PC - Minutes 01-05-81CITY OF ROSEM_EAD
8838 VALLEY BOULEVARD
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA
PLANNING COMMISSION
STUDY SESSION
JANUARY 5, 1981
MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER - The Study Session was called to order by Chairman
Cleveland at 6:00 p.m., in the Conference Room of Rosemead City
Hall, 8838 Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California.
2. ROLL CALL - Present: De Cocker, Lowrey, Cleveland, Ritchie, Mattern
Absent: None
Ex Officio: Kress, Dickey, Carmona, Fernandez
3. MATTERS DISCUSSED - Condominium Ordinance
The discussion began with a review of matters discussed at the Study
Session of December 15, 1980 (Commissioner Ritchie's concerns).
The consideration of Commissioner Ritchie's concerns then continued.
5. ALLOWABLE LENGTH OF BUILDINGS SHORTENED
Commissioner Ritchie expressed his desire to shorten the allowable
length of buildings to 120 feet. There was no objection by mem-
bers of the Commission and staff was instructed to make the approp-
riate change in the draft of the new Condominium Ordinance.
6. REQUIRING TWO PLANS FROM DEVELOPERS
There was adiscussion by -theCommission with regard to the
preliminary discussions between the developer and staff. It was
stated by Commissioner Ritchie that he would like to see two
plans submitted and a brief summary of the discussions during pre-
liminary plan check. He also stated that the summary should in-
clude the reasoning behind the changes in the plan (if any) and
the discussions leading up to the plan that is ultimately sub-
mitted to the Commission for their consideration.
7. REQUIRING STEEL SUPPORTING POSTS FOR WOODEN FENCES
Commissioner Ritchie stated that he would like to see this incorporated
into the Ordinance to prevent the deterioration of wooden fences, if
they are to be utilized.
It was also determined that only wooden fences would be required
to haveasteel supports installed.
All the Commissioners concurred with Commissioner Ritchie.
8. REQUIRING THE FOLLOWING ELEMENTS PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION BY THE
PLANNING COMMISSION:
The following is a brief summary of the items to be required and the
discussions regarding each item.
a. plot plan - Shall include an aerial view of the project and the
placement of structures, parking, landscaping and fencing.
b. elevation plan - Ordinance shall include the following statement:
"Elevation plans of project and adjacent properties--both existing
and proposed grades." Commissioner Mattern requested that the
elevation plans also illustrate the proposed and existing grades
of neighboring (adjacent) properties.
Planning Commission Minutes
Study Session - January 5, 1981
Page Two
c. grading and drainage plans - It was determined by the Commission
that the accuracy of the drainage and grading plans should be
set forth.
After some discussion it was determined that the plans should
be done at sea-level elevations, and that both grading and
drainage plans should be required.
There was also a discussion regarding the pumps and back-up
systems, flooding of the streets and the adequacy of the flood
control systems.
Consideration of Commissioner Lowrey's Concerns
1. REQUIRING STEEL SUPPORTS FOR WOODEN FENCES TO BE SET IN CEMENT
There was a discussion by the Commission regarding requiring elevation
plans of the proposed enclosure to surround the project, in addition
to plot plans illustrating placement,of the enclosure from an aerial
view.
In addition, Commissioner Lowrey requested that the steel supports
for wooden fences to be set in cement to prevent them from collapsing.
There was no objection by the members of the Commission, and staff was
instructed to include this item.
2. PARKING REQUIREMENTS
There was a lengthy discussion regarding the parking requirements.
Among the matters discussed was the trade-off of open space for additional
parking, the possible discouraging effects of parking on larger unit/
family-type developments, the possibility of allowing tandem parking
within projects, and the possibility of restrictions on condominiums
discouraging development.
Mr. Carmona addressed the results of the Condominium Parking Survey
and stated that in the smaller projects, there did not seem to be as
much of a problem with parking.
The possibility of allowing staff to submit a parking requirement was
discussed; however, it was determined that the Commission should give
staff direction in the area of parking.
It was suggested by Mr. Carmona that due to the lengthy consideration
of the parking requirements, this discussion should be continued at a
later date. The Commission concurred with this suggestion.
4. ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Cleveland adjourned the Study Session at 7:25 p.m., to the
regular meeting of the Planning Commission, scheduled for 7:30 p.m., in
the Council Chambers.
0
CITY OF ROSEMEAD .
8838 VALLEY BOULEVARD.'
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 5, 1981
MTNIITF. S
1. CALL TO ORDER - The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the
City of Rosemead was called to order by Chairman Cleveland 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 Lowrey.
The Invocation was delivered by Commissioner Mattern.
2. ROLL CALL - Present: De Cocker, Lowrey, Cleveland, Mattern, Ritchie
Absent: None
Ex Officio: Kress, Dickey, Carmona, Fernandez
3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - On items not on the Agenda.
Chairman Cleveland asked if anyone wished to address the Commission.
No one came forward.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 80-207. Request by Rosemead Growers, Inc. for the
establishment of a nursery/growing ground on property known as the
Southern California Edison Right-of-Way, located at the west terminus
of Klingerman Street, adjacent to the Los Angeles County Flood Control
Channel.
The Staff Report dated January 5, 1981 was presented by Mr. Carmona, and
the recommendation for approval was made.
Chairman Cleveland opened the Public Hearing at 7:40 p.m. Seeing no
one wishing to address the Commission, Chairman Cleveland inquired if the
applicants were present. He was informed that they would be arriving
late, but intended to appear at this evening's meeting.
it was suggested by Commissioner Lowrey that this matter be continued
later in the meeting and that the rest of the Agenda be considered in
the meantime. There being no objections raised, this suggestion was
carried out.
5. PC RESOLUTION 80-48 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROSEMEAD GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 80-206 FOR THE SALE OF
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH "ROSE'S MARKET", LOCATED AT
8923 EAST MISSION DRIVE.
Mr. Kress read the Resolution by title only.
it was moved by Commissioner Lowrey, seconded by Commissioner Mattern,
to waive further reading and adopt PC Resolution 80-48.
ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Lowrey, Cleveland, Ritchie, Matterr,
Noes: None
6. PC RESOLUTION 80-49 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROSEMEAD, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, A
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE ROSEMEAD GENERAL
PLAN FOR THAT AREA LOCATED AT 4020-4106 WALNUT GROVE AVENUE, ROSEMEAD,
CALIFORNIA. (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 80-1)
Mr. Kress read the Resolution by title only.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting - January 5, 1981
Page Two
it was moved by Commissioner Lowrey, seconded by Commissioner De Cocker,
to waive further reading and adopt PC Resolution 80-49.
ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Lowrey, Cleveland, Ritchie, Mattern
Noes: None
Commissioner Ritchie then asked if the City Council would be provided
with a map of thearea when they considered General Plan Amendment 80-1.
Mr. Carmona stated that the City Council would be given a full Staff
Report, which would include all attachments.
7. PC RESOLUTION 80-50 - A.RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROSEMEAD GRANTING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP 13844.
(A ONE-LOT SUBDIVISION FOR COMMERCIAL USE.)
Mr. Kress informed the Planning Commission that the City Council is
appealing this decision. He further stated that the City Council would
be holding a Public Hearing for consideration of this Parcel Map.
He then requested that the Planning Commission adopt this Resolution so
that the formal recommendation could be presented to the City Council at
that time. I
Mr. Kress read the Resolution by title only.
It was moved by Commissioner Lowrey, seconded by Commissioner De Cocker,
to waive further reading and adopt PC Resolution 80-50.
ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Lowrey, Cleveland, Ritchie, Mattern
Noes: None
8. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE - On any matter.
Chairman Cleveland asked if anyone present wished to address the Commission.
No one came forward.
9. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS AND STAFF
A. Commissioner Mattern stated that at the last meeting, he had requested
a brief summary of Council action on Planning Commission recommendations.
He submitted a copy of a memorandum to the Traffic Commission to illus-
trate his request. He also stated that he has--been receiving the
Council minutes, and did not mean to imply that he hadn't.
There was then a discussion regarding the amount of detail desired in
the memorandum, and the impact this would have on staff's workload.
Commissioner Ritchie then stated that the last Minutes of a City
Council meeting he received were of the meeting, December 9, 1980.
He also stated that often there was a delay in receiving the Minutes,
and it would be adventageous to be informed of Council action as soon
as possible.
Staff was then directed to provide the Planning Commission with the
memorandum requested by Commissioner Mattern.
B. Commissioner Ritchie expressed his concern with the new legislation
concerning the Housing Element. He stated that the amount of work
would require many hours of time and a larger staff. He questioned
how the funds and staff would be acquired.
Mr.'Dickey stated that there was a meeting scheduled to consider this
matter. He also stated that at the 1981 Planning Commissioner's
Institute, this matter would be addressed.
Commissioner Ritchie then stated that he was concerned, since staff
was limited. He then asked if outside help was being considered by the
City Council.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting - January 5, 1981
Page Three
Mr. Dickey stated that he could not provide an answer to Commissioner
Ritchie's question at this time, but agreed to inform the Commission
of any decisions with regard to this matter.
C. Mr. Dickey requested the Commission be polled on their attendance
at the Planning Commissioner's Institute in Sacramento.
D. The secretary polled the Commission on their attendance at the West
San Gabriel Valley Planning Congress dinner/meeting, January 8, 1981.
Chairman Cleveland was then informed that the applicant for Conditional
Use Permit 80-207 was present, and the consideration of this matter was
continued.
4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 80-207 (Continuation of consideration.)
Chairman Cleveland stated that the Public Hearing was open.
The witnessLwas administered the oath by the secretary.
PROPONENT:
Mr. Eddie Acosta
18012 East Delford
Azusa, California
Mr. Acosta stated that he was the applicant for the project. He stated
that he had read the Staff Report and addressed the Commission regarding
the use of chemicals/sprays.
He informed the Commission that the plants are only sprayed when the
Department of Agriculture determines that it is necessary and places a
quarantine on a plant. In addition, he informed the Commission that the
plants growing on the site would only be one gallon is size, eliminating
the need for spraying upward. Addressing the concern of the use of
chemicals in close proximity to the school, he further stated that the
flood control channel provided a barrier to the school, and that any
spraying necessary would be done on the weekends when children would not
be in the school yard. He was asked by Chairman Cleveland if he would
agree to 'a condition addressing itself to this matter and Mr. Acosta
indicated to the Commission that he would.
There was then a discussion regarding the chemicals to be utilized and
their safety. Also discussed by the Commission was,whether or not a
license is required to purchase the chemicals. Mr. Acosta stated that
the chemicals were available to the general public. In addition to this,
Commissioner Ritchie inquired if the.-nursery had any other locations in
a residential zone. Mr. Acosta stated that he also operated the nursery
at 2453 San Gabriel Boulevard, which is the Monterey Park Water Company
Right-of-Way.
Commissioner Ritchie asked how frequent spraying takes place and Mr.
Acosta stated that spraying only takes place one to four times a year,
and is limited to plants quarantined by the Department of Agriculture.
Commissioner Ritchie then inquired regarding the use and size of trucks,
and expressed his concern with the possible problems associated with the
use of large trucks in a residential zone.
Mr. Acosta stated that there would be very limited traffic and that the
largest vehicle was a two-axle, twenty-foot bobtail truck. He also stated
that the large trucks were being used to pick up plants purchased, and
did not belong to the nursery.
Commissioner Ritchie then asked if the applicants had given any consideration
to controlling mud being spread by the vehicles.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting - January 5, 1981
Page Four
Mr. Acosta stated that asphalt would be placed on Klingerman Street,
and gravel would be utilized in the interior roadways and maintained
to prevent the carrying of soil to the street.
Commissioner Ritchie then asked what the proposed hours of operation
were. Mr. Acosta stated that they intended to operate between the
hours of 7:00 a.m. to 4100 p.m.
Commissioner Ritchie then asked if any of the insecticides or herbicides
were flammable, and if a Fire Department permit was required for storage
of the chemicals. Mr. Acosta then informed the Commission that the
storage of chemicals required approval of the location from the
Department of Agriculture. In addition, he stated that in order to
operate a nursery;-a-State license was required. Commissioner Ritchie
then asked if the applicants had an idea of where the chemicals would
be stored. Mr. Acosta stated that he hoped to utilized an empty pump
house for this; however, Southern California Edison and the Department
of Agriculture would have to give their approval first.
Commissioner Ritchie then inquired what type of sprayer would be used and
how noisy this device was.
Mr. Acosta stated that the sprayer held 200 gallons of water and was
not noisy. He also stated that spraying would not be done when there was
wind or a breeze, and that the time needed for spraying was not very
long. Commissioner Ritchie then asked if Mr. Acosta would agree to a
condition limiting the allowable hours of spraying, and Mr. Acosta stated
that this would not present a problem.
Commissioner Ritchie then asked where potting of the plants would be.
conducted, and where the soil would be mixed. Mr. Acosta then explained
their procedure for mixing and potting of the soil. He indicated that
precautions would be taken,-to minimize the dust and that much of the
potting would be taking place off-site. Also, the soil would be mixed
at another location and then moved to the subject site. He estimated
that the hauling of soil would be done on a limited basis,.ance or twice
a year, since one or two loads of soil would yield approximately 1,000 to
1,500 plants. He also stated that this potting would be done on the
south end of the property. -
There was then a discussion regarding the type of chemicals to be used.
Mr. Acosta stated that weed oil would probably not be used on the site,
since the odor is objectionable and the Department of Agriculture also
objects to.it's use.
Commissioner Ritchie then stated his concern with the size of the trucks
to be used, the mud that might be carried out onto Klingerman Street, and
the hours of operation. He again inquired if the plants would be 1-imited
to one-gallon size.
There was also a discussion regarding the separating wall between the
flood control channel and the subject property, and the location of':the
property in relation of the school.
Commissioner Lowrey asked if the applicant had received and read a copy
of the report from the Air' Quality Management and the County Agriculture
Commission. The applicant indicated that he had not and was given a
copy for his information and review. After reading the report, Mr. Acosta
stated that he fully agreed with the report.
Commissioner De Cocker asked Mr. Acosta how many employees would be
present on the site, and if loading and unloading of plants would be done
on the site. Mr. Acosta stated that the number of employees would range
between two to five people, and that loading and unloading would be done
entirely inside the boundaries of the site to eliminate blocking of the
public right-of-way.
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting - January 5, 1981
Page Five
Commissioner Ritchie then stated that the plot plan submitted to the
Commission did not appear to be drawn to scale, and asked if there
was an easement. Mr. Carmona stated that this part of an old sub-
division. There was then a discussion by the Commission regarding the
width of the driveway.
Commissioner Ritchie asked if the applicants had given any thought to
providing access to their property closer to Delta Avenue. Mr. Acosta
stated that this matter would have to be approved by Southern California
Edison. Mr. Acosta also stated that the entrance was situated so that
there would be more room for the vehicles to turn around, and informed
the Commission that the gate was not accurately represented on the plot
plan. He also stated that the plot plan had not been drawn to scale.
There was then a discussion by the Commission regarding the moving of
the driveway entrance and the installation of a newdriveway apron.
PROPONENT:
Mr. Bob Pitts
Southern California Edison
1000 Potrero Grande
Monterey Park, California
Mr. Pitts addressed the commission regarding the driveway. He informed
the Commission of possible modifications to the fence, and stated that
redesigning of the fence and gate were being considered. He also stated
that landscaping wouldr'be installed to discourage the use of the apron
presently located at the site, and that the apron is a common apron used
by Southern California Edison and the neighboring property to the north.
He stated that the widening of the driveway apron would be unfeasible.
OPPONENT:
Mr. Alberto Caloca
14221 Prichard Street
La Puente, California
Mr. Caloca addressed the Commission regarding the fence which was installed
in conjunction with the establishment of the nursery/growing ground. He
stated that he-believed that the fence was causing traffic to use his
property to pass-by, and that they were infringing upon his property. It
was determined by the Commission that Mr. Caloca's property was encroaching
upon the public right-of-way. Mr. Carmona suggested that Mr. Caloca
meet with him to determine his property boundary. Mr. Caloca agreed to
this solution.
Chairman Cleveland closed the Public Hearing at 8:50 p.m.
There was a discussion by the Commission with regard to the suggestion by
commissioner Ritchie to amend Condition No. 2, restricting the use of
chemicals, and the addition of conditions.
Commissioner Lowrey stated that he was concerned with the use of chemicals
and suggested that the following wording be incorporated into Condition No.
2:
"That the use of chemicals shall be restricted to those listed on the
Environmental Assessment, Mitigation Measures 1, 2, 3;.'and 4".
However, after further discussion, it was decided by the Commission that
Mitigation Measure No. 4 was not appropriate, and it was deleted.
Commissioner Ritchie then added the following as Condition No. 3:
"The growing shall be restricted to one-gallon size plants."
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting - January 5, 1981
Page Six
Commissioner.Ritchie also stated he wished to add the following to
Condition No. 2:
"The spraying of plants shall be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
on Saturday-and 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m, on Sunday."
it was then brought to the attention of the Commission that if the
plants were limited to one-gallon size,,the trees requested by Southern
California Edison surrounding the property would not be allowed. To
remedy this situation, Condition No. 3 was re-written as follows:
"Growing shall be restricted to one-gallon size plants,. excluding one
row of trees around the perimeter."
Commissioner Ritchie also added the following conditions:
4. Hours of operation shall be from 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p,m.
5. Potting is to be done at the south end of the property.
6. Interior roads of the property shall have gravel placed on them
and maintained to prevent mud or dust.
7. Any storage of herbicides or chemicals shall be approved by the
Department of Agriculture.
Commissioner Mattern expressed his concern with the increase of traffic
on Delta Avenue and the possible breaking-down of the driveway apron due
to the large trucks utilizing the driveway. He requested the following
condition be added:
8. All access to the property shall be from Klingerman Street.
Chairman Cleveland asked the secretary to review the conditions for the
Commission, and they were stated as follows:
2. That the use of chemicals shall be restricted to those listed on the
Environmental Assessment, Mitigation measures 1, 2, and 3. Spraying
is to be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on Saturday and 10:00 a.m.
to 2:00 p.m. on Sunday.
3. Growing shall be restricted to one-gallon size plants, excluding one
row of trees around the perimeter.
4. Hours of operation shall be from 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
5. Potting is to be done at the south end of the property.
6. Interior roads of the property shall have gravel placed on them and
shall be maintained to prevent mud or dust.
7. Storage of herbicides or chemicals shall be approved by the Department
of Agriculture.
8. All access to the property shall be from Klingerman Street.
it was moved by Commissioner Ritchie, seconded by Commissioner Mattern,
to adopt the Negative Declaration for Conditional Use Permit 80-207,
subject to the Mitigation Measures.
ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Lowrey, Cleveland, Ritchie, Mattern
Noes: None
it was moved by Commissioner Mattern, seconded by Commissioner Ritchie,
to approve Conditional Use Permit 80-207, subject to Conditions 1 through
8, as amended.
ROLL ^_ALI'- VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Lowrey, Cleveland, Ritchie, .Mattern
.Noes: None
Planning Commission Minutes
Regular Meeting - January 5, 1981
Page Seven
10. ADJOURNMENT -
There being no further business to come before the Commission, Chairman
Cleveland adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m., to the Study Session
scheduled for January 7, 1981, at 7:00 p.m.