should plan for another newsletter/flyer to remind/notify folks of our
existence and let them know what is going on. We also need to
solicit office candidates and notify of when the election will
be.
- We
should have election at March meeting. Will try to have
newsletter/flyer ready for distribution in January. It should
reintroduce association, meetings, e-mail and web addresses. Note
upcoming election. Quick notes on local issues.
- planning for council candidate visits?
- There
are two candidates for our area's City Council seat. The election
is March 6. Councilman Haderlein is seeking a third term. Eugene
Masuda is challenging him.
- Not
yet known if some organization will be sponsoring a candidate
forum. Probably, but if they have all the candidates for all the
council and school board seats it will allow very little time to each.
- Question
as to whether we should invite them to our January or February meeting
to discuss our area issues and goals. No
speeches, just informal question and answer session and the opportunity
to tell them what you want. Limit of 1/2 hour each so we
can accomplish other things as well.
- Agreed
we will invite them. They can choose which meeting depending on
their schedule.
- Want
to let our residents know about the
opportunity and encourage their attendance, but don't want a crowd from
outside the area. If one or both is coming to the January
meeting, we will do a special flyer distribution in advance.
Susan agreed to walk them around.
- temporary overnight parking permits
via internet
- the city is working on a system that will allow buying and
printing temporary overnight parking permits via the internet
- payment by credit card
- reportedly $4 a night vs $3 at the kiosks, the extra to cover
the internet service cost
- they are hoping to have it running in late January '07
- anything
else attendees wish to discuss
- Several people had seen an article in the Star News that
morning about the owner of the proposed strip club at the former
Shakey's pizza site having opened the day before without any of the
required permits. Forcing the city to take action against it and
presumably provide gist for additional lawsuits. So there was some
discussion about that.
Next meeting is January 13,
same
time, same place.
Adjourned about
12:10 pm