Loading...
RRA - Approval of Minutes - 08-10-99 Nrl' REDEVELOfh_i.T kc 1:CY MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING ROSEMEAD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AUGUST 10, 1999 The regular meeting of the Rosemead Redevelopment Agency was called to order by Chairman Vasquez at 7:04 p.m. in the conference room of City Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. The Pledge to the Flag was led by Agencymember Imperial The Invocation was led by Vice-Chairman Clark ROLL CALL OF OIPICERS: Present: Agencymembers Bruesch, Imperial, Taylor, Vice Chairman Clark, and Chairman Vasquez Absent: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES: NONE 1. RESOLUTION NO. 99-18— CLAIMS AND DEMANDS The following Resolution was presented to the Agency for adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 99-18—CLAIMS AND DEMANDS A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $164,804.86 DEMANDS NO. 5650 THROUGH 5670 MOTION BY AGENCYMEMBER IMPERIAL, SECOND BY VICE-CHAIRMAN CLARK that the Agency adopt Resolution no. 99-18. Vote resulted: Aye: Bruesch, Clark, Vasquez, Imperial, Taylor No: None Absent: None Abstain: None The Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. 2. APPROVAL OF FINAL CONCEPTUAL PLANS FOR THE GARVEY AVENUE COMMUNITY CENTER AND SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING PROGRAM Steve Cophenhaver, GRC Associates consultant, stated that the Agencymembers expressed concerns at a prior meeting regarding the cost of the project, design of the entryway signalization, the soils condition, and the possibility of an alternate access to the west. Mr. Copenhaver explained that the total cost of the project, which includes purchase of the property in 1989 and relocation of the muffler shop, professional fees and construction budget would total $7.4 million or$102,780 per unit. Mr. Copenhaver, addressing the alternate access to River Avenue, stated that according to the parcel map, an access cannot be provided unless additional right-of-way is acquired. Dale Brown, BVH Architect, addressed the issue of the permeability of the soil and ways to handle the storm water runoff. Mr. Brown stated that the storm drain system will be connecting from the roofs of the building and will have a series of storm drain inlets RRA 8-10-99 Page 1 throughout the site. Mr. Brown stated that turf block paving will most likely be installed at a portion at the rear of the site that is least used by cars. Agencymember Bruesch asked what effect would recompaction of the soil would have on the permeability of the soil. Mr. Brown responded that any soil recompacted would tend to be less permeable, and the storm drain water would sheet more. However, the site between buildings would not be affected as those are landscaped areas. Vice-Chairman Clark asked if the entire parking lot could have some type of porous paving, and that she would provide Mr. Brown with informational materials that she has. Agencymember Bruesch asked about the slope of the parking area in relation to the buildings. Mr. Brown stated that portions of the parking area slopes to an area with a drain inlet which connects to the underground drains. Agencymember Taylor asked what is the recompaction depth under the footings of the basement? Mr. Brown responded that it is approximately 16' to 17' or until a suitable bearing soil is found. Agencymember Taylor stated that the recompaction depths over the entire site may vary depending on where the debris is buried. Mr. Brown responded that the current site plan contains a minimal area for removal and recompaction and that it goes beyond the 15' soils report recommendation. Mr. Brown stated that areas of drives and other areas adjacent to the buildings need to be considered where there is more settlement. Agencymember Taylor asked how the excavation and recompaction will be bid. Mr. Brown responded that the contractor will bid per BVH's instructions on specific areas and their depths. Agencymember Bruesch stated that his main concern is that care be taken so that there is no ponding or saturation of bearing or subgrade soils due to rainwater or irrigation. Mr. Bruesch stated that the extra cost of excavation and recompaction is necessary to ensure that the water sheets off. Steve Copenhaver stated that one option would be to excavate and recompact only 3' in the areas that have very low loads. However, there may a settling of a few inches, which could result in the pavement cracking, and thus having to make repairs. Mr. Copenhaver stated that the other option is to spend more money now to dig and recompact the entire site, which would eliminate future pavement cracking. Mr. Copenhaver stated that the Agency needs to direct Mr. Brown on this issue. Agencymember Clark stated that she is concerned for the safety of the residents and asked if the extra excavation and recompaction will ensure their safety. Mr. Brown stated that they are exceeding the soils report recommendation. Mr. Brown stated that cost estimate for the extra excavation would be $200,000 to $300,000. RRA 8-10-99 Page 2 Frank Tripepi, Executive Director, stated that the Agencymembers need to make a decision on whether to spend $200,000 to $300,000 for the extra excavation versus how much the cost would be to fix the asphalt on the parking area should it move and crack. Agencymember Taylor pointed out that it is not just a matter of repaving the parking lot, it would have to be dug out and recompacted again. Mr. Tripepi stated that it would be an on-going repair for years and by spending the extra money now, that problem would be eliminated. MOTION BY AGENCYMEMBER IMPERIAL, SECOND BY AGENCYMEMBER BRUESCH that the Agency approve the final conceptual plans and expend the additional funds for the extra excavation and recompaction. Before vote could result, more discussion ensued. Agencymember Taylor stated that he favors the extra excavation and recompaction, but does not intend to vote for the conceptual plans. It was the decision of the Agencymember to bifurcate the motion to APPROVE THE ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE EXTRA EXCAVATION AND RECOMPACTION. Vote resulted: Yes: Bruesch, Clark, Vasquez, Imperial, Taylor No: None Absent: None Abstain: None The Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. Vice-Chairman Clark asked about the noise level, particularly at night by groups using the multi-purpose rooms, and its effect on the senior housing units facing that area. Mr. Brown stated that no units facing that area, and a courtyard that separates the buildings. Agencymember Bruesch asked if the large room could have removable partitions. Mr. Brown, referring to the rendering on the easel, stated that that may be not be practical for immediate access from the interior circulations and of meeting the emergency egress requirements. Mr. Tripepi added that the large room is for City events and the multipurpose rooms on the other side of the building, when combined, are close to the same size as the large room. Agencymember Taylor asked Mr. Brown to address the security issue. Mr. Brown, referring to the rendering, described the ingress and egress areas. Agencymember Taylor asked if the gates for residents are going to be security type gates. Mr. Brown replied that the driver would have a transmitter to open the gate. Agencymember Taylor stated that the driver would then have to wait until the gate is open to drive through. Mr. Taylor stated that that could be a potential problem as the residents pull in and block the ingress while the gate is opening, and asked if what can be done to alleviate that problem. RRA 8-10-99 Page 3 Mr. Tripepi suggested taking the center lane, which is now designated as one of the exit lanes and turn it into a straight ahead lane, which would result in two lanes going into the complex and one coming out. Mr. Copenhaver suggested moving or relocating the security gate. Agencymember Taylor asked about securing the community center at night. Mr. Brown, referring to the rendering, responded that the side perimeter is fenced, there are three gates that can be closed at night, and that there is an access open for seniors to receive visitors at night using the telephone code system. Agencymember Taylor stated that his biggest objection to the entire project is that anybody can look across the street and see people going in and out of the center, and that there is no way possible for anyone coming out of the front office or reception area to see anything that is going on in the back of the project. Mr. Taylor continued that from Garvey Avenue no one can see what is occurring in the back of the building or the back parking lot unless someone is walking across the bridge. Mr. Taylor stated that the security for this building is going to be a nightmare. Mr. Tripepi stated that video cameras can be installed at the corner of the building to face the back parking lot. Mr. Brown added that more cameras are planned throughout the area also. Agencymember Bruesch inquired about the left-turn pocket location length. Joanne Itagaki, Traffic Engineer, stated that the left-turn pocket on Garvey would be about 75' or 4 car lengths. Agencymember Bruesch asked about potential problems for westbound traffic if events are held during peak evening traffic hours. Ms. Itagaki responded that the left-tum pocket westbound would be protected and does not forsee any problems. Agencymember Taylor requested an update on the operating cost. Michael Burbank, Director of Parks and Recreation, stated that the cost will be estimated for the upcoming budget as the project will not be completed until September, 2000. Mr. Burbank stated that the Rosemead Community Center costs approximately$300,000 a year to operate. MOTION BY AGENCYMEMBER BRUESCH that the Agency approve the final conceptual plans for the Garvey Avenue Community Center and Senior Housing Projects. Before the motion was seconded, more discussion ensued. Agencymember Taylor inquired about the eligibility requirements for moving into the senior housing. Mr. Tripepi responded that this item is not on the agenda for discussion and will be discussed at a later date. Agencymember Taylor asked if the Agencymembers received a list showing the residency eligibility of the tenants that moved into the Angelus senior housing. Mr. Taylor asked how many of those residents were under the six month residency requirement. RRA 8-10-99 Page 4 Don Wagner, Assistant City Manager, replied that he thought there about eight applicants meeting the six month residency requirement. Agencymember Taylor stated that the report listed some residents were as low as 1 Y�to 2 months. Mr. Taylor stated that the building was not fully occupied when finished, and in an effort to fill the units, the residency requirement was not adhered to. Mr. Wagner stated that he will provide another copy of the list. Agencymember Imperial stated that he will Second the Motion of Agencymember Bruesch. Vote resulted: Aye: Clark, Bruesch, Vasquez, Imperial No: Taylor Absent: None Abstain None The Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. Agencymember Taylor stated that he voted No as the security problem is a critical issue, the cost of the units at $102,000 is high, there is not an operating budget, nor where that money is going to come from, and the residency requirements for the tenants has not been established, if they are to be primarily residents of Rosemead. Mr. Taylor stated that with the Angelus Senior Housing, Rosemead residents were not able to obtain the units on a priority basis. Agencymember Imperial requested information on any Rosemead resident not being able to obtain a unit. 3. AWARD OF CONTRACT TO REPLACE TWO POOL HEATERS AT ROSEMEAD POOL MOTION BY AGENCYMEMBER BRUESCH, SECOND BY VICE-CHAIRMAN CLARK that the Agency approve awarding the project to the low bidder, Trans-Therm, Inc., and authorize allocation of an additional $8,000 to provide for the installation of the pool heaters. Vote resulted: Aye: Clark, Bruesch, Vasquez, Imperial No: Taylor Absent: None Abstain: None The Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. Councilman Taylor stated that he voted No as City funds should be used for this project. 4. MATTERS FROM OFFICIALS—None RRA 8-10-99 Page 5 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE ON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MATTERS—None 6. ADJOURNMENT There being no further action to be taken at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m. The next meeting is scheduled for August 24, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted: APPROVED: Agency Secretary CHAIRMAN RRA 8-10-99 Page 6