Temple City Vote May Resolve Crisis Over Center Project

In this quiet community of 31,000, where elections usually come and go with little or no debate, a proposal to oust 21 families from their homes to make room for a shopping center has created quite a stir.

But the controversy could end April 12. The three candidates running for two seats on the City Council say they would not vote to condemn any of the homes for the project. And since the votes of four of the five council members are required for condemnation, it appears that the homes will be saved.

The proposed shopping center, on the northwest corner of Rosemead Boulevard and Las Tunas Drive, is in a redevelopment area that includes several businesses as well as the 21 homes on the south side of Elm Avenue, a quiet residential neighborhood occupied mostly by senior citizens.

The residents whose homes would be taken have been joined in the fight by homeowners on the north side of Elm, who fear an increase in noise and traffic.

The controversy erupted just as candidates were filing for the election, and although they have different views regarding the merit of the project, they are unanimous in opposing condemnation of the homes.

The candidates are incumbent Patrick Froehle and challengers Tom Breazeal and Robert Pitts. Tom Desy, whose name will appear on the ballot, has withdrawn from the race. Incumbent William Dennis is not running for reelection.

Froehle, 43, was a planning commissioner when he was appointed to the council three years ago to fill a vacancy. He is a lieutenant with the Los Angeles Police Department and has lived in Temple City for 19 years.

He said he would approve the purchase of the Elm Avenue homes for the project only if the owners are willing to sell.

“But I am not willing to force them out,” he said. “We will have as large a project as we can with the number of people willing to sell. If people are willing to sell, we can expand the project accordingly.”

Upset Too Early

Froehle said residents may have gotten upset too early, since the council is still studying the proposal and has not even selected a developer.

“But if I lived there,” he said, “I would be concerned too.”

Froehle said he backs the project itself because it would bring more sales tax revenue to the city. Temple City does not levy a property tax and relies on sales tax revenue to pay for city services. Froehle added that the location, at one of the most heavily traveled intersections in the San Gabriel Valley, is ideal for a shopping center.

Breazeal, 50, who has been a member of the Planning Commission for 15 years, opposes construction of the shopping center now, saying the city should focus its attention on improving sales in the downtown retail area. However, he said the Rosemead-Las Tunas parcel will eventually be developed commercially.

Last Year on Panel

A management consultant who ran for the council in 1982, Breazeal said this will be his last year on the Planning Commission.

“I have served long enough, and it is no longer fun,” he said, “but I enjoy serving the community.”

Breazeal said forcing the Elm Avenue residents to relocate would be “reprehensible.”

“They are old people, and they have lived there many years,” he said. “They look out for each other, and to sever that bonding would affect their health.”

Pitts, 47, is a property negotiation agent for Southern California Edison Co. who has lived in Temple City for 22 years. He was an unsuccessful candidate for the City Council in 1982 and 1984.

Seeks Agreement

“I am convinced that the people in this community do not want homes taken by any means,” he said. “The homes should not be utilized for the project unless all the homeowners agree.”

Pitts said he would favor the project if an agreement could be worked out to prevent forcing residents to leave their homes.

“That intersection is an appropriate location for commercial development,” he noted, “and we need the sales tax revenue it would generate.”

Pitts said the city should continue to emphasize low-density single-family homes. He wants to work to revitalize the downtown shopping area, which he considers an economic embarrassment to the city.

“With a partnership between the merchants, the landlords and the city, it can be done,” he said.

‘Best Little City’

“We can provide transportation to our senior citizens who want to shop downtown; we should consider eliminating the two-hour parking restrictions to increase foot traffic, and we can hire a consultant if we have to.

“We have the best little city in the San Gabriel Valley, and I won’t allow any situation (like the business district) that would make people ashamed of the city.”

The proposed shopping center is part of a redevelopment area adopted in 1972. The City Council last month adopted a preliminary design plan for the 8-acre project, which city officials hope will be anchored by a discount department store.

Officials estimate that the center would generate about $300,000 in new taxes each year, an increase of 25% over the city’s current sales tax revenue.

Earlier Project

In the first phase of redevelopment, the city in 1976 built what is known as the K mart Center just south of the proposed development. That project generates more than $250,000 a year in sales tax revenue.

Although 100 families were relocated to clear the land for the K mart Center, few opposed the project.

The two other redevelopment projects in the city, a small one at the northeast corner of Rosemead and Las Tunas, where the Edwards Theatre was built, and the other on Rosemead just south of Broadway, the site of a Sizzler restaurant, prompted little or no controversy.