PC - Item 3A - Planning Commissio Minutes of July 19, 2010Minutes of the
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
July 19, 2010
The regular meeting of the Rosemead Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman
Alarcon at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Commissioner Hunter
INVOCATION - Commissioner Herrera
ROLL CALL OF OFFFICERS PRESENT - Commissioners Herrera, Hunter, and Ruiz, Vice-
Chairwoman Eng, Chairman Alarcon
OFFICIALS PRESENT: City Attorney Murphy, Community: Development Director Wong, Principal
Planner Bermejo, Assistant Planner Trinh, and Commission Secretary Lockwood:,
1. EXPLANATION OF HEARING PROCEDURES AND APPEALRIGHTS
Greg Murphy, City Attorney, presented the procedures and, appeal rights of the meeting.
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE,,,
None
3. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of Minutes - June 21; 2010
Vice-ChairwomarnEng.requested clarification on the bottom of page 8 and asked if there were 12
conditions' or were two;,added for`.,a total of 14 regarding the traffic issue for Doubletree Hotel.
Princip@lFlanner Bermejo stated yes there were two added for a total of 14 conditions and it will be
revised.
Vice-Chairwoman"Eng stated 'on page 11, sixth paragraph, that it was Commissioner Ruiz who
explained to the applicant:, and asked that her name be removed She also would like noted in the
seventh paragraph that she concurred with Chairman Alarcon on what was suggested.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herrera, to Approve the
Consent Calendar with corrections to page 8 and 11.
Vote resulted in:
Yes: Alarcon, Eng, Herrera, Hunter, Ruiz
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 10.02 - Clearwire has submitted a Conditional Use Permit
application to modify an existing 53'-0" tall monopine wireless telecommunications
facility to install one new ground-mounted equipment cabinet within a new equipment
enclosure area adjacent to an existing equipment enclosure lease area and to add
three new 4'-0" tall panel antennas and three new 2'-0" diameter parabolic microwave
dishes at a height of 46'-0" on the existing monopine at 9117;E. Garvey Avenue in the
C-3 (Medium Commercial) zone. „
PC RESOLUTION 10.22 - A RESOLUTION OF TH&,PLAN NING'.COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ,,ANGELES, STATE: OF CALIFORNIA
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT .1042, FOR THE INSTALLATION OF NEW
ANTENNAS AND. EQUIPMENT FOR AN EXISTING;,;,,, WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY, LOCATED AT 9117,E. GARVEY AVENUE IN THE
C-3 (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL) ZONE.
Staff Recommendation - Based'on the analysis and findings contained in this report,
staff recommends that the Planning Commission APPROVE Conditional Use Permit
10.02 and ADOPT Resolution No. 10.22 with findings, and subject to the nineteen (19)
conditions.
Principal Planner Bermejo'presenteflhe staff report.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng questione&staff if; this collocation is going to be 40 feet or 46 feet because
the site map: indicates ttiat: iC will be?40':feetbut the staff report states 46 feet.
Principal Planner Befinejo,,replied'there is an error in the staff report and the new height of the
equipment will be 40 feet.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng asked staff if it is a one story building, and what the height of the building is.
Principal Planner~ Bermejol replied it is one story and the height of the building is 21 feet to the
existing parapet.
Chairman Alarcon opened the Public Hearing.
Fiona Hilyer from Bemis Consultant, Inc. stated she is a representative for Clearwire and
is available to answer any questions.
Chairman Alarcon asked if the Planning Commission had any questions.
None
Chairman Alarcon asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in favor of this project.
None
Chairman Alarcon asked if there was anyone wishing to speak against this project.
None
Chairman Alarcon closed the Public Hearing and asked for a motion.
City Attorney Murphy advised to motion to ADOPT PC Resolution 10=22_ and it should include what
Vice-Chairwoman Eng brought up, that the height be at 40 feet tall;nof 46 feet tall and that would
be in the first recital.
Commissioner Herrera made a motion, seconded.by°Commissioner -Hunter to APPROVE
Conditional Use Permit 10-02 and ADOPT Resolut on_>No. 10.22 with findings, and subject to
the nineteen (19) conditions.
Vote resulted in:
Yes: Alarcon, Eng;.Herrera, Hunter, Ruiz
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Community Development`Director Wohg statefl,hat the Commission's decision is final unless it is
appealed to the City Council within 10!days.
B. CONDITIONAL USE= PERMIT 10.04 AND "PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY
(PCN) 10=01- Walgreens has submitted a Conditional Use Permit application,
`requesting approval fora.new Off-Sale Beer and Wine (Type 20) ABC license in
`conjunction with'a.7existing retail drugstore, located at 2750 San Gabriel Boulevard,
iri:the C-3 (Medium' Commercial) zone. A portion of the Site is also included with the
Design,(D) Overlay zone. Walgreens is also requesting that the City determine that
the issuance of a license for the off-sale of beer and wine will serve the public
convenience or necessity (PCN 10.01) as required by the State Department of Alcohol
Beverage Contfo1, (ABC) when a project site is located in a crime reporting district
with an undue concentration of crime.
PC RESOLUTION 10.23 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 10.04 AND PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR
NECESSITY (PCN) 10.01, FOR A NEW OFF-SALE BEER AND WINE (TYPE 20) ABC
LICENSE FOR WALGREENS, LOCATED AT 2750 SAN GABRIEL BOULEVARD IN THE
C-3 (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL) AND C-3D (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL WITH DESIGN
OVERLY) ZONE,
Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends that the Planning Commission APPROVE
Conditional Use Permit 10.04 and PCN 10-01 and ADOPT Resolution No. 10.23
(Exhibit "A") with findings related to the Conditional Use Permit and public
convenience or necessity of the issuance of the alcohol license, and subject to thirty
(30) conditions.
Principal Planner Bermejo presented staff report.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng asked staff to clarify the change to Condition of Approval number 11.
Principal Planner Bermejo replied that the word "restaurant" shobid:be replaced with "retail
drugstore" in the condition.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng asked staff if the Public Convenience',-or Necessity is a new process from
the Alcohol Beverage Board or if it is a new procedure that_the City has put-together.
Principal Planner Bermejo replied no, it is a process''that has been around for several years and it
only affects certain types of licenses such as off-sale retail licenses. She also stated the City has
not experienced a large number of those types of applicatiohsrahd ABC automatically delegates
the duty of making PCN findings to the City Council; 'but within the last month the City
Council delegated the duty to the Plarming Commission.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng stated in the staff 'report on page 9„staff indicated that there are no other
I` &e
pharmacies in this area of the City,' that provides off-sale of. - r-and"wine in conjunction with retail
and wanted clarification be'cause.there is a CVS across the street that sells beer and wine and
asked if they are in a.different census tract.
Principal Planner Bermejo.replied hat; is correct there, is a CVS, and the store is within a different
census tract.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng.asked staff if there were any reported incidents relating to crime for this
CVS because they are similar, in theirset up.
Principal Planner Bermejo replied that the crime report from ABC did incorporate the CVS because
it is located within a differenVc.ensus tract. She also stated that even though the CVS store sells
beer and wine, it does not influence the number of licenses permitted within the census tract where
Walgreens is locatedr -r'
Vice-Chairwoman Eng stated there is a market, CVS, Walgreens, and Los Toro's on that corner
and asked staff what type of licenses are required for those businesses.
Principal Planner Bermejo replied the other two businesses with off-sale licenses within this
census tract are Wal-Mart and Los Toro's Meat Market. She also stated that if the Chief of
Police and Code Enforcement go out they do not focus on census tract limit lines they actually
incorporate the general area into their evaluation.
4
Vice-Chairwoman Eng asked staff when the one reported burglary mentioned in staff report
occurred at this site.
Principal Planner Bermejo replied we did not get the report dates just numbers within the last year.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng stated she did have a request for the applicant with Conditions of Approval
numbers 28 and 29. She also stated she would like to incorporate that the proprietor be included
in maintaining the items in those two conditions and take on a proactive approach, so they do not
have to wait for Code Enforcement to take action.
Chairman Alarcon asked staff if the Conditions of Approval are on-going and if you happen to drive
by and see something wrong, we should call Code Enforcement. <He also asked Vice-Chairwoman
Eng to clarify her request.
Principal Planner replied that is correct you would call Code. Enforcement.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng added that she would like to see that the proprietor take `aproactive roll and
when they walk on to the premises take care of some of the issuesif it is possible.
Principal Planner Bermejo asked Vice-Chairwoman Eng'andif she would just like to see on-going
property maintenance.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng replied yes. She also requested. clarification on item Number I of the
Resolution
Principal Planner explained that if 'approved tonight the applicant will have 6 months to initiate
progress of implementing the use andsif for some'-reason they are not able to implement the use
within the 6 months then they would needrto.requestan extension of their Conditional Use Permit.
City Attorney. Murphy stated the`language of Section 2-1 comes right from the Municipal Code, so it
is a finding that the Commissions needs to make and the finding is that your activity tonight is not
applicable to an application, that came; about because of a change in ownership or because an
applicant,is.just seeking an;extension' He also stated neither of those being the case below
subsection 'I you see that neither of these findings apply, so therefore you can make the correct
finding accordingto the code..,
Chairman Alarcon opened`the Public Hearing.
Matt Dzurec, the applicant, thanked staff for the detailed staff report and stated that Walgreens
reviewed the conditions of approval and they accept with them all, along with the recommendations
of Vice-Chairwoman Eng. He also stated that the Store Manager, Doug Lam, is here to answer
questions if needed. He also stated this is a very modest request for only beer and wine and
Walgreens will not sell hard liquor. He also gave a brief description of the floor plan of the store
and the security that has been put in place. He also stated products will not be placed near the
front entrances and store staff will be properly trained on how to sell beer and wine in a responsible
and conscientious manner.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng addressed the applicant and stated that when your employees are under
the age of 21, Walgreens will require a manager to assist them with the sale transaction. She also
stated that this is not in the Conditions of Approval but she would like to make sure that is
enforced.
Matt Dzurec, the applicant, replied he agrees and that it is also a state law that minors may not sell
alcohol.
Chairman Alarcon asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in favor of this project.
None
Chairman Alarcon asked if there was anyone wishing 'to' speak against this project.
None
Chairman Alarcon closed the Public Hearing and asked'for a motion.
Y.
Commissioner Herrera made a motion, seconded; by -Commissioner Ruiz, to APPROVE
Conditional Use Permit 10-04 and PCN,10.01 and ADOPT, Resolution No. 10.23 (Exhibit "A")
with findings related to the Conditional,Use,Permit and public convenience or necessity of
the issuance of the alcohol license, and subject to.thirty (30),c9nditions outlined.
Vote resulted in:
Yes: Alarcon, Eng, Herrera; Hunter, Ruiz
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Community Development Director,Wong stated that the Commission's decision is final unless it is
appealed to City Council within 10 days.
_ ytixr,
C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 10.05 - Wen Liu of Tin Tin Restaurant has submitted a
Conditional Use Permit application, requesting approval for a new On-Sale Beer and
Wine Jyp6`*41) ABC-license in conjunction with an existing bona fide public eating
establishment Jocated at 7621 Garvey Avenue, in the C-3 (Medium Commercial) zone.
PC RESOLUTION 10.25 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 10.05, FOR A NEW ON-SALE BEER AND
WINE (TYPE 41) ABC LICENSE FOR TIN TIN RESTAURANT, LOCATED AT 7621
GARVEY AVENUE, IN THE C-3 (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL) ZONE.
Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends that the Planning Commission APPROVE
Conditional Use Permit 10.05 and ADOPT Resolution No. 10.25 (Exhibit "A") with
findings and subject to thirty-one (31) conditions.
6
Assistant Planner Trinh presented staff report.
Assistant Planner Trinh also stated that staff would like to add Condition of Approval Number 32 to
state," Prior to any final inspection the applicant shall verify that all Certificates of Occupancy and
Business Licenses are current."
Commissioner Hunter stated that she had driven by the restaurant earlier that afternoon and she
has a few concerns with the restaurant and requested that Code Enforcement go investigate.
Assistant Planner Trinh replied that staff has completed site inspections,and on July 13, 2010, they
did witness some issues that were stated in the staff report and also added them to the Conditions
of Approval. She also stated improvement items included the tras`.enclosure area and graffiti. She
stated staff addressed these issues to the applicant and° the applicant is aware of the
conditions and is acceptable of them.
Commissioner Hunter stated in the staff report on=page 4 , numbers 1 & 2 states that the site
shall be maintained in a clean, weed, and litter free'state but it is.not.
Assistant Planner Trinh replied that a lot of the other conditions have been addressed to Code
Enforcement but the property maintena ce.ordinance will have to be addressed to the property
owner not the restaurant.
Commissioner Hunter requestedclarification if it is!.the restaurant owner or the property owner's
responsibility to keep it clean,in the pack of the restaurant.
Community Development Director Wong stated thatAypically, and in this case, it is the restaurant
owner's responsibility to';take care ofit and it;is delegated by the property owner but it is the burden
and sole responsibility of'the property owner tomaintain and keep the property in proper condition.
He also stated staff will send a, letter to the property owner to let them know the concerns of the
Plan ning,Gommission and work with.,the property owner and the restaurant owner to make sure the
property,gets cleaned up.
Assistant Planner Trinh stated Code Enforcement has a current case open at this site
Commissioner Rui2 asked,staff if this site has been cited already.
Assistant Planner Trinh replied that Code Enforcement has a case opened at this site now, so they
are aware of the issues.
Principal Planner Bermejo stated that if this project is approved tonight, it will not get final approval
until those items have been recognized.
Commissioner Ruiz stated that before we approve this recommendation and before they even get
their permits, we need to make sure this site gets cleaned up. He also stated we should have this
stipulated into our recommendation that before they get their ABC license the site must be clean.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng read the last paragraph on the first page of staff report and asked staff if this
restaurant had been approved for an ABC license before.
Assistant Planner Trinh replied in the past it has been approved and then it was abandoned so it
was revoked. She also stated this was in the 1990's and since then no one has applied according
to ABC.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng asked staff for clarification regarding the security guard. She stated
currently there is one security guard for the shopping center and asked staff if the restaurant is
proposing to get an additional security guard.
Assistant Planner Trinh replied that is a question that can be addressed'to the applicant
Chairman Alarcon asked staff when you say abandoned what exactly does that mean.
Assistant Planner Trinh replied it means that the license has not been used so they revoke the
Zt~
license back from the restaurant.
Chairman Alarcon asked if there were any other questions for, staff.
None
Chairman Alarcon opened the Public Hearing and inv'ited,applicant to.speak
Andy Yu, representative.of'the "owner of the~ restaurant stated he is present to answer any
questions the Planning' Commission hay have.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng`a`sked Mr-,.,Y 1 dif he-was referring to the security guard that is there or will
there be an additional security guard. -
Andy Yu, representative-replied the. current security guard is paid for by all the tenants of the
shopping center.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng clarified so you are not proposing an additional security guard
Mr. Yu replied no not.if it is.not necessary
Chairman Alarcon asked Mr. Yu, if the security guard stands in one place or is he walking or riding
a bike around the site.
Mr. Yu, the representative, replied the security guard walk's around and check all the areas of the
shopping center.
Commissioner Ruiz asked Mr. Yu, the representative, if he would like an additional security guard
on his site and referred to a Condition of Approval number 30, which states security should be on
site. He also asked Principal Planner Bermejo to clarify Condition of Approval number 30.
Principal Planner Bermejo stated it was staff's intent to have security on site and right now there is
a security guard on the site, so that would suffice the recommendation. She also stated if for some
reason if the security guard that is currently there stopped his services, then the restaurant would
have to provide a security guard.
Commissioner Ruiz asked staff how many units are on this particular site.
Assistant Planner Trinh replied there are 13 units.
Commissioner Ruiz stated that one security guard for 13 units is not,adequate and he would like to
recommend having an additional security guard.
Principal Planner Bermejo stated that can be added if the Planning Commission would like. She
also stated that our Chief of Police did review the Conditions of Approval and there was not a
recommendation that additional security was needed.,
Community Development Wong stated that he wouldlike to recommend an alternative and not to
put the burden on the operator but perhaps in the future. ifJliere' are any problems let him come
back for a security review. He also stated this will gkv them a chance to prove themselves
on maintaining the property and make\sure there are not security issues or complaints. He also
stated if there complaints then we can ~have-them ;come back.;Jo the Planning Commission for
reconsideration. -
Commissioner Ruiz asked staff so we can wnte;this into the Conditions of Approval.
City Attorney Murphy stated that in Condition ofApproval number 5, it is written that it reserves
your right to bring it back.to the Planning Commission.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng, stated ,she agrees with Community Development Director Wong's
recommendation. She"also stated the burden should not be on just the proprietor alone. She also
stated.tl is restaurant has-been heressince 1997 and it is well known, it has been in operation for a
long time, and it only seats about 80 people.
Chairman Alarcon stated that.this is a good alternative and if there is any trouble the restaurant
owner can call th'WCity to let*them know.
Chairman Alarcon asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in favor of this project
None
Chairman Alarcon asked if there was anyone against this project.
None
Chairman Alarcon closed the Public Hearing and asked for a motion.
Community Development Wong stated that he would like an additional Condition of Approval
Number 33 be added subject to the City Attorney's approval, stating that "Conditional Use Permit
10-05 shall not take into effect until the current Code Enforcement action has been abated on the
subject property."
City Attorney Murphy stated that is fine and asked staff if Code Enforcement numbers their actions
or if they had any way of tracking them.
Principal Planner Bermejo replied that yes, they do have a system to track all of their Code
Enforcement cases, but she is not sure if it is in numerical numbers.
City Attorney Murphy requested that staff find out so as we can be. completely correct in the way
we describe it, the current code enforcement case entitled or,whatever their notation is, so this
applicant doesn't get hit if in case a second case is opened some time down the line .
Assistant Planner Trinh stated she believes they go by_address.
Chairman Alarcon asked for a motion from the Planning Commissioners.
Commissioner Herrera made a motion, seconded by' Commissioner Ruiz, to APPROVE
Conditional Use Permit 10.05 and ADOPT.-Resolution'No: 10.25 (Exhibit "A") with findings
and subject to thirty-three (33) conditions.
Vote resulted in:
Yes: ,Alarcon, Eng; Herrera,,Ruiz
No: "None
Abstain: Hunter
Absent: None
Community Development'; Director; Wong stated that the Commission's decision is final unless it is
appealed to City Council within 10 days,.
D. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT 10.05, AMENDING THE ZONING CODE TO REVISE
REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF FLAG LOTS IN THE CITY
OF ROSEMEAD - Municipal Code Amendment 10.05 is a City initiated amendment to
the Rosemead 'Municipal Code (RMC) for the purpose of revising definitions,
development standards, and diagrams that regulate the development of flag lots in
residential zones to implement the recently updated General Plan and to clarify
inconsistencies between flag lot text and graphics in the Rosemead Municipal Code.
PC RESOLUTION 10.24 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT
10.05 AMENDING SECTION 17.04.020 AND 17.16.140 OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO FLAG LOT DEVELOPMENT.
10
Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends that the Planning Commission ADOPT
Resolution No. 10.24 (Attachment A), a resolution recommending that the City
Council ADOPT Ordinance No. 901 (Attachment B), amending Title 17 of the
Rosemead Municipal Code to revise flag lot development standards.
Principal Planner Bermejo presented the staff report.
Chairman Alarcon asked the Planning Commissioners if they had any questions for staff.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng asked staff if this clean up effort will make it more restrictive for property
owners to subdivide the lots and there is a significant number ofclots in the City that may be
developed into flag lots.
Principal Planner Bermejo replied to answer your first question yes it will have a higher standard
for flag lot development and explained why. She also` stated to answer; your second question
regarding how many flag lots we have in the City, there:are possibly 100 lots-that are capable of
being subdivided, but these are not likely to be three,_some may be a single flag'lot or,two.
Commissioner Ruiz asked staff if the developer will be able to use the driveway to add to the flag
lot.
Principal Planner Bermejo replied that is correct and.,that standard,will be a little more flexible.
Commissioner Ruiz clarified that it will be more flexible to add up to the 6,000 feet that is required
now.
Principal Planner replied that is correct.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng stated,ttiat she has somerecommendations in the PC Resolution 10-24, on
the first page after the 4th WHEREAS of the of the recital, she would like to revise this to say "to
clarify inconsistencies between", flag lot text and graphics in the Rosemead Municipal Code."
Principal Planner Bermejo clarified her request.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng requested staff to clarify the last sentence of page 2, section 4, of
the Resolution, and asked if, this is customary planning practice.
Principal Planner Bermejo replied that is the current Rosemead Municipal Code standard.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng asked staff on page 3, Section 4A of the Resolution, will the minimum
frontage for the lot still be required to be fifty foot in width.
Principal Planner Bermejo replied yes that is correct.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng asked staff in the Resolution at the bottom of page 4, at number H3, should
it be two or three flag lots.
11
Principal Planner replied it should be three.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng stated then that should be a corresponding change for the ordinance also.
Chairwoman Eng stated she did not understand the last sentence in the Resolution of page 5, J-2,
regarding the distance of at least three hundred feet and asked staff to clarify.
Principal Planner Bermejo explained that when they submit their application for soil subdivision
they need to show a radius of three hundred feet from the property of existing land uses.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng asked staff what AC stands for in section 5E: on page 6 of the Resolution,.
Principal Planner Bermejo replied it stands for Aggregate Concrete.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng asked staff if the covenant referred to in sectior,`5G on page 6 of the
Resolution, is that something we are going to ask the.developers to record as,part of the deed.
Principal Planner Bermejo replied yes this is correct„and stated this is common language that is
required on the final map to be recorded.
Commissioner Hunter asked staff where'Ahe existing 'flag, lots are located in the City.
Principal Planner Bermejo replied there are several lofs;located'just north of Garvey Avenue, on
Muscatel, Bartlett, Ivar, and,the southern end of,the City,'
Chairman Alarcon asked if there was;;pnyone wishing to speak against or in favor of this project.
None
Chairman Alarcon asked for a.hiotion.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng made a ,motion, seconded by Commissioner Herrera, that the
Planni`n"g -,Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 10-24 (Attachment A), a resolution
recommending that the City Council ADOPT Ordinance No. 901 (Attachment B), amending
Title 17 of the Rosemead Municipal Code to revise flag lot development standards.
Vote resulted in: '
Yes:
Alarcon, Eng, Herrera, Hunter, Ruiz
No:
None
Abstain:
None
Absent:
None
Community Development Director Wong stated to the Planning Commission that their action on
Municipal Code Amendment 10-05, amending the Zoning Code is a recommendation and will be
forwarded to the City Council for their scheduled hearing.
12
5. MATTERS FROM THE CHAIRMAN & COMMISSIONERS
Vice-Chairwoman Eng stated she would like to thank staff and the City for the 4th of July
celebration and also stated that it was enjoyed by the community.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng stated she did receive the Beautification Binder and thanked staff and
mentioned that 52 cases were open and 17 of them got closed so it indicates that the process is
working.
Vice-Chairwoman Eng stated that we need to address and add parking requirements into our
Municipal Code for hotel and motel use's as they will be holding` Oriferences and additional
parking will be needed in the future.
6. MATTERS FROM STAFF
Community Development Wong stated that the next` regular Planning Commission Meeting for
August 2, 2010, may be dark for that evening and ifrbur City Attorney agrees it should be amended
to Monday, August 16, 2010.
City Attorney Murphy replied yes he agrees, and we will amend the meeting to Monday, August 16,
2010.
7. ADJOURNMENT
71
The next regular Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for Monday, August 16,
2010, at 7:00 p.m .
William Alarcon
Chairman
ATTEST:
Rachel Lockwood,
Commission Secretary
13