Loading...
PC - Minutes 01-11-82f CITY OF ROSEMEAD V8838 VALLEY BOULEVARD A ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION JANUARY 11, 1982 MTNUTF.S REVISED DATE..,' 1. CALL TO ORDER: The study session was called to order by Chairman Lowrey at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room of Rosemead City Hall, 8838,Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. 2. ROLL CALL - Present: De Cocker, Schymos, Ritchie, Lowrey, Mattern Absent: None Ex Officio: Kress, Carmona, de Zara 3. MATTERS TO BE DISCUSSED V A. Noise Ordinance, Section 4300. - 4322. Commissioner Ritchie stated that he would like to amend the City's noise ordinance to conform with the County's noise ordinance, by amending the allowable DBA from 55 DBA to 45 DBA. There were no objections by the Commission. Mr. Kress then stated that this amendment could be recommended for adoption by the City Council by submitting a written Planning Commission recommendation. There was then a discussion regarding the best way to formalize this recommendation. It was moved by Commissioner Ritchie, seconded by Commissioner Mattern, to submit a letter to the City Council, recommending that the allowable DBA level be amended to 45 DBA, in Section 4306. of the Rosemead Municipal Code. ' ROLL CALL VOTE - Ayes: De Cocker, Schymos, Lowrey, Ritchie, Mattern Noes: None .,B. Parking.Ordinance . Commissioner Schymos stated that he would like to change between the double lines required to outline the parking then a lengthy discussion regarding the point of measure the feasibility of including an illustration of the type that is required. The Commission also considered the wi and it was suggested that the striping be required to be th required spacing stalls. There was for the lines, and of parking stall lth of the striping, 3" to 3i" wide. Commissioner Schymos also recommended the deletion of the following: "Exterior lines shall be 10 feet apart." The Commission also considered including provisions for angled parking, handicapped parking, parallel parking, and required back-up space. During this discussion, the Commission added the following to the ordinance: "Back-up for vehicles shall be a minimum of twenty-six (26) feet." In addition, the Commission decided to include illustrations of the required parking, and the following was added to the ordinance: "Parking stall shall be striped with double lines as shown on the plans, profiles, and specifications attached hereto." Further, it was the consensus of the Commission to add a paragraph referring to the State laws regulating handicapped parking requirments, and to in- clude a drawing illustrating these requirements. There was also further discussion by the Commission regarding the residential driveway standards, the proposed changes to the parking ordinance, and the definition of "small cars". F` Planning Commission Minutes Study Session - January 11, 1982 Page Two There was a lengthy discussion regarding the enforcement of small car parking, and how to determine which cars are.actually considered small cars. Commissioner Schymos then proposed eliminating the provision allowing 75% of the parking to be for small cars. Mr. Carmona advised the Com- mission that they investigate this further, since elimination of this provision could have an impact on commercial developments being able to meet the required parking. The Commission considered this further and expressed a desire to delete the small car parking provision from retail commercial parking require-..t ments. -4A A ~ rl. ; C. Condominium Ordinance The discussion began with the introduction of Marshall Krupp and Gary Warner of Envista. Mr. Krupp stated that, after reading the proposed ordinance, it was his opinion that portions needed clarification, and standards of development and procedures needed separation.. Further, Mr. Krupp stated that it was his opinion that the proposed ordinance would not bring about the type of developments desired by the Commission. Among the specific areas suggested for improvement were the provisions dealing with elevations, privacy, the definition section, and separation of commercial condominiums from residential condominiums. There was also a lengthy discussion regarding the procedures for design review, and the implementation of a design review committee consisting of members of staff and members of the Planning Commission. It was also suggested that the Commission study the fence height and elevation requirement to be certain that they do not conflict with each other. The Commission then considered whether or not they wished to rewrite the ordinance themselves or hire an outside consultant. It was the consensus of the Commission to direct staff to investigate the economic feasibility of hiring an outside consultant. 4. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, Chairman Lowrey adjourned the study session at 10:45 p.m. *Amended by the Planning Commission, March 1, 1982 to read as follows: "Mr. Carmona was then directed to draft language and drawings for the amendments considered at this meeting."