Loading...
PC - Item 3A - Minutes 9-19-11 1 Minutes of the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING September 19, 2011 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Eng at 7:05 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE -Commissioner Saccaro INVOCATION -Vice-Chair Ruiz ROLL CALL -Commissioners Herrera, Saccaro, Vice-Chair Ruiz, and Chair Eng ABSENT – Commissioner Hunter ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS PRESENT: City Attorney Murphy, Community Development Director Wong, City Planner Bermejo, Assistant Planner Trinh, Planning Technician Casillas, Commission Secretary Lockwood 1. EXPLANATION OF HEARING PROCEDURES AND APPEAL RIGHTS 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 -August 15, 2011 Vice-Chair Ruiz made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herrera, to approve the Minutes of August 15, 2011 as presented. Vote resulted in: Yes: Herrera, Ruiz, Saccaro No: None Abstain: Eng Absent: Hunter 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 70670 -John Khuu has submitted a Tentative Tract Map for a proposed subdivision of two (2) lots, totaling approximately 30,535 square feet of lot area, to be divided into five (5) lots for the construction of five (5) new single-family residences, located at 3715 Ellis Lane. The subject properties are located in the R-1 (Single Family Residential) zone. PC RESOLUTION 11-19 -A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 70670 TO SUBDIVIDE TWO (2) EXISTING PARCELS INTO FIVE (5) PARCELS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 3715 ELLIS LANE IN THE R-1 (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ZONE. 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION -Staff recommends that the Planning Commission APPROVE Tentative Tract Map 70670 and ADOPT Resolution 11-19 with findings, subject to forty-four (44) conditions. Assistant Planner Trinh presented staff report. Chair Eng asked the Planning Commission if they had any questions for staff. Commissioner Saccaro asked staff if the lots will be properly graded and have adequate drainage. Community Development Director Wong replied that is required by the Subdivision Map Act and will be taken care of. He also stated that staff would like the Commission to consider an additional condition of approval to state," that all block walls proposed on the subdivision and grading drainage be installed prior to the recording the final map." He also stated that staff recommends that the parcel be planted with grass or similar materials, to control mud run-off during the rainy season. Chair Eng confirmed that staff is recommending the block walls, grading, and drainage all be completed prior to recording the final map. Community Development Director Wong replied that is correct. Vice-Chair Ruiz asked staff if a condition of approval that requires the maintenance of the lots weeds and unwanted vegetation is needed. Community Development Wong replied that there is a maintenance code section in regards to that and it will enforce that issue. He also stated that there is an additional condition of approval he would also like to add which is that, "the existing house on the property must also be demolished prior to final recording of the map." Chair Eng stated that Condition of Approval number five (5) may address the vegetation and weed abatement concern and asked the Planning Commission if it will satisfy their concern. Vice-Chair Ruiz replied yes. Chair Eng asked staff in regards to the block walls, grading, and drainage is there a condition of approval that can be amended to incorporate that intent. Assistant Planner Trinh replied Condition of Approval number four (4) can be amended to add to the last sentence, "Tentative Tract Map 70670 shall not be final and shall not be recorded until such time the current improvements on the lot have been demolished and the grading, drainage, and block walls be completed prior to recording of the map." Community Development Director Wong stated that he would also like to include that the materials and colors for the block walls be reviewed and approved by staff. Assistant Planner Trinh asked staff if the architectural style of the block wall be added to Condition of Approval number twenty-three (23). Community Development Director Wong replied that would be appropriate. Vice-Chair Ruiz referred to the plans and stated on the southwest corner of the property, it looks like the block wall is going up all the way to the front of the property and asked staff if there should be a set-back on that. 3 Chair Eng asked if he was referring to lot number four (4). Vice-Chair Ruiz replied yes, lot four (4) on the corner and the plans also indicates a 6’-0" tall wall all the way to the front of the property. He also stated there should be a set-back with only a 3’-0" high block wall. Assistant Planner Trinh replied that staff will make sure that is corrected before plans are approved. Chair Eng stated she would like to clarify that she knows the homes and improvements to be made on these lots will be subject to a Design Review and referred to the subdivision maps and asked staff if the homes are intended to be two stories. Assistant Planner Trinh replied that question can be deferred to the applicant. Chair Eng asked if there were any other questions for staff. None Chair Eng opened the Public Hearing and invited the applicant to the podium. Jack Lee, Engineer for the project stated they will work with staff and are willing to comply with all the Conditions of Approval. Chair Eng reiterated the amended Conditions of Approval regarding the grading, drainage, and block walls and asked Jack Lee if they were acceptable. Jack Lee replied yes, and explained that he has designed a preliminary grading plan so the storm water will drain away from the building. Chair Eng asked Jack Lee if the drainage will be completed prior to recording of the final map. Community Development Director Wong asked Jack Lee if the landscaping and irrigation being installed is also included. Jack Lee replied yes. Vice-Chair Ruiz asked Jack Lee if the demolition of the existing home will also be completed before recordization of the final map. Jack Lee replied yes, the existing home will have to be demolished before the grading begins. Kamen Lai, Designer for project explained to the Planning Commission that the demolition, grading, and block walls can be done but the landscaping and irrigation cannot be installed until the homes are built. He explained that is done during the last stages of construction to prevent damage. He also stated that the property owner will take steps to make sure the property is maintained for weed abatement and periodic clean ups. Community Development Director Wong stated that staff is concerned with water and mud run-off into the street during the rainy season and is requesting that the lot is properly maintained, irrigated, or landscaped with lawn or seeded to control the run-off. 4 Kamen Lai explained to the Planning Commission that the property will be fenced and have a green screen surrounding it so the property cannot be seen. He also stated the erosion control will be done around the property line. Chair Eng asked Kamen Lai if during the preparation of the lots they will be shielded. Kamen Lai replied that during the grading process a chain linked fence will be put up and wind screened. He also stated the property owner will do periodic maintenance of the lot. Chair Eng explained to Kamen Lai that staff is concerned that once the grading is completed the lot is not finished and staff would like a finished lawn to prevent water run-off into the streets and going into the storm drains. Community Development Director Wong stated the purpose of the lawn is to control the water run-off. Kamen Lai asked staff if the lawn could be done to the front yard set-back. He explained that if it is done in the back once construction begins it will be destroyed. Community Development Director Wong stated that is correct. Kamen Lai stated the property owner and I agree to the front lawn landscaping. Vice-Chair Ruiz explained to Kamen Lai that staff is concerned with the water run-off into the storm drains during the rainy season and he is glad the property owner is agreeing to do the front lawn landscaping. Gary Taylor, resident, asked staff how long the green screen fencing will be up before the construction starts. He stated a fence with green screening had been up about a year and half ago and nothing was done. He stated that it is an offensive screen when nothing is getting done and it has its purpose when it is being used, but to have it block property and have it deteriorate, which it does, his concern is how long will the fence be up and when will construction start. He also stated he has lived there as a next door neighbor for fifty years and there has not been a problem with water run-off due to the rainy season. He explained that the ground does absorb it and when it does run-off, it does go mainly down the driveway. He stated that under the circumstances if the green screen goes up and sand bags are put in place, he does not really foresee any problems, but if the grading is done as a true grade then there is a potential of the water sheet flowing across. Vice-Chair Ruiz stated that he agrees with Gary Taylor and staff should find out from the applicant when construction will take place. Gary Taylor, resident also stated there is chain-link fencing all around the property that the green screening can be placed on now. Chair Eng asked Kamen Lai and the property owner if they understood all the concerns Kamen Lai replied yes, they understand and if approved, they will work on the grading plan, final map, and get agency approvals. He also stated at the same time work on the architectural design, construction preparation, and getting building permits. Community Development Director Wong stated in terms of construction it will probably take about twelve (12) months for the map to record. Kamen Lai explained they will try to minimize the time the vacant lot will sit there. 5 Commissioner Herrera asked how many stories the homes will be. Kamen Lai replied potentially the homes will be two (2) stories and explained details of what will be done. Chair Eng asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak on this item. None Chair Eng closed the Public Hearing. Chair Eng asked the Planning Commission if there are anymore questions or comments. None Chair Eng asked for a motion with the amendments. Commissioner Saccaro made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herrera, to APPROVE Tentative Tract Map 70670 and ADOPT Resolution 11-19 with findings, subject to forty-four (44) conditions. Vote resulted in: Yes: Eng, Herrer, Ruiz, Saccaro No: None Abstain: None Absent: Hunter Community Development Director Wong stated the decision made tonight by the Planning Commission is final unless it is appealed to the City Council within ten (10) days. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 11-03 -Verizon Wireless has submitted a Conditional Use Permit application requesting to co-locate an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on an existing 75-foot tall T-Mobile monopine tree, located at 8624½ Rush Street in the O-S (Open Space) zone. PC RESOLUTION 11-17 -A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 11-03, FOR THE CO-LOCATION OF AN UNMANNED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON AN EXISTING 75-FOOT TALL T-MOBILE MONOPINE TREE, LOCATED AT 8624½ RUSH STREET IN THE O-S (OPEN SPACE) ZONE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION -Based on the analysis and findings contained in this report, staff recommends that the Planning Commission APPROVE Conditional Use Permit 11-03 and ADOPT Resolution No. 11-17 with findings, and subject to twenty-four (24) conditions. Assistant Planner Trinh presented the staff report. Chair Eng asked if the Planning Commissioners had any questions for staff. None Chair Eng opened the Public Hearing. 6 Ramon Salazar, representative for Verizon Wireless, stated he is from the consulting firm, Core Development Services, and thanked staff for the work done and gave a brief description of what the project consisted of. He also stated he has read the staff report and conditions of approval and is in agreement with most with the exceptions of Conditions of Approval numbers twelve (12), eighteen (18), and twenty (20). He also stated he has hopes that these conditions of approval can be modified tonight by the Planning Commission and staff. He stated the first Condition of Approval number twelve (12) is in regards to the maintenance of trash and litter, Condition of Approval number eighteen (18) is in regards to the generator, and Condition of Approval number twenty (20) is in regards to the yearly monitoring of this cell site. He stated in regards to Condition of Approval number twelve (12) Verizon is requesting that the language state that the City will provide some sort of notice to the carrier from staff to to rectify this issue. He stated Condition of Approval number eighteen (18) at the end of the first sentence Verizon would like language added for emergency operating hours such as natural disasters like earthquakes, floods, hurricanes and if the site goes down they would like to provide service to the emergency relief vehicles and general public servicing the area. He read the last sentence of Condition of Approval number twenty (20) and stated Verizon is requesting if at all possible to have some type of noticing from the City sent to them to make sure Verizon is on par with this condition of approval. He stated Verizon is a large company and it would help to receive some sort of notification to monitor the annual report. He also stated he is available to answer any questions. Chair Eng asked the Planning Commissioners if they had any questions for Ramon Salazar. Greg Murphy, City Attorney stated from the legal perspective, if the Planning Commission would like to make the requested changes, the last sentence in Condition of Approval number twelve (12) may be modified to say, "Any new litter or graffiti should be removed within 24 hours of notice from the City." He stated that way Verizon would not have be required to send someone on a daily basis but still would be required to remove litter and graffiti within 24 hours. He also stated in regards to Condition of Approval number twenty (20) he suggest that the Condition be kept as it stands right now, but authorize staff to work with the applicant to make minor changes, so as Verizon and staff could work for a submission of an annual report for all their sites in the City, rather than submitting reports on different sites throughout the calendar year. He stated leaving the requirement in the Conditions of Approval would make sure Verizon agrees to the Condition. He stated in regards to Condition of Approval number eighteen (18) allowing for emergency purposes while power is on, he could work on the wording to help this need. Vice-Chair Ruiz stated that the Condition of Approval number eighteen (18) refers to back-up generators and asked Ramon Salazar if Verizon would provide the generators. Ramon Salazar replied yes. Vice-Chair Ruiz stated that if Verizon is going to provide the back-up generators then this Condition of Approval number eighteen (18) should not be changed and it is a standard condition to all the carriers in the City. Chair Eng explained that the concern is that the back-up generator be used during the event of an emergency, and Vice-Chair Ruiz has stated that emergency generators are used for emergencies and recommends that there is not a need to modify Condition of Approval number eighteen (18). She asked Ramon Salazar if Verizon has staff that checks the sites on a regular basis. Ramon Salazar replied not regularly, but it is usually done about once a month, or once quarterly. Chair Eng asked staff if there was a standard Condition of Approval that addresses regular maintenance. Staff discussed that it may be Condition of Approval number twelve (12) and they will check. Commissioner Herrera asked staff if Condition of Approval number twenty (20) is standard policy for the City to send out a notification to all the wireless carriers or if the applicant usually remembers. 7 City Planner Bermejo explained that there are a lot of projects that have not reached their anniversary date but staff is willing to work with Verizon to co-ordinate all their reviews under one application yearly. She also explained there is not enough staff to contact the applicants and the Condition of Approvals are part of the operation of the use. Commissioner Herrera asked staff if all cities give notifications for their wireless facilities. City Planner Bermejo replied cities have specific ordinances that address wireless facilities that require them to submit this report. Chair Eng asked Ramon Salazar if Verizon has a customary process in providing this report. Ramon Salazar replied that there is no protocol and this is a fairly new Condition of Approval and other cities have different ordinances. He stated that Verizon will work with staff. Chair Eng suggested that staff add to the Condition of Approval that Verizon will provide the annual report with accordance to what their protocol is. She also also stated that the City of Rosemead cannot be the only City that requires this report. Ramon Salazar stated that this is not very common and they are struggling with a hard date and that is why Verizon is requesting some sort of notification. City Planner Bermejo stated that staff recommends that Verizon contact the Planning Division staff, to set a mutual date to review any reports that Verizon may submit for this site and any other Verizon sites in the City. She also stated this date does not need to be set tonight. Vice-Chair Ruiz asked Ramon Salazar how many sites Verizon has in the City of Rosemead. Ramon Salazar replied he does not really know, it may be five to seven but he can provide that information later. Vice-Chair Ruiz confirmed that this report will be not just for this site but for all the sites in Rosemead. He also explained why these reports were needed and recommended to the Planning Commission that the Condition of Approval not be changed and to follow staff’s recommendation. Ramon Salazar stated the report would be for all the sites and they are not contesting producing the reports. Chair Eng asked Ramon Salazar what is the radius of coverage for this proposed site. Ramon Salazar replied it depends on what type of coverage, typically there is voice and data, in building, and in car coverage. He explained the different interferences and replied that the radius is usually 2 to 2.5 miles. Chair Eng referred to the propagation map and stated there looks like there is still a lot of areas that do not have coverage and asked if there was a general coverage area. Ramon Salazar explained that there are reasons of placement of sites and it depends on where and how before a site is placed. Chair Eng asked staff if there was anyone else wishing to speak on this item. None 8 Chair Eng closed the Public Hearing and asked if the Commission had any other questions. None Chair Eng stated that before she asks for a motion she would like to confirm that there will not be any changes to the conditions of approvals. She stated that staff will work with Verizon with the requirement of the annual report. Greg Murphy, City Attorney asked if that includes not making a change to Condition of Approval number twelve (12) regarding that weeds and graffiti will be removed within 24 hours of notice from the City and requiring the removal being done within the 24 hours of occurrence. Vice-Chair Ruiz stated he agrees with the amendment to Condition of Approval number twelve (12) with the added sentence with the City sending a notice. Chair Eng asked staff if they are in agreement with the amendment to Condition of Approval number twelve (12). City Planner Bermejo replied yes, it is fine and if there is an issue with litter they would definitely get a notice. Chair Eng confirmed that Greg Murphy, Murphy, City Attorney will work with staff with the final language of Condition of Approval number twelve (12) and staff will notify Verizon if there is a problem with the site. She then asked for a motion from the Planning Commission. Vice-Chair Ruiz made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herrera to APPROVE Conditional Use Permit 11-03 and ADOPT Resolution No. 11-17 with findings, and subject to twenty-four (24) conditions. Vote resulted in: Yes: Eng, Herrera, Ruiz, Saccaro No: None Abstain: None Absent: Hunter Community Development Director Wong stated the decision made by the Planning Commission tonight is final unless it is appealed to the City Council within ten (10) days. C. DESIGN REVIEW 11-01 -Freddy and Wilson Yang have submitted an application proposing to remodel the façade of an existing two story office building, located at 8780 Valley Boulevard in the C-3D (Medium Commercial with a Design Overlay) zone. The project also includes new landscaping and signage. The site will continue to be used as an office building consistent with the uses permitted in the C-3D zone once the proposed renovations are complete. PC RESOLUTION 11-18 -A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW 11-01, FOR BUILDING AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS TO AN EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING, LOCATED AT 8780 VALLEY BOULEVARD IN THE C-3D (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL WITH A DESIGN OVERLAY) ZONE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION -Staff recommends that the Planning Commission APPROVE Design Review 11-01 and ADOPT Resolution No. 11-18 with findings, and subject to thirty (30) conditions. Planning Technician Casillas presented staff report. 9 Chair Eng asked if there were any questions for staff. None Chair Eng asked if this property was part of the City’s Downtown Design Guidelines and if this sign conforms to the guidelines. Planning Technician Casillas replied it is not part of the Civic Center, but yes it is part of the downtown and does fall under the Downtown Design Guidelines. Chair Eng asked staff if it is possible to add a front entrance awning. Community Development Director Wong replied yes, it can be added as an additional Condition of Approval. Chair Eng stated that if possible she would recommend that a front entrance awning and awnings on the second floor windows be installed. Community Development Director Wong confirmed that the requested Condition of Approval is for a barrel shaped awning at the front entrance and to carry that theme around to the side elevations on the second floor. Chair Eng replied yes. Vice-Chair Ruiz stated he would like to recommend and request that the awnings be in burgundy color so they enhance the building and compliment the Downtown area. Chair Eng asked staff if there is a Condition of Approval that can be amended or will this be a new Condition of Approval. Greg Murphy, City Attorney, replied that it will have to be a new Condition of Approval. Chair Eng stated that we will need to add Condition of Approval number thirty-one (31) to add a barrel shaped awning to the front entrance and to carry the theme to the side elevations on the second floor. Community Development Director Wong said that is correct for the second story windows and it was also requested to have the windows free of any signage. Chair Eng stated we would like to keep the windows clean and asked if it could be incorporated into Condition of Approval number thirty-one (31). Community Development Director Wong replied yes. Vice-Chair Ruiz stated he does not see the rear portion of the building in the detail sheet and asked staff for the color board. He also requested if we could add a band to divide the rear wall, and put a stripe across it as part of Condition of Approval number thirty-one (31). Chair Eng asked staff if this application is just for an exterior facade and there will be no other improvements. Planning Technician Casillas replied no, not under this Design Review. Vice-Chair Ruiz stated that the materials the applicant is using are of very high quality and he likes them. He also stated he would like to thank staff for pointing this out. 10 Staff brought in the color board for Design Review 11-01 and Vice-Chair Ruiz pointed out where the wall needs to be divided with a color band, to have some sort of articulation and break up the mass. Chair Eng asked if there were anymore questions or comments for staff. None Chair Eng opened the Public Hearing. Raymond Yang, Operations Officer for this project stated he would like to discuss Conditions of Approval numbers twenty-five (25) and twenty six (26) regarding new street trees to be planted in the street wells. He explained that the owners cost have exceeded their expectations for the budget set-forth for this project and are requesting that Conditions of Approval twenty-five (25) and twenty-six (26) be removed. He explained that the two trees would really not make a difference compared to the landscaping that is being installed on the side. Community Development Director Wong referred this item to Greg Murphy, City Attorney, and stated Condition’s of Approval numbers twenty-five (25) and twenty-six (26) are part of the Municipal Code requirement and to have it waived it would have to be approved by the City Council. Greg Murphy, City Attorney asked staff if they have the code provision tonight. Staff replied no, they do not and that is something they will have to research. Community Development Director Wong stated staff will research and if it is not a standard Code requirement, then the Planning Commission could formulate a condition of approval, if the Planning Commission desires to waive the Conditions of Approval. Greg Murphy, City Attorney, stated if the Planning Commission desires to waive those he can craft the language with staff to meet the Planning Commissions direction and can be done this evening. Chair Eng asked Raymond Yang if the Condition of Approval to add the awning at the front entrance and over the two story windows was acceptable to him. Raymond Yang replied that due to financial burden, the design of the property does not need an awning on it and he stated it will make the building and property look older. He also stated that other businesses nearby do not have awnings on their buildings. Chair Eng asked staff what the cost factor to place the awnings is. Community Development Director Wong replied he does not know. Commissioner Herrera stated that the business, "Mr. Lee’s", does have awnings. Raymond Yang stated on the corner of Valley Boulevard and Muscatel they do have brown shades. Staff replied yes those are the awnings. Raymond Yang stated he would have to discuss with the owner if the awnings would go with their designs. 11 Chair Eng recommended that the Planning Commission add a Condition of Approval that the applicant works with staff on the probability of installing the awnings. She asked Raymond Yang if he was agreement with this suggestion. Raymond Yang replied yes and they agree with the windows free of signage and the stripe across the rear portion of the wall. Vice-Chair Ruiz asked Raymond Yang to explain to the applicant that the Planning Commission is trying to upgrade the downtown area of our City. He stated it is part of the Beautification Program that the City is trying to establish. Raymond Yang stated they had the support of the Beautification Program and those funds were taken away from them that would have provided the financing for additional items such as the awnings and trees. He stated we now have to look for additional funds and we have used the best materials so far to make it look the best for the Downtown area. Chair Eng stated that she would like Raymond Yang to extend to the applicant that the Planning Commission appreciates everything they have done so far. Commissioner Herrera stated in regards to the monument sign, she asked Raymond Yang how many tenants do they intend to have there. Raymond Yang replied they are planning on having 15 to 20 tenants at that location. He stated 20 tenants will be full capacity, and the sign has a front and back. He also stated the management company would be in charge of which business will be located on the sign. Commissioner Herrera stated it looks like there is only room for ten. Raymond Yang stated it is ten on each side. Commissioner Herrera stated that it looks like it is five on each side and the height is 72". Vice-Chair Ruiz stated he only sees five also. Raymond Yang stated that the Planning Commission is looking at the existing signage. He stated that new signage is being proposed with a new monument that is coming up from the floor, rather from the wall. Commissioner Herrera asked Raymond Yang if the monument is 72" tall and accommodate ten on each side. side. Raymond Yang replied that is correct. City Planner Bermejo stated that she would like to clarify that the sign plan before the Commission tonight indicates a 6’ tall monument sign with ten sign spaces with five on each side. Vice-Chair Ruiz confirmed that there is only room for ten business spaces on the monument sign and read the dimensions to the Planning Commission. Raymond Yang apologized and explained there is room for twenty tenants in the building, but on the monument sign there will only be room for ten sign spaces, so what it will mean is that later there will not be room for the other ten tenants on the sign. He stated that they do agree to not having any tenants having signage on the windows. Commissioner Herrera stated she hopes the later tenants will not be upset that they cannot have signage out front. 12 Raymond Yang explained that there are some tenants that do not really require a space on the monument sign. Chair Eng asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak on this item. None Chair Eng closed the Public Hearing. Greg Murphy, City Attorney explained that Condition of Approval number twenty-five (25) be phrased,” To meet the requirements of the zone in which the building is located two new street trees shall be planted in tree wells in the existing concrete paved parkway fronting Muscatel Avenue to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, if into the extent not required by the Municipal Code, the requirement the trees be planted, may be waived by the Community Development Director." He also stated that Condition of Approval number twenty-six (26) based on its nature can also be waived by its Community Development Director if the requirement for trees were waived. He also stated for Condition of Approval number thirty-one (31) staff will work with the applicant on the feasibility of installing awnings at the front entrance and on the second story side windows, the awnings to be barrel shaped in burgundy color, all windows shall be free of signage and the applicant shall have a color band on the south wall to provide articulation in the visual break. Chair Eng asked for a motion. Commissioner Herrera made a motion, seconded by Vice-Chair Ruiz, to APPROVE Design Review 11-01 and ADOPT Resolution No. 11-18 with findings, and subject to thirty (30) conditions. Vote resulted in: Yes: Eng, Herrera, Ruiz, Saccaro No: None Abstain: None Absent: Hunter Community Development Director Wong confirmed with the Planning Commission that it is their wish to remove the requirement of the trees. Planning Commissioners replied that if it is not required by the Municipal Code we would consider waiving the requirement due to the financial hardship and because the additional landscaping is being done. Community Development Director Wong stated the decision made tonight by the Planning Commission is final, unless it is appealed to the City Council within 10 days. 5. MATTERS FROM THE CHAIRMAN & COMMISSIONERS Vice-Chair Ruiz stated he will prepare documentation of the Building Code, Chapter 99 to give to staff. He gave a brief summary of what Chapter 99 addresses. Sandra Armenta, resident stated there is a City Ordinance in place now that stipulates that trash cans cannot be seen from the street. She stated it is not possible for Code Enforcement to see every violation and informed the Planning Commission there is a link on the City of Rosemead website to report violations of weed abatement, yard maintenance, trash cans, shopping carts, and graffiti. She explained the process and stated the resident will receive a response electronically if an e-mail address is supplied. 13 Vice-Chair Ruiz expressed his concern with Code Enforcement concerns not handled in a timely manner. Commissioner Herrera stated that everyone needs to take responsibility and help staff to resolve these issues. Chair Eng stated she would like to thank staff for the wonderful unveiling of the 9/11 Memorial and all their hard work to get this accomplished. She also stated that the Garvey Beautification Committee met on Monday, September 12, 2011. She stated a tour was taken of Garvey Avenue to look at the conditions and the items that need to be addressed are cleanliness, and to engage more with the public and private business owners on how to make improvements on Garvey Avenue, and to come up with parking solutions. 6. MATTERS FROM STAFF A. Wal-Mart’s Annual Review of Conditions of Approval City Planner Bermejo presented the staff report. Chair Eng stated she had been contacted by a resident that resides on 1923 Delta Avenue with a concern of reverberating sound or echo that is audible in the resident’s bedroom. She stated she visited the resident’s home at 9:00 am that morning and confirmed to staff that the sound is there. She expressed that she would like staff to investigate this concern and also explained that the sound did not sound like it was generated from the transformer and the sound is pronounced more in the evening hours. City Planner Bermejo explained to the Planning Commission that tonight’s review is an informational report covering the review of Conditions of Approval and staff is not able to recommend further noise studies. She also stated any concerns that are brought up tonight can be put on the agenda for another Planning Commission meeting. Greg Murphy, City Attorney stated if there is a motion as a whole from the Planning Commission to follow up on Chair Eng’s request, the Commission may direct staff to bring that item back at the next Planning Commission meeting for and actual discussion on the item. Chair Eng asked the Planning Commission if they are agreeable for this concern to be be addressed at the next Planning Commission meeting. Vice-Chair Ruiz stated yes, it should be brought back for discussion. Chair Eng stated she shops at Wal-Mart and feels it is a good for the community. She also stated she received compliments from the residents in the area that the shopping cart concerns have been rectified. Jennifer Guenther, representative for Wal-Mart stated Wal-Mart is and continues to be member of this community and will work with staff on any concerns that arise. She also stated she would like to thank Ms. Trinh and Ms. Bermejo for all the time they have put in to ensure the report has been accurate. Marlene Shinen, resident of South San Gabriel, stated she has seen a lot of improvements in Rosemead. She also expressed concern with Wal-Mart’s request for extended hours. 14 7. ADJOURNMENT The next regular Planning Commission meeting will be held on Monday, October 3, 2011, at 7:00 p.m. ATTEST: ________________________ Rachel Lockwood Commission Secretary __________________________________ Nancy Eng Chair