CC - 09-27-94• • APPROVED
CITY OF OS- MEAD
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING DATE O / 9SG
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL RY
SEPTEMBER 27, 1994
The Regular Meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to
order by Mayor Bruesch at 8:05 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City
Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California.
The Pledge to the Flag was led by Mayor Bruesch.
The Invocation was delivered by Pastor Charlie Corum of Olive
Branch Outreach Church.
ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS:
Present: Councilmembers Clark, Imperial, Mayor Pro Tem Taylor,
and Mayor Bruesch
Absent: Vasquez - Excused
Mayor Bruesch noted that Councilmember Vasquez was attending the
National Council on Economic Development.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 13, 1994 - REGULAR MEETING
Mayor Pro Tem Taylor asked that the Minutes of September 13, 1994
be deferred to the October 11, 1994 meeting to include the lot sizes
of 8734-8729 Mission Drive project, as defined by Mr. Rauth.
Councilmember Clark asked for clarification from the Planning
Director as to whether those lots are actually 3300 square feet.
Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated that almost 2/3 of the lots are
substandard, as confirmed by Mr. Rauth, and that the Planned
Development (PD)D Zone requires 4500 square feet. Mr. Taylor stated
further that an R-1 lot is normally 6000 square feet and has been
reduced to 4500 square foot lots. Mr. Taylor asked if this meets the
PD requirements.
Peter Lyons, Planning Director responded that the PD allows lot
sizes to be smaller than 4500 square feet.
Mayor Pro Tem Taylor asked that the PD requirements be brought
back before the Council for discussion and clarification. Mr. Taylor
stated further that this issue was discussed and revisions were made
at a previous Council meeting to increase lot sizes because large
two-story homes were b Ong built on 3000 square foot lots, which
often resulted in construction on substandard lots. Mr.
Taylor stated that there is a lack of definition as to the ultimate
goals of PD standards and that those issues need to be discussed
again in order to provide guidelines to the Planning Commission,
which he thought were already in place.
Frank Tripepi, City Manager, responded that on the 8734-8729
Mission Drive project, Council denied the project because they were
not in agreement with the density situation. Mr. Tripepi further
explained that it is the Council's option to require 4500 square feet
for development and that density standards on a R-2 lot are different
than on a R-3 lot.
Mayor Bruesch requested that discussion of the PD Requirements be
placed on the next agenda.
Councilmember Imperial stated that he is in agreement with Mr.
Taylor and requested photographs of areas that Mr. Taylor was
referring to.
CC 9-27-94
Page #1
Councilmember Clark stated that the Minutes need clarification as
to what actually was said regarding the lot sizes. Councilmember
Clark stated further, that, in fact, she had called attention to the
Council several years ago regarding the need to tighten the PD
standards and that the Ordinance needs further tightening. However,
since the lots were originally zoned R-3, the Planning Department and
Planning commission were not recommending anything in violation of
the current Ordinance. Ms. Clark explained that, we, the Council,
are in agreement that the project is still too high in density.
Mayor Pro Tem Taylor requested Mr. Rauth to describe the lot
sizes for clarification of the September 13, 1994 meeting Minutes.
Mayor Bruesch requested a memo on the water runoff problem at
7634 Highcliff.
A Resolution was presented to Bonnie Culbertson, President and
CEO of the Rosemead Chamber of Commerce upon her retirement.
Ms. Culbertson thanked the Council and announced that the Chamber
hired a management team of which she will be involved with on a
part-time basis for the next few months. The Chamber will be
publishing a 12-page news tabloid.
I. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE
John Rauth, 2702 Bartlett, Rosemead, thanked the Councilmembers
on their decision to deny development of the project at 8723 Mission
Drive. Mr. Rauth also expressed his concern over the Planned
Development (PD) standards established by the City.
Juan Nunez, 2702 Del Mar Avenue, Rosemead, asked if Urgency
Ordinance 746 covers prostitution.
Robert Kress, City Attorney, responded that prostitution is
prohibited by State law.
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None
III.LEGISLATIVE
A. RESOLUTION NO. 94-47 - CLAIMS & DEMANDS
The following resolution was presented to the Council for
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-47
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF
$410,746.78 NUMBERED 10767 THROUGH 10884
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER IMPERIAL, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK
that Resolution No. 94-47 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Vasquez
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
B. RESOLUTION NO. 94-48 - NOMINATING COUNCILWOMAN MARGARET
CLARK TO THE SEAT ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SAN
GABRIEL VALLEY BASIN WATER QUALITY AUTHORITY
CC 9-27-94
Page #2
•
The following resolution was presented to the Council for
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-48
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
NOMINATING COUNCILWOMAN MARGARET CLARK TO THE SEAT ON THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SAN GABRIEL BASIN WATER QUALITY
AUTHORITY
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER IMPERIAL, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM TAYLOR
that Resolution No. 94-48 be adopted. Vote resulted:
Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Vasquez
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
CC-A REQUEST FOR RED CURB ON LOWER AZUSA AT DARLOW AVENUE
MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM TAYLOR, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER IMPERIAL
that the Council approve the installation of 30 feet of red curing on
the east and west side of Darlow Avenue and Lower Azusa Road. Vote
resulted:
Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Vasquez
Abstain: None
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
CC-B RECEIPT AND AWARD OF BIDS FOR THE ROSEMEAD RESIDENTIAL
REHABILITATION PROGRAM 51ST HANDYMAN BID PACKAGE
Juan Nunez, 2702 Del Mar Avenue, Rosemead inquired on the status
of the Channel 9 newscast a few weeks ago on the Handyman Program.
Mr. Tripepi responded that the City has purchased the video and
the Council will be viewing the tape over the next two weeks.
Mr. Nunez stated that this evening's news featured the failure of
Section 8 Housing. Mr. Nunez was informed that Section 8 is Federal
housing and does not apply to Rosemead.
Mayor Pro Tem Taylor referred to the Channel 9 newscast and
stated that out of 500 Handyman projects processed very few people
have been dissatisfied. In the one case taped, the homeowner was not
ignored, but had a choice of alternate contractors to do the work.
Mayor Bruesch stated that the newscast failed to give credit to
staff in the many hours spent in meetings with the homeowner in
trying to satisfy her demands and still follow CDBG procedures.
Councilmember Clark asked if the contractor's references for this
Handyman Project had been contacted.
Mark Fullerton, CDBG Coordinator, responded that they had and the
contractor's license and insurance requirements were verified.
Mayor Pro Tem Taylor asked why the bidders for these projects
have gone down significantly.
CC 9-27-94
Page #3
0 •
Mr. Fullerton responded that during the fiscal year the
contractor's list is updated and Handyman bid packets are mailed to
them. Mr. Fullerton stated further that in this case, the project
was advertised but packets were not mailed. However, each contractor
on their list was notified by phone.
Jeff Stewart, Executive Assistant, stated that several of the
contractor's indicated that they are working in the San Fernando
Valley doing earthquake rehabilitations and were not able to bid
small projects such as this..
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER IMPERIAL
that the Council receive and file all bids; accept and award the bid
to the low bidder, Larry Johnson Construction, for a contract amount
of $36,300.00; authorize staff to enter into the contract with the
owners and contractor; and reject all other bids. Vote resulted:
Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Vasquez
Abstain: None
The Mayor said motion duly carried and so ordered.
CC-C APPROVAL OF ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT FOR CAFE BINH MINH,
3365 WALNUT GROVE AVENUE, #B
VERBATIM DIALOGUE FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER CLARK: I have some questions about this concerning the
noise levels and whether we have really addressed the problem.
MAYOR BRUESCH: I, too, have some questions about this, I was going
to remove it myself.
CLARK: I drove by this tonight...
DON WAGNER, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Councilwoman Clark, the Business
License Investigator met with the two neighbors and the owners of the
cafe at their house at 11:00 p.m. and they experimented with the
levels of volume on the equipment and reached an acceptable level on
behalf of the neighbors. That is Condition No. 8 on the list of
conditions that the business owner signed. So, we were aware of the
concerns by the neighbors on this as they did show up at the
administrative hearing. The Business License Investigator met with
them on the property. I wasn't at that meeting... Steve, go ahead.
STEVE WILLKOMM, BUSINESS LICENSE INVESTIGATOR: Being ever conscious
of the Council's on-going concern of entertainment businesses,
certainly when they are adjacent to residential areas. Immediately,
when the concern was brought up, I went to the subject location and
visited the homes of the people that complained that lived next door
to the establishment at about 11:30 p.m. on a Friday. Because, the
only way to get the right impact or their concerns is when you
actually experience it. What they have on their Karaoke machine
volume is a digital readout that displays numbers in four digits.
Originally, it was up in the 6,000 series. We lowered it the 48
series, rather, they lowered it to the 48 which seemed to be
acceptable. I decided to go a step further and lower it to 4242,
just to be safe and just to go a step further to make sure that the
noise concern was set. After setting it at 4242 and checking with
the proprietors actually in their club with a person singing at a
high-paced, high volume, a lot of base type song, along with somebody
singing, they were accepting of that, I immediately exited and went
to the next door neighbor, went into their home to the most adjacent
bedroom where an infant child and elderly person sleeps, I did not
hear it inside. I asked the person who owns the home to open the
window that is immediately adjacent. I absolutely heard nothing.
CC 9-27-94
Page #4
WILLKOMM CONTINUES: What I am trying to say is that I made every
effort to make sure that it was acceptable to the proprietors, but
even more important, that it was not disturbing to the people that
made the complaints, whether or not they were the persons next door.
I know that has been a concern in the past and we try to deal with
the concern as it was expressed, in this manner, hoping to find a
happy medium. When the complaint was originally lodged at the
administrative hearing, I explained to them that my understanding of
their lodging their complaint or their concern was that all they were
asking for was a "good neighbor" type existence. All parties agreed,
and it appeared to work out very well. From what I understand, there
has not been any problems or concerns since. There are two homes on
this property, and both property owners did agree that... because we
had the person on the telephone on the home behind the first home,
and they seemed to be satisfied with it. So, what I'm trying to say
is although the owners originally turned the volume level down, I
went a step further and turned it down even lower and it was still
acceptable and we have not had any complaints since. Just like
another other situation, should it become a problem, one of the
easier ways, even easier than scientifically measuring the noise, is
that it is very easy for us to just go in the establishment and look
at the volume reading and if it is 4246 and we have complaints, then
we have a condition violation and we can deal with it
administratively then.
MAYOR PRO TEM TAYLOR: Mr. Mayor. Do you actually have the decibel
meter...I have a question about electronics as far as altering the
digital readout. Can they do that?
WILLKOMM: On the machine?
TAYLOR: Yes.
WILLKOMM: Absolutely. It's a regular... just like any other
amplifying or music sound emanating...
TAYLOR: But, altering is like turning back a speedometer.
CLARK: Do you mean odometer?
MAYOR BRUESCH: In other words, having a level and really having a
higher level...
FRANK TRIPEPI, CITY MANAGER: Mr. Taylor means if it reads 4242 can
it be putting out at 5500 decibels.
WILLKOMM: No. It's pretty much exact.
TAYLOR: I understand a legal machine will do that. But, in the
field of electronics almost every thing is possible. I'm not
questioning ...I am impressed with what you are telling us, the extent
of what you have done. I would ask that your comments be in the
Minutes verbatim because they are so detailed and I commend you for
that. Going to the neighbors, lowing the decibels down, whatever it
takes, I think it was the best you could do. It was an excellent
thing. If people come back with complaints that the doors are open
or it is too loud, or somebody turned it up, we, by no means, can
have a Deputy down there auditing or checking that readout. But, you
have bent over backwards. I don't know of anything else you could
have done. As for asking for verbatim minutes, this shows the detail
of what you do go through, it wasn't just somebody saying it.
WILLKOMM: When the City of Rosemead has a problem with an
entertainment licensee, especially if it is with noise, I will
personally be the one dealing with it. That is why I needed to put
some things in place that I can actually measure. With or without an
actual decibel meter, this is the easiest and most precise way that I
could deal with it.
CC 9-27-94
Page #5
• 0
TAYLOR: The only reason that I brought that up was, like I say, I
know people that work with computers and electronics and I cannot
believe the things they can do with them. It is no reflection on
what you are doing. I just mentioned the decibel meter for a backup,
verifying what the meter says when it is at 4242. I am in favor of
allowing this. Either we say you cannot have these businesses or we
put restrictions on them and as the conditions state, "Any violation
of any applicable laws and/or of these operating conditions will be
grounds for suspension and/or revocation of these business licenses".
I think we have it covered and I can understand Mrs. Clark's and Mr.
Bruesch's concerns about the noise.
BRUESCH: That is not my concern, the noise is one of my concerns and
I will tell you I am going to vote No on this because...
TAYLOR: Excuse me, Mrs. Clark did not finish.
CLARK: Can I follow up on the noise concern while Mr. Willkomm is
here.
BRUESCH: OK. I have a very major concern on this particular item.
Go ahead, Mrs. Clark.
CLARK: Did you have a decibel meter? If you were to go in at random
times and check, do you have you own meter? I think that is what Mr.
Taylor was referring to.
WILLKOMM: I believe the City and Temple Station has one.
CLARK: Secondly, when you were testing at the neighbors house, were
they opening and closing the establishment's doors? The customers
could be coming in and out. And while the doors are closed, it could
be nice and quiet. But, if the noise is going to go up and down when
people are going in and out, that would not be acceptable.
WILLKOMM: The management has been cautioned that the doors must be
closed at all times when the Karaoke machine is on. What happens a
lot during the summer is that people want to prop the door open.
This place, I understand, does have air conditioning and the door was
closed the day I was there except when someone was actually entering
or exiting.
CLARK: But, they are not going to turn the machine off while "Mary
Jones" walks out the door or comes in.
WILLKOMM: That is correct. The front door faces the freeway. There
is no back-door, it's a solid wall, no window or anything. I know
for a fact, as I was there, there were customers coming and going. I
had a partner inside while I went to the complainants home and the
customers going in and out did not appear to be a problem. In a
situation where we need to measure a decibel rating, we have that
capability.
CLARK: How long have they been
license?
WILLKOMM: I believe they have
five to six months and have had
CLARK: Charley (Pastor Corum),
PASTOR CHARLEY CORUM: No, they
hours.
having the Karaoke machines without a
Deen open as a cafe for approximately
the Karaoke for approximately four.
could you hear it across the street?
are not usually there during those
BRUESCH: If I may, I will defer to you later, but I have a list of
questions that I need to ask. One, in that same center is a
laundromat. What are their hours of operation? They are open quite
late, are they not?
CC 9-27-74
Page #6
•
WILLKOMM: I understand that they are open until 10:00 p.m. I'm not
sure...
BRUESCH: The weekend hours are probably 11:00 or 12:00.
WILLKOMM: That is very possible.
BRUESCH: The reason I asked that is I have noticed a very severe
impact on parking between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and midnight,
especially on Fridays and Saturdays. This corner shopping center has
been a problem and will continue to be a problem due to the freeway
exit at Walnut Grove. It has been my continued experience over the
last two or three months of going southbound on Walnut Grove and
being cutoff just after crossing Hellman, from people making a left
turn northbound onto Walnut Grove. There is a continuing exit and
entry problem there with people trying to make that turn. There is
an overflow parking problem, both going north on Walnut Grove,
spilling over onto Rockhold, and north and south of Hellman. I think
the entrance of the Karaoke machine began the problems there with the
parking and traffic. I am totally against the continuance of that
karaoke machine because it impacts traffic and parking and compounds
the problem there. I pass that place at least two or three times a
week. It is really bad on weekends, I know that from personal
experience.
Audience: Can I ask a question to the gentleman that is covering the
complaint? How far do you live from the area?
WILLKOMM: I'm the Sheriff's Investigator assigned to this area, so I
don't live there.
Audience: My question is if you lived next to the area that this
complaint comes from, you would agree with the people that are
complaining. I live in that area, but it seems to me that someone is
justifying that the noise is just at a minimum. Yet, you don't live
here or these people don't live here.
BRUESCH: Could you state your name and address for the record.
SUZANO VEGA, 8457 E. Artson Street, Rosemead.
BRUESCH: Could you corroborate my comment about the parking and
traffic problem. It is a continuing problem and it is getting worse
day by day.
IMPERIAL: Mr. Mayor. I requested also to speak on this because as
far as I am concerned, a lot of bad judgment was made in allowing
that business to go into the place to begin with. It is isolated.
It is in a residential area, and it shouldn't have been there to
begin with.
BRUESCH: Absolutely.
IMPERIAL: You can stand on that curb and take decibel ratings all
you want too. But, it keeps me in mind of a lady who made complaints
one time and every time the police went there, there was nothing
happening. I sat in her living room and finally saw what was
happening. These people were monitoring the police scanner.
Everytime they heard it on the scanner, they cut down their noise
level. I don't think we have the ability to continue to do things
like that. It should not have been there to begin with and I don't
think they ought to have an Entertainment License.
BRUESCH: ?Mr. Imperial would you put that in a form of a motion, I
will second it.
IMPERIAL: I will put that in a form a motion to deny the request for
an Entertainment License.
CC 9-27-94
Page #7
BRUESCH: I will second that.
CLARK: Mr. Mayor. I tend to agree on the parking situation. I went
down there just before the meeting tonight and it is red curbed all
the way in front to the next door to the south.
BRUESCH: That's why they go to Rockhold.
CLARK: Yes, so they have to park there.
BRUESCH: I have seen four or five cars north and three or four cars
south on Rockhold that are using resident's parking spaces.
CLARK: The exit situation there, of necessity, is very confusing...
BRUESCH: There has been a motion, any further discussion? Please
vote.
TAYLOR: The motion is.?
BRUESCH: The motion is to deny.
Vote taken from voting slip:
Yes: Clark, Taylor, Bruesch, Imperial
No: None
Absent: Vasquez
Abstain: None
BRUESCH: Thank you, Steve.
END VERBATIM DIALOGUE.
CC-D CONSIDERATION OF INCREASED FUNDING FOR ROSEMEAD SCHOOL
DISTRICT SANE PROGRAM
Councilmember Imperial requested that a poll be taken to
determine how Rosemead is helping the other school districts. Mr.
Imperial asked that this item be deferred to the next meeting.
Councilmember Clark asked if the delay would prevent the program
from continuing.
Char Gerard, Day Coordinator from Rosemead School District,
stated that the State has cut their funding more than 50% The
Sheriff's program is in place and is very successful. Without
additional funding, they may have to discontinue the SANE Program in
May. She stated further that deferring this item for another two
weeks will not affect the program.
Frank Tripepi, City Manager, stated that the City contributes
$15,000 to the Garvey School District and that District contributes
$15,000. The Rosemead School District contributes their amount and
the City contributes also. Mr. Tripepi stated further that with the
Rosemead School Districts' funding being reduced, the recommendation
is that the Council authorize the expenditure of an additional
$5,000.
After more discussion, this item was deferred to the next the
next regular meeting for more information.
V. MATTERS FOR DISCUSSION AND ACTION - None
VI. STATUS REPORTS - None
VII. MATTERS FROM OFFICIALS
A. COUNCILMEMBER IMPERIAL
1. Asked the City Attorney if the City's pornographic material,
business ordinance, and gambling ordinance was up to date.
CC 9-27-94
Page #8
s
Robert Kress, City Attorney, responded that an Urgency ordinance
was adopted prohibiting adult businesses pending the adoption of a
regulatory ordinance. Mr. Kress,stated further that gambling is
regulated by State law.
VIII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE
Holly Knapp, 8367 Whitmore Street, Rosemead, announced that the
"People for People" annual fund-raiser dinner will be held on
Saturday, November 5th at the Rosemead Community Recreation Center.
Mrs. Knapp stated that this organization provides food for many of
Rosemead's residents and residents in surrounding areas.
Suzano Vega, 8457 E. Artson Street, Rosemead, stated that he
spoke with members of Council regarding lawn parkers and other
deteriorated areas in the City and thus far nothing has been done nor
has he been contacted.
Mayor Bruesch responded that approximately 160-200 tickets are
issued weekly throughout Rosemead.
Mayor Pro Tem Taylor responded that one solution is to use
"selective enforcement" to handle this problem and for Mr. Vega to
phone City Hall whenever he observes an habitual lawn parker.
Mr. Vega stated that he is tired of calling City Hall and that
nothing has been done.
Mayor Pro Tem Taylor expressed his disbelief in Mr. Vega's
statements.
Councilmember Imperial explained that he responded to a phone
message from Mr. Vega to the Council and had a meeting with him. Mr.
Imperial stated that this problem was then investigated by staff and
that staff informed him that the problem is now.being handled by Code
Enforcement.
Jeff Stewart, Executive Assistant stated that Code.Enforcement
proceedings are continuing, yard parkers have been cited, trailers in
the yard have been removed, and vehicles on the street have been
cited, as discussed with Mr. Vega.
Mr. Vega continued to express his dissatisfaction.
Councilmember Imperial explained that parking is a problem in
Rosemead and the use of "selective enforcement" for front lawn
parkers and street parkers on street sweeping day is an effective way
of handling this problem. Mr. Imperial advised Mr. Vega to call City
Hall when he observes an offender.
IX. ADJOURNMENT
Councilmember Imperial asked that the meeting be adjourned in
memory of Robbie Nutt.
There being no further action to be taken at this time, the
meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. The next regular meeting is
scheduled for October 11, 1994, at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
City Clerk
CC 9-27-94
Page #9