Loading...
CC - Minutes - 05-11-10Minutes of the JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING May 11, 2010 The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission was called to order by Mayor Taylor at 6:00 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. FLAG SALUTE: Commissioner/Director Margaret Clark INVOCATION: Commissioner/Director Polly Low PRESENT: Mayor/Chairwoman Taylor, Mayor Pro Tem/Vice-Chairman Ly, Council Member/Commissioner Armenta, Council Member/Commissioner Clark, and Council Member/Commissioner Low. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Allred, 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 PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE - None. 2. COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR A. Claims and Demands Resolution No. 2010 -14 Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2010 -14 for payment of Commission expenditures in the amount of $120,912.81 demand nos. 11260 through 11266. Commissioner/Director Armenta made a motion, seconded by Commissioner/Council Member Low, to approve 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 May 11, 2010 Page 1 of 29 3. Matters from Executive Director and Staff A. Housing Development Corporation Review and Approval of Contract with City of Rosemead for Implementation of Certain HOME Funded Programs The City is required to commit its HOME funds for particular affordable housing activities within 24 months after HUD's appropriation of the entitlement allocation. To comply with this requirement, the City desires to contract with the Rosemead Housing Development Corporation (RHDC) to administer certain HOME funded programs. Recommendation: That the Board of Directors take the following actions: Approve a contract with the City of Rosemead for the implementation of: • Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation Loan Program and • Mortgage Assistance Program; and 2. Authorize the President to execute the contract on behalf of the Housing Development Corporation. Economic Development Administrator Michelle Ramirez reviewed the staff report. CommissionerlDirector Low made a motion, seconded by Comm issionerlCouncil Member Armenta, to approve as recommended. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None The City CounciUCommission recessed to Closed Session at 6:08 p.m. 4. CLOSED SESSION A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS (GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8) Property 8838 Glendon Way Negotiating Parties - Agency Executive Director Community Development Director Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 2 of 29 Minutes of the JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING May 11, 2010 The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Clark at 7:00 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. FLAG SALUTE: Council/Commissioner Margaret Clark INVOCATION: Council/Commissioner Polly Low PRESENT: Mayor Taylor, Mayor Pro Tem Ly, Council Member Armenta, Council Member Clark, and Council Member Low. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Allred, 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 5. PRESENTATIONS Rosemead High School 2009-10 Varsity Girls Basketball Team The coaches came up and read the names of the players and the City Council offered their congratulations. 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE Juan Nunez - Expressed concerns about his water bill, he read statement from the bill, concerned about not being refunded money and having to pay for entire 3 month cycle, even if he terminates mid-period. Mayor Taylor asked several questions for clarification. City Manager Jeff Allred noted he would meet with Mr. Nunez and Mr. Fierro to provide clarification. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Public Hearing on the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice The City Council will consider review and approval of the City's Five Year Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice covering the period July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2015. Localities seeking federal program funds are required to certify that they will engage in fair housing planning; namely: (1) that they will conduct at the beginning of each five-year cycle an analysis of impediments to fair housing choice; (2) that they will carry out actions to Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 3 of 29 overcome the effects of identified impediments; and (3) that they will maintain records and make available information and reports, including the analysis of impediments, to document actions undertaken to eliminate identified impediments. Recommendation: That the City Council take the following actions: Conduct a public hearing and take public testimony on the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice covering the period July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2015; and Approve the Analysis of Impediments to submittal of the document to the U.: Development. Fair Housing Choice and authorize the Department of Housing and Urban Economic Development Administrator Michelle Ramirez reviewed the staff report. Mayor Taylor opened the Public Hearing at 7:16 p.m. and called for public comments. Seeing none, he closed the public comments and public hearing. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Suggested one amendment that would add "Vietnamese" to the description of the Rosemead Asian community. Ms. Ramirez affirmed that this change could be made. Mayor Taylor- Expressed some reservations, including noting that the definition of "family", Section 17.04.020, seems overly restrictive, and read from the proposed wording. He requested clarification from staff regarding the preparation of a new definition of "family" and amendment of the zoning code to enact such change in definition. City Manager Allred - Noted that the definition of "family" would be addressed in the few months when the Zoning Code is reviewed. Mayor Taylor-Affirmed that the R1 zone is single and R2 is multiple family. City Manager Allred - Affirmed that the Code is out of date with current legal standards, including the new legal definition of "family." Mayor Taylor- Requested classifications for R-1 Zoning. City Manager Allred - Noted the classification would not change, the Code would merely be updated to include the standard, legal definition of "family." Mrs. Ramirez - This change would only affect the definitions in the code, not the classifications for single and multiple family units. Council Member Low- Requested clarification that this has nothing to do with the definition of "family. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 4 of 29 Mayor Taylor- Expressed concerns regarding the definition of "bachelor" apartment, which is a minimally sized room, however this notes it does not have a bedroom. Mrs. Ramirez - Affirmed that the City cannot say that only one person can live in a bachelor apartment. Mayor Taylor- Noted that a bachelor apartment is indicative of a small room area, and the City may run into a problem of "overcrowding" of units. Bachelor means "one" individual and this may now mean that a family can move into a small, bachelor-type unit. Mrs. Ramirez - Noted the Federal law states that "2 people, plus 1," can live even in a small unit Mayor Taylor- Expressed concerns that 3 people could be living in a small bachelor apartment, but it doesn't require a bedroom. This would mean we start cramping people into a bachelor unit. Mrs. Ramirez - Affirmed that the City cannot determine that only 1 person can live in a bachelor apartment. That would be against Federal law. Mayor Taylor- Expressed concerns this would open the door for one person to rent the apartment, and a whole family would come in to live there. City Attorney Joseph Montes - Clarified that this analysis identified issues within the Zoning Code, and noted the recommendation to bring the Zoning Code into compliance with current law. The current Code's definition of family is out of line with the current state law. He quoted cases that noted the definition must be different. There are codes that supersede our current language and the update is mandatory. Mayor Taylor- Noted that this is aggressively affirming the "homeowner cannot do that." Mr. Montes - Clarified that the current Code says bachelor apartment says only 1 person, and it is not consistent with current state law, state law has different occupancy limits. Mayor Taylor- Stated for the record, that state law doesn't have any common sense or rationale. "2 plus 1 in a 10 x 10 or a 10 x 12 leads to an overcrowding condition. Council Member Clark made a motion to approve the item. She noted an anecdotal story about her thoughts on the state's legislature. Council Member Clark made a motion, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Ly, to approve as recommended. 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 May 11, 2010 Page 5 of 29 Mayor Taylor- Requested information as to when Zoning Code will be coming for review. Ms. Ramirez noted that this was the annual action plan and deals with how we are dealing with the impediments. City Manager Allred noted the Zoning Code is coming to award of bid for selection of consultant who will help with the Code update. B. Extension of Interim Urgency Ordinance 877 to Prohibit the Approval of Applications for Marijuana Dispensaries On June 30, 2009, pursuant to Government Code section 65858, the Rosemead City Council enacted Urgency Ordinance No. 877, which imposed a moratorium on the approval of applications for land use entitlements for medical marijuana dispensaries for a period of 45 days. On August 11, 2009, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 879, which continued the moratorium for an additional period of ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days. Ordinance No. 879 is set to expire on June 25, 2010. During the one year moratorium period, staff has begun to compile and study the substantial health and safety issues, as well as the inconsistencies between State law and Federal law, regarding the approval of and location of medical marijuana dispensaries. This includes, but is not limited to, a review of the Qualified Patients Association et al. v. City of Anaheim lawsuit currently pending before the California Court of Appeals, Fourth District. A decision on the Qualified Patients Association at al. v. City of Anaheim lawsuit had been anticipated before the end of calendar year 2009, but will now not be issued until after the effectiveness of Ordinance Nos. 877 and 879 has expired. The outcome of this lawsuit is expected to resolve whether municipalities have the authority to prohibit dispensaries. Recommendation: That the City Council introduce and conduct the first reading (by title only) of a City Council Ordinance and adopt as an urgency measure pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858 (b) Ordinance No. 895 entitled "An Interim Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Rosemead continuing the provisions of Ordinance 877 and Ordinance No. 879 for an additional period of the one (1) year to continue the moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries in the City." Principal Planner Sheri Bermejo reviewed the staff report. Mayor Taylor opened the Public Hearing at 7:29 p.m. and called for public comments. John Nunez - Requested jokingly that the Council not approve this since he will have to "reclaim" his land, and use the 40 acres for growing "weed." Mayor Taylor closed the Public Hearing at 7:30 p.m. Mayor Pro Tern Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Armenta, to approve as recommended. Vote resulted in: Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 6 of 29 Yes: Armenta,,Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None C. Extension of Urgency Ordinance No. 880 to Prohibit Approval of Applications for Adult Businesses On June 30, 2009, pursuant to Government Code section 65858, the Rosemead City Council enacted Urgency Ordinance No. 878, which imposed a moratorium on the approval of applications for land use entitlements for adult businesses for a period of 45 days. On August 11, 2009, the City Council adopted Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 880 to extend Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 878 for a period of ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days. Ordinance No. 880 is set to expire on June 25, 2010. During the one year moratorium period, staff began to compile and study the substantial health and safety issues involved in the approval of such businesses. Since the adoption of the City's current adult business ordinance (Ordinance No. 753), there have been a number of studies concerning the adverse secondary effects of adult businesses in other Cities, as well as legal decisions regarding local regulation that must be reviewed. This period of time has not provided a sufficient amount of time to fully address the effectiveness and adequacy of Ordinance No. 753 and to complete an Ordinance to replace Ordinance No. 753. Recommendation: That the City Council introduce and conduct the first reading (by title only) of a City Council Ordinance and adopt as an urgency measure pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858 (b) Ordinance No. 894 entitled "An Interim Urgency Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Rosemead, continuing the provisions of Ordinance No. 878 and Ordinance No. 880 for an additional period of one (1) year to May 10,2011. Principal Planner Sheri Bermejo reviewed the staff report. Mayor Taylor opened the public hearing and public comments at 7:31 p.m. Juan Nunez - Expressed concerns that not acting tonight would open the door to prostitution and people "in the line of fire" know better than he. Mayor Taylor closed the Public Hearing at 7: 32 p.m Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Requested clarification of the current issues and case law related to adult business regulation. Mrs. Bermejo - Stated that research is being conducted into the current Ordinances and that the official Zoning map needs to be in place so that a comparison can be made with certain land uses. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 7 of 29 Mayor Pro Tern Ly- Stated that constitutionally, owners are protected in terms of operating as a business, but that the City can restrict where they can go. He expressed concerns about distance from residential, schools, and public facilities. City Manager Allred - Affirmed that the City also institutes distance requirements from other like businesses, so they don't cluster. However, the City does have to provide for a certain number of business sites. Mayor Pro Tern Ly- Questioned whether this is similar to the 'RHNX (Regional Housing Needs Assessment) system. Mayor Taylor- Affirmed that whether the City "agrees or not" it leads to protesting against sex offenders and it has to start somewhere. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Noted that sex offenders were living in a halfway house 2 doors down from his residence. He lives close to a manufacturing area, and is concerned that is where this type of business may develop. Mayor Taylor- Noted that on the 5pm news, there was a story about students performing oral sex in classrooms, recording it on their cell phones and then broadcasting it out. They have no concept of what a moral issue is. Council Member Low made a motion, seconded by Council Member Armenta, to approve as recommended. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None D. Proposed 45-Day Moratorium on New Massage Establishments and Massage Service Providers The proposed urgency ordinance would impose a 45-day moratorium on the issuance of any permits, licenses, tax certificates, approvals, or entitlements for new massage establishments or new massage technicians as such terms are define in Rosemead Municipal Code Section. 5.24. Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 897, which is subject to a 4/5ths City Council approval requirement. City Attorney Joseph Montes provided a report that noted this would be a 45 day moratorium, followed by a 10 day report, which would ultimately result in a public hearing. He noted the state adopted certain massage regulations, the state licenses from the massage board, and clarified that if the state issues the license, our city will have less regulation on massage establishments. There was some legislation introduced to give Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 8 of 29 power back to City, and we are hopeful it will pass. Staff is thinking about how to update our procedures, now there is more restrictive pending legislation, and that staff is still drafting what the new Ordinance would look like after the new laws are in place. Mayor Taylor opened the public hearing and public comments at 7:38 p.m. Noting there were none, he closed public comments and the public hearing. Council Member Armenta made a motion, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Ly, to approve as recommended. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None E. Increase Maximum Bingo Payout to $500 Don Bosco Technical Institute has approached the City requesting the consideration of amending the City's existing Municipal Code section 5.20.110 to increase the maximum payout from $250 to $500. The State maximum was increased on September 30, 2008 and the staff at Don Bosco believes that they are losing participants to surrounding communities that currently allow the payouts up to the $500 limit. Recommendation: That the City Council introduce and conduct the first reading (by title only) of Ordinance No. 896 authorizing the amendment to Section 2.20.110 of Rosemead Municipal Code. City Manager Allred suggesting moving this item to the 25th, since it was actually noticed for that day. Mayor Taylor- Noted this was a fairly common request for a larger "payout." JOINT Public Hearing on the Consent to Use Community Development Funds for Future Capital Improvement Projects Pursuant to Health & Safety Code Sections 33445 and 33679 On March 9, 2010, the City Council unanimously approved the project list component of the Parks, Recreation and General Facilities Master Plan. Contained in the list are thirty-two identified projects within the City that are to be considered. There are ten projects that require the use of Commission funds. Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Sections 33445 and 33679) requires that, if redevelopment funds are to be used to pay for improvements which will be publicly owned, both within and adjacent to the project area, the City Council and the Community Development Commission must list and describe the improvements and the costs associated Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 9 of 29 therewith, as well as make the following findings: a) that the proposed improvements are of benefit to the Project Areas or the immediate neighborhood in which the projects are located; b) that there are no other reasonable means of financing for the proposed projects available to the community; c) that the projects will assist in the elimination of blighting conditions in the Project Areas and are consistent with the adopted 5-year Implementation Plan. Recommendation: It is recommended: 1. That the City Council and Community Development Commission adopt Joint Resolution No. 2010-29 and CDC 2010-15 making the appropriate findings under Health and Safety Code Section 33445; and 2. That the City Council and Community Development Commission adopt Resolutions No. 2010-30 and CDC No. 2010-16 appropriating $280,000 from the existing 2006A Bond proceeds to fund the three urgent playground equipment projects listed as priorities 1 through 3 in the report. Assistant City Manager Matt Hawkesworth reviewed the staff report Mayor Taylor opened the public hearing and public comments at 7:42 p.m. Noting there were none, he closed public comments and the public hearing. Mayor Pro Tern Ly- Expressed concerns regarding the costs to "re-sod" fields at Rosemead Park. He affirmed he supported the use of redevelopment funds for this project. Mayor Taylor- Expressed his opposition to this item and read from the summary of the March 9, 2010, in which Council unanimously approved the "parks component." He affirmed the Council did unanimously approve the long-term plans, which included some 32 identified projects, 10 of which tonight require use of Commission funds. He affirmed his approval of the plan overall, but noted that it was subject to the current financial considerations. He expressed concerns regarding "open-ended" contracts, and stated that with financing costs, projects that were estimated at approximately $6 million could go up to $9 million. These are the "true" costs. He also noted the expansion of the Rosemead Community Center which could go from $2 million to up to $5 million. He noted that he cannot support these "unknown" conditions. Mr. Taylor- further expressed concerns regarding the use of Commission funds to fund improvements identified within the Ordinance itself and read from language which he found to be disturbing. In part, this language read, "The Commission and Council understand the actual cost of public improvements could vary from the cost estimates set forth, however neither board find that such a variety, even if material, even if they are substantial, would alter the findings set forth." He expressed concerns with the discrepancy of millions of dollars and the open-ended contracts. Council Member Low- Requested clarification regarding "open-ended" nature of contract, and when the work would begin. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 10 of 29 City ManagerlExecutive Director Allred -Clarified information regarding engineer's estimate, the finance cost, and the interest rate over 15 years. He gave an example regarding the replacement of equipment at Klingerman. The Resolution requires full disclosure for use of the bond funds; however, a further action from the Council would be required to actually award the bid to a particular contractor. This action is only to request authorization to use $280,000 for projects one through three. For items four through ten, no money will be spent without further action of the Council and Commission. Mayor/Chair Taylor- Read from the Joint Council/Commission resolution and expressed concerns regarding the "making of findings" related to redevelopment law and the benefit to project areas one and two. He noted it lists all of the projects again. He stated that on March 9, 2010, the Council unanimously approved the project list and expressed concern that if we unanimously approve this list tonight, we don't have the twenty million in bond proceeds. He gave the example of the bond issue at the projects $9 million, that $2 million must be used to pay back the City, now we are down to $7 million. He is concerned about committing to a $20 million dollar price. He is hesitant to be caught in a "trap" if we unanimously approve this list and is concerned about the language, "such a variance, even if material". Council Member/Commissioner Armenta made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Low, to approve as recommended. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, No: Taylor Abstain: None Absent: None 8. CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes May 4, 2010 - Special Meeting Council Member Low requested the word "will" to be removed. This was removed administratively by staff. B. Claims and Demands Resolution No. 2010 - 28 Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2010 - 28, for payment of City expenditures in the amount of $1,784,203.13 numbered 100817 through 100830 and 69527 and 69676, inclusively. H. Approval of Undertaking Agreement for Parcel Map No. 68129 - 3177 Rosemead Place Parcel Map No. 68129 is being submitted for consideration and approval along with an Undertaking Agreement to guarantee construction of public improvements subsequent to the recordation of the parcel map. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 11 of 29 Recommendation: That the City Council approve Parcel Map No. 68129 and the Undertaking Agreement. Review and Approval of Contract with Rosemead Housing Development Corporation for Implementation of Certain HOME funded Programs The City is required to commit its HOME funds for particular affordable housing activities within 24 months after HUD's appropriation of the entitlement allocation. To comply with this requirement, staff recommends that the City commit $1,003,055 of FY 2009-10 and FY 2010-11 HOME funds, plus unspent carried over funds from prior FY's by contracting with the Rosemead Housing Development Corporation (RHDC) to administer certain HOME funded programs. Recommendation: That the City Council take the following actions Approve a contract with the Rosemead Housing Development Corporation for the implementation of: • Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation Loan Program, and • Mortgage Assistance Program; and 2. Authorize the Mayor to execute the contract on behalf of the City. K. Probation Officer Contract Renewal The City currently contracts with the Los Angeles County Probation Department for two Deputy Probation Officers (DPOs') for juvenile prevention and intervention programs. These DPOs' work full-time with Rosemead youth who have been identified as at-risk or arrested for minor criminal offenses. These juveniles may have problems ranging from school performance and attendance to vandalism, theft and drug arrests. The DPOs' authority allows them to work closely with the juveniles and their families to implement a variety of programs and services to help correct their behavior. The Agreement shall be effective from July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011 with a total cost of $134,000. Recommendation: That the City Council approve the agreement with the Los Angeles County Probation Department and authorize the City Manager to sign any necessary documentation. Mayor Pro Tern Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Armenta, to approve Consent Calendar with the exception of Item Nos. C, D, E, F, G, and J. 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 May 11, 2010 Page 12 of 29 C. Ordinance 889 - Second Reading: Approving Municipal Code Amendment 10.02, adding the RCMUDO "Residential/Commercial Mixed-Use Development Overlay" Zone and Chapter 17.74 to the City's Municipal Code to Establish Standards for that Zone On April 27, 2010, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. 889, which approved Municipal Code amendment 10-02, adding the RCMUDO "Residential/Commercial Mixed-Used Development Overlay" zone and Chapter 17.74 to the City's Municipal Code to establish standards for that zone. Ordinance No. 889 is now before Council at the required second reading for adoption. Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 889 at its second reading. Mayor Taylor- Noted that he pulled this item because he questions that the City Hall, Bank of America, and Library are all in here as being mixed-use residential/commercial. He requested if any Council Member could tell him why it is in there that way. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Stated that part of it was so the City could meet the RHNA numbers, it may allow for the potential of mixed-use one day and that we may have to build a certain number of units. We have to abide by what the State requires the City to do. Mayor Taylor- Expressed that the penalty for such has never been assessed and that it is "put out" by SCAG, who steers that. He noted several other areas, Temple City Blvd. and Valley, areas that are "cross- hatched" for condominiums and commercial use. He noted the area "down on Garvey" which is more high- rise condominiums near Edison, a block over from Walnut Grove, north and south of GaNey. Further he stated another area which has existing senior citizen housing - an area close to almost two blocks. He noted that the latest map was received at 6:00 pm., at the last minute, which shows City Hall, Bank of America, and Library with a design overlay and a code which states this area must have "design overlay." Design overlay is residential commercial, multiple units, not sure if it is 3 or 4 story. The opposite dash line is the design overlay zone. Something is going on with City Hall and Library - it has been on three overlay maps, and the only information we are getting is that we have to meet our "housing needs". We are saying, "You come up with right deal and you can buy City Hall." Mr. Taylor affirmed that he would have to vote "no" because the proposal is too ambiguous. Mayor Pro Tern Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Low, to approve as recommended. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, No: Taylor Abstain: None Absent: None Council Member Low- Noted that we are approving the mixture of the "design overlay" Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 13 of 29 City Attorney Joseph Montes - Affirmed the actual Ordinance that will approve the issue which the Mayor is concerned about is further along on tonight's agenda. Council Member Low- Wanted to affirm that the audience knew what the Council voted for. D. Ordinance 890 - Second Reading: Approving Municipal Code Amendment 10.03, Adding the C-4 Regional Commercial Zone and Chapter 17.46 to the City's Municipal Code to Establish Development Standards for that Zone On April 27, 2010, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. 890, which approved Municipal Code Amendment 10-03, adding the C-4 Regional Commercial Zone and Chapter 17.46 to the City's Municipal Code to establish Development Standards for that zone. Ordinance No. 890 is now before Council at the required second reading for adoption. Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 890 at its second reading. Mayor Taylor- read the title of the Ordinance for the record. He noted that if the developers can meet the requirements, these buildings can be 75 feet high and stated there is no other building that is 75 feet high. City Attorney Montes - Clarified that all other properties along this part of Garvey have height limitations of 75 feet. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Noted the difficulty of achieving a 75 foot high building with a floor area ratio of .35. Mayor Taylor- Proclaimed that developers are notorious for these types of things. Requested whether developers are entitled to get three exemptions from zoning requirements. Principal Planner Sheri Bermejo - Noted that with residential developments, a developer could get a waiver of three development standards.' Mayor Taylor- Affirmed the three condominium projects were at Garvey, Rosemead/Guess, and Del Mar/Emerson. Mrs. Bermejo - Affirmed Mayor Taylor's assertion, however that residential was not permitted in the matter before the Council in this matter. SB 18 would not be subject in this zone and that a hotel was a permitted land use for this Zone. SB 18 would not count toward a hotel development, it only applies to residential condominium units. Mayor Taylor- Inquired what would happen if a developer came in for a 7 story hotel on Walnut Grove or Garvey? Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 14 of 29 Mrs. Bermejo -Affirmed the developer would have a variable height restriction and set-back requirements . due to residential adjacency issues. They also have a Floor Area Ratio requirement. Staff gave the example that if the buildings were to be higher, it would have to move closer to Garvey and that the variable height requirement has been successful in limiting heights throughout the City. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Requested information regarding the Wal-MartlTarget height requirements. Mrs. Bermejo - Noted Wal-Mart was impacted by the variable height requirement. Mayor Taylor- Estimated it was somewhere in the 45 foot range. Mrs. Bermejo - Noted that all projects require review by the Planning Commission and have to come before the Council for final approval. Staff would then give recommendations and appropriate "buffers" to mitigate their proximityto residential zones. Mayor Pro Tern Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Armenta, to approve as recommended. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, No: Taylor Abstain: None Absent: None E. Ordinance 891- Second Reading: Approving Zone Change 10-02, Amending a Portion of the City of Rosemead's Zoning Map to achieve Consistency with the City General Plan On April 27, 2010, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. 891, which approved Zone Change 10-02, amending a portion of the City of Rosemead Zoning Map to achieve consistency with the City General Plan. Ordinance No. 891 is now before Council at the required second reading for adoption. Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 891 at its second reading. Mayor Taylor- Read the title of the Ordinance and noted that this matter could involve future potential for condominiums with "heaven knows" what to put below it. Mayor Pro Tem Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Low, to approve as recommended. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, No: Taylor Abstain: None Absent: None F. Ordinance 892 - Second Reading: Amending Title 17 (Zoning) of the Rosemead Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 15 of 29 Municipal Code by the Addition of a New Chapter 17.82 (Wireless Telecommunications Facilities) On April 27, 2010, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. 892, which approved amending Title 17 of the Rosemead Municipal Code by the addition of a new Chapter 17.82, which establishes development and approval standards for Wireless Telecommunications Facilities, devices, structures and equipment used for wireless transmission within the City of Rosemead. Ordinance No. 892 is now before Council at the required second reading for adoption. Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 892 at its second reading Linda Paul - representing T-Mobile - Noted she was a "late-comer" to this issue and identified three issues of major concern: 1) requirement with providing the application a structural engineering report -this is unnecessary and burdensome, 2) requirement of providing a map that shows all telecom structures existing and proposed within 1 mile radius. She noted that carriers may have too far to go in meeting "coverage gap," and 3) the language regarding the "de minimus" requirement is confusing. Council Member Clark - Questioned why they have to provide their own map. Community Development Director Stan Wong - Affirmed that the City has maps and can provide that information to the applicant. Ms. Paul - Affirmed that they would not object to this item if the map was provided by the City, she noted that some Cities do not provide that information. Council Member Low- Requested postponement to a later meeting to have chance to review newly presented information. City Attorney Montes - Affirmed that changes to the Ordinance could be made tonight, however it would have to be reintroduced for first reading. Council MemberArmenta - Affirmed with Ms. Paul that if City provides the map, then she would be fine with everything else. Ms. Paul - Yes, and also the waiver of the requirement for the structural report from licensed engineer with application. Mr. Wong -Affirmed that there would be no problem with waiving that particular requirement. The structural analysis can be required before issuing permits. Mayor Taylor- Requested that the calculation be done prior to the issuance of permits. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Requested whether the waiver can be done at the staff level. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 16 of 29 City Attorney Montes - Preferred that the Ordinance be changed tonight and reintroduced for first reading. He suggested the striking of the "structural" language and noted that it is a better idea for individuals to submit the coverage map, even if they are obtaining it from the City, so that the Planning Commission has everything with the application. He does not recommend changing the "de minimus" language. City Manager Allred - The structural language can be struck out completely. Ms. Paul - Affirmed that as long as the "de minimus" language could be explained to everyone, then there is no objection on her part. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- I make a motion to approve the Ordinance, with the amendment of striking item number 4, renumbering the remainder, and introduce upon first reading. Mayor Taylor- Inquired as to when the report would be coming in. Ms. Paul - Affirmed that the map would be provided along with the plan check requirements, prior to the issuance of the building permit. City Manager Allred - This Ordinance will be brought back next meeting for second reading and adoption. Mayor Pro Tern Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Low, to approve as recommended, with the exception of striking in its entirely, Ordinance.item no. 4 and providing renumbering of the remainder of the text. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None G. 2009.2010 Annual Slurry Seal Project - Authorization to Solicit Bids As part of the City's Fiscal Year 2009-2010 Capital Improvement Program, the City Council approved a program entitled, "Targeted Public Works Projects", which consists of public improvements to the City's local streets and public right-of-way areas. This project will help extend the life of local streets and improve community aesthetics. This project is funded through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program which requires that funds be spent on specific project types and in specific target areas. Recommendation: That the City Council authorize staff to advertise and solicit bids to complete the improvement project. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Took it upon himself to take several pictures of the status of several Rosemead residential streets including Newmark, Del Mar. Many of these streets are in disrepair and it denotes the starting of potential blight. Feels that broken streets are the start of broken homes and invites a bad element and gangs in to the City. The area near Marshall and Earle is sinking in. Del Mar along Bartlett, there is a lot Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 17 of 29 of damage. At the May 4t^ Special Meeting, we discussed fixing up the streets with the City Manager as part of the strategic plan. Talked about fixing up 10 streets and then doing 10 more, don't know if these particular streets are on the list. Mayor Taylor- None of these streets is in this year's program. Newmark and Del Mar are in the third year of the program. Deputy Public Works Director Chris Marcarello - Newmark and Garvey are in this year's program. Council Member Clark- Questioned whether the light green areas have been done yet. Mr. Marcarello - Affirmed that last year's program is in purple and this year is in green. Mayor Taylor- Inquired as to the program color for 2010-2011. Mr. Marcarello - Affirmed the green is for the last part of 2009-2010 and next year will go to light yellow. The City's pavement management system is funded through Gas tax and Prop C funds. The system rates all of the streets and noted that slurry sealing is more of an aesthetic program. Proposition 1 B funds will be used for residential resurfacing programs which include more aggressive "grinding and overlay." Mayor Taylor- Inquired if this is what was recently completed on Earle? Mr. Marcarello - Affirmed the Earle Street project. Mayor Taylor- Noted that project looked "immaculate" and it was plain, clear black asphalt. He further noted that on Bartlett, the south half and all of Muscatel, is suffering - the structure is cracking below the surface. , Mr. Marcarello - "Rafael" has been working on the design and will come to Council at the next meeting with a report. Mayor Pro Tern Ly- Noted the "wear and tear"on Garvey and Hellman due to their use as arterials for the 10 and 60 freeways. He is concerned about the effect the disrepair of streets will have on residential communities. Mayor Taylor- We can be proud that our streets are maintained. The streets in some adjoining cities are terrible. Council Member Armenta- The streets north of Garvey on Del Mar were slurried in 2008-2009 and they still have potholes. Mr. Marcarello - The current map is somewhat misleading - it should read that slurry seal is for residential only. We are going to start construction on Garvey to Del Mar in three weeks. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 18 of 29 Mayor Pro Tern Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Low, to authorize staff to advertise and solicit bids to complete the improvement project. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None School Resource Officer Program Funding The City currently contracts with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department for a Special Assignment Deputy that is assigned to Rosemead High School as a School Resource Officer (SRO). The El Monte Union High School District currently shares half the cost of the SRO with the City, therefore, the agreement must be renewed by both the City and School District. Recommendation: That the City Council approve the agreement with the El Monte Union High School District for assistance in funding the SRO position. Council Member Low- Requested confirmation that this project will be funded equally by the High School, that the City is paying 50% and the High School is paying 50%. Mayor Taylor- Stated they are paying on monthly basis. Assistant City Manager Matt Hawkesworth - Affirmed that the City is paying half of the cost of the School Resource Officer and the High School is paying the other half. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Expressed support for the continuation of the School Resource Officer program and that the Council had received reports of the recent intervention efforts by the Officer at the High School. He commended the Sheriff's Department for their professional service. 9. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER & STAFF A. Design Development of Aquatic Facilities at Rosemead and Garvey Parks At its regular meeting on February 23, the City Council authorized Aquatic Design Group to develop schematic designs for the complete renovation of Garvey and Rosemead Pools. The drawings are the first step toward a detailed and three-dimensional view of the projects which better enable the City to determine a realistic project scope and cost estimate. Schematic designs have been completed. Representatives from Aquatics Design Group, along with staff, will provide City Council with a presentation of the completed drawings. With completion of schematic designs, the project is ready to proceed with the full design and construction specifications phase. Recommendation: Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 19 of 29 That the City Council/Commission authorize the City Manager/Executive Director to enter into a professional services agreement with Aquatic Design Group in the amount of $522,450 ($350,041.50 from existing 2006A Bond proceeds and $172,408.50 from funds that will be available through the Redevelopment Agency's repayment of a City loan) to complete design development, construction documents and permit drawings, and to perform construction observation for the renovation of aquatics facilities at Rosemead and Garvey Pools; and 2. That the City Council and Community Development Commission adopt Resolutions No. 2010-31 and CDC No. 2010-17 appropriating $350,041.50 from the existing 2006A Bond proceeds. Parks and Recreation Director David Montgomery-Scott- Provided a brief overview report regarding the completion of the schematic designs approved by Council at their February 23, 2010 meeting for the Rosemead and Garvey aquatics centers. These were done to further determine a more accurate project scope and estimation of costs. There were several changes to the original plans including: 1) Park restrooms on southeast corner of bathhouse at Rosemead Park 2) Office restroom on interior to serve staff and sick patrons 3) Garvey - addition of concession and storage facilities in interior restrooms, increased number of shade structures on deck surfaces. Mr. Montgomery-Scott introduced the consultant, Scott Farrell, who proceeded with a PowerPoint Presentation on the proposed facilities. He began with the presentation of the Rosemead aquatics center. Council Member Armenta - pointed out a typographical error in the plans for Garvey - it should the Rosemead Park address. Staff noted that the correction will be made. Scott Farrell- Introduced himself as the principal architect for the firm, which has been in business for over 32 years, designed over 3,000 aquatics facilities throughout the world, including the UCLA facility. He provided a detailed visual presentation of the Rosemead aquatics center which will include a 40 x 25 meter pool, 14 competitive lanes, floating water polo, cross course diving boards, and the proposals for filters, heaters, pumps, pool storage, and electrical service. Council Member Clark- Inquired about the amount of overall "shallow" space. Mr. Farrell - The existing two pools have a combined total of 7700 square feet shallow space and the new pool will have 3700 square feet of shallow, which is considerable less space. Council Member Clark- Inquired as to the depth that would be considerably shallow for a child. Mr. Farrell - Affirmed that 3.6 feet is about the highest "shallow" depth for a child. Mayor Taylor- Inquired as to how much of the pool will have that depth. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 20 of 29 Mr. Farrell - Noted that the "entering" of the pool is about 2 feet and in between markers would be teaching stations of about 15 feet, running along the stairs. Upon staff's recommended, he conducted a study that looked at expanding the pool out in three directions to accommodate a little bit more "teachable" space. This would add stairs on all 3 or 2 sides and that there were lots of different things that could be done, such as bringing in peninsulas, to segregate out the teaching area. He passed out a diagram. The entire pool, plus bathhouse is designed to accommodate 744 occupants. The 2nd page of the illustration demonstrates a little more what the new pool could be moved to do - it would have a 30 meter floating water polo course, which is the optimum playing field. By pushing it out, you can have an additional 20 feet of water that would connect the shallow to deep parts of the pool and allow the lifeguards and swimming officials to move back and forth. In response to an inquiry from Council Member Clark, Mr. Farrell noted that you could get up to 3750 square feet of pool space. Council Member Clark -further noted that by increasing the shallow space, you decrease the volume of the pool, thereby decreasing the filtration and cost to operate (due to less gallons of water in the pool). Mr. Farrell - It would be approximately $94,000 to increase the shallow volume of the pool and would leave the pool with 50 X 75 feet of shallow area. Peninsulas would be added to leave 20 feet of pool width - could go down to 12 lanes, however, he recommends to remain at 20 feet to have a good connection of structure from one pool to another. Council Member Low- Inquired as to why peninsulas would have to be added in. Mr. Farrell - Noted that peninsulas are not required, however if the purpose is to segregate the two areas of the pools, you would at least have to have a 4 x 6 line with ropes and floats to meet the Code. You also need designation tile, but it would be up to the individual participants to decide whether they could go beyond the ropes to swim in the deeper areas. Council Member Low- Affirmed that some boundary would have to exist and that the rope would be the dividing line. Mr. Farrell - Noted that the peninsulas would allow for the east and west to be shallow, however you have to make the transition somehow, and that it requires 1 foot of vertical space for every 10 feet of horizontal space. The peninsulas would come in with the stairs on the east and west sides. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Requested whether the addition of peninsulas would require the elimination of a lane and why staff recommended 14 lanes. Mr. Montgomery-Scott - Stated that you could have two swim teams practicing at the same time and that you need 10 lanes for competition. Mr. Farrell - Affirmed that you can have multiple uses, all at the same time, and that the new pool was designed for maximum efficiency of use. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 21 of 29 Council Member Low- Reminded that we need to be mindful of residents and kids that want to swim recreationally. Mr. Farrell - Those matters will be taken care of when the pool is programmed for recreation and competitive uses. It is up to staff to program appropriately. The consultant's goal is to provide for maximum use of the pool and the illustration is to how to get more shallow usable space. Council Member Low- Inquired as to how much seating would be provided. Mr. Farrell - The seating is set for up to 400, which would accommodate the crowds for large swimming and water polo meets. Council MemberArmenta - Stated that there will be appropriate time for both recreational swim and competitive practice. In the past the pools were programmed for such dual uses and there was no problem. City Manager Allred -Affirmed that staff would work on the scheduling Mr. Farrell - Noted that the High School level cannot swim 50 meter lanes in competition. The lane design will draw neighboring high schools for use and rentals. Mayor Taylor- Expressed concerns that the City is losing a community pool and would lose control over programming because the pool will be programmed out for high school use. Concerned about the potential logistics problem of programming the pool. Council Member Low- Inquired about the springboards for the high school and who uses 3 meter springboards. Mr. Farrell - Affirmed that high school competition does not dive 3 meter, only 1 meter. Club swimming and NCAA swimming (college) use 1 and 3 meter springboards. Council MemberArmenta - Noted that recreational swimming is seasonal and open during the summer. She attended Rosemead High School and that swimming was offered for P.E., however there are set dates and times for recreational use. Mr. Farrell - Affirmed that water polo is primarily during the winter months when recreational swimming is not available. Council Member Clark- Inquired whether we currently have 1710 square feet of shallow, but have the ability to increase up to 3750. Mr. Farrell - Affirmed that the new design has 2040 square feet of shallow space, where currently you have 7700 square feet. Council Member Clark- Expressed concern about reducing the amount of shallow space in the pools. Doesn't know what the percentage reduction is, however, she is leaning toward not decreasing the shallow part of the pool. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 22 of 29 Council Member Low- Requested to reduce the amount of lanes to 12 so that the remaining area could be used for shallow-based recreation. Mr. Farrell - Affirmed that the lanes could be reduced to 12 to increase shallow space, however, the "trade off"would be the loss of the 30 meter floating water polo course. There are "optimum" and."acceptable' levels of courses. The optimum would be a 30 x 20 course and acceptable would be a 25 x 25 course. Council Member Low- Inquired if you could still have multiple uses with the reduction of the 2 lanes Mr. Farrell - Affirmed that the City could eliminate 2 lanes and go with more shallow space, however, you would eliminate the optimum water polo course. Mr. Montgomery-Scott - Stated that a 25 meter pool is for high school and club, and a 30 meter pool is for college. If you took away two lanes, you would only have a pool that accommodates high school competition, not college level. Council Member Low- Stated that she is only concerned that the pool would be big enough for high school competitive use. Mayor Pro Tern Ly- Stated that kids like to use pool to "cool off' and they would enjoy more use out of the water slides and splash play, rather than just the pool. He doesn't think that the shallow part of the new Rosemead pool will really be used by youth for recreational purposes, the "fun" will happen at Garvey. The shallow area at Rosemead should be geared more toward lessons and instructional purposes. Council MemberArmenta - Inquired as to the survey conducted on the Garvey school district students and whether the majority of them would rather have the slides and water play area. Mr. Montgomery-Scott- Noted the results of the survey (about 600- 700 students) and that there was only about a difference of 75 students who would prefer the splash play and slides. Council Member Clark- Expressed concerns regarding the "north vs. south" problem, and that the proposal for the Rosemead pool is not family-oriented. There is a perception problem that the Rosemead pool will only be for high school and college students. Mayor Pro Tern Ly- Noted his agreement with Council Member Clark and that is an issue that needs to be addressed. He attended the open house on May 4r^ and the presentation on May 5th and mentioned that parents with children will typically go to Garvey pool. Mr. Farrell - Stated that decreasing the pool by a little bit does not really make a huge difference in terms of efficiency savings, and that pools work off water surface area and overall volume. Mayor Taylor- Expressed concerns that the City will lose the community family-oriented pool in favor of competitive college-level participants. He mentioned that many take the Garvey pool for granted and inquired as to the capacity of the proposed Garvey pool. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 23 of 29 Mr. Farrell - Affirmed that there is a capacity of 78 in the wet play area, 75 in instructional areas, and the slides can accommodate 330 riders per hour. Overall, the pool would have a capacity of about 206. Mayor Taylor- Inquired as to the total capacity of the Rosemead pool. Scott Farrell - Stated that the capacity of the Rosemead pool is 492. Mayor Taylor- Inquired as to the current capacity of the Garvey pool now. Mr. Farrell - Stated that the capacity is currently 584. Mayor Taylor- Stated that if you cut down capacity to 300, you are basically cutting the capacity in half of what it is now. He noted that there can still be several hundred individuals at Garvey pool and is concerned about the new proposed maximum capacity. Council Member Clark- Inquired as to the capacity for instruction at Garvey pool. Mr. Farrell - Noted that the instructional pool has capacity of 75, which is roughly 5 classes of 15. Mayor Taylor- Inquired as to the programming for the kid zone, where is the recreational fun time? Mr. Farrell - Noted that the City staff is responsible for appropriately programming the pool. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Stated that given the options, in his opinion nine times out of 10, the kids are going to use the slides and play pad and not just jump into the pool. He affirmed that Council Member Clark brought up the issue regarding Rosemead, he felt that Rosemead will really be used for lessons, Mommy and me, parent and me, and those type of uses. The real recreational programming will happen at Garvey and he feels the City accomplished that with the current proposed design. Mr. Farrell - Stated that the proposed Garvey design is a great facility for families. Council MemberArmenta - Inquired as to the participation numbers and impact effects of the Fontana facility. Mr. Montgomery-Scott - Stated that the Fontana facility is really a combination of the proposed Rosemead and Garvey designs, they do get a high level of participation, and they have the advantage of having a large pool which is adjacent to the smaller pool. He noted that they have a high level of participation, but are not near capacity. Mr. Farrell - Noted that in his experience, on a hot summer day, there are typically 20 people in the competitive side of the pool, and the rest are on the slides and wet play. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 24 of 29 Council Member Low- Inquired whether her Council colleagues were in favor of expanding the shallow space at Rosemead pool. Mayor Pro Tern Ly- Proposed to continue this item to the next meeting in order to receive community feedback. Council Member Clark -Agreed with deferring the discussion to the next meeting and inquired as to how staff advertised the community meetings held on the proposed pools. Mr. Montgomery-Scott - Noted that information was provided in Rosemead Resources, the website, flyers to all schools and the high school, e-blasts, signs posted at Garvey community center, Rosemead Park and Garvey Park, and informational boards at the high school and adult school. There was also a front-page article in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune. Council Member Armenta - Inquired if men and women's restrooms could be reversed. Mr. Farrell - Noted that reversing the restrooms would not be a problem. He further went on to present the proposed Garvey pool and mentioned the dire state of the current bathhouse. He mentioned the 1535 square feet of proposed wet play and the height of the slides. Slides would be bounded by "heavy planting" in order to protect the adjoining residential area. In addition, there is a proposed color palette that would "blend in" with the existing neighborhood and give a residential character to the shade structures. The wet play would be on the left, the center would be for instructional use, and the water slides would be located on the right. The water slides would empty into "shut down lanes." Council Member Low- Expressed concerns that children would run from the wet play to the slide area, if the pool was located between them. Mr. Farrell - Noted that there are planned elements, such as seat benches, which would prohibit that. Mayor Taylor- Affirmed Council Member Low's point, that kids want to run back and forth between areas. Mr. Farrell - Stated that the pool can be moved to the end, or the wet play to the middle, however, in his experience, the way they are presented is the optimal location so that staff and lifeguards can have a "straight shot out" in the event of a water safety emergency. Mayor Taylor- Expressed concerns about the community thinking that they were short changed in ending up with a 30 x 50 foot pool. This will be in place for the next 50 or 60 years and was concerned that this size would just be too small for the community. Council Member Clark- Affirmed that she was referring to the Rosemead pool. Mayor Taylor- Expressed concern that the Rosemead pool would be the "cream of the crop" and that the Garvey pool would only be the size of the Council Chamber. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 25 of 29 Council Member Clark- Expressed concerns that people in the north are going to think that the Rosemead pool is only for competition and that there is no "fun" element. Mayor Taylor- Noted that the community will have to travel an extra two miles and that he is talking about general public use. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Stated that this is a "grass is always greener" situation, no matter what you build, north or south, the other side is always going to feel like they are getting the shorter end of the stick. In the end, the products are both going to be great facilities. Mayor Taylor- Inquired if any of the Council want to direct redrawing of the schematics to consider the increasing the shallow space at Rosemead pool Council Member Clark- Inquired as to the use of recycled water at the new facilities Mr. Farrell - Noted the facilities will be built to the highest energy efficient standards possible and that efficiency has greatly increased with new technology over the last 5 years. Council Member Clark- Inquired about the implementation of LEEDs standards to the projects. Mr. Farrell - Stated the project could not be constructed due to current LEEDs standards without spending an extraordinary amount of money, however, some of the planning building standards will provide the City with 4 LEEDS points. The standards board is working on a landscape LEED, which the City could then qualify for. Mayor Taylor- Inquired about the specifics of the solar system. Mr. Farrell - Noted that there would be 2 panels per square foot and in summer and transitional months, it is likely that the heater would never need to be turned on. There will be an approximate 4 to 5 year "payback" on that and there is a 15 - 20 year guarantee on the panels, depending on the particular manufacturer. Brian Lewin - Inquired as to whether the solar panels will be heat generation or electrical generation. He also noted he did not review the updated proposals. As a result of speaking with one gentleman and doing research, he expressed support to expand the shallow area at the proposed Rosemead pool and removing at least 2 of the competitive lanes. He feels this would still allow for training and also suggested that the shallow end be divided into horizontal quarters, and put something in there to create partition in quarter or half points to allow for an area for parents with small children who just want to sit in pool. This would be to discourage larger kids from interfering with the parents and smaller children. He also mentioned installing an "anchor' so that a portion of the pool could be closed off to "playing" in order to encourage quiet family use. In terms of the pool becoming a victim of its own success, staff could be directed to limit hours or establish certain hours that were available for competition and outside use. Council would listen to the residents on this issue and act accordingly. This seems to be a very good project and is looking forward to seeing the pools completed. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Suggested continuing this item to the May 25th meeting so that community input could be received. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 26 of 29 Mayor Taylor- Stated that this item would return to the Council in two weeks. 10. MATTERS FROM MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Thanked code enforcement and Public Works staff for their work in removing graffiti throughout the City and noted that he does now see an increase of graffiti only in the public rights of ways, sidewalks and curbs. Encourage staff to continue to patrol the public right of way areas. He thanked Council Member Armenta regarding informing staff about the Edison parcel on Dorothy, where there appears to be a large amount of "dumping." He visited that site and noted Edison was moving debris in and out, and that they were not subject to the same criteria like Wal-Mart was, where they were required to mitigate dust and potential construction damage to cars and residents. He expressed that the debris could be damaging to the children near Willard School. Council Member Armenta - Noted that she passes this site regularly, due to her work at Willard School, and notices different trucks in and out of the site, as well as piles of rock coming out in to the street. Council Member Clark - Inquired if staff could research the source of the rock piles and work being conducted. Council Member Armenta - Stated that Edison still needs to abide by the City Codes for construction. Mayor Taylor- Directed staff to contact Edison. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Inquired as to when Garvey pool would be up and operational. Mr. Montgomery-Scott - Stated that Garvey pool will be operational at the end of the month Council Member Low- Expressed concerns about site at Walnut Grove and Garvey where Upper San Gabriel Water District are doing a project. She contacted a Board member and they were able to repave on Walnut Grove, it is not as bumpy as before, however, they did not wait long enough and there are tire marks all over the street. City Manager Allred - Noted that he is working with the Water District to determine what can be done Council Member Low- Inquired as to why they were able to work on the project for so long. City Manager Allred - Stated that the contractor had permitting problems due to work near the water channels. He mentioned it was a good project and there are many benefits (such as recycled water for golf course, street medians). He noted that the contractor's work was substandard and that the contractor will be trying to mitigate the problem. Council Member Low- Stated that the City needs to be in touch with contractors to ensure how they schedule their work progress in order to inform residents. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 27 of 29 Mayor Taylor adjourned the meeting, however, it was noted that he had missed a public speaker's card. The public speaker made her comments. Dolly Leong - Read from a prepared statement and gave her address as P.O.6939 Rosemead, CA. She referred to letters dated March 18th and May 5th (to the Council) and inquired as to whether the Council received her correspondence. She asserted her contention that a City inspector, James Donovan, cited her property based upon allegations made by her tenants, whom she believed were trying to obtain free rent. She expressed concerns that her private address and contact information was revealed to the tenants and she was exposed to their violent nature. She mentioned a moisture problem on the property that should be investigated. Ms. Leong alleged that the City failed to provide proper protection in a code enforcement case. These tenants are cheating both the government and the property owner, that they steal water and lock water taps, throw eggs at property and drink alcohol openly in public. She also noted they leave their trash out where it can attract vermin. She requested certain City documents including the contract with Willdan Associates, as well as information related to building officials and inspectors, and their compensation. She made several requests including: 1) a city study for cost and budgets, 2) information on the City's practice of destroying certain documents, and 3) the reason the City does not have the tentative tract map she requested, 4) information related to the City's policy of not requiring the property owner to be on site when their property is inspected, 5) the City's interference with eviction process, 6) information related to other property owners subject to triple charges, 7) City interference with eviction processes makes owners unpopular in the neighborhood and noted the City should protect property owners and 9) what measures the City is taking to ensure this will not happen again. Mayor Taylor- Noted that there was too much information expressed tonight and not enough documentation for him to offer any input. Dolly Leong - Inquired if the Council had received the May 5th correspondence. Mayor Taylor- Noted that an item needs to be placed on the agenda for Council consideration and that they need back up documentation to make an opinion. Dolly Leong - Requested to have the City Clerk certify that she submitted a letter with 10 attachments, which was dated stamped May 6, 2010. Council Member Low- Inquired as to the crux of the problem. Dolly Leong - Responded that her tenants had been trying to get free rent from the beginning, they used the City and Los Angeles County inspectors in order to file false claims against her in order to avoid paying rent and getting evicted. She noted she gave them a $200 reduction in rent since the property had previously been vacant for 11 months. She mentioned that she had complied with all Code requests and had spoke with Council Members Armenta and Ly in October. There was a graffiti removal issue that was resolved in December 2009. She inquired as to why she was not informed that a code inspector was to visit the property, so that she would have been able to explain certain matters about the property when he made the inspection. Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 28 of 29 property, so that she would have been able to explain certain matters about the property when he made the inspection. Mayor Pro Tem Ly- Noted that there was no backup documentation and since this item was not on the agenda, he personally did not think further discussion on the matter was appropriate. Mayor Taylor- Stated that the document submitted with the public comment is "just a letter and that nothing more could be done at this time. Dolly Leong - Requested that the item be placed on a future agenda for discussion City Attorney Montes - Stated that if this is an open or pending code enforcement matter, then it would not be in the Council's jurisdiction to discuss the matter. If it is a complaint against a City contractor or vendor, then the City Manager can handle that as appropriate. Further, if it is a public records request, then the City Clerk can process it as such. Dolly Leong - Stated her regrets that the Council did not review her correspondence and alleged that Code Enforcement staff was aware of the pending eviction and proceeded to cite her property with violations. Mayor Taylor- Advised Ms. Leong that staff would have to assemble the facts of the matter before issuing a response. 11. ADJOURNMENT The City Council meeting adjourned at 10:29 p.m. The next joint Community Development Commission and City Council meeting is scheduled to take place on May 25, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m., respectively. Gary T r Mayor ATTEST: Gloria Molleda City Clerk Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2010 Page 29 of 29 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 of May 11, 2010 were duly and regularly approved by the Rosemead City Council on the 22nd of June 2010, by the following vote to wit: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None ,,b@A-D UAL C)~g Gloria Molleda City Clerk