3. Site Furniture.
a. Site furnishings (i.e., benches, bicycle racks, bollards, trash receptacles and newspaper racks) should be compatible with the design of adjacent buildings.
b. Site furnishings should not create pedestrian/vehicular conflicts.
Developments are encouraged to provide bicycle storage facilities such as racks or lockers. See photo.
c. Bicycle storage should be easily accessible from the street, transit stops and pedestrian routes.
Special Use Commercial Design Guidelines.
The guidelines contained in this subsection provide supplementary design guidance addressing more challenging development types. Certain types of development present design challenges that require unique solutions.
Development types in this section include:
A. Office. Office uses have physical and functional characteristics that are not typical of commercial development. Office uses are typically within multi - 7 -39
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Design Guidelines
story buildings that are larger in scale. There are fewer public entries and higher utilization of on -site parking. Within the buildings, the types of tenants are usually consistent.
1. Site Organization. Parking should not be located between the front of the building and the street. Surface parking should be located at the rear of the site or the side of the building. See Figure 7.8.
FIGURE 7.8 Planning Area 1 Parking Location
o o on =GI 4)
�j t*D
ow *0 4p it
Locate parking to the side and rear of the building
2. Building Design.
a. Office development should incorporate variations in vertical and horizontal wall planes to reduce scale and massing.
b. Primary building entries should be well defined and provide a "sense of entry" for the building. Use of architectural features such as columns and awnings is encouraged. See photo.
c. Office buildings should have the primary entry visible from the public street and be accessible from pedestrian pathways or parking areas.
d. Entry lobby interiors should be well -designed and of high quality when visible from the building's exterior.
e. Development occurring at corner locations should provide creative architectural and site design features. Art objects, plazas and other appropriate features are encouraged.
B. Drive -Through Businesses. Drive -through businesses include restaurants, banking institutions with drive -up teller/ATM access, pharmacies and other similar facilities. Drive -through businesses have additional design considerations related to on -site circulation, noise impacts and vehicular access.
Landscaping separates drive -through
from adjacent street
7-40
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN l Design Guidelines
Colonnades and portico used to break
up mass of building.
1. Site Organization.
a. The primary visual presence along the major street frontage should be the building, not a drive -through lane or parking.
b. Menu board speaker placement should be located to reduce excessive noise and reduce impacts to surrounding areas and should be landscaped in a manner that screens or minimizes the impacts.
Use of visual feedback systems that do not have a speaker are encouraged.
c. Drive -through lanes should accommodate vehicle stacking at the menu board and pickup windows without impacting other on -site circulation.
d. Drive -through aisles should be separated from adjacent streets and parking areas. Landscaping and/or low masonry walls should be utilized. See photo.
2. Building Design.
a. Outdoor eating areas are encouraged. Outdoor eating areas should provide details such as low walls, fountains, trellis elements, etc. b. Franchise identifying features should only be located on the main structure.
c. Exterior doors, equipment rooms, and service/employee entries should be designed with complementary architectural treatment.
C. Large Anchor Retail. Large anchor retail development is characterized by larger than average retail square footage under one roof. Large anchor retail development requires extensive parking to accommodate higher -than - average parking demand. Large anchor retail uses are often located on sites with multiple buildings of various sizes.
1. Site Organization.
a. Parking lots for large anchor retail uses are discouraged from being located entirely in front of the building. Smaller lots to the sides and/or rear of the building are encouraged.
b. The number of entrances and exits should be designed and located to avoid interfering with traffic flow along adjacent streets.
2. Building Design.
a. Exterior walls should terminate with a building cap such as a roof or cornice.
b. Distinct and interesting rooflines instead of flat roofed structures are encouraged.
7-41
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Design Guidelines
c. Exterior wall treatments such as arcades, porticos, offset planes and colonnades should be used to break up the mass and scale of the building. See photo.
d. Design of outdoor storage or sales areas (i.e. garden centers) should be consistent with the architecture of the primary building, utilizing articulated walls or fencing to enclose the space.
3. Loading and Service Areas.
a. Loading and service areas should be located and designed to minimize direct exposure to public view. Walls or landscape screening should be used to reduce visual impacts.
b. Loading area location and design should prevent truck back-up maneuvers from or onto public rights -of -way or parking aisles.
D. Public Assembly Facility. Public assembly facilities include buildings where large groups of people gather and utilize large common spaces. These uses typically have significant on -site parking requirements and are characterized by higher profile architectural design.
1. Site Organization.
a. The location and orientation of buildings, parking lots, driveways and entries should be designed to minimize noise and traffic impacts on adjacent properties.
b. Avoid locating parking between the front of the building and the street. Parking should be located at the rear and/or side of the property.
c. Exterior spaces, plazas and courtyards should be designed to minimize noise impacts on adjacent properties.
d. Screening and buffering should be provided between places of assembly and adjacent residential uses.
2. Circulation and Parking.
a. Parking should be located in close proximity to the primary entrance. A safe pedestrian path should be provided from all parking areas to the main entrance.
b. Parking should be screened from public view by walls, landscaping or other appropriate methods.
c. Passenger pickup and drop-off areas should not interfere with on - site and off -site vehicular and pedestrian circulation.
E. Hotels and Motels. Hotels and motels are a commercial use with some residential attributes. They are often highly visible from primary roadways.
Therefore, their design has a high level of impact on the surrounding area. 7-42
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN l Design Guidelines
Residential units above retail space
have consistent materials, but details
differentiate uses
1. Site Organization.
a. The primary visual presence along the major street frontage should be the building and driveway approach not a parking lot. b. Delivery and service loading areas should be located toward the rear of the property and screened to minimize impacts.
c. Recreational facilities such as swimming pools should be designed to offer privacy for users and to minimize noise impacts on adjacent uses.
d. Common open space should be provided on -site.
2. Building Design.
a. Upper floors should be set back to lessen the appearance of mass or bulk.
b. For structures over two stories, access to guest rooms should be provided from interior hallways.
c. Avoid room entrances directly adjacent to parking lots or exterior walkways.
d. Walkway, stairway and balcony railings, and other similar architectural details should be consistent with the building design. e. Mechanical equipment including swimming pool equipment should be located to minimize impacts on adjacent uses and screened from public view using landscaping or architectural enclosures.
3. Parking and Circulation. A covered drop-off zone for vehicles and pedestrians independent of drive aisles should accommodate guest loading and unloading.
4. Landscaping. A five-foot minimum landscaped buffer should separate ground floor units from on -site walkways parking facilities and other on - site amenities.
F. Mixed -Use. Mixed -use projects are defined as developments that combine commercial/office and residential uses or structures on a single lot, or as components of a single development. The uses may be combined either vertically within the same structure, or spread horizontally on the site in different areas and structures.
1. Site Organization.
a. Parking facilities for residential uses and commercial uses should be separated.
b. Commercial loading areas and refuse storage facilities should be placed as far as possible from residential units and be completely screened from adjacent residential development.
7-43
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN l Design Guidelines
c. Parking area lighting and security lighting for the commercial uses should be shielded so as not to spill over into residential areas.
Residential units should also be shielded from illuminated commercial signs.
d. Commercial spaces should have the primary entry visible from the public street and be accessible from pedestrian pathways or parking areas.
2. Building Design.
a. Separate entrances should be provided when residential and commercial uses are provided in the same structure.
b. The architectural imagery and use of materials should be consistent throughout the entire mixed -use project. However, differences in materials and/or architectural details should be used to differentiate the residential portion of the project from the commercial portion of the project. See photo.
c. The design of storefronts should be consistent with the design guidelines for general commercial development. The residential portion of a mixed -use project should be consistent with the design guidelines for multi -family development.
d. Transparency between the commercial spaces on the ground floor and the street is highly encouraged.
e. Building design should incorporate measures to reduce the impacts of business activities, such as noise, on residential uses. See photo.
G. Parking Structures. Parking structures provide an option to increase parking without utilizing additional land for surface parking. They can be integrated in a single building with other uses, or stand alone. Parking structure design must consider architectural compatibility, size, scale, bulk and function as it relates to adjacent buildings and overall design of a project.
1. Site Organization. Adjacent residential uses should be buffered from parking structures through building orientation, landscaping or walls.
2. Access and Circulation. Balcony covers outdoor dining space, providing a noise buffer
a. Complete and uninterrupted vehicle circulation should occur on all levels of the parking structure.
b. Entrances and exits should be located so that vehicles do not enter or exit onto residential streets or at busy intersections. c. Pedestrian circulation should be clearly delineated and separated from vehicular circulation. The use of landscaping, walkways and decorative paving is encouraged. See photo.
Balcony covers outdoor dining space,
providing a noise buffer
umminmor
Mem
7-44
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN l Design Guidelines
Glass -backed elevator shaft and cab
Retail store lines ground floor of
parking structure
3. Security and Lighting.
a. Visibility into the structure from adjacent activity and public areas should be maximized to provide natural surveillance.
b. Locating elevators and stairs on the perimeter of the structure is highly encouraged to provide natural surveillance from exterior public areas.
c. Elevators should be located where the door and open and elevator cab should have glass facing the public view. Any glass tinting should be minimal to ensure daytime and nighttime visibility. See photo. d. Interior walls should be painted a light color to improve illumination.
4. Building Design.
a. Exterior elevations should incorporate design components and materials similar to or compatible with the primary building(s). This includes fenestration patterns, colors and materials.
b. Retail or other uses are encouraged along the exterior at the ground level of the parking structure where appropriate. See photo. c. Landscaping along the setback area is encouraged.
d. The exterior elevations of the parking structure should exhibit horizontal rather than sloping design elements.
e. Exterior elevations should be designed to minimize untreated facades.
f. All mechanical equipment and piping should be painted to match the interior of the structure.
5. Screening. All appurtenances (i.e., transformers, ventilation shafts, maintenance access, etc.) should be screened from public view.
H. Motor Vehicle Dealerships. Features of vehicle dealerships typically include outdoor storage and display of vehicles vehicle display oriented toward the street and vehicle drop off and pick up areas.
1. Site Organization.
a. Noise sources should be located and oriented away from residential properties.
b. All storage areas should be screened from view from the public right-of-way and adjacent residential areas.
2. Building Design.
a. Ancillary structures such as enclosed storage areas should be architecturally consistent with the primary building on the site. b. Service uses should be contained entirely within a building of solid construction.
7-45
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Design Guidelines
c. The access points to the service bays should not face the public right-of-way.
d. Vehicle washing areas should be designed and located so they are not visible or audible from the public right-of-way or residential areas.
3. Walls and Fences. Security fencing and perimeter walls should be decorative and consistent with the architecture of the primary buildings.
4. Other.
a. Public address systems should not be used in outdoor areas. Any public address system should confine noise within an enclosed building.
b. Compressors and other pneumatic equipment should be located on the interior of a site to minimize noise impacts on adjacent properties.
c. Storage facilities should be provided on -site for vehicles parts and potentially hazardous materials.
d. Storage facilities should be enclosed entirely within permanent buildings.
I. Service Stations and Car Washes. Service stations and car washes are intensive uses that are characterized by large volumes of vehicular traffic and expansive areas of paving that generally allow vehicles to maneuver freely. Aesthetics, traffic, use of equipment and machinery and storage are common concerns associated with these uses.
1. Site Organization.
a. Projects located at street corners should provide a strong design element to anchor the corner. This can be accomplished using a reverse building placement where the main building is placed on the corner or by using a prominent landscaping feature. See photo. b. Building elevations containing car wash openings should not face towards the public right-of-way or toward residential uses. c. Rather than adopting a standard design, elevations that are unique to the community and are not a corporate or franchise design are strongly encouraged.
2. Building Design.
a. High quality durable building materials must be used. b. Service stations and car washes should incorporate facade materials that create a textured design.
c. Reflective glossing and fluorescent surfaces are prohibited.
Corner design element at service
station
Sloped roof on pump island canopies
7-46
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN l Design Guidelines
d. Car wash equipment must be enclosed within a permanent structure.
e. Car wash buildings must incorporate noise control measures that minimize noise generated by machinery blowers or other
mechanical equipment.
f. Pump island canopies should use a hip gable or other roof system to match the architecture of the primary buildings on the site. See photo.
g. Recessed lighting or internally illuminated canopies must be utilized to reduce glare.
3. Circulation and Parking.
a. Driveway cuts should be limited to two per site.
b. Where commercial development abuts the service station two-way vehicular access integrated with the adjacent commercial development should be provided.
c. The location of filling pumps, car washing facilities or other on -site facilities must be designed to avoid vehicle stacking or overflow onto adjacent streets.
d. Self-service facilities such as water and air or vacuuming must be located so that they do not obstruct onsite circulation. e. Separate parking areas must be provided for on -site retail. f. A fuel delivery truck unloading zone should be provided and should not obstruct vehicular circulation and parking areas.
4. Landscaping Walls and Fences.
a. Landscaping along the perimeter of the site to reduce visual impacts is encouraged.
b. Landscaped berms or hedges should be located along public streets.
J. Telecommunication Facilities. Telecommunications facilities include poles, towers, antenna support facilities and components. These facilities have special design and location considerations in order to minimize adverse visual impacts on the surrounding area.
1. Location.
a. Telecommunications facilities should be located to minimize their visibility. The use of landscaping is encouraged to screen the facility. b. Co -location of facilities is encouraged.
2. Facilities Design.
a. Telecommunications facilities integrated into the design of existing buildings is encouraged.
7-47
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Design Guidelines
b. Efforts should be made to conceal the facility within or behind existing architectural features.
c. Roof mounted facilities should be located and screened appropriately to limit the visual impact on the building silhouette. d. Facilities should be screened on all sides.
e. All telecommunications facilities should use materials colors and textures that blend with the natural setting and built environment.
Reflective surfaces should not be used.
f. Telecommunications facilities should be as small as possible and the minimum height necessary.
Applicants should consult the General Commercial Guidelines in addition to the guidelines contained within this subsection. g.
7.6.6 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
This section provides design guidelines and concepts applicable to residential projects within Planning Area 1.
A. Site Planning.
1. Developments should relate to the adjacent street and neighborhood context. Developments that ignore the street and create an isolated enclave are highly discouraged.
2. Developments should generally be oriented parallel to public or internal streets. See Figure 7.9.
3. Doors should be visible from the street or other public areas and windows should allow residents to have "eyes on the street" for natural surveillance.
4. Clustering of multi -family units should be a consistent site planning element. Whenever possible, buildings should be configured around courtyards, gathering areas and open spaces. See photo.
5. Pedestrian circulation should be considered when designing a multi- family development, not only within the site, but to and from the site as well.
6. Windows and entries should be placed to maximize natural surveillance of the site. Corridors should be visible from as many units as possible. 7-48
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN l Design Guidelines
FIGURE 7.9 Planning Area 1 Residential Building Orientation Buildings are orientated parallel to street
B. Building Scale and Massing.
1. Architectural elements such as recessed or projecting balconies, porches or other elements that add visual interest, human scale and character to the neighborhood are encouraged. See photo.
2. Varied building heights are encouraged to provide visual interest and give the appearance of a collection of smaller structures. The development's building height should create a transition from the heights of adjacent development, rather than abrupt height changes.
For example, a three-story building facade should not be located adjacent to a single -story, single-family home.
C. Building Entries.
1. Courtyard doors or gates used as building entries should be attractively designed as an important architectural feature of the building or development.
2. Individual unit entries from the exterior of the building should have a strong relationship with a fronting street, internal walkway or courtyard as appropriate to the overall siting concept. A transition area from the public space or walkway to the private dwelling unit entry such as a porch, steps or landscaped walkway, should be provided.
D. Stairs.
1. Building facades that enclose stairways should include residential -type windows to reduce the visual bulk of the stairwell and enhance safety.
Building facades enclosing elevator shafts should use architectural treatments to reduce visual mass.
2. Where prefabricated stairs are used, additional design features such as screen walls, enhanced railings or accent colors should be used to enhance appearance. The additional design features should be consistent with the overall building design.
7-49
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Design Guidelines
E. Building Materials and Color.
1. The development's dwelling units, community facilities and parking structures should be unified by a consistent use of building materials, textures and colors.
2. Garages should incorporate architectural detailing, such as patterned garage doors or painted trim.
3. Carports, detached garages and accessory structures should be designed as an integral part of the development's architecture. They should be similar in material, color, and detail to the primary building(s) of the development. See photo.
F. Roofs.
1. Roof pitches and materials should appear residential in character and should consider the prevailing roof types in the neighborhood.
2. Carport roofs should be compatible with the roof pitch and materials of the primary building(s). Avoid flat, unarticulated roofs.
3. Roofs should allow for solar panels.
G. Mechanical Equipment and Vents.
1. The following must be screened from views from publicly accessible spaces:
a. Electric and water utility meters;
b. Heating/ventilation/cooling equipment;
c. Irrigation and pool pumps;
d. Rooftop mechanical equipment;
e. Other mechanical equipment.
2. Appropriate methods of screening include fencing, landscaping, roof parapets and architectural enclosures. The design of screening devices must be compatible with the primary building(s).
3. Mechanical equipment must be located as to minimize noise impacts on residential units.
H. Outdoor Recreation and Open Space.
1. Residents should have access to usable open space for recreation and social activities. Open spaces should be conveniently located for the majority of the units.
2. Open spaces and courtyards should be designed to be as visible from as many dwelling units as possible or along main walkways.
3. Open space areas should be sheltered from the noise and traffic of adjacent streets or other incompatible uses.
7-50
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Design Guidelines
Low wall/fencing separates private
open space from common area
Seating along common open space is
shaded by trellis
4. A series of connected open space areas of varying shape, appearance and usage are encouraged.
5. Open space should be configured and sized to be usable areas and not merely leftover areas.
6. Open space intended for private use should be provided adjacent to the units it serves.
7. Boundaries between private and common open spaces should be clearly defined by low walls or plant materials. See photo.
8. Outdoor recreation and open space areas should be visible from as many units as possible and from private open space areas. Direct convenient access from ground level, private open space to the communal play area is encouraged.
9. Recreation areas should be located away from public streets, parking or entry areas unless physically separated by walls, fencing or dense landscaping.
10. Hard surface areas for outdoor activities should be provided. These active recreation areas should be separated from vehicular use areas.
11. Seating areas should be provided adjacent to outdoor recreation areas.
Seating location should consider comfort factors including sun orientation, shade and wind. See photo.
I. Miscellaneous Site Elements.
1. Site Furniture.
a. Site furnishings (e.g., benches, bicycle racks, bollards, trash receptacles and newspaper racks) should be compatible with the design of adjacent buildings.
b. Site furnishings should not create pedestrian/ vehicular conflicts.
2. Refuse Storage Areas.
a. Refuse storage areas should be located within parking garages or to the rear of buildings and screened from publicly accessible areas. b. Refuse storage areas should be located conveniently close to the residential units.
c. Refuse containers should be covered.
d. Architectural enclosures should be used to enclose outdoor refuse containers.
e. The design of enclosures should be architecturally compatible with other buildings on the site, and their design should use similar forms, materials and colors.
7-51
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Design Guidelines
j.
f. Refuse storage should provide an opaque or semi -opaque horizontal cover or screen to reduce unsightly views. The horizontal screen/cover should be integrated into the enclosure design and should be compatible with the adjacent development.
The refuse storage areas should be located so that the doors do not interfere with landscaping and pedestrian and vehicle circulation. g.
h. Dimensions of refuse enclosures should not exceed the reasonable space required for anticipated use.
i. Mailboxes should be located in highly visible, conveniently accessible areas, per USPS requirements.
Incorporation of design features, such as a built frame consistent with the primary building's architectural design, is encouraged.
J. Landscaping.
1. Use of landscaping is encouraged to define and accent specific areas such as building and parking lot entrances and the main walkways to community facilities.
2. Plant materials should be used to define the edge between public and private space, buffer adjacent uses when appropriate, and screen service areas.
K. Parking and Circulation.
1. Large surface parking areas, where cars would dominate views and increase perceived density, should be avoided. Surface parking should be divided into a series of small parking areas with convenient access that relates to adjacent dwelling units.
2. Parking areas should be located in the development's interior and not along street frontages. Screening measures, such as landscaping and walls, should be used to minimize visual parking impacts.
3. Cross circulation between vehicles and pedestrians should be minimized. A clearly marked walkway should be provided from the parking areas to the main entrances of the buildings.
4. Access to transit stops should be integrated into the pedestrian circulation network.
5. Bicycle storage such as racks or lockers should be provided and be easily accessible from the street and the pedestrian routes.
7-52
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN l Design Guidelines
Lighting should be pedestrian -scaled
Fountain provides focal point, art
work and seating
6. Sight lines from dwelling units to the parking area should be provided.
L. Lighting.
1. Light standards should be residential/pedestrian in scale and be spaced appropriately for the fixture, type of illumination and pole height. See photo.
2. Lighting in parking areas should be arranged to prevent direct glare into adjacent dwelling units.
3. When appropriate, wall -mounted lighting may be incorporated. Wall - mounted lights should be architecturally compatible and pedestrian scaled.
7.6.7 PUBLIC SPACE AND AMENITIES DESIGN GUIDELINES
This section is intended to provide design guidance on publicly accessible open spaces including walkways, plazas and courtyards, as well as site amenities or features.
A. Plazas and Courtyards.
1. A plaza or courtyard should have an articulated edge (buildings, benches, landscaping, etc.) to provide a sense of arrival.
2. Site amenities such as seating, lighting, planters, drinking fountains, distinctive paving, art work, and bicycle racks should be provided. See photo.
3. Plazas should incorporate focal points such as sculptures or water features where space permits. See photo.
4. Furniture and fixtures used in the plaza areas should complement the building architecture.
5. Soft and hard -surfaced areas should be incorporated into the overall plaza design.
6. Decorative paving used in the plaza areas should complement the paving pattern and colors used elsewhere on -site.
B. Sidewalk Dining.
1. Street furniture should be compatible with the adjacent public improvements, private structures, and building materials. The design materials and colors used for chairs, tables, lighting, and other fixtures including umbrellas and awnings should be generally consistent with both the architectural style and colors used on the building facade.
2. The street furniture cannot restrict motor vehicle sight lines.
3. The street furniture cannot impede entry to the building and must not preclude applicable emergency exit requirements.
7-53
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Design Guidelines
4. All barriers and/or surrounding outdoor dining areas should withstand inclement outdoor weather and one hundred (100) pounds of horizontal force at the top of the barricade when in their fixed positions.
5. Outdoor dining facilities should be for sit-down food and beverage service only; no stand-up service.
6. Seating (tables and chairs) should not be removed from outdoor dining areas during business hours.
7. To identify the most appropriate location(s) adjacent to the restaurant to locate outdoor dining, consider the relationship between the characteristic of the spaces and activities surrounding possible outdoor dining locations. Outdoor dining facilities must comply with Chapter 4 of this Specific Plan.
8. The use of retractable awnings or removable umbrellas is generally encouraged. See photo.
9. Awnings and umbrellas should not cover more than fifty percent (50%) of the outdoor dining area, providing patrons with a choice between sun and shade.
10. Awnings should maintain at least eight (8) feet of vertical clearance above the sidewalk level and should not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height.
11. Umbrellas should be mounted in a stable base to minimize accidental or windblown tipping over.
12. Awnings and umbrellas should be located to not interfere with street trees. See photo.
13. Umbrellas and awnings should be cleaned at least once per month.
14. Barriers surrounding outdoor dining areas should complement the facade of the building and the public realm, as well as be highly transparent (e.g., wrought iron fencing).
15. Within the outdoor dining area, especially near entrances, provide trash receptacles for use by patrons and restaurant employees to minimize litter.
16. When designing an outdoor dining area, provide appropriate lighting to create a nighttime ambience that complements the adjacent buildings and public realm.
17. Lighting should be incorporated into the facade of the building, and should complement the style of building. Lights on buildings should not be glaring to pedestrians, and should illuminate only the outdoor eating area.
Removable umbrellas are used to
shade tables, but do not interfere with
existing trees
7-54
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Design Guidelines
18. Plants, trees, and flowers, when used within the outdoor dining area, should be in portable containers to promote the most flexible use of the space.
19. For potted plants, include a saucer or other suitable system to retain seepage.
C. Walls and Fences.
1. Walls and fences are generally used for security purposes, to define ownership, to mitigate nuisances such as noise, and to screen areas from public view. Walls and fences should be kept as low as possible while performing their functional purpose.
2. Landscaping should be used in combination with walls to soften otherwise blank surfaces. Vines planted on walls are strongly encouraged to hide flat wall surfaces to help reduce graffiti.
D. Lighting.
1. Pedestrian scale lighting is strongly encouraged. The style and color of lighting should be consistent with the character of a public space.
2. Bollards are intended to separate pedestrians from vehicular traffic areas and to light sidewalk surfaces. Bollard design should coordinate with other streetscape furnishings. In locations, where emergency access may be necessary, removable bollards are encouraged.
E. Site Amenities.
1. Site amenities form elements of commonality, which help to establish the identity of an area and provide comfort and interest to its users.
Individual site amenities within an area should have common features, such as color, material, and design to provide a cohesive environment and more identifiable character.
2. Refuse receptacle design should coordinate with other streetscape furnishings.
3. Pots and planters should be located where pedestrian flow will not be obstructed. See photo.
4. Pots and planters should be durable and have natural color tones that complement the adjacent structures.
5. Bicycle racks should be selected that are durable. Based on their performance, "loop racks" and "ribbon bars" are encouraged, and should be sized according to parking requirements. Bicycle racks that are sculptural or also serve as public art may be used.
6. The design of newspaper boxes should be consolidated into one rack.
The rack should be attractive on all sides and properly anchored. See photo.
7-55
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN l Design Guidelines
7. Visual features, such as fountains, should be incorporated into public spaces to attract pedestrians.
F. Street Furniture.
1. Seating is an important amenity that should be provided throughout commercial areas.
2. The design and selection of street furniture should include considerations for the security, safety, comfort and convenience of the user.
3. Unified street furniture "look" is encouraged. The color and appearance of street furniture products should be selected to complement other design elements.
4. Where possible, furnishings should be grouped together.
5. A greater number and type of furnishings should be provided in higher - use pedestrian traffic areas. Furnishings should not obstruct pedestrian circulation.
G. Landscaping.
1. Tree grates should occur along street edges and plazas where a continuous walking surface is needed. Grate sizes should be a minimum of four feet in diameter. Knockouts should be provided to enlarge the inside diameter for supporting a larger tree trunk as the tree grows. See photo.
2. Tree guards should extend vertically from tree grates, and serve to protect trees in highly active areas. Tree guards should be narrow and painted in a similar color and relate to other site furnishings.
Tree grate
7-56
CHAPTER 8
ADMINISTRATION
Fr IMPLEMENTATION
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN Administration and Implementation
8. ADMINISTRATION AND
IMPLEMENTATION
8.1 SPECIFIC PLAN ADOPTION
The Bellflower Transit Oriented Development Specific Plan (the "Specific Plan") was prepared in conformity with Government Code §§ 65451, et seq. Together with the Bellflower Municipal Code ("BMC") and other applicable law, this Specific Plan sets forth the development and zoning regulations for the Specific Plan area.
8,2 MUNICIPAL CODE REFERENCE
This Specific Plan takes precedence over the BMC in the event of any conflict. This Specific Plan provides the zoning regulations and procedures for the Specific Plan Area. Any standards or regulations that are silent in this Specific Plan will revert to the BMC.
This Specific Plan provides the entire zoning for this Specific Plan area.
The entire property is zoned "TOD SP" and the applicable zoning regulations for this Specific Plan area are those set forth in this Specific Plan.
8.3 DEFNNMONS,
In addition to the defined terms set forth in this Specific Plan, unless the contrary is stated or clearly appears from the context, the following definitions govern the construction of the words and phrases used in this Specific Plan. Words and phrases not defined by this chapter have the meaning set forth elsewhere in the BMC or applicable law.
The following provide definitions of terms used in this Specific Plan:
"Applicable Law": All Federal, State and City laws including the Bellflower Municipal Code ("BMC").
"Director": Director of Planning and Building Services, or designee. "Facade": The vertical surface of a building that is set parallel to a Frontage Line and facing a street.
"Frontage Line": The property lines of a lot fronting a street or other public way, or a park, green, or paseo.
"Frontage Type": These are prototypical arrangements of architectural and site design elements that illustrate ways in which the intended streetscape character can be achieved through design. Appropriate degrees of privacy for adjoining buildings must be considered. "Live -Work Unit": A dwelling unit that incorporates non-residential uses. Permitted non-residential live/work uses are restricted to permitted uses within the zone in which it is located. Live/Work uses must comply with all of the following:
8-1
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Administration and Implementation A. Live/Work units must be internally accessible between the residential area and the non-residential area. The non-residential area must be directly accessible to a non-resident from the ground level via an entry/exit separated from a residential entry/exit; B. An employee of the non-residential use must reside in the dwelling unit. However, the non-residential use may have employees that do not reside within the dwelling unit;
C. Live/Work uses must observe similar operational and delivery hours and walk-in/client visits as other permitted uses within the zone in which it is located.
D. Outdoor storage is not permitted;
E. Live/Work uses cannot store or generate hazardous materials or employ hazardous processes;
F. Noise, vibration, dust, odors, fumes, smoke, heat, electrical interference or other similar nuisances from Live/Work activities cannot be perceived beyond the individual unit; and
G. Live/Work activities cannot increase pedestrian or vehicle traffic beyond that ordinarily associated with the zone in which it is located nor can it reduce the number of required off-street parking spaces available for use.
"Mixed -Use": Multiple land uses and activities within the same building or the same general area.
"Planning Commission": The Planning Commission established by BMC Chapter 2.32. The Director may, however, recommend that the City Council act as the planning agency for a project by resolution as authorized by BMC § 2.32.050. Upon adoption of such a resolution, the City Council will act as the Planning Commission for purposes of this Specific Plan.
8.4 SPECIFIC PLAN AMMNENDMENTS
The Specific Plan provisions are intended to be flexible and responsive to the needs of the City and future commercial development within the Specific Plan area. Furthermore, the Project Review (PR) Process is intended to consolidate typical City review processes and provide the City with the opportunity to ensure future commercial development proposals comply with those development and design standards contained in this Specific Plan and other relevant requirements of the City. Therefore, separate design -related approvals are not generally required. The provisions of this Specific Plan also offer interpretive flexibility to the Director that should accommodate most future development.
It should be noted that this Specific Plan does provide relief for those future developments that deviate from those standards and provisions contained in this Specific Plan, including the following:
8-2
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Administration and Implementation A. Amendment to any portion of the Specific Plan as initiated by the City.
B. Amendment to the text or maps.
C. Amendment in any internal Specific Plan Area boundary.
D. Amendment in standards or regulations, including landscaping and design standards.
E. Amendment that would not have a substantial adverse impact on surrounding properties.
F. Amendment that would not alter any findings contained in the environmental document prepared for the approval.
G. Amendment that would not affect the ability to meet infrastructure and service provisions contained in the Specific Plan.
H. Amendment to design criteria such as paving treatments, architectural details and related criteria.
i. Amendment to landscape treatments, fencing, lighting, trails, and entry treatments, provided the modifications are in substantial conformance with the purpose and intent of the specified design criteria.
J. Amendment to the Specific Plan that would not significantly affect the overall design and visual quality of the area including, without limitation, the following:
Building setback deviation — up to ten percent (10%);
Height of fence or wall deviation — up to ten percent (10%). In commercial zones, a modification of twenty percent (20%) may be allowed;
Projections into required setbacks— up to ten percent (10%); Building height increase — up to ten percent (10%);
Reduction in off street parking requirement — up to ten percent (10%);
All other dimensional or percentage limitations or requirements — up to ten percent (10%).
Any other amendment deemed appropriate by the Director. »
»
The Director may request additional information from the applicant in order to make the necessary findings to approve the amendment. In addition, the applicant would need to provide additional architectural enhancements or other design benefits which would provide the Director with incentive to allow the relaxation of any development standard. The Director must make the following findings (as applicable) to approve the amendment to this Specific Plan:
8-3
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Administration and Implementation A. The adjustment(s) does not change the vision or policy intent of the Specific Plan (the Vision is located in Chapter 2 and policies are included in Chapters 3 and 5 of the Specific Plan);
B. The adjustment will not produce a result that is detrimental to the neighborhood.
The decision of the Director becomes final unless appealed pursuant to the provisions of BMC Chapter 17.112 (Appeals).
8.5 REVUE W AND APPROVAL /AL AUT H C®ITY ; F
THF D FC OR
The Director has the authority to do the following:
A. Implement the Specific Plan in accordance with Applicable Law.
B. Interpret the Specific Plan. In the event that a specific use or type of use is not listed as a permitted use, the Director has authority to determine whether the proposed use is similar to a permitted use and whether the use is permitted, permitted subject to conditions, permitted as a temporary use, or prohibited. In determining "similarity," the Director must make all of the following findings:
The proposed use meets the intent of, and is consistent with, the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan and the Specific Plan;
The proposed use does not adversely impact the public health, safety and general welfare of the City's residents; and » The proposed use shares characteristics common with and is not of greater intensity or density or does not generate more environmental impacts than those uses listed in the permitted uses section.
C. Any applicant, interested person, or public official may appeal decisions of the Director to the Planning Commission in accordance with the Specific Plan or BMC, as applicable.
D. Make technical corrections to maps, diagrams, tables, and other similar documents that may be required to reconcile the changes made by the Specific Plan with any applicable law.
E. Make the following technical amendments:
» Amendment to design criteria such as paving treatments, architectural details and related criteria.
» Amendment to landscape treatments, fencing, lighting, trails, and entry treatments, provided the modifications are in substantial conformance with the purpose and intent of the specified design criteria.
» Amendment to design criteria such as paving treatments, architectural details and related criteria.
8-4
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Administration and Implementation » Amendment to landscape treatments, fencing, lighting, trails, and entry treatments, provided the modifications are in substantial conformance with the purpose and intent of the specified design criteria.
F. Administer, interpret, and enforce all requirements of this Specific Plan, including the acceptance and processing of all land use permit applications.
G. The Director can make a Parking Determination to identify the number and location of required parking spaces in compliance with the standards and guidelines contained in this Specific Plan.
H. Approve project applications. The Project Review process and procedures are described in the next section.
I. Approve proposed additions and enlargements to existing improvements. The approval process and procedures are described in the following section.
8.6 PROJECT REV EWW PROCESS AND
PROCEDURES
All new development projects within Planning Areas 1 through 4 are required to undergo a Project Review approval process and require review by the Director. All development projects within Planning Area 5 must comply with the underlying base zoning standards in accordance with BMC Title 17. The Project Review process provides the City with the opportunity to ensure future commercial and residential mixed -use development proposals comply with those development and other applicable law. The following describes the PR process.
8.6.1 PROJECT REVIEW PROCEDURES AND SUBMITTAL
REQUIREMENTS
The Director will review and confirm compliance of projects with this Specific Plan as follows:
A. Allowable uses and activities;
B. Site plans;
C. Building elevations/Architecture;
D. Landscaping plans;
E. Parking plans;
F. Floor plans;
G. Permanent and temporary uses and activities;
H. Hours and method of operations;
I. Business operation plan/description;
J. Photometrics Plan;
8-5
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Administration and Implementation K. Master Sign Program;
L. Technical studies (i.e. parking, noise, etc.);
M. The Director can establish conditions of approval (as appropriate) with its approval.
To initiate the PR process, all project applicants must submit the following plans and materials to the Director. Plans and studies must be stamped and signed by a licensed professional. The Director must determine its completeness within 30 days. If complete, the Director will review and approve or deny the application. The Director's determination may be appealed to the Planning Commission.
A. Project Application
B. Scaled and dimensioned site plan;
C. Scaled and dimensioned elevations showing all building exteriors on all buildings;
D. Scaled and dimensioned floor plans and building cross sections (if determined necessary by the Director);
E. Grading plan (including drainage scheme), prepared by a licensed civil engineer;
F. Complete inventory of building materials and color palette; G. Scaled and dimensioned landscape plan (including decorative hardscape);
H. Tentative Maps (if determined necessary by the Director); I. Preliminary Title Reports (if determined necessary by the Director); J. Any detail drawings and exhibits as necessary to provide information on various project features that require specific and detailed review. Such detail drawings may include the location and design menu of signage, the project entrance and the community recreation area;
K. Photometrics Plan (if determined necessary by the Director); L. Description of operations (if determined necessary by the Director); M. Studies (e.g. Parking) (if determined necessary by the Director).
If deemed appropriate, the Director has the ability to refer approval authority, on a case -by -case bask, to the Planning Commission and/or City Council, without the necessity of any public hearing.
8.6.2 REQUIRED FINDINGS
The Director will approve the Project Review application, plans, building materials, architectural design and landscaping/hardscape design exhibits, provided the following findings are made:
A. The project is consistent with the provisions of this Specific Plan. 8-6
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN l Administration and Implementation B. The project's design and building architecture is complimentary and compatible with other projects within the Specific Plan area. c. The overall project design and architecture are of high quality and innovative design, use quality construction materials, and creatively use landscape and hardscape materials in order to create a "signature" development for the City of Bellflower.
D. The project is consistent with the Bellflower General Plan. 83 PROVISIONS FOR EXISTING
IMPROVEMENTS AND ADDITIONS
Existing permitted improvements built in conformance to all building and zoning codes in effect at the time of construction may be maintained and repaired as currently existing and approved administratively by the Director, pursuant to the following provisions:
A. Such existing improvements and site conditions may be maintained, repainted, repaired, and landscaping upgraded without having to conform to the provisions of this Specific Plan.
B. Review and approval of such repairs and similar actions is required pursuant to the provisions of this Specific Plan.
C. All proposed additions, enlargements and improvements must conform to those development standards and design guidelines described in the Specific Plan; except additions proposed under the underlying zones must comply with the BMC.
8-7
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Administration and Implementation
8.8 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
At the time of the writing of this Specific Plan, there is no actual, physical development being proposed, nor are any new construction, grading, or other physical alterations to the environment being considered. The Specific Plan is a zoning -level Specific Plan document to guide and regulate future development around a future transit station and is viewed as a regulatory document to ensure practical and higher quality future development in the Specific Plan area. The Director will review all future development proposals on a case -by -case basis and will make applicable findings to ensure that all future development proposals are consistent with those standards and requirements contained in this Specific Plan document. As part of City's review, additional CEQA documentation may be required for each future development proposal, if deemed necessary and appropriate.
9 1MPL EMENTAry ION ACTION PLAN
The following Implementation Action Plan (Table 8.1) lists the specific actions or strategies that should be taken by the City of Bellflower, in coordination with local businesses, future developers, and other agencies where appropriate. Programs and policies for some of these items are already in place and are recommended to be continued within this Study Area. The Implementation Action Plan is organized by the following topic areas:
A. Economic Development Strategies and Initiatives
B. Mobility and Streetscape Actions
c. Parking Actions
D. Housing Initiatives
For each action there is a recommended timeframe for completion, the responsible party or entity, and potential funding source(s). The timeframes are identified as follows:
» Short (1-5 years)
» Medium (5-10 years)
» Long (10 years or more)
Ongoing actions have also been identified. Actual implementation will be dependent on development activity, funding availability, and the Director resources.
8-8
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Administration and Implementation TABLE 8.1 Implementation Action Plan
SPECIFIC ACTIONS
A. Commercial Uses
TIMEFRAME
PRIMARY
RESPONSIBILITY
POTENTIAL
FUNDING
SOURCES
A.1 Complete construction of the new parking garage
on Bellflower Boulevard.
Ongoing,
expected
completion
mid -2020
Public Works
Department
Funding
secured
A.2 Promote redevelopment of key parcels within the
Study Area among developers, commercial brokers,
and the business community to spur additional
investment in older commercial properties.
A.3 Encourage and facilitate new dining and retail
options by aiding in site location, tenant
improvements, and permit processing.
A.4 Work with landlords of vacant properties to make
necessary upgrades through the Business Assistance
Program.
A.5 Coordinate with Metro on the final location,
design, and construction of the transit station to
achieve the urban design policies under Chapter 5,
Objective 5.
A.6 Establish a Business Improvement District for the
downtown and broader area to provide a Clean & Safe
Program, Events, and Downtown Promotion. The BID
requires approval by the affected property owners of
the downtown businesses.
A.7 Work with the Southeast Los Angeles County
Workforce Investment Board to aid with job
placement, job training, and other services to better
align the local workforce with employer needs in
Bellflower.
Ongoing Economic
Development
Department
Ongoing
Economic
Development
Department
Ongoing Economic
Development
Department
Ongoing
Planning
Department,
Economic
Development
Department, and
Public Works
Department
Ongoing Economic
Development
Department
Ongoing
Economic
Development
Department
City
City
City
City
B. Mobility and Streetscape Actions
B.1 Extend Bellflower Boulevard streetscape
improvements from Mayne Street north to Alondra
Boulevard.
B.2 Extend Bellflower Boulevard streetscape
improvements from Flower Street south to Park Street.
Medium Public Works
Department
Medium Public Works
Department
City, Private
Development,
Metro
City, Private
Development,
Metro
8-9
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Administration and Implementation TABLE 8.1 Implementation Action Plan
SPECIFIC ACTIONS
B.3 Encourage and facilitate the installation of bicycle facilities.
B.4 Enhance crosswalks to improve pedestrian access
within the Specific Plan area.
B.5 Design and construct gateway signage at Bellflower
Boulevard and Alondra Boulevard to direct people to
the transit station and downtown.
B.6 Prepare a streetscape improvement plan along
Alondra Boulevard to enhance the identify of
Bellflower and call attention to the downtown.
TIMEFRAME PRIMARY
RESPONSIBILITY
Medium
Medium
Medium
Public Works
Department
Public Works
Department
Public Works
Department
Medium Public Works
Department
POTENTIAL
FUNDING
SOURCES
City, Caltrans,
Metro
City, Caltrans,
Metro
City, Private
Development,
Metro
City, Private
Development,
Metro
C. Parking Actions
C.1 Manage curbside parking along Bellflower
Boulevard by establishing time limits to increase
turnover and convenience to users. Enforce parking
limits.
C.2 Establish passenger loading areas along Bellflower
Boulevard or within the vicinity to accommodate
increased demand for ride -hailing services.
C.3 Adopt a parking occupancy target for public
parking facilities to ensure adequate parking
availability for visitors, residents and employees.
C.4 Establish a system to monitor parking occupancy
regularly and recommend changes (if necessary) to
managing parking supply
C.5 Consider expanding the existing parking district as the opportunity arises through new development, in
order to continue to promote shared parking within
the area.
C.6 Coordinate with Metro to balance the parking
demands of the transit users with residents and
visitors in the Specific Plan area. Look for opportunities to share parking at the proposed transit station.
C.7 Improve signage for off-street public parking
locations and the parking structure at the Civic Center.
C.8 Continue the valet program for key locations in the downtown to address parking constraints at peak
hours.
Short
Public Works
Department,
Planning
Department, and
Public Safety
Medium Public Works
Department
Short City Council
Medium Public Works
Department and
Public Safety
Long Public Works
Department
Short Public Works
Department and
Planning
Department
Long
Ongoing
Public Works
Department
City
City, Private
Development
City
City
City
Economic
Development and
Public Works
Department
City, Metro
City
8-10
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Administration and Implementation TABLE 8.1 Implementation Action Plan
SPECIFIC ACTIONS
D. Housing Initiatives
TIMEFRAME
PRIMARY
RESPONSIBILITY
POTENTIAL
FUNDING
SOURCES
D.1 Study inclusionary zoning best practices to
determine affordable housing policies for multifamily
housing projects.
Short
Planning
Department and
Economic
Development
Department
City, AB32, SB2
D.2 Study and adopt strategies to reduce and prevent
homelessness in the Specific Plan area.
Ongoing Economic
Development
Department, Public
Safety Department,
Planning
Department, and
Public Works
Department
City, AB32, SB2
D.3 Study existing density bonus regulations to
determine effectiveness and recommend updates.
Short Planning
Department and
Economic
Development
Department
City, AB32, SB2
D.4 Identify grant application priorities to fund and
support the development of affordable housing.
Ongoing Economic
Development
Department
City, AB32, SB2
D.5 Identify and coordinate with affordable housing
developers.
Ongoing Economic
Development
Department
City, AB32, SB2
8-11
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Administration and Implementation
8.10 POTENTIAL FUNDING MECHANISMS
There are a number of grants, loans, and value capture funding mechanisms that could finance the infrastructure and community benefits identified in this Specific Plan. These resources are described below.
8.10.1 LOCAL TAX INCREMENT AND ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS
Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District
The Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD) is a funding mechanism whose primary purpose is to finance a wide array of infrastructure projects with "communitywide significance," including transit improvements and affordable housing. EIFDs are a California state legislation signed into law in September 2014 and further refined as a tool in 2015.
An EIFD can be established without voter approval by a city, county, or joint powers authority to fund specific infrastructure and economic development projects as outlined in the financing plan. EIFDs can leverage multiple funding streams to achieve these goals —including tax increment financing, if approved by voters, assessment revenues, fees, and other sources such as state and federal grants. EIFDs may not issue debt without a 55 percent vote of the district's registered voters, nor can revenues be used to fund ongoing maintenance and operations. An EIFD can be established without geographic limitations on where it can be used, therefore it could be employed on a single corridor, such as Flower Street, around the new Bellflower Station, or throughout the whole Specific Plan area.
Revenues could be applied to a number of improvements including transit -oriented development, development that carries out sustainable communities' strategies, affordable housing, and civic projects such as parks and libraries. EIFDs can furthermore finance infrastructure work including pedestrian connectivity, streetscape improvements, water and sewer infrastructure, and parking facilities.
Community Revitalization Investment Authorities
Community Revitalization Investment Authorities (CRIAs)—another funding mechanism recently passed in California to help carry out revitalization activities —share a number of similarities with EIFDs. CRIAs use tax increment to implement an economic revitalization financing plan within a defined area to construct, improve, or rehabilitate specified projects with community -wide benefits.
CRIAs may be established without voter approval after three public hearings with public support. It is governed by a board of appointed public and government representatives who can issue bonds without voter approval. A CRIA must operate within an investment area that meets the state's criteria of a disadvantaged community based on socioeconomic, public health, and/or environmental factors. The 2017 8-12
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Administration and Implementation SCAG EIFD/CRIA Technical Assistance Application indicates that all or most of the Specific Plan area is eligible.
Financing can be used to fund public or private revitalization projects including infrastructure construction and repair, owner or tenant improvement loans, and affordable housing. CRIAs have an affordable housing set -aside: 25% of tax increment revenues must be used for very low, low, and moderate -income housing.
Special Assessment Districts
Special Assessment Districts can be used to fund any improvement that provides a "direct and special" benefit to the assessed property. Each property owner who receives a benefit pays a share of the costs of the improvements over a period of years. Improvements like the recommended sidewalks enhancements, street trees, lighting, art, and benches that improve connectivity, as well as safety improvements like private security, can be funded via Special Assessment, while "general" benefits like schools may not.
There are two primary challenges in establishing Special Assessment Districts, particularly for those in already developed areas. The first is that total property taxes can only increase a certain amount before new development is disadvantaged relative to properties not subject to an assessment. The second challenge is that assessment districts require a majority vote of property owners weighted by property value to pass. All the affected properties must stand to benefit from that particular improvement, and no assessment can exceed the "reasonable cost" of its special benefit to that parcel.
Business Improvement District
A Business Improvement District (BID) is a common type of Special Assessment District that assesses business and/or property owners to fund maintenance, marketing, and other activities, including additional public services or improvements. A BID is a powerful tool for raising funds to provide enhancements to the area, but cannot be used to issue bonds.
Under the California Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989 and Property and Business Improvement District Law of 1994, a district can be established via a County resolution of intent to form a BID.
If a majority of property owners do not protest the resolution during a subsequent public hearing, an advisory board would be appointed. Once formed, a special assessment can be charged to commercial property or business owners for an amount proportional to the benefits they will receive.
The City and Downtown Bellflower business and property owners are in the process of forming two BIDs in the Specific Plan area along Bellflower Boulevard: one located north of Flower Street to Alondra Boulevard; and the other located south of Flower Street to Rose Street. Funding raised could be applied toward enhanced sanitation and cleaning as well as other streetscape and pedestrian improvements.
8-13
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Administration and Implementation Landscape and Lighting Assessment District
Like a BID, a Landscape and Lighting Assessment District (LLAD) is another type of Special Assessment District that could be applied to fund new street lights and pedestrian lights, landscaping, parkways, medians, and other amenities. An LLAD requires that benefits accrue proportionately to the assessed properties. LLADs are more flexible than BIDs in that they can issue bonds and require a simple majority of property owners for formation. Commercial corridors within the Specific Plan area may consider LLADs to fund area -wide lighting and streetscape improvements.
8.10.2 REGIONAL AND STATE SOURCES OF FUNDS
Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities
The 2006 Global Warming Solutions Acts (AB 32) established a cap and trade system in California. The system establishes quarterly auctions of carbon allowances, whose proceeds are deposited into a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. Using revenue from this fund, the Strategic Growth Council administers the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) program, which funds land -use, housing, transportation, and land preservation projects to support infill and compact development that reduces greenhouse gas emissions.
Approximately $395 million in AHSC funding was announced in FY 2017- 18; recipients will be announced in Summer 2019. Potential projects could include installation of new or improved pedestrian crossings, walkways, bikeways, or bus lanes, streetscape improvements, including, but not limited to the installation of lighting, signage, urban greening, street furniture, or other related amenities for pedestrians, cyclists and transit riders, traffic calming projects. Funding can also be used for the acquisition and rehabilitation of affordable housing, or the conversion of nonresidential structures to residential dwelling units.
Projects that can show the Strategic Growth Council that they reduce vehicle miles traveled by locating near transit are most competitive for funds. However, the market for carbon emissions has shown itself to be relatively unstable. Rather than trading emission allowances, companies are reducing emissions. While this is certainly beneficial to the environment, it means that the future of this funding source is uncertain.
Infrastructure State Revolving Loan Fund
The California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (I -Bank) loans money at below -market interest rates for infrastructure projects around the state. The I -Bank is the state's general-purpose financing authority that finances public infrastructure and private development projects that promote economic development and revitalize communities.
Eligible project categories in Bellflower include the rehabilitation of streets, water supply and flood control, expanded public transit, and power and communications facilities. Categories also include new 8-14
BELLFLOWER SPECIFIC PLAN I Administration and Implementation educational, cultural, or social facilities, as well as parks and recreational facilities.
Recent loan recipients in Southern California have included the City of San Gabriel, which borrowed $3.8 million at 3.5 percent interest to upgrade, reconstruct, and rehabilitate its public streets.
8.10.3 FEDERAL SOURCES
Economic Adjustment/Revolving Loan Fund
The Economic Development Administration, a bureau in the U.S.
Department of Commerce, administers the Economic
Adjustment/Revolving Loan Fund (RLF), which assists state and local entities in creating and implementing strategies to improve local economic conditions in areas that have experienced structural change in their economic bases.
The RLF provides capital to help small businesses and entrepreneurs expand production capabilities with gap financing. Businesses in Bellflower looking for assistance would contact the local EDA Regional Office (Pacific Coast Regional) with information on interest rates.
Maximum loans are $650,000 per borrower with terms of seven years for working capital, 15 years for fixed assets, and 20 years for real estate.
Start-up firms, as well as those looking to expand, could benefit from use of this loan program.
8-15
c8--05‘
ib s FL0
staqp0rt
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
ATTENTION: Ryan Smoot, City Manager
FROM: Elizabeth C. Oba, Director of Planning and Building Services Rowena Genilo-Concepcion, Planning Manager
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible action to read by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1448 — An Ordinance amending the Transit Oriented Development Specific Plan ("TODSP") by making clerical changes.
DATE: May 27, 2025
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On February 24, 2025, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1442, amending the TODSP document (Exhibit C to Ordinance No. 1442) related to regulations and expansion of the boundaries to implement the Housing Element. Following adoption of the ordinance, it was observed that the document included "clerical errors" including:
(1) figures reflecting TODSP boundaries that were inconsistent from what was presented to the City Council, and (2) figures and tables that were partially printed that inadvertently affected the formatting of the final TODSP document. In an abundance of caution, Ordinance No. 1448 is presented to resolve the clerical issues. Since the proposed changes relate only to formatting and do not change the content of the TODSP document that City Council approved, in essence, Ordinance No. 1448 is only a "clean up" of "clerical errors." Adoption of Ordinance No. 1448 does not materially affect the TODSP document, it will only confirm the final TODSP document by superseding Ordinance No. 1442 — Exhibit C.
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL
1. Read by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1448; or
2. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is a cost for codifying the proposed ordinances within the BMC along with publication, etc. These are already anticipated as part of the City's budget. No additional direct fiscal impact is identified. Indirectly, the proposed actions will assist the City with obtaining State and federal grants.
-1-
Staff Report — Ordinance No. 1448
May 27, 2025
CEQA STATUS
The City reviewed the environmental impacts of the proposed Resolution and Ordinance pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq. "CEQA") and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regs. §§ 15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines"). In accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines § 15162, the City Council finds as follows:
A. Resolution No. 22-04 was adopted by the City Council on January 20, 2022, approving Mitigated Negative Declaration No. MND 21-01.
B. Changing the zoning designation for the properties identified in the Resolution and Ordinance is an activity contemplated by MND 21-01.
C. This activity does not contemplate any changes which will require major revisions to MND 21-01 nor are there any substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which MND 21-01 was undertaken.
D. There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time MND 21-01 was approved.
BACKGROUND
•;• TODSP
The TODSP was originally adopted in 2019. On February 24, 2025, the City Council amended the TODSP document by repealing and replacing it in its entirety via adoption of Ordinance No. 1442. The amendment was related to regulations and expansion of the boundaries of the TODSP area to implement the Housing Element.
Following adoption of the Ordinance No. 1442, it was observed that the document included "clerical errors" including: (1) figures reflecting TODSP boundaries that were inconsistent from what was presented to the City Council, and (2) figures and tables that were partially printed that inadvertently affected the formatting of the final TODSP document. Ordinance No. 1448 is presented, in an abundance of caution, to resolve the clerical inconsistencies. The changes proposed relate only to formatting and do not change the content of the TODSP document that the City Council previously approved.
In essence, Ordinance No. 1448 is only a "clean up" of "clerical errors," with no substantial change to the TODSP document. Ordinance No. 1442 — Exhibit C will be superseded by Ordinance No. 1448.
❖ Information Relative to Transit -Oriented Development ("TOD") On April 14, 2025, the City Council considered zoning ordinance text amendments to implement the Housing Element. During that meeting, the City Council instructed the Planning Director to provide more information relative to TOD including parking exemptions within the TODSP area.
-2-
Staff Report — Ordinance No. 1448
May 27, 2025
BACKGROUND — Continued
As initially approved, the purpose of the TODSP was to identify appropriate sites for mixed -use development that support or encourage the use of various modes of transportation, and to allow for higher density developments at areas near the future rail station on Bellflower Boulevard. Transit oriented districts are concentrated around public transportation with pedestrian -friendly amenities that promote walkable communities.
Walkable communities are believed to reduce car dependence and significantly reduce parking needs.
In recent years, in response to the declared housing emergency, California Legislator's introduced Bills that exempt certain projects from local parking requirements based on proximity to public transit. These Bills are deemed matters of Statewide importance and, accordingly, apply to all cities, including charter law cities. The following are some of the Bills that limit the City's ability to impose parking requirements:
• Assembly Bill 2097 ("AB 2097") prohibits public agencies from imposing minimum parking requirements on certain development projects (i.e., residential, commercial, and mixed -use developments) located within 1/2 mile of a public transit'. This law was signed in 2022 and is aimed at encouraging transit -oriented development. Most of the properties located within the TODSP area are affected by AB 2097 due to the planned future rail stop on Bellflower Boulevard. • Senate Bill 9 ("SB 9") allows property owners to build up to four homes on most lots zoned Single Family (SF), and it also allows for reduced parking per unit or potentially none if the project is located within a 1/2 mile walking distance of a high -quality transit corridor? or major transit stop?. This bill was signed into law in 2021.
• Senate Bill 35 (SB 35) requires streamlined approval of affordable homes near transit. In addition, affordable housing projects are exempt from parking requirements under certain circumstances, including if the development is located within one-half mile of public transit3 and granted these projects relief from local parking mandates.
' "Public Transit" means a "Major Transit Stop" which includes (a) an existing rail or bus rapid transit station, (b) a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, (c) the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 20 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods, and (d) major transit stops that are included in the applicable regional transportation plan. (Gov. Code § 65863.2(h)).
2 "High -Quality Transit Corridor" means a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours. (Pub. Res. Code § 21155(b)). 3 "Public Transit" means a location, including, but not limited to, a bus stop or train station, where the public may access buses, trains, subways, and other forms of transportation that charge set fares, run on fixed routes, and are available to the public.
-3-
Staff Report — Ordinance No. 1448
May 27, 2025
BACKGROUND — Continued
in addition to the above, State Accessory Dwelling Unit ("ADU") law allows property owners to provide reduced or eliminate parking requirements under certain circumstances, including ADUs located within one-half mile walking distance of public transit3. In this instance, "public transit" means a location, including, but not limited to, a bus stop or train station, where the public may access buses, trains, subways, and other forms of transportation that charge set fares, run on fixed routes, and are available to the public.
Although several bills and laws base the parking exemptions on proximity to "transit," there are differences in the type of "transit."
ATTACHMENTS
A. Ordinance No. 1448 (with TODSP document) 5
B. Ordinance No. 1442 (without attachments) 10
-4-
CITY OF BELLFLOWER
ORDINANCE NO. 1448
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TRANSIT ORIENTED
DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC PLAN ("TODSP") BY MAKING CLERICAL
CHANGES
THE COUNCIL DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council finds and declares as follows:
A. On February 10, 2025, the City Council held a public hearing to consider expanding the TODSP area by completion of a zone change and a general plan amendment, amending existing boundaries within the TODSP, and amending the TODSP regulations;
B. On February 24, 2025, Ordinance No. 1442 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at its regular meeting;
C. Ordinance No. 1442 amended the TODSP document by increasing the residential density to 100 and 40 units per acre; adding new parcels to the TODSP area; changing the zoning designations of specified parcels to TODSP as a result of expanding the boundaries of the TODSP area; amending and renaming areas within the TODSP to "Planning Areas;" eliminating the commercial allowable uses table in all Planning Areas and replacing it by referencing BMC Table 17.48.040 (Town Center District — Allowable Uses); reformatting tables for allowable uses and development standards to simplify and improve readability; and updating exhibits to conform with Planning Areas; D. Following adoption of the Ordinance No. 1442, it was observed that Ordinance No. 1442 included "clerical errors" including: (1) figures reflecting TODSP boundaries that were inconsistent from what was presented to the City Council, and (2) figures and tables that were partially printed that inadvertently affected the formatting of the final TODSP document;
E. This Ordinance is presented, to correct clerical errors in Ordinance No. 1442.
The changes proposed by this Ordinance only relate to formatting and do not change the substantive content of the TODSP that the City Council previously approved. In essence, Ordinance No. 1448 is only a "clean up" of "clerical errors," with no substantial change to the TODSP document; F. This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to Article III(C) of the City Charter to enact land use regulations. As required by Article III(B) of the City Charter, the City Council finds that the law enacted by this Ordinance will not unduly burden a person's ability to pursue economic opportunities and safe and legal residential housing. To the contrary, this Ordinance is intended to correct minor clerical changes in the TODSP only.
-5-
City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1448
G. The City reviewed this Ordinance pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA"), the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regulations §§15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines"); CEQA, CEQA Guidelines and Bellflower Guidelines collectively referred to as "CEQA Regulations"); and H. On May 27, 2025, the City Council considered this Ordinance. Its findings are made based on the entire administrative record including, without limitation, testimony and evidence presented to the City Council at its May 27, 2025 hearing.
SECTION 2. Planning Agency. Pursuant to BMC § 2.32.050(F), the City Council is acting as the Bellflower Planning Agency for purposes of the Project.
SECTION 3. Incorporation by reference. Except as otherwise provided, all findings set forth in Ordinance No. 1442, including, without limitation, environmental assessment, zone ordinance text amendment, and general plan findings, are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth.
SECTION 4. Action. Based on the above findings, the City Council approves the amendments to the Downtown Bellflower Transit Oriented Development Specific Plan ("TODSP") — Specific Plan No. 8, as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A," which is incorporated by reference. To the extent that Ordinance No. 1442 conflicts with this Ordinance, it is superseded.
SECTION 5. Construction. This Ordinance must be broadly construed in order to achieve the purposes stated in this Ordinance. It is the City Council's intent that the provisions of this Ordinance be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Ordinance.
SECTION 6. Enforceability. Repeal of any provision of the BMC does not affect any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred before, or preclude prosecution and imposition of penalties for any violation occurring before this Ordinance's effective date. Any such repealed part will remain in full force and effect for sustaining action or prosecuting violations occurring before the effective date of this Ordinance.
SECTION 7. Validity of Previous Code Sections. If this entire Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any repeal or amendment of the BMC or other city ordinance by this Ordinance will be rendered void and cause such previous BMC provision or other city ordinance to remain in full force and effect for all purposes.
SECTION 8. Reliance on Record. Each and every one of the findings and determinations in this Ordinance are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the project. The findings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.
-6-
City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1448
SECTION 9. Limitations. The City Council's analysis and evaluation of the project is based on the best information currently available. It is inevitable that in evaluating a project that absolute and perfect knowledge of all possible aspects of the project will not exist. One of the major limitations on analysis of the project is the City Council's lack of knowledge of future events. In all instances, best efforts have been made to form accurate assumptions. Somewhat related to this are limitations on the City's ability to solve what are in effect regional, state, and national problems and issues. The City must work within the political framework within which it exists and with the limitations inherent in that framework.
SECTION 10. Severability. If any part of this Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provisions or applications and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable.
SECTION 11. Electronic Signatures. This Ordinance may be executed with electronic signatures in accordance with Government Code §16.5. Such electronic signatures will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.
SECTION 12. Summaries of Information. All summaries of information in the findings, which precede this section, are based on the substantial evidence in the record.
The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact.
SECTION 13. Recordation. The City Clerk, or her duly appointed deputy, is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance; cause it to be entered into the City of Bellflower's book of original ordinances; make a note of the passage and adoption in the records of this meeting; and, within 15 days after the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, cause it to be published or posted in accordance with California law.
SECTION 14. Effective Date. This Ordinance will take effect on the 30th day following its final passage and adoption.
-7-
City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1448
ORDINANCE NO. 1448 HAD ITS FIRST READING ON MAY 27, 2025, ITS SECOND READING ON MAY 27, 2025, AND WAS DULY PASSED, APPROVED, AND
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELLFLOWER AT ITS REGULAR MEETING OF , 2025.
Ray Denton, Mayor
ATTEST:
Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Karl H. Berger, City Attorney
By: Justin A. Tarnayo, Assistant City Attorney
ATTACHMENT:
Exhibit A: TODSP Document
-8-
DUE TO DOCUMENT SIZE,
PLEASE SEE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING
AGENDAS WEBPAGE AT THE LINK
BELOW.
https://bellflower.ca.gov/government/city council/city council me etings.php
-9-
CITY OF BELLFLOWER
ORDINANCE NO. 1442
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING 1) ZONE CHANGE CASE NO. ZC 25-01 TO: (A) ESTABLISH ZONING OVERLAYS ("HOUSING OPPORTUNITY OVERLAY ZONE • HOOZ") FOR CERTAIN PROPERTIES TO ALLOW
MIXED USE OR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS; AND (B) EXPAND
AND MODIFY BOUNDARIES OF THE DOWNTOWN BELLFLOWER
TRANSIT -ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC PLAN ("TODSP")
TODSP AREA; AND (2) APPROVE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT
AMENDMENT CASE NO. ZOTA 25-01 TO: (A) ESTABLISH
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND USES
WITHIN THE "HOOZ"; AND (8) AMEND THE TODSP DOCUMENT
RELATED TO REGULATIONS AND EXPANSION OF THE
BOUNDARIES TO IMPLEMENT THE HOUSING ELEMENT
THE COUNCIL DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council finds and declares as follows:
A. Zone Change Case No. ZC 25-01 and Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Case No. ZOTA 25-01 are proposed amendments to the zoning designations, the TODSP and Title 17 (Zoning) of the Bellflower Municipal Code ("BMC") to establish regulatory framework of future development and uses within the "HOOZ" as it relates to the implementation of the Housing Element ("Project"); B. The City desires to create housing opportunity area overlays by completion of a zone change, a general plan amendment, and amendments to Title 17 of the BMC pertaining to housing opportunity area overlay standards; C. The City desires to expand the TODSP area by completion of a zone change and a general plan amendment, amend existing boundaries within the TODSP, amend the TODSP regulations;
D. The City reviewed this Ordinance pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA"), the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regulations §§15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines"); CEQA, CEQA Guidelines and Bellflower Guidelines collectively referred to as "CEQA Regulations"); E. Notice of Public Hearing before the City Council was duly given and published in the time, form, and manner as required by law;
F. On February 10, 2025, the City Council held a public hearing to receive public testimony and other evidence regarding the proposed TODSP amendment zone change and zoning ordinance text amendment, including information provided by City staff and public testimony; and
-10-
City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1442
G. On February 10, 2025, the City Council considered this Ordinance. Its findings are made based on the entire administrative record including, without limitation, testimony and evidence presented to the City Council at its February 10, 2025 hearing.
SECTION 2. Factual Findings and Conclusions. The City Council finds as follows:
A. The proposed Zone Change, TODSP and Zoning Code amendment allow for development of high -density, mixed use and/or residential development to accommodate the City of Bellflower's 2021-2029 Regional Housing Need Allocation ("RHNA");
B. Metro is planning a new light rail transit line that will connect southeast LA County to downtown Los Angeles. The transit tine will include a station in Bellflower ("Bellflower Station"), which is anticipated to be located near the northwest comer of Bellflower Boulevard and Pacific Avenue. The new rail transit line is anticipated to generate demand for new residential and commercial developments surrounding the Bellflower Station area, which supports a thriving downtown environment; hence, the proposed TODSP amendment;
C. The TODSP includes a 1/2 mile radius boundary from the anticipated station location and comprises approximately 330 acres;
D. The TODSP boundaries are proposed to be extended and are defined by Alondra Boulevard on the north, Rower Street on the south, Clark Avenue on the west, and Woodruff Avenue on the east, plus additional area on both sides of Bellflower Boulevard between Jefferson Street on the north and Palm Street, near SR -91, on the south.
E. The majority of the expanded TODSP and proposed overlay areas are comprised of existing commercial uses with some existing residential units; F. The expanded TODSP and overlay areas, are comprised of the following zoning classifications: "R-1" (Low Density Residential), "R-2" (Medium Density Residential), "C -G" (General Commercial), "M-1 (Light Industrial), "DFD" (Design for Development) and "TC" (Town Center);
G. The Zone Change proposes to establish new Planning Areas and a new zoning overlay over the parcels within the TODSP and within the Housing Opportunity Areas, respectively, as shown on Exhibit "A";
H. The Zone Change proposes to change the zoning designations from "R-1" (Low Density Residential), "R-2" (Medium Density Residential), and "TC" (Tovm Center District) to "SP" (Specific Plan) as shown on Exhibit "A"; -11-
City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1442
I. The TODSP is a transit -supportive document that will regulate future land uses, development, transportation improvements, economics, and infrastructure and utilities within the Specific Plan area by providing development and design standards and guidelines for development surrounding the future light rail system;
J. The amendments to the TODSP document are proposed to increase the residential density to 100 and 40 units per acre; add new parcels to the TODSP area; to change the zoning designations of specified parcels to TODSP as a result of expanding the boundaries of the TODSP area; amend and rename areas within the TODSP to "Planning Areas;" eliminate the commercial allowable uses table in all Planning Areas and replace it by referencing BMC Table 17.48.040 (Town Center District — Allowable Uses); reformat tables for allowable uses and development standards to simplify and improve readability; and update exhibits to conform with Planning Areas, as shown on Exhibit "C"; K. The Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment establishes a regulatory framework of future development and uses for certain properties located within 12 specific areas as it pertains to the implementation of the Housing Element (2021-2029 Planning Period) as shown on Exhibits "B" and "C"; and
L. The Ordinance repeals and replaces in its entirety the TODSP document as shown in Exhibit "C".
SECTION 3. Environmental Assessment. In accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines § 15162, the City Council finds as follows:
A. Resolution No. 22-04 was adopted by the City Council on January 20, 2022, approving Mitigated Negative Declaration No. MAID 21-C1.
B. Changing the zoning designation for those properties identified in this Ordinance is an activity contemplated by MND 21-01.
C. This activity does not contemplate any changes which will require major revisions to MND 21-01 nor are there any substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which MND 21-01 was undertaken.
D. There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time MND 21-01 was approved.
SECTION 4. Notice of Determination. The City Manager, or designee, is directed to file a Notice of Determination in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §§ 15075; and any other applicable law.
-12-
City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1442
SECTION 5. General Plan ("GP') Findings. Pursuant to Government Code § 65860, the changes implemented by this Ordinance are consistent with the following goals and policies of the GP. The City Council finds as follows:
A. Land Use Element — General Policy 1.2: "Encourage opportunities to sensitively integrate different, but compatible, land uses"; B. Land Use Element — General Policy 2.1: "Create opportunities wherein a population diverse in terms of income, age, occupation, race, lifestyle, values, interest, and religion may interact, exchange ideas, and realize common goals"; C. Land Use Element - General Goal 5: "Provide incentives for reinvestment in aging, built -out developments and encourage consolidation of properties for higher quality land uses and designs";
D. Land Use Element — Mixed Use Policy 1: "Allow for innovative and/or neo-traditional uses in established area";
E. Land Use Element - Mixed Use Implementation Program 2.2: "The City shall consider different mechanisms to implement new innovations in housing and commercial endeavors";
F. Housing Element — Goal 2: "Provide a variety of housing types to accommodate special needs groups and all economic segments of the City"; G. Housing Element — Policy 2.1: "Designate sufficient land in the General Plan Land Use Element and Zoning for the development of a range of housing types to meet the identified needs of all economic segments of the community, while providing a high quality of life for all residents";
H. Housing Element — Goal 3: "Minimize the impact of governmental constraints on housing production and affordability";.
L Housing Element — Policy 3.7: 'Provide flexibility in development standards to accommodate alternative approaches to provide affordable housing such as mixed use projects";
J. Housing Element — Goal 5: "Identify adequate sites to achieve housing variety"; K. Housing Element — Policy 5.1: "Provide a range of housing types, including low density single-family homes, moderate density townhomes, higher density multi -family units, and residential/commercial mixed use in order to address the City's share of RHNA";
L. Housing Element — Policy 5.2: "Create mixed use opportunities along key commercial corridors as a means of providing housing in dose proximity to services and transit, enhancing pedestrian activity and community Interaction"; -13-
City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1442
M. Housing Element — Policy 5.3: "Encourage in iii development and reuse of underutilized land, where reuse is consistent with desired neighborhood character";
N. Housing Element - Policy 5.4: "Encourage recycling of existing, poorly designed, substandard multi -family developments to higher densities as a means of facilitating housing for all economic segments of the community and providing improvements to housing in need of major upgrades"; and O. Housing Element - Policy 5.6: "Explore opportunities for new residential development within those areas of the City occupied by vacant or underutilized commercial or industrial uses."
SECTION 6. General Plan and Zoning Conclusions. The proposal conforms with the City's General Plan and the zoning regulations in the BMC as follows:
A. The proposed zoning designation is harmonious with the proposed GP land use designations and is consistent with the following policies and goals of the General Plan Land Use Element, based upon the findings in Section 4 of this Ordinance.
B. The proposed zoning designation is harmonious with the proposed GP land use designations and is consistent with the policies of the Mixed Use section of General Plan -- Land Use Element, based upon the findings in Section 4 of this Ordinance.
C. The proposed zoning designation is harmonious with the proposed GP land use designations and is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan — Housing Element, based upon the findings in Section 4 of this Ordinance.
D. The zoning designation of the Specific Plan is consistent with the Mixed Use land use designation of the General Plan.
SECTION 7. Specific Plan Findings. The City Council finds as follows:
A. That the amendment to the TODSP promotes public health, safety, and general welfare, and serves the goals and purposes of BMC Title 17.
The proposed amendments to the TODSP promote public health, safety, and general welfare, and serves the goals and purposes of BMC Title 17 in that: (1) future development within the project area will benefit from focused planning efforts whereby infrastructure, land use relationships, land use intensities, and public service needs will be carefully examined and planned In a comprehensive manner and the TODSP provides a mechanism to carry out such planning efforts; (2) the TODSP is a transit -supportive specific plan that -14-
City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1442
guides the future Iand use, mobility, and economic development in the area; (3) the TODSP provides a collective community vision and strategy for the area that regulates and uses and design policies and standards, identifies locations for potential infill development and expanded multirnodal transportation choices, and promotes a healthy lifestyle through the availability of active transportation options; and (4) the guidelines and standards set in the TODSP are derived from the goals and purposes of the City's GP and BMC Title 17.
B. That the proposed amendments to the TODSP are consistent with the goals, policies, of the GP, based upon the findings in Section 4 of this Ordinance.
C. That the amendments to the TODSP will not adversely affect surrounding properties.
The proposed amendments to the TODSP will not adversely affect surrounding properties in that it includes a number of Planning Areas that provides an option for the property to be developed and operated in compliance with the standard underlying zone or to take advantage of new provisions in the Planning Area (e.g., increased maximum building height, density, etc.), so long as certain standards are met. Furthermore, the TODSP allows the flexibility for specific parcels to be developed as a mixed use development, which furthers the City's interests in increasing its housing stock and considering different mechanisms to implement new innovations in housing and commercial endeavors.
SECTION 8. Zone Change Findings. Pursuant to BMC § 17.104.030, the City Council makes the following findings:
A. There are changed conditions since the existing zoning became effective to warrant other or additional zoning.
The City Council adopted a new Housing Element to accommodate its obligations to encourage housing in accordance with California law, This is a changed condition that justifies an amendment to the TODSP.
B. The proposed zone changes will not adversely affect adjoining properties as to value or precedent, and will not be detrimental, based upon the findings in Section 2 of this Ordinance.
C. The zone changes will be in the interest or furtherance of public health, safety and general welfare, based upon the findings in Section 2 of this Ordinance, D. That the approval of such zone changes will not adversely affect the Comprehensive Zoning Plan.
The approval of the proposed Zone Change is consistent with the goals and policies of the GP, based upon the findings in Section 4 of this Ordinance. The -15-
City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1 442
proposed Zone Change would allow for more viable opportunities within the project area and ensure future developments will comply with the development standards set forth within the Specific Plan and BMC.
SECTION 9. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Findings. Pursuant to BMC § 17.104.030, the City Council makes the following findings:
A. This proposed Ordinance will not adversely affect any property in the City as to value or precedent and will not be detrimental.
The proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment ("ZOTA") will not adversely affect any property in the City as to value or precedent and will not be detrimental to any area of the City, based upon the findings in Section 5 of this Ordinance. The proposed ZOTA simply intends to amend the boundaries within the TODSP, amend the TODSP regulations, and expand the boundaries of the TODSP. In addition to establishing a regulatory framework of future development and uses for certain properties located within 12 specific areas, as it pertains to the implementation of the Housing Element. Furthermore, the proposed changes to the TODSP do not affect any particular property. Rather, they are applicable to the Planning Areas and overlays within the TODSP area and Housing Opportunity Areas, respectively, and are intended to enhance property values of those properties within the Planning Areas and overlays.
B. The ZOTA will be in the interest or furtherance of public health, safety and general welfare.
This ZOTA promotes public health, safety and general welfare, by ensuring that future developments within the TODSP are built and designed to the highest standard, based upon the findings h- Section 7 of this Ordinance. Furthermore, the proposed regulations are in the interest and furtherance of public health, safety and general welfare in that it facilitates new development of underutilized properties thereby increasing the City's housing stock and value of private properties.
C. This ZOTA will not adversely affect the City's General Plan or zoning regulations set forth in the BMC,
D. The proposed ZOTA will not adversely affect the City's GP in that proposed ZOTA simply amends the existing boundaries within the TODSP, amends the TODSP regulations and expands the boundaries of the TODSP, creates new Housing Opportunity Areas consistent with the City's GP and adheres to changes in State laws.
-16-
City of Bellflower
Ordinance No, 1442
SECTION 10. Approval. Based on the above findings, the City Council approves the amendments to the Downtown Bellflower Transit Oriented Development Specific Plan ("TODSP") — Specific Plan No. 8, ZOTA 25-01, and ZC 25-01, as set forth in Exhibits "B" and "C" respectively, attached to this Ordinance and incorporated by this reference.
SECTION 11. Construction. This Ordinance must be broadly construed in order to achieve the purposes stated in this Ordinance. it is the City Council's intent that the provisions of this Ordinance be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Ordinance.
SECTION 12, Enforceability. Repeal of any provision of the BMC does not affect any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred before, or preclude prosecution and imposition of penalties for any violation occurring before this Ordinance's effective date. Any such repealed part will remain in full force and effect for sustaining action or prosecuting violations occurring before the effective date of this Ordinance.
SECTION 13, Validity of Previous Code Sections. If this entire Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any repeal or amendment of the BMC or other city ordinance by this Ordinance will be rendered void and cause such previous BMC provision or other city ordinance to remain in full force and effect for all purposes.
SECTION 14. Reliance on Record. Each and every one of the findings and determinations in this Ordinance are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the project. The fndings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.
SECTION 15. Limitations. The City Council's analysis and evaluation of the project is based on the best information currently available. it is inevitable that in evaluating a project that absolute and perfect knowledge of all possible aspects of the project will not exist. One of the major limitations on analysis of the project is the City Council's lack of knowledge of future events. In all instances, best efforts have been made to form accurate assumptions. Somewhat related to this are limitations on the City's ability to solve what are in effect regional, state, and national problems and issues. The City must work within the political framework within which it exists and with the limitations inherent in that framework.
SECTION 18. Severability. if any part of this Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provisions or applications and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable.
SECTION 17. Electronic Signatures. This Ordinance may be executed with electronic signatures in accordance with Government Code §16.5. Such electronic signatures will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature. -17-
City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1442
SECTION 18. Summaries of Information. All summaries of information in the findings, which precede this section, are based on the substantial evidence in the record.
The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact.
SECTION 19. Recordation. The City Clerk, or her duly appointed deputy, is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance; cause it to be entered into the City of Bellflower's book of original ordinances; make a rote of the passage and adoption in the records of this meeting; and, within fifteen (15) days after the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, cause it to be published or posted in accordance with California law.
SECTION 20. Effective Date. This Ordinance will take effect on the 30th day following its final passage and adoption.
ORDINANCE NO. 1442 HAD ITS FIRST READING ON FEBRUARY 10, 2025, ITS SECOND READING ON FEBRUARY 24, 2025, AND WAS DULY PASSED,
APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELLFLOWER AT ITS REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 24, 2025.
ATTEST:
Ray DUntO4 Mayor
arl H. Berger, I : Attorney
ATTACHME
Exhibit A: Zo ' g Map
Exhibit 8: + ` - « went
ODSP Document
-18-
Gl pBELLFtowE�
'CROWING TOG
staqp0rt 1 4-M
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
ATTENTION: Ryan Smoot, City Manager
FROM: Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of April 28, 2025, Regular Meeting of the City Council.
DATE: May 27, 2025
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
None
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL
1) Approve the April 28, 2025, Regular Meeting Minutes; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
ATTACHMENT
Minutes of the April 28, 2025, Regular Meeting. 2
1 CROWING TOLE•
MINUTES
CITY OF BELLFLOWER
REGULAR MEETING OF THE BELLFLOWER CITY COUNCIL
MONDAY, APRIL 28, 2025
BELLFLOWER CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5:30 P.M. CLOSED SESSION / 7:00 P.M. OPEN SESSION
5:30 P.M. - CLOSED SESSION
1 CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Dunton called the Regular Meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Bellflower City Hall, 16600 Civic Center Drive, Bellflower. 2 ROLL CALL
The following members of the City Council responded present to roll call:
Mayor Ray Dunton
Mayor Pro Tem Sonny R. Santa Ines
Council Member Dan Koops
Council Member Wendi Morse
Council Member Victor A. Sanchez
3 RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
For the record, 1) City Manager Smoot announced the titles of the Closed Session items; and 2) City Attorney Berger announced that there was a change to the property owner information listed on the agenda, noting that JJR Holdings, LLC is now the property owner.
There being no one from the public in attendance, without objection, Mayor Dunton recessed the Meeting at 5:33 p.m. to a Closed Session regarding:
A CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — INITIATION OF LITIGATION - GOVERNMENT CODE § 54956.9(d)(4). Number of Cases: One. Potential defendant and property listed below is not required by applicable law; voluntarily disclosed:
JJR Holdings, LLC Jame A c'andre; 9070 Artesia Boulevard, 9080 Artesia Boulevard, and 17427 Virginia Avenue.
For the record, Closed Session adjourned at 6:57 p.m.
2 Bellflower City Council Minutes
April 28, 2025
4 RECONVENE FOR OPEN SESSION
Item No. 4
Mayor Dunton reconvened the Meeting at 7:05 p.m. with all members present and announced that no reportable action was taken during Closed Session. 7:00 P.M. - OPEN SESSION
5 CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Dunton called the Open Session of the Regular City Council Meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
6 ROLL CALL
The following members of the City Council responded present to roll call:
Mayor Ray Dunton
Mayor Pro Tem Sonny R. Santa Ines
Council Member Dan Koops
Council Member Wendi Morse
Council Member Victor A. Sanchez
Staff Participants:
Ryan Smoot, City Manager
Karl H. Berger, City Attorney
Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
Len Gorecki, Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works Brian McNerney, Director of Public Safety
Elizabeth Oba, Director of Planning and Building Services Kathryn Brun, Associate Planner
Wangsu Lee, Assistant to the City Manager
Jennifer Russell, Management Assistant
7 INVOCATION
Mayor Pro Tem Sonny R. Santa Ines offered the Invocation. 8 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works Len Gorecki led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.
3 Bellflower City Council Minutes
April 28, 2025
9-A CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
Item No. 9
Mayor Dunton provided details relative to the City's celebration of National Small Business Week from May 4-10, 2025, by recognizing small businesses and encouraging residents to support local establishments throughout the week.
Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines provided details relative to the City's "Day of the Shred" event to be held on May 17, 2025, at Thompson Park, providing free document shredding services to residents on a first -come, first -served basis.
Council Member Sanchez provided details relative to the Bellflower Honors Program, which offers residents the opportunity to dedicate a street pole banner or an inscribed brick to honor local veterans.
Council Member Koops provided details relative to the City's Leadership, Experience and Development (LEAD) Program's eight -week, summer session open to students in the graduating classes of 2026 through 2029 with an application window of May 1 through June 6, 2025.
Council Member Morse provided details relative to the Bellflower Civic Chorus concert, "Feel Good Favorites," to be held on May 3-4, 2025, at the William and Jane Bristol Civic Auditorium.
9-B PRESENTATION: Certificates of Achievement for Student Art Festival Winners
Mayor Dunton and his City Council colleagues, along with Senator Bob Archuleta District Representative Karla Caceres, presented certificates of achievement to the 2025 Student Art Festival winners Aaliyah Vasques from St. Dominic Savio Elementary, Sofia Gatiglio from Valley Christian Elementary, Jacqueline Wang from Valley Christian Elementary, and Keyla Francia from Washington Elementary.
10 PUBLIC COMMENTS
Brian Barreto, External Affairs Manager at California American Water, 1) addressed the City Council to highlight the company's service in the Los Angeles region and its ongoing efforts to improve water reliability; 2) noted the company's acquisition of the Bellflower Municipal Water System in 2022, enhancing service to 1,800 homes and businesses; and 3) reported about recent and upcoming infrastructure improvements within the City of Bellflower.
Cheryl Williams, resident, in response to comments provided by Brian Baretto, expressed high praise for the crew from California American Water that completed a recent pipe installation project near her home and commended the team for immediately addressing any issues that arose for residents during the project. 4 Bellflower City Council Minutes
April 28, 2025
10 PUBLIC COMMENTS — Continued
Item No. 10
Toni Veltri, resident, expressed concern relative to 1) lack of pedestrian safety measures near McNab Avenue and Ron Yary Stadium, especially during weekend soccer matches; 2) recent mail theft and a lack of response from the Bellflower Post Office to address concerns such as the thief bypassing the master locks and a refusal to replace them; and 3) recent changes to the traffic signal at McNab Avenue and Alondra Boulevard resulting in a ten-minute wait.
In response to comments provided by Toni Veltri, Mayor Dunton stated that 1) Public Works staff was in the room, had heard the concerns, and would make any necessary changes; and 2) agreed with her concerns relative to mail theft, noting that all Council Members had also experienced mail theft.
Rick Cook, resident, requested and received confirmation from Mayor Dunton that public comments would be allowed during discussion of Item 13-A (Southern California Edison Lighting — Executive Tract).
11 PUBLIC HEARINGS
A Consideration and possible action to 1) conduct a public hearing to consider an appeal from Robert Preece (representing Design UA, Inc.) of the Planning Commission's adoption of Resolution No. PC 24-15; and 2) adopt Resolution No. 24-15 — A Resolution denying an appeal (AP -25-01) and upholding Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 24-15 denying Development Review (DR 3-24-15169) and Conditional Use Permit (CU -24-07) for the construction of a 3,786 -square -foot restaurant with a drive -through component located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard.
CEQA: The City reviewed the environmental impacts of the proposed Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq. "CEQA") and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal.
Code of Regs. §§ 15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines"). CEQA Guideline § 15061(b)(4) exempts projects that are disapproved or rejected. Should the City Council affirm the Planning Commission's decision and deny the DR and CUP, no further environmental review is required. If, however, the City Council opts to overturn the Planning Commission's decision and approve the project, it is still exempt pursuant to CEQA Guideline § 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) as the project is less than 10,000 square feet in floor area on a site zones for such use and not involving significant amounts of hazardous substances where all necessary public services and facilities are available, and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive.
For the record, City Manager Smoot introduced the item.
For the record, Council Member Morse 1) announced that she would recuse herself from this item due to a conflict of interest as her employer owns property within 1,000 feet of the subject property; and 2) left the dais and Council Chambers at 7:27 pm.
5 Bellflower City Council Minutes
April 28, 2025
11 PUBLIC HEARINGS — Continued
Item No. 11-A
A Consideration and possible action to 1) conduct a public hearing to consider an appeal from Robert Preece (representing Design UA, Inc.) of the Planning Commission's adoption of Resolution No. PC 24-15; and 2) adopt Resolution No. 24-15 — Continued
City Manager Smoot stated that City staff spoke with McDonald's representatives recently regarding concerns raised during the Planning Commission's review of the project and it was up to the City Council whether they would like to continue this matter or have staff present the item as scheduled.
For the record, 1) Mayor Dunton confirmed that staff could present the item first, prior to discussing whether it would be continued; and 2) Council Member Sanchez requested and received a point of clarification from Mayor Dunton that speakers in attendance would be able to provide public comments related to this item.
Associate Planner Kathryn Brun 1) provided a PowerPoint presentation of the Staff Report; and 2) responded to Council Members' questions along with City Manager Smoot, City Attorney Berger, and Director of Planning and Building Services Oba.
For the record, 1) Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines disclosed that he had an ex parte communication with a representative from McDonald's; and 2) Mayor Dunton, Council Member Koops, and Council Member Sanchez also disclosed that they had ex parte communications with consultants, the development team onsite, and a senator as well.
For the record, Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines 1) noted that he communicated with Viviana Gomez, Transportation Deputy for Supervisor Janice Hahn (Metro Board Chair), who confirmed the target completion date for the Southeast Gateway Line is 2035; and 2) Senator Archuleta's field representative Karla Caceres recently stated at a presentation that the Senator helped secure $231 million in state funding for the project.
For the record, at the request of Mayor Dunton, City Attorney Berger clarified that this is an appeal hearing and "de novo" process, and so the protocol would be to open the public hearing to receive new evidence as if the other hearing never occurred, beginning with the Appellant, and then ask the clarifying questions from there.
Following discussion, it was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines, seconded by Council Member Sanchez, and carried without objection, to open the public hearing.
City Attorney Berger, stated that since this was a public hearing, it requires the Appellant to testify first as part of the proceedings, followed by anyone else who would like to present testimony, and noted that the Appellant would be given twenty minutes to present.
6 Bellflower City Council Minutes
April 28, 2025
11 PUBLIC HEARINGS - Continued
Item No. 11-A
A Consideration and possible action to 1) conduct a public hearing to consider an appeal from Robert Preece (representing Design UA, Inc.) of the Planning Commission's adoption of Resolution No. PC 24-15; and 2) adopt Resolution No. 24-15 — Continued
Troy Stevenson, Appellant Representative, McDonald's, stated that he was formally requesting a continuance to allow time to evaluate the feasibility of a dedicated left -turn lane for the property, but offered to respond to any questions or provide testimony if the City Council wished to proceed.
City Attorney Berger, 1) stated that if the appellant is requesting a continuance, it is within the City Council's discretion to consider it; 2) suggested that, should the City Council choose to grant the continuance, members of the public who are unable to return at a future date be given an opportunity to provide testimony at this time; and 3) recommended that the City Council consider taking a straw vote to determine whether to proceed with the continuance or continue with the public hearing and allow the appellant to present their case.
At the request of Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines relative to any new information to justify the continuance of the item, Appellant Representative Stevenson 1) confirmed that there is the possibility of creating a dedicated left -turn lane for the subject property; 2) explained that this change would significantly impact the traffic conditions at the site, making it a substantial design change; and 3) clarified that the dedicated left -turn lane being discussed would be a broken, double -yellow, center median for northbound traffic and not a left -turn "pocket." City Manager Smoot, 1) suggested the City Council consider having the City's traffic engineers, as well as the Appellant's, review the proposed left -turn lane in detail, noting that there is an intersection in close proximity and parking on both sides of the street with limited street width; and 2) emphasized the importance of having data and analysis available for review before discussing the matter further.
City Attorney Berger, 1) apologized for intervening, but emphasized that this is a due process issue; 2) reminded the City Council that they are acting in a quasi-judicial role, the Appellant has filed an appeal, entitled now to make a case regarding why the Planning Commission's decision was wrong; 3) suggested that if the appellant is requesting a continuance, the Council take a straw vote to determine whether to allow the continuance; 4) expressed concern that the information being presented was speculative, as it had not been filed with the City or included in the evidence provided to the City Council in the item package; 5) stated that if the City Council wishes to proceed with the new information, the continuance should be granted; otherwise, the hearing should proceed.
Bellflower City Council Minutes
April 28, 2025
11 PUBLIC HEARINGS - Continued
Item No. 11-A
A Consideration and possible action to 1) conduct a public hearing to consider an appeal from Robert Preece (representing Design UA, Inc.) of the Planning Commission's adoption of Resolution No. PC 24-15; and 2) adopt Resolution No. 24-15 — Continued
Following discussion, it was the consensus of the City Council (Council Member Morse recused), to continue the public hearing to a future date.
City Attorney Berger 1) stated that any member of the public who could not come back to the continued public hearing should be allowed to provide testimony for the record, noting that they will not be able to provide any further testimony at the continued hearing; and 2) clarified that if the hearing is to be continued, a specific date must be set or public notice will need to be provided again for the continued public hearing.
For the record, City Manager Smoot, suggested the Public Hearing be continued to the May 12, 2025, City Council meeting.
At the request of Mayor Dunton, Appellant Representative Stevenson confirmed that the continuance to May 12, 2025, would be sufficient.
James Taylor, Jr., Taylor's Lock & Key (neighboring business), 1) stated that his business was established in 1977, provides lock and key, and security services, and had adequate parking arrangements with the previous Omni Office Products, but Brothers Janitorial took over the property and no longer allowed parking access; 2) stated that the area is overwhelmed with traffic as it is and the timing of traffic signals make it difficult to exit local establishments safely; 3) emphasized that Bellflower residents should not have to struggle to find parking just to get a meal or obtain local services, noting that there is an Edison easement with seven parking spaces that maybe should be reconsidered as public space in the future; 4) mentioned that his property is on the table for consideration by McDonald's if needed to create a third lane and driveway access for the northbound entrance; 5) expressed the opinion that a mixed -use development concept with business at ground level and apartments above would make the most sense for the property; and 6) at the request of Council Member Koops, stated that he is in favor of the project as long as they are considerate of Bellflower residents.
Following discussion, it was moved by Council Member Sanchez, seconded by Council Member Koops, and carried by the following roll call vote, to continue the Public Hearing to May 12, 2025:
AYES: Council Members — Sanchez, Santa Ines, Koops and
Mayor Dunton
RECUSE: Council Member — Morse
For the record, Council Member Morse returned to the Council Chambers and dais at 8:09 p.m.
8 Bellflower City Council Minutes
April 28, 2025
12 ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION
Item No. 12
None
13 CONSIDERATION ITEMS
A Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Southern California Edison for the acquisition of the City -owned streetlights within the Executive Tract neighborhood.
City Manager Smoot introduced the item.
Assistant City Manager/ Director of Public Works Gorecki 1) provided a PowerPoint presentation of the Staff Report; and 2) along with City Manager Smoot and City Attorney Berger, responded to Council Members' questions.
At the request of Council Member Sanchez, City Attorney Berger 1) explained the process for creating an assessment district which would include an Engineer's Report to determine what the assessment will be, noted that this may not be uniform for all parcels, and require all affected property owners to vote on the assessments; and 2) noted that the reimbursement period depends on the study and assessments, but a typical bond reimbursement period is 30 years.
For the record, City Manager Smoot further explained that the assessment report would be completed every year on an ongoing basis to reassess those costs.
At the request of Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines, Assistant City Manager/Director Gorecki confirmed that City staff can survey the property owners that would potentially be affected by this to see if they would be in favor of creating an assessment district before spending any additional funds on a consultant to complete a study.
At the request of Mayor Dunton, Assistant City Manager/Director Gorecki confirmed that the streetlights are currently off and not functional within the Executive Tract neighborhood.
Rick Cook, Executive Tract neighborhood resident, 1) expressed strong opposition to above -ground electrical lines, expressing the opinion that they are aesthetically unappealing; 2) expressed support for undergrounding utilities, noting that many local residents visit their neighborhood to walk, so any improvements would benefit the entire area; and 3) expressed his willingness to tax himself to eliminate visible wiring and would campaign for it in his neighborhood.
Sarah Miller, Executive Tract neighborhood resident, 1) expressed the opinion that changing to above -ground electrical wiring would be "going backwards," would disrupt the clean and charming look of their neighborhood, and undermine the work to modernize the area; and 2) at the request of Mayor Dunton, stated that she couldn't speak to the creation of an assessment district at the moment, noting that home owners spent a lot of money on their homes in that area. 9 Bellflower City Council Minutes
April 28, 2025
13 CONSIDERATION ITEMS — Continued
Item No. 13-A
A Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Southern California Edison for the acquisition of the City -owned streetlights within the Executive Tract neighborhood — Continued Urain Cook, Executive Tract neighborhood resident, 1) emphasized that underground utilities were a determining factor in purchasing her home, as it added to the neighborhood's appeal; 2) stated that she did not want to be assessed, noting that she already pays a tremendous amount to Edison; 3) expressed the opinion that switching to above -ground wiring was "going in the wrong direction;" 4) advocated for the future undergrounding of utilities, noting that it is expensive, but "that's what cities do;" and 5) suggested solar lighting be considered.
Lennae Kos, Executive Tract neighborhood resident, 1) expressed safety concerns and reported two recent vehicle theft attempts in the neighborhood, one of which was thwarted by a resident; 2) expressed the opinion that the approximate timeline of two years for new lighting installation was unacceptable; 3) requested and received clarification from Mayor Dunton that if the wires were to be installed above ground, that it would not go over her house; and 4) requested additional police presence in their neighborhood until they get lights.
In response to comments provided by Lennae Kos, 1) Mayor Dunton stated that Edison can install above -ground lighting within two months and the City has requested additional Sheriff's Department services, but there are currently no resources; and 2) at the request of Council Member Morse, Director of Public Safety McNerney confirmed that additional patrols could be deployed to the area to help maintain safety.
Cathy B. Hampton, resident, 1) stated that she resided in the "non -executive" area of Dunrobin Avenue which was adjacent to the neighborhood under discussion; and 2) requested and received clarification from Mayor Dunton that all of Dunrobin Avenue was not included in the subject area.
Cheryl Williams, resident, 1) requested and received clarification from Mayor Dunton relative to the available options for addressing the issue; 2) expressed the opinion that if an assessment district is established to fund underground utilities, that was "on their backs;" and 3) agreed that this neighborhood needs streetlights and above -ground wiring is unsightly, but expressed the opinion that she did not want her tax dollars to be spent for this purpose, noting that if Edison installed it, they should fix the problem. 10 Bellflower City Council Minutes
April 28, 2025
13 CONSIDERATION ITEMS — Continued
Item No. 13-A
A Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Southern California Edison for the acquisition of the City -owned streetlights within the Executive Tract neighborhood — Continued Doug Donovan, Executive Tract neighborhood resident, 1) indicated support for considering alternative lighting solutions; 2) suggested a new system could offer improved energy efficiency by providing more lumens with less wattage; 3) mentioned that if the existing infrastructure is in sufficient condition, perhaps the Santa Fe Springs subcontractor and City Engineer may be able to repair the existing infrastructure, as they were able to do a few years ago; and 4) referred to a previous City tax approved by voters for public safety, expressing the opinion that lighting is a safety issue.
Karen Whitmus, Executive Tract neighborhood resident, 1) stated that they bought their property because of the way it looked and wanted to maintain it like that, just as anyone else would want to, noting that former Council Members lived in the neighborhood; 2) expressed frustration with comments making property owners in this area seem like "elitest;" 3) suggested using solar lighting, which was mentioned at a community meeting three years ago; and 4) expressed the opinion that Edison was to blame, noting that their issues began after a transformer failure around Christmas time, and the City is not pushing hard enough to fix the existing infrastructure rather trying to replace it.
Darlene Palacios, resident, stated that she felt solar lighting has consistently been dismissed as an option by the City in past discussions and requested alternative solutions involving solar be explored for the Executive Tract area.
In response to comments provided by Darlene Palacios, Council Member Koops reminded her that the flashing pedestrian lights the City installed in her neighborhood are solar -powered.
In response to public comments relative to a community meeting held a few years ago, Assistant City Manager/Director Gorecki 1) confirmed a community meeting took place at Thompson Park a few years ago, residents in the neighborhood were invited to attend, it was attended by five or six residents, solar lighting was discussed, and the meeting lead to testing of different solar heads, models, and wattages; 2) stated that various solar lights have been installed around the City, noting the City parking lot on Artesia Boulevard behind Doughboys and Dunkin Donuts and the "Empower" parking lot (Flower Street); and 3) noted that solar lights do not provide the same illumination as traditional streetlights and encouraged the residents from the Executive Tract to review the solar lights to get a good sense of what that looks like, and confirmed he would include that information in the survey to residents.
11 Bellflower City Council Minutes
April 28, 2025
13 CONSIDERATION ITEMS — Continued
Item No. 13-A
A Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Southern California Edison for the acquisition of the City -owned streetlights within the Executive Tract neighborhood — Continued At the request of Council Member Koops, Assistant to the City Manager/ Director Gorecki confirmed that the City could have one solar light installed in the Executive Tract to serve as a test in the context of their own neighborhood at an approximate cost of $1,500.
Following discussion, it was moved by Council Member Morse, and seconded by Mayor Dunton, to direct staff to pursue Council Member Koops's suggestion of installing one solar light in the Executive Tract to serve as a test for further consideration of this matter and increase public safety presence in the area. The vote was taken following additional discussion.
At the request of City Manager Smoot for additional clarification with regard to staff direction, 1) Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines suggested that staff should wait for the analysis results of the light; 2) Mayor Dunton suggested staff work in parallel to evaluate whether new wiring could be pulled through the existing underground infrastructure; 3) Council Member Sanchez cautioned that if a solar option proved viable and economical for this neighborhood, the City Council may be asked to implement this in other areas of the City and requested staff look into LED lighting specifically; 4) Council Member Koops expressed the opinion that all affected residents should be informed about their options, including the cost of a possible assessment, if they want an assessment district created, noting that he is concerned about whether the lumens will be sufficient, but that will not be determined until tested.
Following discussion, 1) City Manager Smoot suggested staff evaluate all three options and present a comprehensive analysis so an informed decision could be made based on the costs and feasibility of each; 2) in response to Mayor Dunton relative to an informative letter and survey of the residents, City Manager Smoot confirmed that it could be done, noting the only caveat would be that the costs would still be unknown until more decisions are made as to whether an assessment district would be formed, which would require a formal engineer's assessment; and 3) Council Member Koops requested the 48 property owners be kept informed as to future meetings related to the matter; 4) Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines reiterated the need to conduct an informal survey first with preliminary cost estimates to measure the affected property owners' support for an assessment district before investing in a formal engineer assessment; and 5) City Manager Smoot confirmed that staff would explore viable alternative options and provide rough cost estimates to compile a survey outlining each option for residents to review.
12 Bellflower City Council Minutes
April 28, 2025
13 CONSIDERATION ITEMS — Continued
Item No. 13-A
A Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Southern California Edison for the acquisition of the City -owned streetlights within the Executive Tract neighborhood — Continued Fred L. Taylor, III, resident, expressed the opinion that if multiple solar lights were to be tested in the neighborhood, then they should be installed on the same side of the street in sequence to get a clear contrast of how they will illuminate the area compared to regular streetlights.
Following lengthy discussion, it was previously moved by Council Member Morse, previously seconded by Mayor Dunton, and carried by the following roll call vote, to direct staff to 1) explore alternative solutions to the streetlight outage within the Executive Tract neighborhood, including but not limited to LED lighting, solar lighting, and the creation of an assessment district to replace the existing infrastructure; 2) survey the affected property owners to determine whether they would want to create an assessment district and provide them with information and options relative to the issue, as well as notification of future meetings concerning the matter; and 3) provide information relative to available options and survey results to the City Council for further consideration of the matter:
AYES: Council Members — Morse, Sanchez, Santa Ines, Koops, and Mayor Dunton
B Consideration and possible action to: (1) waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1443 — An Ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Case No. ZOTA 25-01 amending various provisions of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Bellflower Municipal Code ("BMC") to implement the Housing Element; and (2) discuss the implementation of the State law pertaining to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).
City Manager Smoot introduced the item.
Director of Planning and Building Services Oba 1) provided a PowerPoint presentation of the Staff Report; 2) noted that if Ordinance No. 1443 is adopted it will be effective in 30 days, so if the City Council would like to make changes to the square footage, another ordinance would be brought back at the next meeting, coupled with an urgency ordinance so that it takes effect immediately; and 3) along with City Manager Smoot and City Attorney Berger, responded to Council Members' questions.
At the request of Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines, City Attorney Berger confirmed that the ordinance presented for approval is an accurate rendition of what state law provides of what you can do.
13 Bellflower City Council Minutes
April 28, 2025
13 CONSIDERATION ITEMS — Continued
Item No. 13-B
B Consideration and possible action to: (1) waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1443 — Continued
At the request of Council Member Sanchez, 1) Director Oba confirmed that if state law changes, the City is obligated to comply regardless of what the municipal code states; however, explained that the municipal code is written in a way that incorporates state law, so changes are automatically deferred to state law; and 2) City Attorney Berger further clarified that, a) if the City Council proceeds with the adoption of the ordinance and it becomes effective, then the City will be required to comply with state law regarding any changes in Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) regulations; b) if the City adopts different regulations, the issue of whether a charter city must comply with state mandates remains unresolved and reiterated that the City is now a charter city.
Council Member Sanchez, 1) stated that the concern primarily lies with multi -family developments and where ADUs are being implemented; 2) emphasized the importance of considering parking impacts, noting that ADUs often result in the loss of parking spaces; and 3) proposed postponing a decision on the item to first explore options for responsible developers specifically, allowing those who can provide parking to opt into the option of permitting a maximum of four ADUs and conversion.
Following discussion, City Manager Smoot 1) stated that while such an approach may be possible, it would require further study; and 2) suggested adopting Ordinance No. 1443 and bring back urgency ordinances for further consideration.
For the record, City Attorney Berger clarified that unless a building permit has been issued, changes to zoning and related regulations can affect projects even if they are still in the application stage and explained that there is no vested interest for the applicant.
At the request of Council Member Sanchez, City Manager Smoot and City Attorney Berger reiterated that the recommendation is to adopt Ordinance No. 1443 as presented and give staff direction to return with additional ordinances to make additional changes as to square footage and conversion ADUs, noting the importance of ensuring proper implementation of the housing element.
Following discussion, it was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines, seconded by Council Member Koops, and carried by the following roll call vote, to 1) waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1443; 2) direct staff to draft an urgency ordinance and regular ordinance to amend the maximum allowable square footage for ADUs from 800 sq. ft. to 1,200 sq. ft.; 3) direct staff to draft an urgency ordinance and regular ordinance to allow the City Council to further consider additional flexibility related to the maximum number of ADUs allowed; and 4) continue the matter to May 12, 2025, for further consideration:
AYES: Council Members — Morse, Sanchez, Santa Ines, Koops, and Mayor Dunton
14 Bellflower City Council Minutes
April 28, 2025
14 CONSENT CALENDAR
Item No. 14
For the record, Council Member Koops announced that he would recuse himself from Item 14-F (Agreement File No. 809.3, Southstar Engineering & Consulting) due to a potential conflict of interest as he owns property within 500 feet of the subject property.
For the record, Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines requested that Item 14-E (Lease Agreement File No. 1087 with Mariah Lin dba The Rhizophora Post) be pulled for comment only.
Relative to Item 14-E, at the request of Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines, Director of Economic Development DellaLonga 1) confirmed that the applicant for Kiosk A is operating this business for the first time; and 2) confirmed that the applicant had not attended one of the City's seminars for entrepreneurs and they would be encouraged to attend one of the seminars in the future.
Noting Council Member Koops's recusal on Item 14-F and following discussion, it was moved by Mayor Dunton, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines, and carried without objection, to approve the actions stipulated on the Consent Calendar.
A Consideration and possible action to receive and file Warrant Register No. 25-102, dated April 28, 2025.
Action: Received and filed Warrant Register No. 25-102.
B Consideration and possible action to receive and file Treasurer's Report for the Month of March 2025.
Action: Received and filed Treasurer's Report.
C Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute Agreement File No. 752.1, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with Michael Baker International, to provide an assessment of the Caruthers Park Regional Stormwater Capture and Infiltration System.
CEQA: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.) and CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, §§ 15000, et seq.), the City conducted an environmental assessment. Based on the environmental assessment, the project was determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15303 (Class 1 — Existing Facilities).
Action: Authorized the City Manager to execute Agreement File No. 752.1, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with Michael Baker International.
D Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of the April 14, 2025, Regular Meeting of the City Council.
Action: Approved the April 14, 2025, Regular Meeting Minutes. 15 Bellflower City Council Minutes
April 28, 2025
14 CONSENT CALENDAR — Continued
Item No. 14
E Consideration and possible action to receive and file Lease Agreement File No. 1087 with Mariah Lin dba The Rhizophora Post for lease of property at 16552 Bellflower Boulevard, identified as Kiosk A.
Action: Received and filed Lease Agreement File No. 1087.
F Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute Agreement File No. 809.3, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with Southstar Engineering & Consulting, Inc., to provide construction management and inspection services for the Bellflower Youth and Senior Center Project.
Action: Authorized the City Manager to execute Agreement File No. 809.3 with Southstar Engineering & Consulting, Inc., in a form approved by the City Attorney. 15 COUNCIL REPORTS
For the record, pursuant to AB 1234, Council Member Sanchez reported on his recent official travel to the League of California Cities City Leaders Summit on April 23-25, 2025, in Sacramento, California, to 1) speak in front of an audience of 250 leaders from across the State on behalf of the City and the region regarding Housing Assistance Program (HAP) funding for homeless housing services that we have struggled to receive and retain for the New Hope homeless shelter operations; 2) advocate for Prop 36 (Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and Theft Reduction Act) funding and the implementation of it sooner rather than later; and 3) meet with Senator Bob Archuletta, Assemblymember Jose Luis Solache, and a few other legislators from other regions. State law requires that local government officials report on their official travel activities when public funds are expended.
Therefore, Council Member Sanchez's report was made pursuant to California Government Code Sections 53232.2 and 53232.3 and Bellflower Resolution No. 06-02.
Council Member Sanchez, Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines, Council Member Koops and Mayor Dunton made various comments and reports.
16 ADJOURNMENT
Without objection, Mayor Dunton adjourned the meeting at 10:05 p.m. to the next Regular Meeting of the Bellflower City Council at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, May 12, 2025.
Attest:
Ray Dunton, Mayor Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
City of Bellflower Approved: May 27, 2025
16 Cs -'1 p LLFLO ,
CROWING TOGS' •
r
staff
eport
p.
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
ATTENTION: Ryan Smoot, City Manager
FROM: Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of the May 12, 2025, Special Meeting of the City Council.
DATE: May 12, 2025
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
None
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL
1) Approve the May 12, 2025, Special Meeting Minutes; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
ATTACHMENT
Minutes of the May 12, 2025, Special Meeting... 2
1 G,I o LL FL 0w�R
-WING 'roof- • -
MINUTES
CITY OF BELLFLOWER
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BELLFLOWER CITY COUNCIL
MONDAY, MAY 12, 2025, 4:00 P.M.
BELLFLOWER CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1 CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Dunton called the Special Meeting to order at 4:07 p.m. 2 ROLL CALL
The following Members of the City Council responded present to roll call:
Mayor Ray Dunton
Mayor Pro Tem Sonny R. Santa Ines
Council Member Dan Koops
Council Member Wendi Morse
Council Member Victor A. Sanchez
Staff Participants:
Ryan Smoot, City Manager
Karl H. Berger, City Attorney
Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
Len Gorecki, Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works Tae Rhee, Director of Finance
Anna Garan, Finance Manager
Brian McNerney, Director of Public Safety
Wangsu Lee, Assistant to the City Manager
Dakota Wallace, Management Assistant
3 PUBLIC COMMENTS
For the record, there was no one in attendance wishing to provide public comments.
2 Bellflower City Council Special Meeting Minutes
May 12, 2025
4 BUDGET STUDY SESSION
Item No. 4-A
A Consideration and possible action to approve adjustments to the Proposed Budget for Fiscal Years 2025-2027.
Finance Manager Garan 1) provided a report of the modifications to the proposed budget; and 2) responded to Council Members' questions along with City Manager Smoot, Director of Public Safety McNerney, and Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works Gorecki.
For the record, City Manager Smoot added that minor inconsequential modifications were made to the Drug Education/Rehabilitation Fund of about $1,000 or so for City special events.
For the record, and without objection, Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines requested annual reports of 1) how many trees were planted and removed citywide; and 2) how much is spent for a grant writer and how much grant funding is received.
At the request of Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines, Finance Manager Garan clarified that the proposed budget modifications impact the General Fund and the General Fund Capital Projects Fund, demonstrating that there is a 1) decrease of $204,045 in Fiscal Year 2025-26 and $208,085 in Fiscal Year 2026-27 to the General Fund surplus for the restoration of the Bellflower Sister City, Inc., budget and increase of funding for Public Safety services; and 2) decrease of $200,000 in Fiscal Year 2025-26 and $100,000 in Fiscal Year 2026-27 to the General Fund Capital Projects Fund surplus for the Bellflower Boulevard Street Lighting project and planting of additional trees.
Council Member Koops expressed support for purchasing technology for public safety, such as "ShotSpotter" and/or "ALPR cameras," reiterating that this technology would be a supplemental option to increase public safety services due to the lack of resources provided by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.
At the request of Council Member Sanchez, Director of Public Safety McNerney clarified that the purchase of additional "ALPR cameras" is included in the proposed budget, confirming that the additional cameras will be placed at "main entry points" throughout the City.
Relative to traffic management projects (Account No. 51606), 1) Council Member Sanchez a) reiterated his opinion that $75,000 is not sufficient to assist with traffic calming measures and does not demonstrate that the City is actively working on addressing the concerns of residents, highlighting that the City Council received written communication from a resident regarding traffic concerns earlier in the day; and b) proposed a budget of $150,000 annually for citywide traffic calming measures; and 2) City Manager Smoot a) stated that the proposed budget allocates $75,000 for traffic calming measures to complete a site -specific concept for the designated block of Park Street to Flower Street and Ardmore Avenue to Clark Street that examines the entire geographical area to mitigate and solve the problems identified in previous relative studies; and b) clarified that the allocation of $75,000 is sufficient to conduct the required studies and/or implementation of certain traffic calming measures.
3 Bellflower City Council Special Meeting Minutes
May 12, 2025
4 BUDGET STUDY SESSION — Continued
Item No. 4-A
A Consideration and possible action to approve adjustments to the Proposed Budget for Fiscal Years 2025-2027 — Continued
For the record, 1) Council Member Sanchez expressed the opinion that the proposed traffic calming measures to complete the site -specific concept for the designated block should be done; however, additional funding for citywide traffic calming measures, such as the implementation of cameras or signage, should be allocated in the proposed budget as well; 2) Council Member Morse expressed support in allocating additional funding to develop solutions and alleviate the traffic concerns, noting that speeding occurs in her neighborhood and is a concern of the residents; 3) at the request of Mayor Dunton, Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works Gorecki stated that one radar feedback sign is approximately $10,000; however, the cost is dependent on the location and electrical needs; and 4) Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines suggested that the City Council wait for the results of the proposed study before allocating additional funding, further expressing that he cannot support the allocation of additional funding towards a non-specific project, noting that the budget may be amended in the future if additional funding for a specific project is needed.
In response to questions and comments provided by Council Member Sanchez and Mayor Dunton, Finance Manager Garan clarified that projects for traffic improvements, such as signage, are paid out of the General Fund Street Signs Account (Account No. 010-43180-3100), not the Traffic Management Projects Account.
For the record, it was moved by Council Member Sanchez, seconded by Council Member Koops, to allocate $150,000 annually for citywide traffic calming measures. The vote was taken following additional discussion.
For the record, relative to the motion on the floor, 1) Mayor Dunton a) expressed concern with allocating additional funding for a non-specific project, highlighting that if the additional funds are not fully spent, the funding cannot be disbursed to other line items or accounts due to restrictions; and b) stated he would like to see traffic enforcement conducted by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department to better assist with traffic calming and safety; 2) Council Member Morse reiterated that the funding may be used to develop solutions to assist with traffic calming citywide and could be utilized to purchase signage; and 3) Council Member Koops expressed support in allocating additional funding specific to traffic calming measures, expressing the opinion that changes to the current traffic patterns must be made to keep children in the community safe.
At the request of Council Member Koops and Mayor Dunton, 1) Assistant City Manager/Director Gorecki stated that a radar feedback sign may assist with traffic calming; however, feedback from residents may vary, noting that a radar feedback sign was recently placed on Rosecrans Avenue approximately four to five months ago and no feedback has been received; and 2) Finance Manager Garan stated that the $75,000 currently allocated for traffic calming measures is funded by Measure M, further clarifying that the reallocation of these funds must be used in accordance with Measure M guidelines; however, Measure M funds in addition to the General Fund surplus may be utilized to implement certain traffic calming measures.
4 Bellflower City Council Special Meeting Minutes
May 12, 2025
4 BUDGET STUDY SESSION — Continued
Item No. 4-A
A Consideration and possible action to approve adjustments to the Proposed Budget for Fiscal Years 2025-2027 — Continued
Following lengthy discussion, Council Member Sanchez amended his original motion, seconded by Council Member Koops, and carried by the following roll call vote, to allocate $75,000 to the General Fund Street Signs Account (Account No. 010-43180-3100) for citywide traffic calming measures:
AYES: Council Members — Koops, Morse, and Sanchez
NOES: Council Members — Santa Ines and Mayor Dunton
5 ADJOURNMENT
Without objection, Mayor Dunton adjourned the meeting at 4:47 p.m.
Ray Dunton, Mayor
City of Bellflower
ATTEST:
Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
Approved: May 27, 2025
5 GtC`I ov B LLFLO ,
CROWING TOGS' •
r
staff
eport
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
ATTENTION: Ryan Smoot, City Manager
FROM: Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of the May 12, 2025, Regular Meeting of the City Council.
DATE: May 27, 2025
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
None
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL
1) Approve the May 12, 2025, Regular Meeting Minutes; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
ATTACHMENT
Minutes of the May 12, 2025, Regular Meeting 2
1 do o LLFt 0,
CROWING TOGE•-
MINUTES
CITY OF BELLFLOWER
REGULAR MEETING OF THE BELLFLOWER CITY COUNCIL
MONDAY, MAY 12, 2025
BELLFLOWER CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5:30 P.M. CLOSED SESSION / 7:00 P.M. OPEN SESSION
5:30 P.M. - CLOSED SESSION
1 CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Dunton called the Regular Meeting to order at 5:31 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Bellflower City Hall, 16600 Civic Center Drive, Bellflower. 2 ROLL CALL
The following members of the City Council responded present to roll call:
Mayor Ray Dunton
Mayor Pro Tem Sonny R. Santa Ines
Council Member Dan Koops
Council Member Wendi Morse
Council Member Victor A. Sanchez
3 Consideration and possible action to appoint Deputy City Attorney N. Richard Shreiba as an additional Labor Negotiator for the City.
Following brief discussion, it was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines, seconded by Council Member Koops, and carried by the following roll call vote, to appoint Deputy City Attorney N. Richard Shreiba as an additional Labor Negotiator for the City:
AYES: Council Members — Sanchez, Santa Ines, Koops, Morse, and Mayor Dunton
4 RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
For the record, City Manager Smoot announced the titles of the Closed Session items.
2 Bellflower City Council Minutes
May 12, 2025
4 RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION — Continued
Item No. 4
There being no one from the public in attendance, without objection, Mayor Dunton recessed the Meeting at 5:33 p.m. to a Closed Session regarding:
A CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
(Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6)
Agency Negotiator:
Employee Organization
City Manager, City Attorney, Deputy City Attorney
N. Richard Shreiba
All represented employee bargaining units.
B CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR
(Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8)
Property:
Agency Negotiator:
Negotiating Party:
Under Negotiation:
17046 Bellflower Boulevard (APN 7109-025-002)
Ryan Smoot, City Manager
Euclid Hazard Capital, LLC; Artes Capital
Price and terms of payment
For the record, Closed Session adjourned at 6:13 p.m.
5 RECONVENE FOR OPEN SESSION
Mayor Dunton reconvened the Meeting at 7:03 p.m. with all members present and announced that no reportable action was taken during Closed Session. 7:00 P.M. - OPEN SESSION
6 CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Dunton called the Open Session of the Regular City Council Meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.
7 ROLL CALL
The following members of the City Council responded present to roll call:
Mayor Ray Dunton
Mayor Pro Tem Sonny R. Santa Ines
Council Member Dan Koops
Council Member Wendi Morse
Council Member Victor A. Sanchez
3 Bellflower City Council Minutes
May 12, 2025
7 ROLL CALL — Continued
Item No. 7
Staff Participants:
Ryan Smoot, City Manager
Karl H. Berger, City Attorney
Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
Len Gorecki, Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works Jim Dellalonga, Director of Economic Development
P.J. Mellana, Director of Parks and Recreation
Elizabeth Oba, Director of Planning and Building Services Rowena Genilo-Concepcion, Planning Manager
Kathryn Brun, Associate Planner
Wangsu Lee, Assistant to the City Manager
Dakota Wallace, Management Assistant
8 INVOCATION
Council Member Dan Koops offered the Invocation.
9 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Director of Planning and Building Services Elizabeth Oba led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.
10-A CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mayor Dunton provided details relative to the video recording of the City's BRAVO Awards ceremony made available to the public for viewing on the City's YouTube channel, website, and Spectrum Cable Channel 36.
Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines provided details relative to the Parks & Recreation Department's Leadership Experience and Development ("LEAD") Program with applications for the eight -week summer session accepted through June 6, 2025.
Council Member Morse provided details relative to the City's Certified Farmers Market held every Monday from 3:00 to 7:00 p.m. at Town Center Plaza.
Council Member Sanchez provided details relative to the free in -person programs held in May at the Clifton M. Brakensiek Library located at 9945 Flower Street.
Council Member Koops provided details relative to the City's "Day of the Shred" Event to be held on May 17, 2025, at Thompson Park, providing free document shredding services to residents on a first -come, first -served basis. 4 Bellflower City Council Minutes Item No. 10-B
May 12, 2025 Page 4 of 17
10-B PRESENTATION: Proclamation Declaring May 18 — 24, 2025, as "National Public Works Week"
Mayor Dunton and his City Council colleagues declared the week of May 18 — 24, 2025, as National Public Works Week in the City of Bellflower and presented the proclamation to Bellflower Public Works Department Employees Luciano De Leon and Andrew Ricard.
Luciano De Leon accepted the proclamation and thanked the City Council for their recognition of their service.
10-C PRESENTATION: Proclamation Declaring the month of May as "Asian American and Pacific Islander Month"
Mayor Dunton and his City Council colleagues declared the month of May as Asian American and Pacific Islander Month in the City of Bellflower and presented the proclamation to Assistant to the City Manager Wangsu Lee.
Assistant to the City Manager Lee accepted the proclamation and thanked the City Council for their recognition.
11 PUBLIC COMMENTS
For the record, written public comments were received from Ace Elchico prior to the start of the meeting and were provided to the City Council and made available to the public.
Laurene Duke, Total Wellness Dentistry, expressed public safety concerns stemming from increased homelessness in the vicinity of her business on Clark Avenue and Oak Street, stating 1) the number of homeless individuals in the area has increased significantly in the last three years, noting that she has had physical and verbal altercations with homeless individuals that congregate around her office, resulting in her and her employees not being able to enter the facility to conduct business; 2) she has contacted the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department for assistance; however, the response time is delayed and takes approximately two hours for a Deputy to arrive at the scene; and 3) requested that additional patrols be conducted in the area and business owners and residents be notified of City encampment cleanups so that they can better protect their properties from displaced homeless individuals.
In response to comments provided by Laurene Duke, 1) Mayor Dunton confirmed that the area is currently patrolled by Southwest Patrol and suggested she speak with Director of Public Safety McNerney regarding the matter; and 2) Council Member Koops clarified that Southwest Patrol conducts citywide patrols at different hours of the day and night, confirmed that Public Safety would patrol the area more frequently, and thanked her for the longevity of her business in the City.
5 Bellflower City Council Minutes
May 12, 2025
11 PUBLIC COMMENTS — Continued
Item No. 11
Priscilla Brown, resident, expressed public safety concerns in the vicinity of Clark Avenue and Oak Street, stating the opinion that 1) in support of the previous speaker's comments, homelessness in the area is a concern; and 2) she does not want business owners that positively impact the City to leave due to public safety concerns.
Ace Elchico, resident, expressed public safety concerns in the vicinity of Liggett Street and Cabell Avenue, including vehicles speeding at various hours of the day and night, 1) noted he provided written public comments prior to the start of the meeting to demonstrate the speeding that occurs in his neighborhood on a daily basis; 2) stated he has contacted the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and Public Safety Department regarding the matter, but has yet to find a resolution; and 3) suggested the City consider adding speed bumps or additional patrols in the area to assist with the traffic concerns.
In response to comments provided by Ace Elchico, Mayor Dunton 1) suggested he speak with Director of Public Safety McNerney regarding the matter; 2) explained that the City has budgeted additional funding for increased Deputy patrol, such as a traffic car; however, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department is unable to fill vacant positions; and 3) confirmed that the City Council received his written public comments prior to the start of the meeting.
Darlene Palacios, resident, 1) stated that she has witnessed multiple street takeovers in the recent past and asked what the City is doing to prevent them; and 2) explained that the sidewalks in her neighborhood have been recently repaired; however, weeds have grown through the cracks, expressing the opinion that this may cause a tripping hazard.
In response to comments provided by Darlene Palacios, Mayor Dunton suggested she speak with Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works Gorecki regarding her concerns relative to the sidewalk repairs.
John Williams, resident, expressed noise concerns with the neighboring business located on Bellflower Boulevard and Pacific Avenue, stating 1) car alarms are set off at various hours of the day and night, noting that multiple alarms may be set off at one time and ring for long periods of time; 2) he was informed by staff at the business that certain alarms cannot be disengaged due to the model of the vehicle, so there is little they can do to prevent the alarms from being triggered; and 3) he has spoken with the business owner and Code Enforcement, but has yet to find a resolution.
In response to comments provided by John Williams and at the request of Mayor Dunton, City Manager Smoot requested Mr. Williams's contact information so that staff can contact him to gather more information regarding the matter. 6 Bellflower City Council Minutes
May 12, 2025
11 PUBLIC COMMENTS — Continued
Item No. 11
Eileen, resident, expressed noise concerns with the neighboring business located on Bellflower Boulevard and Pacific Avenue, stating that 1) she is a tenant of the previous speaker and noted that the alarms are typically triggered between 5:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.; 2) the issue began approximately three years ago, but they have not been able to find a resolution; and 3) cars speed out of the parking structure at various hours of the day and night, requesting the City implement traffic calming measures to prevent speeding in the area.
12 PUBLIC HEARINGS
A Consideration and possible action to adopt Resolution No. 25-14 — A Resolution approving a Substantial Amendment to the Fiscal Year 2020-2021 ("FY") Annual Action Plan to reprogram unused Community Development Block Grant Coronavirus Relief funds ("CDBG-CV") for the redesign of the public sidewalk located at TownCenter Gateway Plaza on the northeast corner of Belmont Street and Bellflower Boulevard to encourage social distancing. (Continued from April 14, 2025)
City Manager Smoot introduced the item.
Director of Economic Development DellaLonga 1) provided a PowerPoint presentation of the Staff Report; and 2) along with City Manager Smoot and Consultant Ana LeNoue of Avant -Garde, Inc., responded to Council Members' questions.
At the request of Council Member Koops, Director DellaLonga explained that the redesign of the TownCenter Gateway Plaza would include the removal of trees, repair of sidewalks, and the replacement of benches with other amenities in order to create social distancing, noting that the Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") requires a mandatory COVID-19 "tieback" in which the reprogramming of the unused funds must be directly tied to helping communities prevent, prepare for, and respond to the direct and indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.
At the request of Council Member Koops, Consultant LeNoue explained that supporting documentation and financials are required for recipients to receive a business grant through CDBG-CV funds, expressing the opinion that it is difficult for recipients to provide proper documentation based on HUD's guidelines, as they need to show proof of financial status prior to and after the pandemic.
Bellflower City Council Minutes
May 12, 2025
12 PUBLIC HEARINGS — Continued
Item No. 12-A
A Consideration and possible action to adopt Resolution No. 25-14 — Continued For the record, Council Member Sanchez expressed the opinion that the City Council should consider reprogramming the unused funds to create a new outdoor space or pocket park.
At the request of Council Member Sanchez, relative to the proposed "New Neighborhood Park/Rec site at 9443 Artesia Boulevard" and "Palm Street Park Fitness or Amenity Zone Activation," 1) Director of Parks and Recreation Mellana a) confirmed that both subject properties are City -owned; b) clarified that the implementation of a pocket park at 9443 Artesia Boulevard would be approximately one million dollars, noting that Measure A funds in addition to the unused CDBG-CV funds could be utilized to fully fund the project; and c) stated that additional funding for the implementation of a new fitness zone at Palm Street Park would be needed as the project will likely cost more than the unused CDBG-CV funds; 2) Director DellaLonga confirmed that the CDGB-CV funds must be expended by November of 2026; and 3) Consultant LeNoue confirmed that renovating an existing park to better utilize space and encourage social distancing would be an eligible use of the CDBG-CV funds; however, the park must be in a low -and -moderate -income area and cannot already be budgeted for improvements.
For the record, 1) Mayor Dunton expressed frustration with creating a new park at 9443 Artesia Boulevard or fitness zone at Palm Street park, expressing the opinion that homelessness in the subject areas is an issue and the creation of a new space would allow for more homeless individuals to congregate in those areas; 2) Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines suggested the City Council look into renovating the Picnic Shelter area at Simms Park, further suggesting that the CDBG- CV funds could be used for the renovation of the Picnic Shelter and any remaining funds could be utilized for the redesign of the TownCenter Gateway Plaza; and 3) at the request of Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines, Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works Gorecki clarified that the proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2025-27 allocates funding for improvements to the Picnic Shelter at Simms Park, so the proposed project would be ineligible per HUD's guidelines.
For the record, Council Member Sanchez suggested reprogramming the unused funds for the redesign of Friendship Square which could include the removal of the existing fountain and addition of benches to create social distancing.
Following brief discussion, 1) City Manager Smoot suggested the City Council direct staff to look into allocating the unused funds for a specific project, such as the redesign of Friendship Square, to ensure the HUD deadline requirements are being met, noting that the matter will come back to the City Council at a date certain for formal adoption; and 2) Director DellaLonga confirmed that the funds may be utilized for the design and/or construction of a project. 8 Bellflower City Council Minutes
May 12, 2025
12 PUBLIC HEARINGS — Continued
Item No. 12-A
A Consideration and possible action to adopt Resolution No. 25-14 — Continued For the record, Council Member Koops expressed support in reprogramming the unused funds for the redesign of Friendship Square, further suggesting that if the funds are not fully expended for that project, the City Council should consider utilizing the remaining funds for the removal of the trees and sidewalk repair at the TownCenter Gateway Plaza.
In response to questions and comments provided by Council Member Koops and Mayor Dunton, 1) City Manager Smoot reiterated that the City Council should reprogram the unused funds for one project only as the HUD guidelines and requirements are extensive; and 2) Director DellaLonga confirmed that staff will come back to the City Council for formal approval to reprogram the unused funds at the May 27, 2025, Regular City Council Meeting.
Following discussion, it was moved by Council Member Sanchez, seconded by Council Member Koops, and carried without objection, to re -open the continued public hearing.
Sophia Partida stated that she was in favor of the City utilizing the funds towards improvements at "Laurel Plaza" or Friendship Square located outside of Pirate Park.
Following discussion, it was moved by Council Member Koops, seconded by Council Member Sanchez, and carried without objection, to close the public hearing.
It was moved by Council Member Sanchez, seconded by Council Member Koops, and carried by the following roll call vote, to 1) direct staff to look into reallocating the unused CDBG-CV funds for the redesign of Friendship Square; and 2) continue the Public Hearing to May 27, 2025:
AYES: Council Members — Sanchez, Santa Ines, Koops, Morse, and Mayor Dunton
9 Bellflower City Council Minutes
May 12, 2025
12 PUBLIC HEARINGS — Continued
Item No. 12-B
B Consideration and possible action to 1) conduct a public hearing to consider an appeal from Robert Preece (representing Design UA, Inc.) of the Planning Commission's adoption of Resolution No. PC 24-15; and 2) adopt Resolution No. 25-15 — A Resolution denying an appeal (AP -25-01) and upholding Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 24-15 denying Development Review (DR 3-24-15169) and Conditional Use Permit (CU -24-07) for the construction of a 3,786 -square -foot restaurant with a drive -through component located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard. (Continued from April 28, 2025)
CEQA: The City reviewed the environmental impacts of the proposed Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq. "CEQA") and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regs. §§ 15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines"). CEQA Guideline § 15061(b)(4) exempts projects that are disapproved or rejected. Should the City Council affirm the Planning Commission's decision and deny the DR and CUP, no further environmental review is required. If, however, the City Council opts to overturn the Planning Commission's decision and approve the project, it is still exempt pursuant to CEQA Guideline § 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) as the project is less than 10,000 square feet in floor area on a site zones for such use and not involving significant amounts of hazardous substances where all necessary public services and facilities are available, and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive.
City Manager Smoot introduced the item.
For the record, Council Member Morse 1) announced that she would recuse herself from Item 12-B as she has property interests within 1,000 feet of the subject property; and 2) left the dais and Council Chambers at 8:12 p.m.
Director of Planning and Building Services Oba 1) provided a verbal report of the Staff Report; and 2) along with City Manager Smoot and City Attorney Berger, responded to Council Members' questions.
It was moved by Council Member Koops, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines, and carried without objection, to re -open the continued public hearing.
For the record, the following individuals introduced themselves, spoke in opposition to adopting Resolution No. 25-15, and responded to Council Members' questions:
• Troy Stevenson, Appellant Representative, Design UA, Inc. • Patti Yuen, Franchise Owner/Operator, McDonald's Corporation • Robert Yu, Traffic Engineer, Design UA, Inc.
10 Bellflower City Council Minutes
May 12, 2025
12 PUBLIC HEARINGS — Continued
Item No. 12-B
B Consideration and possible action to 1) conduct a public hearing to consider an appeal from Robert Preece (representing Design UA, Inc.) of the Planning Commission's adoption of Resolution No. PC 24-15; and 2) adopt Resolution No. 25-15 — Continued
For the record, Appellant Representative Stevenson 1) stated Design UA, Inc., intends to invest in the City of Bellflower, noting that the recently built McDonald's on Artesia Boulevard and Woodruff Avenue was the first "on the go" concept in the United States, highlighting that the intent is to create a similar restaurant at the proposed site; 2) explained the proposed project has been designed so traffic patterns would not be impacted, further noting that City staff recommended the approval of the project to the Planning Commission with modifications to the landscape, pedestrian access, and parking, which were adhered to; 3) expressed the opinion that the proposed project is the only viable project for this site, noting that if a residential development was built on the subject site, it would negatively affect nearby business owners and residents; 4) stated that "McDonald's will generate millions of dollars in revenue per year which translates to hundreds of thousands in sales tax revenue for the City;" and 5) confirmed Design UA, Inc., agrees to a) schedule off peak delivery times to mitigate traffic congestion, if required; and b) install delineators on Bellflower Boulevard directly in front of the site, if required.
For the record, Franchise Owner/Operator Yuen 1) introduced herself as the Franchise Owner/Operator of the McDonald's located on Artesia Boulevard and Woodruff Avenue, as well as the proposed Franchise Owner/Operator of the subject site; 2) explained that the intent is to create a modern and efficient fast food service while also supporting residents in the City, highlighting that McDonald's partners with local programs to support children and families in the local area; 3) highlighted that the security cameras and lighting have been recently upgraded at the location on Artesia Boulevard and Woodruff Avenue, noting that the proposed site will have the same equipment and standard of maintenance and cleanliness; and 4) stated that McDonald's recently purchased three properties in the City to provide subsidized housing for mid -management employees of the corporation, reiterating that the goal of the corporation is to provide support and grow leaders from within the community.
At the request of Council Member Sanchez, Appellant Representative Stevenson 1) clarified that McDonald's has determined that they are unable to expend additional funds for the traffic improvements requested at the April 28, 2025, Regular City Council Meeting due to economic constraints; 2) explained that the owner of the neighboring property has refused cross access into their property unless they are able to purchase the property outright; and 3) confirmed that McDonald's can address and modify the elevations of the property, highlighting that the intent is to mirror the aesthetics of the McDonald's located on Artesia Boulevard and Woodruff Avenue.
For the record, Council Member Sanchez disclosed that he had an ex parte communication with a representative from McDonald's.
11 Bellflower City Council Minutes
May 12, 2025
12 PUBLIC HEARINGS — Continued
Item No. 12-B
B Consideration and possible action to 1) conduct a public hearing to consider an appeal from Robert Preece (representing Design UA, Inc.) of the Planning Commission's adoption of Resolution No. PC 24-15; and 2) adopt Resolution No. 25-15 — Continued
At the request of Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines relative to Attachment B of the Staff Report, Appellant Representative Stevenson confirmed that the traffic analysis conducted was based on scope methodology provided by the City Traffic Engineer and determined that the McDonald's development will not have an impact on the current traffic pattern or impact current adjacent intersections studied.
For the record, Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines 1) expressed the opinion that he enjoys dining at McDonald's and would like to see another McDonald's within the City; however, the location of the proposed site will add additional traffic to the area, further emphasizing that the future Southeast Gateway Line located adjacent to the proposed site will significantly increase the traffic congestion in the area; 2) stated that he contacted Viviana Gomez, Transportation Deputy of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, regarding the official completion date of the Southeast Gateway Line and received confirmation that the first phase of the line is scheduled to be completed in 2035; and 3) provided written communication from Transportation Deputy Gomez for the record.
At the request of Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines and Mayor Dunton, 1) Traffic Engineer Yu a) confirmed that the traffic analysis conducted was based on industry standard and included the adjacent apartment complex as well as the future Southeast Gateway Line, further confirming that the results showed that the traffic patterns would remain the same; b) stated that he drove from Alondra Boulevard to Bellflower Boulevard multiple times and observed sufficient traffic progression; and c) reiterated that the traffic analysis was deemed "acceptable" per industry standard; and 2) Appellant Representative Stevenson a) stated that the proposed site is "over parked," noting that if a residential project was built on the site, parking would not be required per the State of California; and b) confirmed that another site for an additional McDonald's restaurant in the City is being brought to the Planning Commission for consideration at the next meeting.
For the record, in response to comments made by Council Member Koops relative to a paragraph in the staff report relative to "irrelevant questions" and the appellant's "due process rights," 1) Appellant Representative Stevenson clarified that McDonald's does not intend to sue the City, noting that they have had a great working relationship with the Planning Commission and City staff; and 2) City Attorney Berger clarified that, to be fair to the appellant, the language in the staff report is from his office, not the appellant, and is standard language for this type of hearing.
12 Bellflower City Council Minutes Item No. 12-B
May 12, 2025 Page 12 of 17
12 PUBLIC HEARINGS — Continued
B Consideration and possible action to 1) conduct a public hearing to consider an appeal from Robert Preece (representing Design UA, Inc.) of the Planning Commission's adoption of Resolution No. PC 24-15; and 2) adopt Resolution No. 25-15 — Continued
For the record, Mayor Dunton 1) expressed concern with the potential "stacking" of vehicles on Bellflower Boulevard, noting that the "stacking" may cause the driveways of neighboring residents and businesses to be blocked; and 2) stated that complaints regarding the traffic congestion on Bellflower Boulevard have been received, expressing the opinion that the proposed site in addition to the future Southeast Gateway Line will create heavier traffic congestion; and 3) expressed the opinion that the installation of delineators on Bellflower Boulevard will not mitigate the traffic concerns, but will cause additional concerns as they will likely be hit by cars traveling north or south on Bellflower Boulevard.
At the request of Mayor Dunton, 1) Franchise Owner Yuen a) stated that 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. is considered "rush hour" and is the busiest time of the day for McDonald's, further explaining that approximately three -hundred to four -hundred vehicles enter the drive -through each day; and 2) Traffic Engineer Yu confirmed that the proposed site can accommodate fifty vehicles per hour.
For the record, the following individuals did not state a position in favor or against adopting Resolution No. 25-15, but made comments and asked questions generally related to the public hearing:
• Darlene Palacios
• Cheryl Williams
• Sophia Partida
• Dennis Kline
Following discussion, it was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines, seconded by Council Member Koops, and carried without objection, to close the public hearing.
For the record, 1) Council Member Sanchez a) expressed concern with the impact on the current traffic pattern, stating the opinion that the installation of delineators in lieu of a two-way left -turn pocket would not mitigate the traffic congestion; and b) suggested that modifications to the elevation be addressed and brought back to the City Council for consideration before denying the project in its entirety; 2) Council Member Koops expressed support for the proposed project, expressing the opinion that the site would enhance the City and the area, further stating that the City cannot determine the impact the future Southeast Gateway Line will have on the area, so it cannot be considered in conjunction with the proposed project; and 3) Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines expressed the opinion that McDonald's has a great business plan; however, he is concerned with the impact to the current traffic pattern, noting that although the Southeast Gateway Line has not yet been completed, it must be considered.
13 Bellflower City Council Minutes
May 12, 2025
12 PUBLIC HEARINGS — Continued
Item No. 12-B
B Consideration and possible action to 1) conduct a public hearing to consider an appeal from Robert Preece (representing Design UA, Inc.) of the Planning Commission's adoption of Resolution No. PC 24-15; and 2) adopt Resolution No. 25-15 — Continued
Following brief discussion, and at the request of Council Member Sanchez, City Attorney Berger explained that an affirmative vote would support the denial of the project and a tie vote would result in the denial of the project.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines, seconded by Mayor Dunton, and carried by the following roll call vote, to adopt Resolution No. 25-15:
AYES: Council Members — Sanchez, Santa Ines, and Mayor Dunton NOES: Council Member — Koops
RECUSE: Council Member — Morse
For the record, Council Member Morse returned to the Council Chambers and dais at 9:19 p.m.
Recess: For the record and without objection, Mayor Dunton recessed the meeting at 9:19 p.m. for a brief break.
Reconvene: For the record, Mayor Dunton reconvened the meeting at 9:29 p.m., with all Council Members present.
13 ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION
A Consideration and possible action to: 1) adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 1444 - An Urgency Ordinance amending Bellflower Municipal Code Chapter 17 (Accessory Dwelling Units) governing maximum allowable square footage; 2) adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 1445 - An Urgency Ordinance amending Bellflower Municipal Code Chapter 17 (Accessory Dwelling Units) governing the number of allowable accessory dwelling units; 3) read by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1446 — An Ordinance amending Bellflower Municipal Code Chapter 17 (Accessory Dwelling Units) governing maximum allowable square footage; and 4) read by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1447 — An Ordinance amending Bellflower Municipal Code Chapter 17 (Accessory Dwelling Units) governing the number of allowable accessory dwelling units. (Matter continued from April 28, 2025)
City Manager Smoot introduced the item.
Planning Manager Genilo-Concepcion 1) provided a PowerPoint presentation of the Staff Report; and 2) responded to Council Members' questions along with City Manager Smoot, City Attorney Berger, and Director of Planning and Building Services Oba.
14 Bellflower City Council Minutes
May 12, 2025
Item No. 13-A
13 ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION — Continued A Consideration and possible action to: 1) adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 1444; 2) adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 1445; 3) read by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1446; and 4) read by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1447 — Continued For the record, Council Member Sanchez expressed concern relative to the proposed number of allowable Accessory Dwelling Units ("ADUs") (Urgency Ordinance No. 1445 and Ordinance No. 1447), expressing the opinion that the proposed language would create additional development constraints instead of removing them, reiterating that the City should utilize prescriptive methods of design to better assist applicants with their projects and allow greater flexibility.
At the request of Council Member Sanchez, relative to the proposed number of allowable Accessory Dwelling Unites ("ADUs") (Urgency Ordinance No. 1445 and Ordinance No. 1447), 1) Planning Manager Genilo-Concepcion a) clarified that an applicant may develop multiple ADUs within the portions of existing multi -family dwelling units that are not used as livable space and multiple detached ADUs on lots with existing or proposed multi -family dwelling units, provided that the development satisfies all development standards applicable in the zone in which the property is located, further explaining that there are fifteen development standards; however, only four of the fifteen would be applied to existing conditions, specifically, usable open space, off-street parking, lighting, and refuse storage, which is already included in Title 17 of the Bellflower Municipal Code; b) reiterated that the four development standards would affect existing conditions in addition to the conversion of an existing space or build of a detached structure and would apply to the entire subject property; and c) confirmed that Ordinance No. 1443 reduced the parking requirements for ADUs, explaining that the requirement for additional parking spaces for additional bedrooms after the first two was eliminated; and 2) City Manager Smoot reiterated that if a developer would like to convert an existing space or build a detached structure, they must meet the current development standards.
Following brief discussion, 1) City Attorney Berger explained that development standards are applicable to the underlying zone in which the property is located, noting that this allows for a City Planner to make a determination on which development standards apply to the property based on the zone in which it is located as well as the construction date; 2) Director Oba stated that per the Bellflower Municipal Code, certain improvements are allowed to be done to an existing structure without conforming to the current development standards; however, if the property is considered "non -conforming" due to the four development standards previously discussed, the Bellflower Municipal Code requires that the current development standards be met for the existing structure and the conversion of an existing space or the build of a detached structure; and 3) City Manager Smoot clarified that the intent is to incentivize developers to build; however, they must meet the current development standards in order to build or convert.
15 Bellflower City Council Minutes
May 12, 2025
Item No. 13-A
13 ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION — Continued A Consideration and possible action to: 1) adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 1444; 2) adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 1445; 3) read by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1446; and 4) read by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1447 — Continued For the record, following brief discussion between Council Member Sanchez and Director Oba relative to parking standards, City Attorney Berger reminded the City Council that parking standards are not on the Agenda and an item can be placed onto a future agenda if the City Council wishes to explore the matter.
It was moved by Council Member Sanchez to: 1) adopt
Urgency Ordinance No. 1444; and 2) bring back Urgency Ordinance No. 1445 at a future date with further information regarding the required parking standards for existing or proposed multifamily dwellings.
Relative to the motion on the floor, 1) Director Oba clarified that Urgency Ordinance Nos. 1444 and 1445 were brought to the City Council for consideration and adoption so they may take effect immediately and take effect prior to the effective date of May 28, 2025, for Ordinance No. 1443, noting that if not adopted, there will be a slight gap between the proposed maximum allowable square footage and the recently adopted maximum allowable square footage for an ADU under Ordinance No. 1443; and 2) City Attorney Berger confirmed that staff can bring back another Urgency Ordinance at a future date for City Council consideration, reconfirming that if adopted, the Urgency Ordinance will take effect immediately.
At the request of Mayor Pro Tem Santa Ines, City Manager Smoot clarified that Ordinance No. 1443 sets the maximum allowable square footage for an ADU to 800 square feet, which is effective May 28, 2025; however, the current Bellflower Municipal Code sets the maximum allowable square footage at 1,200 square feet.
Following discussion, it was moved by Council Member Sanchez, seconded by Council Member Koops, and carried by the following roll call vote, to 1) adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 1444 upon a four -fifths (4/5) vote to take effect immediately; 2) read by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1446; and 3) table Urgency Ordinance No. 1445 and Ordinance No. 1447 to a later date and direct staff to further research the applicable development standards for existing or proposed multifamily dwellings:
AYES: Council Members — Sanchez, Santa Ines, Koops, Morse, and Mayor Dunton
16 Bellflower City Council Minutes
May 12, 2025
14 CONSIDERATION ITEMS
None
15 CONSENT CALENDAR
Item No. 14
It was moved by Council Member Koops, seconded by Council Member Sanchez, and carried without objection, to approve the actions stipulated on the Consent Calendar.
A Consideration and possible action to receive and file Warrant Register No. 25-111, dated May 12, 2025.
Action: Received and filed Warrant Register No. 25-111.
B Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of the April 21, 2025, Special Meeting of the City Council.
Action: Approved the April 21, 2025, Special Meeting Minutes.
C Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of the April 24, 2025, Special Meeting of the City Council.
Action: Approved the April 24, 2025, Special Meeting Minutes.
D Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of the April 29, 2025, Special Meeting of the City Council.
Action: Approved the April 29, 2025, Special Meeting Minutes.
E Consideration and possible action to approve the appointment of the Chamber of Commerce's nominee Jennifer Beech to the Southeast Los Angeles County Workforce Development Board (SELACO WDB) for the term July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2027.
Action: Approved the appointment of Chamber of Commerce's nominee Jennifer Beech to the SELACO WDB Board of Directors for the term ending June 30, 2027.
F Consideration and possible action to adopt Resolution No. 25-16 — A Resolution approving the Amended and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for the Gateway Region Integrated Regional Water Management Joint Powers Authority.
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 25-16, authorizing the City Manager to sign the Amended and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for the Gateway Region Integrated Regional Water Management Joint Powers Authority (Agreement File No. 523).
G Consideration and possible action to approve the 2025 Fireworks Permits.
Action: 1) Approved 14 Fireworks Permits; and 2) authorized the City Manager to execute the necessary approvals for the Bellflower Chamber of Commerce and Bellflower Kiwanis Club to operate on City owned property. 17 Bellflower City Council Minutes
May 12, 2025
16 COUNCIL REPORTS
Item No. 16
Council Member Sanchez, Council Member Koops, and Council Member Morse made various comments and reports.
At the request of Mayor Dunton and consensus of the City Council, casual attire will be implemented for all City Council Meetings from May 27, 2025 through October 13, 2025.
17 ADJOURNMENT
Without objection, Mayor Dunton adjourned the meeting at 10:04 p.m. to the next Regular Meeting of the Bellflower City Council at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 27, 2025.
Ray Dunton, Mayor
City of Bellflower
ATTEST:
Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
Approved: May 27, 2025
18 Continuation of the Public
Hearing for the Re -allocation
of the Remaining CDBG-CV
Funds
May 27, 2025
Direction Received
ff
• Re -allocate the remaining $407,553
in CDBG-CV to the Friendship Plaza
• Updated Resolution and
Substantial Amendment to reflect
the direction provided by City
Council
Recommendation
1. Re -Open the continued public hearing; take testimonial and documentary evidence; after considering the evidence, adopt Resolution No. 25-21; or
2. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
Resolution No. 25-18
Nuisance Abatement Lien
17046 Bellflower Blvd.
17046 Bellflower Blvd. –Before Abatement
17046 Bellflower Blvd. –After Abatement
17046 Bellflower Blvd. -Cost of Abatement
•Code Enforcement Personnel: $4,438.01
•Public Works Personnel: 4,780.50
•City Attorney Costs: 23,077.10
•California Landscape and Design: 60,805.00
•Integrated Demolition and Remediation: 119,000.00
Total: $212,100.61
17046 Bellflower Blvd. –Notice to Owner
October 9, 2024 – Formal Notice of Public Nuisance and Intent to Abate with City Personnel November 21, 2024 – Formal Notice Abatement Warrant Obtained and City’s Intent to Abate January 30, 2025 – Formal Notice of City’s Intent to Abate with City Personnel Email Correspondence regarding abatement:
March 17, 2025
March 18, 2025
April 17, 2205
April 15, 2024 – City executed abatement warrant at Property for trash, junk, graffiti, overgrown vegetation August 20, 2024 – City provided 60-day extension to pay abatement costs at owner’s request, with notice of continuing blight and demand for abatement plan
October 9, 2024 – Noticed recording lien for $11,954.05
17046 Bellflower Blvd. –Record Abatement Lien
May 2, 2025 – Formal Demand for payment of City’s nuisance abatement-related costs per BMC 8.36.180, and notice of today’s hearing to contest costs.
No payment received in satisfaction of abatement costs by May 27, 2025 (today) at 4:00 p.m. All requirements satisfied for recording of nuisance abate lien against subject property and to be collected by special assessment
April 18, 2025 – Notice of Loan Default and Election to Sell Under Deed of Trust recorded with the County by mortgage lender for outstanding balance due of $2,263,619.21. 90-day notice to cure before proceeding to foreclosure sale at auction, approximately 4 weeks after cure period Recording this lien is necessary to preserve City’s rights with superior lien to lender prior to sale of property
Resolution No. 25-18
Nuisance Abatement Lien
17046 Bellflower Blvd.
Questions