Loading...
PC - Minutes 06-01-81REVD E CITY OF ROSEMEAD 8838 VALLEY BOULEVARD ~•j ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING h'D JUNE 1, 1981 MINUTES DATE.../5, 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 Schymos. The invocation was delivered by Commissioner De Cocker. 2. ROLL CALL - Present: De Cocker, Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Absent: None Ex Officio: Kress, Dickey, Carmona, Christianson, Fernandez *3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting, May 4, 1981 Regular Meeting, May 18, 1981 It was moved by Commissioner Mattern, seconded by Commissioner De Cocker, to approve the Minutes of May 4, 1981, as printed. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: Schymos Commissioner Schymos stated that he abstained from voting because he was not present at the May 4, 1981 meeting. *It was moved by Commissioner Schymos, seconded by Commissioner Ritchie, to approve the Minutes of May 18, 1981, as printed. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Ritchie, Mattern , Schymos* Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: d'ahymes, Lowrey Chairman Lowrey stated that he abstained from voting because he was not present at the May 18, 1981 meeting. 4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE: On items not on the Agenda- ~Mr. Jose Gonzales 8527 Drayer Lane South San Gabriel, California Mr. Gonzales stated that he had received a notice regarding the construction at Narramore Christian Foundation. Chairman Lowrey informed him that this matter would be discussed by the Commission, later in the meeting. Mr. Kress then stated that he had reviewed the request for a modification to the approved plot plan for Narramore'Christian Foundation, and it was his opinion that the extent of the changes constituted a zone change. He further explained that the current zoning was PD, and subject to a specific plan; therefore, any change, such as the one proposed, would require a public hearing for a zone change. There was a discussion regarding Mr.. Kress' recommendation. Dr. Narramore asked why a continuance was necessary, and Mr. Kress stated that a public hearing required notification of property owners and advertisement within the City. Mr. Richard Hull, representing Narramore Christian Foundation, then asked if the applicants would be required to submit an application for a zone change. Mr. Kress stated that they would not. *Commissioner Schymos requested that his vote on the Minutes of May 18, 1981 be changed to "AYE" - request made at the regular meeting, June.15,'1981 Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - June 1, 1981 Page Two PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-224: Request by Jose P. Martinez for the sale of al- coholic beverages for on-site consumption in conjunction with an existing restaurant, known as "Su Amigo E1 Michaocano", and located at 8685 East Garvey Avenue. (Continued from May 18, 1981) The memorandum dated May 27, 1981 was presented by Mr. Carmona and the recom- mendation for denial on the basis of non-supported findings was made. Mr. Martinez, applicant, stated that his representative/translator had not arrived. He requested that the Commission consider this matter later in the meeting to allow his representative to arrive. The Commission then moved on to the next item. 6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-222. Request by Jose, Saturnina, Ricardo and Agnes Noguera for the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption in con- junction with an existing restaurant, known as "Pete's Pizza", and located at 8752 East Valley Boulevard. The Staff Report dated June 1, 1981 was presented by Ms. Christianson, and the recommendation for conditional approval was made. Chairman Lowrey opened the Public Hearing at 7:45 p.m. Seeing no one wishing to address the Commission, the Public Hearing was closed accordingly. Ms. Noguera,-applicant, stated that she was present to answer any questions by the Commission. Commissioner Mattern stated that there were more parking spaces available on-site than was indicated on.the application, and requested that this be changed for the record. Commissioner Schymos inquired if a permit was needed to paint in a design over- lay zone. Mr. Carmona reviewed the Code requirements and determined that this was not required. Mr. Pete Poster,-owner of.the subject property, addressed the Commission regarding the recent repainting of the structure. Chairman Lowrey then requested that this conditional use permit be granted for a period of 2 years, rather. than 5 years as recommended by staff, due to the change in ownership. Ms. Noguera was then informed that at the end of this period, the Commission would review the matter for extension. She stated that this was agreeable to her. Mr. Dickey then suggested that,a false roof front be installed on the structure to conceal the air and heating units. Ms. Noguera then stated that she was not buying the property, only leasing the business. Mr. Dickey then withdrew his suggestion. It was moved by Commissioner Schymos, seconded by Commissioner Mattern, to approve Conditional Use Permit 81-222, for a period of two years. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None 7. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-225: Request by Rosa and Enrique Covarrubias for the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption in conjunction with an existing restaurant, known as "E1 Tapatio", and located at 8742 East Garvey. The Staff Report dated June 1, 1981 was presented by Ms. Christianson, and the recommendation for denial on the basis of non-support of the findings was made. Chairman Lowrey opened the Public Hearing at 7:59 p.m. The witness was administered the oath by the secretary. PROPONENT: Mrs. Rosa Maria Covarrubias 8742 Garvey Avenue Rosemead, California Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - June 1, 1981 Page Three Mrs. Covarrubias addressed the Commission with regard to the basis for this request. She also stated her willingness to,;secure agreements with adjacent businesses to utilize their parking facilities. _ Chairman Lowrey closed the Public Hearing at 8:02 p.m. Commissioner De Cocker asked what the hours of operation would be. Ms. Christianson stated that the hours of operation on the application were listed as "15 to 18 hours, starting at 7:00 a.m." Mrs. Covarrubias informed the Commission that they normally open their restaurant from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Also discussed by the Commission were the parking requirements for this establishment. The applicants were informed that they would need 14 parking spaces because there are other uses in the same structure. Commissioner Schymos then stated that he did not believe the required findings were supported in this case. Mr. Carmona also stated that the basis for the staff recommendation for denial was based on non-support of the required findings. There was then a discussion regarding the findings required for approval. Commissioner Mattern then expressed his agreement with Commissioner Schymos that this request did not meet with the required findings for approval. It was moved by Commissioner Schymos, seconded by Commissioner Mattern, to deny Conditional Use Permit 81-225, due to lack of support for the required findings. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None The applicant was then requested to contact staff regarding the appeal process. Chairman Lowrey asked Mr. Martinez, applicant for Conditional Use Permit 81-224, if he was prepared to present his case to the Commission. Mr. Martinez stated that he was. The Commission then resumed their consideration of Conditional Use Permit 81-224 at 8:15 p.m. 5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-224: Request by Jose P. Martinez for the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption in conjunction with as existing restaurant, known as "Su Amigo E1 Michaocano", and located at 8685 Garvey Avenue. (Continued from May 18, 1981) The memorandum dated May 27, 1981 was presented by Mr. Carmona, and he restated the original recommendation of denial based on non-supported findings. In addition, Mr. Carmona informed the Commission that a written protest to this project had been submitted by Mary F. Kellogg, a property owner in the vicinity of the subject establishment. Chairman Lowrey asked if anyone present wished to address the Commission. PROPONENT: Air. Daniel Valcasa 3859 Brooklyn Avenue Los Angeles, California Mr. Valcasa addressed the Commission on behalf of Mr. Martinez. He informed the Commission of Mr. Martinez's intention to serve alcoholic beverages with food only, and to limit the amount of alcoholic beverages consumed by his patrons. He further stated that the hours of operation stated on.the application were in error, and that the restaurant was open from 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Chairman Lowrey closed the Public Hearing at 8:20 p.m. It was moved by Commissioner De Cocker, seconded by Commissioner Mattern, to - deny Conditional Use Permit 81-224, on the basis of non-supportive findings.--- ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None i a Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting -'June 1, 1981 Page Four OTHER BUSINESS 9. MODIFICATION TO SECTION 8110: Request by Mr. and Mrs. Sandstede for a waiver of the sidewalk requirement for property located at 3352 Rockhold Avenue. The memorandum dated-May 26,.1981"was presented by Ms. Christianson and the recommendation for denial was made. Commissioner Mattern stated that there were three properties in the immediate vicinity that had full street improvements installed. He also stated that there was a school in close proximity to this location, and the surrounding streets all had full street improvements in place. He further recommended that this waiver be denied. Commissioner Schymos expressed his agreement with Commissioner Mattern's findings, and added that there were several trees that should be considered for removal. He also stated that if the trees were removed, the sidewalk would not be broken up by the roots. Commissioner Ritchie asked if this street was scheduled for installation of street improvements through an assessment district. Mr. Dickey stated that it is not. There was then adiscussion regarding installation of full street improvements throughout the entire City. Chairman Lowrey then stated his agreement with Commissioner Mattern's statements. There was also a discussion regarding the responsibility of the City in the matter of tree removal. it was moved by Commissioner Mattern, seconded by Commissioner Ritchie, to deny the request for waiver of the sidewalk requirement for property located at 3352 Rockhold Avenue. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None Commissioner Ritchie then stated that he seconded the motion because, in this case, the cost of installation for the street improvements was a small percentage of the cost of the property improvement. 10. REFERRAL.; FROM CITY COUNCIL: Clarification of Zoning Code Amendment providing for limited retail thrift stores. The memorandum dated May 27, 1981 was presented by Mr. Carmona, and the recommendation for reaffirmation of the original approval was made. Commissioner Schymos then made a statement regarding his opposition to allowing this type of use within, the City. He also stated that he did not wish torec- comend the adoption of this amendment on the basis of allowing one use to con- tinue their operation in the City. Commissioner Ritchie then made the following statement regarding his support of this amendment: "I'd like to answer each one of the questions that was raised by the Council. Why is the proposed use only allowed within the CBD zone? I want to be as can- did as possible because I think this is the only was to answer these questions. It's a piece of special legislation for a specific use and it's like a variance, except that we're disguising it. There's no reason to beat around the bush. This is for a specific, special legislation. It's done all the time. And why is the use allowed within the CBD at all if this area is considered the pride of the City? Well, I can't recall how long this operation has been there, but I think it's been there for over twenty years. We haven't had one single complaint. This store is used by, what I would consider, the working poor. Those people who may live in poverty, or live under the poverty level, but refuse to accept wel- fare and are completely dedicated to the conservative work ethic. I know I may sound like I'm preaching, but I really believe this. We shouldn't deprive these Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - June 1, 1981 Page Five people who want to help themselves without help from "Big Brother"; or at least an opportunity to do so. I'd rather see these people operate this store, as they have been doing in the past twenty years or so, rather than some governmental agency taking over this use. I remember when.1 was a kid, my mother would shop in just such places, and I also remember furnishing my first place after World War II_ Z bought some furniture downtown at the Goodwill Store. . .or not the Goodwill Store, but the Salvation Army. I wish I'd kept it, it's worth a lot more than what I paid for it. There are also older people who are not as fortunate as some of us. These are some of the people on a fixed income. They're on retirement and their only means to try to keep up is to make every penny count, and this is one way they can do it. This particular store, as I understand it, sells mostly used clothing. And I think we tend to forget, as we.ourselves get more comfortable, and the scales weight get higher in reading, those early days of our youth when we weren't so comfortable. I know that I remember quite well my mother working for the SERA sewing project. The ones here wo are old as I am, which may include Mr. Schymos and, I think, Mr. Lowrey, that we all remember, at least my family would, rather shop in a place like this than to accept a government handout. I'm really sincere in that I think there is a place for this type of store. San Marino, Rosemead is not. They're on a bus line and they would be closer to a bus stop than they were, before. I think that we should provide some opportunity for those people who do not want to be on welfare, who do want to try and take care of themselves, some opportunity to participate in what I call our free society. The 600-foot radius provision was put in there at Mr. Mattern's suggestion, if you draw a radius around this particular store where they propose moving, it will allow one more place in the City, and we still have the conditional use permit as control. Again, I want to say that I consider this to be a private enterprise where people are helping people. As I understand it, and from what I remember from the presentation made by the people who have this place, the income, gross, is about $2,500 a,-month. You couldn't- even keep a store open for that. These people donate their time. I, for one, would recommend that this be sent back to the Council with the same recommendation we have given it." Commissioner Schymos then stated that he was not opposed to the National Charity League, however, he questioned the legality of adopting a Zoning Code Amendment specifically for the accommodation of one organization. He also stated his concern with the possibility that another organization would apply for a conditional use permit at the same time as the National Charity League. There was then a discussion regarding the conditional use permit control in preventing the over-saturation of the area withthis type of use. Chairman Lowrey then expressed his support of Commissioner Ritchie's statements. Commissioner Ritchie then requested that his remarks be included in the minutes of this meeting. Commissioner Mattern then stated his agreement with Commissioner Ritchie's remarks, and stated that he was in favor of this Zoning Code Amendment, Commissioner De Cocker also expressed his support of the Zoning Code Amendment. it was moved by commissioner Ritchie, seconded by Commissioner Mattern, to reaffirm the original vote on the recommendation, and to include the remarks regarding the basis for this recommendation to the City Council, in the form of a memorandum. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: Schymos Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting - June 1, 1981 Page Six 11. PC RESOLUTION 81-20 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-223 FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8921 EAST VALLEY BOULEVARD, ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA. Mr. Kress read the Resolution by title only. It was moved by Commissioner-Ritchie,.seconded_by Commissioner De Cocker, to waive further reading and adopt PC Resolution 81-20. ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None 12. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE: On any matter Chairman Lowrey asked if anyone present wished to address the Commission. No one came forward. 13. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS AND STAFF A. Mr. Carmona summarized some of the matters to be considered by the Commission in the coming months. Among them were the Deep Lot Ordinance, Adult Business Moratorium, Thrift Shops, Garage Sales, Cal-Fed Helistop Request, Land Use Element, and Condominium Ordinance. There was then a discussion by the Commission regarding the Condominium Ordinance and the questions that have been raised by the council. B. Mr. Carmona requested an additional two weeks to answer the Commission's request for changes in the Agenda and the Agenda delivery schedule. C. Mr. Dickey requested that anyone planning to attend the conference in Palm Springs contact his office as soon as possible regarding arrangements. D. Mr. Dickey informed, the Commission that the annual San Gabriel Valley Open Golf Tournament and dinner, sponsored by the Rosemead Chamber of Commerce would be held on June 9, 1981. He also stated that the Council meeting will be held on June 10, 1981, instead of June 9. E. Commissioner Ritchie requested that staff inform non-English speaking applicants that they will need an interpreter when they appear before the Commission at public hearings. F. Commissioner Ritchie stated that in the matters referred to the Commission by the City Council,- he would like to have some guidance from the Council as to'the problems to be addressed in the Commission's review. G. Commissioner Mattern inquired when the conditional use permits approved by the Commission became effective. In this regard, he suggested that the permit be held until such time as the conditions had been reasonably complied with. There was then a discussion regarding achieving compliance with conditions and the various methods available to staff to get compliance with conditions. Commissioner Schymos stated that he felt that the Planning Commission was only a judicial body, and not a policing body. Mr. Kress stated that this was correct, since enforcement was a matter delegated to staff in the day-to-day operation of the City. It was further recommended that Planning Commission members may report any violations observed by them to staff as soon as possible. 14. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, Chairman Lowrey adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m.