CC - Minutes - 03-22-22 Special and RegularMINUTES OF CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 22, 2022
The special meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Low
at 6:04 p.m. in the Rosemead City Hall Council Chamber, located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard,
Rosemead, California.
PRESENT: Mayor Low, Mayor Pro Tem Dang, Council Members Annenta, Clark, and Tang
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Kim, City Attorney Richman and City Clerk Hernandez
1. CLOSED SESSION
A. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE DISCIPLINE/DISMISSAL/RELEASE
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957
City Attorney Richman announced the City Council would go into closed session and
announced any reportable actions at the 7:00 p.m. regular meeting.
Mayor Low recessed the closed session meeting at 6:05 p.m. and reconvened at 7:08
p.m. to open session.
City Attorney Richman reported the City Council would return to closed session at
the end of the regular meeting.
7:00 P.M.
The regular meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order by Mayor Low
at 7:08 p.m. in the Rosemead City Hall Council Chamber, located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard,
Rosemead, California.
PRESENT: Mayor Low, Mayor Pro Tem Dang, Council Members Armenta, Clark, and Tang
ABSENT: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Mayor Low
INVOCATION was led by Council Member Armenta
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Kim, City Attorney Richman, Director of Parks and
Recreation Boecking, Director of Public Works Chung, Interim Finance Director Chamberlain,
and City Clerk Hernandez
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 1 of 20
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
Sue Yamamoto Library Manager, announced the library's new schedule in addition
to continuing sidewalk services. She elaborated on the library's story time session
is on April 10. She announced that on April 5`^, there will be first, second, and
booster vaccinations readily available to the residents. Ms. Yamamoto stated the
library will now be considered a tool lending service. The library will now have tools
that the public can rent out as they would books.
3. PRESENTATIONS - None
4. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Public Hearing on Specific Plan Amendment 2 1 -01 and Zone Change 21-01
Del Mar Property, LLC has submitted entitlement applications requesting to amend
the Zoning Map by changing the zone of 7539 & 7545 Garvey Avenue (APN
Nos. 5286-022-009 and 5286-022-010) from Garvey Avenue Specific Plan (GSP)
to Garvey Avenue Specific Plan, Incentivized Mixed -Use (GSP-MU) zone, for the
development of a new residential/commercial mixed-use development. The project
proposes the construction of a seven -story mixed-use development with 6,346 square
feet of nonresidential (commercial) use on the first floor and 75 residential units on
the first through seventh floors. Of the 75 residential units, 30 are live/work units and
45 are residential apartments. The project also proposes 147 parking spaces and
12,547 square feet of landscaping. The project also includes a text amendment to the
Garvey Avenue Specific Plan permitting sit-down restaurants with a minimum
requirement of 1,000 square feet to obtain an Administrative Use Permit (AUP) for
beer/wine sales in the Garvey Avenue Specific Plan (GSP) and Garvey Avenue
Specific Plan, Incentivized Mixed -Use (GSP-MU) zones.
Recommendation: That the City Council take the following actions:
1. Conduct a public hearing and receive public testimony;
2. Introduce the first reading, by title only, Ordinance No. 1008, entitled
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, TO APPROVE ZONE CHANGE 21-01 AND
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 21-01 TO AMEND THE
ZONING MAP BY CHANGING THE ZONE OF 7539 & 7545
GARVEY AVENUE (APN NOS. 5286-022-009 AND 5286-022-
010) FROM GARVEY AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN (GSP) TO
GARVEY AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN, INCENTIVIZED MIXED-
USE (GSP-MU) ZONE, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW
RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT
AND APPROVE A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE GARVEY
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 2 of 20
AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN PERMITTING SIT-DOWN
RESTAURANTS WITH A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF
1,000 SQUARE FEET TO OBTAIN AN ADMINISTRATIVE USE
PERMIT (AUP) FOR BEER/WINE SALES IN THE GARVEY
AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN (GSP) AND GARVEY AVENUE
SPECIFIC PLAN, INCENTIVIZED MIXED-USE (GSP-MU)
ZONES; and
3. Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2022-18, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR SPECIFIC
PLAN AMENDMENT 2 1 -01 AND ZONE CHANGE 21-01. THE
SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 7539 & 7545 GARVEY
AVENUE (APN NOS. 5286-022-009 AND 5286-022-010)
City Attorney Richman stated that City staff requested Item 3A to be pulled and
moved to the April 12, 2022, City Council agenda. She explained that staff received
a letter and the CEQA consultant must review.
Council Member Armenta requested to open for public comments related to Item 3A.
Mayor Low opened the public hearing for public comments. There being no public
comments, Mayor Low continued the public hearing to the next City Council
meeting.
ACTION: Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Dang and seconded by Council Member
Armenta to postpone the public hearing on Specific Plan Amendment 2 1 -01 and Zone
Change 21-01 to the April 12, 2022 City Council meeting agenda. The motion was
carried out by the following roll call vote AYES: ARMENTA, TANG, LOW, AND
DANG; NOES: NONE ABSTAIN: CLARK
Council Member Clark stated for the record she abstained due to her property's
proximity to the project.
B. Public Hearing on Appeal of Modification 21-08
On February 7, 2022, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing of Modification 21-08 for an extensive exterior fagade renovation of the
existing Universal Plaza building, located at 8855 Valley Boulevard in the Central
Business District with a Residential/Commercial Mixed -Use Development and
Design Overlay (CBD/RC-MUDO/D-O) zone. The applicant intends on converting
the Universal Plaza building into a food hall. The only Planning Commission
approval required by the City's code for the Applicant's project was a Design
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 3 of 20
Review. All other aspects of the project were permitted under the Code. The Planning
Commission approved the Design Review as permissible under the Code.
On February 16, 2022, the City Clerk's Office received a letter of appeal from the
Law Offices of Murray D. Fischer, representing 420 Boyd Street, LLC, the property
owner of 8801-8845 Valley Boulevard. As a result, the public hearing for the appeal
was scheduled for March 22, 2022 to be heard by City Council.
Recommendation: That the City Council uphold the Planning Commission's decision
for Modification 21-08 and adopt Resolution No. 2022-19, entitled:
AN RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE MODIFICATION
21-08, AMENDING DESIGN REVIEW 03-110, BY MODIFYING
CONDITION OF APPROVAL NO. 1 AND ELIMINATING
CONDITION OF APPROVAL NO. 24, ALLOWING FOR AN
EXTERIOR FACADE RENOVATION AND THE REVIEW OF
THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLANS CONCURRENTLY
WITH THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION, AND PERMITTING
STAFF TO REVIEW FUTURE SIGNAGE. THE SUBJECT SITE
IS LOCATED AT 8855 VALLEY BOULEVARD (APN: 5391-
009-002), IN THE RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL MIXED-USE
DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN OVERLAY (CBD/RC-
MUDO/D-O) ZONE
Associate Planner Lao explained the City Clerks department received an appeal letter
on February 16, 2022 from the Law Office of Murry D. Fisher on behalf of
420 Boyd St. LLC, the property owner of 8801-8845 Valley Blvd relating to the
Planning Commission's decision for Modification 21-08. Associate Planner Lao
stated all the minimum code requirements were met for the project modification for
residential/commercial mixed-use development and design overlay zone.
Council Member Armenta asked what the reasons for the appeal were.
Associate Planner Lao stated the reasons for the appeal was a private easement
agreement between the property owners, impact of parking related services,
inadequate loading zones, inadequate trash areas, measuring of electric meter and
water meter, inadequate consideration of utilities, maintenance needs, smells, and
inadequate attention to construction needs.
Council Member Armenta clarified she asked for an explanation for transparency
reasons, for anybody listening to the meeting via online can understand the item being
discussed.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 4 of 20
Mayor Pro Tem Dang stated he was a bit confused and thought the item was a design
review item to the Planning Commission. Asked for clarification of the item.
City Attorney Richman explained that the staff report does discuss the reason that the
project is before the City Council from the Planning Commission, which was the
discretionary approval that would be required in the code in the design review. There
was a fagade improvement in the front. The other aspects of the projects are consistent
with the code. Therefore, there is no need to go forward, except for the fact of the
design component. The appellant lists several other things, not related to design
review, for the basis of why they filed an appeal. The staff report notes the concerns
the appellant is bringing forward, are not really within the purview of the City
Council to reconsider for this particular review.
Council Member Tang asked what the current uses of the property are and what
businesses are in the Universal Bank build.
Associate Planner Lao stated the current use of the property is a shopping center that
include offices, retail and restaurants. There are currently offices in the building, but
most are vacant, there is a medical lab and a closed down restaurant.
Council Member Tang asked if within the design review, there were any changes.
Associate Planner Lao answered the design review was for the fagade renovation; the
use will remain the same as a shopping center use.
Council Member Tang asked if the property owner can decide the use of the property.
Associate Planner Lao answered yes, the property owner can choose what use they
want on the property.
Council Member Tang asked if there was no requirement of a ratio of each use such
as 30 percent restaurant, 40 percent retail, etc.
Associate Planner Lao answered no, there is no ratio requirement on use.
Council Member Armenta asked if there will be any parameters on what floors will
have specific uses.
Associate Planner Lao replied there are no set rules on what floors require what uses.
City Attorney Richman stated public comments should be heard and give the
appellant an opportunity to speak and present their appeal.
Council Member Clark asked when the additional letter to the appeal was received.
City Clerk Hernandez replied that the second letter was submitted by the attorney of
the appellant five minutes before the City Council meeting began.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 5 of 20
Mayor Low opened the public hearing for public comments
Judith Manouchehri, Appellant's Attorney, used a board as a visual to describe the
property. She stated that her clients were not given proper notice of the public hearing
before the Planning Commission meeting to express their concerns. The concerns of
her client include significant intensification of usage and the impact that it will have
on her client and their tenants. She noted that the original development of the building
was for bank use in the 1960's and not a food hall that will require substantial
improvements to the building. If approved, there will be limited parking, parking of
food delivery trucks on property, asked to limit the use of roof top for a restaurant,
increase in traffic, late hours of operation and increase noise. If the project is
approved, the City should request Mr. Lee the property owner of the building, to be
given substantial conditions to mitigate the concerns addressed by the appellant.
Attorney Manouchehri read for the record property owner, Allan Ta's comments
expressing concern that the City was not requiring any investigating studies for the
food hall. In addition, Mr. Ta indicated the project will create a lack of parking
accommodation and requested the City Council reject the project.
Lim Pam, business owner at Universal Shopping Center where the project area is
being proposed, stated her concern was the food hall will have 27 vendors that will
use the current parking.
Victor Truong, Manager of Great Wall Supermarket, expressed the new project will
take over the current parking spaces.
Unidentified Speaker stated that her parents have a restaurant at the plaza which has
very limited parking and are concerned with losing parking for their customers.
Ling Yam, business owner at the plaza stated that her restaurant operates from Spm
until 9pm because there is no parking during the lunch hour. She said the new project
with 27 food vendors will impact parking even more.
There being no more comments, Mayor Low closed the public comments portion of
the public hearing.
Mayor Low asked if the overall project addresses the parking concerns brought by
residents.
City Manager Kim explained the application that went to the Planning Commission
was strictly for the design review. Since the appellant submitted an appeal for the
design review, the item was before the City Council to consider the design review
application.
Mayor Low asked for clarification if the concerns addressed apply to the appeal from
the appellant.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes ofMarch 22, 2022
Page 6 of 20
City Manager Kim answered the concerns do not apply to the appeal. Staff reviewed
the project previously and it was determined that the project complies with the code
requirements.
Mayor Low stated if the project meets code regulations and a use can switch from
commercial to restaurant use.
City Manager Kim stated yes, there have been changes in use from other businesses
that changed from commercial to restaurant at that plaza.
Mayor Pro Tem Dang asked for the definition of parking at a shopping center.
Associate Planner Lao read the code regulation for shopping centers stating that a
Shopping Center meant a commercial site with two or more separate businesses,
managed as a total entity, sharing common access circulation, signage, and pedestrian
parking areas. So that a public right of way does not need to be used to get from one
business to another in the C-1 and C-3 and CBD zones.
Mayor Pro Tem Dang indicated the key take aways are that there is circulation, and
you don't need to leave the property and then go into a separate drive where
everything is already interconnected and it's free flowing. The change of use didn't
trigger parking because the improvements were only fagade remodel. Since the
property is a shopping center, any business can change its use from commercial, to
retail and restaurant and vice versa. He further explained that the only reason the
project went to the Planning Commission was because of the fagade remodel,
otherwise the project is code compliant. Lastly, stated that once plans are submitted
the Building and Safety and Fire Department will also check the project to ensure its
code compliant.
City Attorney Richman stated the concerns were not from the findings of the design
review.
Council Member Armenta stated parking in the plaza has always been an issue.
She emphasized how over utilized the parking lot is. She noted that the City has
asked Boyd Street, LLC to clean up the property many times. Parking is an issue
everywhere in the City. She noted that in the letter submitted by the attorney,
it's requesting there be sufficient trash bin. Mrs. Armenta noted that she drove by on
Muscatel Avenue and noticed the restaurant at the corner of the plaza had cardboard
all over stacked against the wall. She added that she gets complaints from residents
of foul smell and trash everywhere from the businesses in the plaza. She reiterated
that the appellant was requesting the City to implement strict conditions, which she
asked Boyd Street to also follow their own conditions.
Council Member Clark stated her concerns involved parking and traffic.
Council Member Tang stated that the use of the shopping plaza is not changing, the
project is only a design review. The use is still a shopping center designated by the
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 7 of 20
Municipal Code that is a mix of anything, retail, restaurants, it could be whatever it
wants. He stated he would like to see the property owners update their businesses to
align with the vision of the City.
ACTION: Moved by Council Member Tang and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Dang
to uphold the Planning Commission's decision for Modification 21-08 and adopt
Resolution No. 2022-19. The motion was carried out by the following roll call vote
AYES: Armenta, Tang, Low, and Dang; NOES: None ABSTAINED: Clark
Mayor Low recessed the meeting and reconvened back at 8:34 p.m.
C. Public Hearing on Municipal Code Amendment 21-05
Municipal Code Amendment 21-05 (MCA 21-05) is a City initiated amendment to
Title 17 ("Zoning") of the Rosemead Municipal Code by amending Sections
17.28.030(C)(4) and 17.30.040(E) permitting sit-down restaurants with a minimum
requirement of 1,000 square feet to obtain an Administrative Use Permit ("AUP")for
beer/wine sales in the Neighborhood Commercial (C-1), Medium Commercial (C-3),
Regional Commercial (C-4), Central Business District (CBD), and Residential/
Commercial Mixed -Use Development Overlay (RC-MUDO) zones, in place of a
Conditional Use Permit ("CUP"). The amendment is intended to assist the City's
restaurant business community and provide relief to those that are facing economic
hardship from the COVID-19 pandemic. The AUP is an administrative review by the
Community Development Director, whereas the CUP is approved by the Planning
Commission.
Recommendation: That the City Council take the following actions:
1. Conduct a public hearing and receive public testimony; and
2. Introduce the first reading, by title only, Ordinance No. 1009, entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, FOR THE APPROVAL OF MCA 21-05,
AMENDING SECTIONS 17.28.030(C)(4) AND 17.30.040(E) OF
TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL
CODE, PERMITTING SIT-DOWN RESTAURANTS WITH A
MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF 1,000 SQUARE FEET TO
OBTAIN AN ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT ("AUP")
FOR BEER/WINE SALES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL (C-1), MEDIUM COMMERCIAL (C-3),
REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (C-4), CENTRAL BUSINESS
DISTRICT (CBD), AND RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL
MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (RC-MUDO)
ZONES, IN PLACE OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
("CUP")
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 8 of 20
Associate Planner Lao reported that the City initiated amendment of the Rosemead
Municipal Code was being amended to permit sit-down restaurants with a minimum
requirement of 1,000 square feet to obtain an Administrative Use Permit for
beer/wine sales in the Neighborhood Commercial, Medium Commercial, Regional
Commercial, Central Business District, and Residential/Commercial Mixed -Use
Development Overlay zones. The amendment is intended to assist the City's
restaurant business community and provide relief to those that are facing economic
hardship from the COVID-19 pandemic.
Mayor Low opened the Public Comment period.
Resident Allen asked the City Council to consider the impact Design Review 21-05
will have on the community and nearby school.
There being no further comments, Mayor Low closed the Public Hearing public
comments.
Mayor Pro Tem Dang showed his support for MC 21-05. He stated this would be
great for the City in making it more competitive against neighboring cities. He stated
that restaurants will keep the economic engine going. He emphasized that the City
would still have control over how restaurant operations are handled and carried out.
Mayor Low agreed with what Mayor Pro Tem Dang stated, adding that any
restrictions needed would still be in place.
City Manager Kim stated that the Administrative Use Permit process is similar to the
Conditional Use Permit process in that there is still noticing and public review taking
place. However, the Administrative Use Permit process is done by the Community
Development Director and not the Planning Commission.
Council Member Clark asked if there was an appeal process that would take place if
there was opposition.
City Manager Kim replied yes, it can be appealed to the Planning Commission which
can then go to the City Council.
Council Member Armenta asked to take into consideration the types of spirits being
served. She stated that in the City of San Gabriel there is a market that sells wine and
beer, and a food court that are near two high schools and an elementary school within
proximity. She stated she has yet to hear any issues. She urged City staff to ensure
they look at how many licenses are being approved and the concentration of one
location.
Mayor Pro Tem Dang asked Associate Planner Lao if the ordinance applies to bars
and liquor stores or accessory to a restaurant.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 9 of20
Associate Planner Lao clarified it only applies to a "sit down restaurant' setting, a
restaurant must be at least 1,000 square foot in size, and no fast-food restaurants.
City Manager Kim clarified the permit is only for beer and wine, no hard liquors.
Council Member Tang stated a customer will have to order food, not just beer
and wine.
City Manager Kim explained the intent for customers is to eat and have the option to
order beer and wine. He reiterated that it is a sit-down restaurant setting, beer and
wine can be sold, the restaurant must be at least 1,000 square feet or larger.
The applicant will go through a similar process for a Conditional Use Permit.
Council Member Tang asked what the cost difference to the applicant is when
discussing Administrative Use Permit versus a Conditional Use Permit.
Associate Planner Lao explained that the Conditional Use Permit application fee
would be $1,985 and the Administrative Use Permit application fee would be $1,165.
Council Member Tang asked what the timeline difference between the processing of
an Administrative Use Permit and Conditional Use Permit or other impacts is.
Associate Planner Lao explained that a Conditional use Permit does take longer
because it goes to the Planning Commission, which only meet twice a month. An
Administrative Use Permit process will go faster because it is reviewed and processed
by City staff. The notice requirements are still the same for both processes.
Council Member Tang asked how far in advance is the public given notice to voice
their concerns before the Community Development Director makes a decision.
Associate Planner Lao answered the noticing requirement is ten days.
City Manager Kim added that the Administrative Use Permit process is streamlined
administratively, while the Conditional Use Permit process is mandated by the
Planning Commission which meets twice a month Commission.
Council Member Tang stated that a Conditional Use Permit can take anywhere from
two weeks to four weeks if a Planning Commission meeting is cancelled.
Council Member Tang asked how the Planning Commission came up with the
minimum of 1,000 square feet.
Mayor Pro Tem Dang answered that the number was borrowed from the Freeway
Corridor Specific Plan. He noted that he and Council Member Ly took the average
size of a restaurant.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 10 of20
Mayor Low asked if the 1,000 square footage includes the dining and sitting area
together.
Mayor Pro Tem Dang answered it is the dining and kitchen area together.
Council Member Tang said he is inclined to support the hearing process; however,
he does like items to go before the Planning Commission because it gives assurance
to residents to voiced their concerns.
Mayor Pro Tem Dang asked City Manager Kim to explained how the appeal process
will be for an Administrative Use Permit.
City Manager Kim explained that there is a process for noticing and having a hearing
with the Administrative Use Permit process which if appealed will go to the Planning
Commission.
Council Member Clark asked what the radius number is for notices being mailed out
to residents.
City Manager Kim replied the standard radius is 300 feet around the project.
Council Member Tang stated that if the intent is to attract businesses into vacant
spaces, how is the City going to promote this new Administrative Use Permit process.
City Manager Kim stated there are developments happening to help promote
businesses in the City.
ACTION: Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Dang and seconded by Council Member
Armenta to introduce the first reading, by title only, Ordinance No. 1009. The motion
was carried out by the following roll call vote AYES: Armenta, Clark, Tang, Low,
and Dang; NOES: None
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
Council Member Armenia pulled Consent Calendar items D, E, F, and G.
ACTION: Moved by Council Member Tang and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Dang to
approve Consent Calendar Items A, B, C, and H, with the exception of D, E, F, and G. The
motion was carried out by the following roll call vote AYES: Armenta, Clark, Tang, Low,
and Dang; NOES: None
A. Claims and Demands
Resolution No. 2022-21
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page I I of 20
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS
AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $1,463,561.92 CHECKS
NUMBERED 110859 THROUGH NUMBER 110956,
DRAFTS NUMBERED 5601 THROUGH NUMBER 5612 AND
EFT NUMBERED 50981 THROUGH NUMBER 50993
INCLUSIVELY
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2022-21.
B. Approval of Minutes
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the regular meeting minutes of
December 8, 2020.
C. Display of the Vietnamese American Heritage and Freedom Flag with the
United States of America Flag Along Valley Boulevard as a Symbol of Freedom
and Democracy
Every year, the Vietnamese Refugee Community of Los Angeles County request that
the City Council support the Vietnamese American citizens of the Rosemead
community by authorizing the display of the Vietnamese American Heritage and
Freedom Flag along with the United States of America Flag, as a symbol of freedom
and democracy, on Valley Boulevard from Saturday, April 23, 2022, through Sunday,
May 1, 2022. The flags' display together is consistent with the United States Flag
Code protocol.
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the request of the Vietnamese
Refugee Community of Los Angeles County to display the Vietnamese American
Heritage and Freedom Flag side-by-side with the United States of America Flag along
Valley Boulevard from April 23, 2022, through May 1, 2022, in accordance with the
protocol specified in the United States Flag Code.
D. Various Residential Street Resurfacing, FY 2021-22 - Project No. 21032 — Award of
Construction Contract
As part of the City's Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Capital Improvement Program, the City
Council approved the Various Residential Street Resurfacing Project (Project). The
Project consists of asphalt concrete cold mill and overlay, localized full depth asphalt
concrete replacement at various locations (pothole repairs), traffic loop restoration,
markings and striping at various locations Citywide. On March 9, 2022, the City
performed a bid opening, and publicly opened four (4) sealed bids. After staff
conducted a comprehensive bid analysis to determine the apparent lowest bid, the bid
submitted by Onyx Paving Company, Inc. in the amount of $927,000 is determined
to be the lowest responsive bid.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 12 of 20
Council Member Armenta asked that staff ensure that the aesthetics of the project
resurfacing look good.
Council Member Tang asked if City staff could verify if there are upcoming road
projects from utility companies that could be done first and then resurface the street.
Public Works Director Chung explained that there is a street moratorium, which
utility companies are not allowed to break into roads for four years after the
completion of a City resurfacing project. If there was a break in a recent resurfaced
road, it may be due to an emergency. He noted that notification letters will be sent to
various utility companies to make them aware of street resurfacing withing the City.
Recommendation: That the City Council take the following actions
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a construction contract with Onyx Paving
Company, Inc. in the amount of $927,000. In addition, authorize an amount of
$92,700 (10%) as a contingency to cover the cost of unforeseen construction
expenses, for a total construction budget of $1,019,700.
2. Adopt Resolution No. 2022-20 amending the City's Fiscal Year 2021-22 CIP
Budget to appropriate additional funds in the amount of $19,700 to increase
funding for the Various Residential Street Resurfacing Project No. 21032, for a
total Project budget of $1,019,700.
ACTION: Moved by Council Member Armenia and seconded by Council Member Clark to
authorize the City Manager to execute a construction contract with Onyx Paving Company,
Inc. and adopt Resolution No. 2022-20. The motion was carried out by the following roll
call vote AYES: Armenta, Clark, Tang, Low, and Dang; NOES: None
E. Approval of the Traffic Commission Recommendations for Traffic Improvements at
the Intersection of Del Mar Avenue and Fern Avenue
At the February 3, 2022, Traffic Commission Meeting, staff presented
recommendations to improve the existing roadway conditions at the intersection of
Del Mar Avenue and Fern Avenue. After discussion and presentation of the item, the
Traffic Commission approved the staff recommendations for the area. Public Works
Field Services staff will be able to complete all the recommended items. If necessary,
additional materials and supplies may be purchased at a minimal expense to complete
the recommended work, and staff would utilize the approved Fiscal Year 2021-2022
Traffic Signs and Markers available funds.
Recommendation: That the City Council authorize approval for the following
improvements at the intersection of Del Mar Avenue and Fern Avenue:
1. Repaint existing STOP pavement legend and stop bar for the west leg of Fern
Avenue and Del Mar Avenue.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 13 of 20
2. Remove and replace existing 30"00" STOP sign in the west leg of Fern Avenue
and Del Mar Avenue with anew 36"x36" STOP sign (RI -1).
3. Install "CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP" plaque (W44P) below new
STOP sign. Per CAMUTCD Section 2C.59 guidelines the "CROSS TRAFFIC
DOES NOT STOP" (W44P) plaque may be used in combination with a STOP
sign when engineering judgment indicates that conditions are present that are
causing or could cause drivers to misinterpret the intersection as an all -way stop.
4. Install vertical red retroreflective strip on the STOP signpost for enhanced
visibility.
5. Install "School Crossing Ahead Signage" (SW24-3(CA)) on the north and south
legs of Del Mar approaching the intersection.
6. Red Curb Installation: Extend the existing red curb, on the west side of the north
leg of Del Mar Avenue to 16' north of the crosswalk and install 10' of red curb
on the east side of the south leg of Del Mar Avenue, north of the shark teeth.
7. Removal of Non -Conforming Signage: The existing non -conforming signage
"WHEN FLASHING" plaque under the existing "School Speed 25 mph" sign
should be removed and replaced with a new S4 -2P plaque "WHEN CHILDREN
ARE PRESENT." Per CAMUTCD Section 713.16 reduced school speed limit
ahead sign (S4-5, S4 -5A).
Council Member Armenta stated that Del Mar Avenue is seen as a speeding street.
Furthermore, she and Council Member Clark attended a grand opening ceremony for
an early head start program school on Del Mar Avenue. She noted that traffic calming
measures are needed and thanked City staff for being proactive in the safety of
pedestrians.
ACTION: Moved by Council Member Armenta and seconded by Council Member Clark to
approve the traffic improvements at the intersection of Del Mar Avenue and Fern Avenue.
The motion was carried out by the following roll call vote AYES: Armenta, Clark, Tang,
Low, and Dang; NOES: None
F. Approval of the Traffic Commission Recommendations for Traffic Improvements at
the Northwest Curb Ramp at The Intersection of Garvey Avenue and Bartlett Avenue
At the February 3, 2022, Traffic Commission Meeting, staff presented
recommendations to increase the visibility of the curb ramp located in the northwest
corner of Garvey Avenue and Bartlett Avenue and to indicate that it is not a driveway
and to deter vehicles from using it as such. After discussion and presentation of the
item, the Traffic Commission approved the staff recommendations for the area.
Public Works Field Services staff will be able to complete all the recommended
items. If necessary, additional materials and supplies may be purchased at a minimal
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes ojMarch 22, 2022
Page 14 of 20
expense to complete the recommended work, and staff would utilize the approved
Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Traffic Signs and Markers available funds.
Recommendation: That the City Council authorize approval for the following
improvements for the curb ramp located in the northwest corner of Garvey Avenue
and Bartlett Avenue:
Installation of approximately 16 -feet of yellow handrail behind the curb ramp
along the entire elevated step per Caltrans standards.
2. Installation of approximately 6 -feet of red curb on the southwest side of the curb
ramp apron, starting at the back of curb return to the end of slope of the ramp.
3. Installation of approximately 6 -feet of red curb on the northeast side of the curb
ramp apron, starting at the back of curb return to the end of slope of the ramp.
G. Approval of the Traffic Commission Recommendations for Traffic Improvements at
the Intersection of Mission Drive and Delta Avenue
At the February 3, 2022, Traffic Commission Meeting, staff presented
recommendations to improve the existing roadway conditions at the intersection of
Mission Drive and Delta Avenue. After discussion and presentation of the item, the
Traffic Commission approved the staff recommendations for the area. Public Works
Field Services staff will be able to complete all the recommended items. If necessary,
additional materials and supplies may be purchased at a minimal expense to complete
the recommended work and staff would utilize the approved Fiscal Year 2021-2022
Traffic Signs and Markers available funds.
Recommendation: That the City Council authorize approval for the following
improvements at the intersection of Mission Drive and Delta Avenue:
Install yellow ladder striping for the existing crosswalks at Mission Drive and
Delta Avenue on the west and north legs.
2. Install approximately 40 -feet of red curb along the north side of Mission Drive.
This red curb is recommended to provide a clear line of sight for any waiting
pedestrians. The red curb should be installed between the curb return to the yield
line.
3. Install approximately 20 -feet of additional red curb along the south side of
Mission Drive. Red curb is recommended to provide a clear line of sight for any
waiting pedestrians. The existing red curb should be extended up to the driveway.
Council Member Armenta asked to approve Items F and G together. She thanked
Public Works Director Chung for taking the initiative and moving forward with
projects that have been long standing items.
Mayor Pro Tem Dang also thanked Public Works Director Chung for pushing
projects forward and ensuring the safety of residents on the roads.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 15 of 20
ACTION: Moved by Council Member Armenia and seconded by Council Member Clark to
approve Consent Calendar Items F and G. The motion was carried out by the following roll
call vote AYES: Armenta, Clark, Tang, Low, and Dang; NOES: None
H. Adoption of Resolution No. 2022-22 Establishing Salary and Benefits for Part -Time
Employees
In addition to its' full-time staff, the City maintains a variety of employee
classifications on a part-time or hourly basis. The employees in these positions work
throughout the year, seasonally, or on a temporary basis and typically work no more
than 1000 hours per fiscal year unless exempt from CaIPERS requirements or
assigned to one of the four 3/4 -time positions. Resolution No. 2022-22 adjusts the
salary steps for these Part -Time classifications effective March 22, 2022, revises the
job title of the 3/4 -time Preschool Teacher classification to Playschool Teacher, adds
a new recruitment incentive pay for certain job classifications, and authorizes for
additional step salary advancements within the salary ranges. There are no other
changes to the Salaries and Benefits for Part -Time Employees resolution.
Recommendation: that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2022-22 approving the
aforementioned salary and benefits for Part -Time classifications effective March 22,
2022, and changing the job title of the 3/4 -time Preschool Teacher classification to
Playschool Teacher.
6. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER & STAFF
A. COVID-19 Update
This is a recurring item that will be on the agenda to update the City Council on items
related to COVID-19.
Recommendation: That the City Council discuss and provide further direction.
City Manager Kim reported the County of LA Department of Health Order update
was that masks are still required at all emergency and homeless shelters public transit,
health care settings, long term care facilities and correctional and detention facilities.
Masks, however, are strongly recommended, but not required for all persons
regardless of vaccination status and other outdoor public settings and businesses. The
City's current case count is 10,704 positive cases with total 184 deaths, 89% of
Rosemead residents have had at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine, and however,
82% of Rosemead, Rosemead residents are fully vaccinated. The City of Rosemead
in partnership with Mount Castle Marketing will provide COVID-19 testing sites
until the end of May. Employees and the public are no longer required to wear masks
at City facilities, only recommended.
7. MATTERS FROM MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 16 of 20
A. Possible Support of Senate Bill 1040 (Rubio)
Council Member Armenta requested the City Council discuss and provide direction
regarding the California Department of Insurance requests for a letter of support for
Senate Bill 1040, authored by Senator Susan Rubio.
Recommendation: That the City Council discuss and provide direction to City staff.
Council Member Armenta reported that Senate Bill (SB) 1040 by Senator Rubio is
to allow for restitution for consumers harmed by unlicensed sellers of insurance. This
bill takes aim at those scams by authorizing the Insurance Commissioner to order
unlicensed sellers of insurance to pay restitution to their victims. Currently the
Commissioner does not have authority to order restitution for victims. Therefore,
victims of fraud must file individual lawsuits to obtain restitution. The bill authorizes
the Department of Insurance to seek a restitution order on behalf of victims.
She urged the City Council to support SB 1040 by submitting a letter of support by
Wednesday, March 23, 2020.
Mayor Pro Tem Dang asked if scammers are out of state, will the state bill allow them
to cross state lines and retrieve the fine.
Council Member Armenta answered yes, only in states that are regulatory, which
include Arkansas, Kentucky, Kansas, Maine, Virgina and West Virgina.
Council Member Tang asked if the state lobbyist can look into SB 1040 to ensure
the City is clear on its position.
Mayor Low explained that the City Council can sign off on items if the City Council
is all in favor of a bill. If anyone in the City Council is not in favor, they are free to
send a letter to the state as an individual.
ACTION: Moved by Council Member Clark and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Dang
to send a letter of support for Senate Bill 1040. The motion was carried out
by the following roll call vote AYES: Armenta, Clark, Tang, Low, and Dang;
NOES: None
B. Discussion of the Establishment of a Public Safety Commission
During the February 8, 2022, City Council meeting, Mayor Polly Low requested staff
to research ideas for establishing a Public Safety Commission. During the March 8,
2022, City Council meeting, Mayor Polly Low requested to agenize the item for
discussion.
Recommendation: That the City Council provide further direction on the following:
1. Purpose and duties of the Commission.
2. Provide a total number of members that will be a part of the Commission; and,
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 17 of 20
3. Provide direction for staff to prepare an Ordinance to establish a Public Safety
Commission
Senior Management Analyst Guerrero reported that City staff completed a survey of
16 neighboring cities, and 12 cities have established a public safety committee or
commission. The committees serve in an advisory role and provide recommendations
to the City Council relating to law enforcement, crime prevention and improving
quality of life for the community. The Public Safety Commission may be tasked in
partnership with temple sheriffs station personnel. The Commission may review
complaints, concerns from residents and business community, crime incidents and
trends, safety issues, emergency preparedness information, homeless encampment
issues and recommendations, coordinate crime prevention and public awareness
programs and events. Additionally, Chief of Police Shigo would like to bring back
the six-week Community Academy as part of the commission's task and allow the
commission to encourage the community to partake in this program.
Council Member Clark suggested starting a Public Safety Commission as a
committee before deciding on making it a commission.
Mayor Low stated she would prefer to start a Public Safety Commission as a
commission rather than a committee
Council Member Armenta was in favor of a Public Safety Commission, it's much
needed in the City. She emphasized that public safety is a top priority of the City.
Mayor Low stated that in order to establish a commission, the City Council has to
specify the purpose and responsibilities of the commission.
Council Member Tang thanked Mayor Low for taking the lead in proposing a Public
Safety Commission to look at what are the major issues, and ideas on how to address
those issues. He asked that the Council address how the City and Temple Sheriff
Station work together.
Mayor Pro Tem Dang expressed support for establishing a Public Safety Commission
and stated there is a lot of work the commission could work on right away such as
homelessness and emergency management.
Council Member Clark stated the City Council should be involved in Public Safety
matters. The City Council cannot take part in a commission, only if it's a committee.
City Attorney Richman explained that when a legislative body is creating another
legislative body, then it would need to be a separate legislative body. Unless the City
Council wants to create a standing committee, they can be part of it. When an
ordinance creates a commission, the City Council gives duties to the Commission.
Council Member Clark stated that if it's a committee the City Council could
participate just like the Public Safety Connections.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2021
Page 18 of 20
City Attorney Richman stated that it's common for Council Members to participate
on ad hoc committees or standing committees, but not in commissions bodies.
Mayor Low reiterated that the City Council forms the commissions and asks them to
discuss topics, address matters, and provide ideas to report back to the City Council.
-council Member Clark asked City Attorney Richman if there is a training put on by
the Sheriff's Department for the Commission, would that violate the Brown Act if
the majority of commissioners or council attend.
City Attorney Richman replied that since the meeting is not a City meeting, the
Commission can attend a training or Academy being put by another agency without
violating the Brown Act.
Mayor Low made a motion to draft an ordinance.
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Low and seconded by Mayor Pro Term Dang to direct
staff to bring back a draft ordinance establishing a Public Safety Commission, duties,
and responsibilities. Motion was carried out by roll call vote: AYES: Armenta,
Tang, Low, and Dang; NOES: None; ABSTAIN: Clark
C. Council Comments
Council Member Armenta announced the Rosemead Park Walking Trail
subcommittee would be hosting a public meeting about the walking trail and
thanked Public Works Director Chung for his work on the project.
Council Member Tang thanked Parks and Recreations Director Boecking for his
work on the Youth and Government program. He also stated the Rosemead sign on
the west bound on the 10-I freeway needs repairing.
Mayor Pro Tem Dang announced that Wealth by Health is coming back and thanked
them for their work. He asked to agendized for discussion Assembly Bill 1771 and
to bring back the FiberCity item for further discussion and direction.
Mayor Low adjourned the regular meeting at 9:58 p.m. and reconvened back to
closed session at 9:58 p.m.
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 19 of 20
8. ADJOURNMENT
There being no reportable actions taken in closed session, Mayor Low adjourned-themeeting
at 10:45 p.m.
Ericka Hernandez, City Clerk
APPROVED:
Rosemead City Council Special & Regular Meeting
Minutes of March 22, 2022
Page 20 q(20