Loading...
CC - Item 4B - Minutes of May 26, 2015 MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL, THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE ROSEMEAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JOINT MEETING MAY 26, 2015 The meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Clark at 7:01 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Council Member Low INVOCATION was led by Council Member Ly PRESENT: Mayor/Chair/President Clark, Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair/Vice President Armenta, Council Members/Board Members Alarcon, Low, Ly STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Allred, City Attorney Richman, Assistant City Manager/Acting Public Works Director Hawkesworth, Community Development Director Ramirez, Director of Parks and Recreation Montgomery-Scott, Public Works Manager Sullivan, and City Clerk Molleda. 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS Marge Filbin expressed concern about coyotes being spotted close to Rosemead High School and Encinitas School and asked what could be done. City Manager Allred advised Ms. Filbin that staff was aware of the problem and public safety and code enforcement have been trying to determine where they were coming from. Police Chief Somoano explained what the Sheriffs Department was doing to control the problem since coyotes were a protected species. Ms. Filbin asked whether the City of Rosemead was leaving the Baldwin Park Animal Control to go to the San Gabriel Humane Society. City Manager Allred advised that the City was currently served by the Los Angeles County Animal Control which was in Baldwin Park, but because it was a long way for the residents and staff to go, the City has been negotiating with San Gabriel Valley Humane Society, but no decisions have been made yet. Mayor Clark shared her understanding that the coyotes were coming down looking for food and water because of the drought. 2. PRESENTATIONS • Rosemead School District Honoring Monday Regan, Recreation Supervisor Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of May 26,2015 Page 1 of 10 ITEM NO. 4.B Dr. Amanar Perez recognized Monday Regan who has served as the PTA Council President for a number of years. Since the PTA Council meets on Monday mornings which was a work day, Ms. Regan has used her vacation time to attend the meetings. Ms. Perez wanted the City Council to be aware that Ms. Regan was honored as the PTA Council's Honorary Service Award recipient. • Platinum Scholars Honoring San Gabriel High School Student Annie Wong was presented with a scholarship award from Platinum Scholars, a non-profit organization that awards scholarships to underprivileged children. He provided a brief history of Annie's story and noted she would be the first in her family to go to college. He noted that Annie writes poetry and recites poetry to inspire other young girls Who have had similar experiences. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Adoption of Development Impact Fees Municipal Code Amendment 15-01 Recommendation: That the City Council: (1) Move to introduce first reading, by title only Ordinance No. 949, entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY REPEALING SECTION 12.44.020 (PARK AND RECREATION IMPACT FEE) OF TITLE 12, CHAPTER 12.44 AND ADDING ARTICLE 7 (DEVELOPMENT FEES), CHAPTER 17.170 (DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES) TO TITLE 17 TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES.FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT;(2)Approve Resolution No 2015-07, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CIfY,COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, ADDING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES TO THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE FEE SCHEDULE TO IMPLEMENT THE DEVELOPMENT FEE PROGRAM ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE NO. 949 Villarreal,from W Illdan Financial provided the City Council with background on the Development Impact Fees, and reviewed the framework with Council. He defined Development Impact Fees as a one-time fee imposed to ensure that new development paid for the capital cost associated with development. The fee was based on calculating new development's fair share of infrastructure and facility needs based on the demands that new development would place on the City's system of facilities through the year 2025. He advised Council of the four fee categories and the projected revenue for each through 2025. City Planner Sheri.Bermeio advised the City Council that staff received the City Council's input at the April 28th workshop and the input from the Building Industry Association's letter and staff has brought forward a fee resolution and an ordinance to implement the Development Impact Fee. She briefly advised Council the fee resolution proposed to implement the maximum justified fee over a three-year period, effective 60 days after the second reading of the ordinance. She informed the City Council what the phase-in fees for each year would be for a single family, multi-family, retail, and office industrial development. The traffic impact fee for mixed use (commercial-residential) development were lower because mixed use projects were less automobile dependent. Thereafter followed a discussion regarding the traffic fees being Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of May 26, 2015 Page 2 of 10 less for mixed use projects and the data collected by the Institute of Traffic Engineers which was used to make the fee projections. City Planner Bermeio explained the ordinance to the City Council and updated the City Council on the survey of the development impact fees; the different types of fees charged by neighboring cities and compared those cities' fees to Rosemead's proposed development impact fees. Mayor Clark opened the public hearing. There being no one wishing to speak, Mayor Clark closed the public hearing. Council Member Ly expressed concern about the fee for the single family and multi-family prototype which were on the high end of the average scale. explained that Rosemead was a residential community and he suggested reducing the proposed fee on the single family and multi-family to $6,000 - $6,500. City Manager Allred explained that staffs concern was that because of the phase in, the fees would be low the first couple of years and the City would be missing the opportunity to raise the funds needed for the projects that would have to be built. Mayor Clark agreed with Council Member Ly stating that the fee could be reduced for the single family residences, rather than mixed use, because the developer would profit on those. City Attorney Richman advised the City Council that legally the goal was to make sure there was a nexus between what the fee was and what the projected projects were so if one type of residential use was reduced, and not another, the City would have to make sure there was still a nexus. Mr. Villarreal explained staff has calculated the maximum justified fee, so it would be legal to charge a fee that was lower than the maximum. However, if the full amount of revenue was not collected from the land use, then the other and uses were being short-changed and in that situation, it was recommended to backfill the amount reduced, by another funding source that was not impact fees. A lengthy discussion ensued between the City Council, City Attorney and staff regarding lowering the impact fees for single-family residences, and backfilling the amount reduced through another funding source, such as the General Fund. City Attorney Richman confirmed that the City Council could backfill at a later date if the impact fees were backfilled properly using the General:Fund or some other non-allocated money at that time. Mayor Clark asked if it were possible for the City Council to come back in five years and see how much development has occurred, how much money was coming in from the tees and what projects were being done. Mr. Villarreal stated that it was recommended the impact fee be updated every five years, so five years from now if the project list wasn't working or the development was way off, then Council could update the fees accordingly. He confirmed there was a project list and the park fee was only paid by residential development so the park fee for single family and multi-family could be reduced to get a lower residential fee without jeopardizing the items on the project list. Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of May 26, 2015 Page 3 of 10 Council Member Armenta expressed her feelings that if the City was going to backfill the impact fees, it should not be the responsibility of the residents or the City. Council Member Low agreed with Council Member Armenta about backfilling. She felt the park fee was different and felt the City could make adjustments in the park fee. Mayor Clark asked if the park fee could be deleted on residential. Thereafter Council discussed lowering the park fee and Council's discussion at the last meeting about the residential fees being too high. Mr. Villarreal advised the City Council that the park fee for single family residential could be reduced to $4,318 which would reduce the entire fee for single family residential to $6,500. Mr. Villarreal said that multi-family residential would be reduced proportionately also. Council discussed whether to bring this item back at the next meeting. City Manager Allred suggested the ordinance be passed with instruction to lower the park fee on the multi-family residential. City Attorney Richman confirmed the ordinance could be introduced tonight and the resolution with the fees be brought back to the next meeting to be adopted when the ordinance was adopted. ACTION: Moved by Council Member Ly,and seconded by Council Member Low, to approve for first reading, Ordinance No. 949. City Attorney Richman read the title of Ordinance No. 949 into the record: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,AMENDING THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY REPEALING SECTION 12.44.020 (PARK AND RECREATION IMPACT FEE) OF TITLE 12, CHAPTER 12.44 AND ADDING ARTICLE 7 (DEVELOPMENT FEES), CHAPTER 17.170 (DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES) TO TITLE 17 TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. The motion unanimously carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alarcon, Armenta, Clark, Low and Ly. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR Items C, F, and G were pulled for discussion and separate action. A. Claims and Demands • Resolution No. 2015-26 Recommendation: to approve Resolution No. 2015 —26, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $1,544,709.18 NUMBERED 88732 THROUGH 88865 INCLUSIVELY • Resolution No. 2015- 11 Recommendation: to approve Resolution No. 2015— 11, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of May 26,2015 Page 4 of 10 THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD AS THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY OF THE ROSEMEAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF$8,350 NUMBERED 10128 THROUGH 10129 • Resolution No. 2015-05 Recommendation: to approve Resolution No. 2015 -05, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE ROSEMEAD HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $85 NUMBERED 1573 THROUGH 1574 B. National Security Seminar, US Army War College Recommendation: That the City Council authorize the attendance, at City expense for the air flight only, of Council Member Polly Low to.the National Security Seminar, US Army War College in Carlisle, PA, on June 1'-June 4th D. Highway Safety Improvement Project-Garvey Avenue Rejection of all Bids Recommendation: That the City Council reject all bids received for the Highway Safety Improvement Project-Garvey Avenue and direct staff to review and modify the scope of work and to conduct another public bid for this project. E. Traffic Signal.Improvements Project-Mission Drive and Walnut Grove Avenue Recommendation: That the City Council: (1) Approve the plans and specifications for the Traffic Signal Improvements Project, Mission Drive and Walnut Grove; and (2) Award a contract to California Professional Engineering, Inc. in an amount of$97,887.99 and authorize a contingency amount of$15,000(approximately 15%) to cover the costs of any unforeseen construction expenses. ACTION: Moved by Council Member Ly, and seconded by Council Member Armenta to approve Consent;Calendar items A, B, D, and E. Items C, F, and G were pulled for discussion. The Motion unanimously carried by the following vote: AYES: Alarcon, Armenia, Clark, Low, and Ly. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR C. Approval of Fireworks Stand Locations Recommendation: That the City Council approve the list of applicants and their stand locations, and waive the electrical permit fee. John Hynes addressed the City Council stating he owned a coin laundry on the corner of Walnut Grove and Heiman. Mr. Hynes was speaking on behalf of the tenants regarding a fireworks stand being placed in the parking lot. He indicated the owner had approached the tenants advising that if they contributed a certain amount of money, he would not allow the fireworks Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of May 26,2015 Page 5 of 10 stand to be there. Mr. Hynes then read a statement to the City Council requesting the City Council deny the approval of the retail sale of fireworks at that location because of the negative impact on the small parking lot and the businesses located there. In response to Council Member Low's concern that the City should deny the permit if it impacted the businesses, City Attorney Richman advised the Council that depending on what the Code said, denying a fireworks permit based on the location might be beyond the Council's authority. Community Development Director Michelle Ramirez informed the City Council that the only requirement for issuing an application, was the owner had to agree to the location of the stand on the owner's property. She read that section of the Code to the City Council. Thereafter followed a discussion regarding Council's authority in approving or denying the fireworks permit. Mayor Pro Tem Armenta agreed with Council Member Low that it didn't.seem fair that the businesses and customers of those businesses were affected because of the fireworks stands. Her understanding of the Code was that the City Manager could determine whether or not he saw fit to determine if the location was appropriate.: She felt that parking was an issue and was within the City Manager's purview to deny the application. City Attorney Richman stated that after reading the Code,the City Council did have the authority to place some conditions on the issuance of the permit. Thereafter followed a lengthy discussion regarding the issue. Council Member Ly understood the impact it had on Mr. Hynes' business, but he felt>it was a dispute between him as a tenant and the property owner. Council Member Low stated that if the City Council could not do anything at this time, the ordinance should be looked at and asked the City Attorney if that was possible. City Attorney Richman stated that the City Council was allowed to condition; however, the information to know what that condition would be at this point in time was unknown. Further discussion ensued about having to make a decision by June 1st; bringing the ordinance back in the future,and talking to the property owner. ACTION: Moved by Council Member Ly, and seconded by Council Member Alarcon to approve the list of applicants and locations per staffs recommendation. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Alarcon, Armenta, Clark, Low and Ly. F. City's Water Use Plan at Facilities, Parks and Infrastructure to Achieve Mandatory Conservation Requirements Recommendation: That the City Council receive and file the report. City Manager Allred advised the City Council that a comprehensive report was included identifying the Plan to reduce water usage in each of the City's facilities to comply with the Governor's mandate of a 25% reduction in water usage. Mayor Clark expressed concern about maintaining the landscaping at the Dinsmoor House. Staff confirmed that it was staffs intention to keep everything alive, at the Dinsmoor House, but Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of May 26, 2015 Page 6 of 10 the City did have to adhere to the two day a week water schedule. He advised that the proposal to eliminate the irrigation in the front would only be if the water companies or Governor imposed further regulations. PUBLIC COMMENTS Brian Lewin expressed his support for the portion of the report where it mentioned replacement with drought tolerant landscaping as the first option of choice as opposed to artificial turf, advising the reasons for his support. He also suggested the City look at ways to reduce water inside the facilities mentioning ways to do that. Council Member Ly agreed with Mr. Lewin's suggestions. Mayor Clark also agreed with Mr. Lewin's suggestions and requested staff look into waterless urinals and other water reduction equipment especially for any new buildings. The report was received and filed by the City Council. G. LASD Annual Service Level Authorization Recommendation: That the City Council approve the Service Level Authorization with the Los Angeles County Sheriffs'Department and authorize the City Manager to sign any necessary documentation. Mayor Pro Tern Armenta complemented the Sheriffs Department on their service, but expressed her concern about the!lack of communication between the Sheriffs Department and the City Council. She advised of two incidents'.at:Emerson School involving the use of a helicopter. She received several phone calls from concerned residents but did not have any information to respond to their concerns. Council Member Low asked what the notification protocol was for those types of situations. City Manager Allred advised that the Police Chief would contact the City Manager or Assistant City Manager on very serious incidents such as a shooting or death, and staff immediately called the Council. He explained the particular situation mentioned by Mayor Pro Tem Armenta was on a Friday, city hall was closed, and the Police Chief was off so staff was not notified until Mayor Pro Tem Armenta called. Police Chief Samoan advised that when he was off and a serious incident occurred the watch commander wouldrotify him or Sgt. Moreno. He then explained the helicopter was a very useful tool in law enforcement and not just used for serious incidents advising the City Council why the helicopter was being used on those occasions. Council Member Low asked if it was possible to send a quick text message to the City Council in those circumstances. Police Chief Somoano advised the Council that they could call the watch commander to find out why the helicopter was flying over any part of Rosemead. Council Member Ly felt that one of the benefits of the sheriffs contract was the resources of the full sheriffs department and the power of the Temple Station. He felt that whenever Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of May 26, 2015 Page 7 of 10 possible the City Council should be notified because the Council did receive questions from residents all of the time. He stated the Sheriff's Department was doing a phenomenal job here in the City. ACTION: Moved by Council Member Ly, and seconded by Council Member Low to approve the contract with the Sheriffs Department for this year. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Alarcon, Armenta, Clark, Low and Ly Mayor Clark suggested that if something occurred in the middle of the night, a group text or email be sent to the City Council. Council Member Ly did not wish to be included in a group text; however a group email was okay. 5. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER & STAFF A. Garvey Avenue Medians—Turf Removal Project Recommendation: That the City Council provide direction regarding the turf removal project on the Garvey Avenue Medians. City Manager Allred advised the City Council that two options were being presented to Council. One option was to remove the turf on the medians and replace it with drought tolerant landscaping, or remove the turf and replace it with artificial turf, or a combination of both. Public Works Manager Sean Sullivan advised there was$100,000 budgeted for this project and in addition, there was approximately$28,000 in turf removal rebates, In order to receive that funding the City needed to complete one of the options being presented to Council. He informed Council there were 15 medians on Garvey Avenue. Council Member Low felt that staff should determine what makes sense; in one area it may make sense to use artificial turf and in another use drought tolerant landscaping. Mayor Clark asked if the City was allowed to drip irrigate plants if drought tolerant plants were planted. Mr. Sullivan responded that drip irrigation was permitted; however the existing drip irrigation system has been severely impacted by the trees on the medians and the installation of new irrigation system along the medians would be cost prohibitive. Any landscape that was planted would be manually watered by the existing landscape contractor. Council Member Ly personally felt that the best solution was to use drought tolerant landscaping because it looked nicer, was better for the environment and would encourage the residents to move toward that direction. Mayor Clark agreed with Council Member Ly noting that driving up Garvey, several medians have lots of trees and it would not be practical to put artificial turf. Mayor Pro tern Armenta agreed with Council Member Low to allow staff to look at the individual medians and determine whether or not it called for drought resistant plants or the artificial turf. Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of May 26, 2015 Page 8 of 10 Council Member Low moved, and seconded by Council Member Ly to do a hybrid of drought tolerant landscaping and artificial turf with drought tolerant landscaping taking priority. The motion unanimously carried by the following vote: AYES: Alarcon, Armenta, Clark, Low, and Ly 6. MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL A. SB 355 (Lara) Rivers and Mountains Conservancy Board Representation Recommendation: That the City Council provide direction on this matter. City Manager Allred advised this item was placed on the Agenda by Mayor Clark. There has been legislation introduced that would change the makeup of the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy Board of Directors. Mayor Clark has drafted a letter of opposition unless amended and the letter states the way it would need to be amended to be acceptable. Mayor Clark added for clarification, that this legislation would not affect her but it would affect some of the board members who were on the Board. A brief discussion ensued on changing the City's position if the legislation was amended to be acceptable. Mayor Pro Tem Armenta stated she would not be approving the opposition letter. She did not have enough information and she had a problem with part 1 where it states, we do not wish to lose the only one of our voting seats that currently is filled!" Council Member Low expressed her concern that she did not see how this legislation directly impacted the City and she was riot comfortable with having the City send out an opposition letter. She felt as an individual, the Mayor could send a letter of opposition. Council Member Ly asked what the overall service area of the Conservancy was. Mayor Clark advised it was from the northern mountains to the ocean, including Orange County. Thereafter followed a'brief discussion about protecting cities' rights to how representatives were appointed to the board, the elimination of one of the seats and the reduction of the overall board membership. Mayor Clark explained the manner in which this was being done could happen to the City in the future. She noted that she thought a compromise was in the works,that even the author of the bill would be comfortable with but the City needed to voice its opposition. Council Member Ly felt this bill was indicative of Sacramento to limit local governments voice by taking away local:government's representation on local bodies. He was very concerned about this trend. Council Member Ly moved, and seconded by Mayor Clark, to take a position of opposition to this Bill, unless amended, authorize the City Manager to lift that opposition should favorable language come about, and eliminating the parenthetical sentence in part 1. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Alarcon, Clark and Ly. NOES: Armenta and Low. Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of May 26,2015 Page 9 of 10 7. COUNCIL COMMENTS Council Member Ly was excited to see the upcoming skate park design workshop coming up on June 171h. He provided a list of emails and contact information from all the students and children who were present at the meeting and asked they be contacted. He also commended staff for a wonderful and lovely Memorial Day program. Mayor Pro Tern Armenta noted that she would be in Vallejo on June 17th and would not be able to attend the skate park design workshop. She also thanked David Montgomery-Scott and his team, and the public works department for their hard work for both the City's and Savannah's Memorial Day Service, mentioning how beautiful the program was. Council Member Alarcon advised that he and the Chief of Police attended a memorial for fallen officers earlier in the week that was very emotional. Council Member Clark pointed out that she would have liked to have attended the June 17th Workshop for the design of the skate plaza, but she would also be out of town. She asked if, in the future, staff could query Council to see if the date and time were good for them. She asked if the meeting would have to be posted if there were more than three council members present. City Attorney Richman confirmed that if there were going to be three members of the Council present at the workshop, then it had to be noticed. Thereafter followed a discussion of how to post the workshop so that it met the requirements of the Brown Act. Mayor Pro Tem Armenta announced that due to bad weather, the Relay for Life luminaria ceremony was not held after the event. Therefore, the luminaria ceremony for the Relay for Life would be held on Thursday,June 25Th at Zapopan Park from 7:30 pm. to 9:00 pm. Mayor Pro Tem Armenta also announced that the City would be taking a break from hosting the Relay for Life due to the loss of volunteers. She then advised the City Council of some of the reasons for the loss of volunteers. Council Member Ly suggested that an alternative event to fund raise to fight cancer be considered. 8. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, Mayor Clark adjourned the meeting at 924 p.m. The next regular City Council meeting is scheduled to take place on June at 7:00 p.m. in the Rosemead City Hall Council Chamber. Carol Cowley, Interim City Clerk APPROVED: Margaret Clark, Mayor Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of May 26,2015 Page 10 of 10