CC - Item 4A - Appeal of Conditional Use Permit 11-14 at 8772 Valley BoulevardROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JEFF ALLRED, CITY MANAGER
DATE: MARCH 27, 2012
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 11 -14
8772 VALLEY BOULEVARD
SUMMARY
On January 17, 2012, the City of Rosemead Planning Commission conducted a duly
noticed public hearing for Conditional Use Permit 11 -14 (CUP 11 -14), a request for a new
On -Sale Beer and Wine (Type 41) ABC license in conjunction with a bona fide public
eating place, known as Hunan Restaurant. The restaurant is located at 8772 Valley
Boulevard, in the C -3D (Medium Commercial with a Design Overlay) zone. The Planning
Commission denied CUP 11 -14 based on the analysis and findings contained in the
Planning Commission's staff report. The Planning Commission staff report, meeting
minutes, and resolution are included in this report as Attachments "A ", "B ", and "C ",
respectively.
On January 19, 2012, the City Clerk's office received an appeal letter (Attachment "D ")
from the applicant, Lan Tan, requesting to appeal the Planning Commission's decision.
The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing for the appeal of CUP 11 -14 on
February 14, 2012. The City Council staff report and meeting minutes are included in this
report as Attachments "E" and "F." During the public hearing Mr. Tan asked the City
Council to postpone the public hearing so that he could continue to work with staff to
address all the issues raised during the Planning Commission hearing. The Council
unanimously approved his request, and the meeting was continued to March 27, 2012.
On March 8, 2012, staff received a second letter from Mr. Tan (Attachment "G "),
requesting an additional 60 days to address the City's concerns. The letter states that he
has engaged the services of Mr. Michael Lewis, of Lewis & Company, Inc. to assist in the
revisions of his plans.
Staff Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council CONTINUE the public hearing for the appeal of
CUP 11 -14 to June 12, 2012.
ITEM NO. _24�,
APPROVED FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA:
City Council Report
March 27, 2012
Page 2 of 2
ANALYSIS
On February 22, 2012, Community Development Department and Public Safety
Department staff completed a joint site inspection of the Hunan Restaurant. Mr. Tan was
also present. During the meeting, staff provided Mr. Tan with several recommendations
for interior floor plan modifications to make the rear portion of the building consistent with a
restaurant establishment.
As the City Council may recall, the Planning Commission denied CUP 11 -14 on the basis
that the proposed floor plan was a misrepresentation of the current restaurant layout.
Although the submitted floor plan resembled dining area throughout the establishment, the
actual set -up of the rear of the establishment resembled a hostess bar. A hostess bar is
not permitted use in the City.
During the City Council meeting on February 14, 2012, staff's report included a letter from
the property owner (Attachment "H "), dated February 6, 2012. In this letter the property
owner states that he opposes the tenant's intention of operating a restaurant in the front
portion of the building and operating the rear portion of the building as a hostess bar.
Mr. Tan states in his recent letter to the City that creativity will be necessary to address all
the issues raised during the hearings and meetings with staff. If Mr. Tan intends to
operate a full service restaurant at 8772 Valley Boulevard, floor plan modifications will be
required.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Section 15309 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines exempts
projects that consist of inspections to check for the performance of an operation, or the
quality, health, and safety of a project from environmental review. Accordingly, Conditional
Use Permit 11 -14 is classified as a Class 9 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section
15309 of CEQA guidelines and therefore exempt from further environmental analysis.
PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS
This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process.
Prepared by: Prepared by:
WtXJ /, 9. 4t
Sheri Bermejo Michelle Ramirez
City Planner Acting Community Development Director
Attachment A:
Planning Commission Staff Report, dated January 17, 2012
Attachment B:
Planning Commission Minutes, dated January 17, 2012
Attachment C:
Planning Commission Resolution 12 -01
Attachment D:
Appeal Letter, dated January 19, 2012
Attachment E:
City Council Staff Report, dated February 14, 2012
Attachment F:
City Council Meeting Minutes, dated February 14, 2012
Attachment G
Letter requesting a 60 day extension from Lan Tan, dated March 8, 2012
Attachment H:
Opposition Letter from the Property Owner, dated February 6, 2012
ROSEMEAD PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE ROSEMEAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DIVISION
DATE: JANUARY 17, 2012
SUBJECT: DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 11 -14
8772 VALLEY BOULEVARD
Summary
Lan Tan has submitted a Conditional Use Permit application requesting approval for a
new On -Sale Beer and Wine (Type 41) ABC license in conjunction with a bona fide
public eating place located at 8772 Valley Boulevard, in the C -3D (Medium Commercial
with a Design Overlay) zone.
Environmental Determination
Section 15309 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines exempts
projects that consist of inspections to check for the performance of an operation, or the
quality, health, and safety of a project from environmental review. Accordingly,
Conditional Use Permit 11 -14 is classified as a Class 9 Categorical Exemption pursuant
to Section 15309 of CEQA guidelines and therefore exempt from further environmental
analysis.
Staff Recommendation
Based on the analysis and findings contained in this report, it is recommended that the
Planning Commission DENY Conditional Use Permit 11 -14 and ADOPT Resolution No.
12 -01 with findings (Exhibit A).
Property History & Description
The subject site is located on Valley Boulevard just west of Muscatel Avenue. The total
size of the lot is approximately 9,700 square feet. The lot is developed with a 5,500
square foot restaurant on the first story, and an approximate 630 square foot investment
service office on the second story.
According to Planning Division records, several Conditional Use Permits for On -Sale
alcohol licenses were approved at the subject site. The following table illustrates the
history of alcoholic license requests and approvals for the subject restaurant.
ATTACHMENT A
PC Meeting January 17, 2012
CUP 11 -14 (Denial)
Page 2 of 21
Case File
Business
Year
Notes
Name
Approved
On January 6, 1975, the Planning Commission granted a new
On -Sale alcohol license in conjunction with a restaurant to the
Rose Room. On November 16, 1987, the City initiated
CUP 72
Rose Room
1975
revocation proceedings for Conditional Use Permit 72 based on
non- compliance with the Municipal Code requirements. On
December 14, 1987, the Planning Commission approved a
modification to Conditional Use Permit 72 allowing the
continuance of alcoholic sales.
CUP 88-
Rose Room
1988
Transfer of Ownership
424
CUP 89-
Rose Room
1989
Transfer of Ownership
466
CUP 90-
Rose Room
1990
Transfer of Ownership
497
On November 2, 1992, the Planning Commission granted the
transfer of an existing On -Sale General Alcohol license (Type
47) to the Da Du Corporation/Rose Room Restaurant. In March
of 1993, the City Council granted Dance and Entertainment
licenses to the establishment. During the period of this
restaurant's operation, from January 1999 to December 2001,
the Sheriffs' Department received numerous calls relating to
serious and violent incidents occurring at this site. These
CUP 92-
Rose
R Room
1992
incidents included various gang related activities ranging from
gang fights to multiple homicides on the property. In December
of 2001, the Rose Room was issued a Notice of Accusation
regarding the revocation of the Dance Permit and Business
License due to the many violations that occurred at this site.
The Rose Room entered into two Last Chance Agreements with
the City to keep the restaurant open. Due to the strict conditions
that were set forth in the Final Last Chance Agreement, the
Owner of the Rose Room decided to close the establishment in
2005.
On October 3, 2005, the Planning Commission granted a new
On -Sale beer and wine license (Type 41) to Pho King
Restaurant. Since the approval of Conditional Use Permit 05-
CUP 05-
Pho King /King's
1021, the restaurant has changed its business name several
1021
Garden /Hunan
2005
times from Pho King Restaurant to King's Garden to its current
Restaurant
business name of Hunan Seafood Restaurant. According to the
California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC), the
alcohol license was cancelled on November 10, 2008.
PC Meeting January 17, 2012
CUP 11 -14 (Denial)
Page 3 of 21
North Elevation
Site & Surrounding Land Uses
The project site is designated in the General Plan as Commercial and on the zoning
map it is designated C -3D (Medium Commercial with a Design Overlay) zone. The site
is surrounded by the following land uses:
North:
General Plan:
Commercial
Zoning:
C -3D (Medium Commercial with a Design Overlay)
Land Use:
Commercial
South:
General Plan:
Commercial
Zoning:
C -3D (Medium Commercial with a Design Overlay)
Land Use:
Commercial
East:
General Plan:
Commercial
Zoning:
C -3D (Medium Commercial with a Design Overlay)
Land Use:
Commercial
West:
General Plan:
Commercial
Zoning:
C -3D (Medium Commercial with a Design Overlay)
Land Use:
Commercial
PC Meeting January 17, 2012
CUP 11 -14 (Denial)
Page 4 of 21
Administrative Analysis
v
Restaurant Operations
The applicant is currently operating a full service restaurant at the site. The daily hours
of operation are from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m., seven days per week. The restaurant
currently employs eight (8) employees on the largest shift.
The applicant is requesting approval for a new On -Sale Beer and Wine (Type 41) ABC
license in conjunctipn with a bona fide public eating place. The applicant has indicated
that the restaurant was previously owned by him and his former wife, however, she has
transferred the entire business to him. In addition, as noted above, ABC cancelled the
previous on -sale license in 2008. .
Floor Plan
The floor plan (attached as Exhibit "C ") submitted by the applicant indicates that the
restaurant dining area provides seating for twenty -two (22) patrons. The applicant has
indicated that the existing floor plan will remain. As illustrated on the floor plan, the
kitchen is situated in the center of the building and the two dining areas are separated
by a hallway. Each dining area has a service counter.
A site inspection completed by the Planning Division on November 16, 2011, revealed
that the floor plan submitted is a misrepresentation of the current restaurant layout.
According to Staff's inspection, the front dining area is well lit and consistent with a
family style restaurant atmosphere, and the rear dining area resembles a hostess bar
setting with dim lighting. The rear dining area is furnished with private, enclosed lounge
areas that do not provide table dining. Each lounge area •also provides a private
television screen. The table seating shown on the applicant's floor plan in this area
does not exist. Staff found a dance floor, disco ball, karaoke machinery, and a speaker
system in this area instead. This back room also provides access to a dressing room
and two storage rooms. Pictures that were taken during Staffs' inspection have been
included in this Staff report as Exhibit "D." A hostess bar is not a permitted use in the
City.
According to California Department of Alcohol and Beverage Control, a "bona fide public
eating place," means as a place which is regularly and in a bona fide manner used and
kept open for the serving of meals to guest for compensation and which has suitable
kitchen facilities connected therewith, containing conveniences for cooking an
assortment of foods which may be required for ordinary meals, the kitchen of which
must be kept in a sanitary condition with the proper amount of refrigeration for keeping
of food on said premises and must comply with all regulations of the local department of
health (Section 23038). Therefore, the actual use of the restaurant, as proposed on the
floor plan submitted by the applicant, clearly does not meet the State's definition of a
bona fide public eating place.
z-
PC Meeting January 17, 2012
CUP 11 -14 (Denial)
Page 5 of 21
Staff has received a worksheet from the State Department of Alcoholic Beverage
Control (ABC), which indicates that the subject restaurant is currently located in a
census tract that has an over - concentration of alcohol permits. ABC defines "over -
concentration" as greater than one license per 1,147 residents living within the subject
census tract. The population of the census tract (No. 4813) in which the subject
property is located is 2,963 residents. The number of allowable on -sale ABC licenses
for this census tract is three (3). Currently, there are six (6) authorized on -sale licenses
for this census tract. ABC has also determined that this location is located in a high
crime district.
The City's Chief of Police has reviewed this request and has indicated that the
applicant's proposal cannot be supported. In addition to the ABC determination that
must be taken into account, on January 10, 2012 the Chief of Police conducted a site
inspection which confirmed Staffs suspicion that the floor plan resembles a hostess bar.
This confirmation was made based on the Chiefs experience with the Asian Gang
Taskforce.
In addition, according to the Chief of Police, the subject site has historically been the
source of law enforcement problems relating to Asian gangs, drugs, and prostitution.
He has also indicated that the rear portion of the restaurant has historically been used
as a "hostess bar' under the disguise 'of a legitimate family restaurant.
The Chief of Police further indicated that since 2005, when the applicant and his former
wife assumed control of the restaurant, the rear portion of the restaurant has been used
as an Asian gang "hangout." Specifically, the LA County Sheriff Department's
undercover operations at the.subject site revealed known underage gang members who
fled the scene.
Importantly, given the request to legally serve alcohol on the site via an ABC permit, the
Chief indicated that after the alcohol license was cancelled with ABC in 2008, the
applicant continued to sell alcohol in the restaurant and had alcohol hidden behind the
service counter.
The Chief of Police, Public Safety Department, and Planning Division Staff have been
working with the applicant to resolve issues of concern since the application was
originally submitted. The Chief of Police and Planning Staff have suggested that the
applicant revise the actual floor plan and furnishings of the rear portion of the building to
be consistent with a "family restaurant" environment. The applicant has indicated that
he is not willing to make these changes. The applicant told the Chief of Police that he
would like to re -open the rear portion of the building as a "sports bar, karaoke and
dance area." The Commission should note that the applicant has submitted
Entertainment and Dance License applications to the City's Administration Department
for karaoke and dance. These applications are currently pending, and require City
Council approval. The applicant has informed the Chief of Police that his goal is to
PC Meeting January 17, 2012
CUP 11 -14 (Denial)
Page 6 of 21
operate a club similar to a restaurant/bar located in Temple City, which is essentially
known as a hostess bar by the Public Safety Department. The Chief of Police is
concerned that such business operation would attract clientele which will once again
result in problems for the City.
Schools, Churches, and Residential Properties within the Vicinity
The subject site is 600 feet away from Muscatel Middle School and Rosemead Church
of Christ. Residential properties are situated less than 100 feet away from the subject
site.
Public Comments
On January 10, 2012, Staff received an email (attached as Exhibit "E) in regards to the
business operations located at the subject restaurant. The email states that the
business is operating as an illegal hostess bar where drinks are served and girls are
paid to sit with customers. This exhibit would lend credence to a conclusion that the
applicant is currently operating in violation of the City's Municipal Code, State law, and
ABC regulations.
Municipal Code Requirements
Section 17.112.030 (9) of the Rosemead Municipal Code (RMC) allows on -sale alcohol
licenses in the C-1, C -3, CBD and M zones upon the granting of a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) by the Planning Commission. Conditional Use Permits may be granted
when it can be shown that all of the following criteria from RMC Section 17.112.010 can
be met:
A. The granting of such a Conditional Use Permit will be in harmony with the
elements or objectives of the General Plan.
The site is designated in the General Plan for Commercial and on the zoning
map it is designated C -3D (Medium Commercial with a Design Overlay). The
proposed use is in conformity with the General Plan in that C -3D (Medium
Commercial with a Design Overlay) zoning is a corresponding zone district with
the Commercial General Plan land use category.
B. The establishment, maintenance or conduct of the use for which the Conditional
Use Permit is sought will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals,
comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the
neighborhood thereof.
According to the Chief of Police, the subject site has historically been the
source of law enforcement problems relating to Asian gangs, drugs, and
prostitution. On January 10, 2012, the Chief of Police conducted a site
inspection which revealed that the floor plan resembles a hostess bar based on
his experience with the Asian Gang Taskforce. The applicant told the Chief of
Police that he would like to re -open the rear portion of the building as a "sports
PC Meeting January 17, 2012
CUP 11 -14 (Denial)
Page 7 of 21
bar, karaoke and dance area," similar to one located in Temple City, which is
essentially known as a hostess bar by the Public Safety Department. The Chief
of Police is concerned that such business operation would attract clientele
which will once again result in problems for the City.
In addition, according to ABC, a "bona fide public eating place," means a place
which is regularly and in a bona fide manner used and kept open for the serving
of meals to guest for compensation and which has suitable kitchen facilities
connected therewith, containing conveniences for cooking an assortment of
foods which may be required for ordinary meals, the kitchen of which must be
kept in a sanitary condition with the proper amount of refrigeration for keeping
of food on said premises and must comply with all regulations of the local
department of health (Section 23038). The actual use and layout of the
restaurant, as opposed to the floor plan submitted to the City, clearly illustrates
that the applicant does not meet the State's definition of a bona fide public
eating place. Furthermore, the floor plan submitted as Exhibit "C" clearly
misrepresents the current restaurant layout and is believe to have been an
attempt to deceive the City. The proposed operation is not suitable at the
proposed location due to its proximity to sensitive land uses and the high
potential that the actual use would violate City codes and State law. Further,
the subject site is 600 feet away from Muscatel Middle School and Rosemead
Church of Christ. Residential properties are situated less than 100 feet away
from the subject site.
Therefore, the approval of the On -Sale beer and wine (Type 41) license will be
detrimental to the health, safety, piece, morals, comfort or general welfare of
the persons residing or working in the neighborhood.
C. The granting of such a conditional use permit will not be detrimental or injurious
to the property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare.
A site inspection completed by the Planning Division on November 16, 2011,
revealed that the floor plan submitted is a misrepresentation of the current
restaurant layout. According to Staff's inspection, the front dining area is well lit
and consistent with a family style restaurant atmosphere, but the rear dining
area resembles a hostess bar setting with dim lighting. The rear dining area is
furnished with private, enclosed lounge areas that do not provide table dining.
Each lounge area also provides a private television screen. The table seating
shown on the applicant's floor plan in this area does not exist. Staff found a
dance floor, disco ball, karaoke machinery, and a speaker system in this area
instead.
In addition, on January 10, 2012, the Chief of Police conducted a site
inspection which revealed that the floor plan resembles a hostess bar, based
on his experience with the Asian Gang Taskforce. The Chief of Police has
PC Meeting January 17, 2012
CUP 11 -14 (Denial)
Paqe 8 of 21
indicated that since 2005, when the applicant and his ex -wife assumed control
of the restaurant, the rear portion of the restaurant once again became an
Asian gang hangout. The LA County Sheriff Department's undercover
operations at the subject site revealed underage gang members who fled the
scene. He also indicated that after the alcohol license was cancelled with ABC,
the applicant continued to sell alcohol in the restaurant and had alcohol hidden
behind the service counter.
Therefore, the approval of the On -Sale beer and wine (Type 41) license will be
detrimental or injurious to the property and improvements in the neighborhood
or the general welfare.
Section 17.112.100 of the Rosemead Municipal Code States that in addition to the
general findings required for the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning
Commission, or on appeal to the City Council, shall find that each of the following facts
or conditions exist, prior to the issuance of a new Conditional Use Permit authorizing the
sale of alcoholic beverages:
D. The proposed use will not present problems including, but not limited to,
loitering, obstruction of pedestrian traffic, increased vehicular traffic, increased
parking demand, crime, interference with children on their way to school,
interference with shoppers using streets, defacement and damage to property;
and
The applicant has indicated to the Chief of Police that he would like to re -open
the rear portion of the building as a "sports bar, karacke and dance area,"
similar to one located in Temple City, which is essentially known as a hostess
bar by the Public Safety Department. Since the subject site is located 600 feet
away from Muscatel Middle School and Rosemead Church of Christ and less
than 100 feet away from several residential properties, the approval of the On-
Sale beer and wine (Type 41) license will present problems including, but not
limited to, loitering, obstruction of pedestrian traffic, increased vehicular traffic,
increased parking demand, crime, interference with children on their way to
school, interference with shoppers using streets, defacement and damage to
property.
E. The proposed use will not lessen the suitability of any nearby commercially
zoned properties for commercial use; and
A site inspection completed by the Planning Division on November 16, 2011,
revealed that the floor plan submitted is a misrepresentation of the current
restaurant layout. According to Staff's inspection, the front dining area is well lit
and consistent with a family style restaurant atmosphere, and that the rear
dining area resembles a hostess bar setting with dim lighting. A hostess bar is
not a permitted use in the City. The rear dining area is furnished with private,
PC Meeting January 17, 2012
CUP 11 -14 (Denial)
Page 9 of 21
enclosed lounge areas that do not provide table dining. Each lounge area also
provides a private television screen. The table seating shown on the
applicant's floor plan in this area does not exist. Staff found a dance floor,
disco ball, karaoke machinery, and a speaker system in this area instead.
In addition, according to ABC, a `bona fide public eating place," means as a
place which is regularly and in a bona fide manner used and kept open for the
serving of meals to guest for compensation and which has suitable kitchen
facilities connected therewith, containing conveniences for cooking an
assortment of foods which may be required for ordinary meals, the kitchen of
which must be kept in a sanitary condition with the proper amount of
refrigeration for keeping of food on said premises and must comply with all
regulations of the local department of health (Section 23038). The floor plan of
the restaurant clearly illustrates that the applicant does not meet the State's
definition of a bona fide public eating place.
Therefore, the approval of the On -Sale beer and wine (Type 41) license will
lessen the suitability of any nearby commercially zoned properties for
commercial use.
F. The use shall not adversely affect the welfare of area residents or result in
undue concentration in the neighborhood of establishments dispensing
alcoholic beverages including beer and wine. Consideration shall be given
regarding whether the proposed use will detrimentally affect nearby residentially
zoned communities, considering distance to residential buildings, churches,
schools, hospitals, public playgrounds, and other establishments dispensing
alcoholic beverages.
Staff has received a worksheet from the State Department of Alcoholic
Beverage Control (ABC), which indicates that the subject restaurant is currently
located in a census tract that has an over - concentration of alcohol permits.
ABC defines "over- concentration" as greater than one license per 1,147
residents living within the subject census tract. The population of the census
tract (No. 4813) in which the subject property is located is 2,963 residents. The
number of allowable on -sale ABC licenses for this census tract is three (3).
Currently, there are six (6) authorized on -sale licenses for this census tract.
ABC has also determined that this location is located in a high crime district.
The City's Chief of Police has reviewed this request and has indicated that this
proposal cannot be supported. On January 10, 2012, the Chief of Police
conducted a site inspection which revealed that the floor plan resembles a
hostess bar based on his experience with the Asian Gang Taskforce. A
hostess bar is not a permitted use in the City.
PC Meeting January 17, 2012
CUP 11 -14 (Denial)
Page 10 of 21
In addition, the subject site is 600 feet away from Muscatel Middle School and
Rosemead Church of Christ. Several residential properties are situated less
than 100 feet away from the subject site.
Therefore, the approval of the On -Sale beer and wine (Type 41) license will
endanger or otherwise constitute a menace to the surrounding properties.
Public Notice Process
This item has been noticed throug h
includes a 300' radius public hearing
the San Gabriel Valley Tribune, and
and on the subject site.
the regular agenda notification process, which
notice to thirty (30) property owners, publication in
postings of the notice at the six (6) public locations
Prepared by:
A__ .
Lily Trinh
Assistant Planner
Submitted by:
W"9
Michelle Ramirez
Acting Community Development Director
EXHIBITS:
A. Resolution 12 -01
B. Floor Plan and Site Plan
C. Staff Inspection Pictures
D. Email Received from Public
Minutes of the
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
January 17, 2012
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Vice -Chair Ruiz at 7:00 p.m., in the
Council Chambers, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Vice -Chair Ruiz
INVOCATION - Commissioner Hunter
ROLL CALL - Commissioners Herrera, Hunter, Saccaro, and Vice -Chair Ruiz
ABSENT — Chair Eng
ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS PRESENT: City Attorney Murphy, Acting Community Development Director
Ramirez, Consultant Wong, City Planner Bermejo, Assistant Planner Trinh, Lt. Tim Murakumi, Chief of
Police, and 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 - December 19, 2011
Commissioner Herrera made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hunter, to approve Minutes of
12 -19.11 as presented.
Vote resulted in:
Yes:
Herrera, Hunter, Ruiz, Saccaro
No:
None
Abstain:
None
Absent:
Eng
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 11 -14 - Lan Tan has submitted a Conditional Use
Permit application requesting approval for a new On -Sale Beer and Wine (Type 41) ABC
license in conjunction with a bona fide public eating place located at 8772 Valley Boulevard,
1 ATTACHMENT B
in the C -3D (Medium Commercial with a Design Overlay) zone.
PC RESOLUTION 12.01 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA DENYING CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT 11 -14, A REQUEST FOR A NEW ON -SALE BEER AND WINE (TYPE 41) ABC
LICENSE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A BONA FIDE PUBLIC EATING PLACE, LOCATED AT 8772
VALLEY BOULEVARD IN THE C -3D (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL WITH A DESIGN OVERLAY)
ZONE.
Staff Recommendation - Based on the analysis and findings contained in this report, it is
recommended that the Planning Commission DENY Conditional Use Permit 11 -14 and ADOPT
Resolution No. 12-01 with findings.
Assistant Planner Tdnh presented staff report into the minutes.
Vice -Chair Ruiz asked the Planning Commission if they had any comments or questions for staff.
None
Vice -Chair Ruiz opened the Public Hearing and asked if there was anyone wishing to speak in favor or
against this project.
Gary Mok presented the Planning Commission with written information to be included into the record.
Consultant Wong addressed the City Attorney and requested a recess to review the information that was
submitted to the Planning Commission by Gary Mok.
Greg Murphy, City Attorney, replied a ten (10) minute recess will be taken to review the information that
was just submitted and will reconvene at 7:20 pm.
Vice -Chair Ruiz opened the meeting and invited the first guest speaker to the podium.
Greg Murphy, City Attorney, recommended to the Planning Commission to not put any more weight
onto the information that was just submitted as you would to verbal testimony. He stated what has been
submitted are allegations made by someone who is in business dealings with the applicant and the sole
conclusary evidence is a judgment from the East District El Monte Court House but it is against the
business rather than the individual. He also recommended treating this as normal comments from a
member of the public who comes to the podium and do not give it additional weight because it is in
written form or using legal language. He also stated this amounts to allegations and matters of opinion and
if the Planning Commission has any questions he would be happy to answer them.
Vice -Chair Ruiz asked the Planning Commission if there were any questions for Greg Murphy, City
Attorney, regarding his recommendation.
Li
Vice -Chair Ruiz invited Mr. Mok the first speaker to the podium
Gary Mok, speaking on behalf of Chien P. Luu, thanked the Planning Commission and stated he is the
individual that submitted the information tonight for the Planning Commission to review. He also stated that
he is here tonight in objection to Lan Tan's request.
Vice -Chair Ruiz asked if the Planning Commission had any questions for Mr. Mok.
None
Vice -Chair Ruiz invited then next speaker to the podium
Lan Tan, applicant, stated that the information submitted tonight is for a previous business investment at a
different location and a court date of February 17, 2012 has been set. He stated that he does not
understand why Mr. Mok is here objecting to his application. He stated he had a previous business with this
gentleman and gave a brief history of other businesses he has in other cities and stated that some are
in his wife's name. He also stated that he has gone to the Temple City Sheriffs to try to obtain information
about his case but has been unable to receive anything. He stated that he had also contacted ABC but was
told that if the Conditional Use Permit is not approved by the City they cannot approve the ABC Beer &
Wine license. He stated that he does not understand what is going on and will need to contact his attorney.
Vice -Chair Ruiz thanked the applicant and asked if anyone had any questions.
Commissioner Herrera asked if the denial is recommended because of incidents at this location
and requested more information.
Vice -Chair Ruiz stated the recommendation by staff is to Deny Conditional Use Permit 11 -14 and asked
Assistant Planner Trinh for more detail.
Assistant Planner Trinh explained to the Planning Commission that the applicant misrepresented the floor
plan on his application and referred to Exhibit B. She explained that when staff, the Chief of Police, and
Public Safety conducted a site inspection the floor plans submitted did not match what was actually at the
restaurant. She referred to the pictures in Exhibit C and pointed out that the booths did not have tables,
they are almost fully enclosed, there are individual televisions, three large big screens, and the lighting is
very dim in the rear, whereas in the front it is fully lit. She stated that when she spoke with the Chief of
Police, he informed her that the applicant indicated to him that he would like to open the rear of the building
for entertainment and karaoke. She stated the applicant has also applied for these business license
applications with the City. She stated because of this misrepresentation staff cannot support this use.
Vice -Chair Ruiz thanked Assistant Planner Trinh for her exhibits and explanation. He stated that Greg
Murphy, City Attorney, has explained that we should not any emphasis on the new information submitted
tonight but base our decision on the specifics of the lounge and what the applicant is proposing to have.
He also stated that he would like to hear from Lt. Tim Murakami, the Chief of Police who is present tonight.
He asked if there were anymore questions or comments from the audience.
None
Vice -Chair Ruiz closed the Public Hearing and invited Lt. Tim Murakumi, Chief of Police to the podium.
Lt., Tim Murakumi, Chief of Police, stated that he had been an original member of the Asian Gang
Taskforce and this building in the past was known as the Rose Room. He stated that when it was the Rose
Room a lot of violence had taken place there and it was eventually closed down. This applicant has re-
opened this building as a restaurant, but his concern is that the back room that has been transitioned back
into a hostess bar. He stated that he is not opposed to a restaurant serving beer and wine but he is
concerned with the back room. He explained that the back room is not set up to hold a Quincinera or
birthday parties, but is set up like a hostess bar. He stated that he has spoken with the applicant and
explained to him that he would support a restaurant but he cannot support a nightclub. He stated that he
cannot support a nightclub scenario and explained in the past they have had difficulties with the back room
being subleased to individuals that used the restaurants liquor license. He stated that this building has
been a past gangster club. He explained that this would not benefit the City and foresees
potential problems for law enforcement if approved.
Vice -Chair Ruiz asked if the Commissioners had any questions for Lt. Tim Murakumi, Chief of Police.
Commissioner Hunter stated she thought this application is for a family restaurant.
Lt. Tim Murakumi, Chief of Police, replied that is what the application states but when you look at the
building it is not set for that. He explained that the problem is that there is a door in the back room that has
an entrance to the street and the door from the restaurant to the rear area has been closed off giving the
appearance of two separate entities. He also stated without going through that back door you cannot see
what is going on in that back room at all. He stated that he has recommended to the applicant that the
restaurant be redesigned and extend the restaurant seating to the back room.
Assistant Planner Trinh stated that staff has spoken with Mr. Tan regarding the floor plan and possibly
modifying the rear area into a bona -fide eating establishment, but he has indicated that he wants the
entertainment, dance floor, and karaoke in the rear.
Vice -Chair Ruiz asked Assistant Planner Trinh if the applicant has denied all request and recommendations
that staff has made.
Assistant Planner Trinh replied yes and therefore staff is denying this application.
Vice -Chair Ruiz thanked staff and asked if anyone else had any questions.
Lan Tan, applicant, stated he would like to address the Planning Commission.
Vice -Chair Ruiz re- opened the Public Hearing and asked Lan Tan to the podium.
Lan Tan clarified that the floor plan, which is Exhibit B, is the floor plan that had been approved previously
in 2008. He also explained that he would like the back to be a sports bar and gave examples of what it will
include (televisions to watch sport events, three big screens, karaoke, and a dance floor). He also stated
he has a business in Temple City and compared this building to that one.
Vice -Chair Ruiz thanked Mr. Tan for his comments and explained that because he has not agreed to any of
the request and recommendations from staff, they are recommending the Denial of Conditional Use Permit
13
11 -14. He closed the Public Hearing and asked if the Commissioners had additional comments or
questions.
Commissioner Saccaro stated that even though the floor plans may have been approved previously for a
restaurant, the floor plan is not acceptable today for a new Beer and Wine (Type 41) ABC License.
Vice -Chair Ruiz stated he agrees with Commissioner Saccaro and the pictures in Exhibit C speak
for themselves. He thanked Lt. Tim Murakumi, Chief of Police, and staff for their hard work.
Consultant Wong stated he would like to reiterate a comment made by Commissioner Saccaro. He stated
the ABC does not meet the criteria, but the Planning Commission decision should be based on the city
code which states it should be a bona -fide eating establishment and this establishment is not. He stated
that staff has asked for the applicant to modify his plans and he has refused to do so and that is why staff is
recommending the Denial of Conditional Use Permit 11 -14.
Vice -Chair Ruiz thanked Consultant Wong and asked for a motion.
Commissioner Herrera made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Saccaro, to approve the
DENIAL of Conditional Use Permit 11 -14 and ADOPT Resolution No. 12-01 with findings.
Vote resulted in:
Yes:
Herrera, Hunter, Ruiz, Saccaro
No:
None
Abstain:
None
Absent:
Eng
Greg Murphy, City Attorney, stated if any member of the public or the applicant would like to appeal
this matter the appeal must be filed within 10 days of tonight's decision and the appeal will be heard by the
City Council.
5. MATTERS FROM THE CHAIR & COMMISSIONERS
Commissioner Herrera asked staff for an update on the red curb on Delta Avenue off of Valley Boulevard.
City Planner Bermejo replied that concern was submitted to Public Safety and staff will follow -up and verify
status.
6. MATTERS FROM STAFF
Acting Community Development Director Ramirez reminded the Panning Commission of the upcoming
Lunar New Year Festivities taking place this Saturday, January 21, 2012 as long as the weather permits it,
if it rains then it will be held on Sunday, January 22, 2012 or the following weekend. She stated this will be
taking place at the Auto Auction site.
7. ADJOURNMENT
The next regular Planning Commission meeting will be held on Monday, February 6, 2012, at
7:00 p.m.
ATTEST .
c�A LJ 6—Ork
Rachel Lockwood
Commission Secretary
M
PC RESOLUTION 12 -01
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 11 -14, A REQUEST FOR A
NEW ON -SALE BEER AND WINE (TYPE 41) ABC LICENSE IN
CONJUNCTION WITH A BONA FIDE PUBLIC EATING PLACE,
LOCATED AT 8772 VALLEY BOULEVARD IN THE C -3D (MEDIUM
COMMERCIAL WITH A DESIGN OVERLAY) ZONE (APN:5390 -010-
038).
WHEREAS, on October 10, Y 2011, Lan Tan from Hunan Restaurant filed a
Conditional Use Permit application, requesting for a new On -Sale beer and wine (Type
41) ABC license in conjunction with a bona fide public eating place, located at 8772
Valley Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, 8772 Valley Boulevard, is located in the C -3D (Medium Commercial
with a Design Overlay) zone; and
WHEREAS, Section 17.112.020(9) of the Rosemead Municipal Code (RMC)
allows "on -sale alcohol licenses in the C -1, C -3, CBD and M zones upon the granting of
a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)." Section 17.112.010 sets criteria required for granting
such a permit. These criteria require that the proposed use is deemed:
A. The granting of such conditional use permit will be in harmony with the
elements or objectives of the General Plan; and
B. The establishment, maintenance or conduct of -the use for which the
conditional use permit is sought will not be detrimental to the health, safety,
peace, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working
in the neighborhood thereof; and
C. The granting of such conditional use permit will not be detrimental or
injurious to the property and improvements in the neighborhood or the
general welfare.
WHEREAS, Section 17.112.100 of the Rosemead Municipal Code states that in
addition to the general findings required for the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit,
the Planning Commission, or on appeal the City Council, shall find that each of the
following facts or conditions exist, prior to the issuance of a new Conditional Use Permit
authorizing the sale of alcoholic beverages:
D. The proposed use will not present problems including, but not limited to,
loitering, obstruction of -pedestrian traffic, increased vehicular traffic,
increased parking demand, crime, interference with children on their way to
school, interference with shoppers using streets, defacement and damage
to property; and
1 ATTACHMENT C
E. The proposed use will not lessen the suitability of any nearby commercially
zoned properties for commercial use; and
F. The use shall not adversely affect the welfare of area residents or result in
undue concentration in the neighborhood of establishments dispensing
alcoholic beverages including beer and wine. Consideration shall be given
regarding whether the proposed use will detrimentally affect nearby
residentially zoned communities, considering distance to residential
buildings, churches, schools, hospitals, public playgrounds, and other
establishments dispensing alcoholic beverages.
WHEREAS, Sections 65800 & 65900 of the California Government Code and
Section 17.112.010 of the Rosemead Municipal Code authorize the Planning
Commission to approve, conditionally approve or deny Conditional Use Permits; and
WHEREAS, on January 5, 2012, thirty (30) notices were sent to property owners
within a 300 -foot radius from the subject property, in addition to notices posted in six (6)
public locations and on -site, specifying the availability of the application, plus the date,
time and location of the public hearing for Conditional Use Permit 11 -14, and on
January 6, 2012, the notice was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune; and
WHEREAS, on January 17, 2012, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed
and advertised public hearing to receive oral and written testimony relative to
Conditional use Permit 11 -14; and
WHEREAS, the Rosemead Planning Commission has sufficiently considered all
testimony presented to them in order to make the following determination:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City
of Rosemead as follows:
SECTION 1 . The Planning Commission HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES
that facts do exist to justify denying Conditional Use Permit 11 -14 according to the
Criteria of Chapter 17.112.010 of the Rosemead Municipal Code as follows:
A. The granting of such conditional use permit will be in harmony with the
elements or objectives of the General Plan.
FINDING: The site is designated in the General Plan for Commercial and on the
zoning map it is designated C -3D (Medium Commercial with a Design Overlay). The
proposed use is in conformity with the General Plan in that C -3D (Medium Commercial
with a Design Overlay) zoning is a corresponding zone district with the Commercial
General Plan land use category.
B. The establishment, maintenance or conduct of the use for which the
2
conditional use permit is sought will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace,
morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the
neighborhood thereof.
FINDING: According to the Chief of Police, the subject site has historically
been the source of law enforcement problems relating to Asian gangs, drugs, and
prostitution. On January 10, 2012, the Chief of Police conducted a site inspection which
revealed that the floor plan resembles a hostess bar based on his experience with the
Asian Gang Taskforce. The applicant told the Chief of Police that he would like to re-
open the rear portion of the building a a "sports bar, karaoke and dance area," similar
to one located in Temple City, which is_essentially known as a hostess bar by the Public
Safety Department. The Chief of Police is concerned that such business operation
would attract clientele which will once again result in problems for the City.
In addition, according to ABC, a "bona fide public eating place, "means a place which is
regularly and in a bona fide manner used and kept open for the serving of meals to
guest for compensation. and which has suitable kitchen facilities connected therewith,
containing conveniences for cooking an, assortment of foods which may be required for
ordinary meals, the kitchen of which must be kept in a sanitary condition with the proper
amount of refrigeration for keeping of food on said premises and must comply with all
regulations of the local department of health (Section 23038). The actual use and
layout of the restaurant, as opposed to the floor plan submitted to the City, clearly
illustrates that the applicant does not meet the State's definition of a bona fide public
eating place. Furthermore, the floor plan submitted as Exhibit "C" clearly misrepresents
the current restaurant layout and is believe to have been an attempt to deceive the City.
The proposed operation is not suitable at the proposed location due to its proximity to
sensitive land uses and the high potential that the actual use would violate City codes
and State law. Further, the subject site is 600 feet away from Muscatel Middle School
and Rosemead Church of Christ. Residential properties are situated less than 100 feet
away from the subject site.
Therefore, the approval of the On -Sale beer and wine (Type 41) license will be
detrimental to the health, safety, piece, morals, comfort or general welfare of the
persons residing or working in the neighborhood.
C. The granting of such conditional use permit will not be detrimental or injurious
to the property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare.
FINDING: A site inspection completed by the Planning Division on November
16, 2011, revealed that the floor plan submitted is a misrepresentation of the current
restaurant layout. According to Staffs inspection, the front dining area is well lit and
consistent with a family style restaurant atmosphere, but the rear dining area resembles
a hostess bar setting with dim lighting. The rear dining area is furnished with private,
enclosed lounge areas that do not provide table dining. Each lounge area also provides
a private television screen. The table seating shown on the applicant's floor plan in this
area does not exist. Staff found a dance floor, disco ball, karaoke machinery, and a
3
speaker system in this area instead.
In addition, on January 10, 2012, the Chief of Police conducted a site inspection which
revealed that the floor plan resembles a hostess bar based on his experience with the
Asian Gang Taskforce. The Chief of Police has indicated that since 2005, when the
applicant and his ex -wife assumed control of the restaurant, the rear portion of the
restaurant once again became an Asian gang hangout. The LA County Sheriff
Department's undercover operations at the subject site revealed underage gang
members who fled the scene. He also indicated that after the alcohol license was
cancelled with ABC, the applicant continued to sell alcohol in the restaurant and had
alcohol hidden behind the service counter.
Therefore, the approval of the On -Sale beer and wine (Type 41) license will be
detrimental or injurious to the property and improvements in the neighborhood or the
general welfare.
D. The proposed use will not present problems including, but not limited to,
loitering, obstruction of pedestrian, traffic, increased vehicular traffic, increased parking
demand, crime, interference with children on their way to school, interference with
shoppers using streets, defacement and damage to property; and
FINDING: The applicant has indicated to the Chief of Police that he would like
to re -open the rear portion of the building as a "sports bar, karaoke and dance area,"
similar to one located in Temple City, which is essentially known as a hostess bar by the
Public Safety Department. Since the subject site is located 600 feet away from
Muscatel Middle School and Rosemead Church of Christ and less than 100 feet away
from several residential properties, the approval of the On -Sale beer and wine (Type 41)
license will present problems including, but not limited to, � loitering, obstruction of
pedestrian traffic, increased vehicular traffic, increased parking demand, crime,
interference with children on their way to school, interference with shoppers using
streets, defacement and damage to property.
E. The proposed use will not lessen the suitability of any nearby commercially
zoned properties for commercial use; and
FINDING: A site inspection completed by the Planning Division on November
16, 2011, revealed that the floor plan submitted is a misrepresentation of the current
restaurant layout. According to Staffs inspection, the front dining area is well lit and
consistent with a family style restaurant atmosphere, and that the rear dining area
resembles a hostess bar setting with dim lighting. A hostess bar is not a permitted use
in the City. The rear dining area is furnished with private, enclosed lounge areas that do
not provide table dining. Each lounge area also provides a private television screen.
The table seating shown on the applicant's floor plan in this area does not exist. Staff
found a dance floor, disco ball, karaoke machinery, and a speaker system in this area
instead.
4
In addition, according to ABC, a "bona fide public eating place," means as a place which
is regularly and in a bona fide manner used and kept open for the serving of meals to
guest for compensation and which has suitable kitchen facilities connected therewith,
containing conveniences for cooking an assortment of foods which may be required for
ordinary meals, the kitchen of which must be kept in a sanitary condition with the proper
amount of refrigeration for keeping of food on said premises and must comply with all
regulations of the local department of health (Section 23038). The floor plan of the
restaurant clearly illustrates that the applicant does not meet the State's definition of a
bona fide public eating place.
Therefore, the approval of the On -Sale beer and wine (Type 41) license will lessen the
suitability of any nearby commercially zoned properties for commercial use.
F. The use shall not adversely affect the welfare of area residents or result in
undue concentration in the neighborhood of establishments dispensing alcoholic
beverages including beer and wine. Consideration shall be given regarding whether the
proposed use will detrimentally affect nearby residentially zoned communities,
considering distance to residential buildings, churches, schools, hospitals, public
playgrounds, and other establishments dispensing alcoholic beverages.
FINDING: Staff has received a worksheet from the State Department of
Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC), which indicates that the subject restaurant is
currently located in a census tract that has an over - concentration of alcohol permits.
ABC defines "over- concentration" as greater than one license per 1,147 residents living
within the subject census tract. The population of the census tract (No. 4813) in which
the subject property is located is 2;963 residents. The number of allowable on -sale
ABC licenses for this census tract is three (3). Currently, there are six (6) authorized
on -sale licenses for this census tract. ABC has also determined that this location is
located in a high crime district.
The City's Chief of Police has reviewed this request and has indicated that this proposal
cannot be supported. On January 10, 2012, the Chief of Police conducted a site
inspection which revealed that the floor plan resembles a hostess bar based on his
experience with the Asian Gang Taskforce. A hostess bar is not a permitted use in the
City.
In addition, the subject site is 600 feet away from Muscatel Middle School and
Rosemead Church of Christ. Several residential properties are situated less than 100
feet away from the subject site.
Therefore, the approval of the On -Sale beer and wine (Type 41) license will endanger
or otherwise constitute a menace to the surrounding properties.
SECTION 2 . The Planning Commission HEREBY DENIES Conditional Use
Permit 11 -14, for a new On -Sale beer and wine (Type 41) license, located at 8772
Valley Boulevard.
5
SECTION 3 . This resolution is the result of an action taken by the Planning
Commission on January 17, 2012, by the following vote:
YES: HERRERA, HUNTER, RUIZ, AND SACCARO
NO: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
ABSENT: ENG
SECTION 4 . The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and
shall transmit copies of same to the applicant and the Rosemead City Clerk.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this
17 day of January, 2012.
for Rui , -Chair
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of a resolution adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rosemead at its regular meeting, held on the 17 day of
January, 2012 by the following vote:
YES: HERRERA, HUNTER, RUIZ, AND SACCARO
NO: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
ABSENT: ENG
�c
Michelle Ramirez, Sec ary
APP 61/ED AS TO FO a1N:
egory M. urphy, Planning Commission Attorney
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
M
y.
HUNAN SEAFOOD RESTAURANT INC.
8772 Vallgy Blvd.
Rosemead, Ca. 91770
January 19, 2012
City of Rosemead
Re; C.U.P. and Alcohol License
G
JAN 19 2912
Dry
To Whom It May Concern:
We would tike appeal the C.U.P. and Alcohol License application, which were denied by
City Commissioners on January 17, 2012.
Any questions, please contact us.
Sincerely,
Lan Khanh Tan
n
M
ATTACHMENT "D"
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY C UNCIL
FROM: JEFF ALLRED, CITY MANAGER
DATE: FEBRUARY 14, 2012
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 11 -14
8772 VALLEY BOULEVARD
SUMMARY
On January 17, 2012, the City of Rosemead Planning Commission conducted a duly
noticed public hearing for Conditional Use Permit 11 -14, a request for a new On -Sale Beer
and Wine (Type 41) ABC license in conjunction with a bona fide public eating place, known
as Hunan Restaurant, located at 8772 Valley Boulevard, in the C-313 (Medium Commercial
with a Design Overlay) zone. The Planning Commission denied CUP 11 -14 based on the
analysis and findings contained in the Planning Commission's staff report. The Planning
Commission staff report, meeting minutes, and resolution are attached as Attachments "A",
"B ", and "C ", respectively.
On January 19, 2012, the City Clerk's office received an appeal letter, included in this
report as "Attachment D ", from the applicant, Lan Tan, requesting to appeal the Planning
Commission's decision.
Staff Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council UPHOLD the Planning Commission's decision to
DENY Conditional Use Permit 11 -14 and ADOPT Resolution 2012 -12 (Attachment "E ").
ANALYSIS
On October 5, 2011, Lan Tan submitted a Conditional Use Permit application requesting
approval for a new On -Sale Beer and Wine (Type 41) ABC license in conjunction with a
bona fide public eating place located at 8772 Valley Boulevard, in the C -3D (Medium
Commercial with a Design Overlay) zone. Upon hearing all testimonies from the public,
the Commission adopted Resolution No. 12 -01, denying CUP 11 -14.
CUP 11 -14 was denied based on the following reasons:
A site inspection completed by the Planning Division, Chief of Police, and Code
Enforcement revealed that the floor plan (Attachment "F ") submitted is a
misrepresentation of the current restaurant layout. The front dining area is well lit
ATTACHMENT E
APPROVED FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA:
City Council Report
February 14, 2012
Page 2 of 3
and consistent with a family style restaurant atmosphere, while the rear dining area
is configured as a hostess bar setting with dim lighting and lack of dining tables.
The Chief of Police has reviewed this request and has indicated that the applicant's
proposal cannot be supported. He has indicated that the rear portion of the
restaurant has historically been used as a hostess bar, under the disguise of a
legitimate family restaurant. A hostess bar is not a permitted use in the City.
The California Department of Alcohol and Beverage Control (ABC) defines a "bona
fide public eating place" as a place which is regularly and in a bona fide manner
used and kept open for the serving of meals to guest for compensation and which
has suitable kitchen facilities connected therewith, containing conveniences for
cooking an assortment of foods which may be required for ordinary meals, the
kitchen of which must be kept in a sanitary condition with the proper amount of
refrigeration for keeping of food on said premises and must comply with all
regulations of the local department of health (Section 23038). Therefore, the actual
use of the restaurant, as proposed on the floor plan submitted by the applicant,
clearly does not meet the State's definition of a bona fide public eating place.
On February 6, 2012, staff received a letter from the property owner (attached as
Attachment "G "). The property owner has stated that he opposes the tenant's intention of
operating a restaurant in the front portion of the building and operating the rear portion of
the building as a hostess bar. With the property owner's disapproval of the use, the City
Council has additional grounds to UPHOLD the Planning Commission's DENIAL.
LEGAL REVIEW
Resolution 2012 -12 has been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Section 15309 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines exempts
projects that consist of inspections to check for the performance of an operation, or the
quality, health, and safety of a project from environmental review. Accordingly, Conditional
Use Permit 11 -14 is classified as a Class 9 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section
15309 of CEQA guidelines and therefore exempt from further environmental analysis.
PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS
This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process, which includes
a 300' radius public hearing notice to thirty (30) property owners, publication in the San
Gabriel Valley Tribune, and postings of the notice at the six (6) public locations.
City Council Report
February 14, 2012
Pane 3 of 3
Pare
'*Q�
Lily Trinh
Assistant Planner
Prepared by:
Michelle Ramirez
Acting Community Development Director
Attachment A:
Planning Commission Staff Report, dated January 17, 2012
Attachment B:
Planning Commission Minutes, dated January 17, 2012
Attachment C:
Planning Commission Resolution 12 -01
Attachment D:
Appeal Letter, dated January 19, 2012
Attachment E:
CC Resolution 2012 -12
Attachment F:
Restaurant Floor Plan
Attachment G:
Opposition Letter from the Property Owner, dated February 6, 2012
Minutes of the
Joint City Council,
and
Housing Development Corporation
February 14, 2012
The Joint meeting of the Rosemead Housing Development Corporation and City Council was called to order
by Mayor Ly at 7:08 p.m. in the Rosemead City Council Chamber located at 8838 East Valley Boulevard,
Rosemead, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Director /Council Member Clark
INVOCATION: Director /Council Member Low
PRESENT: PresidentlMayor Ly, Vice- PresidentlMayor Pro Tom Armenta, Directors / Councll Members
Alarcon, Clark and Low
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Allred, City Attorney Richman, Assistant City Manager Hawkesworth,
Acting Community Development Director Ramirez, Director of Finance Brisco, Director of Parks and
Recreation Montgomery-Scott, Public Works Director Marcarello, and City Clerk Molleda
1. ORDINANCES READ BY TITLE ONLY
State law requires that all ordinances be read in full prior to the City Council taking action; however,
by motion, unanimously adopted, the City Attorney can be instructed to read all ordinances by title
only.
Recommendation: That the City Attorney be instructed to read all ordinances which appear on this
agenda by title only, and that further reading be waived.
Director /Council Member Polly Low made a motion, seconded by Vice- President/Mayor Pro Tom
Sandra Armenta, to approve ordinances by title only. Vote resulted in:
Yes: Alarcon, Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE -None
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Agenda Item 3B was moved up for discussion.
Rosemead Housing Development Corporation and City Council Joint Meeting
Minutes of February 14, 2011
Page 1 of 11
ATTACHMENT F
B. Appeal of Conditional Use Permit 11.14 — 8772 Valley Boulevard
On January 17, 2012, the City of Rosemead Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed
public hearing for Conditional Use Permit 11 -14, a request for a new On -Sale Beer and Wine
(Type 41) ABC license in conjunction with a bona fide public eating place, known as Hunan
Restaurant, located at 8772 Valley Boulevard, in the C -3D (Medium Commercial with a
Design Overlay) zone. The Planning Commission denied CUP 11 -14 based on the analysis
and findings contained in the Planning Commission's staff report.
On January 19, 2012, the City Clerk's office received an appeal letter from the applicant, Lan
Tan, requesting to appeal the Planning Commission's decision.
Recommendation: That the City Council UPHOLD the Planning Commission's decision to
DENY Conditional Use Permit 11 -14 and Adopt Resolution No. 2012 -12, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL AND
UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO
DENY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 11.14, A REQUEST FOR A
NEW ON -SALE BEER AND WINE (TYPE 41) ABC LICENSE IN
CONJUNCTION WITH A BONA FIDE PUBLIC EATING PLACE,
LOCATED AT 8772 VALLEY BOULEVARD IN THE C -31D
(MEDIUM COMMERCIAL WITH A DESIGN OVERLAY) ZONE
(APN: 5390. 010.038)
Executive Director /City Manager Alfred gave a brief summary of the staff report.
Assistant Planner Lily Trinh explained that on January 17th the Rosemead Planning Commission conducted a
public hearing for Conditional Use Permit 11 -14 to request a new Type 41 beer and wine license in
conjunction with a bonafide public eating place known as Hunan Restaurant. After hearing all the testimony
on this item the request was denied by the Planning Commission. The applicant submitted a letter to the City
Clerk's Office appealing the Commission's decision. The Commission denied the permit due to the following
reasons: After a site inspection was conducted by the Planning Division, the Chief of Police, and Code
Enforcement it was revealed that the floor plan submitted is a misrepresentation of the current restaurant
layout. The front eating area is well lit and is consistent with a family restaurant atmosphere; however, the
rear dining area is configured as a hostess bar setting with dim lighting and lack of dining tables. A hostess
bar is not permitted in the City. Secondly, the actual use of the restaurant as proposed by the applicant
clearly does not meet California Alcohol License and Beverage Control's definition of a bonafide eating place.
The Planning Division, the Chief of Police and Code Enforcement have tried to work with the applicant to
modify the floor plan of the rear area into a family restaurant atmosphere; however, the applicant indicated
that he did not want to modify the floor plans. Therefore, staff is recommending that the City Council uphold
the Planning Commission's decision to deny the Conditional Use Permit 11 -14 and approve Resolution 2012-
12.
Lan Tan — Restaurant owner asked that the City Council postpone the public hearing to try to work with staff
and remodel the back portion of the restaurant.
Rosemead Housing Development Corporation and City Coundl Joint Meeting
Minutes of February 14, 2011
Page 2 of 11
Mr. Allred stated that staff would like to continue the public hearing to March 27 and give the Planning
Division and Public Safety sufficient time to work with the applicant to possibly modify the rear end of the
building.
PresidenNMayor Ly opened the Public Hearing at 7:15 p.m.; there being no comments President/Mayor Ly
continued the Public Hearing to the March 27, 2012 City Council meeting.
Director/Council Member Polly Low made a motion, seconded by DlrectorlCouncil Member William
Alarcon, to continue the Public Hearing on March 27th. Vote resulted in:
Yes: Alarcon, Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
A. Public Hearing on the Fiscal Year 2012 -13 Action Plan for Federally- Funded Programs
The City Council will conduct its required annual public hearing regarding the projected use
of federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership
(HOME) funds for the upcoming 2012 -2013 fiscal year. The U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) has not yet announced the final amounts to be allocated to
participating communities; however, cities have been warned that Congress will make severe
cuts to these programs — an expected 35.6% in Rosemead's CDBG allocation and 25%
decrease in HOME funds. The drastic funding reduction to the CDBG program will result in
reduced funding for the City's Senior Nutrition Lunch program currently operated at the
Garvey Community Center and the Rosemead Community Recreation Center. Due to the
funding reductions, it may be necessary to consolidate the City's two Senior Nutrition Lunch
programs into a single location.
Under federal regulations, no more than 15% of the CDBG allocation (or an estimated
$114,750) can be used for "social service" activities. Written proposals have been received
from seven (7) organizations that are current recipients, which include the Family Counseling
Services, People for People, Rosemead High School, Rosemead School District, Southern
California Housing Rights Center, The Whole Child, and YMCA of West San Gabriel Valley.
In addition, proposals have also been submitted by Family Promise and Mentally and
Educationally Retarded Citizens, Inc. (Merci). Due to the impending federal funding
reductions, allocations to social service agencies will also be reduced or in some cases
eliminated.
Recommendation: That the City Council conduct a public hearing and take public
testimony on the Annual Action Plan covering the period July 1, 2012 — June 30, 2013. No
further City Council action is necessary.
Acting Community Development Director Michelle Ramirez reviewed the staff report.
Rosemead Housing Development Corporation and City Council Joint Meeting
Minutes of February 14, 2011
Page 3 of 11
President/Mayor Ly opened the Public Hearing at 7:20 p.m
George Nalbach — Representative of Santa Anita Family Services explained that CDGB funds received are
used to offer family counseling and a variety of other services to Rosemead families.
John Lovato — Representative of the Rosemead School District stated that the CDGB funding helps to
provide parents and students with parenting classes, conflict resolution, and educating parents and students
to raise achievements.
Ron Esguivel — Representative of the Rosemead School District stated that attendance of diverse families in
the parenting classes have increased and thanked the City Council for supporting the program.
Norene Rand — Director of People for People thanked the City Council for their continued support and
funding which has provided two part -time employees and services for over 75 Rosemead families.
Holly Knapp — Representative of People for People thanked the City Council for their support and the City
assistance during Christmas season that helped many families.
Leonor Ortega — Representative of the Housing Rights Center stated that their program provides many
services to landlords and tenants in the City of Rosemead.
Charlene Dimas Peinado — Chief Executive Officer of the Whole Child program stated they provide
homeless family services to families that need housing assistance.
Martha Escanuelas — Representative of Mentally and Educationally Retarded Citizens, Inc., thanked City
Council for considering their application for CDGB funding and added that they provide services to multi -
handicap, non - verbal patients to improve their quality of life.
President/Mayor Ly closed the Public Hearing at 7.37 p.m. No further action was required at this time.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Claims and Demands
Resolution No. CDC 2012 -04
Recommendation: to approve Resolution No. CDC 2012 — 04 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE SUCCESOR AGENCY OF THE CITY
OF ROSEMEAD ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND
DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $1,775,238.64 NUMBERED 11677
THROUGH 11681 INCLUSIVELY
Rosemead Housing Development Corporation and City Council Joint Meeting
Minutes of February 14, 2011
Page 4 of 11
• Resolution No. HDC 2012 — 02
Recommendation: to approve Resolution No. HDC 2012 — 02 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD ALLOWING
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF $1,914,30
NUMBERED 1543 THROUGH 1544 INCLUSIVELY
• Resolution No. 2012 —13
Recommendation: to approve Resolution No. 2012 —13 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS
IN THE SUM OF $1,916,367.63 NUMBERED 76217 THROUGH
76355 INCLUSIVELY
B. Installation of Full Capture Trash System in Catch Basins Projects —Award of
Contract
As part of the City's Fiscal Year 2011 -12 Capital Improvement Program, the City Council
approved the "Installation of Full Capture Trash Systems in Catch Basins Project', which
consists of retrofitting sixty-one (61) of the City's 661 stormwater catch basins with trash
capture devices to prevent infiltration of trash from the storm water system to the waterways.
The retrofit of these sixty -one basins is the first phase in retrofitting all catch basins by
October 2016 in compliance with the LA River Trash Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and
water quality permit mandates.
Recommendation: That the City Council:
1. Approve the plans and specifications for the project; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with Time Structure in the amount of
$26,960.00 and establish an amount of $4,000 (approximately 15 %) to cover the cost of
unforeseen construction expenses.
Juan Nunez — asked if gardeners are required to obtain permits because of the concern of blowing trash on
the street.
President/Mayor Ly explained that the unfunded mandate is from the Environmental Protection Agency,
which requires cities to capture the incoming water from storm drains.
Director of Public Works Marcarello stated that the catch basins are to regulate trash being dumped in storm
drains.
Rosemead Housing Development Corporation and City Council Joint Meeting
Minutes of February 14, 2011
Page 5 of 11
Director /Council Member Clark expressed concern that the catch basins may have unintended
consequences and clog the storm drains.
Executive Director /City Manager Allred explained that the cost to install the stone drains will be $27,000.
C. Approval of Parcel Map No. 71253 -3333 Delta Avenue
Parcel Map No. 71253 is being submitted for consideration and approval prior to the
recordation of the parcel map. All conditions of approval and public improvements on the
site have been completed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department.
Recommendation: That the City Council approve Parcel Map No. 71253 and direct the City
Clerk to arrange for the recordation of the map.
D. Right -of-Way Certification for Federally- Funded Projects
As part of the City's 2011 -12 Capital Improvement Program budget, the City Council
approved a program titled'Hellman/San Gabriel Intersection Improvements ", which consists
of the construction of concrete Intersection, traffic signal upgrade and appurtenances at the
intersection of Hellman Avenue and San Gabriel Boulevard. This project is federally- funded
through the Metropolitan Transportation Agency (MTA) and California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans).
Recommendation: That the City Council approve Resolution No. 2012 -11, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER, OR THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC ,WORKS, TO
EXECUTE RIGHT -OF -WAY CERTIFICATIONS FOR
FEDERALLY- FUNDED TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS WITH
THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
E. Resolution No. 2012 -02 Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to accept
Irrevocable Offers of Dedication
Irrevocable Offers of Dedication (IOD) are made in conjunction with private improvements
projects and map subdivisions, usually as a condition of approval related to a project. IODs
represent a portion of land /real property that is dedicated by a property owner to the City for
a public purpose (such as right -0f -way enhancement, sidewalk installation, or planting of
street trees). IODs are reviewed by the Public Works Department and subsequently
presented to the City Council for consideration. After completion of improvement work (e.g.
installation of sidewalk, trees), the City can formally accept the offer of real property to be
used for public purposes. Approval of the resolution will allow the City Manager or designee
to accept IODs on behalf of the City. Such delegation will streamline efforts for processing
these items.
Rosemead Housing Development Corporation and City Council Joint Meeting
Minutes of February 14, 2011
Page 6 of 11
Recommendation: That the City Council approve Resolution No. 2012 -02, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO ACCEPT IRREVOCABLE
OFFERS OF DEDICATION
F. Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter Replacement Project— Award of Contract
As part of the City's Fiscal Year 2011 -12 Capital Improvement Program, the City Council
approved the °Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter Replacement Project°, which consists of the repair
and replacement of sidewalk, curb and gutter in various locations in the City. This project will
improve American with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance and is funded through gas tax
monies.
Due to the current competitive construction climate, the successful bid received was lower
than anticipated and budgeted. It is therefore prudent to take advantage of the low prices
received and add additional sidewalk locations to this project. Additional locations will be
added based on the City's Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter Repair List. These locations have
been compiled with input from the Traffic Commission, the public, and staff observations.
Based on this, it is recommended that a 25% contingency amount be allocated to this
construction project. The contingency amount is within the limits established in the City
Purchasing Policy and will be used to cover unforeseen construction expenses and the
installation of additional repair locations.
Recommendation: That the City Council:
1. Approve the plans and specifications for the Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter Replacement
Project.
2. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with Kormx, Inc. for the Sidewalk, .
Curb and Gutter Replacement Project in the amount of $142,057. In addition, authorize
an amount of $35,000, as a contingency, to cover the cost of additional sidewalk
locations and unforeseen construction expenses.
G. Resolution No. 2012 -14— Proclaiming Termination of Local Emergency
On December 1, 2011, the Director of Emergency Services proclaimed a local emergency
existed in the City of Rosemead. The City Council rated said action on December 5, 2011,
as a result of conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property caused by
high winds. At this time it is appropriate to proclaim the termination of said local emergency.
Recommendation: That the City Council approve Resolution No. 2012 -14, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, PROCLAIMING TERMINATION OF
LOCAL EMERGENCY
Rosemead Housing Development Corporation and Cdy Council Joint Meeting
Minutes of February 14, 2011
Page 7 of 11
Vice-President/Mayor Pro Tem Sandra Armenta made a motion, seconded by DirectorlCouncil
Member Polly Low, to approve Consent Calendar items, Vote resulted in:
Yes: Alarcon, Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
5. MATTERS FROM CITY MANAGER & STAFF
A. Mid -Year Budget Update
The City Council will be provided with a FY 2011 -12 mid -year budget update presentation
along with a brief economic look towards the upcoming fiscal year. The recently updated
Strategic Plan identifies key goals and objectives to ensure long -term fiscal sustainability and
staff has been working to ensure that these are met. however, recent actions taken by State
lawmakers to eliminate redevelopment have caused immediate adverse impacts on the
stability of the City's current fiscal year and beyond. At this time, efforts are being made to
mitigate the need to draw from the General Fund reserve balance at a rate of approximately
$100,000 per month in order to maintain existing service levels. Aside from the impacts of
the deficits created by the State, the General Fund revenues have proven to be stable and
are generally in line with budget projections. Assessed property values are expected to
moderately increase this year, sales tax revenue is projected to meet budget expectations
and most other revenues have not varied significantly from budget estimates.
Recommendation: That the City Council approve receive and file the mid -year update.
Finance Director Brisco reviewed the staff report and presented a brief PowerPoint presentation
PowerPoint presentation is available in the City Clerk's office for public view.
Executive Director Allred reiterated that the City Council previously adopted five principles as part of the
City's annual budget and strategic plan to help approach and maintain responsibility to the community and
oversee financial responsibilities.
Finance Director Brisco explained that the legislation also passed Senate Bill 89, which eliminated Vehicle
License Fees; these are fees that cities collected, resulting in a $204,000 short fall.
President/Mayor Ly asked if the League of California Cities was taking action regarding the elimination of
Vehicle License Fees, which violates Proposition 22.
Assistant City Manager Hawkesworth stated that a joint lawsuit between the League of California Cities and
some cities have filed preliminary filings against SB89.
Rosemead Housing Development Corporation and City Council Joint Meeting
Minutes of February 14, 2011
Page 8 of 11
Finance Director Brisco continued with presentation and added that the current general fund expenditures will
cover the remaining redevelopment agency's cost left of $500,000. Mr. Brisco reiterated that management
has limited their supplies and service cost. Some Capital Improvement Project funds are able to accumulate
through Proposition A or Proposition C funds that can be used for other projects. With the dissolution of
redevelopment, came the elimination of low- moderate income housing funds; however, with Senate Bill 654,
it will help preserve some of the housing money but will not come into effect until January 2013.
Director /Council Member Clark asked if SB654 had been approved and signed by the Governor.
Presidenf/Mayor Ly clarified that SB654 was passed by the legislators and the bill is considered a non -
urgency bill; therefore, will not take effect until 2013.
Assistant City Manager Hawkesworth explained that Assembly Bill 1585 had not been approved which
contains the urgency language that resulted in removing the urgency language from SB654. He added that
the bill supports low income and only secures the existing fund balance and does not authorize any new
funding.
Finance Director Brisco continued with the presentation and explained that in order to maintain financial
stability the City will have to control cost, staff adjustments to programs, renegotiate with contractors, limit
traveling and meeting expenses, update fee schedules, and seek highest yield investments.
DirectorlCouncil Member Polly Low made a motion, seconded by Vice- President/Mayor. Pro Tern
Sandra Arrnenta, to receive and file the mid -year budget update. Vote resulted in:
Yes: Alarcon, Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
6, MATTERS FROM MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
A. Oversight Board Appointments
The City Council will consider the appointment of two individuals to serve on the Oversight
Board for the Successor Agency of the former Rosemead Community Development
Commission. One Oversight Board Member will be appointed by the Mayor to represent the
City. The other Board Member will be appointed by the Mayor from the ranks of the
Rosemead Employees Association to represent the employees of the former Rosemead
Community Development Commission.
Recommendation: That the City Council provide direction or take action as it deems
appropriate.
Executive DirectorlCity Manager Allred reviewed the staff report.
Rosemead Housing Development Corporation and City Council Joint Meeting
Minutes of February 14, 2011
Page 9 of 11
City Council nominated City Manager Allred as a board member to the Oversight Committee.
DirectorlCouncil Member Polly Low made a motion, seconded by Vice- PresidentlMayor Pro Tom
Sandra Armenta, to appoint City Manager Allred to the Oversight Committee. Vote resulted in:
Yes: Alarcon, Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
City Council nominated Administrative Assistant Martin Jones as a board member to the Oversight
Committee.
Director /Council Member William Alarcon made a motion, seconded by Director /Council Member
Margaret Clark, to appoint Administrative Assistant Martin Jones to the Oversight Committee. Vote
resulted in:
Yes: Alarcon, Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Director/Council Member Clark asked for the meeting to adjourn in memory of Xavier Quintanilla, who
passed away.
President/Mayor Ly explained that six years ago this month his father was diagnosed with cancer and lost
his battle a year after that. Mr. Ly explained that he had shaved his hair off as a way to honor his father and
an opportunity to raise money for Relay for Life, which the City of Rosemead.participates in every year. He
urged the public to log into the website to donate to this cause and participate in the City's Relay for Life
event to be held on June 9th.
President/Mayor Ly adjourned the Housing Development Corporation and City Council meeting to closed
session at 8:08 p.m.
7. CLOSED SESSION
A. Conference with Legal Counsel — Potential Litigation
Government Code Section 54956.9 (b): t matter
The Housing Development Corporation and City Council reconvened back from closed session with no
reportable actions at 8:24pm.
Rosemead Housing Development Corporation and City Council Joint Meeting
Minutes of February 14, 2011
Page 10 of 11
8. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned in memory of Xavier Quintanilla at 8:24 p.m. The next regular City Council meeting is
scheduled to take place on February 28, 2012 at 7:00 p.m.
�ilf
r
ATTEST:
W6 0- -W
Gloria Molbda'
City Clerk I
Rosemead Housing Development Corporation and City Council Joint Meeting
Minutes of February 14, 2011
Page 11 of 11
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS.
CITY OF ROSEMEAD )
I, Gloria Molleda, City Clerk for the Rosemead City, do hereby certify that the meeting
minutes from February 14, 2012, were duly and regularly approved and adopted by the Rosemead
City Council on the 13th of March 2012, by the following vote to wit:
Yes: Alarcon, Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly,
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
- Alicd wits.
G oria Molleda
City Clerk
HUNAN SEAFOOD RESTAURANT
8772 Valley Blvd
Rosemead, CA 91770
March 6, 2012
City of Rosemead
Planning & Community Development
ATTN: Lily Trinh
8838 E. Valley Blvd.
Rosemead, CA 91770
Dear Ms Trinh:
Recr; v „i !,y
Date 3 8' /Z
I would like to request an extension of 60 days for my appeal of the Planning
Commission's denial of a Conditional Use Permit for the sale of beer and wine at
Hunan Seafood Restaurant.
I have been reviewing the concerns expressed by the Commission, the staff and the
Sheriff s Department and I have recently engaged the services of a consultant to assist
in the development of a new site plan to address those issues. It appears that some
creativity will be necessary to address all the issues raised at the hearing and in
meetings with the staff. The limitations of the site make it difficult to accommodate all
of the concerns.
I would appreciate the additional time to work with my consultant, and engineer to
make the necessary revisions to the plans and submit them with adequate time for staff
review. I have been operating a successful business in just a portion of the existing
building for the last seven years and I would very much like to expand that operation to
take full advantage of the entire building.
For your records I have engaged the services of Mr. Michael Lewis of Lewis &
Company hic. to assist in the revisions to my plans.
I would be most appreciative of your favorable consideration of my request.
Sincerely,
Tony Tan
Owner
ATTACHMENT G
(ED
INVESTMENT, LLC.
2211 East 27 Street. Vernon, CA 90058 TeL• (213) 216.4812 Fax-(323)595-2889
Email: WF.Investment@yahoo.eom
February 6, 2012
Conditional Use — Landlord Retraction of Approval
To: City Council of the City of Rosemead
Previously, our company signed an affidavit for our tenant, located at 8772 Valley
Boulevard, a seafood type restaurant, to obtain an ABC license. Our company would like to
add some of our recent findings in which we feel is essential for the city council to know prior
to approving or disapproving the conditional use permit.
It was made clear to us recently that our tenant's intention is not only to sell alcohol in
the seafood restaurant establishment but rather to sell alcohol in an enclosed area towards the
rear of the premise which was supposed to be either used as a storage area or an expansion of
the restaurant Due to recent inspections, we have found out that the tenant intends to open
some sort of a hostess club or bar in the back part of his leased unit completely separate and
separate than the family environment the current restaurant provides. In fact, the tenant has
already installed numerous bar equipment, lounge chairs/sofas, television and remodeled in full
the premise (lighting, paint, etc.) Our management hereby disapproves of the tenant's planned
usage of this "back section" of his leased premise. We have no issue. for the tenant selling
alcohol at the restaurant but we do not condone any type of hostess type bar or lounge that is
"fronted" by a family type restaurant in the front.
If there are any questions, please feel free to let us know. Thanks!
S' ly,
W &F rcstmint. LLC.
W & F Investmun LLC. 2211 Fast 27TH Street. Vemon. CA 90058 TEL: 213.2164812 FAX: 323 - 5852888
Email: WF.Investmmt @yaboo.eom
ATTACHMENT H