CC - 08-19-86 - Adjourned Joint MeetingMINUTES OF THE
CITY COUNCIL
AUGUST 19,
• APPROVED
CITY OF ROS:.1IIEAD
DATL' e7
ADJOURNED JOINT MEETING
& PLANNING COMMISSION
1986 AT 7:00 P. M.
The Adjourned Joint Meeting of the City Council and the
Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead was called to
order by Mayor Imperial in the Conference Room of City Hall,
8838 E. Valley Blvd., Rosemead, California, at 7:15 p. m.
The Pledge to the Flag was led by Mayor Imperial.
The Invocation was delivered by Chairman Lowrey.
ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS:
Present: Councilmembers Bruesch, Cleveland, Tury and
Mayor Imperial.
Absent: Councilman Taylor (Arrived at 7:25 p.m.)
Present: Commissioners Mattern, Young, DeCocker, and
Chairman Lowrey
Absent: Commissioner Schymos (Excused Absence)
I. REVIEW OF DRAFT GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
A. Land Use Element
Donald Cotton of Cotton/Beland, stated that the draft of
the text of the General Plan Elements is completed as well as
the draft Environmental Impact Report which must be prepared
for the General Plan. He added that a copy of the Land Use
2000 Map which shows the proposals of land use that are con-
tained in the plan which had been presented to the Commission and
Council Monday-is a slightly earlier version than the map that
is on the wall .in' a large scale.
Mr. Cotton commented that there have been several sessions
that this land use map has been gone over in some detail and
each time specific areas of concern have been discussed. He
felt that all the areas had been covered that at this point in
time and that. the necessary modifications:and/or adjustments
and changes have been included in the maps. He stated that
the text of the General Plan basically incorporates the goals
and policies of each of the elements that were previously dis-
cussed, and it also contains all the items that are required
by State Law regarding General Plans.
Mr. Cotton stated that the purpose of this meeting was
to allow the Council and Commission the opportunity to comment
on the map and the text of the General Plan and the Environ-
mental Document. All the comments will be incorporated in the
draft and provide copies of the draft for hearing purposes;
however, before hearings are held on the Plan,it is necessary
to circulate the Environmental Impact Report which is complete
with the exception that,there is some traffic information that
needs to be included in it. He remarked that tonight is really
the first time that this traffic information will be covered.
After this has been done, the Circulation Element will be final-
ized and the Enviornmental Impact Report will then be finalized.
Mr. Cotton stated that if the Environmental Impact Report
is in the hands of the OPR (Office of Planning and Research)
by the end of this month, the circulation period would run 45
days from the day it is logged in in Sacramento. He stated that
the Planning Commission could schedule Public Hearings in mid-
October or the latter part of October, and depending on how
many hearings the Planning Commission holds on the General Plan,
the City Council could conduct hearings in November, prior to
the Christmas Holidays.
Adj.C/M 8-19-86
Page #1
Donald Cotton presented'a.brief review of the text and
the Land Use Map,which`is being purposed. He commented on the
two mixed-use categories, Residential/Commercial which.would
permit either Residential or certain. Commercial uses within
that district, and the other mixed-use category is Light.Indus-
trial/Commercial.
Commissioner Young stated that he had a real problem with
Residential/Commercial, and commented that as a businessman on
.Valley Blvd., this would allow children to run' around his busi-
ness all day long and residents. do not like it when the commer-
cial trash is picked up early in the morning next to their bed-
room:windows. He did.,not feel that the mixed-use would work.
He felt that the strip commercial areas were valuable and he
felt that it would be foolish to allow those areas to go resi-
dential.
Councilman'Tury understood Mr. Young's feelings; however,
_he.felt that there was too much Commercial, and the land will
be developed to its highest and best use. If this highest and
best use is Commercial, then that is what it would be developed
into. He felt that if this area was all made into only Commer
cial, it would never be developed. He remarked that because of
"the lack of parking and the depth of the zoning, Valley can only
accomodate inexpensive, rundown commercial buildings.
Commissioner Young stated that be felt that in the future
there would be businesses leaving the Malls because of the high
rents and there would be a returning to the Commercial strips
where rents are not so high.
;Councilman Bruesch stated. that he did, not feel that strip
Commercial-is inherently bad as'shown on this document.
Councilman Tury stated that any City around Rosemead that
has strip Commercial without parking behind it, is nothing; how-
eyer,.if.this Council or some other Council would re-zone the
depth, it would then be more desirable.
Donald Cotton stated that he did not want Zoning to be con-
fused with the Land Use Element, and added that there is a require-
ment of State Law that the Land Use Element.and Zoning be consis-
tent and it is sometimes difficult to achieve; however, the mixed-
use idea is an attempt to give flexibility in order to utilize
either type of zoning within that category without being in viola-
tion of the Land Use Map.
Councilman Bruesch commented that there is a P-D Overlay
on Valley and the Planning Commission and the City Council has
the decision making power to what will be developed.
Donald Cotton stated that the Council makes the determina-
tion and establishes the standards under which the development
can occur;.however, it does put more of a burden on the Commission
and the Council to deal with the issue,. but it does give an option.
Mayor Imperial stated that if the Zoning calls for either/or
the developer can take the City to Court, if he is not allowed to
build residential units.
Mr. Cotton.stated.that this would.be the same situation as
when CUP required, and the City is not required by law to grant
any conditional use. The City has discretion when it comes to
CUP's, and the same situation applies here. He added that.the
intent is that there are options for people who want to develop
in these areas.
Councilman Cleveland stated that the property on Valley
Boulevard has had only three new buildings built in the
past 40 years between Rosemead Blvd., and Temple City Blvd.
Councilman Bruesch stated that he felt that the mixed-use
would be the only way to have adequate parking for the type of
vehicle traffic there is on Valley Blvd. Adj.C/M 8-19-86
Page ;2
Chairman Lowrey commented on the area west of Rosemead Blvd.,
and south of the San Bernardino Freeway. He stated that he felt
the area should be Commercial/Industrial or.something of that nature.
Commissioner Mattern stated that he felt that area should stay
as it is on the map and possibly put a design overlay over it, and
he felt that it would be a good place for Commercial use.
Councilman Bruesch commented on the intersection of Garvey
and San Gabriel and the fact that there are three trailer parks,
and inquired if eventually these trailer parks would be out of
there according to the zoning map.
John Carmona stated that all trailer parks in the City are
non-conforming right now.
Mayor Imperial stated that he did not have a problem with
the Land Use Element with the exception of the mix-use Residential/
Commercial. He was not in favor of that mixed use and he could not
vote for that part of the Land Use Element.
. Councilman Cleveland stated that if the mixed use is done away
with there will be a lot of displacement of residential properties
in the event that the commercial development does materialize. He
stated that he felt that the mixed use should be left as is because
the opportunity.of flexibility could be utilized.
Councilman Bruesch stated that he feels that when there is a
change in land-use there will be a change in zoning. He remarked
that what the mixed use would allow the future Commissions and
Councils,would be the flexibility to have a P-D overlay on the
property.
Commissioner Young stated that he did not know of a mixed-
use area that was successful. He stated that LaVerne had it on
Foothill Blvd., and it has become a fiasco. He felt that Valley
and Garvey should be commercial.
Councilman Tury commented that Duarte has a fine mixed-use
concept on Huntington Drive, and it looks very attractive.
Councilman Bruesch stated that he has seen the mixed-use
in LaVerne and he agrees with Mr. Young; however, he felt that
it was not the fault of the document but the fault of the people
who are using the document.
Mayor Imperial stated that there was no way that they could
predict what future bodies of the City would do.
Robert Kress, City Attorney, stated that if a mixed-use con-
cept is approved,then Ordinances would have to be adopted that
specify certain situations and findings have to be made. This
Council could write the standards. It is more than just a design
overlay. It is really an entitlement, and more like a Use Permit.
It would have to be decided if the good parts of a mixed-use con-
cept work for this particular parcel. That would mean looking at
the surrounding uses.
Councilman Taylor stated that because the City has so much small
commercial strip zoning, it is not a problem if a large commercial
shopping center closes. He feels that is what has helped Rosemead
for all these years. The City has a lot of small businesses contri-
buting to the Sales Tax Revenue. He had originally considered try-
ing the mixed-use; however, after the discussions tonight he felt
that if apartments get into that area, it would destroy the Commer-
cial concept. He does not think that the City could legally stop
apartments from going in.
John Carmona requested that Land Use 24 be turned to in the
text and it states that mixed use is permitted only in one situa-
tion, a planned development of 1 acre or more, and in Land Use 33
with 2 pages of guidelines, the Council can be restrictive.
Adj.CIM 8-19-86
Page N3
Mark Blodgett, Consultant of Cotton/Beland, commented.what -
the mixed-use 'concept is really concerned with is Garvey and
Valley Boulevard. He remarked that outside of Rosemead, these'
streets have extensive strip commercial and the adjacent cities
also have an excess amount of commercial uses. He commented
- that the model that this mixed-use concept was based upon
evolved from some of the work that has been done in these
foothill communities., Arcadia, Monrovia and Duarte. This way,
-market forces dictate what will go in these areas in the
future, and.this is where we get back to the highest and best
use. If commercial activities revitalize through whatever
market forces come down in the future, presumably, there will
be commercial development. This land use policy does not dis-
courage commercial development in the City. The mixed use de-
signation does not preclude the existing commercial, and it also
encourages certain, areas to develop into commercial.centers..
`Councilman Bruesch commented.that.in the text it states
that mixed use developments.must provide adequate buffering
between the residential and commercial uses. He added that this
could be added in the Zoning Ordinance, and if the development
does not have.that buffering it cannot go in.
Mr. Blodgett stated that could be.part of the conditional
use process.
Commissioner Young stated that he felt that condensed
commercial -use.has been stressed, but commercial strip use
has been discouraged. He-inquired as to why Mr. Blodgett feels
that there is an excessive amount of commercial strips in the
% cities surrounding Rosemead.
Mr. Blodgett stated that cities in.the San Gabriel have
basically designated whole strips of their major arterials as
commercial, and the result is that there are similar problems
exhibited with their commercial strips, El Monte and Pomona.
Councilman Taylor requested concrete evidence of where this
mixed-use.concept was working.
Mr. Cotton stated that he felt that Huntington Drive from
the race track west to the Los Angeles City limits was a good
example of mixed use development.
Councilman Taylor felt that that was a different socio-
economic group, and not similar to Valley Boulevard. He stated
that he could not support the development of apartments on Valley
Blvd.
Councilman Tury stated that he did not feel that any member
of the Planning Commission or the Council disagrees with his atti-
tude about apartments; however, he did feel that there has been
a 40 year problem on Valley Blvd., and he did.feel that on the
outlying areas there should be some options available.
Frank G. Tripepi, City Manager,
commercial buildings cannot be built
parking. He added that unless depth
commercial strips parking will alway
do not have a place for customers to
do business.
stated that a whole line of
on Valley Blvd., because of
can be attached to these
be a problem. If retailers
park, they simply will not
Mr. Donald Cotton summarized the discussion, and stated that
he felt that the mixed-use concept on Garvey and Valley was some-
thing that the Council was uncomfortable with. He remarked that
it would be possible to continue the commercial designation on
the land use map which is basically what it is now.
Councilman Taylor stated that would be his personal prefer-
ence, and he felt that it was residential/commercial right now.
He suggested that Rosemead and Del Mar be left Residential/Commer-
cial,'and leave Valley and Garvey Commercial or Light Manufacturing.
That way there would be something to compare it to and possibly
someone could monitor it, to see what will happen. Adj.CM 8-19-86
Page =4
Councilman Tury stated that he could support that on Valley;
however, not on Garvey. He requested a memo on mixed-use concept
on Valley Blvd., and list what the down side is, and what to look
for so those problems can be forstalled.
Councilman Bruesch requested that the memo include alternatives
for enhancing the parking along those commercial strips.
Councilman Taylor stated that he felt that Garvey and Valley
should remain Commercial.
Councilman Cleveland stated that.he preferred the mixed-use
concept.
Councilman Tury stated that he would go along with Councilman
Taylor's feelings.
Councilman. Cleveland stated that he also would go along with
Councilman Taylor's feelings because in the last 40 years there
has been no commercial development and with the way it is now,
there will be no chance of ever getting it.
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TAYLOR, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN BRUESCH
that the proposed Land Use Element be approved with the exception
of Valley Blvd., from the West City limit to Rio Hondo be Commer-
cial and East of Rio Hondo be Commercial/Lt. Industrial and that
Garvey from the East City limit to the Edison Right-of-Way be Com-
mercial/Lt. Industrial and from the Edison Right-of-Way to the West
City limit be CommerciaL.. Vote resulted:
UPON ROLL CALL ALL COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT VOTED AYE.
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
B. Circulation Element
Wes Pringle, Traffic Engineer who has worked on the Circula-
tion Element, briefly reviewed the element. He stated that the
most important think to understand the relationship between land
use and circulation, is that they are one and the same and if one
is changed, ',it will probably have an impact on the other. He re-
marked that there are a few specific areas where there are oppor-
tunities or needs for additions to the circulation system; but
basically the pattern and classifications have been established.
He stated that they looked into future conditions as to traffic
volume changes that may come about due to land use changes, and
it was not found that there were any major deficiencies in the
circulation system. There were some recommendations made on
Rosemead Blvd., basically north of the freeway. It was recommended
that consideration be given to the removal of on-street parking,
and there is a potential access problem to the Rosemead Shopping
Center. He suggested a specific study session to review both
methods of increasing capacity on Rosemead, and methods of improv-
ing Glendon Way, Rosemead and the freeway ramps intersection.
He suggested that the City cooperate with the RTD and to encourage
large employers to have car-pooling programs.
Mr. Pringle stated that the Rush Street extension study was
prepared by Willdan early this year. He identified six options
that could be used as part of the General Plan. 1. Extend Existing
Right-of-Way to Rush in South E1 Monte. 2. Connection of Rush St.,
with Pomona Freeway interchange opposite westbound off-ramp at Rose-
mead Blvd. 3. Connection of Rush St., to Pomona Freeway with fly-
overs. 4. Roadway connection beginning at Walnut Grove opposite
Narramore Foundation east to Pomona Freeway off-ramp. 5. Rush St.,
extended northward to Garvey Avenue via River St., with supplemental
connections possible to Fern, Stingle, and Klingerman. 6. No Pro-
ject; maintain status quo.
Councilman Tury stated that option I. was completely out of
the question; however, he felt that although option 3. may be more
expensive, but it would be a long term solution to a long standing
problem.
Councilman Taylor stated that the proposal has been made to
widen San Gabriel Blvd, and that should help the traffic congestion
in that area for awhile. Adj.CM 8-19-86
Page #5
Councilman Taylor stated that he would prefer to go along
with that improvement and see what the results are. He also
stated.that..the.eztension.of Rush Street was out of the question.
He preferred going with the San Gabriel/Pomona Freeway off-ramp
widening, and after a :few years it could be reevaluated.
Councilman Tury stated that he did not feel that widening
of the off-ramp would be a long-range solution to the traffic
problem. He felt that the long-range solution would have to
by-pass that area and finding some other way to get to the
freeway from Walnut Grove.
Councilman Bruesch stated that the problem exists on Walnut
Grove.and there will be a medical center opened up very shortly
which will add to the traffic problem. He inquired how much it
would cost for,Option #3.
Mr., Pringle.stated that it would.cost approximately $8,000,000.
Councilman Bruesch stated that he felt that something would
have tb''be done.eventually, and preliminary studies should not be
put off.
Councilman Taylor stated that there is still the option of
resignalization for that area, the Landisview, San Gabriel and
Walnut Grove. Councilman Taylor left the Meeting..
Mayor Imperial commented on the signalization at Rush and
Walnut Grove which is pedestrian controlled, and stated that it
was.a.nightmare.
Councilman Bruesch stated that some sort of action has to
be taken on the Circulation Element which would set the City's
future goals for that southeast area.
Frank G. Tripepi, City Manager, stated that it has to be
recognized that there is a problem.or a potential problem.
Councilman Bruesch stated that he felt from the discussion
that Options 1 and 6 are out, and they are not acceptable.
MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TURY, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CLEVELAND
that Options 2 and Option 3 be considered to alleviate the traf-
fic problem on Walnut Grove and Rosemead Blvd., as part of the
Circulation Element. Vote resulted:
UPON ROLL CALL ALL COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT VOTED AYE.
The Mayor declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
Mr. Cotton stated that a sketch of Option N2 and Option #3 could
be included in the Circulation Element.
Councilman Bruesch requested a time table toward a solution of
the problem so that a decision can be made as to which way it will
be resolved.
Councilman Tury suggested that possibly when this set of
Agency Notes are retired, and this may then be the time to look
at this as a Redevelopment Project and a worthwhile reason to
sell more agency bonds.
Councilman Bruesch stated that plans and specifications could
be prepared before that time, and there would be no reason to wait
for that.
Mayor Imperial inquired if there was any further comments
for the Councilmembers or the Commissioners on the subject.
Chairman Lowrey stated that they certainly appreciated the
joint study session with the City Council.
Mayor Imperial stated that they would be getting together soon.
The Meeti t adjourned to August 26, 1986 at 8:00 p. m.
a.vnn CTTV CLERK