Loading...
PC - Item 3A - Minutes 5-2-11Minutes of the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 2, 2011 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Vice - Chairwoman Eng at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH OF OFFICE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Commissioner Ruiz INVOCATION - Commissioner Hunter ROLL CALL - Commissioners Herrera, Hunter, Ruiz, ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS PRESENT: City Manager Ramirez, Assistant Planner Trinh, ( 1. EXPLANATION OF HEARING PROC Greg Murphy, City Attorney, 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE Council Member Saccaro and Cor 3. CONSENT Eng Lockwood rights of the meeting. )pointed Planning Commissioner Michael for their reinstatement. A. Approval of Minutes - April 18, 2011 Vice - Chairwoman Eng stated that she has one correction on page 2. Commissioner Herrera made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Ruiz, to approve the Minutes of April 18, 2011 with one correction on page 2. Vote resulted in: Yes: Eng, Herrera, Hunter, Ruiz No: None Abstain: Saccaro Absent: None 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. DOWNTOWN ROSEMEAD DESIGN GUIDELINES - The City of Rosemead proposes to adopt Downtown Design Guidelines for Downtown Rosemead, located on Valley 1 Boulevard between Walnut Grove Avenue and Rosemead Boulevard. The guidelines are intended to supplement the Rosemead Municipal Code and would be used during the development approval process, and are intended as a reference point of expectations of quality development. The principle design criteria and architectural styles represented in the document are meant to assist in the design, development, and implementation of quality architecture and site planning. Use of these guidelines will ensure that new development and redevelopment upholds a commitment to high - quality development in the City of Rosemead. PC RESOLUTION 11 -06 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,, STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE DOWNTOWN ROSEMEAD DESIGN GUIDELINES TO THE CITY COUNCIL. Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 11.06, a resolution recommending approval of the Downtown Rosemead Design Guidelines to the City Council. Assistant Planner Trinh presented the staff report. Vice - Chairwoman Eng asked if the Vice - Chairwoman Eng asked staff why Grove Avenue, where Barr Lumber was Assistant Planner Vice - Chairwoman No. 2 and asked ad any questions for staff. ley Boulevard and Walnut Design Guidelines. already zoned as C -4 Regional Commercial. is located in Redevelopment Project Area is expiring. evelopment Manager Ramirez explained that there are two Project Areas. Project ulates Garvey Avenue and is set to expire in the year "2013 ". She stated Downtown located in Project, Area 2 and is set to expire in "2030 ". Vice - Chairwoman; Eng stated that under Design Objectives on page 5, number 10, she would like staff to add at the end of the sentence "for new and existing businesses ". Vice - Chairwoman Eng stated she would also like to add that an objective state "to create some form of uniformity in the City ". She also asked staff if the objectives were numbered in a certain order. Assistant Planner Trinh replied no. Vice - Chairwoman Eng asked if on page 6, under Architecture, if the building height is limited to one to two stories. 2 Assistant Planner Trinh replied the Rosemead Municipal Code has limitations on height requirement which is set at 75 feet. Vice - Chairwoman Eng asked staff if the City has an example of a "traditional building ". Assistant Planner Trinh replied that the purpose of this statement is to create uniformity within the Downtown Area. She also suggested the word traditional be changed to existing buildings. Vice - Chairwoman Eng replied that would be a clearer basis to asked staff about page 8, under Architectural Detail and Facade and wanted to know if the City currently has a unique character of t Assistant Planner Trinh replied it is the intention of the document to She stated the sentence can be revised to say, "The unique charactei this document." Vice - Chairwoman Eng stated so the goal of Downtown. Commissioner Hunter asked staff if keep them the same colors. Assistant Planner Trinh replied tt to compliment the buildings. She and colors will be included in I or upgrade will have to go before �r Trinh Planning be that purpose. She also ation, "unique character" rntown. ate a unique Downtown. he Downtown created by is to achieve a unique :s to install awnings and will not be restrictions on colors but staff will want the colors ed all projects will be reviewed by staff as a Design Overlay review. She also stated anyone doing a facade, remodel, Manning Commission for approval. at projects related to zoning, colors, and lettering, will be for approval. He also recommended that only address ency purposes. it projects related to zoning, colors, and lettering will be for approval, Vice - Chairwoman Eng asked staff about page 12 Arcade and inquired if properties are deep enough to facilitate that, type of design. Assistant Planner Trinh replied that current properties are very narrow. She explained that there are instances where a property owner owns more than one lot and, in the future, may want to consolidate the lots to create some type of development. In those cases, an Arcade may work. Vice - Chairwoman Eng asked staff if there are currently any historic buildings in this Downtown area. Assistant Planner Trinh replied no but there may be in the future. 3 Vice - Chairwoman Eng referred to page 23, Window Signs, and asked staff if the City is currently putting restrictions on this item. Assistant Planner Trinh replied no and explained that the Municipal Code allows 15 percent window signage, which the property owner could put telephone numbers and/or business hours. Vice - Chairwoman Eng referred to page 29, Parking, and asked staff the meaning of, "At -grade parking shall not be located between building and the street frontage ". Assistant Planner Trinh replied that it is being recommended to have the building located at the front of the property line, so that it is more pedestrian oriented and business friendly. She also explained that if the parking is located in front of the building it is not as pedestrian oriented. Vice - Chairwoman Eng asked about vehicular access, and questioned if the property did not meet the 350 frontage what would happen. Assistant Planner Trinh explained that even if there entitled to have a driveway off of Valley Boulevard. Vice - Chairwoman Eng referred to meant a rooftop. Assistant Planner Trinh Vice - Chairwoman Er feet from the nearest n Eng "Ivy -It". Assistant PI Department clean. She staff wfv outdoor the property owner is still ied'if the solid cover trash enclosures furniture must be a minimum of ten (10) safety reasons and bus fumes. type of maintenance will be required for the Graffiti- id that this graffiti deterrent was recommended by the Public Services vy. She also stated that the product is easy to maintain and keep the website address where they could obtain more information. Vice - Chairwoman Eng requested that on page 39, under Public Art, "businesses" be included in the introduction paragraph. She also questioned staff why the Gateway Arch on page 40 is so expensive. Assistant Planner Trinh replied that the cost was based on a survey of other cities with Gateway Arches and explained that the cost includes materials, labor, installation, and detail of the Arch. Commissioner Hunter stated that installing a clock was discussed when the Committee met. 11 Vice - Chairwoman Eng asked if the Planning Commissioners had any other questions. TO101- Vice - Chairwoman Eng opened the Public Hearing, Brian Lewin stated that he would like to congratulate and welcome Planning Commissioner Michael Saccaro and congratulated reappointed Commissioners Herrera, Hunter, and Ruiz. He asked staff if the Design Guidelines had been vented with the Mixed Use Guidelines, Assistant Planner Trinh replied yes and explained that both Guidelines were consolidated. Brian Lewin thanked staff for including Trash Enclosures. He inquired staff where the intended use is for the Ivy. Assistant Planner Trinh replied along block walls as Brian Lewin suggested that it also be used a with staff that in regards to monument signs, with setbacks. Assistant Planner Trinh replied yes. Brian Lewin also recor to allow for at least 30 visibility in regards to;; Commissioner Ruiz currently. _ Brian Lewin expressed landscaoina on the of regards to signage, ME deterrent. or rose bushes.; He confirmed that they will only be in places be designed and maintained . He expressed concern with ordinances that address these issues they are discussed during the Design Review process. -n is not with Public- Right -Away but with the proposed He stated sometimes landscaping blocks exit visibility. emended to staff that before the Design Guidelines are finalized, in be added to consider 30 feet visibility. City Attorney Murphy explained that these guidelines are non - binding and non mandatory guidelines for the Planning Commission to use to review Design Applications. He stated that the Planning Commission will have the binding requirements of the Municipal Code. These guidelines should be thought of as a supplemental to the Municipal Code, or as a way to fluctuate the Municipal Code, rather than something that will bind development on its own. Vice - Chairwoman Eng asked if there are any more questions. None Vice - Chairwoman Eng closed the Public Hearing and asked for a motion. Vice - Chairwoman Eng thanked Commissioner Diana Herrera and Commissioner Joan Hunter for being part of the Design Guideline Committee which helped with the recommendations of guidelines. Greg Murphy, City Attorney, stated that the motion is to Adopt the Design Guidelines as amended by the Planning Commission discussion at tonight's meeting. Commissioner Herrera made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hunter, to ADOPT Resolution No. 11.06, a resolution recommending approval of the Downtown Rosemead Design Guidelines to the City Council as amended by the Planning Commissions discussion at tonight's meeting. Vote resulted in: Yes: Eng, Herrera, Hunter, No: None Abstain: None Absent: None 5. MATTERS FROM THE CHAIRMAN Commissioner Hunter expressed concern that there is not a lid, or a gate with a lock, on the trash bin located behind Universal Bank. She stated that this allows for the illegal use of dumping trash at this site. She requested that staff contact the property owner and have this taken care of. er Ruiz requested that staff check on the restaurant property located on Temple City nd Valley Boulevard. He is concerned about the construction taking place and inquired was following the plans approved by the Planning Commission. stated that staff will look into these two items. 6. MATTERS FROM ST A. Follow -up on Planning Commission Concerns Community Development Manager Ramirez gave an update on two follow up items from the May 2, 2011, Planning Commission meeting. She reported that staff has spoken with the property owner of 2562 River Avenue and this site is scheduled to be cleaned up on May 4 or 5, 2011. She also stated staff will verify that it has been cleaned. The second issue is the property owned by SCE on Walnut Grove and Rush, and a request that this site be made into a park. She explained that the City's Parks & Recreation Director, David Montgomery Scott has been in contact with SCE and informed that SCE is not interested in making this site a park at this time. She stated that staff will continue to work with SCE and is recommended that the graffiti deterrent Ivy -It be installed to cover the chain link wall. Commissioner Hunter stated that the SCE property maintenance is not being kept up and recommended a sign be put up stating that the property belongs to Southern California Edison. Community Development Manager Ramirez replied that staff will make sure the property is cleaned up immediately. Commissioner Saccaro asked staff if the City is trying to purchase this property or trying to develop a park. Community Development Manager Ramirez explained that this was interested in purchasing for the development of a park. Sh the Parks & Recreation Director, has been in contact with SCE a the possibility of developing those properties. Commissioner Saccaro asked if the City is expec park or is the City willing to do it if SCE will give the Community Development Manager Ramirez replied give permission. Commissioner Saccaro asked staff if it is possible ti Community Development Manager Ramirez replied Commissioner Ruiz asked if Eminent Domain is a p Community Development Manager Ramirez replied area. 7. ADJOURNMENT ATTEST: Rachel Lockwood Commission Secretary "was something the City David Montgomery Scott, ieir vacant properties and California Edison to develop the both options and SCE will not for the property. tried. City does not have Eminent Domain in this meeting will be held on Monday, May 16, 2011, Nancy Eng Acting Chairwoman