CC - 03-31-87 - Adjourned MeetingAPPROVED
CITY (?F 1:0Spr'AlEADp
DATE
MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED MEETING
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 31, 1987 AT 7:30 P. M.
The Adjourned Meeting of the Rosemead City Council was
called to order by Mayor Imperial at 7:30 p. m., in the Con-
ference Room of City Hall, 8838 E. Valley Blvd.,'-Rosemead,
California.
The Pledge to the Flag was led by Councilman Taylor.
The Invocation was delivered by Councilman Bruesch.
ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS:
Present: Councilmen Bruesch, Cleveland, McDonald,
Taylor and Mayor Imperial
Absent: None
1. GENERAL PLAN STUDY SESSION
Mayor Imperial stated that this adjourned meeting was
held to discuss the proposed General Plan.and any corrections
and/or additions that the Council may have regarding it.
Gary Chicots introduced Mark Blodgett and Laura Hudson,
representatives of Cotton/Beland Consultants, who were
involved in the.preparation of the General Plan from its
inception. .
Mark Blodgett commented that they had gone through the
past documents and identified some problems which were typo-
graphical errors or incorrect data, and have recommended the
revisions in a two page memorandum that was presented to the
Council. He stated that the General Plan contains the Land
Use Element, Housing Element, Circulation Element, Resource
Management Element and the Economic Development Element and
in addition it contains an Implementation Plan and the Envi-
ronmental Impact Report.
Councilman Taylor suggested that the Council go through
the list of corrections and note them.
Mark Blodgett stated that the first correction was on
page LU10, Figure LU2, and he remarked that the property west
of Walnut Grove Avenue, north of Wells;-Street, had been in-
correctly designated as "High Density Residential and he:
stated it should have been designated "Low Density Residential"
on the southern half of that property.
Councilman Taylor stated that there should be another
correction on this page, and that it is on the south side
of Valley next to the Wash, and it should be changed to
residential not commercial` since it is actually housing.
Mark Blodgett stated that a portion of the property on
the north side of Muscatel School, immediately.south of
Lawrence, was designated public facility and he felt that there
may be an error in that designation,'and that single family
designation should be retained.
Gary Chicots stated that it is being utilized as
residential and' will be corrected to show low density.
Mark Blodgett stated that immediately north of Lawrence
had been designated as high density early in the General Plan
program,. and he.inquired 'if that should be left as designated
on.the:'map or should that be modified to reflect the single
family residents. He remarked that it would have to be sub-
sequently zoned R-3 to be consistent with the General Plan
designation for that property.
CM 3-31-87
Page H1
i •
Councilman Taylor suggested that the north side of Lawrence
be designated R-1 for the frontage lots, and the rest of the
Council agreed.
Mark Blodgett stated that there was an error on Page LU-26
Figure LU-9 in District B, which is located on the eastern most
portion of Valley Blvd., and commented that the pattern shows
it to be mixed-use Residential/Commercial and it should have been
designated Light Industrial/Commercial. He stated that on Page
LU-27, Table LU-3, there should be a square under Commercial for.
District A. This should indicate that Commercial Zoning is al-
lowed under Zoning in District A.
Councilman Taylor commented that Residential would be allowed
with a Conditional Use Permit in District A. He inquired what
District A was zoned right now.
Gary Chicots stated that it was zoned C-3 now.
Councilman.Bruesch requested that they turn to Page LU-16,
and commented that he did not see Arlene Bitely School on the
Map, and requested that the new school site be added and desig-
nated as public use.
Mark Blodgett stated that the new school had been 'built
since these maps had been prepared, and he would see to it that
it is added.
Councilman Bruesch stated that the school goes from Egley
down to Fern, and west of Jackson.
Mr. Blodgett stated that they would get the precise location
of the school from staff and the road right-of-way and make the
appropriate changes.
Mark Blodgett stated that on the bottom of page H-6 there
was a typographical error, and the number 46,000 should be de=
leted; and the last sentence should read "to 50,000 persons at
build-out (refer to-Table H-4)."
Mark Blodgett stated that the next correction was on page
H-17 in the last paragraph, and it should read: "Additional
housing opportunities will be provided within those districts
designated for mixed-use residential commercial. According to
the 'Land Use Element, approximately 72 acres will be.designated
mixed-use Residential/Commercial. If residential development
occurs Citywide, the maximum densities allowed under the Land-
Use Element, the population will be 49,299 persons and 14,939
dwellings at maximum build-out. This represents an increased
population over 1985 D.O.F. estimates of 1600 persons and an
addition of 931 dwelling units. If 50 percent of the areas
designated for mixed use: Residential/Commercial is developed
according to the maximum residential densities (14 dwelling
units per acre) prescribed in the Land Use Element, 504 units
will be located within these mixed-use areas."
Mark Blodgett commented that on Page ED-9,Figure ED-1 again
District B was incorrectly designated as Residential/Commercial
and it should have been designated as Light Industrial/Commercial.
He remarked that the last two changes concern graphics and they
need to reflect the corrections and changes made to graphics in-
cluded in the Land=Use Element. Pages 11 and 12 of the Environ-
mental Impact'Report,.Table 2, which is a reproduction of Figure
9, of the Land Use Element, and will have to be reflected on this
graph as well. He stated that Table 2 will be an exact replica
of LU-3.
Councilman Taylor commented on the zones that can be used
under District A, LU-3, are R-l; R-3, P-O, P-D, C-1, C-3, & Mixed-
use Residential/Commercial.
CM 3-31-87
Page M2
Mark Blodgett stated since the time this table was
designed,there have been policy revisions made at the dir-
ection of the-City Council.
Councilman Taylor stated that in Districts C, D & E,
Residential is the underlying zone; however, on page 12 in
Table 2 in the EIR, R-1 and R-2 Zones are not checked off in
Districts C and E.
Mr. Blodgett stated that since this table was made, some
districts have been revised from Residential/Commercial to
Industrial/Commercial while others have been redesignated from
Industrial/Commercial to Residential.
Councilman Taylor inquired what residential X's are going
to be put on the Page 12.
Mr. Blodgett stated that the table on page 12 will not have
any, and it will be identical to the table LU-3-. Any residential
development will be permitted with a Conditional Use Permit in
those districts.
Councilman Taylor stated that he did not want people to have
to come in for a CUP in order to use their homes. There had been
a time that the people around Montgomery Ward:'s could not add
to their homes because of the zoning, and also there was this same
problem on Brighton and by the Auto Auction. He did not want any-
one to have to get a CUP when their property is in~the,underly,ing
zone to begin with.. He stated that anyone looking at Table ED-1
on page ED-8, would not realize that Residential use is the under-
lying use for Districts A, C, D, and E. He did not want the resi-
dents to have to come in and get a CUP.
Mr. Blodgett stated that he agreed that needs to be clarified,
and the noted change to the land use table will be made. He stated
that the intent.-of Table ED-3 was to identify appropriate types of
commercial uses that might be considered to be used in this parti-
cular district over others.
Councilman Taylor stated that he did not dispute that, and if
someone wanted to come in and buy the area and build commercial,
it would be fine; however, he did not want the underlying shadow
of those who live there,to,have.a restriction put on them.
Mr. Blodgett stated that residential land uses will not be-Pre-
eluded in these areas.
Councilman Bruesch inquired what could be added to both LU-3
and ED-1 that the Planning Commission and the developers know that
Residential is the underlying zone there.
Mr. Blodgett stated that in District A, the need for a CUP
for residential use, may need to be revised to reflect the per
mitted use in the zoning. He remarked that some additional text
would be added to clarify the uses.
Councilman Bruesch commented that if the-four or five lots at
the very north of District' A. could be Residential instead of C-1 and
C-3, they would not need, a CUP in order to improve their homes.
Gary Chicots stated that the intent of the mixed-use zone was
to permit, some of the areas like Rosemead Blvd., that are already
C-1 and C-3 which are under-utilized.
Mr. Blodgett stated that if a portion of the District were
zoned commercial and the balance residential, then that would pre-
clude any of this recycling from taking place.
Councilman Taylor stated that it would not preclude it, but
would allow the commercial with a.CUP. It would only allow the
people who live in the City to have the priority over the people
who are building in the City and do not live here. Anyone who
wants to buy the lots, can apply for a CUP and they can develop
it.
CM 3-31-87
Page N3
i
i
Councilman Bruesch questioned the down-zoning of lots, and
inquired if the owner of the lot would be allowed to add a room
if the property were down-zoned.
Gary Chicots stated that they could probably not add a room
if they have more than one unit.
Mark Blodgett stated that there would have to be a sub-
sequent revision to the Zoning Ordinance and the Zoning Map
to reflect the changes that have been made to the General
Plan Land Use Map. He commented that they tried to make this
transition as easy as possible. First of all, they created
land-use designations to correspond as closely as possible with
Zone Districts so that it is very clear in relation to the zone.
The other was to delineate the boundaries on the land-use map
to correspond as much as we could with the existing zone district
boundaries. He stated that he hoped that they had not created any
unintentionally non-conforming areas.
Councilman Bruesch commented that the whole area that he lives
'in is down-zoned and will be way out of compliance.
Mark Blodgett stated that there are areas that will be sub-
ject to down-zoning subsequent to the adoption of the General Plan.
Councilman Bruesch stated that by down-zoning these areas
it negates the ability of the homeowner to.improve their property
and-yet,in other areas of the community a developer can come in and
apply a P-D and develop the property in any way that they want to.
He felt that gave the advantage to the developer over the homeowners.
Mark Blodgett stated that'the General Plan was not designed
to make a distinction between private property owner and developer.
The developer would be subject to the same requirements concerning
density as a private property owner. Property owners may improve
their property; however, they cannot construct an additional unit
if they are in an R-1 zone.
Councilman Bruesch inquired about a room addition.
Mr. Blodgett stated that.would be subject to the standards
of the zoning ordinance.
Laura Hudson stated that one of the things necessary to do
is to revise the Zoning Ordinance to comply with the General Plan,
and at that time, the provisions of the non-conforming uses may
be revised to take into account the difficulty with insurance and
parking maintenance. She added that many Cities are doing differ-
ent things to handle the non-conforming uses.
Councilman Bruesch suggested that when the zoning ordinance
is studied that the non-conforming section be thoroughly studied.
He wanted to make sure that people who are on R-2 lots with two
dwellings on it, are not denied the rights that a developer has
by assembling parcels.
Mark Blodgett stated that the General Plan is just the
first phase, and the Zoning Ordinance is a very important second
phase.
Laura Hudson stated that there is a provision. in the Imple-
mentation Plan that the Zoning Ordinance can be revised to imple-
ment the General Plan', and it can be noted in that section'that
particular attention can be paid to the handling of non-conforming
uses.
Councilman Taylor commented on the statements made on page
LU-25.
Mark Blodgett stated that there was a typographical error in
the last paragraph and "Applicable Land Use" should be corrected
to read: "Land Use Allowed".
CM 3-31-87
Page k4
Mark Blodgett stated that he would go over the Map very
carefully with Gary Chicots to make sure that the areas have
been correctly designated so that certain properties are not
misclassified, and will incorporate the corrections and changes
that were made tonight.
Mark Blodgett remarked about the Circulation Element and
the Rush Street extension. He stated that rather than desig-.-
nate a specific right-of-way for the Rush Street extension, he'd
indicate that there are some alternative options available.
The other aspects of the Circulation Element were standards and
particular components that are required by State Law for inclusion
into these elements.
Councilman Bruesch commented on the statements on page Cir#12
in the first paragraph, and requested that a comment be put into that
paragraph that Walnut Grove throughout the length is not acceptable.
Mark Blodgett stated that their traffic consultant identified
roadways that were over capacity by using a formula that looks at
the average daily traffic, and commented that it was a very general-
ized methodology. He stated that they would take a second look at
Walnut Grove.
Councilman Bruesch stated that in his opinion there is no
way that Walnut Grove would be acceptable.
Councilman Taylor stated that he was hesitant in putting
an off-ramp on Rio Hondo. because it will be coming through a
totally residential area; however, he would support another lane
at Rosemead Blvd. .
Mark Blodgett stated that he thought there may be a problem
with the Graphic.
Councilman Taylor stated that the wall was built so a lane
could be diverted through that wall and there is no other place
on that entire Freeway that has an opening like that.
Mark Blodgett stated that that graphic will be revised, and
the reason for this graphic was primarily to identify the indivi-
dual roadways that correspond to the standards that have been
identified beginning on page CIR-7. He will make sure that it
is corrected.
Councilman Bruesch emphasized that the redesigning of the
on-ramps and off-ramps on Rosemead Blvd., is something that needs
to be looked at in depth. He felt that the confirguration of
those off-ramps are a detriment to commercial development there.
Mark Blodgett commented on the Resource Management Element
was formated.in such a way to meet State requirements for an open
space conservation element. He stated.that it has been incor-
porated a Section to include both Park & Recreation facilities
as well as issue areas that are mandated by the State.
Councilman Bruesch commented on page RM-11, Goal 4, and in-
quired if the Municipal Code would come in conformance with this
goal, and begin to emphasize energy conservation.
Mark Blodgett stated that if the City has this as a policy,
then the City should make some effort in implementing it. A
policy similar to this is highly recommended by the State for
inclusion in the local General Plans. He did feel that some
provisions would have to be made in existing codes through the
adoption of their ordinances to identify these and to make it
known to the residents. All new residential and commercial de-
velopments are required to do energy calculations as part of
the process, and certain mitigation has to be identified to
reduce energy consumption if it exceeds certain levels.
CM 3-31-87
Page #5
Mr. Blodgett commented on the Noise Element, and he stated
that it was by-far the most technical of the elements, and has
been designed to parallel the State requirements for Noise Ele-
ments. He remarked that the basic emphasis is to identify
noise sensitive land-use within a, community, and to quantify
the noise impacts that will result from the adoption of the
land-use policy map, and to make recommendations or to identify
mitigation measures that will reduce adverse impacts. He in-
quired if there were any specific concerns or questions regard-
this element.
Councilman Bruesch remarked that mixed-use land use policy
states that buffers are required between the mixed-use property
and the residential, and inquired if that meant a sound barrier
of some sort.
Gary Chicots stated that when an ordinance is being considered
to regulate mixed-uses, that could be a required condition in the
zoning ordinance-taking into consideration the types of uses that
are being allowed and the noise levels that they put out.
Councilman Bruesch commented that he was in favor of that and
that this would mean another form of control over the noise nuisance.
. Mr. Blodgett commented that since Caltrans is such a slow
moving agency, he recommended that a policy be added in this ele-
ment that indicates that the City will actively pursue Caltrans
in their highway planning program.
Frank G. Tripepi, City Manager, stated that the last portion
of the Sound Attenuation Wall on the I-'10 Freeway is being started
now, and:there.was a..portion of the Pomona Freeway that the devel-
per was required to put in the Sound Attenuation Wall.:.
Mr. Blodgett commented that there would be a policy included
in the General Plan dealing with the requirement of Sound Attenua-
tion Walls along the Pomona Freeway and it would emphasize the
developer's responsibility in providing these areas.
Councilman Bruesch inquired about the noise along'the railroad
tracks, and commented that possibly trees could be used along with
a wall as a noise barrier.
Councilman McDonald stated that there's a possible.merger of
Southern Pacific and the Santa Fe Railroads and the tracks along
Grand Avenue may be used a great deal more than they are now so
it may be important to require developers to provide some type of
sound barriers.
Mr. Blodgett stated that another policy would be incorporated
in the Noise Element that a private development along the Railroad
right-of-way must provide some type of sound barrier.
Mark Blodgett commented on the Public Safety Element and stated
that it was.also mandated by the State and essentially it combines
the Safety and the Seismic Elements, and he stated that he felt that
it was one of the most important elements because it is specifically
concerned with reducing the loss of life and injury in the event of
an earthquake. He remarked that the.main feature was that it calls
for the preparation of a comprehensive Preparedness Plan, and in ad-
dition an effort has been made to identify evacuation routes and
emergency shelters which is required by the State.
Mark Blodgett commented on the Housing Element and that it is
one of the most comprehensive of the elements of the Rosemead General
Plan, and stated that the reason for that is that the State require-
ments for housing elements is by far the most comprehensive. He
remarked that the goals and policies for this element basically look
at housing as a necessity rather than a commodity. It recognizes
the importance of a persons home and the fact that a person's home
is probably the single greatest investment that a family can make,
and.:in.addition the State emphasizes the need for all communities
to make an effort to provide housing for all income groups regard-
less of race or income. He stated that the housing goals of the
State have been reflected in this plan. CM 3-31-87
Page N6
• 0
Councilman Taylor stated that he felt that the City of
Rosemead is not shrugging its responsibility of supplying ade-
quate low income housing, and the City has more than their share
of low income housing. He did have one strong reservation in
this plan and he referred to page H-1 in the middle of the last
paragraph which states The Rosemead General Plan Housing Element
contains the 'Goals and Policies' component required by State Law.
The detailed analysis used in assessing housing need is found in
the Background Report. The Background Report also serves as a tech-
nical appendix to the entire General Plan. The final component re-
quired by State Law is 'Implementation Program' which is located in
the Implementation Plan, also located in the Appendix. He remarked
that this was what he had referred to several months ago in regard
to the Implementation Plan which is not an Element, but the impor-
tance of the plan as far as the policies and procedures that would
be used. He requested that everyone turn to IM-16 and IM-18. He
commented on Item H, Page IM-16, which stated that an inspection
be initiated of a house that is for sale to insure that housing is
maintained in accordance with the adopted building and safety codes.
He felt that the Code Enforcement Program which checks.property
within the City is rather low-keyed but adequate; however, Item B
on Page IM-18 requires property owners to correct any code or ordi-
nance violation before an occupancy permit can be issued or reissued.
He stated that he had strong reservations regarding that require-
ment, and he commented that on Page H-15, Code Compliance. Checks,
it states at the request,of a property owner or prospective buyer,
but in the Implementation Plan it is required. He did not have
a problem with an inspection if it was requested; however, he did
not feel that it should be a requirement.
Mayor Imperial stated that he did not have a problem with the
requirement because in case it is necessary, at least there will
a tool available.
Councilman Taylor stated that if there is.a requirement, and
common sense is used,it would be alright; however, that is something
that cannot be judge everyday and he was not comfortable with an
owner being saddled with that kind of restriction.
Councilman Bruesch commented on a friend who recently purchased
a home and under a freshly painted wall there was dry-rot, and after
a period of three months, the dry-rot was found and it cost the new
owner about $17,000, and an inspection might have prevented that.
Frank G. Tripepi, City Manager, stated that there is now a
new Real Estate Disclosure Act, that requires the owner to list
any defects that are known, and if the owner fails to disclose
any of these items, the buyer does have a right to make the seller
make good the cost of all the damages.
Councilman Taylor stated that the buyer is then protected by
that law, and he did.not feel that it was necessary to.include
the required inspection of re-sale property in the General Plan.
Councilman Bruesch inquired if it would not be possible to
state that the City would implement the policies of that new law.
Frank G. Tripepi, City Manager, stated that the suggestion
could go to .the Planning Commission and then be returned to the
Council for consideration.
Margaret Clark stated that it might be a counter-productive
requirement because there may be an.older person that wants to
sell his property and he may not have the cash to fix up the pro-
perty before selling it, and it may also out-price some of the
young people who are just entering the housing market.
Juan Nunez stated that the.real estate 'law allows a full year
after-.the purchase-to:,'get these'defects_cor.rected by the seller.,
CM 3-31-87
Page #7
•
0
Mayor Imperial inquired if the real estate law requires the
seller or the real estate broker to tell the buyer what can be
put on the property or what cannot be.
Mark Blodgett stated that the disclosure law is basically
designed to identify or make clear any structural deficiencies
with the property or any constraints that might at some future
time affect that property, such as if it is in a specific earth-
quake zone.
Councilman McDonald commented on the liability that would
be placed on the City if an inspector should miss something that
was defective and signed off on the property. He'.added that this
would be taking liability for something that the City had nothing
to do with.
Councilman Taylor stated that he felt that
seller should negotiate who is going to fix the
is going to pay for it, and the City should not
the inspection for the resale of property.
Mark Blodgett stated that the last element
Development Element and inquired if there were
corrections.
the buyer and
defect and who
be involved with
was the Economic
any changes or
Councilman Taylor reiterated his statement about optional elements
in that'once an optional element has been adopted, the optional
element has the same force and. authority as the mandatory.elements,
and can significantly expand the authority of the local government
over a particular issue.
Councilman Bruesch stated that on page ED-6 it states that it
would be beneficial to encourage local service commercial uses such
as supermarkets and drugstores to locate in larger exclusively com-
mercial.districts at the intersections of Valley/Rosemead Blvd.,
and Garvey/San Gabriel Blvd. He had been suggesting this and hoped
that the City could move forward on it now that it is in black and
white.
Councilman Taylor requested a minor clarification on page ED-10
which states Goal 2: ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMERCIAL CENTERS
LOCATED IN FOUR DISTINCT AREAS OF THE CITY, and inquired if that
was correct or should it be SEVEN DISTRICT AREAS.
Gary Chicots stated that it should be SEVEN DISTINCT AREAS.
Mark Blodgett stated that Councilman Taylor was correct in
pointing out that while this is an optional element of the General
Plan, once it is adopted with the General Plan it holds the same
force of law as the mandated elements. He remarked that this was
the reason that every effort has been made to make sure that it
is consistent with land use policy, and at the same time adding
the goals and policies identified in the land use element.
Councilman Taylor stated that the requirement of a CUP for the
mixed uses, helps clarify Page ED-8.
Mark Blodgett stated that the Implementation Plan's purpose
is to identify specific measures that will serve to implement
the goals and policies in the previous elements. He commented
that page IM-2 deals specifically with the implementation of the
land use element. He stated that this section recognizes the
areas 'where Zoning Ordinance inconsistency with the.General Plan
will result when this plan is adopted. Measures have been outlined
to bring in the Zoning Ordinance to conform with the Land Use policy.
This Implementation Program does recognize that there will be cer-
tain areas where re-zoning will be difficult. He added that the
State does require that-.Zoning Ordinances be brought-into conformance
with adopted General Plan within a reasonable period of time. He
felt that it should not exceed the five years that is outlined in
the recommendations.
Gary Chicots commented that as long as the City is in the
process of trying to make the Zoning in conformance with the
General Plan, the City should not run into any problems with the
State. CM 3-31-87
Page N8
•
Councilman Taylor requested that Councilman Bruesch re-ask
his question again regarding down-zoning.
Councilman Bruesch commented-that when property in a large
area is down-zoned from R-2 to R-1, the owner cannot do certain
additions to their property, and yet, a developer can go into a
mixed use area and slap a P-D over it and they can do whatever
they want.
Frank G. Tripepi, City Manager, stated that they can both
do whatever they want, and they have to do is apply for a P-D
Zone.
Councilman Bruesch stated that most owners do not have the
kind of financing that is necessary to do that; however, a developer
would have the necessary funds to buy out an acre of land.
Councilman Taylor stated that the P-D Zone was.going to be
changed so the developer will not have that much leverage.
Councilman Bruesch stated that he wanted to make sure that
the City is not allowing the private developer,by using the P-D
Zone,an advantage. that the City is not allowing to the individual
owner.
Gary Chicots stated that the entire P-D zone can be dropped,
or if a P-D comes along that does not fit the standards, they just
not be approved.
Councilman Taylor stated that there has been a little abuse
of the P-D Zone; however, there have been a lot of fine residential
homes on large lots. He did think that there should be a require-
ment of 4500 sq. feet instead of 3000 sq. feet per dwelling unit.
Margaret Clark commented that she lived in an area that is
targeted for down-zoning, and her property now is allowed to have
four units; however, she has only two at the present time. She
inquired why certain areas that are particularly blighted in the
Housing Conditions, Figure 6, were left R-2 and some were down-
zoned to R-1.
Mark Blodgett stated that the reasoning behind the reduction
in zoning for this particular area involved numerous factors, such
as the infrastructure is inadequate in terms of supporting a higher
density development. He commented that areas where there are-sub-
stantial number of blighted units do recycle to higher densities
than single family neighborhoods that, generally, have good housing.
.Mrs. Clark stated that she does not live in area #4825.01;
however, she is particularly concerned because it shows as the
most blighted and could not understand how the blight would be
eliminated by locking the property in a way that improvement can-
not be made when the property is down-zoned to R-1.
Mr. Blodgett reiterated the fact that the primary concern
was infrastructure, and added that the area is very deficient
in water.
Gary Chicots stated that in the proposed Zoning Ordinance
there is a section in the non-conforming portion that basically
states that units that are non-conforming may be altered,- pro-
vided that the unit density shall not be increased, they can
still make minor changes to the property.
i
Councilman Taylor stated that is something that needs cor-
recting because there is a difference between a minor improvement
and a rebuilding. He felt that the word "minor" should be clarified.
Councilman Bruesch suggested that before any major down-zoning
is done, that section be checked thoroughly to make sure that what
Mrs. Clark is concerned about is covered. He commented that he was
in favor of down-zoning because he felt that it.was a good way to
prevent over-burdening of City facilities; however, he did not want
to jeopardize a persons ability to make use of their own land, and
therefore, he wanted to go through that section very carefully be-
fore any re-zoning is done. CM 3-31-87 Page #9
f 0 0
Councilman Bruesch continued by saying that he wanted to make
sure that "rebuild" is in the non-conforming section.so that
a person could add a bedroom, garage or a family-room to an
established dwelling.
Margaret Clark suggested that instead of down-zoning the
properties from R-2 to R-1, leave the zone R-2 and make the re-
quirement of square footage greater per dwelling unit.and more
open space. This.would in effect down-zone by raising-the stan-
dards and then everyone would be treated equally.
Frank G. Tripepi, City Manager, commented that the minutes
reflecting the changes made will be sent to the Planning Com-
mission for concurrence, and then the General Plan prior to adop-
tion will be set on the Council Agenda with a Public Hearing.
This public hearing.will be legally noticed as required by law,
and this Notice will be published in a local newspaper.
Gary Chicots stated that when a zone is changed each and
every property owner affected by the change will be notified,
and that is also required.
Mark Blodgett commented that if these areas are designated
as low density residential, there is an implied intent that there
will be a subsequent zoning to reflect that lower density, and
if there is an area that i's, perhaps, inappropriate for down-
zoning, then it should be considered at this stage. He felt that
by doing this it would avoid many problems in the future.
Councilman Taylor stated that at this time, he did not know
what the R-2 requirements are as far as square footage and what
can actually be built on a lot.
Councilman McDonald stated that he did not feel that the
zoning was the problem, but the overcrowding of the infrastructure
that is in those areas so that it does not overtake the capabilities
of the water and the streets and whatever else there is in the infra-
structure. He stated that the standards of the R-2 can be raised or
the zone can be down-zoned.
Robert Kress, City Attorney, stated that the adoption of this
plan is an implied promise to go through with at least holding the
hearings on the down-zonings. At that time, the decision will be
made whether or not to change the zone and the result of that pub-
lic hearing and the evidence presented, may point the Council to
a different direction at that time,.back to amending the General
Plan to conform existing uses. He added that the Council has a
lot of options.
Councilman Taylor inquired what the building density was on
an R-2 lot.
Gary Chicots stated that it was about 3,000 sq. foot per unit
and this would include the regular R-2 and the deep lot-
Councilman Taylor inquired what it was in the R-1-,Zone.
Gary Chicots stated that it was 6,000 sq. foot per dwelling
unit.
Councilman Taylor inquired if a person could add on in a deep
lot in the R-1 Zone.
Gary Chicots stated that the standards on the deep lot in the
R-1 are higher than they are in the R-2. He added that in the
R-2 zone.a maximum of'_6.units may be built. He stated that it
was 6000 sq. ft. for the first unit in the R-1, and 5500 sq.ft:.for.the
additional two units.
Councilman Taylor inquired about on an R-2 lot.
Gary Chicots stated that the first dwelling needs 6000 and
each additional dwelling needs 3000.
'CM 3-31-87
-_--Page #10
11
Councilman Taylor stated that with the R-2 Zoning 6 units
can be built if they have adequate square footage; however, in
the R-1, only 3 units can be built with the adequate square footage.
Gary Chicots stated that maybe something in-between could be
considered as far as square footage per dwelling unit, maybe 4500
sq. ft. per unit or maybe 5000 sq. ft.
Councilman Bruesch stated that basically staff is being, directed
to leave the Land Use Map as it is; however, staff should investigate
improvement of the R-2 Zones so that when zone changes come up, people
can be given the option.
Councilman Taylor inquired what is going to happen regarding
the down-zoning from R-2 to R-1.
Frank G. Tripepi, City Manager, stated that if the majority
of the Council agrees this evening that the development should be
controlled taxing the substandard infrastructure that exists,then
the development standards will be upgraded and down-zoning will
not have to be shown on the Land Use Map. If the primary goal is
not to allow any development to tax the infrastructure, then there
no need to down-zone.
A gentleman in the audience inquired about a piece of property
that he owned in the area being discussed and the lot is 100 X 200
ft. And he commented that he had heard that someone could build
6 units on a lot that is 50 X200 ft. deep.in the R-2 Zone.
Gary Chicots stated that if it qualifies as_ a deep lot, they
can.
The gentleman stated that the City has not been telling him
that for the last 20 years, and he has five units on his property
now which is 100 X 200 ft.
Frank G. Tripepi, City Manager, stated that the development
standards have to be seen and how it is layed out on the property.
Juan Nunez commented on the Public Hearings regarding the
down-zoning and inquired if it would be one for the entire area.
Gary Chicots commented that anytime a Zone Change case goes to
either the Planning Commission or Council, they are required to
have a public hearing and the property owners affected by that
zone change in the 300 foot radius around that property are
notified.
Councilman McDonald stated that he would be in favor of
pulling out the down-zoning suggestion from the General-Plan
and put in the suggestion of going with the increasing of the
R-2.requirements.
Laura Hudson stated that the General:Plan has to specify
the land use density. What has been done is to call them low,
medium, or whatever for that area and specified the number-of
units per acre. She stated that if the number of units per
acre is changed, it can be done; however, it is necessary to
know the number of units per acre, that the Council thinks is
appropriate.
Gary Chicots stated that the Medium density is 8 to 14
units per acre.
Councilman Bruesch stated that he would like to go over
the areas separately through the Public Hearing process on a
case by case basis.
Councilman Taylor did not feel that each site should be
considered separately, and suggested that the medium density
should be 6 to 9 units per acre.
Laura Hudson suggested that the range be from.0 to 9 units
then the multi-family would be included in the range.
CM 3-31-87
Page #11
Councilman Taylor inquired if that would mean a maximum
of 9 single family units or would it mean -a 9 unit apartment
building.
Ms. Hudson stated that would be up to the Council when
the Zoning is approved. She stated that when stipulating 0-9
units per acre, all that is meant that each unit requires a
larger amount of land to permit open space and adequate drive-
way standards.
Councilman Taylor stated that he would want to prevent an
apartment type construction.
Gary Chicots stated that the density standard would regu-
late that because it would say how many units are allowable per
sq. foot of land area. He added that the high limit of 9 units
per acre would be about 4500 sq. ft per dwelling unit.
Mayor Imperial stated that there was a concensus on the
Council that the medium density be 0 to 9 dwelling units per
acre.
Councilman Bruesch inquired what the density standard would
be in the R-3 zone or would it be down-zoned to R-1 or R-2.
Councilman McDonald inquired how much area is being down-
zoned from R-3 to R-1.
Gary Chicots stated that on page IM-3 there is some R-3 Zoning
in areas 1 and 3.
Councilman Taylor stated that there is an up-zone in area 15
from R-2 to R-3.
Ms..Hudson stated that areas 6, 7, 8,9 and 10 will all go back
to medium density, R-2.
Gary Chicots stated that an ordinance amending the density
standards for the R-2 will be brought before the Council.
Councilman Bruesch stated that Item F, on page IM-9, deals
with commercial development and he felt that this encourages
mini-malls, and he did not want to encourage new mini-malls.
He requested that Item F be deleted for the.time being.
Gary Chicots stated that this was a pretty general statement
and he.doubted that it would affect small businesses.
Councilman Bruesch stated that he would rather have a state-
ment that encourages small businesses to come together with larger
shopping malls instead of going towards the mini-malls.
Frank G..Tripepi, City Manager, stated that the encouragement
is.there, but if they cannot, they can develop whatever they can
develop.
Councilman Bruesch commented on Item F on page IM-32 and re-
quested that this be deleted.
Councilman Taylor also stated that he was in favor of deleting
Item F because the Redevelopment Law has changed so much in the last
five years that any project area has to go to the vote of the people,
and the County is going to get in all the districts, and every agency
has to agree with it. He felt that unless it is such a blighted area
that all the districts will agree that the area has to be redeveloped.
Mayor Imperial so directed that Item F, on page IM-32 be deleted.
Juan Nunez inquired if anyone could come in and get a variance
in the R-1 and R-2 zone to construct something on a smaller square
footage than required.
Mayor Imperial stated that anyone could apply, but that does
not mean that they will get a variance.
CM 3-31-87
Page #12
•
C1
Juan Nunez requested that when this is brought back to
the Council, it be put in slide form so that the audience can
see what areas are being discussed. He felt that it was very
difficult to follow in the manner that the General Plan was
discussed tonight.
Councilman Taylor stated that there are some maps included
in the General Plan Book that could be shown on a slide for the
public hearings.
There being no further business to handle, the Council
Meeting was adjourned to the next regular Meeting on April 14,
1987 at 8:00 p. m.
Respectfully submitted:
City Clierk
APPROVED:
MAYOR
CM 3-31-87
Page #13