Loading...
CC - Item 5B - Minutes of December 12, 2017 Special WorkshopMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, TRAFFIC COMMISSION, AND BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING DECEMBER 12, 2017 The special meeting of the Rosemead City Council, Planning Commission, Traffic Commission, and Beautification Committee was called to order by Mayor Low at 5:02 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California PRESENT: Mayor Low, Mayor Pro Tem Ly, Council Members Planning Commission — Chair Dang, Vice -Chair Tang, Traffic Commission — Chair Masuda, Vice -Chair Omelas, Beautification Committee — Chair Armenta, ABSENT: Council Member Alarcon, Traffic Cirtii�sio Members Aragon Jr., Padilla-Sornoso, Yang STAFF PRESENT: City Managers, City Attorn4 McKinney, Director of Finance Lieuu%'_W of Parks Public Works Ramirez, Director of otty D Donohuea. 3 1. WORKSHOP A. Garvey At Specifo,,,Plan Study and Clark Eng, Herrera, Lopez Quintanilla Aragon 1r , %ry, Lewin, Liu Assistant City Manager ion Chacon, Director of Kim, and City Clerk Dr. Tom Wilhaiftg the—Conservation Committee of the Sierra Club a�geilC��pter spt� on concern��'vith the final Environmental Impact Report or a certifiedE�enf�pact Report for public review. Mr. Williams inquired on how the specr5tlan bolres were determined. He expressed there are concerns _ ,th c 'onsistenc �nd e� opportunity and visual requirements of the Garvey iue Specrfic Pian. City JIftriey Rlman announced Council Member Clark owned property within 500 feet M ect and therefore would participate as a member of the public. Council Mi tuber Armenta asked Mr. Williams what other group he was referring to in addressing concerns with the Garvey Avenue Specific Plan. Dr. Williams replied he was representing the Conservation Committee of the Sierra Club Angeles Chapter and another group named Citizens Coalition for a Safe Community a 501(c)(3) dealing in Los Angeles County. Neither group had ties within the City except for him, owning a property on Bartlett Avenue. Director of Community Development Kim introduced Lisa Brownfield, consultant from MIG Inc., to facilitate the Garvey Avenue Specific Plan presentation. Rosemead City Council, Planning Commission, Trak Commission, and Beautification Committee Special Joint Meeting ITEM NO. 5.B Minutes of'December 12, 2017 Page I of 4 Lisa Brownfield, consultant at MIG Inc., gave an information overview of the Garvey Avenue Specific Plan. She explained the City was interested in revitalizing the Garvey Corridor due to slow economic growth and scattered mix of commercial and light industrial land uses. The purpose of the specific plan is to establish a vision and objectives for new development and define action to reinvigorate the corridor. As part of the planning process there have been stakeholder interviews, ad-hoc committee meetings, city department meetings, and community surveys. Characteristics of the specific plan include improving pedestrian orientation through active transportation and urban design. Four new zoning categories would be established for land use and development standards for site planning, building, parkg aphitectural, and open space provisions. Garvey Avenue improvements would include landscape medians, bikeways, on -street parking, and bus loading ba rgr ing, and traffic signal upgrades. The specific plan also focuses on irastructuts improvements such as water systems, sewer system study and improvement , and a px ct level analysis of the storm drainage system. John Kanlund, consultant at MIG Ino:;= spoke on the environmental ratpact report process for the Garvey Avenue Specific PIt_ "tat g ath an initial iirdy, notice of preparation resulting in a draft Environmental rT-Jact Report. Public hearings were conducted, and all documents were sent to the Sifak ,!s Clearing House. In the process there were several impacts that vyepe not significant`air quality was the only significant unavoidable impact: Mrs. Brownfield continued with th@ Garviidy Speme]an presentation. ,Zoo Planning Cot missioh;t Eng asked -for clarification on the remodel, re -use and redevelupt rscept wisp andscapmg, �49w,,was the depth of properties determined under the new 44F zorais, were there a onsiderations for electric vehicle charging stations lastly, as d7fthere wits n qpt on for special business zone. Mrs. Bro ` 14 repP d landscape varied throughout the corridor and we are suggesting fiUlmen ing measures on the next level. The remodel, reuse or eveloped coneet woul&lie up to the property owners. The depth of the corridor is lot deep, excefor some north and south streets. As for special business zones, the FTty,did not reire a business zone. Lastly, electric vehicle charging stations are not rh,tlplan, bit would be a good idea in the future or could be added to the CommuntBeriefits Program. Planning Obmmission Tang asked besides the Community Benefits Program, were there other incentives for the pedestrian orientations for property owners. Also, asked if a building did not have the building frontage, but had the dining accessibility, could they still have outside dining. Mrs. Brownfield explained the plan did not allow for outside dining to be on the front of the line, they would still have to have a minimum of the 25 percent building frontage requirement. Incentives could be added to the Community Benefits Program at any time. Rosemead City Council, Planning Commission, Trak Commission, and Beautification Committee Special Joint Meeting Minutes of December 12, 2017 Page 2 of 4 Director of Community Development Kim asked if there was a line for outdoor dining in front with the second level cantilever to the property line. Mrs. Brownfield explained in the sense that if there is a building that has a second level that has some arcade, which qualified too. Beautification Committee Member Lewin expressed concerns with some communities that allow outside dining that intrude into the sidewalk area. He did support the idea of outdoor dining by limiting to the property line itself and not into the public right of way. Mrs. Brownfield replied that the current specific planaflows businesses to encroach to the public right of way. The City could review a pfbpV�` grid put additional rules if necessary. There are rules in the specific plan whci state §6cific space needs to be mobile. Mr. Lewin also suggested better safety e'asures for outside dmm�VQng the public right of way pedestrian corridor to be k;d in than,specific plan or &ia'City policy in the future. Traffic Commissioner Berrysted that the widih,-, the sidewalk and outside dining should be considered. He aske�3Jf!-here were going to xa' any requirements or benefits for larger developments using, soles ,anels or tares water heaters in new construction projects. _ S;,,things like sq r panels afflankless water heaters were being Mrs. Brownfi0o considered zder the i,tainable desi� in the specific plan. Property owners could obtain addit l points i they have act ssible operating eco roofs. acent atrgf spoke about outdoor dining encroaching onto the axe cTthke Los Angeles that incorporate pocket parks of Conn1ipity Doelopment Kim explained that each development requires levels of en space and incorporating a pocket park to an outdoor dining a good e! ple. Planning r &ioner Dang stated that in the City of Los Angeles, the Public Works Dir€or has the discretion to grant certain amount of feet for an outdoor dining to encroach on public right of way. He suggested the city of Rosemead could do the same. He asked how far the public amenity space, in terms of depth a business, could have. Mrs. Brownfield explained that it would depend on the developer, the specific plan did not have a minimum depth which was something that the City should think about adding. Planning Commissioner Dang referenced slide no. 19 of the presentation on incentives and how to obtain certain points. If a developer obtains 38 community Rosemead City Council, Planning Commission, Trak Commission, and Beautification Committee Special Joint Meeting Minutes of December 12, 2017 Page 3 of 4 benefit points in the Residential/Commercial Zone, would that be with a .85 floor area ratio or would it be scaled. Mrs. Brownfield replied no, the floor area ratio becomes .85 once you hit the minimum 21 points. Anywhere between 21 to 40 points will be at a .85 floor area ratio. Planning Commissioner Dang stated a developer would not have an incentive to try to give more if all you need is 21 points to obtain a .85 floor area ratio. He suggested to allow for an extrapolation, a formula, to make it worth their'while. Secondly, under the mixed-use zone, where a commercial building could�be liUilt and have the floor area ratio component, could a developer build an agent building since it's not really a commercial building, does that mean it's prhrbrtrcn the mixed-use zone. Mrs. Brownfield explained a residential build zone, if it's a residential only project. If rf's ra re use setting, that residential building can and al that is half an acre, the plan does notAl Wfor a But if you have a mixed-use that has a resrdixi mixed-use, then you would allowed a residen$ the auto auction site, as long $ ou have the mix are able to have a residential b€idigby itself. Council Member Armenta asked' -c and Floor Area Ration. She stated they were not A... .. be able to other speei 4 of fli mmunity their fl their not permit€ .d in the mixed use lential build Y a larger mixed For example, you have a site kIe residential stiWte by itself. ;otiiponent, in this{case a vertical top. If you have a larger site, like use in the horizontal fashion, you alagu on thp,;Community Benefit Program 3ewapb't willing to build a hotel, since their 1""cod area ratio. If they fall within Program, would they be able to increase menu of things that they can do under the their floor area ratio. Council Meri'MW" ,rmentp l' Wd for the record to show that a developer did have to ild a specrflc project ani did not have a chance to participate in the Community B-ne,frt Program increase their floor area ratio. She asked when the plan would cofWao fruition r Director oiiiinunity Development Kim replied staff would start the Planning Commissio'%--public hearings possibly in January of 2018; then followed by the approval ofthe City Council Mayor Pro Tem Ly interjected and stated mid-March or April the plan could possibly be adopted by the City Council. Rosemead City Council, Planning Commission, Traffic Commission, and Beautification Committee Special Joint Meeting Minutes of December 12, 2017 Page 4 of 4 n IVWIIIi4.1uOWN The meeting adjourned at 6:06 p.m. The next special City Council meeting is scheduled to take place on December 12, 2017, at 6:00 p.m. followed by the regular City Council meeting at 7:00 p.m. in the Rosemead City Hall Council Chamber. Marc Donohue, City Clerk BOWITGATU-1] Polly Low, Mayor Rosemead City Council, Planning Commission, Traffic Commission, and Beautification Committee Special Joint Meeting Minutes of December 12, 2017 Page 5 of 4