Loading...
PC - Mintues 11-21-77CITY OF ROSEMEAD 8838 VALLEY BOULEVARD ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 21, 1977 MINUTES • 1. Call To Order - The regular meeting of the Rosemead Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman DeTora at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Rosemead City Hall, 8838 Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Cleveland. . . Invocation was delivered by Commissioner Lowrey. 2. ROLL CALL - Present: Commissioners: Tury, Ritchie, DeTora, Cleveland, Lowrey Ex officio: Sullivan, Dilkes, Dickey, Christianson 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular Meeting - November 7, 1977 It was moved by Commissioner Tury, second by Commissioner Lowrey and carried to approve the minutes of November .7, 1977 as.printed. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Tury, Ritchie, DeTora, Cleveland, Lowrey APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Study Session - November 15, 1977 It was moved by Commissioner Ritchie, second by Commissioner Tury and carried to approve the minutes of November 15, 1977 as printed. 4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - On items not on the Agenda. None. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. CONDITIONAL USE PEP14IT 77-121 - A request by J.P. Grim/Finkle Properties, Inc. to establish a storage facility at 8635 Valley Boulevard, Rosemead. Mr. Sullivan presented the staff report. Chairman DeTora opened the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. The Oath was administered. PROPONENTS. . . Robert M. Ridgley, 16400 Ventura Boulevard, Encino, designer architect. Introduced a rendering to the Commission of the project Lewis C. Finkle, 40 Admiralty-Cross, Coronado, owner. Mr. Finkle stated he has owned this property for 10 years and that there has been no interest shown in development for this parcel. Theodore Bentley, 525 Wilcox Avenue, Los Angeles, Mgt. Consultant. Mr. Bentley compared.this project to those similar to Beacons and Lyons storage areas which utilize commercial rather than industrial areas. . . claimed this use was one of the least adverse . . . clarified that the facility was for public use by homeowners, not private for large companies. PC Minutes • . 11/21/77 -3- 6. AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE "VI", SECTION 89 OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE Mr. Sullivan presented the staff report. Public hearing opened at 9:30 p.m. it closed accordingly. . Discussion It was moved by Commissioner Lowrey, second by Commissioner Cleveland to amend Section 89 of the Subdivision Ordinance as follows: Sec. 89 FEES. At the time of submission, the person submitting a Tentative map shall pay a filing fee of: $70.00 plus $10.00 per lot payable to the City of Rosemead. Condominium projects based upon total number of residential lots plus the common lot. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Tury, Ritchie, DeTora, Lowrey, Cleveland OTHER BUSINESS 7. PARCEL MAP 10061 - Applicant proposes to subdivide .a 18,600 square foot parcel into two separate lots located at7864 and 7902 Emerson Place, Rosemead. Mr. Sullivan presented the staff report. Addressing the Codmission : Mr. Lloyd Irvine, representative of Crawford Stores, Inc. Discussion by the Commission. It was moved by Commissioner Tury, second by Commissioner Lowrey and carried to approve Parcel Map 10061 and the Negative Declaration subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with all the conditions as set forth in the City Engineers report except for Conditions #3 and #4, modified to read as follows: #3. Emerson Place does not meet the ordinance requirement of 64 feet for a residential entrance street from a master plan of highway. Applicant to provide an irrevocable offer to dedicate. - #4. The alley does not meet the ordinance requirement of 30 feet. Applicant to provide an irrevocable offer to dedicate. 2. Correct all Building Code violations that exist on the structures on Lots 1 and 2. (i.e. make application for occupancy permits) 3. Correct all zoning violations (i.e. comply with parking requirements) ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Tury, Ritchie, DeTora, Cleveland, Lowrey 8. FINAL DRAFT - "D" ZONE OVERLAY Commission reviewed the final draft... Discussion ensued regarding normal maintenance on residential and commercial structures and concern over being too restrictive. . . It was the concensus of the Commission that this final draft be reviewed and again reconsidered at the study session to be held on November 29, 1977.