Loading...
CC - Minutes - 08-25-20 SpecialMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL JOINT MEETING AUGUST 25, 2020 The special joint workshop of the Rosemead City Council and Planning Commission was called to order by Mayor Armenta at 6:04 p.m., in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. CITY COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Armenta, Mayor Pro Tem Low, Council Members Clark (teleconferenced), Dang and Ly PLANNING COMMISSION PRESENT: Vice -Chair Lopez, Commissioners Berry, Tang, Vuong, and Leung ABSENT: None 1. WORKSHOP A. Freeway Corridor Mixed -Used Overlay Zone Project RRM Design Group will provide the City Council and Planning Commission with an update on the Freeway Corridor Mixed -Use Overlay Zone project. On September 18, 2019, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) awarded the City $160,000 under the Senate Bill 2 Planning Grant. The funds received are intended to address the State's housing shortage and high housing costs by enabling the preparation, adoption, and implementation of plans and process improvements to streamline housing approvals and accelerate housing production. Director of Community Development Frausto-Lupo expressed that the Commercial Task Force Committee, Planning staff, and the project consultants from RRM Design Group held a kickoff meeting to discuss the goal of the Freeway Corridor Mixed -Used Overlay Zone. They evaluated and proposed sites in vicinity to the interstate determined on and off ramp. Since then, RRM Design Group has worked with stakeholder interviews and the background report. Mrs. Frausto-Lupo welcomed consultants from RRM Design Group to provide an update on the project and shed some light on the next steps. Diane Bathgate, Principal at RRM Design Group, stated the objective of the presentation is to provide a project update, share information collected from the community and research of existing City documents and engaged in discussion such as project progress in line with the Planning Commission's and City Council's thoughts and goals. Ms. Bathgate provided a background of the efforts being funded by Senate Bill 2 Planning Grant which encourages new housing production that helps facilitate and create zoning districts for opportunity sites in the vicinity of interstate 10 Freeway. Matthew Ottoson, Senior Planner at RRM Design Group, walked through the discussions of different opportunity sites, background research, analysis report, stakeholder input, issues and opportunities, preliminary overlay concepts, and initial concepts. Rosemead City Council and Planning Commission Special Joint Meeting Minutes of August 25, 2020 Page I of 6 Commissioner Berry expressed that this was a great start, and he looks forward to transforming some of the areas discussed to build up our community. Commissioner Tang stated this is a great initiative just like the Garvey Avenue Specific Plan and looks forward to seeing the outcome. Commissioner Vuong inquired if there was any evaluation with the case studies or mixed- use developments that utilizes affordable housing and how many of those tapped into density bonus laws. He questioned if they are effective compared to city policies. He noted that Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) was a priority and that these corridors would be important to meeting our numbers; asked if that assessment was done and if so, what it looks like so far. Mr. Ottoson touched base on more recent housing legislation as part of the background research and analysis report. He stated that there has been a lot of recent state legislation that touches on density bonus and affordable housing and some leniency in the permitting of that type of housing especially when certain percentages of very low or low income are included in development. He added, they are working with several communities on addressing similar concerns where state housing legislation provides flexibility in the development. Commissioner Vuong asked if the plazas/developments used for the case studies have good occupancy numbers/vacancies; questioned if these standards are adopted, would they meet the current marketplace, emphasizing that commercial corridors and buildings look different due to COVID-19. Ms. Bathgate stated as the economy changes, stakeholders were more interested in the residential/ commercial ratio which they think should be more flexible and adaptive to the changing market conditions. She added the percentage of commercial, especially if it causes an effect to bring it onto the second floor in order to accommodate the amount of commercial or residential that they want would not be feasible. She noted by having some of those requirements that would bring flexibility as we move forward. Mr. Ottoson added some of the things that were brought up were encouraging more outdoor dining positive spaces and maybe less internal retail space, which would allow that flexibility. For instance, if you provide this outdoor dining space, then perhaps that does contribute some percentage to your required commercial. Other ideas shared were office space rather than a strict business. He added this is something they want to look closer at to make sure it stands the test of time. Commissioner Leung stated that he agrees with Commissioner Vuong regarding right -size development; expressed he is excited for this project. Council Member Ly thanked the consultants and staff for their hard work. He opined that he believes that any project that is currently initiated would probably not come to fruition while they are on the Council. However, it would lay the foundation for a future Council to have more tools and flexibility in land use by taking advantage of these on ramps and off ramps, which have been both a blessing and a challenge in the past. Mr. Ly added this Rosemead City Council and Planning Commission Special Joint Meeting Minutes of August 25, 2020 Page 2 of 6 is important as it would create more opportunity areas within residential units and commercial that will contribute to the future design of Rosemead. Council Member Dang referred to slide #18 of the presentation and inquired if this is an initial concept/test case to see if this works. Mr. Ottoson answered that is correct and stated that this is a small excerpt of a broader range of development standards that they cross compared. He added, they are working with their architects to truth test the development standards and what could realistically be built based on both the dimensions of the site, the parking requirements, as well as the adjacency to single family residential. These are things that they are considering as they put together these initial concepts. Council Member Dang also inquired about the survey/analysis done in comparison to the adjacent cities and mixed -used projects. In that aspect, he questioned if our design standard is more restrictive or not as development friendly or forgiving. Mr. Ottoson stated that there are different key levers such as lot size, high FAR, parking, and dialing those in based on the existing conditions. In the background report, they compared some of the surrounding cities: Alhambra, El Monte, San Gabriel, and Temple City. He added, the one that stood out the most was FAR, and there is a broad range amongst the surrounding communities. He asserted that something that may be right for Alhambra may not work for Rosemead; for instance, when looking at San Gabriel Boulevard, there are several smaller lots, smaller line depths that really limit the potential for development and the height and density are more on par with some of the surrounding cities. Those key levers and ensuring it makes sense for these different opportunity areas rather than carte blanche applying something that is applied across the entire spectrum of these opportunity areas here. Council Member Dang agreed with Mr. Ottoson that every city is different, and so are the dynamics; emphasized that the FAR is kind of very restrictive at 0.8, in comparison to the Garvey Avenue Specific Plan which is 1.6; asked the designers to spend more time on this matter and give a recommendation on how to particularly address the FAR issue. Mr. Dang also addressed the residential versus non-residential percentage; referred to the sampling of neighboring cities and inquired if the 70/30% is across the board because he wanted to make sure Rosemead is competitive with our neighboring cities. He added, it would not make any sense if a developer came to our city and have all these restrictions, versus our competitor like Alhambra, who offers a lot more bonuses and flexibility. Mr. Ottoson stated that many of the stakeholders felt that this development standard is very limiting in development, which may force commercial office retail component, in some cases to the second floor. He added, even to hit the exact number of the 33% RCMEDL is very challenging, stating there are other ways to achieve that desired mixed-use condition without pushing this development standard. He also noted that most of the surrounding cities do not have this condition, and they only use FAR or other standards to achieve that desired mixed-use condition. Mr. Ottoson clarified that they are not proposing 0.8 to be the FAR, rather it is shown on the graphic which reflects the outcome of accommodating parking on the site, height requirements, and the number of units as commercial square Rosemead City Council and Planning Commission Special Joint Meeting Minutes of August 25, 2020 Page 3 of 6 footage. He reiterated that they are not proposing 0.8 as the FAR, but it is where they ended up with trying to get near some of the existing development standards that the city has and truth testing this condition on San Gabriel Boulevard. Ms. Bathgate added that the stakeholders they spoke with felt that that ratio is restrictive compared to others. Looking at FAR is very important, but some of the other standards even in the higher FAR can be difficult to reach. She used parking as an example, if there are open space requirements particularly related to residential. She added, they would look carefully at when crafting the regulations to ensure those all balance out and even if you provide a bigger FAR, you want to make sure that the other standards all aligned. Council Member Dang agreed and thanked them for the clarification. He expressed that even if you put a big FAR, it does not mean it would pencil out and there are other factors to consider such as parking, landscaping which eats up into the real estate. He referred to the slide and stated that FAR is a byproduct after you put in all these parking spaces, which is the final in the equation. Mr. Dang addressed that there are more creative ways to address 70/30%, and referred to outdoor dining, and live/work situation where that qualifies as a commercial. He asked if at the next presentation to see what works for other cities and requested recommendations that may work for Rosemead. Lastly, he stated that the Garvey Avenue Specific Plan parking space comes out to 26 and believes it is a great bonus and attractive feature that he would like to see in the Freeway Corridor Mixed -Used Overlay Zone Project. Mayor Pro Tem Low wanted a better understanding and the correct definition of the Freeway Corridor Mixed -Used Overlay Zone. She stated that the City has certain kind of zoning; some are high density, commercial which are designated for certain parcels. By having this overlay, she inquired if those parcels could keep high density commercial and permit mixed-use. Director of Community Development Frausto-Lupo replied yes, the purpose of the overlay is to develop standards specifically for these areas, allow additional housing and to provide that mixed-use opportunity so that we can both revitalize the area, increase the economic development and housing opportunities. Mayor Pro Tem Low questioned if that parcel is currently zoned for a certain type of use, can the property owners do mixed-use in addition to what is permitted. Mrs. Frausto-Lupo answered that will be part of the process, and if there's an overlay, typically they would have the opportunity to do either. Mayor Pro Tem Low referred to slide 15, noting the first bullet of development standard states "to ensure overlay standards are consistent with a contemporary zoning standard for mixed use development". She questioned what the contemporary zoning standards are and if that is the current standard we have. Director of Community Development Frausto-Lupo responded no, it would be in addition, so beyond what we have here in Rosemead. She expressed that part of the purpose of this project is for the consultants to look at what else is out there in other areas that may be working and how we can potentially incorporate that in Rosemead. Rosemead City Council and Planning Commission Special Joint Meeting Minutes ofAugust 25, 2020 Page 4 of 6 Ms. Bathgate elaborated that we want to make sure that the development standards reflect current development trends, and construction techniques, that kind of context. She explained that is really what is meant by contemporary zoning standards to ensure it is responsive to current needs. Mayor Pro Tem Low referred to the "Building Mass percent - Provide flexibility in achieving the required residential and nonresidential percentages" and questioned if that is commercial versus residential percentage. She noted that is an interesting topic we are facing; two years ago, we need mixed -used to be 30/70 but now, the community and developers stated that would be very hard due to the economy changes and expressed that should be looked at. By the time the project is complete, she inquired about the percentage guidelines. Community Development Director Frausto-Lupo expressed that establishing a new percentage would not be ideal. She added, upon discussions with stakeholders, having the percentages would make it more restrictive, but it is something that needs to be considered. For example, we can make it more flexible by saying commercial on the ground floor rather than 35% nonresidential to 65% residential as part of the exercise. Mayor Pro Tem Low questioned about the right -size parking. She noted that they envisioned these projects to be mixed-use, lots of commercial so that people will have less need of driving a car and do all the shopping within the plaza a few years ago. However, people are now requesting more residential than the commercial components, and there is less need for driving. In terms of parking, she requested the consultants to figure out the amount of parking needed. Community Development Director Frausto-Lupo stated that parking will be part of the exercise. She expressed that our society is accustomed to having cars, however younger people are using cars less and less. Part of the sites in the study are along major commercial corridors, so transportation is closely looked at. Mayor Pro Tem Low stated the studied opportunity areas are very suitable areas such as Del Mar Avenue and San Gabriel Boulevard and sees a lot of need for improvement. If our city is serious about developing these areas, she expressed to make it flexible for people to develop, instead of placing all kinds of restrictions and making it difficult for people to do so, which defeats the purpose. She stated if we are going to do it, let's be very flexible to not only encourage development but also help the developers. She added that we also need to look at a lot of smaller parcels, and possibly combine parcels which is very important to making these projects more successful. Council Member Clark addressed her concern about being mindful of single -story areas; noted she lives by the Garvey Avenue Specific Plan and therefore could not participate on the dais and had to participate as a member of the public. She expressed that one of the projects that is apparently by right, at least if they conform to the standards, is 70 feet tall, which could be peering down into our neighbor's yard, and there are residents that are very upset about that. She added, she wants to be sure that when this goes through, that is not by right and it would not be giving the developer the right to do what he wants without taking into consideration the neighbors that live nearby. She also stated that we always talk Rosemead City Council and Planning Commission Special Joint Meeting Minutes of August 25, 2020 Page 5 of 6 about line of sight, so we do not want someone peering down into your pool or bathroom, and that's important. Council Member Clark appreciates Mayor Low's comment about flexibility and believes that what we need to do which is having the possibility to do this but it's not by right, and it's going to have community input and see what the neighbors think. She elaborated that she would like to do this as a study but not cast anything in stone that may harm the community. She also reminded the Council and Commissioners that a few years back, there was a Councilman that wanted to do this everywhere, but the people spoke loud and clear, and that's how she, Council Member Ly, and Mayor Armenta were elected on this platform. She reiterated that we should be considering the area, community, and neighborhoods. Mayor Armenta addressed her concerns about parking and although parking requirements are being adhered to, there is a fine balance. The goal was able to live close to where you work, but not many live close to their jobs. Back in 2009, they wanted to have people movers all over the sidewalks and reduce traffic flow and car usage within 10 years, however, we have not seen that happen. A few years back, she and Mayor Pro Tem Low went with a developer to look at developments in a neighboring city, and initially, all the retail was full of restaurants, and retail stores. Unfortunately, many of those businesses closed, and the one common factor was parking. Even the developer said they all closed because there is not enough parking. Mayor Armenta stated she understands the consultants are adhering to the parking requirements but need to be realistic if we want businesses to thrive and succeed, and that's not going to happen with limited parking. She referred to the GSPMU which has 10 units and 26 parking stalls. If each unit has one car parked, that leaves 16 parking spots left. She received many comments from residents who state they are unable to park in front of their own home because they live around the corner of a development so everyone parks down the street. She reiterated to the consultants to take parking into consideration. She echoed Council Member Ly's remark, and stated we are trying to set the standards for the future, and we must set the building blocks, a great foundation for future Council Members. Mayor Armenta thanked the consultants for bringing these initial concepts and doing a great job to ensure at ensuring our City is taken care of in the future. Mayor Armenta adjourned the special meeting at 7:03 p.m. 09--- Ericka Hernandez, City Clerk APPROVED: Polly Lo. Ma or Rosemead City Council and Planning Commission Special Joint Meeting Minutes of August 25, 2020 Page 6 of 6