Loading...
PC - Minutes 08-03-81I t t l CITY OF ROSEMEAD lJ' 8838 VALLEY BOULEVARD ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 3, 1981 MTNI7TF.4 l .n...y ~.~.:J U DATE.gcc%.:.lZ ./..9./....._.... 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 Ritchie. The invocation was delivered by Commissioner Mattern. 2. ROLL CALL - Present: Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Absent: De Cocker Ex Officio: Kress, Dickey,.Christianson, de Zara 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Ms. Christianson informed the Commission that the Minutes had not been completed in time for this meeting for reasons set forth in the Memorandum submitted to the Commission. 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 Chairman Lowrey announced the matters scheduled for public hearing, and requested that anyone wishing to address the Commission with regard to any of these matters rise and be administered.the oath. The oath was administered by the secretary. 5. CONDITIONAL USE PER14IT 81-229: Request to serve beer for on-site consumption at 9766 Valley Boulevard, Rosemead by Abraham Gordon DBA Karom 'N Kue Billiard Parlor. The Staff Report dated August 3, 1981.was presented by Ms. Christianson and the recommendation for denial due to non-support of the required findings was made. Chairman Lowrey opened the Public Hearing at 7:40 p.m. PROPONENT: Mr. Leonard Gordon 2459 Coldwater Drive Beverly Hills, California Mr. Gordon stated that he was representing the applicant in this matter and addressed the Commission regarding the reasons this permit was being requested. He cited poor business as the main reason for this request. in addition, he informed the Commission that the majority of the arcade games had been removed. Mr. Gordon also stated to the Commission that he-did not believe that a large number of off-street parking spaces would be required, since many of the patrons live nearby the establishment and walk there. r Chairman Lowrey closed the Public Hearing at 7:45 p.m. There was then a discussion by the Commission regarding the testimony of the proponent. Also discussed was the possibility of securing an agreement with the adjacent property owner to utilize their parking lot for the establishment under consideration. Commissioner Schymos then expressed his opinion that if this Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - August 3, 1981 Page Two establishment were allowed to serve alcoholic beverages, the family business would-be eliminated. It was moved by Commissioner Schymos, seconded by Commissioner Mattern, to deny Conditional Use Permit 81-229, on the grounds that this type of use is not desirable to the public convenience, and non-sufficient off-street parking. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None Absent: De Cocker 6. PARCEL MAP 14373 AND ZONE VARIANCE 81-95: Request by Peter Wong to subdivide an existing parcel of land into two lots, and a request for a variance for minimum lot width and rear yard setback at 3229 Evelyn Avenue. The Staff Report dated August 3, 1981 was presented by Ms. Christianson, and the recommendation for conditional approval of both requests was made. PROPONENT: Mr. Edmond Chiang 2645 West Garvey Avenue Alhambra, California Mr. Chiang stated that he was representing the applicant and stated that the applicant had agreed to implement all conditions set forth in the Staff Report. OPPONENTS: Juan Duenas 2702 South Del Mar Avenue Rosemead, California Mary C. Cortez 3245 Evelyn Avenue Rosemead, California Ms. Evelyn Rankin 3219 Evelyn Avenue Rosemead, California Mr. Duenas expressed his concern that the granting of a variance at this time would create.a substandard lot in the future. Mr. Kress assured Mr. Duenas that this would not occur, since a zone variance remains in effect indefinately. Ms. Cortez expressed her concern with children playing in her driveway, and re- quested that the applicant be required to construct a block wall along the common property line to prevent any children-possibly'living in the new home from playing in her driveway. In addition, she expressed her concern that the proposed new dwelling would block air and light from the rental unit she main- tains in the rear of her lot. Ms. Rankin inquired how much of a variance would be granted, and also requested that a block wall be constructed along her property line. She stated that she was making this request because there is a problem with children trespassing on property in this neighborhood.. Mr. Chiang stated that he could not agree, to the construction of a block wall on behalf of the applicant; however, he did believe that the applicant intended to construct some type of separation between the adjacent properties. Chairman Lowrey closed the Public Hearing at 8:05 p.m. There was a discussion by the Commission regarding Condition No. 3 of the Staff Report, which requires the repair or replacement of the retaining wall. Commissioner Ritchie then stated that he would like to add a condition requiring the construction of a solid fence along the north, south, and west property lines. After some discussion by the Commission regarding the type of fence to be re- quested of the applicant, the following condition was added: "5. Install a solid wood or masonry fence on the north, south, and west property lines to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. If a wooden fence is installed, it shall have steel supports set in concrete. Fence shall be a_ Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - August 3, 1981 Page Three minimum of six feet in height in the rear yard and four feet in height in *the F A §9FAh C;Q.ti.. 9797 77 p. hh^ The possibility of installation of a chain link fence was discussed; however, it was the consensus of the Commission to allow the new condition remain as set forth. Also considered in the discussion of this proposal was the possible drainage from the roof of the new garage onto the adjacent property owners' property. Commissioner Schymos expressed his concern with this, since the garage will be 3 feet away from the property line. At this point in the discussion, various other locations and angles for the garage were discussed.. Commissioner Ritchie also inquired if the owner intended to improve--.;the appearance of the existing house. Mr. Chiang stated.`that it was the owners intention to improve both the exterior and interior of the existing house to be harmonious with the new home. Chairman Lowrey expressed his opposition to this request because of the deficiency in the lot size of Parcel No. 2. It was moved by Commissioner Ritchie, seconded by Commissioner Schymos, to accept the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map 14373 and Zone variance 81-95. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: Schymos, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: Lowrey Absent: De Cocker it was moved by Commissioner Mattern, seconded by Commissioner Ritchie, to grant Zone Variance 81-95, subject to Conditions 1 through 4 in the Staff Report and the addition of Condition No. 5. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes. Schymos, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: Lowrey Absent: De Cocker it was moved by Commissioner Ritchie, seconded by Commissioner Mattern, to approve Parcel Map 14373, subject to Conditions 1 through 5. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: Schymos, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: Lowrey Absent: De Cocker Chairman Lowrey called a recess at 8:30 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:40 p.m. OTHER BUSINESS 7. EXPANSION OF USE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 58: Little People's Preschool, 4715 Rosemead Boulevard The memorandum dated August 3, 1981 was presented by Ms. Christianson and the recommendation for approval of the request for expansion was made. There was then a,lengthy discussion by the Commission regarding this request. Commissioner Schymos stated that the proposed expansion did not conform with the R-1 regulations, and as such, should not be granted. He further stated that there were several zoning violations existing on the property, and that none of the other additions to the facility had been reviewed or approved by the Planning Commission. During this discussion, Ms. Christianson informed the Commission that a petition had been submitted, expressing support of this request. The petition was read by Mr. Dickey, and made a matter of record. The discussion regarding the previous additions to this use continued. In addition, the non-conforming signs existing on the property were discussed. Ms. Uma Chander, applicant and owner of the pre-school, stated that she pur- chased the property in 1978 and many of the items-that do not conform to code *AMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AUGUST 17, 1981 - SEE ATTACHMENT A Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - August 3, 1981 Page Four were existing on the property when she purchased it. Further, she stated that she had never received any notification of the zoning violations and was not aware that there were violations existing on the property. She also expressed her willingness to correct the violations. Also discussed and considered by the Commission was Fire Department, and the lack of off-street parking. that this project had received clearance by.the Fire 1982, and also, the Fire Department had approved the Chander also addressed the Commission with regard to necessary for the school. the recommendation of the Ms. Christianson stated Department, effective until subject expansion. Ms. the off-street parking Commissioner Schymos then stated that this project did not meet the side yard setbacks required by the R-1 zone. Mr. Kress then expressed his opinion that - the R-1 zone did not apply to this project because this was not a residential use. Mr. Kress also stated that he did not agree with Commissioner Schymos' interpretation, since a conditional use permit allowing the use of the structure for a nursery school had been granted,-thereby eliminating a residential use. Commissioner Schymos then stated that all additions or expansions should have been subject to review by the Modification Committee or the Planning Commission. Commissioner Mattern then asked if the applicant was willing to cooperate with the City requests to correct all zoning violations. Ms. Chander stated that she was. Mr. George Peterson, 706 Callita, Arcadia, addressed the Commission regarding the traffic problems due to the narrowness of the street, and lack of traffic control signals. He also stated his opinion that the expansion of this use would generate more traffic in the area and complicate the problems. With regard to these com- ments, Ms. Chander informed the Commission that the arrivals and departures of the children do not occur at one time, but are staggered throughout the day. It was moved by Commissioner Schymos, seconded by Commissioner Ritchie, to deny the request for expansion of Conditional Use Permit 58, and to direct staff to enforce the original conditions of approval for the conditional use permit. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie Noes: Mattern Absent: De Cocker 8.. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - On any matter Mr. George Peterson 706 Callita Arcadia, California Mr. Peterson inquired how to request the installation of traffic controls on Rosemead Boulevard, and if there were any plans for widening the street. Mr. Dickey stated that the request for traffic controls on Rosemead Boulevard would have to be directed to the State of California Highways Commission. In addition, Mr. Dickey stated that there was no plan for widening the street in the near future; however, he could direct a request for study to the Rosemead Traffic Commission. Mr. Peterson then inquired how to request a change of zone in this area. He was then asked to contact the Planning Department to ask for further information on requesting a zone change. 9. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS AND STAFF A. Commissioner Schymos inquired as to the progress in the update of the Zoning Code. Mr. Dickey stated that he would investigate the matter. B. Chairman Lowrey requested that staff investigate each case scheduled for hearing by the Planning Commission for zoning violations, prior to presenting the matter to the Commission. C. Commissioner Ritchie stated that he would like to begin consideration of the new Zoning Ordinance, and requested that a study session for this purpose be Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - August 3, 1981 Page Five scheduled. Chairman Lowrey then stated that he would prefer to postpone the -scheduling of a study session until all members of the Commission and staff are present. D. Commissioner Mattern requested that staff supply the Commission with copies of the revised development plan for Narramore Christian Foundation. Ms. Christianson stated that she was not familiar with the revised plans but would attempt to locate them. E. Commissioner Mattern requested that some consideration be given to the purchase of a new tape recorder. He stated that this, would help to eliminate the problems encountered when the present tape recorder is not in working order. Mr. Dickey stated that the City Clerk was investigating the matter, and he would inquire as to her progress. F. Commissioner Mattern requested-that a study session be scheduled to consider the Parking ordinance. Chairman Lowrey once again expressed his desire to wait until all members of the-Planning Commission and staff were present; however, after further discussion, a study session was scheduled for Wednesday, August 26, 1981. The discussion continued, and it was decided to hold a study session immediately after the next regular meeting, August 17, 1981. In addition, it was further stated that should the next regular meeting run too late, the original date of August 26 would be the alternate date. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, Chairman Lowrey adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. ATTACHMENT A Amendment to Planning Commission Minutes, August 3, 1981, Page 3, Paragraph 1: 5. Install a solid wood or masonry fence on the north, south, and west property lines, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. If a wooden fence is installed, it shall have steel supports set in concrete. Fence shall be a maximum of six (6) feet in height, and four (4) feet in height in the front yard, as viewed from adjacent properties, as set forth'in Section 9121.17 of the Rosemead Municipal Code.