CC - Minutes - 01-26-16 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 1 of 16
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 it 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 Tern 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 taster 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 WAVE 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 26, 2016
Page 2 of 76
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 22nd 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 17th the City held a community workshop at the Public Safety Center to inform the public
of the project and grant. On November 24th 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 Armenia 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.
Velia 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 Tern Armenta's concern '°'
regarding the funneling down of traffic. He also telt the lack of parking will hurt business tremendously.
James Dean who works on Valley Boulevard between Had and Mission expressed his concerns about the
parking on Valley Boulevard and was opposed to the project.
Tom 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 Tern 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 Meeti g
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 concern 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. Pad 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 Tem 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 of January 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 mornings 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 WAVE 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 those 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 Tem 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 Tern 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 Dark 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 surface streets to get home
much quicker. It will also benefit those people who live oft 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 of January 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.Allred 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 Conununity Development Commission Joint Meeting
Minutes of January 26, 2016
Page 8 of 16
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 Tem 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 Cmmnission 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 tile 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 ..e
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 Itagaki 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 Tem 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 Pico 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
Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the
Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting
Minutes of January 26, 2016
Page 11 of 16
speeds that signs will 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 bolts 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 lite is in jeopardy and asked how the City is going to help
her. She agreed with Mayor Pro Tem Armenta about the stop signs and she wanted botts dots also.
In response to Council Member Ly's 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 California 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 a 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 January 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 standpoint 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 Tern 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 recommend that. Mayor Pro Tern Armenta discussed having another study prepared by another
engineering firm. Ms. Navarro also mentioned the storm drains by her home are dogged and she has a
swimming pool in front of her house.
Mayor Pro Tern 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 recommended 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 Tem 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
Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the
Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting
Minutes of January 26, 2016
Page 13 of 16
Integrated Monitoring Program (CIMP) rv"
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 Armenia'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
Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the
Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting
Minutes of January 26, 2016
Page 14 of 16
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. 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 Tern 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
CIMP 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 lett 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.
Rosemead City Council and the Successor Agency to the
Rosemead Community Development Commission Joint Meeting
Minutes of January 26, 2016
Page 15 of 16
Mayor Clark requested staff, for informational purposes, to research what the City's options were, it the City
left the EWIMP.
6. MATTERS FROM MAYOR& CITY COUNCIL
Mayor Pro Tem Armenta 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. Armenta 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
6. 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. /
� . r✓i � ...AI
barol Cowl, Interim City Cle+
APPROVED:
y
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