Loading...
CC - Minutes 11-23-10Minutes of the Community Development Commission and City Council Regular Meeting November 23, 2010 The regular meeting of the Rosemead Community Development Commission and City Council was called to order by Mayor Taylor at 6:03 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. PRESENT: Chair /Mayor Taylor, Vice - Chair /Mayor Pro Tern Ly, Commissioners /Council Members Armenta, Clark, and Low ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: City Attorney Richman, Assistant City Manager Hawkesworth, Community Development Director Wong, Director of Finance Brisco, Director of Parks and Recreation Montgomery-Scott, Economic Development Manager Ramirez, Public Works Director Marcarello, and City Clerk Molleda ABSENT: City Manager Allred 1. ORDINANCES READ BY TITLE ONLY State law requires that all ordinances be read in full prior to the City Council /Agency Board taking action; however, by motion, unanimously adopted, the City Attorney can be instructed to read all ordinances by title only. Recommendation: That the City Attorney be instructed to read all ordinances which appear on this agenda by title only, and that further reading be waived. Commissioner /Council Member Sandra Armenta made a motion, seconded by Commissioner /Council Member Polly Low, to approve ordinance by title only. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE - None 3. COMMISSION CONSENT CALENDAR A. Claims and Demands Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes ofArovember 23, 2010 Page I of 17 • Resolution No. 2010 — 37 Recommendation: to approve Resolution No. 2010 — 37, entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2010 — 37 FOR PAYMENT OF COMMISSION EXPENDITURES IN THE AMOUNT OF $139,619.49 DEMAND NO. 10096 AND DEMAND NOS. 11386 THROUGH 11394. Vice- ChairlMayor Pro Tern Steven Ly made a motion, seconded by Comm issionerlCouncil Member Sandra Armenta, to approve the Commission Consent Calendar. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None 4. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER & STAFF A. Extension of the SR -60 Coalition Reimbursement Agreement The City Council will receive a presentation and consider an extension of agreement with neighboring cities to gamer support for the selection of the SR -60 freeway as the preferred route for the Gold Line Eastside light rail extension project. Rosemead's proportional cost for participation in the coalition will be derived from Measure R Transportation funds. Recommendation: That the City Council direct staff regarding the extension of the SR -60 Coalition Reimbursement Agreement for legislative advocacy services. Public Works Director Marcarello reviewed the staff report. Representative of the SR- Coalition, Council Member Gonzales of South El Monte gave a PowerPoint presentation. PowerPoint presentation is available in the City Clerk's Office. Commissioner Clark asked what the connector to downtown was. Vice -Chair Ly explained it's a light rail from Union Station area and instead of transferring from the gold line, to the red or blue line; passengers can stay on the gold line to go directly to a regional connector on the same line. Mr. Ly added that a regional connector would be a benefit to the community. Commissioner Clark asked when the route will be decided on. Mr. Gonzales - replied the route will be decided between September and December of 2011. Commissioner Clark asked if the High Speed Rail Authority can show the SR -60 that they can be compatible. Has the SR60 Coalition looked at that? Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of November 23, 2010 Page 2 of 17 Mr. Gonzales — replied that the compatibility is an issue for the City, 1 -10 cities and the SR -60 and when Metro decides on a route, they will look at it with more detail. Chair Taylor asked if Metro is looking at one or two routes. Mr. Gonzales — explained that the there are two lines for the SR -60. For the High Speed Rail, Metro is looking at four routes the 1 -10, SR -60, UPA Rail line, and the Union Pacific line. Commissioner Armenta stated that Metro has taken out the Union Pacific line because it's not a possible route. The only two routes that Metro is looking at are the 1 -10 and the 1 -60. Mr. Gonzales — stated that at the Council of Governments meeting they came up with a timeline chart of the High Speed Rail that shows the SR -60 to be quicker route than the 1 -10. SR60 is now concerned because now does that mean we are the favored route. We're waiting to see what happens with the light rail line. Vice -Chair Ly explained that the two lines are not compatible because of the technology. Metro has indicated they are looking towards the south end of the freeway because the High Speed Rail does not like curvature trails on their route. Mr. Ly added that if the High Speed Rail did go along the 1 -60 it will be on the right -of -way of the freeway or along the north end of the freeway; whereas the light rail gold line would be going on the south end of the freeway. Also, if the High Speed Rail Authority wants to avoid eminent domain of homes, they would have to go on the north end of the freeway all the way to Garfield and then switch to the south end and that is a curvature. Mr. Ly stated that for the safety ability of the High Speed Rail, so that most likely eliminates the option of the south end freeway. The SR -60 and the High Speed Rail are two different projects and does not believe eminent domain will be used on the south end of the freeway for the gold line extension. Chair Taylor asked Mr. Gonzales how many homes could be in condemnation in the City of Rosemead because of the High Speed Rail. Mr. Gonzales - replied that about 200 to 300 homes would be in condemnation. Chair Taylor confirmed it was 350 homes that would be in condemnation. He added that's in the right —of- way and the right —of -way is 250 feet wide and approximately 125 feet. For example 250 foot right -of -way, 125 feet to the center of the right- a -way, take off 25 feet, it's a 50 foot concrete deck; take off another 25 so you have approximately 100 feet from the right- of -way which would be the first house on the residential streets all across the city. Mr. Taylor asked what happens to the value of the house or ten houses down the street that terminate on the high speed rail system. He stated if we hang ourselves by saying we'll support the gold line, he can't support it. Mr. Gonzales — stated that his city is in the same situation and didn't know how many homes will be affected because of the High Speed Rail. Mr. Gonzales added that the City of South El Monte has chosen to see what is going to happen with the SR -60 extension first and by waiting the City is not saying they are in support of the High Speed Rail. Also, other cities such as Montebello, Monterey Park and El Monte have not voiced their opposition to the High Speed Rail because the Authority may have another phase of alternatives for the High Speed Rail and the decision on the gold line will be made after September 2011. Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of November 23, 20/0 Page 3 of 17 Chair Taylor asked what the High Speed Rail system's EIR time was because the Authority is a State organization that can override all of the cities and will come on March of 2011 to make a decision. Mr. Gonzales — stated that he was not sure about the time frame. Vice -Chair Ly stated that the High Speed Rail Authority may narrow their choices for two routes by March of 2011, however may look at other potential lines because of the EIR process. He added that an issue is where the meeting will be held whether in Los Angeles or Riverside area. Mr. Ly also stated that the gold line is a separate line and will be built along Washington Boulevard or along the SR -60. Chair Taylor asked Mr. Ly if it was definite that the gold line will be built. Vice -Chair Ly explained that Metro is looking at the Transportation Management System or the no build option as part of the EIR process because it's a scientific study. Chair Taylor asked what the scientific study on the High Speed Rail is going down the I -10 freeway. Vice -Chair Ly replied the scientific study is currently being conducted and the gold line plan is ahead by a year and a half than the High Speed Rail. Chair Taylor stated that things were different in 2006 and 2007 and the City had just found out in February of 2010 that an alternate route had been chosen on the 1 -10 freeway which was a surprise that hit us head on. Mr. Gonzales — explained that the light rail and high speed rail are different projects. Chair Taylor stated that there has to be a compatible way for the two lines to go on the Pomona freeway. It's only a certain segment that the High Speed Rail would go along the Pomona Freeway. Vice- Chair Ly stated the problem is that there are two different agencies with different time lines and the High Speed Rail Authority, Metro has already analyzed going along the south end of the freeway. Omar Hernandez - stated that the High Speed Rail has been funded for the first phase of which the project is supposed to go from San Francisco to San Diego. The second phase will not start till 2022 and because of funding will be set through Measure R, and when the funds goes through, the SR -60 or the Washington line will already be in. Commissioner Low stated there are two choices: the SR -60 or Washington Blvd and felt the City should focus on what is going to benefit the community. Mrs. Low added that if that is the case, the City should support the Coalition to continue to fight that the line goes on the SR -60 and not on the Washington Boulevard route. Chair Taylor stated that 500 homes should not be sacrificed when only one store is producing tax revenue at Montebello Mall for the City and potential restaurants. Vice -Chair Ly stated if there is a stop by the Montebello Mall that would put that stop within a quarter of a mile from Double Tree and Holiday Express and that would benefit the transient occupancy tax revenue. Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of November 23, 2010 Page 4 of 17 Chair Taylor reiterated that by taking 500 R -1 homes is almost 7 percent of residents. Commissioner Low asked Mr. Taylor if by supporting the SR -60 the City will lose. Chair Taylor stated that 500 residents will lose out. Commissioner Low asked what 500 residents he was referring to. Commissioner Clark stated that the High Speed Rail staff previously made statements in front of almost 200 of our residents that they were looking at the 1 -60 freeway but there was so much pushback from cities and organizations that they decided to look at the 1 -10. That was heard by our residents that feel the push to have it on the 10 was from SR60 people who said, "Better you than me ". Commissioner Low clarified to the High Speed Rail Authority staff that she would never support anything that would take homes from people. Commissioner Clark stated to Mrs. Low that the perception is that she would be in support of the 1 -10 route. Commissioner Low stated that if the High Speed Rail is going to go on the 1 -10 freeway on grade or underground she would support that and referred to Mr. Hernandez's comments that the SR -60 would be done before the High Speed Rail. Mr. Hernandez — stated that it was discussed in the Alhambra High Speed Rail meeting it would be a problem to have both High Speed Rail and Metro Link both on the middle of the median and therefore the Authority is looking to move the Metro Link onto the Alameda Lines that go through Alhambra. Commissioner Clark stated that Ms. Genoveva mentioned to her that Union Pacific is against the High Speed Rail because it's not compatible and they are looking at swapping Metro Link with High Speed Rail when it turns to El Monte; Union Pacific could allow Metro Link to use their lines. Chair Taylor— reiterated that two rails cannot run on the same track system. He added the concept of building towers that are going to be subterranean which is not possible. Mr. Taylor stated that he needed to see something in writing with serious alternatives. Mr. Hernandez — stated that the issue is that the High Speed Rail will affect Rosemead corridors and since the City is a member of the SR -60 Coalition, they can help as a group to fight the High Speed Rail. Cities in the SR -60 Coalition include the City of El Monte, Monterey Park and Montebello and many others. Mayor Taylor Recessed the Community Development Commission meeting at 7:01 p.m. in order to continue this discussion at the Council Meeting. Minutes of the City Council Meeting The regular meeting of the City Council was called to order by Mayor Taylor at 7:03 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, Califomia. Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of November 23, 2010 Page 5 of 17 PRESENT: Mayor Taylor, Mayor Pro Tern Ly, Council Members Armenta, Clark, and Low ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Allred, City Attorney Richman, Assistant City Manager Hawkesworth, Community Development Director Wong, Director of Finance Brisco, Director of Parks and Recreation Montgomery- Scott, Economic Development Manager Ramirez, Public Works Director Marcarello, and City Clerk Molleda Community Development CommissionlCity Council continued the discussion regarding the SR -60 Coalition. Council Member Sandra stated that Ms. Genoveva stated the Authority is looking at the 1 -10 freeway because stakeholders at the scoping meeting did not want the High Speed Rail to go along the 1 -60 she stated that at many meetings. She added that a route will be chosen by 2014, and if the High Speed Rail goes on the south side of the 1 -10 freeway, property owners will have to disclose that information when trying to sell their homes. She asked if we support the SR60 how do we know it won't backfire on us. Ms. Armenta asked if the Coalition can produce a letter or proclamation to the City guaranteeing support when the City needs assistance from the Coalition. Council Member Clark reiterated that is would be best if the Coalition looked into the swap option because it would avoid the 1 -60 freeway. She suggested a letter be written and postpone the issue so the consultants could work with Union Pacific and High Speed Rail Authority. Mr. Hernandez — agreed to Mrs. Clark's request in assisting with a letter to be written on behalf of the Coalition to look at further study and address the land swap. Mike Roos — former Assembly Member stated Jerry Lewis, who will be Chair of Appropriation has introduced a bill in which all stimulus money will come back, turning High Speed Rail on its head. He commented that this was a way to balance or rebalance the $3.3 trillion dollars debt of the nation and that is why the City and the SR -60 should collectively work together. Council Member Clark asked Mr. Roos to contact Union Pacific and High Speed Rail regarding the swap option on behalf of the City. Mayor Taylor asked how much time the City had before the High Speed Rail Authority meets in March of 2011. Mr. Taylor also inquired about the $9 billion bonds. Mr. Roos — stated there was plenty of time and that all the bonds have not been issued because there is a lot of clutter in the muni bond market. The Treasurer has announced that because of interest rates and problems with the budget it's creating a bigger back log. Richard Alatorre - former member of the Legislature and former L.A. City Council Member, stated when a City stands to lose 400 to 500 homes the best way to fight it is when you have other cities support. The SR- 60 has succeeded because of the unity of purpose when all cities come together with like objectives. Mr. Alatorre added the commonality that all the cities and the coalition share is the disproportionate amount of Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of November 23, 2010 Page 6 of 17 money going somewhere other than going into the San Gabriel Valley and the need for a multi model system of transportation. Mayor Taylor inquired about the March timeline and that the City does not have any authority. He added that the High Speed Rail Authority will hold their meeting, make a decision and the City should have something to present. Council Member Clark asked the Coalition to make phone calls as soon as possible and meet with High Speed Rail Authority. Mr. Gonzales — stated that the Coalition will need to draft a letter and submit it asking the High Speed Rail Authority to look for alternatives. Mr. Hernandez - commented that the SR -60 Coalition has never endorsed High Speed Rail along the 1 -10 freeway and it discussed that each individual city had to look at their best interest. He added that the SR -60 Coalition had a neutral stand on the issue. Mayor Pro Tem Ly suggested that City Manager draft a letter encouraging the High Speed Rail Authority to look at the swap as an option. Council Member Clark commended Mr. Roos public service to communities. She added when she was fighting eminent domain in Rosemead, there was a bill that they called Roos Bill which allowed other ways to build onto existing schools instead of taking 40 acres of land. As a result the Alhambra School District backed off using eminent domain and obtained funding to build on to their existing high schools. Council MemberArmenta stated she felt more secure if the SR -60 would join the City to fight the High Speed Rail. Mayor Taylor stated he could not endorse the extension to the SR -60 agreement at the moment. Mayor Pro Tem Ly stated the City is asking the SR -60 to take an official stand and draft a letter to look into the High Speed Rail and Metro link swap. City Attorney Richman asked the SR -60 representative that if each of the member cities had to have a meeting at some point. Mr. Gonzales - stated the SR -60 will hold a meeting on December 14th, and asked the City Council to provide a letter addressing the City's concerns that would serve as basis for the SR -60 letter. Mayor Pro Tem Ly— stated that the High Speed Rail Authority may or may not meet in March and that gave the City about 120 days to adopt a letter in concept and authorize the City Manager to draft a letter asking the High Speed Rail Authority to look at the swap as an alternative option. City Manager Allred reiterated City Council's direction to draft a letter for discussion and present it on the SR- 60 for the December 14th meeting. Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes ofNovemher 23, 2010 Page 7 of 17 Mayor Taylor asked if the City and the SR -60 are to be united, what other cities will bring to the unity. Also added that is why the letter needs to be drafted quickly to allow other cities provide input. City Attorney Richman clarified that Council's direction is to direct the City Manager to draft a letter for the December 14th meeting. Council Member Clark stated that the letter needed to be drafted earlier. Mr. Hernandez - stated that the SR -60 would like to get approval of the letter at their December 14th meeting. City Manager Allred reiterated that Council direct City Manager to write a letter for the Coalition to assist the City of Rosemead in support. Council MemberArmenta clarified that the letter needs to be drafted before the 14th so the SR -60 could present it to their board members. City Council recessed the meeting at 7:34 p.m. and reconvened back at 7:40 p.m. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE John Thai — traveled from New York to represent his family who reside on Prospect Avenue in Rosemead. Mr. Thai expressed concern with the Housing Rights Center, claiming they initiated an audit in January of 2010. He added that the Housing Rights Center contacted classified ads of property owners and pretended to be interested or to become prospective tenants. Mr. Thai stated that on August of 2010 he received a letter from the Housing Rights Center making false statements. He spoke to Ms. Irma Salgado and other supervisors and stated that the landlords were required to take a course for anti- discrimination and if they did not sign a letter of arbitration with their corporation, they would sue and prosecute the landlords. Mr. Thai stated that the Housing Rights Center told him that they were contracted with the City and can act as a government agency. He contacted Economic Development Manager Mrs. Ramirez, who contacted the Housing Rights Center and clarified that they are not a government agency but a contractor. Another issue, Mr. Thai expressed was that Mrs. Ramirez stated to the Housing Rights Center that they cannot force any landlord and property owner to take any courses. He added that the Housing Rights Center staff told Mrs. Ramirez that they were required to take the course or be prosecuted. He reiterated that it was against the law because it's a writ of attainder. Mr. Thai asked the Housing Rights Center to provide statistics on how many people are forced to take their course and they refused. Mayor Taylor asked Mr. Thai about the time frames of the issue. Mr. Thai - stated that the issue started in January of 2010, on August he received a letter and as of today there has not been any resolution. Mayor Taylor asked for clarification on what the Housing Rights Center would inquire when asking if dogs and if transgender tenants were allowed. Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of November 23, 2010 Page 8 of 17 Economic Development Manager Ramirez clarified that she had not heard about the transgender issue, also the letter she was provided was dated November and not August. Mrs. Ramirez stated that she spoke to the executive director and another director named Julia, they both indicated the case may not be strong enough for the Housing Rights Center to do anything. She added that the Housing Rights Center has the resources to take legal action to the State Department of Employment and Fair Housing. Mrs. Ramirez suggested to Mr. Thai to contact the Executive Director of the Housing Rights Center. City Manager Allred stated that the City of Rosemead had no direct involvement except that the City retains the Housing Rights Center, pursuant to a Federal mandate, as a recipient of CDGB funds. They are an independent entity and the City has done due diligence on the matter. Mr. Thai — stated that Mrs. Ramirez had been very helpful and referenced a U.S case that went to the U.S Supreme court Goss vs. Lopez in 1975 and felt that his case related to the 1975 case. He added because the City should have the right to regulate the Housing Rights Agency to perform services they need oversight and suggested Mrs. Ramirez have authority to help landlords and property owners know their rights. City Manager Allred asked Mr. Thai what actions he was looking from the City Council. Mr. Thai - asked that City Council intervene and look through the contract and ensure that property owner's . rights are not being violated. City Manager Allred stated since the item was not in the agenda, no action could be taken and his comments are duly noted and staff would take appropriate measures that the contract is appropriate. Mayor Pro Tern Ly asked staff to provide a copy of the Housing Rights Center contract to be put for discussion for the next meeting. Council Member Clark stated that Mr. Thai emailed her and said that the Housing Rights Center was demanding that they take a course and they charge $150, she asked that staff clarify that. Council Member Low asked staff to explain what the Housing Rights Center's process was. Mr. Thai — reiterated that he demanded that the Housing Rights Center release their statistic on the City of Rosemead of who has signed arbitration letters and took their courses and they refused. Council Member Armenta asked if there is literature that stated that courses are not mandated or something to protect the City and property owners. Mrs. Ramirez stated that there is no literature on that specific issue but there is literature at the City Hall lobby, city's website, and staff does as much advertising as it's possible. Council Member Clark asked staff to look at other agencies. J.R Ramirez - received a letter regarding selective traffic enforcements on Willard Ave and Fern Ave. He expressed concern that on certain Fridays there is no parking from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. He stated there is an agreement between parking enforcement and the schools that on certain Fridays, parking violators will be Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of November 23, 2010 Page 9 of 17 exempted from violation ticket. Mr. Ramirez stated the policy for street sweeping has been in place for a long time and as a property owner expects the street to be swept. Mayor Taylor asked why the street was exempt from parking violations. Mr. Ramirez read a letter from the City Manager. Council MemberArmenta explained that at Sanchez Elementary the street is exempt from street sweeping violation because the School District hosts parent teacher conference two days out of the year which are on a Friday. Because it lands on Fridays, there is only street parking and parents need to park on the street. Mr. Ramirez - suggested that parent teacher conferences be held Monday through Thursdays. Council MemberArmenta suggested that Mr. Ramirez approach the School District because the City did not regulate when the schools should have their conferences. Mr. Ramirez - stated that he contacted staff from the school and school district and there was no resolution. He added that street sweeping occurs from 10 a.m. to 10:45 a.m. on Fern Avenue and the school should ask parents to come after the sweepers have come by. City Manager Allred stated that working with Ray Rodriguez, Public Safety Supervisor, who coordinates the program indicated to that Willard is not a street that parents should be allowed to park on. Council MemberArmenta stated it was only Fern and Earle Avenue that parents were asked to park. Mr. Ramirez - asked that if Willard is not exempted then parents should be cited for parking there on Fridays. He continued to read the letter. City Manager Allred asked to meet with Mr. Ramirez and stated that this was the first time that it had been brought up to staff as being a problem. Council MemberArmenta stated the problem is that Sanchez Elementary and Temple Intermediate host their conferences the whole day and where will parents park throughout the day. Mayor Taylor asked what the street sweeping schedule was for Fern Avenue. Mayor Pro Tem Lyreplied the Friday schedule was from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. 8 a.m. to 12 p.m. and 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. Council MemberArmenta stated that one of the problems that do arise if the times are changed would be to change the posting of the times. Mr. Ramirez — asked about the rebel field, the school uses the rebel field for Physical Education. Council MemberArmenta stated that students do not attend school on parent conference day. City Attorney Richman stated that the direction from staff is to come back with some suggestions. Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of November 23, 2010 Page 10 of 17 City Manager Allred stated that he would like to meet with Mr. Ramirez and that at the request of the school asked that parent not be sited for parking violations on the street sweeping day. Council Member Low asked how many times a year is the conferences held. Council Member Armenta stated there are two conferences and one reading circle event. Also added that during graduation parents park at rebels field. Public Works Director Marcarello asked Mr. Ramirez to meet with him and Chief of Police regarding the problem. Mayor Pro Tern Ly asked council to add to the agenda the discussion regarding the Mayer Hoffman auditor which the City of Bell is also contracting. City Manager Allred stated that the item will be brought back on the next agenda. 6. PUBLIC HEARING A. General Plan Amendment 10.1 and Municipal Code Amendment 10.06, Consisting of Amendments to the Land Use Element of the General Plan and Rosemead Municipal Code for the Purpose of Revising Hotel and Motel Development Regulations General Plan Amendment 10 -01 (GPA 10 -01) and Municipal Code Amendment 10 -06 (MCA 10 -06) are City initiated amendments to the Land Use Element of the General Plan and Rosemead Municipal Code for the purpose of revising definitions, parking requirements, required amenities related to floor area ratio limits, and other development regulations for hotels and motels. This item was presented to the Planning Commission for consideration on November 1, 2010. At that hearing, the Planning Commission reviewed GPA 10 -01 and MCA 10 -06 and received testimony from members of the public regarding the proposed revisions to the City's hotel and motel regulations. In response to this testimony, the Planning Commission made one revision to the draft regulations that were prepared by staff. The revision included the addition of a fitness center and spa/beauty salon to the list of optional amenities that hotels could incorporate into development proposals to achieve a higher Floor Area Ratio (FAR). With this revision, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 10 -31, recommending that the City Council ADOPT Resolution 2010 -72 and Ordinance No. 902. Recommendation: That the City Council: 1. Adopt the Negative Declaration; 2. Approve Resolution No. 2010 -72, entitled: Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of November 23, 2010 Page 11 of 17 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 10.01 FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVISING HOTEL AND MOTEL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS IN THE LAND USE ELEMENT 3. And introduce Ordinance No. 902 for first reading, entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT 10 -06, AMENDING CHAPTER 17.04, CHAPTER 17.84, AND CHAPTER 17.112 OF TITLE 17 OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO HOTEL AND MOTEL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS City Planner Bermejo reviewed the staff report. Mayor Taylor Opened Public Hearing at 8:15 p.m. There being no comments Mayor Taylor closed Public Hearing at 8:16 p.m. Mayor Pro Tern Steven Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Sandra Armenta, to approve adopt the Negative Declaration, Resolution No. 2010 -72, and introduce Ordinance No. 902 for first reading. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None 7. CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes July 13, 2010 —Regular Meeting Minutes of July 13, 2010 were deferred to the next meeting. B. Claims and Demands • Resolution No. 2010 — 81 Recommendation: to approve Resolution No. 2010 — 81, entitled: Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of November 23, 2010 Page 12 of 17 RESOLUTION NO. 2010 — 81, FOR PAYMENT OF CITY EXPENDITURES IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,073,318.41 NUMBERED 101043 THROUGH 101058 AND 71644 THROUGH 71805, INCLUSIVELY. C. Ordinance No. 907 — Second Reading: Amending Chapter 10.04.040 of the Municipal Code — Vehicle Code on Private Property On November 9, 2010, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. 907, which amends Chapter 10.04.040 of the Rosemead Municipal Code concerning enforcement of the California Vehicle Code on private property. Ordinance No. 907 is now before Council at the required second reading for adoption. Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 907, entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 10.04.040 OF THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING ENFORCEMENT OF THE CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY D. Refund of Cash Deposit— Parcel Map No. 69127 3130 Evelyn Avenue A Faithful Performance Bond and Labor and Material Bond were required to guarantee construction of sewer laterals, driveway approaches, curb, curb drains, sump pump, grading and the installation of survey monuments for Parcel Map No. 69127. In lieu of such surety bonds, a cash deposit was submitted to the City in the amount of $43,950.00. The work has been completed and the Cash Deposit can be released. Recommendation: That the City Council accept the sewer laterals, driveway approaches, curb, curb drains, sump pump, grading and survey monuments and refund the Cash Deposit. E. Approval of Undertaking Agreement for Parcel Map No. 71159 The Undertaking Agreement for Parcel Map No. 71159 is being submitted for consideration and approval to guarantee construction of public improvements subsequent to the recordation of the parcel map. Recommendation: That the City Council approve the Undertaking Agreement for Parcel Map No. 71159 and direct the City Clerk to arrange the recordation of the map. Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of November 23, 2010 Page 13 of 17 F. Encinita Avenue — Installation of Marked Parallel Parking "T's" The Traffic Commission considered a request to review parking conditions along Encinita Avenue north of Mission Drive and south of Lower Azusa Road. Residents in the area have indicated that patrons of Rosemead Park use on- street parking along Encinita Avenue and that large gaps in between vehicles limit available on- street parking. After visiting the site, it was recommended that marked parallel parking spots (Parking "T's ") be installed along the west side of Encinita Avenue to better delineate parking spaces. Recommendation: That the City Council approve the Traffic Commission's recommendation and authorize the installation of marked parallel Parking "T's" along the west side of Encinita Avenue. G. Request for Red Curb Adjacent to 8747 Loftus Drive and 3625 Dubonet Avenue The Traffic Commission considered a request to review traffic conditions along the road curve at the intersection of Loftus Drive and Dubonet Avenue. .Several residents in the neighborhood indicated that cars parked at this location, coupled with the road curve, create an unsafe driving condition. They are requesting the installation of red curb to improve visibility. After visiting the site, it was recommended that red curbing be installed in between 8747 Loftus Drive and 3625 Dubonet Avenue to improve visibility concerns. Recommendation: That the City Council approve the Traffic Commission's recommendations and authorize staff to install approximately 15 feet of red curbing adjacent to 8747 Loftus Drive and approximately 15 feet of red curbing adjacent to 3600 Dubonet Avenue. Mayor Pro Tern Steven Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Sandra Armenta, to approve City Council Consent Calendar with the EXEPTION of the minutes of July 13, 2010. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None 8. MATTERS FROM MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL A. City Council Meeting Schedule for December 28, 2010 Due to the Christmas holiday season, the City Council will consider cancellation of the regular meeting of December 28, 2010. Recommendation: That the City Council cancel the meeting of December 28, 2010. Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of November 23, 2010 Page 14 of 17 Mayor Pro Tern Steven Ly made a motion, seconded by Council Member Polly Low, that the City Council cancel the meeting of December 28, 2010. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None B. September 11th Run for the Memorial and Other Fundraising Efforts On September 11, 2010, the City hosted a Run for the Memorial event to raise funds for the 10th Anniversary September 11th Memorial, which is included in the City's Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 2010 -11. The run was part of the September 11th Memorial Donor Program approved by the City Council in May. As a result of the public response, members of the City Council have suggested that the run be offered again in September, 2011. Further, staff is recommending a variety of other fundraising activities to continue to raise the estimated $60,000 necessary to build the September 11 th Memorial. Recommendation: That the City Council approve Run for the Memorial 2011 to include a 5K and 1 -mile Run/Walk as well as other activities to raise funds for the September 11th Memorial project. Director of Parks and Recreation Montgomery-Scott reviewed the staff report. Mayor Pro Tem Ly stated that he would like a10K run for the 10th anniversary of the 911 event. Council Member Low expressed support for the 5K and stated it would be cost effective not to do the 10K run. Council Member Clark asked how much more it would cost to include a 1 OK run. Mr. Montgomery- Scott replied the estimated cost to include a 10K run would be around $25,000 and the 5K is just about $16,000. Mayor Pro Tern Ly asked about the discrepancy cost between the 5K run and the 10K run. He added that the last 10K run giveaways were from $1,400 to and increase to $4,400 in 2011 for the 10K run. Mr. Montgomery-Scoff explained that for the giveaways, there may be more runners 375 from 2010 to at least 600 runners. There is an additional $2,500 that would be added if medals were give away to all competitors. He also added that there is an increase in cost for staff both in the Public Safety and Sheriff's Department as well as timing services. Council MemberArmenta suggested in having a 5k and 3k run and asked if staff can look at that option. Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of November 23, 2010 Page 15 of 17 Mr. Montgomery-Scott replied that a 3K is a mile and a half and the 5K and the 1K are both coming in one general area. The 3K would have to be done in lieu of the 1 mile because there are only so many routes. Mayor Pro Tem Ly stated that the 10K run would cross the barrier going south of Rosemead and at the same time people running saw a good deal of Rosemead. Mayor Taylor expressed concern with the traffic congestion he encountered during the event and it was an inconvenience. He asked Mr. Montgomery-Scott on the time frame of the race. Mr. Montgomery-Scott stated that the end time would be 10:30 a.m. and if the race is reduced to a 5K, then the course maybe cleared by 9:30 a.m. Council Member Low agreed with Taylor that the traffic congestion was an issue and made a motion to approve staff recommendation. Mayor Pro Tem Ly made a substitute motion to include the 1 OK run Council Member Armenta asked how many runners participated in the 1 O run. Mr. Montgomery-Scott replied that approximately 22 percent of the runners participate in the 1 OK run Council Member Clark asked if staff expects more 1 OK runners and therefore more money to raise. Mayor Pro Tem Ly stated yes and that the theme would be 1 OK run on the 10th anniversary of September 11 to be held on the10t�. Council Member Clark asked what the objection to the 1 OK run was Mr. Montgomery -Scott replied that cost, the work load would be the most significant cost increase and the course would be open till 10:30 a.m. whereas the 5K run you would close the course at 9:30 a.m. Council Member Low felt that people will come and support either 5K or the 10k and she is in support of the 5K run. Council Member Armenta commended Parks and Recreation Department for the advertising of the last run and that doing the 1 OK would increase staffing, expanding the route and expressed support for the. 5K run. Mayor Pro Tem Steven Ly made a substitute motion, seconded by Council Member Margaret Clark, to support the 10K run. Vote resulted in: Yes: Clark, Ly No: Armenta, Low, Taylor Abstain: None Absent: None Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of November 23, 2010 Page 16 of 17 Council Member Polly Low made a motion, seconded by Council Member Sandra Armenta, to approve the Run for the Memorial 2011 to include a 5K and 1 -mile Run/Walk as well as other activities to raise funds for the September 11th Memorial project.. Vote resulted in: Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None Mayor Pro Tem Ly expressed concern that the City of Bell and the City of Rosemead are using the same financial auditors, Mayer Hoffman and McCann. He asked that Council look into their contract and see if the City should look into the issue. Mayor Taylor inquired about the September 11 th memorial steel beam structure. City Manager Allred stated that staff is aware of his concerns about the concrete below the beam and that people don't play on it. Council Member Armenta suggested if the beam may be placed on a platform. Mr. Montgomery-Scott replied that his concerns have been given to the artist who is looking into the issues. Mayor Taylor reiterated the direction of the High Speed Rail letter that is to be drafted because the Authority of its meeting will want some kind of report to an alternative route. Council Member Low reported on November 18th Public Safety Connection presentation with guest speaker Nick Nevares and asked if it was possible to take the presentation to a school. 9. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:43 p.m. The next regular joint Community Development Commission and City Council meeting is scheduled to take place on December 14, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m., respectively. ATTEST: 1 J Gloria Molleda City Clerk Rosemead City Council and Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of November 23, 2010 Page 17 of 17 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS. CITY OF ROSEMEAD ) I, Gloria Molleda, City Clerk for the City of Rosemead, do hereby certify that the minutes of November 23, 2010, were duly and regularly approved and adopted by the Rosemead City Council on the 8th of February 2010, by the following vote to wit: Yes: Armenta,Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor No: None Abstain: None Absent: None I�A ca Gloria Molleda City Clerk