Loading...
CC - Minutes 01-26-10v Minutes of the JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING January 26, 2010 The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission was called to order by Mayor Clark at 6:02 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member/Commissioner Ly INVOCATION: Mayor/Chairwoman Clark PRESENT: Mayor/Chairwoman Clark, Mayor Pro TemNice-Ch airman Taylor, Council Member/Commissioner Armenta, Council Member/Commissioner Low, and Council Member/Commissioner Ly. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Allred, Assistant City Manager Hawkesworth, Interim City Attorney Montes, Community Development Director Wong, Director of Finance Brisco, Director of Parks and Recreation Montgomery-Scott, Economic Development Administrator Ramirez, Public Affairs Manager Flores, Deputy Public Works Director Marcarello, and City Clerk Molleda 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE None 2. COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR A. Claims and Demands Resolution No. 2010 - 06 Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2010 - 06 for payment of Commission expenditures in the amount of $14,617.00 demand nos. 11221 through 11224. Commissioner/Council Member Polly Low made a motion, seconded by Commissioner/Council Member Steven Ly to approve Commission Consent Calendar. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 1 of 17 3. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER t£ STAFF A. Reinstatement of Eminent Domain Authority Over Non-Residential Properties in Redevelopment Project Area No.1 The Commission will consider the engagement of a consulting firm, GRC Associates, to initiate the reinstatement of eminent domain authority for non-residential properties in Redevelopment Project Area No. 1. Proposals have been solicited from professional consulting firms to do this work. Based on its low cost bid and previous relevant experience, GRC Associates has been selected to perform Redevelopment Plan Amendment work on this project. Recommendation: That the Commission: 1. Authorize the Executive Director to execute a professional services agreement with GRC Associates in the amount of $45,000 for the amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for Project Area No. 1. 2. Establish a contingency of approximately 10% of the contract amount to cover potential unforeseen costs associated with the Redevelopment Plan Amendment. Economic Development Administrator Michelle Ramirez reviewed the staff report. Council Member Polly Low asked why it took so long for the City to establish the tax increment collection if the project was established in 1972. The tax increment collection was established in 1986. Mrs. Ramirez responded that the City was allowed to collect the tax increment as soon as it was filed with the County of Los Angeles. She added that in 1986 the limit of how much the City was going to collect in tax increment was established. Commissioner/Council Member Steven Ly made a motion, seconded by Commissioner/Council Member Sandra Armenta to approve Commission Consent Calendar. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly No: Taylor Abstain: None Absent: None City Attorney Joseph Montes asked that City Council recess to Closed Session regarding the listed item. Mr. Monies announced that additionally subsequently to the posting of the agenda an item pertaining to initiation of litigation had come up that needed to be discussed in Closed Session. He asked that Council vote to include this item for discussion in Closed Session. Commissioner/Council Member Steven Ly made a motion, seconded by Commissioner/Council Member Sandra Armenta to add the additional item to Closed Session. Vote resulted in: Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 2 of 17 Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None City Council recessed to Closed Session at 6:10 p.m. 4. CLOSED SESSION A. Conference with Legal Counsel 1) Government Code 54956.9(a): Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation Name of Case: Haro v. City of Rosemead City Council Meeting Agenda The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Clark at 7:05 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Ly INVOCATION: Mayor Clark PRESENT: Mayor Clark, Mayor Pro Tern Taylor, Council Member Armenta, Council Member Low, and Council Member Ly. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Allred, Assistant City Manager Hawkesworth, City Attorney Montes, Community Development Director Wong, Director of Finance Brisco, Director of Parks and Recreation Montgomery-Scott, Economic Development Administrator Ramirez, Deputy Public Works Director Marcarello, and City Clerk Molleda Council reconvened back from closed session at 7:05 p.m. City Attorney Joseph Montes announced that there was no reportable action taken in Closed Session. 5. PRESENTATIONS • Certificate of Recognition to Elizabeth Lyons for her participation in the USA Track and Field Junior Olympics Cross Country National Championships. Mayor Margaret Clark read the certificate of recognition to Elizabeth Lyons and added that she was very proud of her and the fact that she is a Rosemead resident. The City Council took pictures with Ms. Lyons Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 3 of 17 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE Chuck Lyons - thanked the City of Rosemead for recognizing the youth; he announced that there is now a link on the City's website called, "Celebrating Rosemead's Youth". Mr. Lyons stated that perhaps in a future Council meeting in the Council Chamber he can present a PowerPoint with pictures of the Reno race, which was held during a blizzard. He added that the weather was about 25 degrees and there was about 2 feet of snow on the ground; when the runners ran by there was snow on their chins, noses, eyelashes and foreheads. 7. PUBLIC HEARING A. Municipal Code Amendment 09.03, Amending Chapter 17.12 of Title 17 of the City of Rosemead Municipal Code Relating to the Amortization of Nonconforming Poultry Slaughter Businesses The City Council has directed actions towards the elimination of poultry slaughter business operations within the City. Accordingly, staff and the City Attorney drafted an Ordinance to amortize poultry slaughter businesses in the City within three (3) years from the effective date of this Ordinance. On December 7, 2009, the Planning Commission considered the draft Ordinance and recommended a change in the amortization period from the initial recommendation of three (3) years to less than one (1) year. At this point, the City Council has optional alternative amortization periods to choose from. They include but are not limited to: 1. Staff recommendation of three (3) years. 2. Planning Commission recommendation of less than one (1) year (December 31, 2010). 3. Such other amortization period as the Council deems appropriate based upon legal advice and the public hearing. As an addition to any amortization period contained within the Ordinance, staff and the City Attorney have prepared a provision that could be inserted into the Ordinance at the Council's discretion, which would create an application and hearing procedure for any affected business that believes it cannot meet the amortization period. Should the Council wish to modify the amortization period, or add any provision concerning an application for extension of the amortization period, those changes would need to be incorporated into any motion to introduce the Ordinance for first reading. Recommendation: That the City Council determine whether to adopt an ordinance and any modifications thereto; and, if so, approve the negative declaration and introduce Ordinance No. 883 for first reading amending Chapter 17.12 of Title 17 of the City of Rosemead Municipal Code relating to the amortization of nonconforming poultry slaughter businesses. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 4 of 17 City Attorney Joseph Montes announced that the recommendation on the agenda needed to be revised. Staff has discovered in reviewing the record in preparation for tonight's hearing that although notice of the public hearing for the planning commission (when the planning commission saw this item) was sent to the newspaper for some reason that notice wasn't actually published by the newspaper, consequently this matter needs to be referred back to the planning commission. We recognize that will necessitate further public hearings before the planning commission and then another public hearing before the City Council and we also recognize that several people have come out to speak tonight; in light of that recognition we do not want to discourage anybody who wants to speak this evening. But we do want to indicate to you that there will be other opportunities to speak on this item, so you can either speak tonight or you can speak at one of the subsequent nights that this is discussed or you can speak at all of those occasions if you want. If you speak tonight you will not be prohibited from speaking again at a subsequent meeting. Public testimony will be taken tonight and no action can be taken by the Council other than to continue the public hearing so that the matter can go back to the planning commission. Our recommendation will be to open the hearing, take testimony from whoever wants to give testimony this evening, and then take no further action other than to continue the hearing to a date uncertain so we can re-notice this public hearing for the City Council after the planning commission has had a chance to conduct their hearing. Additional, if the Council has any modifications to the ordinance that they have before them this evening that you would d like the planning commission to consider; the Council Members should give that direction to staff at the conclusion of this item this evening. If there are any questions I'd be happy to answer them; otherwise staff has a brief staff report; also given the number of speakers this evening there is a 3 minute speaking limit. Mayor Margaret Clark asked Planning Commissioner Nancy Eng if she could translate what the attorney had just stated because she wanted to make sure that everyone knew that Council would not be taking any action tonight due to the glitch that occurred with the public hearing notice. Mrs. Eng began to translate and asked Council Member Polly Low if she could continue translating Council Member Polly Low translated the statement in Cantonese. Senior Planner Paul Gary reviewed the staff report. Mayor Margaret Clark opened the public hearing at 7:21 p.m. Colin Lennard - Attorney representing Cal Poultry stated (the following statement is verbatim): I would like tc speak in a brief while and then introduce Dana Phu to make a short presentation as well as the next speaker. We are very very disappointed that the City Council has chosen to essentially consider going ahead with this ordinance. We're disappointed because we have made what we believe a very fair and reasonable offer to the City Council; the offer specifically was that we would provide you with a list of order consultants and there are consultants out there that deal specifically with odor control. That we would get that list to you, a number of major firms, and that if you wanted to add or suggest which ones you wanted we would be willing to take that. We also said that we would have the odor consultant prepare a report and a recommendation of specific items that my clients needed to do to mitigate/prevent order. We would then provide that report back to you, at which time you could make any reasonable changes you thought were necessary on behalf of the city and that we would abide by them. We would then implement what the odor consultant recommended; Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 5 of 17 we would hope that that would be done between 60 and 90 days. We also agree on a parallel track to sit down with your city staff in connection with possible or potential relocation of the business; we understand that the City Council has rejected that offer out of hand. We believe that you are really preventing our client from addressing the real issue and the real issue is odor. We know that there been a series of other alleged violations; there is no outstanding violation as of now. The 206 issue with respect to the wall and the entrance between the suggested retail has now been fixed; there is no entrance there whatsoever. The (inaudible) has been taken care of and the report to the planning commission by the staff referencing the County Health and the violations there, our client has explained to the city on a number of occasions that the County Health does not have any jurisdiction in this matter. In fact the agency that does has jurisdiction, which the State Department of Food and Agriculture, which is out at that facility perhaps every day and at least once a week, have never found any violations whatsoever. As I said before, my client has been prevented from trying to correct these issues. In October of 2006, Mr. Quan Phu wrote a letter to the City suggesting that, not suggesting, actually committing to putting in the necessary odor controls that would mitigate the odor. Putting on a new roof, putting on a ventilation system; putting on a new cooling system and also addressing the appearance of the property; those were rejected by the City. Rejected because of the fact that that would enlarge the use of the lien. Non-conforming use ordinance which wasn't even in existence because it didn't have due process clause in it so I don't see how that could have been rejected at that time. In addition to it, after that was rejected, in 2008 my clients come before this City Council and suggested that in order to provide the corrections of the necessary for the odor control that they be brought to specific use, in other words, not being a non-conforming use anymore but being a committed use and then committing to putting in the necessary odor controls, in fact, staff in a report to the planning commission, which approved the idea, of taking them out of non-conformance status, was then recommended to the City Council that they adopt that proposed ordinance allowing to put in the necessary odor controls and mitigate the one issue that needed correction. In 2009, by the way I should add on the second reading of the ordinance the City Council decided they would not adopt it, in 2009 what happens, the exact opposite, you get a staff report that was 360 degrees the opposite of the original staff report that recommended that the City put my clients out of business. Then it goes to the City Planning Commission, the planning commission then adopts a one year non-conformance use amortization period which in no way would stand up before any court. It comes back before this City Council with a staff report again 360 degrees different than that which the staff report was in 2008. In other words, you had my client on an absolute rollercoaster. You've had them on a rollercoaster from approving to disapproving; you've not allowed them to make the necessary changes that would correct the problem and now you take up this ordinance, which I suggest to you, will not solve any issue whatsoever. Because I don't think any of you can expect my client, if you adopt this ordinance, to expend an enormous amount of money in capital in correcting the odor problem when you are going to put them out of business in 3 years. No sensible business person is going to do that; the only thing that this ordinance is going to do, if in fact you adopt it, is to commit the City to a very expensive and lengthy piece of litigation. Which I don't believe is in the interest of the City or in the interest of the community. It's really incredible in these difficult economic times and inconceivable that the City would terminate a successful ongoing business causing all of its employees to become all of a sudden unemployed without at least finding out whether in fact the business can operate, correct the odor problem, and become and remain part of this business community, which it has done since 1990. That's a long time to be in this community and it's a long time until 2006 until everything was exploding in terms of the alleged violations. I would suggest let Mr. and Mrs. Phu have an opportunity to correct the problem and therefore save their business and become part of this community again, thank you. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 6 of 17 Dana Phu - owner of Cal Poultry stated she wanted to share a little bit of her story with them; her husband and she came to the U.S. in 1982, they came to the City of Rosemead and they both attended the Rosemead School District. She stated that the main reason why they started this business was because their family throughout two thousand five hundred years they have to have once a year a uniform chicken; a wholesome chicken with feet and head attached. That represents a unity in the family just like Thanksgiving time where there is a turkey. She added that when they came here they couldn't find that kind of service to their people, their community, and their religion. Mrs. Phu added that throughout the years they have had a lot of support from the community that tells them that this is what they need because it symbolizes unity to family. She explained that they employed 15 people, of which some, have been with them for more than 10 years and if Cal Poultry is closed it is going to be very difficult for them to find another job due to the economic times. Mrs. Phu stated that a lot of her customers were concerned that the business would be closed because it is part of their culture, their family, and their unity. She stated that since 2006 they have been submitting a lot of requests to let them fix the problems but they have been rejected. Council Member Steven Ly stated that he was very offended that there were signs in the audience that say, "minority hater; he stated he was not a minority hater but an American that was here to defend the residents of Rosemead and the City of Rosemead. Mrs. Phu stated that those signs were from the community and not from her. Mayor Margaret Clark stated that there would be no more applause during the meeting. She added that the hearing could be discontinued because no action would be taken tonight and it would be coming back again. She asked that the audience be respectful to the various speakers and listen without any applause or booing. Phyllis Tury - read two paragraphs of city staff reports; the first one was from the staff report when Cal Poultry was first coming in to the City; she then read a paragraph of an impact agreement signed by Mr. Phu Mrs. Tury stated that the business' parking lot is not only a parking lot but also a loading dock. She stated that 3'% years ago her neighbors and she started complaining because they couldn't stand the odor; she added that the odor was not the only issue. She stated that the traffic backs up on Garvey and cars try to go around the cars that are waiting to turn into the parking lot that is being used to unload chickens. She stated that she has given a lot of pictures over the last few months; she addressed a specific one that showed two squashed chickens laying on the sidewalk, which is accessible to any child walking by. Mrs. Tury stated that the chickens laid there for 2 days and on the 31d day her friend took a picture of them. She then addressed a second picture that showed live chickens in cages with the exception of one dead one. Mrs. Tury added that they were not trying to be unreasonable but that there were certainly problems, which they were complaining about. Mrs. Tury held up pictures for the audience to see. Adolfo Ponce - stated that his main concern was that they were dealing with an owner of a business that has total disregard for the community; the reason why they are addressing this issue now is because they brought it to the forefront. He stated that it has taken time for them to actually get to speak on this item, violation after violation, and added that they were not being unreasonable Mr. Ponce stated that business are asked to leave certain cities because they are nuisance to that community; they become and outgrow that facility. He stated it was sad that the owner had to bring up ethnicity and religion; he said he was a minority and he asked that Council please concentrate on the real issue, which is that the owner has been violating the residents' right for a healthy life in this community. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 7 of 17 Marisa Lam - stated that for as long as she has lived, she and her family have been a loyal customer of Cal Poultry because they have provided their family to put a fresh poultry on their table. She added that as a practice their family would offer the sacrifice of the poultry to worship their ancestors as a sign of respect. Ms. Lam added that if anything happened to Cal Poultry her family would be greatly affected and that she was disappointed to hear that Council would not be giving the business an opportunity to clean up their facilities. Ken Vona - stated that he believed he lived in a world where everyone tries to change who you are and that the best thing was to stay true to yourself. Mr. Vong stated that he has lived in Rosemead for 5 or 6 years and felt that the City was not adapting to its people but felt that as the minority they had to adapt to Rosemead. He stated that he knew times were rough and that shutting down a business that has been in Rosemead for over 20 years was going to give a wrong message to kids; that dreams come true but they fall apart. He added that he was very disappointed that the City of Rosemead was not recognizing a business that caters to the people of Rosemead. San Voong - stated that based on the economics he hears in the federal government and the state government are trying to keep small business in place and hearing that the City was trying to do the opposite of that was daunting to him. He added that Cal Poultry paid their taxes and based on what their attorney had stated they have attempted to address the odor issue. Mr. Voong added that he did not think that the city was in the same order of the federal and state government and that shutting down a small business is not going to do a service to the community. Vince Voong - stated that America was based on democracy; he added that Cal Poultry was the only place in Rosemead where he could get fresh chicken. He asked if they were willing to fix the odor then why are they not being allowed to do so and asked what the accomplishment would be by closing down the business. Mr. Voong stated that people talked about smell and that Los Angeles was basically polluted but they are able to fix the problem. He stated that if someone was paying taxes and providing services to the community and are willing to make changes but they are not being allowed to make a change, that is not justice. Mayor Margaret Clark stated there would be no applause and if it continued the public hearing would end. Council Member Polly Low translated the statement. Sandy Ho - stated that everyone is here for the American dream to build their life for their families. She stated that all the people here were part of a family; what they do is have dinner and have chickens, chickens and heads and feet. She stated that her grandparents and ancestors prefer the head and feet of the chickens and they couldn't get that in an Albertson's or other grocery stores. She stated that they were going to lose part of their culture because some people didn't like the heads and feet. She stated that when her grandparents died she hoped to have a chicken with the head and feet for them; she added that as part of their culture during Asian holidays they would place a whole chicken on a altar as part of an offering. Lam Bui - stated his family and his in-laws have visited Cal Poultry since they opened; he stated this was a disservice to the surrounding cities because there are no other businesses around here that sell these products and provide these services to the community. He stated that the City can certainly do something here to sanitize the Cal Poultry business and he urged the City to allow the business to stay in Rosemead and find a solution for everyone. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 8 of 17 Justin Lee - stated that the significance of this store was not only that they provided a rare product but for the Asian community his fresh poultry was part of his culture, a tradition, and part of religion. He stated that shutting down a small business was not the solution in a very slow economy; the violations can easily be fixed and if we know this why don't we let them fix it. He added that what was at stake here was a family run business that was being run out for providing a valuable product that serves the community. He reiterated that closing the business was not the solution and asked that they be allowed to solve that problem so that they can strive within the community. Vincent Lieu - stated he supported Cal Poultry and hoped that the Council work with the Cal Poultry owner to not close them down; this can cause a lawsuit and cost the City a lot of money. Joyce Limones - stated she was Indian-American and you didn't see her crying about her culture; she said her mother was full blooded and she had come to Rosemead to adapt to the world and adapt to changes. She stated she knew Americans were trying to protect the safety of health and trying to keep the City clean, it's not about tradition. She stated that she and her mother have adapted to live happily. She added that she remembered when there were farmers in Rosemead and it was full of farms but they had moved out because this had become a city. She stated this was not about race but rather about health safety and that she would like to see a solution for both sides. Patricia Villaroez - stated that her family had moved to Rosemead in 1966 and her parents' dream was to purchase a home that was on an M-1 zone (residential and light manufacture) and have a business in the back and in 1977 they resurrected their business. She stated that around 1991 they suddenly woke up as if they were living next to the 605 freeway; the area between Valley and the Pomona freeway where the duck farm was and from there on woke up to that smell. She stated she appreciated everyone's issue but they were not living next to this business and consequently their family life was impacted; they no longer could have barbeques because the moment they went outside the smell was like if they lived next to a sewer plant She stated that she understood that the owner had a business that was well accepted in their culture; however, instead of moving to Arcadia they should have stayed in Rosemead to fully understand the ramifications the business was having with its neighbors. Frank Yeh - Director of the Chinese Political Action committee stated that he knew Mr. Phu and he was not only a businessman; he added that he did not understand why this business had become an issue after 20 years and did not think it was fair to close down his business when there are ways to mitigate these issues. He stated that he suggested that Council find common grown and solutions and not lead the City into a lawsuit; this will only cost the City money. Brian Lewin - stated he had mixed feeling about this issue himself; he stated that as someone that worked with in environmental field and on code matters he found Cal Poultry's violations disturbing, as well as the odor issue. He stated that on the other hand Cal Poultry was a local thriving business and it serves many Rosemead residents and people from the surrounding cities and contributes to the City's tax base. Mr. Lewin stated that the problems needed to be addressed but sometimes it mattered how you did things or if you did it. He stated that by passing this ordinance it would address most of the issue; however, it will make their customers very unhappy, and may expose the City to an expensive lawsuit that it may or may not win. Mr. Lewin stated that Council should be careful as to what message they would be sending if this ordinance is approved because the City had not been very successful at attracting commercial developments for several Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 9 of 17 decades. He stated that Council should develop a plan and if Cal Poultry could not comply with it then the City should invoke amortization but that he thought the City should work with them. Augie Gorbea - thanked the Mayor for allowing him to speak and thanked Council Member Ly for recognizing that we have communities full of diversity. Mr. Gorvia stated that he has been a customer of Cal Poultry for 7 years and that he was Puerto Rican and liked fresh chicken. He added that Cal Poultry has served his community excellently for over 20 years and are willing to follow the City's requests; it doesn't make sense to close a thriving business. Julie Gentry - stated that thirty-three thousand Asians didn't strike her as being a minority; she added that she was allowed to speak on this issue because there were a lot of freedoms, such as, freedom to speech, freedom to vote, along with many other freedoms but that with that freedom came a lot of responsibility. She added that we had a responsibility to be good neighbors and that this particular business had not been a good neighbor. There been health and code violations after violations and her list only went back to 2003; she added that the business had many opportunities to fix these issues and had not. She stated much of the tragedy in Haiti could have been prevented if they had proper building codes. Jean Hall - stated that the business has had many opportunities, just like it had been previously mentioned, to take care of their non-conformance and we have been through many City leaders over the years and sometimes it's okay but now we are at a different place. Mrs. Hall added that what everyone was there for this night is to pass this item down because Council could not do anything at this time. She stated that this had to do with the fact that a slaughter poultry business had no place in a density populated neighborhood and that should be the only thing that should be discussed because this had nothing to do with people's cultures or anything else. Mrs. Hall. stated that perhaps the Council could go through the process of exploring other options and perhaps using their Redevelopment powers that are in their disposal. Juan Nunez - stated that he understood that the poultry was used as part of people's religion and culture but that the City was now in a different culture; he added that where he came from they used to kill the animals and gut them out in their front yard and now here in Rosemead he doesn't do that because he has come into a different culture. He added that he could not continue with his customs because they might offend other people. Linda Han - stated she knew the owners of Cal Poultry and she understood that the neighbors were sensitive to the smell and asked if they could imagine working in it. She added that the people there worked very hard and the issues were not personal but it was the way that the City had brought this forth. She stated that her grandmother took the bus from El Monte to Rosemead to buy fresh chickens for religious reasons and stated that taking away this business would obviously hurt other business is the area because they bring business to other people. Amy San - she stated that most of the people that were against this business was because of the odor but she learned tonight that the business was denied to change that; it's not that they did not want to make those changes to make it better. It's because they were not allowed to make it better. Mayor Margaret Clark asked that the City Attorney address that issue. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 10 of 17 City Attorney Joseph Montes stated that he thought the issue that was being raised here is that there was an application submitted previously by the property owner for a zoning code amendment that would have allowed this to be a permitted use. Currently it is not a permitted use at its present location, Cal Poultry, it is not a permitted use at that location, they are a grandfathered use and what's known as a non-conforming use. Under the City's non-conforming ordinance, a non-conforming business is not allowed to expand. In order to make corrections to the building and address ventilation; the owner had previously indicated that modifications to the building including raising the roof, would be necessary to address ventilation issues. That would not be allowed under the City's present code and a zoning code amendment was brought forward through the planning commission and the City Council that would have made that, the poultry slaughter business a legal use or a permitted use so that they could expand the building and that was denied by the City Council at the second reading of the ordinance. Consequently, modifications to the business that would increase the size of the building are not allowed at this time under the City's current codes. Mayor Margaret Clark stated that she would also like to explain that in order to allow the expansion of the building we have to avoid a spot zoning situation, which is not proper. The City would have to allow slaughter houses anywhere in the manufacturing zone, which in Rosemead it is three areas that allow manufacturing. This would have allowed slaughter houses in three different areas of the City and there was considerable and very large public opposition for that and that is the reason why that was changed unanimously by the previous Council. Ken Voonq - stated that his mother had been purchasing chicken for over 20 years from Cal Poultry and that there were many reasons, as other people had explained, why they have to purchase fresh chicken. He added that more importantly they needed it for their prayers of their ancestors. Mr. Voong asked why it took 20 years to address the smell issue; if this business closes it would not only affect the employees of Cal Poultry but the community as a whole. City Attorney Joseph Montes stated that if there were no further speakers this evening, again he would just remind the Council that this matter needs to be deferred back to the Planning Commission and the Council shall take no action this evening other than to make a motion to continue the item to a date uncertain and if there are modifications or additions to the ordinance that the Council would like the Planning Commission to consider they should provide that information to staff at this time. If there are other actions that the Council would like to consider this evening you can ask me any questions in that regard. Mayor Pro Tem Gary Taylor asked if the public hearing was now closed. Mr. Montes stated that the public hearing could not be closed at this point because we want to make sure that all the testimony that was given tonight is included as part of the record and so we will continue the hearing this evening as an open public hearing; that is my recommendation. Council Member Polly Low translated the City Attorney's statements. Mayor Pro Tern Gary Taylor made a motion, seconded by Council Member Steven Ly to continue the public hearing to a future date after the Planning Commission reviews this item once again . Vote resulted in: Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 11 of 17 Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None The City Council recessed at 8:44 p.m. and reconvened at 9:03 p.m. 8. CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes November 17, 2009 - Regular Meeting January 12, 2009 - Regular Meeting B. Claims and Demands Resolution No. 2010 -14 Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2010 -14, for payment of City expenditures in the amount of $573,268.33 numbered 100685 through 100699 and 68513 and 68670, inclusively. C. Ordinance No. 866 - Second Reading: Approving Municipal Code Amendment 09.04, to Require Design Review Approval for any Dwelling with a Development Living Area Equal to or Exceeding Two Thousand Five Hundred Square Feet in R-1 and R-2 Zones. On January 12, 2009, the City Council introduce Ordinance No. 886, which approved Municipal Code Amendment 09-04, amending the Zoning Ordinance to require Design Review approval for any dwelling with a developed living area equal to or exceeding two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet in R-1 and R-2 zones. Ordinance No. 886 is now before Council at the required second reading for adoption. Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 866 at its second reading. D. Whitmore Street Resurfacing Project Phase I - Authorization to Solicit Bids As part of the City's Fiscal Year 2009-10 Capital Improvement Program, the City Council approved the "Residential Street Resurfacing Project", which consists of the rehabilitation of various streets within the City. This component of that project proposes the rehabilitation of Whitmore Street from Del Mar Avenue to the Alhambra Wash. Funding for this project is available through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 - Community Development Block Grant program (ARRA CDBG). Recommendation: That the City Council authorize staff to advertise and solicit bids to complete the improvement project. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 12 of 17 E. Resolution No. 2010.04 Authorizing the Recordation of the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for those Portions of L.A. County Assessors Parcel No. 8595-011.011 Proposed for Use for Public Sidewalks and Amenities In accordance with the City of Rosemead Municipal Code Section No. 15.04.040, the owner(s) of the property located at 3016 Rosemead Place, have submitted an executed irrevocable offer of dedication. The irrevocable offer of dedication has been determined by the Civil Engineer to be necessary and appropriate to permit the installation of a street tree in accordance with City standards. Recommendation: That the City Council approve Resolution No. 2010-04, authorizing the City Engineer to execute and record the irrevocable offer of dedication for L.A. County Assessor Parcel No. 8595-011-011. Mayor Pro Tern Gary Taylor asked that the minutes of the November 17 meeting be deferred to the next City Council meeting. He asked that the PowerPoint presentation of the UFC item also be transcribed in verbatim format. Mayor Pro Tern Gary Taylor made a motion, seconded by Council Member Steven Ly to approve the Consent Calendar EXCEPT for Item Nos. F and G and the Minutes of the November 17th City Council meeting. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None' Abstain: None Absent: None Resolution No. 2010.05 Authorizing the Recordation of the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for those Portions of L.A. County Assessors Parcel No. 5285.002.026 Proposed for Use for Public Sidewalks and Amenities In accordance with the City of Rosemead Municipal Code Section No. 15.04.040, the owner(s) of the property located at 2706 Lindy Avenue, have submitted an executed irrevocable offer of dedication. The irrevocable offer of dedication has been determined by the Civil Engineer to be necessary and appropriate to permit the installation of a street tree in accordance with City standards. Recommendation: That the City Council approve Resolution No. 2010-05, authorizing the City Engineer to execute and record the irrevocable offer of dedication for L.A. County Assessor Parcel No. 5285-002-026. City Manager Jeff Allred stated that per a request of a resident it was asked that there be a minor modification and this item would be brought back on a future meeting. No Action was taken on Item 8F. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 13 of 17 G. City Tree Maintenance Services - Award Contract At its December 8, 2009 meeting, the City Council approved specifications to solicit proposals for annual tree maintenance services. The services include tree management and regular maintenance of trees located within City parkways, medians, parks and City-owned facilities. As urban forestry is an important City asset, these services are critical to ensure that City trees remain healthy, aesthetically pleasing, and safe for both the motoring and pedestrian public. Recommendation: That the City Council approve authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with West Coast Arborist, Inc. for an estimated annual cost of $150,000 for the first three (3) years, with an annual option to renew for the following two (2) years. Juan Nunez - pointed out that there was a type-o on the agenda regarding the annual cost and it should be $150,000 and not $150,00. Mayor Pro Tern Gary Taylor made a motion, seconded by Council Member Steven Ly to enter into a contract with West Coast Arborist, Inc., for an estimated annual cost of $150,000 for the first three (3) years, with an annual option to renew for the following two (2) years. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None 9. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER & STAFF A. Funding Request from Joy of Kung Fu for Sponsorship of "Fitness Awareness Day" Event Representatives from Joy of Kung Fu, a regional martial arts organization that promotes general wellness, are requesting City sponsorship of a community-wide Fitness Awareness Day on August 7, 2010 to be held at the Rosemead Community Recreation Center. Additionally, they are requesting City Council authorization of event funding in the amount of $4,000 to help offset event costs. . Recommendation: That the City Council give staff direction regarding the request of Joy of Kung Fu for sponsorship of Fitness Awareness Day 2010 and funding in the amount of $4,000. Director of Parks and Recreation David Montgomery-Scott reviewed the staff report. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 14 of 17 Mayor Pro Tem Gary Taylor stated he had reservations over the number of request that were coming in, in the sense that, we had a dog show over at the Mission Inn and we gave them a donation. He asked how they would draw the limit to the number of people that come in and request donations. Mr. Taylor added that he was not questioning the validity of it but asked how we would the draw the line for other businesses because they should all be allowed to participate. He added that he would hate to be placed in a situation where a business asked why the City donates to certain businesses and not to them. Council Member Polly Low stated that she agreed with Mr. Taylor; she stated that she was supportive of the different organizations in the City that promote events but the event was $10,000 and they were asking for the City to pay half of that amount. She added that she was willing to help but she did not feel that the City should be responsible for 50% of the cost. She stated that the City should have some sort of policy to donate a few hundred dollars to organizations to help out but she did not think the City should be responsible for 50% of the cost of these events. Mrs. Low asked if Joy of Kung Fu was a non-profit organization. Mr. Montgomery-Scott stated they were not even incorporated, therefore cannot be a non-profit organization. Rather than asking for a donation they are asking that the City cosponsor the event; recognizing that by doing so it would cost the City about $4,000. Council Member Steven Ly stated that at least lately the City has been looking at ways to partner with organizations for example EDI. Initially ED] came to the City and the cost was $22,000 and it was about 50%; and they lowered that because the cost was obviously too much. He added that he felt that in many ways this was the same; partnering with other organizations that are City wide is a good thing if the Council agrees with the event. Mr. Ly stated that he had spoken to the sponsors of the event and his feeling was that they really just want to have a good day where they can talk about how to be more fit and how to be more aware in terms of eating right and exercising. Council Member Sandra Armenta asked if the City held a health fair. Mr. Montgomery-Scott stated that at this point the only health fair that the City runs is a senior health fair Mayor Margaret Clark stated that she would feel more comfortable if they maybe gave half. Council Member Polly Low stated she agreed with her and that there should be some guidelines that addressed organizations requesting for donations. City Manager Jeff Allred stated there were some guidelines that Council adopted about 5 or 6 months ago and one of the guidelines was that an organization that received donations for these events would have to be incorporated as a non-profit. Mayor Pro Tem Gary Taylor referred to page 2 of the proposal and read the first paragraph addressing the organizations and clarifying that Joy of Kung Fu was not incorporated. Mr. Taylor added that there would be more confusion if the policy was not followed. He stated that the City was trying to make an effort to assist organizations but he did not want to make this a free for all; he stated that they say it's a community based event but they are also promoting their businesses. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 15 of 17 Council Member Polly Low stated that if the City has a policy then the City should follow it because if they don't then other requests will begin to start coming in. Mayor Margaret Clark stated that she agreed and that the City needed to be consistent. She asked if the City could waive the cost, if there were in kind services. Mr. Montgomery-Scott stated that the items listed were in-kind services. Mayor Pro Tem Taylor stated that included with the in-kind services the City could also promote this event in the newsletter. Mayor Pro Tern Gary Taylor made a motion, seconded by Council Member Polly Low to assist Joy of Kung Fu furnish banners, announce the event in the City's newsletter, and provide them with a booth at the 4m of July celebration. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None 10. MATTERS FROM MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL Council Member Sandra Armenta stated that on Martin Luther King Day there were two trees that had fallen down; two on her street and one on Marshal. She commended Chris Marcarello and his staff for having an outstanding response to those situations, especially Danny Godoy. She also asked if they could look into the area of the intersection of Rio Hondo and Valley and Mission because the way the lighting is it is very confusing to the residents. Council Member Polly Low reminded everyone about the upcoming Lunar New Year event, which had been cancelled the previous Saturday due to the weather. Mayor Pro Tem Gary Taylor asked that the Council be provided from now on with the Rosemead Ad Hoc Youth Committee agenda materials, as well as the Sister City Committee agenda materials. He also asked regarding the brief discussion regarding the diseased trees; he asked how fast the City was going to have an arborist go out there and check those trees because they are in bad shape. Chris Marcarello stated that an arborist had been out earlier this week and will continue to be out inspecting the trees and that report will be brought back to Council for their review, via the newsletter. Council Member Steven Ly stated that at the last Council meeting he talked about how frustrated he is with Southern California Edison in terms with our desire to gain access to some of their right of ways in order to get more green space for the City. That frustration will be addressed at every meeting until this issue is addressed by Southern California Edison and expects them to see at future City Council meetings. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 16 of 17 Mayor Pro Tern Gary Taylor stated that the City has had an excellent relationship working with Edison and currently the City has facilities under their power lines for a minimal of $1 a year and they have committed three parcels for the City under those power lines. ;He added that he believed they were trying to work with the City but as far as those sections across from the Edison headquarters; that to him was a different situation. 11. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:33 p.m. The joint Community Development Commission and City Council meeting is adjourned to Saturday, February 6, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. at the Rosemead Park Swimming Pool for a tour of facility as well as the Garvey Park Swimming Pool and aquatics facilities in neighboring communities. Margaret ark Mayor ATTEST: VLLOY i I Gloria Molleda City Clerk Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2010 Page 17 of 17 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS. CITY OF ROSEMEAD ) I, Gloria Molleda, City Clerk for the City of Rosemead, do hereby certify that the minutes from January 26, 2010 were duly and regularly approved and adopted by the Rosemead City Council on the 23rd of February, 2010, by the following vote to wit: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None l AMA'D, loria Molleda City Clerk