Loading...
PC - Minutes 12-21-81CITY OF ROSEMEAD 8838 VALLEY BOULEVARD ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 21, 1981 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER - The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead was called to order by Chairman Lowrey at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of Rosemead City Hall, 8838 Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Schymos. The Invocation was delivered by Commissioner Ritchie. 2. ROLL CALL - Present: De Cocker, Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Absent: None Ex Officio: Kress, Dickey, Carmona, de Zara 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Special Meeting, November 9, 1981 Regular Meeting, December 7, 1981 Commissioner Ritchie requested the following changes in the Minutes of November 9, 1981: Page 209, Line 15 - well I haven't. amended to read well I have. . Page 213, Line 17 - I don't grant you. amended to read I do grant you. . or otherwise amended to make the sentence grammatically correct. Page 228, Line 9 - Deletion of "it" from the phrase, "There it is, in the Edison Company-serviced area. so that it reads, "There is, in the Edison Company-serviced area. Page 228, Line 10 - Amendment of phrase, a thousand watts. to read, . a thousand megawatts. . Page 232, Line 9 - Amendment of generator and one gap engine. to read, . generator and one-inch gap engine. . There being no objections by the Commission, the amendments were so ordered.. Mr. Kress then agreed to contact the court stenographer and inform her of the amendments. It was moved by Commissioner Ritchie, seconded by Commissioner Mattern, to approve the Minutes of November 9, 1981, as amended by Commissioner Ritchie. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None Commissioner De Cocker then requested the following amendment to the Minutes. of December 7, 1981. Page 6, Paragraph beginning "Section F" - The addition of Commissioner De Cocker's recommendation to the City Council that the quarterly emissions reports be made available to the City for public review within ten (10) days of the deadline date. Commissioner Ritchie then requested that the discussion regarding Conditional Use Permit 81-236 contained on Page Two be amended to show that Commissioner De Cocker had requested the addition of a condition requiring that the alcoholic beverages be sold at room temperature, or non-refrigerated. He further requested that the minutes reflect that the Commission had been advised against the addition of this condition by Mr. Kress. There being no objections by the Commission, the amendments were so ordered. It was moved by Commissioner De Cocker, seconded by Chairman Lowrey, to approve the Minutes of December 7, 1981, as amended. Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - December 21, 1981 Page Two Chairman Lowrey then requested that his vote for the adoption of PC Resolution 81-42 be amended from "Aye" to "No". There being no objections by the Commission, the change in the roll call vote was so ordered. Chairman Lowrey then called for the vote on the motion for approval of the Minutes of December 7, 1981. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None 4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE: On items not on the Agenda Chairman Lowrey asked if anyone present wished to address the Commission. No one came forward. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-234: Request by Min Seong Kang and Mi Yong Kang for the establishment of a convenience market to be operated in conjunction with a service station, to be constructed on property located at 9423 Valley Boulevard. The Staff Report dated December 16, 1981 was presented by Mr. Carmona, and the recommendation for conditional approval was made. The witnesses were administered the oath by the secretary. Chairman Lowrey opened the public hearing at 7:55 p.m. PROPONENTS: Ken Pike 9220 Steele Street Rosemead, California Anthony.Di Lorenzo 1270 Inverness Drive La Canada, California Mr. Pike stated that he was representing the buyer and seller of the property. He addressed the Commission regarding his client's desire to improve the pro- perty to benefit the citizens of Rosemead. In addition, he stated that he would be glad to answer any questions by the Commission regarding the proposal. Chairman Lowrey closed the public hearing at 8:00 p.m. There was then a lengthy discussion by the Commission regarding whether this pro- posal entailed the demolition of all existing structures to allow for new construc- tion, or the modification of the existing structures to accommodate the new use. Mr. Carmona stated that this proposal was for entirely new construction. Also dis- cussed was the expiration of the variance and conditional use permit for the existing service station. It was stated that the conditional use permit/variance previously granted was no longer in effect. Mr. Di-Lorenzo informed the Commission that he was the present owner of the property, and that the sale of gasoline had been abandoned in March of 1981. In addition, he stated that it was his opinion that it is not economically feasible to operate a service station due to the competition provided by the AM/PM Markets and other similar establishments. There was then a discussion by the Commission regarding the code requirements for the establishment of a service station. Also, the Commission considered the need for a variance due to the lot's inability to meet the minimum lot size requirement for the establishment of a service station. During this discussion, Commissioner Mattern stated that if this conditional use permit was granted, he would request the addition of the following conditions: 7. The proposed parking spaces shall be 10' X 20' in size. 8. The alley from the eastern property line to the street is to be repaved, to City standards. 9. An "exit only" sign shall be placed at the end of the alley. Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - December 21, 1981 Page Three Further considered was the absence of lot dimensions on the plot plan and a scaled drawing of the proposed locations of all structures. The Commission also discussed the minimum number of parking spaces required for both the service station and the convenience market, other possible uses for the subject property, and the possibility of acquiring the property adjacent to the subject property for utilization in this proposal. Mr. Pike informed the Commission that the adjacent lot was not available for sale, and he did not anticipate it becoming available for a long time to come. There was also discussion regarding the number of employees to be hired, the need for additional parking to accommodate the.garage use, and if this was to be a self-service or full-service station. It was stated by the 'applicants re- presentative that the service station would be operated independent of the market, and that it would be a full-service station. Commissioner Schymos then stated that the proposed service station did not comply with the minimum lot size requirement of 14,000 square feet set forth in Section 9184.A(2),.and the establishment of a market on the same site would be an over- crowding of uses on a non-conforming lot.' Further, he stated his opinion that the crowding of the two uses would not be more beneficial to the City than the existing mix of residential and commercial uses. Mr. Kress then suggested to the Commission that this matter be continued and the applicants be instructed to file an application for a variance to Section 9184.A (2), minimum square foot lot requirements for service stations. Further, he stated that there were a number of questions that should be answered to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission regarding the development of this lot. There was then further discussion regarding the availability of the adjacent property. During this discussion, other members of the Commission expressed their agreement with Commissioner Schymos' statements regarding the attempt to over- utilize the property. The Commissioners also expressed their disagreement with "the City Attorney's recommendation for continuance. It was the consensus of the Commission that the service station minimum requirements should be adhered to as much as possible in the development of a new service station. Further the Com- mission again stated that it was their belief that the applicant was attempting to overutilize the subject property. Commissioner Ritchie then stated that the project's presentation was inadequate in that it omitted several important facts, including the adjacent property use, mention of access to the alley, the type of sign to be utilized, the placement and square footage of structures and setbacks on the plot plan, the size of the proposed parking spaces, the elevation plan, the type of fence or block wall to be utilized, the location of the proposed pumps for the service station, lack of dimensions, lack of calculations stating the number of parking spaces that would be required. He further stated this agreement with Commissioner Schymos that the applicant was attempting to over-utilize this site, and that he would not be in favor of granting a variance to allow this project to be constructed. Based on inquiries by Commissioner De Cocker regarding the number of required parking spaces, it was determined that the minimum parking requirement could not be met. Commissioner De Cocker also added that the hours of operation for both the market and service station had not been included in the presentation. Lengthy consideration was then given to the other types. of uses that could be established on this particular site that would be more in keeping with the size and -zone of the lot. There was also a discussion regarding the appropriate motion for denial. Mr. Kress stated that the Commission need only make a motion for denial and that the appropriate findings would be included in the resolution. Commissioner Ritchie then requested that the resolution contain all the facts supporting the Commission's denial discussed during the course of the public hearing. In addition, he requested an explanation from Mr. Kress as to why the specific findings were not included in all resolution. Mr. Kress then informed the Commission that a statement could be included in the resolution relating to the number of uses requested in the proposal, however, he Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - December 21, 1981 Page Four advised the Commission against including all the comments made by the Commission. Commissioner Ritchie then stated that he would like a summary of action included in the resolution, other than the standard findings contained in the resolutions. It was moved by Commissioner Schymos, seconded by Commissioner Ritchie, to deny Conditional Use Permit 81-234, on the basis that the applicant was attempting to incorporate too many uses on a lot that is substandard to support a service station alone.. Commissioner Schymos then requested that this be reflected in the resolution as well. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None OTHER BUSINESS 6. EXTENSION REQUEST: Request by Loren Phillips and Associates, Inc., for an ex- tension of approval for Tentative Tract No. 37066, located at New Avenue and Garvey Avenue. The memorandum dated December 17, 1981 was presented by Mr. Carmona, and the recommendation for approval of the time extension was made. There was then a discussion by the Commission regarding the time allowed for recordation of the final map under the Subdivision Map Act, and the effect the present condominium moratorium would have of this development. Mr. Carmona explained to the Commission that this map would be exempt from the provisions of the moratorium because it was approved prior to the effective date of the moratorium. PROPONENT: Tom Stewart Loren Phillips & Associates, Inc. 1740 Huntington Drive Duarte, California Mr. Stewart addressed the Commission with regard to the reasons the extension was being requested. In addition, he addressed the Commission regarding the problems encountered with this development. Commissioner Mattern then expressed his opposition to the granting of an ex- tension to this tract map because it was subject to the old condominium ordinance. He stated his belief that this would result in the construction of a sub-standard project. There was then a discussion regarding the amount of work and preparation for construction that has been completed on the site. Following this discussion, Mr. Kress suggested that this matter be continued to the next regular meeting to provide him with an opportunity to advise the Commission of the possible "effects of their denial of the extension request. There being no objections by the Commission, the request for extension for Tract 37066 was continued to January 4, 1982. 7. PC RESOLUTION 81-42 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-236, FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8150 GARVEY AVENUE-, ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA. Commissioner Schymos requested that this resolution be deferred until the other resolutions had been considered. 8. PC RESOLUTION 81-43 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-237, ALLOWING THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2428 NORTH SAN GABRIEL BOULEVARD, ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA. Mr. Kress read the resolution by title only. It was moved by Commissioner Mattern, seconded by Commissioner De Cocker, to waive further reading and adopt PC Resolution 81-43. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - December 21, 1981 Page Five 9. PC RESOLUTION 81-44 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD GRANTING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP 14655. (A ONE-LOT SUBDIVISION INTO TWO SEPARATE PARCELS.) Mr. Kress read the resolution by title only. There was then a discussion by the Commission regarding the adequacy of Condition No. 5, and the possible need for a zone variance to allow the garage on Lot 1 to be placed on the property line. Mr. Carmona stated that he would investigate the Code requirements regarding the placement of a structure on the property line; however, he also informed the Commission that this had been allowed previously in flag lot developments without a variance. This was due, in part, to Commission policy. After further discussion, Commissioner Ritchie then requested that Condition No. 5 be amended to read as follows: 5. Relocate the southerly property line of Parcel 1, one foot to the south so that the dimensions of Parcel 1 are 89' X 73', and Parcel 2 is 61' X 12' X 89'. There was then further discussion by the Commission regarding the need for a zone variance for the rear yard setback, and the legality of adopting the resolution in view of the possible need for another public hearing to consider the zone variance. It was moved by Commissioner Ritchie, seconded by Chairman Lowrey, to waive further reading and adopt PC Resolution 81-44, as amended. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None 10. PC RESOLUTION 81-45 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD GRANTING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP 14664. A ONE-LOT SUBDIVISION INTO TWO SEPARATE PARCELS.) Mr. Kress read the resolution by title only. It was moved by Commissioner Schymos, seconded by Commissioner De Cocker, to waive further reading and adopt PC Resolution 81-45. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None The consideration of PC Resolution 81-42 was then resumed. 7. PC RESOLUTION 81-42 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-236 FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8150 GARVEY AVENUE, ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA. Commissioner Schymos inquired if denial of this resolution would be legal in view of the fact that this permit had been granted to the applicants at the last regular meeting. Mr. Kress then stated that this type of action would not be advisable, since the applicants were not present and had been informed that their request had been approved. In addition, he stated that the adoption of the minutes of that meeting had been approved and those minutes reflected the approval. There was then a discussion regarding the date the approval becomes effective. Mr. Kress stated that the approval becomes effective from the date the action is taken and not from the date the resolution is adopted. Commissioner Schymos then stated that he was requesting that this resolution be denied because at the time of the consideration, he had not had sufficient'time to review:-the matter. In addition, he stated that since the date of the action, he had discovered facts that he wished to incorporate into the record. Commissioner Ritchie then requested a written opinion from Mr. Kress regarding the effective date of approval. Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - December 21, 1981 Page Six There was then further discussion regarding the possible effects of denying this resolution, and the possibility of deferring adoption of the resolution under consideration. Mr. Kress advised the Commission that the continuance of the adoption of the resolution would not serve a purpose, since the approval was already in effect. Commissioner Ritchie then suggested that this conditional use permit be closely monitored and that any concerns or problems be considered at the time.of the request for extension of the permit. Chairman Lowrey called a recess at 9:55 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 10:00 p.m. It was moved by Commissioner Mattern, seconded by Chairman Lowrey, to waive further reading and adopt PC Resolution 81-42. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None Commissioner Ritchie then restated his request for a written opinion from Mr. Kress regarding the effective date of approval. 11. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE: On any matter Chairman Lowrey asked if anyone present wished to address the Commission. No one came forward. 12. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS AND A. Commissioner De Cocker inquired regarding the status of his suggestion for a Planning Commission retreat. Mr. Carmona stated that he did not know, at this time, if this suggestion would be approved. B. Commissioner Schymos requested that the Planning Commission agenda packets be delivered one week prior to the Planning Commission meetings to allow the Commission sufficient time to review each matter. There was a discussion by the Commission regarding this matter, and the Commissioners expressed agreement that having the agenda packets delivered one week earlier would alleviate the problem of spending two weekends a month investigating agenda matters, and conflict with other plans. After further discussion regarding this matter, it was the consensus of the Commission that staff be directed to deliver the agenda packets on the Monday preceeding the regular meeting date. It was also agreed that the new deadline become effective for the January 18, 1982 agenda packet. C. Commissioner Ritchie stated that businesses were being advertised with addresses in the R-1 zone. He requested that these be investigated because a commercial use in a residential zone was a violation of the zoning code. In addition, he stated that there are a number of zoning violations and asked why these are allowed to continue. There was then a discussion regarding the code enforcement and zoning enforcement procedures. It was suggested by 'Mr. Kress that the Commission make their concerns known to the City Council. D. Commissioner Mattern requested the the resolution format be amended so that the vote at the time of the public hearing and the vote for adoption of the resolution would be reflected. Mr. Kress then explained to the Commission that they should vote the same for both actions. There was then a discussion regarding the voting procedures. E. Commissioner Ritchie stated that he would like to present a list of zoning violations existing in the City to the Council to bring the various problems to their attention. F. Commissioner Ritchie requested that a study session be scheduled to consider the proposed condominum ordinance. In addition, he requested that staff contact Mr. Marshall Krupp and invite him to attend. After a short discussion a study session was scheduled for January 11, 1982, at 7:00 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - December 21, 1981 Page Seven 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, Chairman Lowrey adjourned the meeting at 11:00 p.m.