Loading...
CDC - 12-19-06MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING ROSEMEAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION December 19, 2006 Chairman Taylor called the regular meeting of the Rosemead Community Development Commission to order at 7:03 p.m. in the conference room of City Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. The Pledge to the Flag and Invocation were waived as having been completed during the meeting just adjourned. ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS: Present: Commissioners Clark, Imperial, Tran, Vice-Chairman Nunez, Chairman Taylor Absent: None 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE - None 2. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Resolution No. 2006-27 Claims and Demands Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2006-27, for payment of Commission expenditures in the amount of $40,592.54 demands 8032 through 8044. B. Minutes November 28, 2006 - Regular Meeting C. Bank Signature Cards The Rosemead Community Development Commission requires several different bank accounts to efficiently operate its financial matters. Authorized signers on the Commission's bank accounts include all Commission Members; City Clerk; City Manager; and Assistant City Manager. Banks require new signature cards to be completed upon any changes in the list of authorized signers. With the retirement of the former City Manager and Assistant City Manager it is necessary to remove their names as authorized signers and replace their names with the new City Manager and Deputy City Manager. CDC Minutes 12-19-06 Page 1 of 9 • • Recommendation: That the Commission authorize City Manager Andrew C. Lazzaretto and Deputy City Manager Oliver Chi be named as signers on the various Rosemead Community Development Commission Bank Accounts, replacing the names of the former City Manager and Assistant City Manager. F. Exclusive Negotiating Agreement -YK America International Group The City of Rosemead received a request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) from YK America International Group (YK) to redevelop the 8+/- acre site at the southwest corner of Rosemead Boulevard and Glendon Way. Over the past several weeks, YK, which is a San Gabriel Valley based development company, has worked with staff to develop a finalized ENA for the Commission's consideration. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Commission approve the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the Rosemead Community Development Commission and YK for the potential development of the 8+/- acre site at the southwest corner of Rosemead Boulevard and Glendon Way. Chairman Taylor requested Items D and E be pulled for separate consideration. COMMISSIONER IMPERIAL MADE A MOTION, WITH A SECOND BY VICE- CHAIRMAN NUNEZ to approve the Consent Calendar items listed above. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Imperial, Nunez, Taylor, Tran No: None Abstain: None Absent: None The Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. D. Exclusive Negotiating Agreement - Richmont Development The City of Rosemead received a request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) from Richmont Development to redevelop the 6+/- site at the northeast corner of Valley Boulevard and Walnut Grove Avenue. Over the past several weeks, Richmont Development, which is a Los Angeles based development company, has worked with staff to develop a finalized ENA for the Commission's consideration. CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 2 of 9 • o Recommendation: That the Commission approve the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the Rosemead Community Development Commission and Richmont Development for the potential development of the 6+/- acre site at northeast corner of Valley Boulevard and Walnut Grove Avenue. Chairman Taylor expressed concern about displacing owners of improved properties for the sake of one interested property owner and realtor wanting exclusive negotiating rights. He referenced other ENA proposals approved in the past, which involved incorporation of vacant parcels. Executive Director Lazzaretto stated that under Redevelopment guidelines this property might be considered underutilized because of placement of buildings and the amount of open space in relation to the buildings, but nonetheless is developed. The developer is proposing a much different development on the corner with a replacement of mixed uses. The proposal is for different development stages/phases. CDC Executive Deputy Director Saeki explained the developer has a relationship with the property owner at the corner of Walnut Grove and Valley. Plans currently submitted are preliminary; if approval is given a more comprehensive and detailed plan will be submitted for Commission consideration. Chairman Taylor felt apprehensive about subjecting four additional properties to the threat of condemnation based one property owner's partnership with a developer. In addition, Chairman Taylor pointed out that community buildings such as a church, school, and Masonic lodge would be displaced if the development went through. Mr. Saeki explained that this is a typical redevelopment scenario encountered in his experience and that the ENA agreement specifies the provision of relocation assistance to displaced owners. Commissioner Tran indicated he had no problem in supporting the ENA negotiation agreement because before condemnation is employed, the matter would have to come back for approval. Mr. Tran pointed out that staff has planned a visionary Master Plan which include four to five parcels; ENA approval would begin the first step. Chairman Taylor asked what would happen if ENA properties approached don't want to sell. Mr. Saeki explained the different options available which might include condemnation in the future if approved by the Commission. Chairman Taylor asked how many times Mr. Saeki had been involved with the condemnation process; he indicated he has been involved five times. CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 3 of 9 0 0 Commissioner Clark indicated she was not in support of the proposal. Chairman Taylor recalled only being involved with the process once in Rosemead; the process did not achieve good results for the City. He again expressed apprehension about displacing improved properties, especially community service buildings. Mr. Saeki pointed out that the ENA was put together with guidance from Agency Attorney Wallin and provides the Commission with the flexibility to change their mind. He indicated the proposal would give the developer the opportunity to approach the property owners to determine if a deal can be brokered without City assistance. Chairman Taylor pointed out the developer is free to do that now, without the ENA agreement. Mr. Saeki agreed but pointed out that the agreement provides the Realtor with an exclusive. Chairman Taylor commented that part of the ENA process includes sending owners a 25 page letter which states their property may be condemned, generating anxiety. Executive Director Lazzaretto emphasized staff is not recommending eminent domain in any form at this point; it is always a possibility, but it is not currently recommended. Agency Attorney Wallin added that part of the ENA proposal includes a provision which reserves the right of City to extend the owner participation process with all of the property owners that occupy the land being discussed. Juan Nunez, Rosemead resident, expressed concern about the ENA agreement and urged caution. Commissioner Clark again stated she was not in support of displacing functioning properties and indicated she preferred development take place on vacant lots. Chairman Taylor agreed. VICE-CHAIRMAN NUNEZ MADE A MADE A MOTION, WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TRAN to approve the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the Rosemead Community Development Commission and Richmont Development for the potential development of the 6+/- acre site at northeast corner of Valley Boulevard and Walnut Grove Avenue. Vote resulted: Yes: Nunez, Tran No: Clark, Imperial, Taylor Absent: None Abstain: None CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 4 of 9 • El Commissioner Imperial inquired about a property at San Gabriel and Garvey. Chairman Taylor indicated information about that property was not currently available. E. Exclusive Negotiating Agreement - Mr. Hieu Tran, Owner/Developer of the San Gabriel Superstore The City of Rosemead has received a request from Mr. Hieu Tran, owner/developer of the San Gabriel Superstore in the City of San Gabriel, for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with the Community Development Commission to redevelop the 1+/- acre site at southeast corner of Rosemead Boulevard and Steele Street. Over the past several weeks, Mr. Tran has worked with staff to develop a finalized ENA for the Commission's consideration. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Commission approve the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the Rosemead Community Development Commission and Mr. Hieu Tran of the San Gabriel Superstore for the potential development of the 1+/- acre site at the southeast corner of Rosemead Boulevard and Steele Street. Executive Director Lazzaretto summarized the proposal as a mirror image of the one previously discussed for Richmont Development. Chairman Taylor commented a precedent was being set, whereby an individual owner of an existing business comes in to the Commission to put a development on one parcel. The owners get the benefit of selling their property through the eminent domain process. He asked why individual owners can't negotiate their own deals with developers. Mr. Lazzaretto replied that ideally individual owners negotiate privately with developers, but this doesn't always happen. He reiterated that staff is not advocating the use of eminent domain; it is reserved as a last resort. Developers have to invest a lot of time for property negotiations and an ENA gives them a guarantee that no other developer is going to do the same thing. He referenced another Commission development at Rio Hondo which did not involve the use of an ENA which resulted in a positive outcome. Chairman Taylor asked why a similar process could not be undertaken with the proposal being discussed. Mr. Lazzaretto explained the circumstances were different; an adjacent project has not been proposed in this case. An appraisal could be done, but it is a very costly and risky process, as the City would not know which developer might be interested even if the property could be acquired. He explained one advantage of the ENA is that the initial risk is taken by the developer, who contacts property owners and brings back a plan for Commission consideration. CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 5 of 9 • • Agency Attorney Wallin reiterated that under an ENA set-up, the appraisal is done at the developer's expense. Chairman Taylor felt the ENA process is a bit awkward; as the owner is getting the protection of going through the appraisal process. Mr. Saeki pointed out that an appraisal is almost complete, as it was authorized by the Commission prior to his employment with the City. Deputy City Manager Chi explained that initially staff felt this development might be combined with another project which has since been determined as not a possibility. Prior to receiving and presenting the results of the appraisal to the Commission, a developer approached staff with the idea of using the same architect and work with the City to bring in an appropriate tenant if granted an exclusive agreement. Chairman Taylor asked why the owner isn't already independently approaching the businesses. Mr. Saeki and Mr. Chi explained that an ENA provides a realtor with an incentive to negotiate and imparts more design control to the Commission, as the final project would have to receive agency approval. Commissioner Clark pointed out that developers have to get their projects approved anyway. Vice-Chairman Nunez commented that realtors might not be willing to invest a lot of money and time if they do not have exclusive agreement. If an exclusive is not granted, new owners may choose to exclusively build apartments in that area. As it is zoned for that type of use, by law the Commission could not oppose the apartment development even though a desire and need for a mixed use development has been discussed. Commissioner Tran asked what type of retail space has been proposed by the developer. Mr. Saeki indicated a Trader Joes specialty grocery store and a TGI Fridays Restaurant have been discussed with the developer. Staff can shop the space with national chains if the control granted by an ENA is achieved. Commissioner Clark asked why the same staff pitches cannot be made without an ENA agreement. Mr. Chi responded that without the agreement, the developer would be in inclusive control of the project, eliminating City design and tenant selection input. CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 6 of 9 Interim Community Development Director Duff explained that when developers approach national retail tenants, one of the first questions they ask is if the developer has an exclusive. An ENA shows developer commitment and site control for the project Developers sometimes do not expose their site to national retailers out of fear that they will shop around for different developers. An exclusive keeps developer fear at bay. Chairman Taylor commented that Traders Joes has said no to a store in Rosemead when they have been asked in the past. Mr. Saeki shared that the City of Monrovia had approached Traders Joes for a while and they always had said no. Monrovia now has Trader Joes in the Huntington Oaks Center as the result of a redevelopment project. Mr. Duff indicated a similar scenario took place in the City of Claremont, which also had received a negative answer from Trader Joes and then received a store as a result of an ENA. Mr. Saeki further commented that he believed Claremont had a development agreement which resulted from an ENA. Commissioner Clark reminded the Commission that in the past, 52 letters were sent out to national chain restaurants and each request was rejected. Vice-Chairman Nunez inquired if an ENA was in place when requests were made. Chairman Taylor indicated he was not entirely sure. As a side note, he commented about a section on the staff report that was copied from a previous report and not updated correctly. Mr. Saeki apologized for the error. Chairman Taylor stated his reasons for not supporting the item: his preference is to give owners and developers the first chance to come up with their own agreements rather than the City getting involved with a threat of eminent domain. COMMISSIONER TRAN MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE, WITH A SECOND BY VICE-CHAIRMAN NUNEZ, to approve the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the Rosemead Community Development Commission and Mr. Hieu Tran of the San Gabriel Superstore for the potential development of the 1+/- acre site at the southeast corner of Rosemead Boulevard and Steele Street. Vote resulted: Yes: Nunez, Tran No: Clark, Imperial, Taylor Absent: None Abstain: None Chairman Taylor encouraged staff to facilitate owner discussions amongst themselves. CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 7 of 9 0 0 Mr. Saeki indicated the owner had already said no to develop the property when the City conducted the appraisal as part of the owner participation process several months ago. Chairman Taylor clarified this was new information and would subject the owner to condemnation because the owner already said no to development. He asked why staff was initiating the ENA process given the owner's stated lack of development interest. Mr. Saike indicated the recommended action was a step in the redevelopment process. Commissioner Tran clarified that he had already said "no" to developing the property, but not to selling the property. Chairman Taylor didn't question development of the site, but rather the methods used by the City to achieve development. Commissioner Tran pointed out that an ENA was just passed at Temple City and Valley which will affect three existing businesses. Chairman Taylor pointed out the parcel is adjacent to a four acre vacant lot. Commissioner Tran asked why he supported other ENA proposals and not the one just voted on. Chairman Taylor responded the owners can get together, as the areas there are blighted. Commissioner Tran inquired if Chairman Taylor wanted to see apartments built at the site in question. Chairman Taylor responded the City needs to be very careful, as the City has limited commercial sales properties. Commissioner Tran agreed and responded that this is why the ENA was suggested with Trader Joes as a possible tenant. He further indicated that by voting to not support the ENA, he had turned down a Trader Joes in the City. Chairman Taylor disagreed, indicated that they had not turned away any retailer and pointed out that Trader Joes was a hypothetical, possible tenant. Commissioner Tran responded by saying it was his opinion and he was entitled to it. Chairman Taylor acknowledged his opinion and reminded him the issue was settled with the vote on the item. 3. MATTERS FROM THE CHAIRMAN & COMMISSIONERS CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 8 of 9 0 4. MATTERS FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & STAFF Executive Director Lazzaretto introduced George Agaba, who is now a permanent member of Planning Department. The Commission welcomed him aboard. 5. ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting is scheduled for January 23, 2007 at 7:47 p.m. This is the only Community Development Commission meeting taking place during the month of January. Respectfully submitted: APPROVED: Commission Secretary CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 9 of 9 • 0 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING ROSEMEAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION December 19, 2006 Chairman Taylor called the regular meeting of the Rosemead Community Development Commission to order at 7:03 p.m. in the conference room of City Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. The Pledge to the Flag and Invocation were waived as having been completed during the meeting just adjourned. ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS: Present: Commissioners Clark, Imperial, Tran,,Vice-Chairman Nunez, Chairman Taylor Absent: None 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE - None 2. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Resolution No. 2006-27 Claims and Demands Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2006-27, for payment of Commission expenditures in the amount of $40,592.54 demands 8032 through 8044. B. Minutes November 28, 2006 - Regular Meeting C. Bank Signature Cards The Rosemead Community Development Commission requires several different bank accounts to efficiently operate its financial matters. Authorized signers on the Commission's bank accounts include all Commission Members; City Clerk; City Manager; and Assistant City Manager. Banks require new signature cards to be completed upon any changes in the list of authorized signers. With the retirement of the former City Manager and Assistant City Manager it is necessary to remove their names as authorized signers and replace their names with the new City Manager and Deputy City Manager. CDC Minutes 12-19-06 Page 1 of 9 • 0 Recommendation: That the Commission authorize City Manager Andrew C. Lazzaretto and Deputy City Manager Oliver Chi be named as signers on the various Rosemead Community Development Commission Bank Accounts, replacing the names of the former City Manager and Assistant City Manager. F. Exclusive Negotiating Agreement - YK America International Group The City of Rosemead received a request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) from YK America International Group (YK) to redevelop the 8+/- acre site at the southwest corner of Rosemead Boulevard and Glendon Way. Over the past several weeks, YK, which is a San Gabriel Valley based development company, has worked with staff to develop a finalized ENA for the Commission's consideration. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Commission approve the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the Rosemead Community Development Commission and YK for the potential development of the 8+/- acre site at the southwest corner of Rosemead Boulevard and Glendon Way. Chairman Taylor requested Items D and E be pulled for separate consideration. COMMISSIONER IMPERIAL MADE A MOTION, WITH A SECOND BY VICE- CHAIRMAN NUNEZ to approve the Consent Calendar items listed above. Vote resulted: Yes: Clark, Imperial, Nunez, Taylor, Tran No: None Abstain: None Absent: None The Chairman declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. D. Exclusive Negotiating Agreement - Richmont Development The City of Rosemead received a request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) from Richmont Development to redevelop the 6+/- site at the northeast corner of Valley Boulevard and Walnut Grove Avenue. Over the past several weeks, Richmont Development, which is a Los Angeles based development company, has worked with staff to develop a finalized ENA for the Commission's consideration. CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 2 of 9 • E Recommendation: That the Commission approve the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the Rosemead Community Development Commission and Richmont Development for the potential development of the 6+/- acre site at northeast corner of Valley Boulevard and Walnut Grove Avenue. Chairman Taylor expressed concern about displacing owners of improved properties for the sake of one interested property owner and realtor wanting exclusive negotiating rights. He referenced other ENA proposals approved in the past, which involved incorporation of vacant parcels. Executive Director Lazzaretto stated that under Redevelopment guidelines this property might be considered underutilized because of placement of buildings and the amount of open space in relation to the buildings, but nonetheless is developed. The developer is proposing a much different development on the corner with a replacement of mixed uses. The proposal is for different development stages/phases. CDC Executive Deputy Director Saeki explained the developer has a relationship with the property owner at the corner of Walnut Grove and Valley. Plans currently submitted are preliminary; if approval is given a more comprehensive and detailed plan will be submitted for Commission consideration. Chairman Taylor felt apprehensive about subjecting four additional properties to the threat of condemnation based one property owner's partnership with a developer. Ir addition, Chairman Taylor pointed out that community buildings such as a church, school, and Masonic lodge would be displaced if the development went through. Mr. Saeki explained that this is a typical redevelopment scenario encountered in his experience and that the ENA agreement specifies the provision of relocation assistance to displaced owners. Commissioner Tran indicated he had no problem in supporting the ENA negotiation agreement because before condemnation is employed, the matter would have to come back for approval. Mr. Tran pointed out that staff has planned a visionary Master Plan which include four to five parcels; ENA approval would begin the first step. Chairman Taylor asked what would happen if ENA properties approached don't want to sell. Mr. Saeki explained the different options available which might include condemnation in the future if approved by the Commission. Chairman Taylor asked how many times Mr. Saeki had been involved with the condemnation process; he indicated he has been involved five times. CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 3 of 9 Commissioner Clark indicated she was not in support of the proposal. Chairman Taylor recalled only being involved with the process once in Rosemead; the process did not achieve good results for the City. He again expressed apprehension about displacing improved properties, especially community service buildings. Mr. Saeki pointed out that the ENA was put together with guidance from Agency Attorney Wallin and provides the Commission with the flexibility to change their mind. He indicated the proposal would give the developer the opportunity to approach the property owners to determine if a deal can be brokered without City assistance. Chairman Taylor pointed out the developer is free to do that now, without the ENA agreement. Mr. Saeki agreed but pointed out that the agreement provides the Realtor with an exclusive. Chairman Taylor commented that part of the ENA process includes sending owners a 25 page letter which states their property may be condemned, generating anxiety. Executive Director Lazzaretto emphasized staff is not recommending eminent domain in any form at this point; it is always a possibility, but it is not currently recommended. Agency Attorney Wallin added that part of the ENA proposal includes a provision which reserves the right of City to extend the owner participation process with all of the property owners that occupy the land being discussed. Juan Nunez, Rosemead resident, expressed concern about the ENA agreement and urged caution. Commissioner Clark again stated she was not in support of displacing functioning properties and indicated she preferred development take place on vacant lots. Chairman Taylor agreed. VICE-CHAIRMAN NUNEZ MADE A MADE A MOTION, WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TRAN to approve the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the Rosemead Community Development Commission and Richmont Development for the potential development of the 6+/- acre site at northeast corner of Valley Boulevard and Walnut Grove Avenue. Vote resulted: Yes: Nunez, Tran No: Clark, Imperial, Taylor Absent: None Abstain: None CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 4 of 9 J 0 Commissioner Imperial inquired about a property at San Gabriel and Garvey. Chairman Taylor indicated information about that property was not currently available. E. Exclusive Negotiating Agreement - Mr. Hieu Tran, Owner/Developer of the San Gabriel Superstore The City of Rosemead has received a request from Mr. Hieu Tran, owner/developer of the San Gabriel Superstore in the City of San Gabriel, for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with the Community Development Commission to redevelop the 1+/- acre site at southeast corner of Rosemead Boulevard and Steele Street. Over the past several weeks, Mr. Tran has worked with staff to develop a finalized ENA for the Commission's consideration. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Commission approve the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the Rosemead Community Development Commission and Mr. Hieu Tran of the San Gabriel Superstore for the potential development of the 1+/- acre site at the southeast corner of Rosemead Boulevard and Steele Street. Executive Director Lazzaretto summarized the proposal as a mirror image of the one previously discussed for Richmont Development. Chairman Taylor commented a precedent was being set, whereby an individual owner of an existing business comes in to the Commission to put a development on one parcel. The owners get the benefit of selling their property through the eminent domain process. He asked why individual owners can't negotiate their own deals with developers. Mr. Lazzaretto replied that ideally individual owners negotiate privately with developers, but this doesn't always happen. He reiterated that staff is not advocating the use of eminent domain; it is reserved as a last resort. Developers have to invest a lot of time for property negotiations and an ENA gives them a guarantee that no other developer is going to do the same thing. He referenced another Commission development at Rio Hondo which did not involve the use of an ENA which resulted in a positive outcome. Chairman Taylor asked why a similar process could not be undertaken with the proposal being discussed. Mr. Lazzaretto explained the circumstances were different; an adjacent project has not been proposed in this case. An appraisal could be done, but it is a very costly and risky process, as the City would not know which developer might be interested even if the property could be acquired. He explained one advantage of the ENA is that the initial risk is taken by the developer, who contacts property owners and brings back a plan for Commission consideration. CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 5 of 9 • 9 Agency Attorney Wallin reiterated that under an ENA set-up, the appraisal is done at the developer's expense. Chairman Taylor felt the ENA process is protection of going through the appraisal bit awkward; as the owner is getting the process. Mr. Saeki pointed out that an appraisal is almost complete, as it was authorized by the Commission prior to his employment with the City. Deputy City Manager Chi explained that initially staff felt this development might be combined with another project which has since been determined as not a possibility. Prior to receiving and presenting the results of the appraisal to the Commission, a developer approached staff with the idea of using the same architect and work with the City to bring in an appropriate tenant if granted an exclusive agreement. Chairman Taylor asked why the owner isn't already independently approaching the businesses. Mr. Saeki and Mr. Chi explained that an ENA provides a realtor with an incentive to negotiate and imparts more design control to the Commission, as the final project would have to receive agency approval. Commissioner Clark pointed out that developers have to get their projects approved anyway. Vice-Chairman Nunez commented that realtors might not be willing to invest a lot of money and time if they do not have exclusive agreement. If an exclusive is not granted, new owners may choose to exclusively build apartments in that area. As it is zoned for that type of use, by law the Commission could not oppose the apartment development even though a desire and need for a mixed use development has been discussed. Commissioner Tran asked what type of retail space has been proposed by the developer. Mr. Saeki indicated a Trader Joes specialty grocery store and a TGI Fridays Restaurant have been discussed with the developer. Staff can shop the space with national chains if the control granted by an ENA is achieved. Commissioner Clark asked why the same staff pitches cannot be made without an ENA agreement. Mr. Chi responded that without the agreement, the developer would be in inclusive control of the project, eliminating City design and tenant selection input. CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 6 of 9 • 0 Interim Community Development Director Duff explained that when developers approach national retail tenants, one of the first questions they ask is if the developer has an exclusive. An ENA shows developer commitment and site control for the project Developers sometimes do not expose their site to national retailers out of fear that they will shop around for different developers. An exclusive keeps developer fear at bay. Chairman Taylor commented that Traders Joes has said no to a store in Rosemead when they have been asked in the past. Mr. Saeki shared that the City of Monrovia had approached Traders Joes for a while and they always had said no. Monrovia now has Trader Joes in the Huntington Oaks Center as the result of a redevelopment project. Mr. Duff indicated a similar scenario took place in the City of Claremont, which also had received a negative answer from Trader Joes and then received a store as a result of an ENA. Mr. Saeki further commented that he believed Claremont had a development agreement which resulted from an ENA. Commissioner Clark reminded the Commission that in the past, 52 letters were sent out to national chain restaurants and each request was rejected. Vice-Chairman Nunez inquired if an ENA was in place when requests were made Chairman Taylor indicated he was not entirely sure. As a side note, he commented about a section on the staff report that was copied from a previous report and not updated correctly. Mr. Saeki apologized for the error. Chairman Taylor stated his reasons for not supporting the item: his preference is to give owners and developers the first chance to come up with their own agreements rather than the City getting involved with a threat of eminent domain. COMMISSIONER TRAN MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE, WITH A SECOND BY VICE-CHAIRMAN NUNEZ, to approve the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the Rosemead Community Development Commission and Mr. Hieu Tran of the San Gabriel Superstore for the potential development of the 1+/- acre site at the southeast corner of Rosemead Boulevard and Steele Street. Vote resulted: Yes: Nunez, Tran No: Clark, Imperial, Taylor Absent: None Abstain: None Chairman Taylor encouraged staff to facilitate owner discussions amongst themselves. CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 7 of 9 • 0 Mr. Saeki indicated the owner had already said no to develop the property when the City conducted the appraisal as part of the owner participation process several months ago. Chairman Taylor clarified this was new information and would subject the owner to condemnation because the owner already said no to development. He asked why staff was initiating the ENA process given the owner's stated lack of development interest. Mr. Saike indicated the recommended action was a step in the redevelopment process. Commissioner Tran clarified that he had already said "no" to developing the property, but not to selling the property. Chairman Taylor didn't question development of the site, but rather the methods used by the City to achieve development. Commissioner Tran pointed out that an ENA was just passed at Temple City and Valley which will affect three existing businesses. Chairman Taylor pointed out the parcel is adjacent to a four acre vacant lot. Commissioner Tran asked why he supported other ENA proposals and not the one just voted on. Chairman Taylor responded the owners can get together, as the areas there are blighted. Commissioner Tran inquired if Chairman Taylor wanted to see apartments built at the site in question. Chairman Taylor responded the City needs to be very careful, as the City has limited commercial sales properties. Commissioner Tran agreed and responded that this is why the ENA was suggested with Trader Joes as a possible tenant. He further indicated that by voting to not support the ENA, he had turned down a Trader Joes in the City. Chairman Taylor disagreed, indicated that they had not turned away any retailer and pointed out that Trader Joes was a hypothetical, possible tenant. Commissioner Tran responded by saying it was his opinion and he was entitled to it. Chairman Taylor acknowledged his opinion and reminded him the issue was settled with the vote on the item. 3. MATTERS FROM THE CHAIRMAN & COMMISSIONERS CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 8 of 9 • 0 4. MATTERS FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & STAFF Executive Director Lazzaretto introduced George Agaba, who is now a permanent member of Planning Department. The Commission welcomed him aboard. 5. ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting is scheduled for January 23, 2007 at 7:47 p.m. This is the only Community Development Commission meeting taking place during the month of January. Respectfully submitted: k& L,!~ Commission Secretary APPROVED: CHAIRM CDC Minutes 12-19-2006 Page 9 of 9 0 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS. CITY OF ROSEMEAD • 1, Nina Castruita, Commission Secretary of the City of Rosemead Community Development Commission, do hereby certify that the minutes from December 19, 2006 were duly and regularly approved and adopted by the Rosemead Community Development Commission on the 23rd of January 2007, by the following vote to wit: Yes: CLARK, IMPERIAL, NUNEZ, TAYLOR, TRAN No: NONE Absent: NONE Abstain: NONE J ~ \~,l1LF/~ Nina Castruita Commission Secretary