Loading...
CC - Item 5B - Minutes of January 26, 2016 MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE ROSEMEAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JOINT MEETING JANUARY 26,2016 WORKSHOP 6:00 P.M. The workshop of the Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission was called to order by Mayor/Chair Clark at 6:03 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead,California. PRESENT: Mayor/Chair Clark, Mayor Pro TemNice-Chair Armenta, Council Members/Board Members Alarcon, Hall, and Low STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Allred, City Attorney Richman, Community Development Director Ramirez, Interim Public Works Director La, Interim Director of Parks and Recreation Soash, and Interim City Clerk Cowley. 1. Workshop on Metro Grants for Improvements to Valley Boulevard and Garvey Avenue City Manager Allred introduced the item indicating the workshop is a continuation from a workshop held in November to discuss two items involving Metro Grant opportunities for Valley Boulevard and Garvey Avenue. A. Valley Boulevard Interim Public Works Director Anthony La provided the staff report indicating the Metro Grant is for Valley Boulevard from Charlotte Avenue to Temple City Boulevard, approximately 1.7 miles in length. He advised the City Council that Rosemead was selected for the grant in 2011 for Fiscal Year 2015-2016 and Fiscal Year 2016-2017. The grant is for approximately$781,000 with a local match requirement of about $639,000 for a total project cost of$1.4 million. He advised the funding does specify the inclusion of raised center medians all the way from Walnut Grove to Mission Drive. The grant also requires the City to restrict on-street parking on both sides of the street during the morning hours from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and the evening hours between 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to allow for three eastbound and westbound lanes during those peak hours. The third condition for the grant is to put in a bike route which is just signage—no striping. Mr. La explained the grant improvements would help move mobility and the raised medium would provide some safety so there are some benefits; but there are also several challenges in implementing this project. He advised the challenges would be the loss of parking on both sides of the street during the peak hours. Another challenge is the north side of the street just west of Walnut Grove is located in the City of San Gabriel, which means if the project is implemented to restrict on-street parking that would require full cooperation from the City of San Gabriel. He added,on the north side of the street east of Rio Hondo to Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26. 2016 Page l of 16 ITEM NO. 5.B west of Temple City Boulevard is located in the City of El Monte and therefore would need cooperation from El Monte for the restricted parking as well. The fourth challenge is if a raised center median is built as required by Metro,there will be left ingress and egress impacts to the adjacent businesses. He noted the cost for the project would be close to$2.3 million because of the raised medians which means the City would have to pay$1.5 million to receive a $781,000 grant because of the high expense of constructing raised medians. Mayor Pro Tem Armenta commented that the people who applied for the grant are no longer with the City and as she has stated several times, decisions are made without the City Council being given an opportunity to provide input until after the City receives the grant. She felt that when the City asks for grants, everyone needs to be taken into consideration including the residents and businesses. She mentioned speaking to businesses and the negative impacts this would have on their businesses, in particular Jim's Burgers. She felt the project would make more sense if El Monte,Monterey Park, and San Gabriel were included. The GPS system Apps will indicate cutting through Rosemead as a faster route because there will be six lanes. This will cause more traffic conditions on the City's streets. She expressed her concerns regarding the traffic and parking problems this project will create in the City and mentioned the complaints the Council already receives regarding parking. She asked where the medians will be constructed. Interim Public Works Director La responded that the medians would be constructed between Walnut Grove and Temple City Boulevard with median breaks at intersections. Mr. La also responded to her question regarding the impact of going from six lanes in Rosemead down to four lanes in the neighboring cities stating that she was correct in pointing out that people may use WAYS App or other tools and traffic will flow based on the shortest or quickest route, using those apps. Mr. La advised Ms.Armenta that the City did not have any data on the impacts. Council Member Ly confirmed that the grant has not yet been accepted and stated that it was his understanding the staff applies for grants,which Council encourages staff to do. The grant then comes before the Council in this type of forum where residents and the Council have an opportunity to voice their opinions and decide whether or not to accept the grant. He did not think Mr. La's predecessors did anything wrong in applying for grants; that's what Council wants staff to do. Council does not want the taxpayers to foot the total bill. He said whether or not this is a good grant is before the Council to discuss. He confirmed with Interim Public Works Director La that staff was not recommending the grant be accepted. Mr. La affirmed that staff is concerned with the impacts from accepting this money. Mr. Ly continued that there is a good indication that even though staff applied for this grant, it is good to have a conversation about it and staff is recommending the City not take this grant because it will cost too much based on what the City will receive. He felt that the impact would be too much on Valley Boulevard; however,there is definitely a need to improve capacity along Valley and Garvey and optimally not with City money. Finding grants is a way that makes sense for the residents and businesses. B. Garvey Avenue Interim Public Works Director La presented the staff report indicating the grant is for the area from New Avenue to the east City limit which is just over the Rio Hondo Bridge. He pointed out the boundaries for Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of January 16, 1016 Page 2 of16 this project is much larger than the boundaries for the Specific Plan; a total of 2.3 miles. Mr. La gave a quick overview that on September 22"d the City learned it would be receiving the grant and it became official on September 24, 2016 when the Metro Board voted to award the City$2.3 million in funding for Garvey Avenue. He advised that on October 14,the Garvey Avenue Specific Plan Ad Hoc Committee met and on November 171'the City held a community workshop at the Public Safety Center to inform the public of the project and grant. On November 24t a City Council workshop was held and that was when the item was continued until tonight. Mr. La explained that the MTA grant funding has conditions. Beginning in Fiscal Year 2020-2021 parking would be restricted on the north side only between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. to allow for a third west bound lane; and the south side only between 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to allow for a third eastbound lane. The City will have to implement the project and restrict parking four years from now. It also requires bike route signs and the City would have to contribute $992,000 to receive the$2.3 million. He advised the City Council of the benefits and impacts to the community. The benefits are mobility improvement for Garvey Avenue as well as access improvement for the adjacent businesses; $2.3 million for landscaping, sidewalks and signal lights. This grant is for$2.3 million and only requires restricted parking which can be done with signage. The remaining funds can be used for traffic Improvements, pedestrian lighting, sidewalk and landscaping and some level of traffic mitigation measures for existing or future development. Mr. La explained the impacts of loss of some on-street parking on the north side between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and on the south side between 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. beginning some time in 2020 and 2021. City Manager Allred added that the Garvey grant does not require the installation of any more medians. Council Member Ly confirmed that staff is recommending we accept this grant. Mayor Pro Tem Armenta confirmed that nowhere in the staff report does staff make a recommendation to accept the grant; noting it can be assumed that staff is recommending this grant based on the pros and cons. Mayor Clark invited public comments. Jimmy Duong, whose family has businesses on both Valley Boulevard and Garvey Avenue expressed his family's opposition to the Valley Boulevard improvements. He also expressed support for the Garvey Avenue project with the restricted parking during peak hours. Peter Ta who owns property on Valley Boulevard expressed his opposition to the grant for Valley Boulevard. Vella Navarro expressed her opposition to both Valley Boulevard and Garvey Avenue grants because the businesses will be losing money if they cannot park curbside. Beverly Morten, President of the El Monte Cemetery Association was opposed to the Valley Boulevard grant which would be detrimental due to the parking impacts to the cemetery when a funeral is in progress and when the volunteers help clean up the cemetery. Council Member Ly thanked Ms. Morten for all she does for the cemetery noting it is a landmark. Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2016 Page 3 of 16 Ron Esquivel was opposed to the Valley Boulevard plan agreeing with Mayor Pro Tem Armenta's concern regarding the funneling down of traffic. He also felt the lack of parking will hurt business tremendously. James Dean who works on Valley Boulevard between Hart and Mission expressed his concerns about the parking on Valley Boulevard and was opposed to the project. Torn Le who has a law office on Valley Boulevard across from the cemetery expressed his opposition to the project due to the limited parking spaces. ACTION: Moved by Council Member Ly, and seconded by Council Member Armenta,to decline the grant for Valley Boulevard. The motion unanimously carried by the following vote: AYES: Alarcon, Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly. Mayor Clark opened the public comments for the Garvey Avenue grant. William Chen who owns property on Garvey Avenue expressed concern about the restricted parking on the south side of Garvey during peak hours which would impact the businesses on his property. He was opposed to the project. Ernestine Bacio expressed concern about the traffic and the elimination of parking spaces along Valley and Garvey. Brian Lewin thanked Council for making Valley Boulevard a moot point. He registered his opposition to the Garvey Avenue project expressing his reasons including the loss of the Class I and Class II bike lanes proposed in the Specific Plan;the increase of traffic and the danger to the bicycle riders during peak hours. He asked the City Council not to accept the grant. Kai Kyi who owns businesses on Garvey Avenue was in support of the grant which would beautify Garvey Avenue, stating he was opposed to bike lanes. Daniel Deng who owns a business on Garvey felt that any improvement on Garvey is better than no improvement. He felt the Traffic Commissioners and City Council can work together to get the best use of the funds to improve Garvey Boulevard. He was in favor of accepting the grant and working with the community to address the concerns of the people. James Wang who owns property on Garvey Avenue understood the City was going to build a parking lot at the park. Mayor Pro Tem Armenta clarified the City was not building a parking lot at the park. City Manager Allred thought Mr. Wang was talking about the improvements the City was going to make to the parking lot at Zapopan Park which is next to his business. Mr. Allred explained there will be signage indicating the parking lot is for public parking. It will be the first public parking the City will have in its history. Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2016 Page 4 of 16 Ms. Armenta confirmed that it is a parking lot which may or may not include additional parking but it is not a parking structure. Mayor Clark advised that Chris Melendrez attended the workshop and turned in many signatures against the Garvey project at the workshop. Mr. Melendrez planned to attend the meeting and bring several people with him but unfortunately, his father passed away last night. Mr. Melendrez asked Mayor Clark to express his opposition to the project. Mr. Melendrez raised several issues at the workshop, one of which was why bother with the project if the speed limits were not going to be increased. Another issue, which was expressed several times is that many businesses do not have parking in the back for their customers so there would be no parking at all. Mayor Clark mentioned again the signatures Mr. Melendrez collected in opposition to the Garvey Avenue grant. Council Member Ly realized there is a lot of concem about the Garvey Avenue grant and as someone who lives about 150 to 200 feet away from Garvey Avenue, he understands the concerns. However,the fact that he lives so close, and the fact that he thinks the City needs this grant, shows that it is something that would really benefit the City. Every single resident that has addressed the City Council has stated that traffic is an issue. They say it is hard to get onto Valley and hard to get onto Garvey and that they have to use smaller streets to connect to. The fact of the matter is it is going to get worse over time. If the City doesn't find a way to increase capacity along the major streets then there will be further and further back up along the area over the next ten to twenty years. He mentioned the streets were already graded as Ds and Fs. Those grades are only going to get worse. Council Member Ly mentioned the street routes he takes when traffic on the freeway is heavy so he can bypass the traffic, realizing it is unfair to the residents on those streets. He believes the auto auction site and the Lanwin site is a catalystic project along that corridor. Something great is going to happen there one day. The problem is if the City does not improve capacity and does not fix the problem of traffic now, it is only going to get worse. He shares the Mayor's concerns about Class III bike lanes, which are unprotected bike lanes that have no barriers,that's why he pushed very hard for Class I protected bike lanes along that corridor. In order to make sure that the pedestrians, the drivers and the bicyclists are safe protected bike lanes are necessary. Part of the money in this grant can be used to study how to do that. Mr. Ly confirmed with Interim Public Works Director La that if the City accepts the grant it would not be until 2020. Council Member Ly feels this grant is very important expressing the reasons why. If the City accepts the Metro grant, the City can shift$2 million of the City's general fund money into somethings such as improving services, park space,expanding efforts to bring in quality development in the city, improving public safety. Mayor Pro Tern Armenta felt if the City accepts this grant the parameters are not going to change whether the improvements are done now or in ten years. She felt there were so many grants available that do not require the City to go from a four lane street to a six lane street and the City has capable staff that can get grants and not have to limit the parking. She felt Metro is being very stringent on what the parameters are. In a perfect world if El Monte and Monterey Park were to come together to have one full stretch of six lane highway from the east to the west, then maybe it would somehow divert the traffic flow. She is not willing to have Rosemead and its residents be the guinea pig to see whether or not traffic flow is going to continue especially when the City doesn't have the data to know what happens when the additional lane ends at El Monte and Monterey Park. Modern technology will direct people who don't live or shop in Rosemead to go Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes ofJanuary 26, 2016 Page 5 of 16 onto Garvey because it is a six lane street. She stated she teaches on the south side and she drives Garvey all the time and knows the improvements that need to be made on Garvey, but she is not willing for the businesses to collapse because there is no parking. She would love to know where the City is going to get all of these parking lots when the City is built out. All of the property is being bought to do mixed use projects. She did not think someone would sell their property to build a parking lot. She felt the reality is if the City decides to accept the grant, it will have to live within its parameters and it is going to be detrimental to the residents. She reiterated her concerns about people being directed down Garvey Avenue from their GPS systems, which would create more traffic and cause them to use residential streets when Garvey becomes congested. Council Member Low expressed her thoughts indicating she hoped everyone understands Council is trying to do the best thing for the City. She acknowledged everyone agrees that Garvey needs to be improved. She confirmed the parameters set by the grant is to install bike lanes and the loss of parking on one side of the street in the momings from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and on the other side of the street from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Interim Public Works Director La clarified that it is a bike route which is to install signage to that effect. In response to Council Member Low's question regarding the benefits of accepting this grant, Interim Public Works Director La responded that strictly from a traffic standpoint and money standpoint having money to beautify the corridor because the third lane is only parking restrictions therefore there is money left to do sidewalk improvements, it would benefit development. Council Member low noted that the City needs more parking and she has talked to the City Manager to find ways to purchase lots to turn into public parking. She felt that is a way to mitigate the parking problems. She found it interesting that the City of Rosemead does not have any public parking lots. She felt it was a good thing to have the extra lane because by adding the extra lane, traffic is moving and people don't need to go zig-zagging onto side streets. After thinking about everything, she would like Council to give Garvey a chance to change. Mayor Clark called the regular meeting to order at 7:20 p.m. and recessed to the workshop for continued discussion on Garvey Avenue. Mayor Clark expressed her view that the City was not increasing capacity; it is preventing people from stopping and patronizing the businesses. In addition, people will be using the WAYS App which will tell people to go on Garvey instead of Valley and those are people that are not living and shopping in the City; they only want to get downtown as fast as they can. The reason Metro wants to give the City this money is to move traffic faster to downtown. She felt that is not her job; her job is to take care of the City's businesses and residents. It is unfair to those people who live off of Garvey that want to get onto Garvey to go someplace and it is going to be impossible. Several businesses stated they don't have parking spaces for people to park. Secondly, the City will be committing $1 million to match the grant and in order to build all of these parking lots, the City will have to buy land which is very expensive. She did not know how many parking lots the City can buy but she felt people are not going to stop in a parking structure and walk two or three blocks to get there. She felt parking structures were fine in a shopping center like the Target Shopping Center. To say the City will mitigate taking the parking taken from people by building structures Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26. 2016 Page 6 of 16 and parking lots was ridiculous. She suggested If the City has$1 million to match the grant then spend it on Garvey and do the things to improve it, but not buy land for parking that is being taken away. Council Member Alarcon discussed having commuted for many years, and he felt that opening a third lane on Garvey would bring more people off the freeways. He felt hose people were not going to stop to eat or to shop; they are going to go home. He also mentioned walking on Garvey Avenue and he felt it would be dangerous for the pedestrians walking on Garvey and crossing the side streets. Mayor Pro Tern Armenta and Interim Public Works Director La entered into a dialogue regarding the funds the City would use to match the grant and what can be done with those funds to improve Garvey Avenue. Interim Public Works Director La advised the money that is required to match is at the discretion of the City Council and most cities use Prop C or t Gas Tax funds as a local match, indicating it is hard to quantify how far a million dollars will go because the City will have to determine what to do with it. If Council is talking about decorative sidewalks and street lights, the City will probably be able to do a quarter of a mile on each side. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Armenta, Interim Public Works Director La advised he did not know the number of grants available that the City can apply for to use for the Garvey corridor without having to restrict parking. He explained most of the grants are federal or state money to be used for mobility, or air quality oriented, which means agencies would compete by demonstrating how we would improve air quality. Projects that improve mobility or air quality competes much better than beautification projects. Mayor Pro Tem Armenta suggested the City look for grants for protected bike lanes, and maybe receive a little more to improve Garvey corridor. Council Member Ly agreed with Mayor Clark regarding the unfairness to those people who live close to Garvey; knowing the effect he and his neighbors encounter when Garvey is impacted. He felt if Garvey isn't improved, it is only going to get worse. In terms of how the City pays for parking, the City Council recently passed a Development Impact Fee (DIF)which includes funds to buy some lots for parking. He understands the hesitation this Council has but he thought Council Member Low said it best when she said that if nothing happens in ten years do we believe things are going to improve. Council Member Ly felt the answer was no. Things don't suddenly improve. Traffic doesn't just suddenly flow better. It's only going to get worse as time goes on because there is only going to be more people as time goes on. By improving and adding a third lane for 2.3 miles, the people that benefit will be the residents because they will be able to get off the freeway at New, Del Mar and San Gabriel Boulevard and take the service streets to get home much quicker. It will also benefit those people who live off of Hellman, Emerson, Marshall,or any of the east west parallels that run along the corridor. Interim Public Works Director confirmed for Council Member Low that grants tend to tie to air quality improvement, meaning to demonstrate a reduction in emissions is when a project competes better for the grant. He also confirmed that by using the$2.3 million for mobility, the City can use its matching funds for beautification. Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes ofJanuary 26, 2016 Page 7 of 16 ACTION: Moved by Council Member Ly, and seconded by Council Member Low, to table this grant and instruct staff to look for grants for improvements on Garvey that don't eliminate parking and revisit the issue only if we can't find any other grants. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Alarcon,Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly. There being no further business to come before the Council, the workshop adjourned at 7:38 p.m. REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. The workshop of the Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission was called to order by Mayor//Chair Clark at 7:20 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead,California. The meeting was recessed until 7:47, at which time Mayor/Chair Clark reconvened the meeting. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Mayor/Chair Clark. INVOCATION was led by Mayor Pro TemNice Chair Armenta. PRESENT: Mayor/Chair Clark, Mayor Pro TemNice-Chair Armenta, Council Members/Board Members Alarcon, Hall, and Low STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Allred, City Attorney Richman, Community Development Director Ramirez, Interim Public Works Director La, Interim Director of Parks and Recreation Soash, and Interim City Clerk Cowley. 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE Rob Oehler spoke on behalf of the Rosemead Chamber of Commerce expressing gratitude to Jeff Allred for all he has done over the years and specifically requested Mr. Allred to extend and postpone his retirement until the end of the year. Jean Hall shared some comments she has received from residents regarding the departure of so many people at City Hall. She asked the City Council to re-examine the retirement date of Jeff Allred. She suggested that perhaps Council was too hasty in accepting his resignation. She discussed some of the accomplishments under Mr. Allred's tenure and asked that he consider postponing his retirement and stay on with the City. Daniel Deng stated the City has been very lucky to have Jeff as its City Manager for the past seven years. He expressed his gratitude for all that Mr.Alfred has done and hoped he would stay longer. Cynthia Imperial thanked the City Council for the Jay Imperial Park that is moving forward. She also thanked City Manager Allred for everything he has done as City Manager. Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26.2016 Page 8 of16 Jimmy Wang on behalf of the Rosemead Sister City Committee, expressed his hope that Jeff Allred will stay with the City much longer. Ron Esquivel stated it is rare to find a city manager that really cares about the City. He attends a lot of events and Jeff is always there and he chooses to be at the events because his heart is in it. He expressed his mixed feelings of wanting Jeff to enjoy his retirement but at the same time, he felt the City needed him. He urged Mr.Allred to reconsider his retirement and think about postponing it for a little while. He acknowledged Mr.Allred's accomplishments, Mayor Pro Tern Armenta remembers the exact date Jeff started working for the City June 15, 2009. 3. PRESENTATIONS None 4. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Claims and Demands • Resolution No. 2016-03 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $1,601,443.87 NUMBERED 91220 THROUGH 91371 INCLUSIVELY Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No.2016-03 • Resolution No. 2016-02 SA entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD AS THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE ROSEMEAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF$593.17 NUMBERED 10160 Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2016-02 SA B. Approval of Minutes • Minutes of December 8, 2015 Recommendation: Approve the Minutes of December 8, 2015 C. National League of Cities 2016 Congressional City Conference—March 5th through 9th, Washington, DC Recommendation: That the City Council authorize the attendance, at City expense,of any Council Member that wishes to attend the National League of Cities Congressional City Conference in Washington D.C. from March 5, 2016 through March 9, 2016. Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2016 Page 9 of 16 D. Second Reading — Ordinance No. 2016-02 — Omnibus Ordinance Ratifying all Ordinances Adopted by the City Council from 2012 through 2015 Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 2016-02"An Omnibus Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Rosemead, California, Ratifying Ordinances Adopted Between 2012 and 2015: E. Housing Element 2015 Annual Progress Report Recommendation: That the City Council receive and file the City's 2015 Housing Element Annual Progress Report. F. Rosemead Public Works Yard Project(Project No. 31016)—Award of Contract Recommendation: That the City Council (1) approve the plans and specifications for Project No. 31016, Rosemead Public Works Yard project; (2) award the construction contract to CEM Construction, Corp. in the amount of$518,000, and authorize a construction contingency of$51,800 (10%), for a total of $569,800; and (3) adopt Resolution No. 2016-03 appropriating an additional $100,000 from Genera Fund Reserve for the project. ACTION: Moved by Council Member Ly,and seconded by Council Member Alarcon,to approve the Consent Calendar with the de minimis changes to the December 8,2015 Minutes. The motion unanimously carried by the following vote: AYES: Alarcon, Armenta,Clark, Low, Ly, 5. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER&STAFF A. Klingerman Street/Angelus Avenue Curve Traffic Evaluation Recommendation: The Traffic Commission recommends that the City Council approve Willdan's technical recommendations, as follows: (1) Install all-way "STOP" control at the intersection of Angelus Avenue and Graves Avenue; (2) Install interlocking delineators and raised round markers along the curve at Klingerman Street and Angelus Avenue; and (3) Install additional "Chevron' sign(s) on each approach to the curve. Interim Public Works Director La introduced Joanne Itagaki of Wildan Engineering who is the City's professional traffic engineer to present the traffic evaluation for the Klingerman/Angelus curve in the City of Rosemead. Joanne ltagaki presented an analysis of the technical report presented to the Traffic Commission. The analysis was made on the curve at Angeles and Klingerman Streets; which is called an L curve turning northbound to westbound. The curve is signed with advance markings and signs in both the northbound and eastbound directions. She advised the technical analysis included observation of the intersection and the location in the general area. She indicated they looked at the three year collision history of the whole Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2016 Page 10 of 16 area; and took 24 hour traffic count; as well as A.M. and P.M. peak hour traffic counts at Angeles, Graves, and Klingerman and San Gabriel which included pedestrians were taken 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and 2:15 p.m. to 3:15 p.m. Ms. Itagaki advised they also did an origin and destination survey which is basically a license plate survey looking at cars entering and exiting that area where they were coming from and where they were going. A radar speed survey was taken of speeds approaching and departing on the curve. To address the concerns with regard to speed and safety around the curve they looked at possible mid-block closure at the curve; looking at some supplemental traffic control devices which included stop controls and the California Manual Uniform Traffic Control Devices which provides guidelines for the installation of stop signs. Those guidelines include review of reported collisions, the volume of traffic and other criteria with regard to pedestrian movement, visibility and things like that. She provided an example of the half closure explaining to Mayor Clark that half closure would prohibit entrance on the curve from one direction; but that would result in vehicles being diverted to other streets in the area. She also looked at interlocking delineators as a supplemental traffic control device which is one of the recommendations. She was also recommending the addition of Chevron signs on Klingerman pointing in the northbound direction of the curve and adding a chevron sign in the eastbound direction from Klingerman to Angeles. She advised their technical recommendations are to install the Interlocking delineators in the same location where the delineators are currently located and to add the chevron signs. They are recommending the posting of an all way stop at the intersection of Graves and Angeles because they found there are a lot of pedestrian and vehicle conflicts,especially during school hours and this would help to reduce that conflict of pedestrians crossing when vehicles are going north and south as well as pedestrians crossing west with conflicts of cars turning left and right. This will also help to condition the drivers to stop before they enter the Intersection and reduce the northbound vehicle speed as they are approaching the intersection. Mayor Pro Tern Armenta noted that she teaches as Rice Elementary and when the stop sign was installed at Kent and Angeles, the school principal at the time was very adamant about not putting a stop sign at that location because there is a teachers' parking lot there and it would conflict with teachers trying to get in and out during peak hours. Mayor Pro Tem Armenta discussed her findings regarding the recommendations and mentioned in the City of Pica Rivera there is the exact type of curve on Gallatin and Paramount and stop signs were installed before the curve in each direction. She felt that stop signs should be placed before the curve on Klingerman and Angeles. Ms. Itagaki advised she does not know the circumstances behind the stop signs at the other location but from their perspective, stop signs are used to determine right-of-way where there are conflicts with cross traffic and things like that. She reiterated Wildan's technical recommendation is not to install stop signs before the curve. After Mayor Pro Tem Armenta reiterated her concerns about the need for stop signs in that location, Ms. Itagaki responded that they did look at placing stop signs before the curve but their technical recommendation was not to do that. Grace Garner on behalf of Garvey School District read a letter from the current principal at Rice Elementary School to the District expressing the school's concern about traffic and students safety. The proposed stop signs at Rice would be beneficial in that it would ensure that traffic speed would be slower. This would insure student safety. In addition, the crossing guards' safety would benefit from the slower speeds that signs will Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes ofJanuary 26, 20/6 Page 11 of 16 bring. She expressed the principal's appreciation of the City thinking about the students and looking at ways to help the school and community. Velia Navarro thanked the City Council for taking her situation seriously. She totally disagrees with the engineers that performed the study on Angeles and Klingerman. They don't live there and the black wires need to be there seven/24 so they know what she has to go through getting out of her driveway. She advised the City Council what she has to do in order to turn into her driveway. She indicated that she did not receive the notice of the Traffic Commission meeting so she was unable to attend and discuss the situation. She is happy that the Council is concerned about the children at Angeles and Graves, but what about her and her family. She wants to be safe and does not want to see all of the signs posted. She asked why bot dots can't be installed. She has seen people deliberately hit the delineator poles. She felt the study was a waste of money. She feels her life is in jeopardy and asked how the City is going to help her. She agreed with Mayor Pro Tern Armenia about the stop signs and she wanted bot dots also. In response to Council Member Lys question regarding the concern if the City did install stop signs before the curve, Ms. Itagaki responded that the installation of stop signs was the choice of the City Council. From the engineer's perspective the use of a stop sign would be a non-standard installation of a stop sign. He advised there are specific guidelines laid out in the Califomia Manual Uniform Stop Sign Control Devices where the collision history is looked at, the volume of traffic, the volume of opposing traffic,side street traffic come into play when determining a need for a stop sign. She indicated in this case because there is no opposing traffic. Thereafter followed a discussion regarding the ramifications of installing a stop sign and City Attorney Richman advised cities have immunity under the law but if the City does certain things that create a dangerous condition of property then those immunities cannot be invoked. She felt the question is will those changes create a dangerous condition and she can't answer that question. Thereafter followed a brief discussion on the interpretation of a dangerous condition. Council Member Ly asked the Traffic Engineer if the City added stop signs before the curve and she were asked to testify on this issue, whether that would meet the threshold of the City adding to a dangerous condition. Ms. Itagaki stated the report has already stated that Wildan Engineers would not be in support of it. It is already stated in the report that that would be a non-standard installation; there are no cross street traffic where one has to worry about right-of-way issues. Council Member Low addressed the issue stating the problem is cars going east on Klingerman.The solution proposed is not going to solve the problem at all; the City would be doing the same thing it did several years ago that didn't work. She mentioned she emailed the public works director a picture of a curve in Monterey Park and the City of Monterey Park installed a stop sign there which really helped the residents. Council Member Low felt to stop sign would help on Angeles. She felt the solutions proposed will not solve the problem at all. Just because it doesn't fit using the guidelines, it needs to be looked at using common sense. Council Member Low asked if there was any way the City Council can approve the installation of a stop sign. Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of.lanuary 26, 2016 Page 12 of 16 City Attorney Richman advised that the City Council has the authority under the Vehicle Code to approve a stop sign by resolution or ordinance. She advised it is up to Council to adopt a resolution in spite of the engineer's recommendation. Interim Public Works Director La clarified that Ms. Itagaki is looking at it from a technical standpoints which does not meet the guidelines. He added as pointed out by the City Attorney, under the Vehicle Code,Council has the authority to direct staff to install a stop sign. There may not be technical reasons, there could be other reasons. Council Member Ly indicated he was not against a stop sign, he just wanted to make sure the City does it in a way that provides the City with the fullest extent of legal protection possible. He felt that if the City prepared a resolution stating the reason why the City is installing a stop sign, it might provide the city with a little more cover. Thereafter followed a brief discussion regarding the adoption of a resolution by the City Council, contacting the JPIA for their opinion, as well as contacting the City of Pico Rivera to determine the background and justification for the stop sign installed in Pico Rivera. City Attorney Richman agreed with contacting the JPIA because if ultimately the JPIA is comfortable with the action and they are our insurance carrier, that is worth the call. In response to a request by Ms. Navarro, Mayor Pro Tem Armenta suggested Ms. Navarro meant to make the street into a cul de sac on both sides. City Manager Allred said that the Traffic Engineering firm would not recommended that. Mayor Pro Tem Armenta discussed having another study prepared by another engineering firm. Ms. Navarro also mentioned the storm drains by her home are clogged and she has a swimming pool in front of her house. Mayor Pro Tem Armenta requested that when looking into the curve, the City also look into putting the stop sign where it has been suggested at the school as well as the stop sign at the curve. Mayor Clark suggested waiting until the situation with the curve has been solved. Thereafter followed discussion as to whether both stop signs are warranted and needing an engineer to make that recommendation. Council Member Ly recommending installing the stop sign at the curve and monitor the situation by the school and if it looks like there is a need for additional mitigation then another study can be commissioned and make a decision then. City Council concurred with Council Member Ly's recommendation. City Attorney Richman confirmed the resolution will be brought back for the stop sign at the curve. ACTION: Moved by Council Member Ly, and seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Armenta, to direct staff to bring back a resolution on the Klingerman/Angelus to include stop signs before the curve in each direction and to check with the California JPIA regarding the issue. The motion unanimously carried by the following vote: AYES: Alarcon,Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly. B. Cost-Sharing Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for Implementing the Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Program (CIMP) Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2016 Page 13 of 16 Recommendation: That the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute the cost-sharing MOA with eighteen other public agencies for Implementing the CIMP Interim Public Works Director La advised the City Council that this item is regarding the Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Program known as CIMP. To comply with the 2012 storm water permit. In 2013 the City of Rosemead joined the Upper Los Angeles River Watershed Group in participating in the development of the CIMP. Now the CIMP has been completed and was approved by the Regional Board last August. The next step is to implement the CIMP for the Upper Los Angeles River Watershed Group. The cost to implement the CIMP for the entire upper Los Angeles area is approximately$2.5 million. Rosemead's share for the first year is about$45,000 which is about 1.5%. The recommendation is to authorize the City Manager to execute a cost-sharing MOA with each of the other agencies for implementation of the CIMP, Mayor Clark expressed her opposition stating she was voting against it. She explained the issue she has with it is the MS 4 Permit gives the cities the option of complying at the outfall where the City's water is going into the storm drain channel, monitoring what goes in and taking care of it. This requires the City monitor compliance at the receiving waters which ties the City with the Dominguez channel and could make the City pay cleanup costs for the Los Angeles Harbor even though 99%of the City's water runoff is captured by the Rio Hondo spreading ground. There are some lawsuits pending and there is one city that does its own monitoring and at considerably less cost. She mentioned Rosemead is in an EWIMP that is estimated to cost$6 billion and the last time this issue came up she stated the City should not be responsible for cleaning up the pollution from other Cities all the way to San Fernando. She expressed her fear that going along with this implies that the City is okay with doing that. Council Member Ly expressed understanding of Mayor Clark's concerns and, in principle, he would agree with her that Rosemead should not pay for other cities' particulate matter. However, the Regional Quality Control Board disagrees with the City and we have to continue with this otherwise the risk of going alone, in his opinion, is too great. Mayor Clark stated she was at the Regional Board hearing a couple of months ago and three of the environmental groups are suing so it is not a done deal. She said it is not like the City has a safe harbor and will be fine. Council Member Ly reiterated his agreement with Mayor Clark, but he felt as a City this is the best thing we can do and at least the City can be with everyone else on this issue. Moved by Council Member Ly to authorize the City manager to execute the Cost-sharing MOA with the other 18 public agencies. Council Member Ly withdrew his motion for further discussion. Interim Public Works Director La responded to Mayor Pro Tem Armenta's question as to whether the City had any data to know what would occur if the City backed out of the agreement by indicating because the City is part of the EWIMP the City has more time to comply with the permit requirement. For example, by 2017 the City has a 31% metals TMDL milestone. He explained if the City is not part of the EWIMP and has its own plan, it would be in violation. The City is part of the EWIMP that extends to the CIMP which does the monitoring and reporting. If the City does not approve this agreement there is a chance that the City will have to do its own monitoring and he did not know if the City would get approval from the Regional Board. Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of January 26. 2016 Page 14 of 16 Because the City is part of the EWIMP, it has more time to implement the measures to bring the City to compliance with the permit. City Manager Allred added that as part of the EWIMP the City has coverage if litigation occurs, the City is not standing alone; it is part of a group consisting of 18 public agencies as a measure of protection from litigation. Mayor Pro Tem Armenta confirmed that Rosemead's share for year one is $26,013, and $23,602 for year two and $23,056 for year three, respectively; and asked if the City would spend a lot more money, if it did this on its own. Mr La responded that the costs would be much higher because the next step would be to go to the Regional Board to get approval to do it on its own. He explained the Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Program states specifically what to monitor,what to collect and how to report. If Rosemead were to do it alone then the City would have to go to the Regional Board to get the data collection. Mayor Clark confirmed the City would spend a lot more money for the monitoring; however, if we join the LIMP then the City is giving tacit approval to the EWIMP and that is her concern. If we are taking on the pollution that is coming from other cities and we have to clean up the harbor for things the City is not responsible for that's way more expensive than just saving a little money for monitoring. Mr. La indicated the CIMP strictly talks about monitoring and reporting. Mayor Clark said that's right, it talks about it but what's the unintended consequences. Mayor Clark noted the City is being threatened to be sued anyway. City Attorney Richman noted that if the City left the CIMP it will draw attention to the Board so it might not be litigation but it could be that the Board will be fining the City. A discussion between Mayor Clark and the City Attorney ensued regarding the City's partnership in the EWIMP and the $6 billion cost. Mayor Clark indicating the City didn't know the costs at that time. City Attorney Richman explaining she realized that but if the City leaves it, the City will expose itself to the Board. Mr. Richman advised having dealt with the Board for another City they are very unforgiving and will fine the City very quickly. Ms. Richman indicated the City can ask for a fine now,or it can work together and perhaps legislation will pass to have storm water taxes to pay for these items. Mayor Clark stated she was totally against that. Rachel said she understood, but for the rest of the Council the discussion point is if the City wants to leave, then there's the possibility of being fined by the Board unless the City can very quickly create monitoring and compliance; however, it would take some time to get the technical assistance if that is something the Council wants to do. ACTION: Moved by Council Member Ly, and seconded by Council Member Low, to authorize the City Manager to execute the cost-sharing MOA for the CIMP. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Alarcon, Armenta, Low, Ly. NOES: Clark. Mayor Clark requested staff, for informational purposes, to research what the City's options were, if the City left the EWIMP. Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting Minutes ofJanuary 26, 2016 Page 15 of 16 6. MATTERS FROM MAYOR 8 CITY COUNCIL Mayor Pro Tem Armenia advised she was sent some pictures of a very large lake in front of the famous curve and she spoke with Mr. La to see if the gutters were clogged or something else was clogged so that if and when El Nino arrives it doesn't get worse. Mr. La advised that he sent Mr. Scott out to look at it. He is looking at additional solutions to make sure whatever we do now, won't happen again. Ms. Armenia asked that the meeting be adjourned in memory of a long-time resident Mr. Cardenas who passed away. Mr. Cardenas was the father of one of the City's Parks and Recreation employees who she had the privilege of working with many years ago. She also asked the meeting be adjourned in memory of Scott Bui, another long-time resident who passed away. Mr. Bui graduated from Rosemead High School and his brother also worked for Parks and Recreation during the same time. 7. COUNCIL COMMENTS 8. CLOSED SESSION City Attorney Richman announced the City Council will recess to closed session pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 for public employment matters for the City Manager and City Clerk positions only. The City Council recessed at 9:13 p.m. The City Council reconvene to open session at 11:00 p.m. at which time the City Attorney announced there is no reportable action. 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Clark adjourned the meeting at 11:00 p.m. in memory of Mr. Cardenas and Scot Bui. 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 January 26. 2016 Page 16 of 16