[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:11] Good evening. I will now call to order the September 22nd, 2026, special city session meeting of the South Passing City Council at 6.03 p.m., chief city clerk Newsom, please call the roll.
[0:27] Here. Here.
[0:32] Here. Here. Here. Here. First, we'll, we'll, we'll study session, we'll be discussing, we'll be providing discussion direction on proposed amendments to chapter 19a, noise regulation of the South Passing Municipal Code.
[0:44] A recommendation is recommended the City Council received the staff presentation to provide
[0:49] direction on potential amendments to chapter 19 A, noise regulation of the South Passing
[0:52] Municipal Code.
[0:53] Senior planners, Stephen Peterson will present item.
[1:09] There is the presentation.
[1:11] Good evening, Mayor Rossi and council members.
[1:13] I'm Stephen Peterson, senior planner in the community development department.
[1:17] We also have Andrew Rodriguez, the city's lead code enforcement officer here with us in
[1:23] person and our consultant Bill Vosty from Rincon Associates is available on Zoom.
[1:29] You'll remember that we were last before you on May 20th when we presented a preliminary
[1:35] version of the noise regulations update to you. At that time, the council provided us
[1:41] with direction and some questions to consider. Today, we're returning to you to provide answers
[1:47] to those questions and to share with you a further evolved draft of the noise regulations,
[1:53] including a refinement to the objective noise standards based on field measurements and an alternative
[2:00] noise zone map.
[2:11] Okay, this slide. There we go. Okay, got it. Now we're going. All right. Tonight,
[2:18] my presentation will cover four topic areas based on grouping council's questions and directions
[2:24] from last time into these four categories.
[2:28] First, we'll provide some clarification of exemptions
[2:31] in the ordinance.
[2:33] Second, we'll explain the education and enforcement process.
[2:37] Third, we'll discuss the results of field measurements
[2:40] of noise around town and resulting refinements
[2:45] to the proposed objective noise standards.
[2:48] And finally, fourth, we'll present two different options
[2:51] for how the noise zone map could be organized.
[2:59] First, regarding exemptions to the ordinance,
[3:03] council had asked that it be clarified
[3:05] that generators used temporarily during a power outage
[3:09] are exempt from the noise regulations.
[3:12] So we have revised section 19a9b
[3:16] to specifically and clearly exempt use of generators
[3:20] for emergency work.
[3:22] And when providing temporary utility service
[3:24] during a power outage. Second, Council had requested clarification regarding school
[3:30] events held on school grounds or at school-owned facilities. Oopsy. Sorry. Second, Council had requested
[3:40] clarification regarding school events that would be exempt. Accordingly, Section 19a9a of the
[3:46] proposed ordinance has been revised to make it clear that school events held on school grounds
[3:52] or at school-owned facilities, including fundraising events are exempted, fundraising events to benefit the school but not held on school grounds or at school-owned facilities would not be exempt.
[4:07] A temporary noise permit could be obtained for off-campus events.
[4:15] Next, I'll move on to the second topic area of the presentation regarding the enforcement approach or process.
[4:23] and our lead code enforcement officer, Andrew Rodriguez, is available to elaborate if needed.
[4:30] The code enforcement division approaches noise and all code enforcement issues
[4:35] focused on education and seeking voluntary compliance. When there is a noise complaint or a
[4:43] noise issue has been observed, staff contacts the responsible party or property owner,
[4:49] explains the applicable regulations and identifies measures to reduce noise such as closing a door or turning the volume down.
[4:59] If the responsible party takes immediate measures to reduce the noise, a notice of violation is typically not issued and the correction is documented in the file.
[5:12] If staff are unable to contact the responsible party or if the noise is not reduced,
[5:17] a notice of violation may be issued, providing a further opportunity for voluntary correction.
[5:26] Continued noncompliance may eventually result in an administrative citation,
[5:32] but staff avoids progressing to that level if at all possible.
[5:38] A primary goal of this noise regulations update is to establish objective standards for noise limits
[5:45] that are clear and don't rely on subjective perceptions and can accurately and consistently
[5:52] be enforced.
[6:03] The staff report provides examples of three scenarios and how measurement and enforcement
[6:09] of noise standards would occur in each.
[6:12] One involves commercial noise affecting a residential property.
[6:15] One discusses mechanical equipment like an air conditioning system and another discusses
[6:21] vehicle noise like a motorcycle being warmed up in the driveway. Andrew could go over those
[6:27] in detail if the council desires, but each relies on a consistent measurement and enforcement
[6:34] protocol as laid out in the proposed noise regulations and a standard operating procedures
[6:40] memo that is under preparation now.
[6:49] Council had asked how complaints are handled when
[6:52] and a noise event is not actively occurring.
[6:55] When a complaint concerns noise, which is not actively occurring,
[6:59] staff gathers information about the source,
[7:01] timing, duration, and affected location before scheduling an inspection.
[7:07] Staff would contact the party responsible for the noise
[7:10] and provide information regarding the noise regulations
[7:13] to encourage voluntary compliance in the future.
[7:17] Staff then follows up with the reporting party,
[7:19] explaining their inspection findings and information about the noise regulations and enforcement
[7:25] actions taken.
[7:30] Moving on to part three of the presentation. As directed by Council, staff conducted
[7:35] measurements to check that the proposed numerical objective noise standards are reasonable to ensure
[7:42] that everyday normal activities would not be violations and that noisy nuisance activities would be.
[7:48] Field measurements were conducted at multiple times in locations in residential, commercial and open space areas around town, using the equipment and procedures laid out in the proposed noise regulations.
[8:02] To give you a general sense of noise levels around town, on a sidewalk in a residential neighborhood in the 300 block of Monterey Road, on a Tuesday at around noon.
[8:15] readings were about 50 decibels. At the South Pasadena dog park in the open
[8:23] space zone with dogs and people playing batting cages in skate park active. At
[8:30] 130 in the afternoon on a Tuesday we measured 64 decibels. While on a Thursday
[8:37] night at 9 p.m. on the sidewalk directly in front of a busy Irish pub on Mission
[8:43] Street with a band playing inside and the front door open. We measured 73 decibels. Keep in mind
[8:51] that sound drops off at a rate of six decibels for every doubling of distance from the source.
[8:59] And that sound may be affected by the presence of buildings, walls, terrain, and absorptive or
[9:07] reflective surfaces.
[9:09] So for our field testing, a total of 27 noise measurements were taken around town.
[9:17] When compared to the exterior noise standards originally suggested to you on May 20, 70% of
[9:25] the measurements exceeded those originally proposed standards, indicating that the standards
[9:32] were probably too strict. Staff fine-tuned the standards accordingly, raising them five to ten
[9:40] decibels in order to distinguish typical everyday acceptable noise from nuisance noise. Then we
[9:49] compared the field measurements to the newly recommended standards and found now that approximately 18%
[9:57] and of the field measurements remained in violation,
[10:02] which sounds more appropriate.
[10:04] So go ahead.
[10:05] Go ahead.
[10:06] Just a quick question.
[10:07] And it might have been in here.
[10:08] I might have forgotten.
[10:10] When you say you're measuring it,
[10:12] is there a certain amount of time
[10:14] like are you measuring it for five minutes
[10:16] or some period of time
[10:17] and then taking an average or how are you?
[10:19] And I know that's part of what we're going to fix,
[10:21] but what's the procedure?
[10:24] It's a 10 minute measurement as spelled out
[10:27] in the noise regulation.
[10:29] So 10 minutes and then it's an average of that 10 minutes?
[10:32] That's correct.
[10:32] Okay, thank you.
[10:33] So I think I have a quick question on here,
[10:35] because I'm looking at the self-positina dog park,
[10:38] which is the one in zone two
[10:41] that wouldn't have made the original sound recommendation
[10:45] that you had or that was in place.
[10:48] Like that to me is, you know, it's down in the rollo.
[10:52] And it doesn't seem to be in the same space
[10:55] is Garfield Park and Via Del Rey.
[10:59] So I guess I'm looking at are we increasing the noise levels and
[11:04] Garfield Park and Via Del Rey to accommodate the dog park,
[11:08] instead of saying that maybe what's in there in the rollo can tolerate a higher sound.
[11:16] Not only to address the South Positina dog park.
[11:21] No, no, I understand, but I'm talking about the zone as a whole.
[11:24] So the whole zone was bumped up a little bit, but we took measurements at various parks
[11:32] around town to check the reasonableness of the.
[11:36] Well, but I guess that's what I'm trying to understand is the reasonableness before
[11:41] bumping up the sound in all of zone two, because the only one that seems to me that it wasn't
[11:51] complying was the, what was happening in the Royo, which is dog park, batting cages,
[11:56] skate park, but it's down in the complete, it's down in a residential area, whereas
[12:00] the other areas are residential areas. So I don't think that they should be in the
[12:05] same category. You know, what is, what's noise in a residential versus what's, just because
[12:10] they're both parks, but one's residential, one's not residential.
[12:14] Sure. These are just a few excerpts of the measurements. There were additional readings
[12:17] taken at Monterey Hills Elementary that I believe exceeded that original standard as well.
[12:27] I could just provide a little bit. As Andrew mentioned, this is just an example of all
[12:32] of the 27 that were conducted. And in zone two, it's not isolated to open space. So as we'll see
[12:40] in the presentation for the noise ordinance map, zone two includes other land use zones as
[12:49] while it's not just the open space.
[12:51] I understand, but what I'm trying to come to is really that you're talking about a
[12:58] different category, because it's not just that it's an open space, is it an open space
[13:03] in a residential neighborhood, or is it open space down in the arroyo that doesn't have
[13:08] residential near it?
[13:10] Is it, you know, Monterey Hills sound during, you know, drop off and pick up during the
[13:16] day or is it something that goes to 10 p.m. at night. So when we're making the blanket
[13:21] rules and we're expanding it out, you know, to, you're saying, okay, Monterey Hills
[13:26] didn't meet that need, but now we're, you know, we've changed it, but to 10 p.m. at night
[13:33] is, that's the question to try to accommodate a noise issue that's really a, you know,
[13:39] something that's concentrated at 3 p.m. Then it's also the other question is how ambient
[13:44] noise plays into it because, you know, this is a question the DBA is a whole, you know,
[13:52] when you have like car traffic sound, like they're during the normal day sounds versus the evening
[13:57] sounds. So I guess what I'm concerned is taking a bumping it up so that places aren't out of compliance,
[14:09] but doing it for the entire 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. time frame versus like something that's like the reasonable time frames.
[14:18] And the hours that we have, that can be adjusted.
[14:23] If that's something that the council wants to include as part of the feedback for what we bring back.
[14:30] That's certainly something that we can look at and consider.
[14:34] When we go through the presentation as well, the option that we came up with also has to do based on the designation of the streets.
[14:44] And so we will see that even, and that's how we split up the second option in terms of even if the land use may be zoned open space, for example,
[14:54] If it's on one type of street, it may be in, you know, noise zone three verses.
[15:00] No, I don't, too, to account for what you're describing in terms of appropriateness. So it's kind of like context. Right. That's exactly what I'm talking about. So, you know, it's the concern of, I'll give a good example, Eddie Park. Right. So Eddie Park, just because it's a park, but it is in the middle of a neighborhood. But if you designated the same sound and time frame that you do for a rollo, it has a significant
[15:29] different impact on the people who live there than the same sound necessarily does in the
[15:36] Royal.
[15:38] Right.
[15:38] I get it.
[15:39] So it sounds like Erica, you're going to look at that when you actually bring something
[15:43] back to us.
[15:44] Well, we did do that for the commercial-zoned parcels, again, based on the street designation,
[15:51] but that's something that we can take back in terms of it.
[15:59] Levels that we are suggesting that's feedback that we can take back of course
[16:04] And if there's other ways that we want to map it out of course we can take that feedback
[16:09] The other thing that I just want to mention is we did also look at comparisons just to get a sense of
[16:16] Where are proposed or revised proposed levels compared to other cities and so they'll present on that as well
[16:24] Just in terms of giving a bigger picture.
[16:31] Okay,
[16:35] so
[16:38] Continuing on,
[16:41] okay, and then on a Thursday night at 9 p.m. on the sidewalk directly in front of a busy Irish pub on Mission Street with a band playing inside in the front door open, we measured 73 decibels.
[16:56] Oops, and we talked about how sound drops off based on distance.
[17:02] and the fact that based on the measurements proposed, the first time around 70% of our field
[17:12] measurements were over the proposed limit, but based on our newly proposed objectives,
[17:22] noise standards, only 18% of them were over, so we think we're providing a better, more fine
[17:29] tune set of numbers here, okay. And speaking to the 18% of the field measurements that remained
[17:39] in violation, these were, the measurements still exceeding the standards were amplified
[17:47] musical performances where closing a door or turning the volume down did seem appropriate.
[17:53] it. Therefore, staff feels that the revised standards are calibrated appropriately. We
[18:00] can go through some of the specific ground-true thing measurements if the council would
[18:04] like.
[18:07] I guess I'd like to also ask on like cumulative
[18:09] noise. So there's like the one Irish pub, but then if you have that standard, you've increased
[18:16] the standard across the board and then you have several places all hitting it. That's like
[18:21] 75 DBA until 7 o'clock at night.
[18:26] So just like how does cumulative sound work?
[18:30] Well, sound drops off by distance as we discussed.
[18:35] So one noisy bar and another noisy bar, a block away,
[18:40] aren't really going to generate relative noise.
[18:44] So what about when they're next to each other?
[18:53] They would still be subject to the same standard
[18:55] And the meter that we have has a fairly kind of directional microphones, it's easy to kind of isolate one, but depending on how close they are, it's sort of situational, but it's not hard to kind of measure two different properties, even if they're next to each other and regulate them independently.
[19:17] Next staff reviewed the noise ordinances adopted by our neighboring cities of San Gabriel, Pasadena, Alhambra and San Marino.
[19:26] to evaluate how South Pasadena's recommended new standards compare.
[19:33] Direct comparison is difficult because the other jurisdictions generally use
[19:37] different regulatory approaches, measurement locations, and enforcement criteria.
[19:43] But of the jurisdictions we reviewed, San Marino's ordinance is most comparable to
[19:50] South Pasadena's proposed ordinance as shown in the chart on the slide.
[19:55] and we found that San Marino standards are very similar to what we are proposing. Day
[20:02] time and evening standards for residential are exactly the same with the daytime standard
[20:08] for commercial also being the same and the nighttime commercial standards being five
[20:15] decibels higher in South pass than San Marino which perhaps seems appropriate considering
[20:22] South Pass has a more active commercial downtown, including bars, restaurants, and live music venues.
[20:37] This table shows the newly proposed standards in the green column alongside the standards
[20:42] as originally proposed in May, as mentioned before, standards have generally been raised 5 to 10
[20:49] decibels. As currently proposed, the standards coherently and logically step up gradually from the
[20:57] Quietist requirement of 55 decibels for nighttime in a residential district, to the loudest allowable standard being commercial areas along main streets in the daytime at 75 decibels.
[21:18] Finally, this brings me to the last section of the presentation.
[21:23] Council had requested that staff provide an alternative noise zone map that requires quieter noise levels for
[21:31] or commercially-zoned properties on secondary streets, such as El Centro, different from
[21:37] commercially-zoned properties on main corridors, such as Faroaks or Mission.
[21:43] So in preparing this alternative option to noise zone map, staff utilized the city's
[21:51] adopted general plan, which classifies streets into four categories you can see on the screen.
[21:58] Primary corridors such as Faroaks, Huntington, Monterey, and Freemont are designated as
[22:06] thoroughfare, Maine, or Connector streets, while local or secondary streets such as El
[22:12] Central or Mound are termed access streets.
[22:20] Option 1, as shown to you in May, has the originally proposed classifications with commercial zones
[22:27] shown in the darkest blue as zone 3, having the highest allowed noise levels. Open space
[22:34] and community facilities zoned properties as zone 2 in the medium blue color with the
[22:41] medium level of allowed noise. And residential areas shown in light blue, zone 1, with the
[22:49] quietest allowed noise levels.
[22:55] Next, here's the newly proposed option 2 noise zone map where
[23:01] the residential areas are shown in light blue as zone 1, the quietest area. Zone 2 in medium
[23:10] blue contains open space, community facilities, and commercial properties that are along access
[23:18] roads, the secondary streets, the local streets, and zone three with the loudest,
[23:26] allowed noise levels being shown in dark blue for commercial properties along the
[23:33] thoroughfare main and connector streets, the main busiest streets in town.
[23:39] Staff recommends option two because it acknowledges the different
[23:45] different character of major commercial streets like pharaohs and mission from minor secondary
[23:51] or access streets, while both may have commercial uses.
[23:56] This map provides a gradual step down of allowed noise levels from a major commercial street,
[24:03] for example, mission, which would have a nighttime noise limit of 65 decibels, stepping down
[24:09] down to a limit of 60 decibels for commercial properties along secondary local access street like Mound or El Centro, and stepping down further than into the residential neighborhoods, say along Oxley at 55 decibels.
[24:27] So we think it provides a logical step down.
[24:30] And
[24:35] so to wrap up, staff is recommending that number one, we proceed forward utilizing
[24:41] the revised noise standards that were refined through the ground truthing and field measurement
[24:47] process.
[24:48] And number two, that we utilize noise zone map option two, which acknowledges the different
[24:55] nature of commercial areas and neighborhoods along the main streets in town versus those
[25:00] along quieter local access streets.
[25:03] And number three, that next time staff will return to council with the ordinance for
[25:10] first reading.
[25:13] That concludes my presentation.
[25:15] We're happy to answer any questions.
[25:17] Thank you.
[25:19] Do I have any questions from council?
[25:26] I guess there's a, is there, I noticed that there's the San Marinos here, but is there
[25:32] anything that shows what other cities have done?
[25:36] No, because the other cities don't have numerical standards, they have generalized standards
[25:41] like what we have in our present ordinance, which are based on a sensitivity of a reasonable
[25:47] person being disturbed by the noise and statements like that, but we were pleased to find
[25:53] that San Marino, which does have numerical standards, lines up almost exactly what we came
[26:00] up with.
[26:01] So we felt like maybe we're on target here and are we in need of daytime standards?
[26:09] Do you time ghost will 10 p.m.
[26:11] That's just seven or so seven in some cases, right?
[26:15] 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. Yes, so we're basically regulating sound 24 hours a day. No, 7 a.m. to 10 p.m.
[26:20] It's 10 p.m. 7 p.m. 7 p.m. 7 a.m.
[26:24] Can you tell me again what the decibel the distance every 10 feet it goes down by what six or something like that?
[26:31] Every doubling of distance from the noise source, it goes down by six decibels.
[26:37] So think if you were 10 feet away from something and it was 70 decibels and then you moved
[26:43] 20 feet away, you're doubling your distance, it would move from 70 decibels to 64 decibels.
[26:50] And how far away are you when you're measuring?
[26:54] Typically, here we're right in front of the property on the sidewalk in front of it about
[26:59] about five feet back from the property line.
[27:01] So you're close.
[27:02] And the, yes, and the location for measurement
[27:04] is spelled out in the ordinance
[27:06] so that we're consistent every time
[27:09] and measuring in the same way.
[27:10] So the ordinance, yeah.
[27:11] So it'll tell you how far you have to be back
[27:13] and where you have to measure from.
[27:15] Exactly.
[27:16] Yeah.
[27:17] Correct.
[27:18] And part of that is to kind of get away
[27:20] from environmental factors or anything else
[27:22] that might influence that reading.
[27:23] So we're actually capturing the sound generated
[27:26] from the property where the noise originates from?
[27:29] Right, because to me, it seems like the number one issue
[27:32] we're trying to address here is objectivity.
[27:36] And so that can be measurable.
[27:38] Yeah, okay.
[27:41] But it's from the property line or is it,
[27:45] I mean, so like in cases where a building
[27:47] has a sound application to it.
[27:50] So that is, it goes to the property line
[27:53] to have an understanding of what the sound is.
[27:56] there. So it's not the noise like from the actual place but it's going down to the sidewalk,
[28:02] for instance, is where you measure it from? Yeah, right in front of the place.
[28:07] Okay.
[28:14] Do you have any other additional questions? I think from what I'm reading here, it seems
[28:19] like a child's birthday party in the daytime would violate the city's noise ordinance.
[28:24] I don't think that's correct. Would a child's birthday party in the daytime violate the city's
[28:29] No, he's certain it's referencing specifically kind of the relationship with distance and volume and how it all pans out
[28:36] in the instance of some of the
[28:39] commercial areas and bars that have live music performances their level inside
[28:45] is, you know, excess of 90 decibels would enable to even hear each other talking
[28:51] and then stepping just outside of that, you know, no more than
[28:54] In a way, it drops down to 73, 74 give or take.
[28:59] So that distance, based on how loud it is, if the birthday party is louder than a band
[29:04] performing in a bar, and the measurements take in closer than maybe 30 or 40 feet from
[29:11] the interior where the band is performing, then it would potentially violate it, but under
[29:16] normal circumstances, I don't believe it would.
[29:23] I have a question.
[29:24] I know the concept here is stepping.
[29:26] But what I really want to know is where are there's, you go from zone three to zone one because it seems to me there's a few spots where there's actually contiguous property line and there's a zone three that drops to a zone one.
[29:46] And there's really no stepping in that kind of a scenario and I'd like to be able to see where those conflicts might be so that we can maybe anticipate something a little bit more nuanced.
[30:00] That's kind of where I am right now. I mean, there's a parcel on Huntington that's surrounded by zone one. Holy families surrounded by zone one, but it's a zone three. There's a number of other places that are literally contiguous to a single family or a zone one in their zone three. So I just want to be able to look at those and to ponder that because obviously when you get down into the granular area,
[30:29] That's when you're seeing if you're really stepping things up or down or if it's just a big jump from quietest to loudest.
[30:40] And I think that gets to Mayor Rossi's earlier comment about context, right?
[30:45] Because I do think there's some of these like holy families in the middle of that holy family special or special specific land.
[30:51] It's in the middle of residential Eddie Park.
[30:56] you've got some Huntington properties, the same thing.
[30:58] So it's kind of, yeah, how do you deal with that?
[31:02] It even Garfield Park, because Garfield's close to, you know, I mean, that's the question.
[31:06] Well, there's a street in between, but a few backyards go right up to it.
[31:11] Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
[31:12] So it's, that's the question, I think.
[31:14] And when you asked earlier, are there specific areas?
[31:17] I think that it strikes me that what we need to just kind of be cognizant of.
[31:21] And without making, you have a whole new project.
[31:23] at this kind of some of those areas that you've got single-family residential right next to open space or a commercial zone.
[31:34] We can certainly when we come back next time and highlight some of those areas where we've got zone three next to zone one.
[31:40] I would just point out that the regulations are set up that if somebody is in zone one, the residential area, the quietest area, and they say
[31:51] I'm being bothered by noise coming from this commercial property in zone three next door.
[31:59] The process would be to measure at the property line of the generating property and the receiving property and
[32:09] measure the noise versus the standards at the generating property and measure the noise versus the standards at the receiving property.
[32:16] So you could kind of catch it, even if that zone three commercial property was okay by its standards,
[32:26] which allow a little noisier in a commercial zone, if their noise was affecting the residential
[32:33] property over the residential properties established limit, that would still be a violation.
[32:39] So that kind of helps account for that.
[32:41] Right, it does, it's helpful, but again, for a, for a zone three property, they might say, great, we've got this limit.
[32:49] And they may not pay attention to what seeps over and that they've actually got another sound limit, right, across the property line.
[32:57] And so, I think being able to understand where those, where that education needs to be, for the, for the zone three property owner.
[33:06] Well, and I think the education one of the areas it really has to be is in the CUP process as well.
[33:11] Right. So I think when they're going through the development or getting permits,
[33:15] the Planning Commission has to have that as part of their consideration of the originating zone and also the receiving zone to.
[33:26] So that might be where we place some of that. I don't know.
[33:30] I agree with you 100% that there's some of it.
[33:33] But if it's not a new development, then you don't have a new property owner use.
[33:38] You might have an existing property owner use with new zone three standards
[33:41] that may not understand what happens.
[33:45] There's still held to those.
[33:47] There's no violation in the adjoining zone one property.
[33:57] We can just a quick one.
[34:00] Yeah.
[34:00] One.
[34:00] You want to go ahead?
[34:01] You're on page six or 19 we've discussed some of this decimal measurement criteria
[34:09] It talks in a
[34:10] That point six
[34:15] This will measure in criteria. You're in the ordinance itself. Yep on page 21 of the 19
[34:24] And also the six on it.
[34:30] Yeah, got it
[34:32] Just curious an a it you know it talks about the national standards
[34:37] She'll be measured at a height of four feet at least four feet away from reflective surfaces
[34:43] For duration release 10 minutes were feasible
[34:46] Practically when you get to a site people are upset you're gonna have to sit there for 10 minutes or or why is it is that as a national standard or something and what why is four feet?
[34:58] So the fourth feed is to make sure that the meter is capturing the noise of the actual
[35:02] generation, not a reflection of the sound bouncing off of the floor, or a wall, think of
[35:08] it like a bubble around the meter so that it's not steering the measurements one way or
[35:12] another.
[35:12] Closer to a wall could elevate that level higher than what's actually being generated
[35:16] as it's capturing kind of where the noise comes from and then the reflection of that noise
[35:20] to the wall next to it.
[35:21] But 10 minutes isn't necessarily the ANSI standards.
[35:25] It's just a time limit that captures that weighted average, so it takes that exposure
[35:30] compares it over the time to come with, you know, one number that summarizes what's
[35:35] otherwise, you know, a more complex number based on time frequency that amplitude of that
[35:43] frequency, a bunch of other factors with that.
[35:46] So, Anthony, your experience going on the site, have you actually stood there for 10 minutes
[35:50] Have you seen taken it?
[35:52] It's really not too much of an inconvenience or even in doing the field measurements, even
[35:59] though it's not necessarily targeting enforcement in this case yet.
[36:06] I haven't had anyone who's really – people are more interested in what the meter is and
[36:09] ask about it more so than concerns or upset or anything like that.
[36:14] Did you bring a meter with you?
[36:16] I brought up the first session I didn't bring it this time.
[36:19] Okay.
[36:21] So I want to go back to Mayor Pratton's question, so the birthday party in the middle of
[36:27] the afternoon sort of thing.
[36:28] Look, would a standard noise be for that?
[36:32] Because I imagine that's similar.
[36:35] Go ahead.
[36:36] It would just depend on the noise zone, the birthday party is occurring in, whether it's at
[36:39] a zone one or zone two on the-
[36:41] The residential.
[36:42] So I think he's talking about like a residential.
[36:45] is
[36:52] it between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. in which case it would be 65 for the LEQ measurement.
[36:59] That's the exposure over time and that's from the property line.
[37:02] And currently that's at 55, is that correct?
[37:05] 60 currently for 10 a.m.
[37:07] And then what are just going back to, sorry, going back to examples of what that is,
[37:13] like what's 65 so much? I guess we have some live examples.
[37:17] So, I mean, 65 would be similar to the South Passing and Dog Park currently, just like with
[37:26] the batting cages and skate park in the middle of the day, so that's just a standard.
[37:31] Yeah, I mean, I think from what I read, Peaky Excitement's moments like seeing Happy Birthday,
[37:35] shouting during games or playing at an indoor trampoline park, R.K. Freakly exceeds Spikewell
[37:39] into the 85 to 95 DB range was what I read. And so that was kind of my concern, was that if
[37:44] If you had children having a good time playing that might actually speak and peak to this higher
[37:51] number and in peaking to that number would trigger potential problems in the middle of
[37:56] the daytime within private property.
[37:58] But it's fine.
[37:59] I mean, I think what we're looking for is some way to come up with something that's objective.
[38:03] I think that what would be more prudent would be to put this within certain hours of operation
[38:09] that, you know, align with, like, let's say if you're saying after sundown or 6 p.m. or so that
[38:15] there's some constraint on when this is applicable versus having a 24-7 regulation of people's activities
[38:23] within their homes. Or in their private spaces of their outdoor spaces of their own.
[38:28] No, I understand that. So I would say that on the spiking, that gets taken care of by the 10 minutes,
[38:33] right? So it has to be, it's a 10-minute measurement. So it's an average of that 10 minutes. I say,
[38:38] the other thing, I just saw you can apply for a temporary noise ordinance.
[38:42] So if you're having a, so if you're having a party of some sort or a wedding in your yard
[38:48] or something, you can actually apply to exceed the noise ordinance.
[38:52] Well, and I think look, I'm in part of it as like you're talking about, kids are naturally
[38:56] noisy.
[38:57] I would be surprised if, you know, our code enforcement came out to give a citation based
[39:05] off of kids laughing. Like, my next
[39:07] Renewable's kids are beautiful. I love them, but, you know,
[39:09] they remind me how a lot of my kids were, if they just
[39:13] naturally go through that phase, but I think that's also
[39:16] a, it is, unless you're running a commercial
[39:20] operation, like a pre-school in your yard, like, is that
[39:23] something our police or code enforcement would be going
[39:26] after people whose kids were laughing in the backyard?
[39:28] So, I think that's the, I can attest to
[39:30] personally having the police come to my house for
[39:34] noise on Father's Day in middle at 12 o'clock in the afternoon under our noise ordinance, so.
[39:40] But that's the current noise ordinance. The problem is there's no objective and that's
[39:44] probably why I wasn't cited. Right, so it's really the objective standards in.
[39:49] Yeah, I think understanding that that that is an absurdity to have to have that happen.
[39:57] And if I can just offer really quick, we are drafting standard operating procedures for
[40:03] code enforcement to talk about, you know, the fact that our enforcement process is
[40:11] geared towards compliance and working with property owners and it outlines, you know, reaching
[40:18] out to the, what the process is in terms of reaching out to the person who, the property
[40:23] owner working with them, when the notice of violation should be issued, you know, it talks
[40:27] about courtesy notices it talks about other things before getting to any sort of punitive
[40:34] measure and so I think it's also important to have that as a written policy and so we are
[40:38] working on that to try to help mitigate and make sure that we're as objective as possible
[40:43] regardless of who's standing in that position.
[40:49] Let's go to public comment.
[40:52] Oh sorry. Do we have any public comment? Yes we do, Madam Mayor.
[40:56] questions?
[40:57] Wait.
[41:10] Madam Mary, were you ready for public comment?
[41:11] Okay.
[41:12] We have two in-person speakers and two via Zoom.
[41:15] I'm going to call both the in-person speakers.
[41:16] If you could please land up at the podium.
[41:19] Benjamin Jocometti.
[41:21] Hold on one moment.
[41:22] Let me make sure people in the room.
[41:24] If you'd like to make a public comment and you're in the room, you can go ahead and fill out
[41:27] a public comment card.
[41:30] And Marie Bluestone?
[41:32] You can both come up to the podium.
[41:34] Either podium.
[41:38] Mr. Jocometti.
[41:43] You're speaking on this item, Mr. Nellie?
[41:45] You can land at the podium too.
[41:47] Hi, I'm Ben Jockimetti.
[41:49] Out of the 317 Monterey have been there for 30 years.
[41:53] This all sounded fantastic.
[41:55] I just want to remind everybody that there is a serious sound violation that's been going
[42:00] on for over six months.
[42:02] And I am the person that has been directly, my place is unlivable.
[42:10] This sound is 24-7.
[42:12] We're not talking just decibels.
[42:15] We're talking this vibrates the entire dwelling.
[42:19] The only reason my neighbors haven't...
[42:22] I have neighbors all over that area.
[42:24] Apparently it's now been designated type 3.
[42:27] We spoke on that.
[42:29] You brought this up.
[42:32] This is a four-ton air mover that's brand new.
[42:37] sound isn't just decibels. It is the vibration, it's the reflection, it's the natural
[42:43] amphitheater. This was a mistake, and I don't want to call fault or anything, but this
[42:50] is an ongoing serious fault that is disturbing the lives, and I mean detrimental to the
[42:57] health and hearing and welfare. There is not a moment I invite anyone to my place at
[43:04] any time. And there is no silence. Forget the hours of operation. This is industrial noise.
[43:13] This is a physical item that pushes so much air. It is unremittant. It is ongoing and has been
[43:24] ongoing for six months now. I lived there for 30 years. As I said the last time I stood up here.
[43:32] A moment of silence is now so precious to me, there are five different sounds this thing
[43:39] makes.
[43:40] 7.
[43:41] Unfortunately, the low decibel one, I have one of your meters, I have two of them, and
[43:45] now I have a vibration monitor as well, because things vibrate at the lower decibels.
[43:51] 47 decibels, 49 decibels, serious vibration, you can't escape it in the bedroom, the bathroom,
[44:02] the kitchen, anywhere. The bed vibrates, everything vibrates for six months now.
[44:12] It's
[44:14] a problem that I now know Andrew Rodriguez, and I will be speaking to him, I would like
[44:20] to know the equipment. I just need to know what kind of equipment's up there. This is
[44:24] a mistake. And there are solutions. We will find a solution together. And I thank you.
[44:30] I just want to bring to your attention the importance of it. Thank you.
[44:35] Marie Bloomstone.
[44:42] I apologize for
[44:47] my appearance. I'm going through kind of a crisis situation
[44:51] right now. Sorry I brought the dog. This is the time that I walk the dog and I
[44:57] understood that I had to be here at six.
[45:00] I can't come in through Zoom when I'm walking the dog. I live at 1131 L. Central,
[45:09] Caddy Corner from Sid, the cat, and all of the development that's being done across the street.
[45:16] I have written approximately 60 emails documenting the noise coming from Sid, the cat, with their
[45:26] are incessant drumming and their party-like atmosphere that goes on till 11 and 12 o'clock
[45:33] at night. Now Andrew has clarified for me that this noise ordinance that you're entertaining
[45:40] does not apply to Sid the cat because Sid the cat has a separate CUP. I understand that.
[45:48] I came to tell you what it feels like to live across the street from a place that has been
[45:56] classified I guess in a mixed-used area. I took a look at the maps that are being presented
[46:03] here and I have a question and a request. Why is our townhome property classified as—it's
[46:15] not classified as residential. I didn't bring it to me—with me. It's classified as—what
[46:23] What did I tell you?
[46:29] We are, yeah, our town homes are not mixed use.
[46:33] We are residences, and I think that that map is incorrect, and I think that our property
[46:40] needs to be like the other light blue properties that are classified as residences.
[46:45] Why are we being discriminated against and treated unfairly?
[46:49] I believe that this is something that this board or somebody in the city can correct so
[46:54] So that we can try to correct some of these noise standards that are being incorporated
[46:59] into the CUPs for these businesses that are coming across the street and absolutely
[47:05] ruining our lives and bringing down our property values.
[47:11] So that is my comment on your proposed noise ordinance.
[47:19] hopefully you will also do something about the CUP for Sid the cat. We can't live
[47:26] with that noise anymore. So thank you for listening to me and hopefully you'll
[47:34] be able to do something. The the the the wound that you have inflicted on us you
[47:41] meaning the city government is not regulated by the state or the Fed or
[47:47] anybody else. It was done by somebody here or the planning commission. Oh, and by the way,
[47:53] the planning commission won't accept my emails anymore. Maybe somebody can fix that. Thank you
[47:59] very much. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker is Mike Noe, and after Mike Noe, we'll be
[48:03] Steve Novotny.
[48:08] Good evening. Just here to speak to, I guess, some of the concerns that people are
[48:16] I did read the agenda item beforehand and recognize that what was at the code, the noise ordinance code accounts for 5% of the city code, but responding to the issues takes 25% longer than any other issues that the city addresses.
[48:35] So recognizing that this is really an opportunity to come up with common sense, I'm reluctant
[48:44] to use that term, but just something that addresses the concerns and is not a blanket noise
[48:49] ordinance.
[48:50] I sympathize with the woman who just spoke.
[48:53] I recognize that, you know, she's probably lived there a lot longer than CityCats existed,
[48:57] but I imagine there's got to be opportunities where these businesses and residences can
[49:03] co-exist. Oh, note, I've talked previously about Pickleball and Orange Grove Park. I did
[49:09] hear that El Centro is being viewed as a place that will lower the decibel threshold.
[49:16] I think that's possibly going to lead to more conflict. If I wouldn't be remiss, you have
[49:23] the giddy ostrich going in on El Centro, you have Sid the Cat, be as tacos to come. Those
[49:29] Those are all presumably late night venues and of course the Orange Grove Park Pickleball
[49:36] Court is on that street as well.
[49:39] So I guess instead of creating a blanket ordinance that ultimately results in the police having
[49:47] to respond to a lot of different calls that may or may not actually improve the situation,
[49:53] but it will definitely increase the higher of those involved.
[49:57] I wonder if there's opportunities that we can find common ground that enable everyone
[50:03] to coexist, enjoy where they live, and enjoy all the opportunities that the city presents.
[50:09] Thanks.
[50:11] Steve Gavatti.
[50:27] Thanks.
[50:27] Since the topic of noise and the noise ordinance is on the forefront today, I want to point
[50:33] out that my next door neighbor, Omari Ferguson, has some type of
[50:38] loud alarm in his backyard that goes off several times every evening.
[50:44] Sometimes as late as 12, 30 a.m., this alarm was already mentioned
[50:49] and complaints filed over a year ago by myself and other neighbors.
[50:56] But nothing has been done, and the noise continues.
[50:59] It is very loud and above any allowable noise limits, especially so late at night.
[51:06] Last week, one night at 11 p.m., I was outside when the alarm went off, and I was able to
[51:13] capture this recording that I'll play for you now.
[52:19] O'Mari Ferguson, stop making this noise, it's inappropriate in any residential area, and
[52:26] And especially in South Pasadena I don't know what this alarm is but it's clearly unacceptable
[52:32] in a quiet residential neighborhood like ours and none of you present here tonight would
[52:38] like to live next to someone with a noise making device like this.
[52:43] I strongly recommend not increasing any allowable noise limits in the proposed changes to the noise
[52:51] ordinance or situations and violations like this will only increase and get
[52:57] worse.
[53:01] We have two speakers via Zoom.
[53:08] Mr. Gladden you may proceed. Hello
[53:11] counsel. I read ambient decibels and on my parcel between 35 and 45 decibels
[53:22] depending on the time of day. The neighbor's single 7-year-old AC unit is 40 feet
[53:29] away and it increases the decibels by 5 or 6 points and that is that is the
[53:41] limit that our current ordinance allows. They just had plans approved using the
[53:48] streamline process that places two AC units, four feet away. So from one unit,
[53:56] 40 feet away, to two units, four feet away. And the estimated DBA that I found
[54:03] with an online calculator is that it would be 67 decibels. An increase of 10
[54:12] times the loudness. I mean, the plans are approved and they're there four feet
[54:18] away.
[54:21] So future potential complaint. I started listening at 5 p.m. and they were on for 20 minutes
[54:32] and it was off for three minutes and then it went on for 90 minutes and it just now turned off
[54:38] and it's in the 70s today. It's a constant air conditioning mechanical noise.
[54:47] it's just tolerable now, but the difference between 45 and 55 is double. So if
[55:00] they're moved closer and somehow kept at the nighttime allowable limit of 55,
[55:07] I should expect twice the loudness in perpetuity.
[55:17] That's what we're dealing
[55:18] with these numbers here. The comparison to Sam Reno was brought up. They have strict regulations
[55:27] on the placement and dampening of air conditioners. We just relaxed our air conditioner rules
[55:36] 2025 and that's what allowed them to put it four feet instead of the eight feet set back.
[55:44] I'm
[55:48] pretty sure I saw on the news the people who were living next to the data centers.
[55:53] They were holding up a sound meter that was reading 65-70.
[56:00] So 65's up there and 55 is still worse than 50.
[56:16] The next speaker is Steve Lawrence.
[56:20] You may proceed, Mr. Lawrence.
[56:24] Good evening, Councilor Ken Yermey.
[56:29] So, a couple of things on the ordinance. One thing I didn't hear is neighbors talking residential
[56:35] neighbors that share fences in the backyard. So, what I heard with measurements being taken
[56:40] at the property line perhaps, you know, assuming like the front of the side of the house.
[56:45] But if there's a property or whatever going on in the backyard, then you have, you know,
[56:54] I was at Sound Measurement going to be accounted for and or measured, that's one question.
[57:00] Next is, I don't know if this is ridiculous or not, but I didn't hear any accommodations
[57:07] or jurisdiction over the Metro.
[57:10] I don't think that there would be, but it would be great if there was, does any of this
[57:14] supply to the Metro at all?
[57:16] The Metro has very specific sound regulations in place on what they're supposed to be adhering
[57:23] to while going through South-Hast, and it definitely gets locked over from time to time
[57:29] through the speed of the train at certain times.
[57:32] And then lastly, I heard something, I forget who was saying this from one of the experts
[57:37] that are about how the found is measured, and they're saying, well, we want to take the
[57:42] measurement from a certain spot so it can be as objective as possible, and we don't want
[57:46] the sound to be influenced by, you know, it being focused or bounced off a wall or something
[57:52] like that.
[57:52] So that's actually the point.
[57:54] You take something like the metro,
[57:55] and if you stand at the crossing guard,
[57:58] the middle of the street, and it goes by it,
[58:00] it's correct speed, not bad,
[58:02] that when you put it up against the metal sound barrier walls,
[58:05] and everything else in the street selecting off of,
[58:07] it's kind of wild, like how loud it gets.
[58:09] It can be very loud.
[58:11] And then someone else brought up,
[58:13] another one is against product vibrations, as well,
[58:15] that's also a thank you.
[58:16] Just things to consider.
[58:17] I'll be looking for those in the notes.
[58:19] Thank you for your time.
[58:25] Mr. I'm sorry I haven't heard from you so it's Shlomo Nizani, Nizani? I'm sorry. Are you speaking on this item here? Are you speaking on the next meeting or this item?
[58:45] Are you speaking on this item here and were you speaking on the next meeting?
[58:57] So I think that's for the general meetings.
[59:00] We're about to wrap up our, would you do a discussion on, this is about sound and noise
[59:05] ordinance only.
[59:06] And then we're going to close this meeting out and then have the regular general city council
[59:10] meeting next.
[59:11] Okay.
[59:11] So this is only for items related to the noise ordinance.
[59:15] So we, okay.
[59:16] So that concludes public comment on this item.
[59:18] Okay.
[59:18] Let's go to discussion.
[59:20] You're looking for direction.
[59:22] Understand?
[59:23] Yes.
[59:24] Yes, if there's some additional homework you'd like staff to do, what would that consist
[59:30] of?
[59:31] We tried to respond as many of the questions that were brought up at the last meeting
[59:34] as possible.
[59:36] Obviously, as you've heard tonight, this is a sensitive issue that we deal with pretty much
[59:41] daily.
[59:42] So, really, if there's additional questions and research you'd like to have done, please
[59:48] let us know what that is.
[59:52] So do I have any discussion from Council?
[59:57] I mean, I think that what we have to.
[1:00:00] Embrace is that we get a lot of these, and the problem with the current municipal code is that it's so subjective that it's hard for our staff to do much about things. So I think the, from my perspective, the importance of this item is get some objective measurements. I like the idea of, you know, looking around at others. I like the different zones. I think John and Sheila brought up a couple of good points about maybe the transition
[1:00:29] or just a little thought about that.
[1:00:32] I don't know if there's homework to be done,
[1:00:34] but I think there's maybe just look at some of those
[1:00:37] kind of crossover zones, or yeah, parks near residences,
[1:00:41] or the Holy Family-specific Plan,
[1:00:44] which is near residences.
[1:00:45] Just kind of, you target a few of those
[1:00:48] and just kind of think through
[1:00:49] what else might need to be part of the ordinance.
[1:00:54] I'm not sure I have an example, but,
[1:00:57] or I don't know if I thought,
[1:00:58] but I think it does need to be thought through.
[1:01:01] But otherwise, I'm generally in favor
[1:01:03] of the way the direction this is going.
[1:01:05] And I also think on some of these items,
[1:01:07] we can always come back if it turns out
[1:01:09] that there's decibels are way too high,
[1:01:11] the decibels are way too low.
[1:01:13] I think we'll know pretty quickly.
[1:01:16] I think my concern is changing,
[1:01:20] increasing the noise levels
[1:01:22] because there are, you know,
[1:01:25] usage is during the daytime that are naturally louder, but they're acceptable, but changing
[1:01:31] that so it goes all the way till 10 p.m. So, what I'd almost want to do is look at the
[1:01:36] evening rates to see. So, I understand, like, Mission Street is a more of a commercial
[1:01:44] area, I think, being consistent with, like, San Marino. I can understand that for Mission
[1:01:51] but then I think when we look at the transition spaces
[1:01:56] and the residential, I think we have to be more sensitive.
[1:02:00] There were actually no change in recommendation
[1:02:03] for the central portion across from Garfield,
[1:02:08] across from Orange Grove Park.
[1:02:11] I know that was stated in this comment,
[1:02:13] but looking at the map, it's exactly the same as Option 1 and Option 2
[1:02:18] for that area.
[1:02:19] Yeah, it's just that Orange Grove Park is directly across the street from a residential.
[1:02:24] So I think I'd be careful about changing noise, you know, increase the decibels to fit
[1:02:34] what people would like it to be for their use, because there's also areas like just going
[1:02:39] back to like Eddie Park, for instance, like understanding the contextual places where then
[1:02:44] And we have an opportunity when it comes to the Royo is a place where I think can handle
[1:02:51] more noise than that's an open space that can be handled more noise.
[1:02:55] So having that contextual difference between the Royo.
[1:02:58] I mean, I think maybe the homework might be for the areas that we've mentioned, the sort
[1:03:04] of kind of transition or stepped up or I want to remember what John said, but maybe it'd
[1:03:11] interesting, for example, on the pickleball, what is that noise there now? And then also
[1:03:17] what, from a, from a home understand point across the street on Orange Grove, you know,
[1:03:21] or on, on El Central, like what is the noise there? It'd be nice, because you did do some
[1:03:24] measurements in some of these places, but maybe in sort of some of these contextual zones
[1:03:29] or the, the kind of, um, transfer, transfer zones, maybe doing a, just a couple, I don't
[1:03:35] know, Todd, I don't know if you believe, I think just it, just so we have an idea of what's
[1:03:40] coming. Yeah, I mean we we could certainly and I think we have taken those numbers. It's also that's one that's also going to be I'm hoping improved with a with a new recommendation will be coming to you in the next meeting or two with limiting the hours of pickle balls of I believe we'll be starting at like seven or eight o'clock in the morning and then wrapping it up at 8 30 or nine somewhere in that area. So that will sort of we're hoping that situation will help improve. It's you know through some of those changes.
[1:04:10] changes.
[1:04:10] Also, our staff is looking at some additional sound proofing in those courts just to see
[1:04:15] if that would also make a 5 or 10 decibel level difference as well.
[1:04:21] That particular concern, I'm hoping that we've got some ideas that will lower that with
[1:04:26] outside of the ordinance.
[1:04:28] In terms of the ordinance, I'm hearing some of the questions about that we go too far.
[1:04:33] The last meeting, there was a concern that we were too tight with the ordinance, so I think
[1:04:38] you're right it's you know it's we're trying to build in a little bit of leeway here to try to
[1:04:42] work with our residents and I think that's something that needs to be said is we're not out there
[1:04:46] trying to ticket everybody you know especially these one-off issues I mean neighbors tend to work
[1:04:52] pretty well with themselves on birthday parties and weddings if they you know they especially
[1:04:57] if they've lived there a while they tend to go out and talk to their neighbors and say hey you know
[1:05:00] we're going to be making some noise it's that's really not what what we're after right now it's that
[1:05:05] that it's that perpetual, or those complaints that continue to come through in a more consistent
[1:05:11] manner, where residents' quality life is being impacted, and we need some objective way
[1:05:17] to prove our case.
[1:05:18] So I think it's, you know, we're trying to put a little bit more science behind this, but
[1:05:23] there's always going to be kind of the art of people working with each other too.
[1:05:26] And I don't think we can write an ordinance that tightens that down too much.
[1:05:30] I mean, one thing we could consider is a frivolous complaint ordinance, and see if there's someone who's
[1:05:36] You know calling the police for things like, you know, kids laughing in the backyard
[1:05:42] Then that's that becomes a problem. We do it once you can do a couple times with the police come out
[1:05:47] Then it's actually like, okay, this is getting to a point where a neighbor dispute is
[1:05:52] Using city resources
[1:05:54] is that is after checking through conditions, what not.
[1:06:00] The other quick thing I would say is there are on Meridian, for instance, the farmer's
[1:06:05] market, but the farmer's market would have a temporary use permit or has a use permit,
[1:06:10] so that would not necessarily change.
[1:06:12] If there's a place where we're having temporary use permits, it's not necessarily changing
[1:06:16] the whole zone, but it's considering that that happens like one night a week or whatever,
[1:06:22] or a couple nights a week.
[1:06:23] And I think also, I don't know, I am guessing you've done the sound measurements on L-Centro
[1:06:29] around the new development with Vietacos, or there's some new things coming to town
[1:06:35] and be kind of interesting to know what those measurements look like as well,
[1:06:39] both from the person making the noise and from the recipients standpoint.
[1:06:48] And I think we did have a good point brought up by one of our speakers tonight in terms
[1:06:52] of the standards that the Plan Commission considers and it's a really good point, you know, wherever
[1:06:59] this ordinance is set in the decibel levels there shouldn't be a CUP where they're brought
[1:07:05] in and allowed to exceed that either. So another important change that we're trying to make here
[1:07:13] and giving a little bit more direction and specificity on those ordinance numbers.
[1:07:18] Do you have any further discussion before we close out this meeting?
[1:07:22] I think a couple of things one is that I guess I don't know if you folks are, it doesn't
[1:07:27] sound like we're willing to entertain something that makes this time of day dependent.
[1:07:32] One, the second would be how I don't see how this addresses multifamily properties.
[1:07:40] So I think would be willing to, if we went for the full increases, I would be willing
[1:07:46] to entertain a more nuanced approach to the evening piece of what considered evening.
[1:07:53] It made it as hard because again, if somebody has a party one time, to me, that's very different
[1:08:00] than if somebody is having a party every single night.
[1:08:04] right, but the multi-family, I'm not sure. So I'm a part of like developers, it is their
[1:08:10] responsibility to put in the noise proofing aspects into their built. And that is, it's-
[1:08:15] But I don't see like if you have a like a multi-unit apartment complex, the property line is at
[1:08:19] the sidewalk. And so if two residents have an issue with one creating more, too much sound,
[1:08:24] that's the serving the other. I don't see how the noise ordinance would apply.
[1:08:27] So I think that that is a different, let's go ahead and ask.
[1:08:31] If it's tenants in apartments next door to each other complaining that's more of a
[1:08:36] civil issue.
[1:08:37] It wouldn't be regulated.
[1:08:38] Right.
[1:08:40] That's private property.
[1:08:41] That's two tenants sharing property within the same private property line.
[1:08:48] Right.
[1:08:48] Exactly.
[1:08:49] And so that's kind of my point is that if you're creating a system that's measuring things
[1:08:53] at the property line, in instances where you have two people in a multi-unit building,
[1:09:00] there's a good chance that significant portion of people in the city won't be served by
[1:09:05] this ordinance, essentially.
[1:09:06] I don't think we have jurisdiction to be able to go inside apartment buildings and decide
[1:09:11] that.
[1:09:14] That's not where we have the jurisdiction, but I think we're really struggling with, is
[1:09:21] any of this going to be so unrealistically raising expectations unrealistically that
[1:09:26] it's going to create more problems than it's worth, I think the Council is very clear
[1:09:31] that having objective measurements and an enforcement mechanism that is spelled out,
[1:09:37] I think we absolutely need to move toward that.
[1:09:40] But I'm just wondering where the rubber meets the road in some of these use cases, we need
[1:09:47] to be ready for this.
[1:09:48] Now obviously staff, you're the front line responders, so you're going to, you're already
[1:09:52] anticipating okay where are we going to have this response issue.
[1:09:55] But you know, it comes back to Council if we have approved this without sufficient vetting.
[1:10:01] I think we need another round at looking at some of these use cases and some of the backed
[1:10:06] up zone one, zone three interactions.
[1:10:09] And I think I'd be more comfortable if we had a little bit more analysis of that.
[1:10:12] In these cases, I think you're referring to the zone 3 being next to the zone 1 properties.
[1:10:22] And is the question, how would we mediate these concerns?
[1:10:26] Is it how would we approve you?
[1:10:28] I mean, I'm assuming it's how would we address these concerns that are going on?
[1:10:33] If you've got properties in zone 1 being that surround a zone 3 property and what does that look like?
[1:10:41] Is that kind of what we're getting at?
[1:10:42] Yes, it is and I also want to address maybe a presumption that was made that you know we're more active in terms of our
[1:10:51] commercial activities in San Reno. San Reno has larger parcels, so that sound gets spread out a lot more. So
[1:10:58] increasing our decibels with smaller parcels actually
[1:11:03] is a very different kind of regulatory standard than San Reno.
[1:11:07] Additionally to that, this is something that I'm like thinking about is that like different
[1:11:12] properties, their orientation relative to the property line is different.
[1:11:16] So the same noise from one parcel that has like a 20 foot setback is very different than
[1:11:21] that same exact occurrence with a 5 foot setback.
[1:11:25] And I think that like, if you're trying to reconcile that, if you're going to need to have
[1:11:30] a lot more analysis in the way this is written into my mind.
[1:11:36] I don't think so because I think in that case they're measuring it from the sidewalk.
[1:11:41] So it really doesn't matter where your property line and do some people have a more luck
[1:11:46] than other sort of thing.
[1:11:48] You have to mitigate the sound and it's a standard that you have to mitigate the sound to
[1:11:53] meet that.
[1:11:54] It's not fair.
[1:11:55] I can't turn it upside as my neighbor.
[1:11:58] I also think, I do think given all the variety of that we have in South Pasadena, commercial,
[1:12:07] multi-family, smaller, larger lots, I think we could litigate this to death ourselves at
[1:12:15] some point, we have to just kind of embrace something and adopt it.
[1:12:19] And then I think I do think we'll know pretty quickly because we don't have any numbers
[1:12:23] right now.
[1:12:23] We talk about increasing.
[1:12:24] But I think it was a pretty good idea to make those measurements and then like let's try to get everybody in compliance, right, so that makes sense to me.
[1:12:34] I just think it's just going to be in my mind when it gets adopted.
[1:12:38] We're going to have to monitor this a little bit and see how that goes.
[1:12:43] Sure. I agree.
[1:12:48] Is that enough information?
[1:12:49] I think we've got a couple of things that we can come back to you with and then I think
[1:12:56] at some point we just, we need to put this in place, we've got the tools and we can
[1:13:00] always correct it down the road.
[1:13:02] But, is Erica stated, I mean, it's a much more common sense approach we're trying to
[1:13:08] get folks to comply, trying to be respectful.
[1:13:10] We understand the fear that the ordinance get weaponized and the desperate levels get weaponized.
[1:13:16] It already is.
[1:13:18] Right.
[1:13:18] So, you know, and I think the problem with the staff's facing is right now, it's just so vague
[1:13:25] that there haven't trouble bringing some issues to resolution, whereas this will help us quite a bit.
[1:13:31] Yeah, I mean, I think my one concern, I agree with the fine-tuning and going ahead,
[1:13:36] figuring out passing. It comes on the new developments and new permits, and that would be
[1:13:41] under the CUP standards. So that's one that's harder to pull back once you've provided the CUP,
[1:13:47] that that's where that would be violent consent.
[1:13:50] Yeah, and I think something for you to think about since we're going to handle this one more time
[1:13:54] is you could always be a little more restrictive. It's easier to loosen it up if you feel like you
[1:14:00] need to than to start scaling it back because people are going to have vested rights once they get
[1:14:04] those approvals and they open up and you're not going to be able, it's not going to be so easy if it's
[1:14:09] time to see you pay. In fact, you know, to scale it back so there may be something to be said for
[1:14:14] scaling back those own twos you're worried about for that reason and you can always loosen
[1:14:19] them up later if you want.
[1:14:20] Okay.
[1:14:21] All right.
[1:14:22] Thank you.
[1:14:23] So if I have a deal further comments from the council, then we'll go ahead and adjourn this
[1:14:30] meeting at 717 p.m.
[1:14:34] And I think we're going to go ahead and move, do you guys want a minute break or if you want
[1:14:38] to just move directly into the next meeting?
[1:14:40] All right.
[1:14:41] Let's go.
[1:14:41] We're going to go to the next meeting.
[1:14:42] All right. So good evening. I don't know how to order the meeting of the adjourned regular
[1:14:47] city council meeting of the self-passing city council at 7.17 p.m. Chief City Clerk Newsom
[1:14:52] please call the roll.
[1:14:54] Councilmember Broad.
[1:14:55] Here.
[1:14:55] Councilmember Primeth.
[1:14:56] Here.
[1:14:57] Councilmember Ketchiodi.
[1:14:57] Here.
[1:14:58] Mayor Pluton Ferguson.
[1:14:59] Here.
[1:15:00] Here, we have a quorum. Thank you. So council member Ron will lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. Please rise and let's put your hand every heart and recite with me. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which stands one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
[1:15:31] Okay. I would like to invite Olivia Radville, senior librarian at the
[1:15:36] South Passing Public Library to present on the new Library
[1:15:39] Campaign through the decades.
[1:15:43] Is Olivia here?
[1:15:55] Well, maybe she's outside.
[1:15:56] Should I be outside?
[1:16:29] Hello, thank you so much for having me.
[1:16:31] My name's Olivia.
[1:16:33] I'm one of the librarians at the South Pass Library.
[1:16:36] And I wanted to talk a little bit about our library
[1:16:39] campaign that we have happening right now.
[1:16:42] It's September through November.
[1:16:43] And I do have some slides.
[1:16:49] Am I good?
[1:16:53] No problem.
[1:16:53] Well,
[1:17:01] can I start talking before the slides start?
[1:17:03] Is that okay?
[1:17:04] Okay.
[1:17:05] So, essentially, we are a Carnegie library.
[1:17:08] In 1906, we received a $10,000 grant from the Carnegie Corporation to construct our
[1:17:13] library building.
[1:17:14] It's not the actual building that is there now.
[1:17:17] It did move in 1930, however, components of the original library were moved to the center
[1:17:22] of the block.
[1:17:23] So, in honor of the 250th birthday of America, we received another $10,000 grant from the
[1:17:32] Carnegie Corporation.
[1:17:33] It is basically no strings, there's no reporting requirement, it is literally just essentially
[1:17:40] a donation that they are making to every library that is a Carnegie library that is still
[1:17:44] operating as a public library.
[1:17:46] It also happens to coincide with the fact that we are now 120 years since we received
[1:17:53] our first grant from the Carnegie Corporation.
[1:17:56] So that is where the funding came from.
[1:17:58] And what we have decided to do with it is a library campaign September through November
[1:18:03] to celebrate this anniversary.
[1:18:06] So there are a few different components to the campaign.
[1:18:09] You'll see in a moment, but first we have special edition library cards that they came out
[1:18:15] on the 14th. We ordered a thousand of them and we had a local graphic designer do the artwork
[1:18:22] for them to celebrate the occasion. There is an illustration once it pops up of our Morton Bay
[1:18:28] fig tree on the side of the building and we've received a lot of positive feedback from the community.
[1:18:35] The second thing that we have are our decade kits. So all of our kits look like this.
[1:18:43] We have them from 1900 through 2000.
[1:18:47] The idea behind these kits, you can forward.
[1:18:50] Can we do a quick, she's showing us,
[1:18:52] or a decade kit, is it possible to?
[1:18:55] So this is the artwork for our library card,
[1:18:59] and that is also our logo for the campaign.
[1:19:01] If you want to forward ahead one slide,
[1:19:03] you'll see what the cards look like.
[1:19:06] And then South Pass Public Library,
[1:19:09] we have in gold foil on the actual printed card.
[1:19:11] And this is the design from the artist that we were very excited to have done.
[1:19:17] And then if you forward one more, so these are again our decade kits.
[1:19:23] So to look back in time as we're celebrating this occasion,
[1:19:29] we decided to create and curate a kit for each decade from 1900 through 2000.
[1:19:35] The idea behind these kits is they're part of our library of things
[1:19:38] was also launched on the 14th of this month.
[1:19:43] That's a content that you can check out
[1:19:46] from the library including outdoor games
[1:19:48] and musical instruments.
[1:19:49] With your library card you can also check out these kits.
[1:19:53] Each kit contains two pieces of children's literature
[1:19:57] that we thought were representative of that decade.
[1:20:00] They were either popular in their time
[1:20:02] or have since had a larger cultural impact
[1:20:05] and came out during that time.
[1:20:07] And then we've included two pieces of either analog technology, toys, games, or artifacts
[1:20:14] that we thought were representative of that decade.
[1:20:16] The idea being that families can check these out and explore that time period.
[1:20:21] With each kit comes a little card.
[1:20:25] On the back of the card is a paragraph about what was happening in South Pasadena during that
[1:20:31] decade, and then why the items in the kit were selected to represent that decade.
[1:20:37] We've actually checked out most of them so far, there's 11 total, so I brought one as
[1:20:42] an example.
[1:20:43] This is one of our remaining ones that has not yet been checked out.
[1:20:45] This is our 1950 kit.
[1:20:47] We have a copy of the Lonely's All.
[1:20:49] We have a copy of Little Bear.
[1:20:51] We have a woolly, woolly, and a magic eight ball.
[1:20:55] We've actually received a lot of requests from parents regarding analog technology, and
[1:21:01] if their kids can see like what a cassette player is and what a CD player is.
[1:21:05] So, those are the 80s and 90s kids.
[1:21:07] We do have, I think, a Tomagachi in the 2000 kit.
[1:21:11] If you want to forward ahead, one more slide.
[1:21:15] Then we have also added for this campaign
[1:21:18] a series of programming, the idea of being
[1:21:21] that this is an eclectic series of programming.
[1:21:23] Everything is family-friendly.
[1:21:25] These are just ways that we can reflect on our culture,
[1:21:30] our community and come together
[1:21:32] and provide opportunities for families
[1:21:33] is to engage with the library.
[1:21:35] So a few big ones coming up.
[1:21:37] I won't go through every single one.
[1:21:39] We have the Genealogy Fair is happening on October 3rd.
[1:21:42] This is our first genealogy fair.
[1:21:45] It's going to include its October 3rd
[1:21:47] at the library from 10 to 3.
[1:21:49] It will include three presentations.
[1:21:52] First will be a Genealogy 101 workshop.
[1:21:55] Second will be Eugene Moy, the former president
[1:21:58] of the Chinese Historical Society.
[1:22:00] We'll talk about Chinese American Genealogy
[1:22:02] in Southern California.
[1:22:04] And then our last will be a presentation.
[1:22:06] It's a short film screening by a local
[1:22:08] documentarian and author, K. Morandian,
[1:22:12] called My Mother's Voice.
[1:22:13] And then she will talk a little bit
[1:22:14] about her family research regarding her mother's experience
[1:22:19] escaping the Armenian genocide.
[1:22:21] We will also have exhibitors there,
[1:22:24] including the South Press Preservation Foundation,
[1:22:27] the California African-American Genological Society,
[1:22:30] and the Immigrant Genological Society.
[1:22:31] So that's going to be kind of an all day event, so that's one of our bigger ones.
[1:22:35] We also have, on the 12th, A Flamenco performance happening at the library.
[1:22:41] It's all ages.
[1:22:42] They'll be performing in the community room.
[1:22:44] There's no registration, and it starts at 6 p.m.
[1:22:47] And then we are going to end on the 28th, so this is the Saturday after Thanksgiving, with
[1:22:54] a screening of Spirited Away, and we will have a live piano score, so there will be a musician
[1:23:00] doing the score for that film. We thought we would just end on a nice family movie that everyone
[1:23:04] can come. A lot of people have not experienced a live piano score during a film screening. So we
[1:23:09] thought that would be kind of a nice way to wrap up this entire program. So that's the overview.
[1:23:16] That's how we've decided to spend the funds. We wanted to put it toward activities that the
[1:23:21] community would immediately benefit from. And if you have any questions, please let me know.
[1:23:26] Do I have any questions?
[1:23:31] Fantastic.
[1:23:32] This looks like a lot of fun.
[1:23:33] I hope that we get it out to the community to know
[1:23:35] all the great things that are happening in the library.
[1:23:38] Would love to see what the kit looks like from the 1980s.
[1:23:44] Shoulder pads.
[1:23:45] Shoulder pads.
[1:23:45] Shoulder pads.
[1:23:46] Yeah.
[1:23:48] We have to go check that out.
[1:23:49] But I also wanted to, since you're here,
[1:23:51] I think to you earlier,
[1:23:53] but you weren't in presence,
[1:23:54] but back in May,
[1:23:56] Olivia over the weekend quickly pulled together a list of names of all of the South
[1:24:02] Pastina residents who had passed away in war and helped us to do something that now
[1:24:08] we have on file for future Memorial Day services. So I want to thank you in person for that.
[1:24:13] Yeah, thank you so much.
[1:24:17] Okay, we'll now move on to public comments.
[1:24:21] Madam Mayor. Okay, I'll just say my little blurb in an effort to better manage the business
[1:24:24] on the agenda general public comments will be limited to first for 30 minutes at the beginning
[1:24:29] of the agenda. If there are speakers remaining in the queue they will be heard at the end of
[1:24:32] the meeting. If you'd like to make a general public comment for items not listed on the agenda,
[1:24:37] please raise your hand on Zoom now and if you are in the room you need to fill out a card.
[1:24:44] Chiefs to do clerk do some, let's go speakers a few seconds to raise hands fill out cards
[1:24:50] and the clerk will maintain a list of speakers who are in the queue. Ms. Newsom may have
[1:24:54] I have a count of speakers for general public comment.
[1:24:56] Yes, Madam Mayor, we have six speakers in person and one speaker in the via zoom.
[1:25:01] I'm going to call all six names.
[1:25:03] You can please lay up at the podium.
[1:25:05] Colin Campbell.
[1:25:07] Shlomo Nitsani.
[1:25:09] Michelle Clark.
[1:25:11] Steve Novotny.
[1:25:12] Laura Smith.
[1:25:14] And Robert Barone.
[1:25:16] Mr. Campbell.
[1:25:17] You may proceed.
[1:25:23] Hi.
[1:25:23] Just giving a quick status.
[1:25:25] Yes, I got to meet with Internal People last week, which was very exciting, to talk about
[1:25:31] potentially doing a role in some new technology.
[1:25:35] So today, the United Nations was meeting, it was a big topic of conversation, new technology
[1:25:41] President Trump was trying to get us to say not artificial intelligence, but super intelligence.
[1:25:46] So again, this is some big upgrades that are coming and I'd like it if I could present
[1:25:51] you guys some options about how in a small town we could use it to protect our kids and, you know,
[1:25:59] help with food and everything else. Thank you. Shlomo Nittani. Good evening. Welcome
[1:26:07] to the library as usual. Okay. I have one item that I really am very concerned that this city is
[1:26:15] just playing games of just kick the bucket and letting go. Maybe you'll forget about it. Maybe
[1:26:22] some day things will happen. Everything is, we have to do a study. We have to do a study.
[1:26:29] I don't know what study cost. How long does it take? But at the same time, it's about time
[1:26:34] that people are going to do something for the citizens of this community. Before I forget,
[1:26:40] so I want to just mention that instead of painting the pavements, why not we do a good job and
[1:26:46] graded and leveled and put a good pavement they painted my street and now it's all cracking up again so
[1:26:55] waste of money
[1:26:57] anyway
[1:26:58] for the last six months i'm talking with people i took three people on or on with my car on a ride
[1:27:05] to show the bed streets, botholes, signage, we need a study
[1:27:12] So, years ago, before you guys were born, there was a U-turn going west on Freemont and
[1:27:19] Huntington.
[1:27:20] It was on Huntington.
[1:27:22] It disappeared.
[1:27:24] Now, we have a problem.
[1:27:26] The businesses that are on the south side of Freemont are suffering because in order to
[1:27:33] get to them, if you drive west, you have to go half a mile down, make a U-turn on the
[1:27:38] median, get a red light on free month, you cannot get to the market going on free month
[1:27:44] left because there is no there is no left turn, you have to continue and get to the market
[1:27:48] and the cleaners and everybody else there. How long does it take to do a study? Oh, we have
[1:27:54] this project that we have like million and a half was forty million dollars for the honey
[1:28:00] tonne free month project. Do a study spend two thousand dollars twenty thousand of whatever
[1:28:06] There it is, the convenient of the driving public, stop sign on Alpha and La Fremontia,
[1:28:16] top of the hill, you drive up the hill, stop sign, why?
[1:28:22] There is no need for it, it's a small street, there is a stop sign coming from La Fremontia
[1:28:27] into Alpha,
[1:28:30] we need to do a study, everything is a study, so I think we need to change
[1:28:38] something attitude. As far as potholes, I saw some things. Oh, we advertise. We feel
[1:28:45] nine potholes in a big, nice, four color publication that the city published. Nine potholes,
[1:28:54] a million potholes around here. The big ones. Oh, we are hiring a contractor and he's specializing
[1:28:59] there and he's going to do it. It's been like four months since I talked to Basam. He had never
[1:29:05] come back to me. I'll get back with you. I haven't heard him. So we have a problem.
[1:29:12] You guys take care of it.
[1:29:16] The next speaker is Michelle Clark.
[1:29:34] Thank you.
[1:29:37] This just bothers the people on my street where I moved to South Pasadine
[1:29:43] in 1983. This structure was in front of my house and has been there ever since. It turns
[1:29:52] Turns out it was part of the Southern California gas company.
[1:29:56] I have talked to people who come by.
[1:30:00] The fire department, city, people, and many Southern California gas company representatives. And they all say, well, we'll look at doing something about it. And it's still there. 45 or so years later. And so a neighbor came by who lives. A couple of blocks from me. And he was taking a picture because he thought it was something else.
[1:30:29] so I went out and talked to him. He's the one that suggested that I come to the city council just to let you know and find out if something can be done.
[1:30:38] It's it's really an eye sore and I think the lower right hand picture you can see it's been turned around and people.
[1:30:45] We're on a barricaded street and people back into this thing all the time and it's just really a mess.
[1:30:53] So I'm sorry to waste your time with this, but I didn't know what else, who else to contact.
[1:31:01] I think we'll have somebody from the city follow up with you and see if we can get the gas
[1:31:06] company to come get this stuff. Yeah, it's got the old, old gas company logo on the front that you
[1:31:14] can barely see. And it's covered with dirt. My son who lived with me there when we moved in,
[1:31:22] And girls came by, and they would write my heart, Jeff, in the dirt.
[1:31:28] Jeff is 15 now.
[1:31:32] Thank you very much.
[1:31:33] Thank you.
[1:31:34] Thank you.
[1:31:35] Steve Novotny.
[1:31:41] Hi, Steve Novotny from over on Heraman Avenue, and at the previous noise study session,
[1:31:49] I mentioned my next door neighbor, Amari Ferguson's alarm that he has in his backyard that
[1:31:56] goes off several times every evening. I don't even know what this device is and shouldn't
[1:32:03] be like that in a residential neighborhood. And I'm going to play that again for you
[1:32:09] because there had a little audio problem earlier.
[1:32:56] I think anyone else would want to live
[1:32:58] next to that. And I don't think anyone with a noise maker like that in their backyard
[1:33:03] the yard should be in the position of making decisions on the noise ordinance for other people.
[1:33:10] Thank you.
[1:33:13] Laura Smith.
[1:33:19] Good evening.
[1:33:20] The topic of my comment tonight is the Fremont corridor project and the safety issues becoming apparent after the recent community meetings.
[1:33:28] I really hope you hear me on this.
[1:33:30] As it stands now, there are definite, clear, major concerns about the safety of this design.
[1:33:37] On night one of the meetings, the consultants were asked about safety data.
[1:33:41] The next day, they came with some numbers from a publicly available website.
[1:33:45] They read them off and said, yep, yep, these numbers are bad.
[1:33:48] We better do something with no further discussion or analysis of that.
[1:33:53] Now, separated bike lanes are relatively new in the history of roadways, but studies of
[1:33:57] their safety are indeed out there.
[1:34:00] I sent two examples for last week's packet.
[1:34:03] It, one is from 2020 and the others from earlier this year, they each found that the design,
[1:34:09] such as what's being proposed here on Fremont, actually increases crash risk for cyclists.
[1:34:14] And that in fact, crashing into the bike lane separators themselves is a regular occurrence,
[1:34:20] resulting in injury or worse.
[1:34:22] From one study, on May 3rd, two children under the age of 16 hit curb stops in different incidents that day.
[1:34:29] One of them was thrown into the number two field calling.
[1:34:33] Can you imagine?
[1:34:35] We're looking at this project in large part because vocal parents wanted safety for their children.
[1:34:41] So why are we designing a two-way at all?
[1:34:44] I believe partly because it was the suggestion that came out of the 23 design suret.
[1:34:49] Well, the 25 urban bikeway design guide says the following.
[1:34:54] That unidirectional bike lanes are the preferred design.
[1:34:57] They're more intuitive for everyone using the street, including people biking, walking, and driving.
[1:35:03] Sorry, bi-directional can be helpful where there's significantly fewer intersections and
[1:35:08] driveways than on Fremont, which has 74 intersections and driveways in 1.8 miles.
[1:35:14] That's a lot.
[1:35:16] When I asked the consultant engineer about the intersections on September 1st, he didn't
[1:35:20] give any answers about how they're looking to address it.
[1:35:22] He seriously looked me straight in the eye and said this is a known risk.
[1:35:26] He said, we're just trying to do the design that was assigned.
[1:35:30] He asked me, please go talk to City Council about this.
[1:35:33] So here I am with far more issues than can be covered in three minutes.
[1:35:37] So I prepared his document for the packet with a lot more detail for your information.
[1:35:41] I hope you take a look at it.
[1:35:43] Please ask the hard questions of those that are working on the design for us.
[1:35:47] If you don't get solid and defensible answers, then show the Fremont portion of this project.
[1:35:53] We never conducted a feasibility study.
[1:35:56] This is the study, it's not feasible.
[1:35:58] A bike lane on Fremont was not in our 2011 plan.
[1:36:01] It's not on a Hanover's current plan.
[1:36:04] And there's really good reasons for that.
[1:36:05] Please use the master plan process, hopefully,
[1:36:08] and choose the safest route for our city.
[1:36:10] Thank you.
[1:36:13] Robert Burrow.
[1:36:19] Good evening.
[1:36:20] There's two issues I'd like to talk about today.
[1:36:23] Both having to do with the Fremont Huntington Corridor project.
[1:36:27] First, there is a traffic study out there.
[1:36:30] I filed an information request back on the 11th of this month, which was denied, asking
[1:36:36] for the traffic study, saying the traffic study is in draft form.
[1:36:40] During the initial public outreach sessions back in February and March, Kim Lee Horne talked
[1:36:46] a lot about this study.
[1:36:48] I asked questions about it.
[1:36:49] They said, yeah, we saw the study.
[1:36:51] There isn't going to be a lot of problems from Fremont if we get rid of right-turn-only lanes
[1:36:57] off of Northbound.
[1:36:59] off of northbound Fremont on to Huntington Mission in Meridian, and this was six months
[1:37:06] ago. And they use that to put a lot of information into their design that was then given to you
[1:37:14] guys, which you voted for in June. So my question is, if the study was good enough for Kimlee
[1:37:20] Horn to use for the design of the bike lanes and you guys voted on it and approved it, why can't
[1:37:27] We see it. You made decisions based on this information. We should have access to this information.
[1:37:33] So also in white and still a draft report after six months.
[1:37:37] The other thing I'd like to talk about are project updates.
[1:37:41] A little over a week ago, there were a couple weeks ago, there was a session
[1:37:45] at the middle school and at the library giving us updates.
[1:37:49] And I noticed that there was a presentation that said there's project updates. And some of these updates
[1:37:54] States are not, we're not as citizens given an opportunity to see these before they're
[1:38:00] presented to us, also, so it's kind of like they're sprung on us, we don't have enough
[1:38:04] time to take a look at them, they're just, here they are.
[1:38:07] And the examples are like pocket parks or the three pocket parks that are proposed or eliminating
[1:38:12] the slip lane right turn only from Huntington onto Northbound Fremont.
[1:38:17] So it seems to me that this project is now becoming a place where we're going to throw in anything that we can to basically slow down and hurt the traffic on Fremont and Huntington.
[1:38:31] I think the pocket park design is terrible and there's lots of reasons why, which I won't go into today.
[1:38:37] Okay, but it seems like all we care about right now isn't safety, it's about making the
[1:38:44] traffic slower on Fremont, whether or not it's the right thing to do or the safe thing
[1:38:48] to do.
[1:38:49] We're looking to punish people who are using South Pasadena as a cut-through, but we're
[1:38:54] also punishing all the people that live and work in the city.
[1:38:58] It takes 15 minutes sometimes on a Thursday to get from my house, which is just north of
[1:39:03] on free month out of the city if I'm going a free month which is ridiculous so
[1:39:08] please urge you to consider all the stakeholders and not just those that want
[1:39:13] a bike lane or want to slow down traffic on free might have a new thank you very
[1:39:16] much. We have one speaker via zoom.
[1:39:23] Oliver McIrman you may proceed. Hello can
[1:39:26] you hear me? Yes we can. Great good evening mayor and city council I've had the
[1:39:31] pleasure meeting many of you. My name is Oliver Maker when I live on the east side of Fremont Avenue
[1:39:36] as well. I wanted to speak also about option 2A which is in the works and is dangerously close
[1:39:42] to home. We paid a premium for our home's accessibility. Previous concerns that I've expressed
[1:39:49] about access have been met with suggestions that public works would modify a side street for loading,
[1:39:55] which is a bitter pill to swallow as it prevents my handicat mother from being safely dropped off
[1:40:02] in front of our own front door. This design takes away basic resident access. I
[1:40:10] looked into discovering the origins of this bike lane and its bike lane and it's
[1:40:14] clearly been in the works for years, but its urgency seems to have begun from a
[1:40:19] need to connect the bike lane development, Alhambra was planning. South Pasadena took
[1:40:26] this urgency and raised ahead, but then Alhambra published their active transportation
[1:40:32] plan, which clearly shows they evaluated safety and three month ranked very low. Alhambra
[1:40:41] deprioritized this route, essentially killing their half of the idea. And then on the other
[1:40:48] side of our city, Pasadena has no plans for connecting the bike lane.
[1:40:53] Laura Smith spoke easy earlier. She's my neighbor and she's compiled on her own a ton of
[1:40:59] safety data showing how dangerous option 2A really is and the data is really compelling.
[1:41:06] I've heard residents raising alarms at the info meetings but the city presses forward
[1:41:12] unabashedly to chase an expiring grant which only covers barely 13% of the total cost.
[1:41:22] And then, if you look at the state actions in Anita's down in San Diego, they have a similar
[1:41:26] bike lane and grants like these can come with strings attached.
[1:41:32] Their bike lanes happen to be locked. They can't remove the bike lanes that are,
[1:41:36] Like I said, they're quite similar, and in many ways safer than ours.
[1:41:42] And they found that their bike lanes cause accidents and block emergency vehicles.
[1:41:48] They voted to remove them, but they can't.
[1:41:51] They won't be able to, for 20 years, due to the legislation.
[1:41:56] I don't know how she has the time for it, but Laura shows me more and more compelling safety
[1:42:00] studies.
[1:42:01] And shouldn't these studies not becoming from residents?
[1:42:04] Isn't it the design team's job to publish these risks before any votes were cast?
[1:42:11] Things like hazards from physical ballards, mitigations for 20 mile per hour downhill
[1:42:17] bikes, and the liability of having an order of magnitude more right hook blind turns than
[1:42:23] that failed Encinitas project?
[1:42:27] I'll have a look at all the data and step back. Why aren't we rushing to connect with them there?
[1:42:34] And then for construction, we're looking at breaking ground next year, overlapping with fair.
[1:42:39] We need to stop the end of time for public comment. Thank you.
[1:42:44] Do we have any more on Zoom?
[1:42:46] That concludes public comment for this evening.
[1:42:48] Okay.
[1:42:51] There being no one else present to speak, I'll now declare the public comment period closed.
[1:42:55] Now we're going to move on to changes to the agenda. Does the council have any reordering
[1:43:00] of additions or deletions to the agenda?
[1:43:07] Any from council?
[1:43:09] Okay. So moving on to the consent calendar, items listed under the consent calendar are
[1:43:14] considered by the city manager to be routine nature and will be enacted by one motion unless
[1:43:18] the public comment has been received or council member requests otherwise, in which case
[1:43:22] the item will be removed for separate consideration. Any motion relating to an ordinance or resolution
[1:43:27] will also waive the reading of the ordinance or resolution and include its introduction or adoption as appropriate.
[1:43:33] Do we have any member of the public wishing to speak on a consent calendar item?
[1:43:36] Madam Mayor, we have one speaker on item 14.
[1:43:39] Okay.
[1:43:41] I move to approve items 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 15.
[1:43:49] Okay, the second?
[1:43:50] Second.
[1:43:50] Just a quick question of 15.
[1:43:52] That includes an amendment to add the intersection.
[1:43:55] Yes, yes.
[1:43:55] Thank you, Michael.
[1:43:56] Yes, that would include the ad doc amendment type of thing.
[1:44:01] Bonnere wrote in Milen, right?
[1:44:03] Yes.
[1:44:04] Perfect.
[1:44:04] I'll take it.
[1:44:04] Yes.
[1:44:05] Thank you.
[1:44:05] Or is it, is that the Fletcher, Fletcher and Elhamber?
[1:44:08] Or is that Monterey Milen?
[1:44:09] Fletcher will, Fletcher and Elhamber will be done.
[1:44:13] Councilmember catchy out ahead brought up to us a few months ago a request on Milen and
[1:44:18] Monterey.
[1:44:19] Michael Martian's did put a memo in the packet stating that intersection would be handled.
[1:44:24] Okay.
[1:44:24] It includes that.
[1:44:25] Yes. Okay. Yeah.
[1:44:29] Yes. Okay. Let's take a roll call.
[1:44:31] Councilmember Braun. Yes. Councilmember Primeth. Yes.
[1:44:34] Councilmember Ketchiodi. Yes. Mayor Patin Ferguson. Yes.
[1:44:37] And Mayor Rossi. Yes. Okay. Moving on to item number 14,
[1:44:42] consideration of approval of a memorandum of agreement with the St.
[1:44:45] Jubil Valley Council of Governments for continued participation in the fresh
[1:44:48] SGV regional food recovery program. So we have public work structure truly in
[1:44:53] leave will present item.
[1:44:56] Madam Mayor, did you want a staff presentation?
[1:45:00] Let's get a question first. I'm sorry. Let's go ahead and get the public comment first. I'm sorry. Colin Campbell.
[1:45:12] All right. Hi, Colin Campbell. So I'll pass it in resident. So I hope I volunteer with the food locker for St. James. And Mike know he expressed that this is being discussed for the SGV regional food recovery. One is I completely support it. Fantastic. My question is that my interest is is there a way that
[1:45:36] that this city program could work with the existing programs that we have going on.
[1:45:43] And you know, I volunteer, I'm not here representing St. James or the food locker program
[1:45:51] right now.
[1:45:51] I'm just, it would be nice if we could coordinate and share information and try to do things
[1:45:56] better to recover food.
[1:45:59] And if there's a way that we could coordinate, that would be really nice.
[1:46:03] Thank you.
[1:46:03] So,
[1:46:09] Jillian, without doing the presentation, I'll just go ahead and ask the question,
[1:46:15] is there coordination that happens?
[1:46:17] Well, how does this food locker program work exactly?
[1:46:19] I think definitely it could be possible we'll reach out to the SGV Cog on the effort we'll
[1:46:26] coordinate with the locker, as far as the program joining together.
[1:46:31] I'll reach out to them to coordinate them.
[1:46:33] Okay.
[1:46:33] Yeah.
[1:46:34] Great.
[1:46:35] Is there any further?
[1:46:36] Go ahead.
[1:46:37] You're just just in part of the coordination Julian is the Holy Family Church.
[1:46:40] They're part of it.
[1:46:41] I've seen the people come from SGV, but they've hired the consultant to actually monitor volunteering
[1:46:46] here on Mondays.
[1:46:47] They come every couple of months.
[1:46:49] Kind of come in.
[1:46:50] They walked the premises.
[1:46:51] They check what's going on.
[1:46:52] You've got the right publications up.
[1:46:54] People are in line asking questions.
[1:46:56] But yeah, I don't feel for a coordinate with your Friday saying, James, I've been over there
[1:47:01] once, but there may be an opportunity so, but they do, I know we've expanded our pick-up,
[1:47:07] and actually I want to thank you because this program in the last three years has really
[1:47:13] helped me have been able to secure, I advise him, and I want to thank Lieutenant Roblato
[1:47:18] who was here.
[1:47:19] I mean, I worked on a grant with Martin Moore for $50,000 was successful, just a few weeks
[1:47:24] ago we got an $80,000 new truck through this program, so it's really important, it saves
[1:47:30] There's a lot of money, but also they've expanded to both
[1:47:35] trader joes, picking up every day, and also what's the place
[1:47:38] on Huntington and Fremont?
[1:47:42] That's been added, so as we give out food, I've seen the
[1:47:46] shopping carts expand exponentially, with great steaks and
[1:47:50] meats and chickens and things like that, so it's a great program,
[1:47:54] but we probably do better things.
[1:47:55] Thank you.
[1:47:57] It wasn't.
[1:47:58] All right, so let's go ahead and take a drive of motion.
[1:48:04] Move to approval.
[1:48:06] Second.
[1:48:07] Okay, let's take a vote.
[1:48:09] Yes.
[1:48:10] Councillor Marbraun.
[1:48:11] Councillor Marraprimuth.
[1:48:12] Yes.
[1:48:12] Councillor Ketchiodi.
[1:48:13] Yes.
[1:48:13] Mayor Patin Ferguson.
[1:48:14] Yes.
[1:48:15] Mayor Raffi.
[1:48:15] Yes.
[1:48:16] Moving on to public hearing.
[1:48:18] Item number 16.
[1:48:19] Continuation of Public Hearing for Transit Oriented Development.
[1:48:22] Alternative plan pursuant to Senate Bill 79 to a date uncertain.
[1:48:30] So we'll have a community development director, Erica Ramirez, speak on this item.
[1:48:36] Madam Mayor, did you want to read the rest of the field?
[1:48:39] Sure, of course.
[1:48:40] So it is recommended the City Council open the public hearing and continue the public hearing
[1:48:45] concerning the proposed transit-oriented development alternative plan pursuant to Senate Bill 79.
[1:48:50] Government code section 65912.155 and direct staff to republish the public hearing notice
[1:48:57] so once a new hearing date is established.
[1:49:00] This is the time and place for the public hearing,
[1:49:02] continuation of the public hearing
[1:49:03] for a transit-oriented development alternative plan
[1:49:06] pursuant to Senate Bill 79, to date and certain,
[1:49:10] and now I would like to ask me to follow
[1:49:12] the director of the hearing,
[1:49:13] whereas please come to the podium and present the staff report.
[1:49:17] Thank you.
[1:49:19] Good evening.
[1:49:26] Good evening, the presentation pulled up.
[1:49:29] There we go.
[1:49:42] Thank you.
[1:49:50] Okay, I'm just gonna say it.
[1:49:53] Sorry about that.
[1:49:56] Thank you.
[1:49:58] On July 1st, SB 79 became effective.
[1:50:01] As a reminder, this is a requirement that the city allow an increase in density and
[1:50:06] heights within a quarter mile of the Metro A line station on Meridian Mission, subject
[1:50:11] to site and project criteria.
[1:50:14] On July 15th, the city council took action.
[1:50:17] Council adopted an urgency ordinance to exempt all sites that already are zoned at 50 dwelling
[1:50:23] units per acre within that quarter mile. Council also adopted two ordinances, one which mimics
[1:50:30] the urgency ordinance and another that exempt sites that were locally designated as historic landmarks
[1:50:35] within that quarter mile. Both of those ordinances were adopted on July 30th and took effect
[1:50:41] August 30th. Additionally, Council authorized an ad hoc committee to work with staff to develop an
[1:50:50] consideration and adoption. On August 5th, a public hearing to consider a transit oriented alternative plan was opened, and it was continued to tonight.
[1:51:01] Next slide, please. Thank you.
[1:51:04] So, why did we continue the public hearing?
[1:51:08] As a reminder, because we started seeing that letters that were being issued from HCD to other cities regarding their alternative plans,
[1:51:17] and it raised concerns for us around the issues of density bonus law, the new height limits
[1:51:23] that were established by SB 79 project requirements, and based on those concerns, Council ask staff
[1:51:29] to request technical assistance from HCD to clarify specific points to allow an alternative
[1:51:36] plan to be adopted.
[1:51:38] The letter is attached to the staff report, but essentially the question centered around
[1:51:44] what SB 79 requirements would apply to the area covered under an alternative plan?
[1:51:50] How does density bonus law affect the area covered by the alternative plan?
[1:51:55] And also it specifically are the new heights set by SB 79 are those still in effect with
[1:52:03] the use of an alternative plan?
[1:52:05] Lastly, there was a pending question that we included in our requests for technical assistance,
[1:52:10] which was related to price or rent or price control.
[1:52:15] That letter was sent out early August
[1:52:17] and we are pending a response.
[1:52:20] Lastly, continuing the public hearing was to allow the ad hoc time to review
[1:52:24] the response from HCD, consider options for an alternative plan,
[1:52:29] and bring forth a recommendation to the full council.
[1:52:33] Next slide, please.
[1:52:37] Just briefly, as a reminder, the purpose of an alternative plan
[1:52:40] is to spread out the density from the quarter mile to a half mile radius, and in doing so, there are limitations.
[1:52:48] One is that you can only reduce density by 50% of the default, and for us, that's 70 dwelling units per acre
[1:52:55] within the 200-foot radius of the station and 50 dwelling units per acre within the quarter mile.
[1:53:01] Also, any slight receiving density can only increase by 200% of the current density allowed by the zoning code.
[1:53:09] Additionally, I just wanted to note that the alternative plans that have been drafted
[1:53:14] and ultimately presented to the planning commission included maintaining the height at the
[1:53:20] default SB 79 height limit, which is 85 feet within the 200 foot mile radius, I'm sorry,
[1:53:27] 200 foot radius and 65 feet for the area within the quarter mile of the station.
[1:53:32] The height limit for any receiving sites for the half mile area distance from the station
[1:53:41] remained at the zoning limit that was set in the zoning code.
[1:53:49] And this was all based on our understanding at the time that an alternative plan allowed
[1:53:54] for redistribution of density, but did not allow any relief from those default heights.
[1:54:02] I think one of the things that we also realized, first of keeping the 65 feet for the 50 dwelling
[1:54:12] units per acre,
[1:54:16] was because based on our previous experience with measure SP, HCD required
[1:54:23] us to have a higher height for 50 dwelling units per acre, is that correct?
[1:54:28] Correct. So with that, with that effort, there was visibility studies that were conducted
[1:54:33] at the 50-dwelling units per acre, and so it did show that that was feasible, but we did
[1:54:39] have to increase our high ability from 50, 55 feet to 65 feet, I want to say.
[1:54:46] So even if we, part of the whole idea behind the alternative plan, I think that the council
[1:54:52] until PAD was or understanding that we initially had, was that we could reduce, by reducing
[1:54:58] from 100 to only units per acre to 50, we'd be able to reduce the height in a comparable
[1:55:05] way, but then it was actually like no, we wouldn't be able to, because HCD would then hold
[1:55:09] us to the standard, but not SB 79 standard. And on top of it, we would have then be applicable
[1:55:17] to density bonus law, so you could end up actually having buildings that were taller
[1:55:23] while we were working and reducing the density. So it was kind of intuitive quite honestly
[1:55:29] to what I think but most people believe an alternative plan would allow.
[1:55:33] Right. There was a lot of questions and flexes. We started seeing those letters come out to
[1:55:38] cities that had proposed alternative plans as well as we were going through this process.
[1:55:43] Yeah, and I also wanted just to know for the council that, you know, the San Diego Valley
[1:55:49] Cog SB 79 ad hoc also submitted questions back in, I believe, May or June of this year
[1:55:55] and the HCD had promised to respond in writing, but then never provided a response to the
[1:56:03] questions and hit some of these exact questions that the city also requested.
[1:56:08] So I think they come back asking, what do we mean by our questions, was that effort so far?
[1:56:16] Thank you.
[1:56:19] So next slide, so with that our next steps are to receive correspondence from HCD, share
[1:56:27] that with the ad hoc to consider an alternative plan, and at that time bring something forward
[1:56:32] based on the recommendation to the council.
[1:56:41] So in conclusion, it stops recommendation that the city council continue tonight's public
[1:56:48] I'm sorry, that Council continue the public hearing, take public comment and make a motion
[1:56:52] to further continue the public hearing and direct staff to re-notice the new public hearing
[1:56:57] date once it's set. Thank you, and this concludes my report.
[1:57:11] Do I have any questions? First, we need to go to public comment, where are the questions
[1:57:15] from the council? Are there any questions from council? Then let's go ahead to public comment.
[1:57:21] Madam Mayor, we have no comment on this item.
[1:57:24] And we have
[1:57:28] made a mirror move approval of staff recommendation.
[1:57:33] I'll second Councilmember
[1:57:39] Braun.
[1:57:40] Yes.
[1:57:41] Yes.
[1:57:41] Councillor Prima.
[1:57:42] Yes.
[1:57:42] Councillor Ketchiodi.
[1:57:43] Yes.
[1:57:44] Yes.
[1:57:44] Mayor Potein Ferguson.
[1:57:45] Yes.
[1:57:46] Yes.
[1:57:47] Yes.
[1:57:48] Yes.
[1:57:50] So now we will go ahead and notice the new public hearing date to date in certain.
[1:57:56] Thank you.
[1:57:57] Okay, so now moving on to item number 17, consideration of direction on development and implementation
[1:58:02] of city holiday lighting ceremony, including authorization for the city manager to execute
[1:58:07] any agreement related to the event.
[1:58:12] We'll enter.
[1:58:14] So we have community service director and the solicitor will present the item.
[1:58:19] Good evening Honorable Mayor and City Council.
[1:58:21] The item before you seeks direction on whether the city should host and produce the 2026 holiday
[1:58:27] lighting ceremony through the community services department and whether the staff should rent
[1:58:31] or purchase an artificial tree for this year.
[1:58:44] By way of background the city hosted the holiday
[1:58:46] tree lighting in 2009 and prior at Heritage Park. Beginning in 2010 the Chamber of Commerce
[1:58:52] assumed primary responsibility through the farmers market agreement and coordinated the event in
[1:58:57] partnership with the city. A menorah lighting was added to the event in 2021. For 2026 staff is
[1:59:05] asking whether the city should take on the primary production role. The intent would be to preserve
[1:59:10] of the existing tree and minor lighting traditions while giving the city the flexibility to expand
[1:59:15] the event in a broader and more inclusive way, including displays, entertainment, and activities
[1:59:20] that acknowledge additional holidays and traditions within our community.
[1:59:24] The Chamber has also expressed interest in remaining involved, and if City Council directs
[1:59:29] the city to proceed, staff would welcome their continued participation and work with them
[1:59:33] to identify a meaningful role as we transition to a city-led event.
[1:59:37] If
[1:59:41] Council direct staff to proceed, we are tentatively planning for Saturday, December
[1:59:45] 5th, 2026 at Library Park in the outdoor area adjacent to the library community room.
[1:59:51] Community services would lead planning contracts, programming and logistics, vendor coordination
[1:59:56] and coordination with our participating departments and community.
[2:00:00] Any partners? As an alternative, city council may direct staff not to move forward with hosting the event and recommend that the Chamber to continue as the event planner.
[2:00:13] Staff also reviewed preliminary pricing for the artificial holiday tree rental and purchase options. The lowest estimate came from Brightlife Designs, the city's current seasonal streetlight decoration vendor. Rental estimates ranged from $6,850 for a 14-foot tree to $13,850 for an event.
[2:00:32] 18-foot tree, with installation and removal included in the price.
[2:00:37] Purchase estimates range from approximately 14,000 to a little under 27,000, but removal
[2:00:43] maintenance and replacement of worn or damaged components would be on the city if we went
[2:00:47] with the purchasing route.
[2:00:49] For 2026 staff recommends renting a tree so the city can evaluate the location size, operational
[2:00:55] needs, and overall costs before considering a longer term purchase.
[2:00:59] In lieu of renting or purchasing an artificial tree, Council could also consider purchasing a
[2:01:05] lived box tree, a live cut tree, or another alternative.
[2:01:12] And just really quickly, these photos are provided for reference.
[2:01:16] On one side, you'll see the trees that are provided by bright life, obviously they're
[2:01:20] artificial and decorated.
[2:01:22] And on the right side of the screen would be more of what a box tree would come, or as we
[2:01:26] know what a cut tree, obviously those would still be decorated for the holiday.
[2:01:30] But live trees would vary in size, high in fullness, so we just want to be mindful of that.
[2:01:39] So in conclusion, there's no additional appropriation requested tonight.
[2:01:43] Staff has identified up to $25,000 within our existing budget for $26.27.
[2:01:50] This would cover the tree rental and decor, staffing, entertainment, supplies, and activities
[2:01:55] and any contingency that would be needed.
[2:01:58] Staff would track the actual cost and use the information to inform future budget discussion
[2:02:02] if the city continues hosting the event.
[2:02:05] Tonight staff is requesting Council direction on whether staff should host and
[2:02:08] produce the 2026 holiday lighting ceremony, whether the city should rent our purchase the artificial tree for the 2026 event.
[2:02:15] And authorize the city manager to execute any related agreements.
[2:02:19] This concludes staff's presentation and I'm happy to answer any questions.
[2:02:23] Do I have any questions for the council?
[2:02:27] Madam Mayor, just a quick one.
[2:02:29] Melissa, I was reading some of the public comments today.
[2:02:32] I think some members of the chamber are agreeing with you, but their dates were a little
[2:02:37] off.
[2:02:37] Did you see one of the recommendations for having it maybe right after things giving that
[2:02:43] week?
[2:02:44] I think that we're asking staff to come in on Thanksgiving weekend.
[2:02:47] Yeah, that was it.
[2:02:48] What were your thoughts on that?
[2:02:50] So I do think it might be a little more challenging for Thanksgiving weekend just because
[2:02:54] a lot of people travel for family.
[2:02:56] We can definitely be flexible.
[2:02:57] So even if we wanted to consider a date that week,
[2:03:01] because I did see the comment pertaining to within five days.
[2:03:04] So if we're interested in looking at a date,
[2:03:06] I would suggest we go backwards into the week
[2:03:08] and maybe consider December 1st,
[2:03:11] or if you want to look at another date,
[2:03:13] whether that's going back to the third on that Thursday,
[2:03:16] we can be flexible.
[2:03:17] Moving forward into the month of December
[2:03:19] will be a little bit more challenging.
[2:03:20] You have breakfast with Santa,
[2:03:21] and then you're getting much closer to your holiday
[2:03:23] so you would have the tree in existence for a little less time.
[2:03:26] You know, I'm listening radio shows and stuff. I'm driving in a car once in a while and recently they've been talking about how people are just starting their
[2:03:33] Christmas or holiday shopping earlier and earlier
[2:03:36] So it may be to go before things give out. I don't know, but I'm not the marketer like these people were
[2:03:42] But I'm curious here at my colleague's thought. Yeah, you know
[2:03:45] Samarino does something on their miss side of mission street and I'm just and I want to say that's in December
[2:03:50] You do know I'm not familiar with Sam marinas event
[2:03:54] I do know a lot of cities will lean towards more of like a December 1st and it's annually
[2:03:58] every year on December 1st. That's what some agencies do. We're happy to look at different
[2:04:03] alternatives for a day. We would like to consider that. Moving back, you just have to consider.
[2:04:08] You have Thanksgiving break and vendors availability, so there's just other things to consider.
[2:04:12] Everybody watching football during Thanksgiving. I know I am, but I don't know.
[2:04:24] Rent the tree, work with, work with Chamber, lead the event, decide what makes sense.
[2:04:33] I was going to say really quickly on the Thanksgiving break, the schools here have a week long break on Thanksgiving and we have a lot of families who do travel.
[2:04:43] So I think one of the things, you know, I've noticed in years past, even our small shopper Saturdays, there were a lot of people who just aren't back in town yet.
[2:04:52] that they go like Friday night before Thanksgiving
[2:04:55] and come back Sunday.
[2:04:57] Some of the best times you go to Disneyland,
[2:04:59] by the way, or it's that Tuesday.
[2:05:02] And also the Tiger Run is December 5th.
[2:05:04] So I think the Tiger Run is December 5th?
[2:05:07] Yes, but let's let,
[2:05:09] I kind of feel like staff should work with others
[2:05:13] and talk to the chamber and do what makes sense,
[2:05:15] but my sense is that it's not gonna be Thanksgiving weekend,
[2:05:18] but.
[2:05:18] But also happy if we want to assign maybe two council members to work with staff like we
[2:05:24] did for the 4th of July and just kind of meet and provide a little direction that could
[2:05:28] also be an option that we consider.
[2:05:30] I was going to really say really quickly.
[2:05:33] I just forgot.
[2:05:34] Shoot.
[2:05:35] So committee.
[2:05:36] I'll be on that committee.
[2:05:37] I love holidays.
[2:05:39] I have some questions.
[2:05:40] Yeah.
[2:05:40] You can ask.
[2:05:41] Okay.
[2:05:43] So I'm trying to understand the rationale here.
[2:05:45] So, we have a Chamber-led event that's been happening pretty regularly, and they've gotten the tree cut down, you know, down to a size that's a little bit more manageable than it was in the past.
[2:05:57] Is the idea here that this is a, that the department has a vision for making this a really great, well-organized event, and that having the city staff, you know, contributes to a lot smoother, larger scale expanded event in the future.
[2:06:15] that still has all the charm of what the Chamber was trying to put on.
[2:06:19] I'm just trying to catch the vision if staff is coming from that.
[2:06:22] Correct.
[2:06:23] So it's not, it's to maintain what's already been existing in the event,
[2:06:26] but expanding it.
[2:06:27] So we're looking at opportunities to bring in other organizations,
[2:06:30] whether we look, if you consider your 4th of July event
[2:06:33] or you have all these community groups that come together and celebrate,
[2:06:36] we don't really do anything after that, right?
[2:06:38] We have smaller events.
[2:06:39] So it's looking to do a larger scale event and looking if we can use our community groups
[2:06:43] in certain organizations to come together and kind of enhance that event, and just also
[2:06:48] expanding the footprint to a little bit larger so we can accommodate those additional groups.
[2:06:53] So a little bit more on the organizing work, the outreach work, the prep, which naturally
[2:06:58] is something that staff wants to do and Chamber in many ways, they're focused on farmers market,
[2:07:08] and that events kind of centered around farmers market, which I think is a great location.
[2:07:13] But I understand that I'm not an event planner, so I don't know what is the best.
[2:07:18] So it's really helpful for me to know staff is really excited about making this a bigger
[2:07:23] event, drawing in more people, and then, of course, that's going to spill over, December
[2:07:29] 5th, the farmer's market, right?
[2:07:31] It's actually a Saturday, so it would be in the evening on the theme day as Tiger Run.
[2:07:35] But it's helpful for my team, since we are already here, that we're not coming in on an additional
[2:07:40] day as well.
[2:07:41] So it is helpful for the Community Services Department, but yes, the goal is to expand
[2:07:48] and kind of enhance the event and hopefully in turn, that also spills into our businesses.
[2:07:52] We know that if you're having events, people are coming to town, so hopefully expanding
[2:07:55] it.
[2:07:55] You do lose the synergy of farmers market and the proximity to all the businesses right
[2:08:00] there for that event.
[2:08:02] But on the plus side, you are able to draw in a lot more community groups who may want
[2:08:08] to contribute. They might want to do their own activities or performances or that sort
[2:08:13] of thing.
[2:08:13] Correct.
[2:08:14] Okay. And now we're talking stage lighting music, because that just caused money.
[2:08:19] So we're looking to not expand too large. So we think a good example is the Moon Festival
[2:08:23] this past weekend where you didn't necessarily need a stage, but you had that good performance
[2:08:28] area. So you were able to use the community room steps as kind of where you maybe have your
[2:08:32] announcements and a speaker. And then you had that footprint to do performances in the
[2:08:37] front, so not expanding with large.
[2:08:38] No, I provided sound for the moon fest.
[2:08:40] I did.
[2:08:41] So you want to use my speaker's system for the holiday lighting?
[2:08:44] We would love to ask health members to be involved, but staff does also have speakers
[2:08:48] as well.
[2:08:49] So we can help facilitate or have DJ permits.
[2:08:53] Good.
[2:08:53] Yeah.
[2:08:54] So this is really helpful because I really want to see who's got the passion for making
[2:08:58] this a wonderful event.
[2:09:00] I so appreciate chamber and everything they do and I like the idea of trying to do as much
[2:09:04] business tie-in as possible.
[2:09:06] I'm Saturday without the farmer's market, that's, we're going to lose some of that natural spillover, and maybe that's unfortunate.
[2:09:14] I mean, I do support this.
[2:09:16] I am also going to see what the real projected costs are going to be.
[2:09:23] Because quite frankly, the Chamber event has been very well received.
[2:09:28] And I know the potential of this kind of event could be maybe bigger.
[2:09:32] and that's what staff's thinking of, but at the same time, there's always a cost benefit,
[2:09:37] especially if something starts building and gets costly. Because first year is always
[2:09:42] everyone's excited, and then in year five, it's costing five times more than you ever thought.
[2:09:48] That's my only concern, but otherwise I'm happy to.
[2:09:51] So, you know, I'll say the other side of it. I'm Triber provides the tree lighting through
[2:09:58] it's farmers market contract is one of its four events. There isn't any, we're not taking
[2:10:04] anything away from them, so if farmers market is a real concern, they could still do holiday
[2:10:10] lighting there as part of that. And I think there is, you know, the space, there's a decision
[2:10:17] made at one point to plant a tree there, and that took a lot of the footprint of Heritage Park.
[2:10:22] work. So the tree got really, you got a really small one. You got to, like, Omari is taller
[2:10:29] than the tree. So I think it's the questions that do something comparable to other cities
[2:10:36] and have a real holiday event that is, and test it out, see if it works and bring something
[2:10:43] that we can bring people together for it. But I think that, you know, I attended last year.
[2:10:49] I'm not sure if we're a few attended, but it's the time with the farmers market starts at 4.30 when a lot of people on a Thursday, when a lot of people aren't able to attend.
[2:10:59] Yeah, no, it's been a really great event, but if the city staff have a vision for making it, to bringing in lots of different groups and making it super special, I can see that happening, and I think the residents will appreciate that.
[2:11:15] Yeah, we can try it out.
[2:11:19] I've heard some people who already came up on agenda, there's some different brainstorming
[2:11:26] ideas of the holiday markets and other things too, which is areas that Chamber could be considering,
[2:11:33] just interesting to explore, I think there's a lot of areas to explore to see what possibilities
[2:11:38] there are.
[2:11:39] And we will be having businesses in that area too.
[2:11:44] do we want to go to public comment? Is there any public comment? I have to ask. Madam
[2:11:51] Mary, do not have any public comment on this item? Do you have any questions? I say rent
[2:11:55] the 14 foot tree. Oh, yes. I think rent for the 14 foot tree. Or a taller. One of the
[2:12:03] two times the height of a mario. I think that in looking at the cost comparison, you're
[2:12:08] getting like for four feet, you're paying like twice as much for the tree, practically.
[2:12:12] Is that right for renting?
[2:12:15] So.
[2:12:15] I mean, I think the library park also has that, you know, it has a lot of nice natural trees.
[2:12:21] So I think renting the 14 foot gives the visual for holiday cards that people would like
[2:12:27] and it kind of brings that attraction there, but it doesn't necessarily have to compete with
[2:12:31] the giant fig tree that is there.
[2:12:35] Oh, 14, oh, I see.
[2:12:39] I just want to appreciate the
[2:12:41] the letters that we received in
[2:12:43] that Adox from the chamber.
[2:12:45] And I really welcome that them.
[2:12:47] They would be able to continue working.
[2:12:50] Yeah, I think including the chamber and the tree.
[2:12:53] I go for 16 feet.
[2:12:54] But I'd let I'd let them decide 14 or 16 personally.
[2:12:57] Yes, I agree.
[2:12:59] Yeah, just because you'll have to sort of visualize whether it's worth it.
[2:13:02] And we will we haven't done a formal walkthrough with the vendor as well.
[2:13:06] Also, we can definitely consider that and what their recommendation is.
[2:13:14] Okay.
[2:13:15] So do you need any other direction?
[2:13:19] You want party planners?
[2:13:21] So approve that the city will take on the event and then approve rental of the tree.
[2:13:27] Yes.
[2:13:28] And authorize city manager to execute any necessary agreements related to the event.
[2:13:33] Yes.
[2:13:35] Perfect.
[2:13:36] So moved.
[2:13:36] All right.
[2:13:37] Is there, did we form a, like, an advisory group, or?
[2:13:43] I'm happy to help.
[2:13:45] I'm happy.
[2:13:45] I didn't ask somebody else really wants to do it.
[2:13:48] I'm happy to help, too.
[2:13:52] I'll stick to the sound system.
[2:13:54] I'm happy to help, as well.
[2:13:56] So we'll plan to schedule with Mayor Rossi and Councilmember Rob.
[2:13:59] There's no vote.
[2:14:00] There'll be two volunteers.
[2:14:02] I do expect Councilmember Permanent to provide us playlists.
[2:14:05] Proceed.
[2:14:07] Okay.
[2:14:08] So, let's go to vote.
[2:14:11] Do we have the vote?
[2:14:12] Oh, the destruction, the destruction, right?
[2:14:15] Okay.
[2:14:16] No new appropriations.
[2:14:17] We have budget for it.
[2:14:18] Yeah, because it authorizes city manager to move forward with the agreement.
[2:14:22] So, I would, do you need a motion to sort of approve everything you said.
[2:14:26] 14 or 16-foot tree rental depending on what you want.
[2:14:30] Okay.
[2:14:30] Yeah.
[2:14:31] I move for that.
[2:14:32] Second.
[2:14:34] Council Member Brown? Yes. Council Member Prometh? Yes. Council Member Cassiote? Yes.
[2:14:38] Mayor Patin Ferguson? Yes. Mayor Rossi? Yes. I'm moving on to Council Member Communications.
[2:14:44] Is this move you'd like to present?
[2:14:49] Council Member Communications? Do you want me to go first? No, you go ahead.
[2:14:53] Okay. I came here the pictures from last week. I do. Excuse me once. Okay.
[2:15:29] I got a background music. I wanted to mention that we had a clean power lines board to treat. We gave
[2:15:40] We gave a certificate of recognition to our former council member, Diana Merlude, on her honoring hers, she'll be stepping down from her service there.
[2:15:48] And so I just wanted to mention that we're kind of a snapshot of what was discussed there was that the Clean Power line is currently in about 39 cities with a geographical possibility of being 89 at some day, but we haven't created a roadmap to get there.
[2:16:07] but just that it's been stable and I've been able to kind of provide a lot of value to residents and customers.
[2:16:16] So do
[2:16:22] you want to go while we're waiting for that?
[2:16:24] Sure. Yeah, I would like to take the opportunity to introduce Joseph Starros to the City Council.
[2:16:29] Joe joins us from the City of La Palma and he's our new Assistant Public Works Director.
[2:16:37] So, yeah, go to the new system
[2:16:47] here, well, yeah, really thrilled to be here with you all
[2:16:51] working with Todd and Julian and the public work department.
[2:16:54] I come from a little smaller city, if you can believe that's one of them in South
[2:16:57] Pass and Orange County's about 1.2 square miles and so we had a lot of things going on there
[2:17:03] but I'm really excited to be out here and working on all the projects that the Council and
[2:17:07] community have coming up. So, broad be here.
[2:17:11] Welcome.
[2:17:13] We will be background music for your intro.
[2:17:18] Do I have any other comments for Council over waiting for this piece?
[2:17:23] I attended Metro's, Metro Headed Invent with the San Gabriel Valley Cog to do a tour of the EOC on Friday and discuss
[2:17:31] this, LA, 2028, public safety measures and concerns, they did talk to them very specifically
[2:17:38] about how as a smaller city on the metro stop, you know, we need more assistance from metro,
[2:17:45] and they need to, like, look at smaller cities on metro stations a little bit differently
[2:17:49] and also to consider safety is more than just, like, the platform and how it extends out
[2:17:55] into like the quarter mile, half mile zone.
[2:17:59] She did bring to another thing which is LA-2028 and something I'm looking to like to add
[2:18:06] to the agenda for the next meeting is formation of basically a committee to start really brainstorming
[2:18:15] LA-20, but looking at having regular council engagement, so I think it's something that the
[2:18:25] It makes sure everybody on the council knows what's happening, but I think it's time
[2:18:29] we need to start thinking through some of this as we think strategically for it.
[2:18:36] So that would be in partnership with other groups and organizations as well.
[2:18:42] Let's see, do we have any other quick thoughts?
[2:18:45] Do we have Michael's presentation ready?
[2:18:48] I'm sorry.
[2:18:49] Do we have Michael's presentation ready?
[2:18:50] Yes, we do.
[2:18:51] Okay, let's go ahead and do Michael's presentation.
[2:19:06] We're ready to go.
[2:19:07] I'm ready to click the next slide.
[2:19:10] There it is.
[2:19:11] Again, I want to thank Todd, the city manager's office and public works.
[2:19:14] This is a strafford avenue a few weeks ago during the rain.
[2:19:18] I was walking with a dog group and we noticed four slabs had been passed about a year or two
[2:19:22] ago, but they were raised about another three inches.
[2:19:24] This is one of the busiest streets during Halloween, hundreds of thousands of kids just
[2:19:29] walked to the street, walking up and down so I want to thank staff, jump on a net, residents
[2:19:33] were so happy, Todd, Julian, thanks staff, great job.
[2:19:38] And there's a homeowner, and then I jumped in and
[2:19:39] pictured with the staff.
[2:19:41] Let's talk to you guys at a great job next.
[2:19:43] This was a couple weeks ago.
[2:19:44] This was one of our residences in the yellow shirt.
[2:19:47] He's a professor in charge of kind of their advanced
[2:19:49] technology at Cal State University LA.
[2:19:51] Susan Saapas, I think Sheila near district, David Blackman.
[2:19:56] And he wanted to, they do a challenge every year with
[2:19:58] Stellantis and General Motors to take an ice internal
[2:20:02] combustion engine and converted to battery powered.
[2:20:05] So this year is to take an emergency responder vehicle, a jeep Cherokee, and convert it over.
[2:20:12] But they wanted to speak with chief Lloyd and also chief fire chief Dan Dunne.
[2:20:19] What is the first responder vehicle?
[2:20:22] Do it response.
[2:20:24] And so they can design it and provide it for a national competition of the 15 universities
[2:20:29] across the United States.
[2:20:30] And here we are at their lab at Cal State University of LA next,
[2:20:39] and then Chief Lloyd had
[2:20:40] to leave for a few minutes, another meeting, and there's a couple more photos, Nikima.
[2:20:47] On the left here, Chief Dunn is speaking to the class about the dangers of electric batteries
[2:20:53] burning and not to getting anywhere near them, at a great time, and I've told the professor
[2:20:58] once you finish that vehicle is donated to the City of South Pasadena.
[2:21:02] Yeah. And then on the right is she's then I went up to check on the goats. There's a
[2:21:07] goats in operation. Public work staff was there in Julian making sure the goats were doing
[2:21:11] their work. They were on break. I think it was about five o'clock. They're taking a little
[2:21:15] break in the shade. Next. They're taking their break. We didn't get on them. They needed
[2:21:20] a break. They were tired. It was late at night. It was about 95 degrees. So they're under
[2:21:24] the tree on the left. And we've got some hundreds of goats out there. We're kind of cute.
[2:21:28] And you're watching us, you know, IDI contact and on the right, again, one of the great
[2:21:33] public works that is Philippe, I believe, there was a big leak over there in Stratford
[2:21:37] by Garfield Park, who is up fixing his so great work by our team thought.
[2:21:41] Thank you.
[2:21:43] Which reminded me that a number of us went to the Kattern House opening last week, which
[2:21:51] is Cal Arts, the president of Cal Arts at this now in South Pasadena and they transformed
[2:21:58] to the house into the Caternhouse, which will also have a performing arts space.
[2:22:03] Wonderful to attend the event and create closer connections with Cal Arts.
[2:22:07] I think a lot of opportunities there to see all the connectivity that came with it.
[2:22:13] The house used to belong to the Watson's who actually contributed significantly to our public arts community
[2:22:21] and to our school community as well.
[2:22:23] they were supporters of measure S, measure S P. They were very into helping the city and community
[2:22:30] schools with making sure that we had arts programs going. So, and actually our electric boxes,
[2:22:36] utility boxes to open to event there years ago, so it was a nice full circle moment. So exciting
[2:22:43] things are happening.
[2:22:46] Oh, you found it. Oh, that wasn't you doing it before? That wasn't
[2:22:51] I don't know you tell me about the so-called gas box.
[2:22:54] All right, so there being nothing else,
[2:22:59] I will now adjourn the regular city council meeting
[2:23:01] to Wednesday, October 7th, 2026 at 7 p.m.
[2:23:04] Thank you and have a nice evening.