Loading...
PC - 03-17-08CITY OF ROSEMEAD PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES March 17, 2008 CALL TO ORDER: The regular meeting of the City of Rosemead Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Lopez at 7:00 p.m. in Room 8 of Rosemead Community Recreation Center at 3936 N. Muscatel Avenue, Rosemead. Commissioner Vuu led the Pledge of Allegiance. Commissioner Cam delivered the invocation. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Commissioner Bevington, Commissioner Cam, Commissioner Vuu, Vice - Chairman Kunioka, and Chairman Lopez ABSENT: None EX OFFICIO: Agaba, Everling, Gonzalez, and City Attorney Yin. EXPLANATION OF HEARING PROCEDURES AND APPEAL RIGHTS: City Attorney Yin explained the public hearing process and the right to appeal Planning Commission decisions to the City Council. 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS Chairman Lopez asked if anyone would like to speak on any items not on the agenda, to step forward. Mr. Jim Flournoy, residing at 8655 Landis View, stated his topic today was "irate citizen." He said at the last Planning Commission meeting, we approved a development for Panda and Wells Fargo, however after talking to a couple of his CEQA friends, it turns out we didn't respond to public comment prior to approving the project. He questioned if he was the only one who thought they would have a public comment period, hold a public hearing, the Planning Commission would accept the public comment and direct staff to respond to them, then it would come back to the Planning Commission for a vote, and then go to City Council for final approval. He stated public comment is required and we didn't do it. He said he put in a number of Public Records Acts Requests on the Panda Project and other projects that are in the City in October, November and December, and he hasn't got a response yet. He stated he did have a copy of a response he received from Mr. Brian Saeki which he has rejected. Mr. Saeki basically said, "Jim, in response to the records request, can you tell me what you think is required in this report based on the paragraph requested." Mr. Flournoy stated in that case, he was quoting the Grading Code and is not going to say if it's in the Grading Code, it's required or not; if it's in the Grading Code it's required. He stated the Building Code is a minimum set of things so for Mr. Saeki to question what he thinks we Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: Monday, March 17, 2008 Page 1 of 16 should be doing, Mr. Flournoy's response was to look at the Grading Code and do it. He said we are talking about Mitigation Measures for the Panda project and these other projects which the City put in a geotechnical four, geotechnical 4.2 condition of approval, on the project. He questioned if the Building Official was going to monitor whether these conditions get done or not. He stated the Building Official is going full speed ahead on this project and there is no evidence that he has any intention of doing the GEO 1 condition prior to issuing Building Permits on this project. He stated all Mitigation Measures (4.2.2 to 4.2.13) point to the 2002 Geotechnical investigation conducted by Geotechnical Professionals Inc. He stated number one, the reports have to be within one year and 2002 isn't within a year. Number two is, he said, the Building Official told Mr. Saeki last week that there were fifty holes drilled and fifty liquefaction tests done and we've done everything that we are supposed to do. He stated if you go to appendix B on your CD, you'll see the liquefaction logs are in the back. Mr. Flournoy stated he did a spreadsheet which he discussed. He stated if you look at them, some are terminated at twenty feet and ten feet, but there is only one going at fifty feet and the rest are very shallow. He stated this report was designed to do nothing more than to find out how much fill there was on the property and how much they're going to have to scrape off and remove. This was never designed to be a building type document. He stated if you were going to do a liquefaction study, you would start here to see how much fill you've got, and then you would measure your fifty feet from the bottom of the fill. He stated this is all the document is good for and we are basing your entire litigation monitoring plan 4.2.2 to 4.2.11 or whatever it is, which does not support your Mitigation Measures. He stated the City needs to provide a document that supports the City's measures and bring it up to date. GEO 1, public comments, litigation monitoring plan, he stated, are things that need to go back to the drawing board and he would like to see this put on the agenda for the next Planning Commission Meeting so we can talk about some of these issues. City Planner Everling stated regarding public comment, it's up to the Planning Commission's purview whether or not they want to delay the approval of a project based on public testimony and then give staff the direction to respond to public comment and then come back to it; as far as the environmental document, State Law does require the forty -five day public review period which was done for the Addendum for the Panda project. He stated as for responding to public comment, Planning and Zoning Law does not require that the Planning Commission delay the decision on a project based on public comment. He said they can either take public comment in, or close the public hearing and direct staff to respond to those public comments. Vice - Chairman Kunioka questioned if Mr. Flournoy was asking about written comments that were directed to the Planning Division that the Planning Commission did not review. Mr. Flournoy stated that is exactly what he is talking about. He stated his written comments were not distributed to the Planning Commission so there is no way they could have reviewed them. City Planner Everling stated everything associated with the Addendum was included in the Addendum for the EIR. He said that all the written comments that were received were given to the consultant and were attached, as required, to the Addendum. Mr. Flournoy stated the written comments should have been attached but were not Chairman Lopez questioned if that was City Planner Everling's responsibility? Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting. Monday, March 17, 2008 Page 2 of 16 City Planner Everling stated yes, to make sure all the written responses were received and included in the Addendum. He said there weren't any written comments that he was aware of, that were not included in the Addendum. Chairman Lopez questioned the date of the public comments. Mr. Flournoy stated his public comments were to be turned in to the City prior to February 19, 2008. City Planner Everting replied State Law states that cities do not have to respond to public comments that are submitted after the forty -five day comment period. He stated when the Addendum went up for public review, any comments received after forty -five days the city had an option to respond to or not. He continued stating the City of Rosemead was not required by law to respond. Mr. Flournoy stated he turned in comments prior to February 19, 2008, which was also a holiday. He stated technically the last day should have been the 20 of February. He said his comments were e- mailed to the City before February 19, 2008 and there was also a written copy turned in on February 20, 2008. City Planner Everling stated he would have to go back and check the dates. Mr. Flournoy stated the document was stamped by the City of Rosemead when it was received. Chairman Lopez stated if someone else isn't doing their job, they would have to find out who it is. If the written comments aren't in there, he questioned, then why isn't the procedure for public comment being followed correctly. He stated he does agree with Mr. Flournoy that the comments should be there if they were turned in. If the City doesn't respond he said, they should at least send the Planning Commissioners a copy so they can have some say of what's going on with the comments in case they want to stop approval or discuss it and move on. Mr. Flournoy said put it on the agenda for the next meeting guys. Commissioner Bevington questioned what should be done in this situation. He questioned if they were going to review the comments to see what is going on. From his understanding, he stated, Mr. Flournoy feels the Commissioners approved something that didn't meet the technical requirements. City Planner Everting stated his understanding is that Mr. Flournoy wants the Planning Commission to revoke the approval of the Conditional Use Permit and go back to review some comments that Mr. Flournoy felt they hadn't received. He stated he's not sure the Planning Commission can do that because it's been approved and the appeal period has already expired, so they would have to initiate the proper revocation procedures. He also stated he does not know if the City can do that legally because technically the applicant hasn't violated any conditions. The only way to do that he said, is if the applicant violates their conditions. City Attorney Yin stated he will have to look into that. Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: Monday, March 17, 2008 Page 3 of 16 Commissioner Bevington stated we need to clean this up. He said he doesn't want an applicant proceeding and then at some point down the line, finding out that there was something they didn't proceed with correctly. City Attorney Yin stated he will work with City Planner Everling on this. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR — These items are considered to be routine actions that may be considered in one motion by the Planning Commission. Any interested party may request an item from the consent calendar to be discussed separately. A. Approval of Minutes — March 3, 2008 Chairman Lopez stated there was a copy of the corrections for the conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit 02 -882 (MOD) that was requested at the last Planning Commission Meeting. Mr. Jim Flournoy stated this was not appropriate because these corrections were not on the agenda. City Planner Everling stated this is something that the Planning Commission asked to see. Commissioner Bevington stated we ordered this at the last meeting. He said we automatically have a right to view it. He stated those were the instructions to staff; to revise the conditions of approval and green light the conditions of approval, so these things need to be carried over. Chairman Lopez questioned if there were any corrections that needed to be made to the conditions of approval. Vice - Chairman Kunioka stated he did not see that these conditions of approval were on the agenda. City Planner Everling apologized for not putting these corrections on the agenda, but this is something, he said, the Commissioners asked for at the last meeting; to review revised conditions of the projects. Mr. Flournoy stated this still has to be on the agenda. Commissioner Bevington stated the only thing he does not see on the conditions of approval, which he thought they talked about, was the changing of the type of trees. Senior Planner Agaba stated the Commissioners directed staff to make sure that when the final landscape plan comes in for review, we make sure that it is not purely palm trees. Commissioner Bevington stated that's fine if that's the understanding. Chairman Lopez stated this is not on the agenda, but we are just reviewing corrections and we are not voting. Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: Monday, March 17, 2008 Page 4 of 16 City Planner Everling stated right. He said they're just verifying the corrections that were made by staff. Chairman Lopez questioned if there were corrections that needed to be made on our calendar for the last meeting. He also questioned if any of the Planning Commissioners had any corrections for the Panda conditions. Vice - Chairman Kunioka stated he only had the revised conditions of approval in front of him since he arrived and wouldn't be able to compare the original conditions to the revised conditions. He stated to table the conditions of approval to the next meeting. The Commissioners agreed to table the conditions of approval to the next meeting, in which we'll have it on the agenda. Chairman Lopez stated they were going to move on to the regular approval of minutes. He questioned for corrections or a motion of approval. Commissioner Bevington stated he had two items to discuss. He stated he'd like the minutes to state when Commission Vuu entered the meeting after the invocation. He also said on page 5, paragraph 13, should state "Commissioner Bevington stated that is true on subdivisions but he didn't realize it would affect something like this." City Attorney Yin stated page 2, paragraph 3, should say "If there are additional items or issues that come up at a Planning Commission or City Council meeting he said, it's within the City Council or Planning Commission's up rview to not take a vote and continue the item pending review of the public concerns." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BEVINGTON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CAM, TO WAIVE FURTHER READING AND ADOPT CONSENT CALENDAR. Vote results: YES: BEVINGTON, CAM, KUNIOKA, LOPEZ, VUU NO: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE Chairman Lopez declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Conditional Use Permit 08 -01 — 8966 Garvey Avenue Presentation: Senior Planner Agaba Staff Recommendation: DENY Conditional Use Permit 08 -01. Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting. Monday, March 17, 2008 Page 5 of 16 Senior Planner Agaba made his presentation and then stated the applicant was present and asked the Commissioners if they had any questions. Chairman Lopez opened the hearing to the public Hamid Sayari residing at 4822 Aqueduct Avenue, Encino, CA 91436, stated their business has been there, according to staff, since 1994. He said they have been trying to serve the community as best as they can. He stated the incidents of cars being stolen and narcotics being sold are incidents that happened outside of the store, in which they had no control over. He said if a car was being stolen outside of the store, they would have no way of knowing if the car was being driven by the owner or thief. He stated the only thing we are responsible for is selling beer to minors. He said we have never had a suspended license for liquor and for that incident, we paid the price. He stated what he has proposed for the new location, as far as selling beer and wine, is to have labels on all the doors stating if the buyer appears to be under the age 27, they'll have to show identification. He also said if they see someone intoxicated or frequently coming in to purchase liquor, they will not sell anymore to them at all. He said whatever we have control on, we'll do. These bums that stay outside, he said, we'll keep out of the store and if 3 or 4 gather, we'll call the Sheriff's Department. He stated that they have informed employees to never chase after someone outside the store for anything; we can replace what they steal, but we can never replace a life. He stated business has been good and we have been there many years. It is an existing liquor license and although they committed an error he said, the most they have done is pay higher insurance like they have paid the fine. He stated he wants the Planning Commission to consider the length of time they have been there with the number of incidents that have happened. We are hoping we can maintain the good business we have provided to the community and hopefully improve the situation and try to eliminate similar incidents from occurring, he said. Also, in the staff report it stated that products were stored too close to the electric panel during a site inspection conducted by staff. He stated a delivery was done at the same time of the site inspection, which is why those items were there. Staff reported that only two beer and wine type 21 licenses are permitted in a census tract, which one was issued and his would be the second, he said, which is why he doesn't see why he can't continue to have what they have already. Masu Sayari, store manager of Roy's Liquor, residing at 3220 Melon Drive, Torrance, CA, stated he's worked at this store approximately 16 years from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm almost seven days a week. He said he can speak of some of the incidents but the rest he does not know about. He stated he came to the city about five years ago to speak with the Mayor and Sheriff regarding the bums. He said there was nothing they could do about this problem. He asked the Sheriff what he could do and was told that begging is legal; there is no physical force being caused. Mr. Sayari continued stating that he personally asks the bums to please move but never physically involves himself with them. Also, about cars that are stolen, he said this happens everywhere. In regards to the shooting, he stated he was not working that night, but the employee working that night called him. He said for the employee to close the door, and do not go outside because it was none of his business. It was said that this incident began in their store, but the next day when he asked what happened, he was told that the victim came in for some cigarettes and left to the taco place next door. When the two men were in front of the taco place, they began to argue, he said, and once they crossed the street near the mechanic shop, they shot each other. He stated he never killed anyone and Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: Monday, March 17, 2008 Page 6 of 16 always tries to stay friendly with the people. Regarding selling beer to minors, the night this incident took place he was out sick. He stated that ABC sent an undercover minor to purchase alcohol and because the clerk was so busy, he forgot to ask for identification. He said he personally checks for identification, and was told by the Sheriff that they have set traps and he has not sold to people without identification. He stated selling $2.00 alcohol to minors doesn't make money and it's not worth it; sometimes he argues with them go buy a soda or a juice and the same goes for cigarettes to minors. He stated he does his best to do his job good. He stated he tries to be positive and that we can ask the Sheriff because she knows him very well. Chairman Lopez questioned if the sale of beer to minors had happened again after the 2001 incident. Mr. Hamid Sayari stated it has happened on one other occasion Mr. Masu Sayari stated that one employee was working at the cash register while he was assisting a customer on the other side of the store. He said two guys came into the store and purchased beer and the employee at the counter did not pay attention. The officer was in the store and they were absolutely right that the clerk did not ask for identification or pay attention; that employee was fired. After that incident, he stated, they made a nice trap by sending two young men to purchase beer. He stated he asked the men for identification and they did not have any although the man stated he was twenty- seven, so he did not sell them beer. This first incident was almost nine years ago and the most recent incident of selling alcohol to a minor happened approximately six months ago. Chairman Lopez opened the public hearing to those IN FAVOR of this application: Mr. Jim Flournoy residing at 8655 Landis View, a resident, questioned if the liquor store to the east of Walnut Grove Avenue on Garvey Avenue was the one they were discussing. Mr. Hamid Sayari stated no. He said they were located on the corner of Delta Avenue and Garvey Avenue. Mr. Flournoy stated they were located west and would be moving east to the new store. He stated he wanted to make sure he knew where they were moving. He questioned what was going to happen to the current store they were at and if they owned or rented it. Mr. Hamid Sayari replied they pay rent but an Asian company purchased the property. Mr. Flournoy questioned if Mr. Sayari was thinking of moving back there to the redevelopment as a tenant. Mr. Hamid Sayari stated they have not yet made him an offer to move back. Mr. Flournoy stated he remembers the store that is at Walnut Grove Avenue and Garvey where Mr. George Westervelt was shot and killed; that store has been much more of a problem than this one. He stated of the two stores, this store has the better reputation. He stated he does think this should be continued. Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: Monday, March 17, 2008 Page 7 of 16 Chairman Lopez closed the public hearing to the public and opened it up to the Commissioners. Vice - Chairman Kunioka questioned that even though they are moving five blocks down, it is a different census tract. Senior Planner Agaba stated that the new location they are moving to is within the same census tract as the existing liquor store at the corner of Walnut Grove Avenue and Garvey Avenue. What staff was trying to show the Commission is that the census tract will now have two liquor stores. Vice - Chairman Kunioka questioned that even though this is a very short move, this will be on a different census tract. Senior Planner Agaba stated yes. Vice - Chairman Kunioka questioned if the current census tract where they're located is also overly concentrated. Senior Planner Agaba stated he did not think so but they did not get a report from ABC because that location was not the subject property. Commissioner Bevington questioned what kind of report is given by ABC; he asked if there was some sort of negative report when the census tract has too many liquor stores. Senior Planner Agaba stated there is a definition of over concentration and if you look on page 6, according to the California Department of Alcohol Beverage Control it defines over concentration as greater than one license per 1,192 residents living within the subject census tract. The population of this census tract is 2,804 and the number of off -sale beer and wine licenses allowed is 2, he stated; one is existing and this would be the second one if approved, which will be the maximum allowed. He stated however, there are other on -sale ABC licenses which are existing within the same census tract and that's indicated on the table on page 6 below the third paragraph. This includes a restaurant called Crabulous, which is within the same shopping center that sells alcohol that is on -sale, he said, meaning you can't take alcohol out of that restaurant meaning that is off -site. He stated there is another restaurant V & L located at 9000 Garvey and also a restaurant that has been giving trouble to the City which is called Casa Latina and has been going on since the ABC license was approved. He said the total of ABC licenses is five: two off -sale and three on -sale within the same census tract. Chairman Lopez stated that two ABC licenses are liquors and the others are restaurants so they can't take liquor outside of them. Vice - Chairman Kunioka stated he didn't measure the distance, but looking at the numbers it's under two hundred numbers between 8606 and 8712 Garvey Avenue which is closer than the new location at 8966 Garvey Avenue. He stated he doesn't know if it's a technical issue regarding the census tract and questioned if that is the hold up. Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: Monday, March 17, 2008 Page 8 of 16 Chairman Lopez stated he agrees with the applicant that he can't stop what happens outside the store. The big issue, he said, is the way they handle the license in the store and who they sell the beer and tobacco products to. City Attorney Yin stated pursuant to Rosemead Municipal Code 17.112.100, there is a provision dealing with alcohol. He stated the Commission needs to determine that all four of those findings have been met. Vice - Chairman Kunioka stated the proposal would be very close to a residential neighborhood and questioned how close the current liquor store is to the residential neighborhood. Senior Planner Agaba stated it's about 2,000 feet. Vice - Chairman Kunioka questioned if shifting the problem would make things worse at the new location. He stated what he is trying to figure out is if they go to this nicer location, would it not reduce the problem. He stated he does not want to say "gang- related" area but questioned if the surroundings were a little nicer than the current location, would it be better? He also questioned the adherence with the existing CUP at the current location. Senior Planner Agaba stated yes, there is a history of non - compliance with the subject conditions of approval. Vice - Chairman Kunioka questioned which conditions were under the control of the tenant and which were the responsibility of the owner. Senior Planner Agaba stated the conditions the applicant was sited for were for not posting a sign which was his responsibility. Commissioner Bevington questioned whether the conditions go toward the tenant or the owner of the property. City Planner Everling stated it would be the tenant's responsibility for the actual land use. Commissioner Bevington questioned that even though the tenant did not own the property, the tenant is responsible for the conditions on that property before the landlord. City Planner Everling stated correct. He said since the owner has to concede to the Conditional Use Permit application, the owner has to be made aware that the applicant is applying for a Conditional Use Permit because the conditions of a Use Permit run with the land. He stated once the Conditional Use Permit is approved, then the landlord is also responsible. Commissioner Bevington stated this is a new application to come to this tract and although the business has been operating for many years, it has a poor record. He stated now that the new owner of their current location wants to improve it, and he wants the applicant to move out. Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: Monday, March 17, 2008 Page 9 of 16 Senior Planner Agaba stated staff would like to make the Commission understand that the subject applicant who has submitted the application before you tonight is the same applicant who has held this CUP ever since. With history of non compliance, with the mandatory requirements of the Rosemead Municipal Code, which requires that any CUP that has to be approved make the findings, he stated staff believes that these same problems will transfer to new subject neighborhood. He stated if it was a new applicant, then possibly we could say this problem would not suffice, but throughout the ten years under the CUP, the same applicant has had the same problems; after the citation the same problems occurred again. He stated the findings under the Rosemead Municipal Code could not be met. Chairman Lopez questioned what could be done to let them keep their license and keep their store. He stated selling the liquor to minors was a big issue but they are making adjustments to that and as for everything else, it was based outside the store. He questioned what staff recommends to be done in order to allow them to keep their license. City Planner Everling stated the Commission would have to make each of the four findings as Senior Planner Agaba pointed out. He said if the Commission cannot make just one of those findings, then the Conditional Use Permit has to be denied. Under State Law, all four findings have to be met as well as the additional findings under the Rosemead Municipal Code which is how the Planning Commission can allow this business to move to a new location. Vice - Chairman Kunioka questioned the maintenance of this property and also wanted to know if there was a connection between this application and the previous application. Senior Planner Agaba stated there is no connection and this is a different applicant. Vice - Chairman Kunioka questioned if the previous applicant wanted an ABC license for this specific location. Senior Planner Agaba questioned if Vice - Chairman Kunioka was talking about the ABC license that was given to Crabulous, which was a sit -down restaurant. Vice - Chairman Kunioka stated he thought there was a proposal for a transfer of license for this particular store. Commissioner Bevington questioned if crime was typical among all liquor stores. City Attorney Yin stated that he cannot comment on that. He stated that it's a case -by -case situation. He said some liquor stores attract certain types of situations and some don't; it also depends on the neighborhood they are in. This is why ABC is concerned about the issue of over concentration. Commissioner Vuu stated we have to find all the findings. City Attorney Yin stated the way the Rosemead Municipal Code is written, the Planning Commission shall make the findings otherwise, it will be denied. Senior Planner Agaba stated staff would like to add that whatever decision the Commission Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: Monday, March 17, 2008 Page 10 of 16 makes tonight will only affect the ABC license and not the convenience market so they can still operate the convenience market if the Planning Commission denies the project. He stated they would have to apply for an Occupancy Permit as a convenience store. Commissioner Bevington stated he does not see how they can make those four findings. Vice - Chairman Kunioka questioned if the existing location is being demolished. Senior Planner Agaba stated according to the applicant, the existing building will be demolished. He stated last year we received a tentative conceptual plan from someone who was proposing a mixed -use at that location, but nothing formal has been submitted to the city yet. City Attorney Yin questioned what the timeframe of approval is for this Conditional Use Permit. City Planner Everling responded it was for six months. Chairman Lopez questioned upon denial of the ABC license, what the applicant's rights would be after this. City Planner Everling stated the applicant could appeal to City Council within ten calendar days. He said the City Council could either uphold the decision that the Planning Commission made or change it. Chairman Lopez questioned what changes the City Council could do. City Planner Everling stated they would also have to make the required four findings. He stated they would be bound by the same laws. City Attorney Yin stated he believes at that hearing, the applicants can submit additional information regarding these findings. Chairman Lopez questioned what would happen if the ABC license is denied on both sides. He questioned if the applicant could correct the findings to come back and reapply for the ABC license. City Attorney Yin stated we are not here to issue an ABC license, but to transfer the use of one. Chairman Lopez questioned what their next option would be if the license is denied. City Planner Everling stated the applicant could open a convenience store without the sale of alcohol. He stated at the existing location they can maintain and operate where they're at, up until the point and time they are required to move by the property owner. Chairman Lopez questioned once the applicant establishes the convenience store and the license is denied, have they lost their license. Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: Monday, March 17, 2008 Page 11 of 16 City Attorney Yin questioned if there was an expiration date for CUP that the applicant was operating with now. Senior Planner Agaba stated this CUP has had several extensions and he believes it is City Policy not to extend CUPs anymore. As far as he understands, he stated the conditions of approval run with land but the City Attorney can correct him if he's wrong. He stated CUPS are no longer extended so it is still current. The Commissioners discussed what it would take for the applicant to re- establish a license if it's denied. City Attorney Yin stated the license is outside of the City's jurisdiction. He said it is from the State. He stated they can resubmit an application, but whatever the state does with their license is out of our hands. Chairman Lopez stated under conditions of the Planning Commission, in order to receive their license, conditions would have to be met. City Attorney Yin stated they could reapply, we could require they come back with a list of things that they were going to do to make sure these things were going to be done. He stated they could install certain security apparatus as well. City Planner Everling stated there could even be security personnel on -site. Chairman Lopez questioned why this can't this be done for them to make the findings and stated that they need to work with staff. City Planner Everling stated it's up to them since they will be moving relatively soon and whether or not the motivation to do this is there. City Attorney Yin stated another option would be to table this to another time and redirect staff to work with the applicant. City Planner Everling stated if the applicant is willing to add security cameras or security personnel to make those concessions for the new location, then the Commission might feel comfortable making the new findings. Chairman Lopez opened the public hearing to the public. Chairman Lopez questioned if Mr. Hamid Sayari was aware of the findings before to know that these were concerns. Mr. Hamid Sayari residing at 4822 Aqueduct Avenue, Encino CA 91436, stated he received the letter Friday and did not have enough time to study the staff report. City Attorney Yin stated that all of these requirements are printed in the Rosemead Municipal Code which is available in printed form and also online, so it is the law. Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting. Monday, March 17, 2008 Page 12 of 16 Chairman Lopez stated he is concerned with the fact that he may not have bothered to look to see what laws they were that he had to follow. Senior Planner Agaba stated that staff had attempted several times to contact the applicant and tell him what the concerns are and what is expected, so staff has been in contact. City Attorney Yin stated if they would like to table this item. Commissioner Bevington stated they're not going to find the traffic getting any better. He stated they can't find the location is further away from residents. He questioned what could staff do to present to us to make the findings. Chairman Lopez stated he understands the law, but is just concerned about the applicant losing his ABC license. Commissioner Bevington stated he thinks they all have concerns of the man losing his ABC license. Chairman Lopez questioned if there is a way that we can table this and give them the opportunity to make changes. He said they are going to make the move anyways, but it's whether or not we place a hold on the license and give them corrections. He questioned how the applicant can control traffic, and then stated he cannot. Commissioner Bevington stated we can't put staff in a box here by saying we've got to find something to make these findings. City Planner Everling stated one of the findings is the burden of proof which lies in the applicant, not staff. Commissioner Bevington stated he has no objection to tabling the project, but he doesn't want instructions going to staff for them to make the findings. He stated he would like the tabling to be open to see if staff and the applicant can work out any of these findings. City Planner Everling questioned what kind of solutions Mr. Hamid Sayari could think of at the moment that would help. Mr. Hamid Sayari stated as far as making it safer, putting surveillance cameras inside the store would be the first thing. He stated if something happens, they have the control to see who it was. As far as having signage on everything he said, before we can open the store, he thinks staff is required to verify that the windows are clear, the signage is appropriate, and there are no issues. He stated this way they can let him know if corrections need to be done. As far as this being close, they are not going too far from their original location; about half a block from where they are currently located. He stated staff has recommended that they can move inside the store without the beer and wine license, but they have to look at the situation as a whole community. He stated eighty percent of what they sell is taxable. These taxes will eventually come back to the community, he said and by taking half of it away, it's taking half from the community. He agrees this kind of business will have an impact on the Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: Monday, March 17, 2008 Page 13 of 16 community because there are bad people everywhere. He said he doesn't have the option to interview people to determine if they are drug dealers or gang members. He stated he's looking to make improvements coming to the new location; putting more lights, an outside camera if necessary, and cameras inside as well. He stated if this is what the Planning Commission is looking for then this is something we can do. Chairman Lopez stated it is a good idea to table it. He said if the applicant works with staff on these findings, the next time we see it, the findings could be ones we can approve. He stated he doesn't want to deny the license when some of these findings are out of their control, but he does agree with staff about added security for the community, his staff and himself. He questioned when the move is supposed to take place. Mr. Hamid Sayari stated we can move as soon as the Planning Commission gives us the green light. He stated they have everything lined up but they cannot move anything until they have the CUP approval. He said they do not have a complete plan and currently there are two separate stores, so putting a security system in an empty store will not work out. He stated tenant improvements need to be made and the things he can change he has no objection to. He stated but something like traffic, in which he cannot change, he will not be able to do. Placing a camera in the shopping center parking lot, he said, doesn't seem necessary but if the Planning Commission wants that, then it will be done. City Planner Everling questioned if the Commission was interested in having staff work with the applicant to revise some conditions to where the Commission feels more comfortable being able to make the required findings. He stated what he recommends the Commission do is to continue the item to the April 7, 2008, Planning Commission. He stated one, this will give staff time to write a Resolution for approval with conditions and two, it will allow staff to come up with conditions with the applicant for signage, surveillance cameras, possible on -site security personnel, and lighting. Commissioner Bevington stated he thinks the Sheriff should come into this. He questioned what could be done because they're liable to have same problems at the current location follow them to the new one. He thinks the Sheriff's expertise and what they can do would make him feel a lot more comfortable with the project. The Commissioners discussed involving the Sheriff in this matter. Chairman Lopez stated they would continue this to April 7, 2008 because personally he doesn't want Mr. Sayari to lose his license. He stated he wants to see this move on and doesn't have a problem if we can clean up and maintain this; it will be a positive thing for the City of Rosemead. Commissioner Bevington stated he does not want anyone to leave feeling that this is going to reverse. He stated this is another opportunity to see if they can have the right circumstances that are bound to these four findings. He stated even with the Sheriff's and staff's best efforts, he may still vote to deny this. Chairman Lopez stated tonight they are not comfortable just denying this proposal without a chance. Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: Monday, March 17, 2006 Page 14 of 16 City Attorney Yin stated this will give staff the opportunity to work with the applicant, which bare in mind, the staff report could come back with a recommendation for denial again. Commissioner Vuu stated he'd like to make a recommendation as far as serving alcohol to minors that if it happens again, we can revoke their CUP. Vice - Chairman Kunioka questioned the signage on the windows. Senior Planner Agaba stated yes, there is excessive signage on the windows. City Planner Everling stated staff will work with the applicant on this. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KUNIOKA, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CAM TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 08 -01 TO MONDAY APRIL 7, 2008. Vote results: YES: BEVINGTON, CAM, KUNIOKA, LOPEZ, VUU NO: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE Chairman Lopez declared said motion duly carried and so ordered. 5. MATTERS FROM THE CHAIRMAN & COMMISSIONERS Vice - Chairman Kunioka questioned if there was an issue with street lighting shining in people's windows, is there a process and who is responsible for it. City Planner Everling stated that is a Public Works matter and they can install shields. Vice - Chairman Kunioka questioned if this is not uncommon. City Planner Everling stated yes, it is not uncommon. 6. MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR AND STAFF City Planner Everling stated they had a very successful community meeting for the Valley Vision Plan on March 5, 2008. He said approximately thirty to forty residents and local business owners attended and it was very positive. The City's consultant made a great presentation and based on the outcome of that meeting, he said, they've scheduled a study session with the City Council Tuesday March 25, 2008, from 5:00 pm to 6:00 pm. He stated this time it will be the Planning Commission, City Council, local business owners, and residents they are looking to get feedback from, as well as direction from the Commissioners and Council members. Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: Monday, March 17, 2008 Page 15 of 16 Vice - Chairman Kunioka questioned if a reminder would be sent. Mr. Brian Lewin questioned if residents would be noticed. City Planner Everling stated based on public input they received regarding the General Plan update, people felt they hadn't been noticed properly. He stated he had a chance to work with Pro Graphics to create a postcard that will be sent to over 20,000 residents. Commissioner Bevington questioned what was going on with the General Plan Amendment. City Planner Everling stated right now regarding the General Plan, the City's consultant is working with sub - consultants on revising the Draft Environmental Impact Report as well as amending the text in the General Plan based on the community meetings. He stated hopefully that will come back and will be open for a forty -five day public comment period, after which time we'll set it up for Planning Commission review. Chairman Lopez stated make sure we get the comments. 7. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Lopez adjourned the Planning Commission Meeting at 8:30 p.m. MOTION BY VICE - CHAIRMAN KUNIOKA, SECONDED BY CHAIRMAN LOPEZ TO ADJOURN UNTIL THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. M E /AG Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: Monday, March 17, 2008 Page 16 of 16