Loading...
PC - Minutes 10-05-81i CITY OF ROSEMEAD 8838 VALLEY BOULEVARD ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 5; 1981 MTNTTTF.S 1. CALL TO ORDER - The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead was called to order by Vice-Chairman Ritchie 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 Vice-Chairman Ritchie. 2. ROLL CALL - Present: De Cocker, Schymos, Ritchie, Mattern Absent: Lowrey (excused) Ex Officio: Kress, Dickey, Carmona, Tang, de Zara 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Study Session, August 17, 1981 Special Meeting, September 1, 1981 Regular Meeting, September 15, 1981 Regular Meeting, September 21, 1981 Commissioner Mattern requested that the Minutes of September 15, 1981 be amended as follows: Page 2, 6th paragraph from the bottom: The addition of . as presented to the Commission tonight. . The sentence now reads, "Commissioner Mattern requested an additional condition - No. 16 - The definitions/specifications of the siding materials, as presented to the Commission tonight, to be added to the plans." Commissioner De Cocker then requested that the date at the top of Page 3 of the September 15, 1981 Minutes be changed from September 16 to September 15. He also requested that the Roll Call Vote for PD Plan 81-1, and the Roll Call Vote for PC Resolution 81-30 be amended to reflect that he was excused from that meeting and did not abstain from voting. Hearing no objections, the changes requested by Commissioners Mattern and De Cocker were so ordered. It was moved by Commissioner Mattern, seconded by Commissioner Schymos, to approve the Minutes of August 17, 1981, September 1, 1981, September 21, 1981 as printed, and the Minutes of September 15, 1981, as amended. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None Absent: Lowrey (excused) 4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE: On items not on the Agenda Vice-Chairman Ritchie asked if anyone present wished to address the Commission. No one came forward. PUBLIC HEARINGS Vice-Chairman Ritchie read the matters scheduled for public hearing 5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-232: Request by Tensho-Kotai-Jingu-Kyo, Southern California Division, for the establishment of a church in an R-1, Single Family Residential zone, on property located at 3926 Rio Hondo Avenue, Rosemead, California. The Staff Report dated October 5, 1981 was presented by Mr. Carmona, and the recommendation for conditional approval was made. Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - October 5, 1981 Page Two The witnesses were administered the oath by the secretary. Vice-Chairman Ritchie opened the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. PROPONENTS: Eileen Yoshioka Warren Yamada Glenn Imai 6932 Shorecrest Drive 3926 Rio Hondo Avenue 3926 Rio Hondo Avenue Anaheim, California Rosemead, California Rosemead, California Ms. Yoshioka addressed the Commission regarding the background of the church. She also stated that the church believed the subject property to be sacred and that the site had been donated to the church by a member as a gift and expression of gratitude. Mr. Yamada spoke on behalf of the church and agreed to implement and comply with all conditions of approval. He further stated that the church agreed with the findings of the Environmental Effect and Mitigating Measures. OPPONENTS: Anna Welch Mr. Kay Hutton 3939 Muscatel Avenue 9424 Steele Street Rosemead, California Rosemead, California Mrs. Welch stated that she was a property owner in the area and expressed her concern with the possible increase in traffic, noise, and the problems associated the need for additional parking in the area. Vice-Chairman Ritchie asked if the proponents wished to speak in rebuttal of Mrs. Welch's statements. Mr. Imai, a proponent, spoke in rebuttal of Mrs. Welch's testimony. He stated that during the clean-up of the property, the members of the church had helped and perhaps that was the basis for Mrs. Welch's statements. However, he stated that this would not be a continuing occurrance. Commissioner Schymos asked Mr. Imai what his capacity in the church was. Mr. Imai stated that he would be living on the site as a caretaker of the grounds. There was then a discussion by the Commission regarding the nuisance caused in the neighborhood by the additional cars parking on the street. It was determined during this discussion that the cars were parked on Rio Hondo Avenue, in front of the church property. Mr. Imai assured the Commission that this would not be a'problem, since there was a proposal for an off-street parking plan to accom- modate the additional cars. Mr. Hutton then addressed the Commission. He stated that his property was next door to the subject site and his concern was with the additional traffic on Steele Street, and what the commercial driveways on Steele Street would be used for. In addition, he expressed his concern that the parking lot for the church would be located next to his home. There was then a discussion regarding the location of the proposed parking, and it was revealed that the parking area would be located on Rio Hondo Avenue, which was determined to be more suited to the slight increase in traffic. In addition, the applicants were asked if they would be opposed to closing up the driveway curb cuts on Steele Street. After a brief consultation with other church members, Mr. Yamada agreed to do so. Vice-Chairman Ritchie closed the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. Commissioner Mattern stated that during his investigation, he found the property to be in a clean and well-maintained condition. He also stated that the members of the church had been most cooperative. In addition, he stated that it was his belief that the parking situation could be resolved to everyone's satisfaction. Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - October 5, 1981 Page Three There was then a discussion by the Commission regarding the possible growth of the membership of the church, the necessity of the conditional use permit, the sign to be placed on the site, the proposed parking area, and the site's conformance with the R-1 zoning code requirements. The members of the church stated that their growth during the past had been very slow, and they did not feel that an increase of membership would cause a problem. Commissioner Schymos then stated that he was opposed to allowing the applicants use the front yard setback as a parking lot, since this was in violation of the R-1 zoning code. There was then a lengthy discussion regarding the possibilities of revising the parking plan so that it would not encroach into the front yard setback. During this discussion, various ways of relocating parking spaces 7 and 8 were considered. In addition, the possibility of relocating the parking area to the side of the property fronting on Steele Street was considered. However, due to Mr.Hutton ,'s concerns, it-was determined.that the parking area should be left on Rio Hondo Avenue. During the course-of the discussion, Mr. Carmona suggested that parking spaces 7 and 8 could be relocated in front of the wistaria vine, and placed at an angle. There is presently a curved wall located in the area, however, Mr. Nagata, owner of the property, agreed to re- move the wall to accommodate the parking area. Further discussion ensued re- garding the proposed parking on Rio Hondo, and the advantages of moving the parking onto Steele Street. Vice-Chairman Ritchie polled the Commission with regard to this matter, and the result of the poll showed that Commissioner- Mattern and Vice-Chairman Ritchie wished to allow the parking area to remain on' , Rio Hondo Avenue, Commissioner De Cocker wished to relocat&'the parking area onto Steele Street, and Commissioner Schymos abstained, having no preference. It was then the consensus of the Commission to allow the parking area to remain where it is. Vice-Chairman Ritchie then asked the applicants if they were recognized by the Internal Revenue Service as a non-profit organization. The applicants submitted a copy of their IRS Identification Number. Also discussed was the living area of the church and the number of people that would be residing on the site. It was determined that a small portion of the church's meeting hall would be needed to accommodate the family occupying the structure. In addition, the matter of installation of fixed seating was considered; however, the members of the church stated that it was a part of their religious ceremony to sit on the floor. Vice-Chairman Ritchie then reviewed the conditions for the applicants. The fol- lowing conditions were amended: 4. The eight (8) open parking spaces shall be provided with some form of turf block so as not to detract from the residential appearance of the site. Parking spaces 7 and 8 will be relocated to the east and shielded from view with a hedge. 7. The applicants shall provide a six-foot block wall decreasing to four feet in the 20-foot front yard setback on the southerly and easterly property lines to provide a buffer for the adjacent properties. Periphery fence on Steele Street and Rio Hondo Avenue shall be chain link and have a hedge behind it. 10. There shall be no more that one building directory sign on the property. It shall be non-illuminated--limited to 1' X 3', attached to the structure, and contain only the name of the church. Condition No. 14 was also added to address the concern of the adjacent property owner regarding the commercial driveways on Steele Street. 14. Easterly driveways on Steele Street shall be replaced by curb, gutter, and sidewalk. The applicants agreed to all conditions as set forth by the Commission, and re- viewed by Vice-Chairman Ritchie. It was moved by Commissioner Mattern,-seconded by Vice-Chairman Ritchie, to approve the findings in the Negative Declaration, and approve the Negative Declaration. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Ritchie; Mattern Noes: Schymos Absent: Lowrey (excused) Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - October 5, 1981 Page Four It was moved by Commissioner Mattern, grant Conditional Use Permit 81-232, the addition of Condition No. 14. seconded by Vice-Chairman Ritchie, to subject to the amended conditions, and ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: Schymos Absent: Lowrey (excused) Vice-Chairman Ritchie called a recess at 9:45 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 10:00 p.m. 6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-233: Request by Saul Calderon Martinez for the sale of alcoholic beverages for off-site consumption in conjunction with an existing market, known as "Saul's Market", and located at 8810 Garvey Avenue. The Staff Report dated October 5, 1981 was presented by Mr. Carmona, and the recommendation for denial was made. Mr. Carmona stated that the recommendation for denial was due to lack of support of theirequired findings. Vice-Chairman Ritchie opened the public hearing at 10:05 p.m. PROPONENTS: Saul Calderon Martinez 2746 Muscatel Avenue Rosemead, California Mr. Jose A. Miranda 8831 Garvey Avenue Rosemead, California Mr. Martinez addressed the Commission regarding the reasons why he was requesting this conditional use permit. He stated that many of his customers requested alcoholic beverages and that he felt this was necessary in order to compete with other businesses. Mr. Miranda was administered the oath by the secretary. Mr. Miranda stated that he was the property owner and expressed his opinion that Mr. Martinez needed to sell alcoholic beverages both to promote business and to offer a convenience to the public. Vice-Chairman Ritchie closed the public hearing at 10:10 p.m. There was a discussion by the Commission regarding the availability of alcoholic beverages in the general area of the market. In addition, Mr. Carmona stated that a petition had been submitted by residents of the area, opposing the granting of this conditional use permit. During the discussion, Commissioner Schymos ex- pressed his concern with the illegal signs present on the site. Mr. Carmona stated that he would have the staff investigate the matter. During the discussion, the Commission„ concurred with staff's opinion that the area was over saturated with establishments offering alcoholic beverages. It was moved by Commissioner Schymos, seconded by Commissioner Mattern, to deny Conditional Use Permit 81-233, due to lack of support for the necessary findings, specifically that the project will be detrimental to the surrounding properties, and that the project will not be desirable to the public convenience. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None Absent: Lowrey (excused) Vice-Chairman Ritchie then informed the applicant that he could file anappeal to this decision with the City Clerk for hearing by the City Council, within ten days. 7. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-234: Request by Min Seong Kang and Mi Yong Kang for the sale of alcoholic beverages for off-site consumption in conjunction with a proposed convenience market, located at 9423 Valley Boulevard. The Staff Report dated October 5, 1981 was presented by Mr. Carmona, and the recommendation for denial was made. Mr. Carmona stated that the basis for the recommendation of denial was due to lack of support for the necessary findings. Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - October 5, 1981 Page Five Vice-Chairman Ritchie opened the public hearing at 10:20 p.m. PROPONENTS: Mr. Ken Pike 9220 Steele Street Rosemead, California Mr. Anthony Di Lorenzo 1270 Inverness Drive La Canada, California Mr. Pike addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicants. He stated that he felt the addition of a convenience market would be an asset to the community, and further stated that the sale of alcoholic beverages would be an added convenience to the public. In addition, he informed the Commission that the applicants proposed over $300,000 in improvements to the subject property. Mr. Di Lorenzo stated that3he is the present owner of the property and addressed the Commission regarding the economic ;necessiEy_.of combining a convenience- market with a service station in order to compete with other companies that have implemented this type of business. He stated that his inability to com- pete with this type of service station was one of the reasons why.he was seeking to sell the property. OPPONENT: Mr. M.C. Gill 1385 E1 Mirador Drive Pasadena, California Mr. Gill addressed the Commission with regard to the litter problem generated by other offices in the area. He stated his belief that a convenience market in this location would contribute to the problem. Mr. Pike spoke in rebuttal of Mr. Gill's statements. He expressed his disagree- ment with Mr. Gill's opinion that the proposed convenience market would con- tribute to the litter problem in the area. Vice-Chairman Ritchie closed the public hearing at 10:35 p.m. There was a discussion by the Commission regarding the previous conditional use permit and zone variance granted.in _1980,: and the necessity of granting another. Mr. Carmona stated that it would be necessary to grant an expansion of the use to include the sale of alcoholic beverages and the convenience market. There was also a discussion regarding the possible conflict with Section 9184. E (1), which stated that there shall be no sale of carbonated drinks, candy, coffee, cigarettes, or other similar items, except from dis- pensers within or abutting the building. In addition, the need for a zone variance was also considered, due to the inability of this site to meet the square footage requirement for a service station. The Commission also considered the availability of alcoholic beverages in the surrounding area. It was moved by Vice-Chairman Ritchie, seconded by Commissioner De Cocker, to approve the filing of the Negative Declaration for Conditional Use Permit 81-234, and make the finding that the project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None Absent: Lowrey (excused) It was moved by Commissioner Mattern,.seconded by Commissioner-De Cocker, to deny Conditional Use Permit 81-234 due to lack of support for the necessary findings. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None Absent: Lowrey (excused) Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - October 5, 1981 Page Six OTHER BUSINESS 8. MODIFICATION TO SECTION 8110: Request by Wayman 0. Wilkes for a waiver of the sidewalk requirement for property located at 3802 Earle Avenue. (Continued from September 1, 1981) Mr. Dickey stated that the request had been withdrawn by the applicant, and an agreement had been reached to allow Mr. Wilkes to post a bond for the installation of the sidewalk at such time as an assessment district would be formed for installation of the street. improvements for the entire area. There was then a discussion regarding the process for posting a bond of this type, and the procedure used to collect the balance of the funds, should the amount of the bond not be adequate. 9. PC RESOLUTION 81-33 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-230 FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7755 EAST GARVEY AVENUE, ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA. It was moved by Commissioner De Cocker, seconded by Commissioner Schymos, to waive further reading and adopt PC Resolution 81-33. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None Absent: -Lowrey (excused) 10. PC RESOLUTION 81-34 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-231 FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8405 EAST GARVEY AVENUE, ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA. It was moved by Commissioner De Cocker, seconded by Commissioner Schymos, to waive further reading and adopt PC Resolution 81-34. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None Absent: Lowrey (excused) 11. PC RESOLUTION 91-35 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD GRANTING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP NO. 14631. (A ONE-LOT SUBDIVISION INTO TWO SEPARATE PARCELS) It was moved by Commissioner Schymos, seconded by Commissioner Mattern, to waive further reading and adopt PC Resolution 81-35. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None Absent: Lowrey (excused) 12. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE: On any matter Vice-Chairman Ritchie asked if anyone present wished to address the Commission. No one came forward. 13. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS AND STAFF A. Mr. Carmona informed the Commission that staff is working on the amendments to the Parking Ordinance, and hoped to have them ready for the Commission by the next agenda. B. Commissioner De Cocker inquired what the point of measure is in determining the four-foot maximum fence height allowed in residential zones, and if it was allowed to place a wrought iron fence on top of a four-foot retaining wall. There was then a short discussion regarding this matter. C. Commissioner De Cocker then inquired how much of the surrounding area is considered in determining staff's recommendation for a sidewalk waiver. Mr. Dickey stated that the distance considered by Staff is one block in each direction. Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - October 5, 1981 Page Seven D. Vice-Chairman Ritchie informed the Commission that a seminar is being held in Anaheim by University of California-Irvine for Planning Commissioners. Mr. Dickey agreed to place the request for authorization for Planning Commissioners to attend this seminar on the next City Council agenda. 14. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, Vice-Chairman Ritchie adjourned the meeting at 11:10 p.m.