Homeowners Group Assails Impact Report for Temple City Development

A homeowners group has sent a letter to the City Council saying that the draft environmental impact report for a redevelopment area does not fully examine the possible effects of the redevelopment.

The report, which on Oct. 25 was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission, indicated that the proposals for the corner of Las Tunas Drive and Rosemead Boulevard would have no significant effect on the surrounding area if mitigating steps were taken.

Certification of the document will be considered at a public hearing at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday.

Potential Negative Effects

The Nov. 2 letter sent by the 40-member Concerned Residents Assn. of Temple City said that the city should look more closely into the potential negative effects on the surrounding area. Group member and redevelopment opponent Roberta Hoffman said of the redevelopment proposals: “ Something’s going to have an effect.”

She said homeowners in the area consider the anxiety they feel about the future of their neighborhood as a “Nightmare on Elm Avenue”--a residential street adjoining the project area. The 250-page report describes the six redevelopment scenarios on the northwest corner of the Rosemead / Las Tunas intersection, including one in which no redevelopment takes place, and their potential effect on the area. All the proposals involve an area designated as Block A, one of five blocks along Rosemead Boulevard from Elm Avenue south past East Broadway, the Community Redevelopment Agency designated as redevelopment areas in 1972.

Mayor Mary Lou Swain said that after discussions with developers, she feels “the larger the project the more viable,” since it would stand better chances of attracting a major anchor store.

The first block in the Rosemead Redevelopment Area to be redeveloped was the southwest corner of the the Rosemead / Las Tunas intersection. A shopping center anchored by a K mart opened there in 1976 and is now a major sales tax generator, Community Redevelopment Director Robert Dawson said.

The City Council, acting as the CRA, in May unanimously offered Long Beach-based Champion Development Co. the exclusive right to negotiate for the development of Block A.

‘Optimum Project’

“We wanted the environmental (impact) document as a tool to come up with the optimum project. The EIR is a process to evaluate the alternatives,” Dawson said.

But Concerned Residents believe the document is incomplete. Their letter protested that traffic studies for the impact report were conducted in summer, when school was out, and no consideration was given to increased congestion during the racing season at the Santa Anita race track in neighboring Arcadia.

Gary Werner of Community Development Consulting Services, which prepared the impact report, countered that historical traffic data compiled by Caltrans was also considered, including figures for peak seasonal flow.

In response to the letter’s charge that the safety of children traveling or playing in the neighborhood was not mentioned, Werner said that because there are no accesses into the center proposed from residential streets, the impact there would be insignificant.

Swain described the impact report as comprehensive, saying it addressed potential problems well and gave specific suggestions on how to minimize them.

Waiting for Comment

Councilman Kenneth Gillanders said the document seemed thorough, but that he was waiting for public comment Tuesday on what might be missing.

“Let’s face it, there are always some matters that the EIR could have addressed,” he said.

The five redevelopment projects described in the environmental impact report included:

Redevelopment of Block A. The plan calls for taking 20 homes and 13 businesses on the 8-acre lot. Fifteen homes on two acres at the east end of the block have already been purchased by the CRA and were removed between 1985 and 1987, Dawson said.

On the land would be built a shopping plaza with 80,800 square feet of mostly retail space and a parking lot for 409 vehicles.

The most extensive proposal that would take, in addition to Block A, 33 homes on three additional acres north of Elm Avenue not designated for redevelopment. If fully implemented, the project would take 54 homes and 13 businesses for an 11-acre shopping plaza. Parking for 609 vehicles would be provided for the center, which would have 135,000 square feet of retail space.

While Block A is designated commercial under the city’s General Plan, the additional three acres are zoned residential.

The expanded area--north of Elm to Hermosa Drive between Rosemead and Reno Avenue--was included in the impact report so the CRA would not have to ask for another one should the developer manage to acquire the additional homes, Dawson said.

The CRA has been considering the inclusion of this area for at least a year because developers kept pointing out that Rosemead was a major corridor, he said, noting that the intersection at Las Tunas is one of the busiest in the San Gabriel Valley.

“If it’s possible for the developer to assemble those parcels it would probably make for a better project,” Dawson said, adding that the impact report would also inform CRA members of potential negatives as well.

Little Extra Noise

According to the environmental impact report, this project would increase traffic volume on the two major roads by 7,755 daily trips. But because traffic would be slower, the projected rise in noise levels would be offset and insignificant, it states.

To counter the substantial disturbance that would be generated by a truck loading and unloading zone near homes on Elm, the report recommends building an 8-foot-high sound wall.

The document suggested that a building be placed between homes and the parking area to minimize glare from car lights, and that the city approve only those shop signs that would not disturb neighbors.

Redevelopment of the same 11-acre area minus the 20 homes in Block A. The 34 homes north of Elm and 13 businesses in Block A would need to be acquired.

The smallest project, which would include Block A minus the 20 homes. The 13 businesses in Block A would have to be acquired.

The last plan, which would redevelop Block A without the 20 homes, but would include 24 homes north of Elm.

All the proposals would require the closure of Reno Avenue between Las Tunas and Elm Avenue, while Elm would have to be closed for the second, third and fifth proposals.

According to Dawson, the proposed single-story shopping centers would yield between $250,000 and $300,000 in sales tax annually. The city, which collects no property tax, derives 31% of its general fund revenue through sales tax, he added.

The city collected a total of $1.3 million in sales tax last year.