Loading...
PC - Minutes - 10-06-14 Minutes of the • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING October 6,2014 The meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Eng in the Council Chambers, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE-Commissioner Herrera INVOCATION -Commissioner Lopez ROLL CALL-Commissioners Herrera, Lopez,Tang,Vice-Chair Dinh, and Chair Eng ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS PRESENT: City Attorney Murphy, Community Development Director Ramirez, Associate Planner Trinh,and Commission Secretary Lockwood. 1. EXPLANATION OF HEARING PROCEDURES AND APPEAL RIGHTS Greg Murphy, City Attorney,presented the procedure and appeal rights of the meeting. 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE Resident Brian Lewin stated he is speaking on behalf of his mother in regards to two (2) massage establishments located in the City of Rosemead. He stated that it was seen by a friend of his mothers on September 27, 2014,that "Garden Massage"appeared to be open at 12:28 am and the window had blinking lights on. He also reported that on a Friday night his mother observed that"Lily Massage' and "Garden Massage' both located on Valley Boulevard appeared to be open at 10:15 pm with blinking lights on. He expressed concern that when his mother called the Temple City Sheriff's to report that both massage establishments were open after 10:00 pm she was told that they had not heard of Rosemead's ordinance. He requested that staff investigate this. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 72586.On October 31,2013, Phat Ton has submitted an application, under the previous Zoning Code,for a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide one existing parcel totaling 21,893 square feet into three (3) parcels, for the development of three (3) new single-family homes. Each single-family home will also be developed with an attached two-car garage. The subject site is located at 3365 Ivor Avenue in the R-1 (Single-Family Residential)zone. PC RESOLUTION 14-13 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 72586 TO SUBDIVIDE ONE (1) EXISTING PARCEL INTO THREE (3) PARCELS, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THREE (3) NEW SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 3365 IVAR AVENUE IN THE R-1 (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ZONE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION - Based on the analysis and findings contained in this report, it is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 14-13 with findings and APPROVE Tentative Parcel Map 72586,subject to the seventy(70)conditions. Associate Planner Trinh presented the staff report. Chair Eng asked if the Planning Commissioners had any questions or comments for staff. 1 Vice-Chair Dinh asked staff when the banning of Flag Lot's Ordinance went into effect. Community Development Director Ramirez replied it went into effect in late November 2013. Chair Eng stated this application was submitted in October of 2013 and asked the average timeline for processing a subdivision of a single-family residential home. Associate Planner Trinh replied it varies and explained this project took a little longer due to Fire Department requirements. She added the applicant needed to meet all of the requirements and standards before it could be presented to the Planning Commission. Chair Eng asked if previous Planning Commissions had approved subdivisions without construction or developments of homes as part of their applications. Associate Planner Trinh replied that these two(2)projects are the first. Chair Eng asked if this is the desired Planning tool for this type of subdivision. City Attorney Murphy explained that the law allows subdivisions to be processed without any proposed development at all. He explained the process and stated it is usually just the subdivision and zoning of the parcels. He stated in this case there is no change in the zoning,so the subdivision is being seen as a single proposal. He added applicants will sometimes bring the subdivision with a Design Review to save on time, but it is standard to see a parcel map come alone and the build out will come back at a later time. Community Development Director Ramirez explained if any of the homes are built at 2,500 feet or larger, then it would come back to the Planning Commission for a Design Review. She added if they are smaller than 2,500 feet, then they do not have to come back to the Planning Commission for a Design Review. She recommended that the applicant be asked how large the homes will be. Chair Eng asked City Attorney Murphy if the City, as a matter of policy and practice for this type of application, could request the improvements be submitted with the subdivision. City Attorney Murphy replied he would advise against it because the law specifically allows the subdivision to be processed on its own and explained the consequences if it were to be made a policy. Chair Eng expressed that there is a major shortage of single-family housing in the City and this is a way and the opportunity to encourage getting more housing for the City. She referred to Condition of Approval number eighteen (18) and asked if Lot one (1) is the only one being developed and the other two(2) lots will remain vacant. Associate Planner Trinh replied they will all be developed. Chair Eng asked as part of this process is only lot one(1) being developed. Associate Planner Trinh replied this application is for the subdivision only, but there will be improvements on all three (3)lots. Chair Eng asked if Conditions of Approval numbers eighteen (18), nineteen (19), twenty-three (23), and twenty-four (24)are applicable to all three (3)lots. Associate Planner Trinh replied yes. 2 Chair Eng asked if Conditions of Approval numbers twenty-three(23) and twenty-five (25)are they applicable to lots two(2)and three(3). Associate Planner Trinh replied yes. Community Development Director Ramirez clarified that all of the Conditions of Approval are applicable to all three (3) lots. Chair Eng stated she wanted to make sure and explained she was not clear if they would and explained why. She referred to Condition of Approval number forty-three (43), regarding the drainage easement, and asked if the drainage easement should be recorded together with the driveway maintenance for the flag lot. She asked if there is a need to maintain the easement drainage. Associate Planner Trinh replied this is a standard Engineering Condition of Approval and is not familiar with their process when they record covenants for the grading. City Attorney Murphy explained this Condition of Approval means that prior to the actual development there has to be a plan for draining the lots. He stated they otter three options; 1) independent drainage system into the public street 2) an independent drainage system into a public drainage facility, or 3) by means of an approved drainage easement. He added if the drainage has to go across property that is not owned by the lot in question, then that easement would have to be recorded, but any easement that the City would approve (as part of meeting this condition would be recorded). Chair Eng asked so the bottom line is for the drainage easement. City Attorney Murphy replied if they used an easement the Engineering Department would require for it to be recorded. He stated the recorded copy would be shown to the Engineering Department before the Engineering Department would approve the plans to build. Chair Eng asked based on this there is an easement for drainage. City Attorney Murphy replied there can be an easement but it is not known for sure. Chair Eng recommended that language be inserted stating, If there is an easement that is needed it must be recorded'and asked if this will be necessary. City Attorney Murphy replied no. Chair Eng stated as a matter of practice that will be just be done. She read Condition of Approval number sixty-nine 69 and asked what it meant. Associate Planner Trinh replied that is a Los Angeles County Fire Department Condition of Approval and she cannot explain it for them. Chair Eng asked if the applicant needed information on what this Condition of Approval meant they would have to contact the Fire Department. Associate Planner Trinh replied yes. 3 Vice-Chair Dinh referred to Condition of Approval numbers twenty-six (26) and twenty-nine (29), she read number twenty-nine (29),and asked if there will be an HOA for Lots two(2)and three(3). Associate Planner Trinh replied it is not an HOA but they are CC&R's which are conditions that are recorded. She explained all property maintenance, such as the vine pockets and things of that nature are shared between both owners of lots two(2)and three(3). She added both owners would have to agree, sign, and record that document. Vice-Chair Dinh asked if things like the water sprinklers would be divided between the two properties. Associate Planner Trinh replied yes. Vice-Chair Dinh asked if lots two (2) and three (3) will have to be sold together in the future or can they be sold separately. Associate Planner Trinh replied they can be sold separately. Chair Eng asked the Planning Commission if there were any further questions for staff. None Chair Eng opened the Public Hearing and invited the applicant to the podium. Representative Kevin Thai stated he is representing Cal Land Engineering and is here to answer any questions the Planning Commission may have. Chair Eng asked if all three (3) lots will be developed at the same time. Representative Kevin Thai replied yes. Chair Eng asked if they will all be two-story single-family homes. Representative Kevin Thai replied yes. Chair Eng asked if the homes will be sold and if this is an investment. Representative Kevin Thai asked the owner of the property to assist with this question. Property owner Phat Ton requested Associate Planner Trinh assist him with his answers. Associate Planner Trinh spoke on the behalf Phat Ton and replied that he is not sure what he will do. Chair Eng asked if the property owner currently lives there. Property owner Phat Ton replied no. Chair Eng asked if the property is currently a rental. Property owner Phat Ton replied yes. Vice-Chair Dinh asked how many bedrooms each of the single-family homes will have. 4 Property owner Phat Ton replied there will be four(4). Vice-Chair Dinh asked if they will each have a two-car garage. Properly owner Phat Ton replied they will each have a three-car garage. Chair Eng asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak or comment on this item. Resident Virginia Nevarez stated she resides in the front home at 3365 Ivar Avenue and asked if she will be given to relocation money. Community Development Director Ramirez stated that is a landlord/tenant question. She explained that it is not required by law to provide funding for relocation. She added if the tenant has a lease, then the properly owner must abide it. If it is month-to-month, it can be a thirty (30) day notice. She stated it the tenant has lived in the residence for a year or longer, then the property owner must give the tenant a sixty (60) day notice. She stated this application is for the approval of the subdivision only, not the construction of the proposed three (3) single-family homes. Resident Virginia Nevarez stated that the speed limit in this neighborhood is 25 miles per hour and expressed concern that speeding is taking place. She requested the City look into this. Community Development Director Ramirez recommended that Ms. Nevarez contact the Sheriff's Department. Chair Eng stated that the City has a Traffic Commission and Ms. Nevarez may attend a meeting to express that concern. She also gave the date, time, and location of when the Traffic Commission meets. She asked if there were any other questions or comments. None Chair Eng closed the Public Hearing and asked the Planning Commission if there were any other questions or comments for staff. None Chair Eng asked if the City currently has R-1 single-family standards for homes that are built and that are less than 2,500 square feet. Associate Planner replied yes. Chair Eng stated she has no further questions and asked the Planning Commission for a motion. Vice-Chair Dinh made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, to ADOPT Resolution No. 14-13 with findings and APPROVE Tentative Parcel Map 72586,subject to the seventy(70)conditions. Vote resulted in: Yes: Eng, Dinh,Herrera,Lopez,Tang No: None Abstain: None Absent: None 5 Community Development Director Ramirez explained the ten(10)day appeal process. B. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 71858 - On October 3, 2013, Man Voong has submitted an application, under the previous Zoning Code, for a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide one (1) existing parcel totaling 16,094 square feet into two (2) parcels, for the development of two (2) new single-family homes. Each single-family home will also be developed with an attached two (2) car garage. The subject site is located at 7441 Whitmore Street in the R-2(Light Multiple Residential)zone. PC RESOLUTION 14-14 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 71858 TO SUBDIVIDE ONE (1) EXISTING PARCEL INTO TWO (2) PARCELS, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF TWO (2) NEW SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 7441 WHITMORE STREET IN THE R-2(LIGHT MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL)ZONE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION - Based on the analysis and findings contained in this report, it is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution 14-14 with findings and APPROVE Tentative Parcel Map 71858,subject to the sixty-seven(67)conditions. Associate Planner Trinh presented the staff report. Chair Eng asked the Planning Commission if there were any questions or comments for staff. Commissioner Tang asked how many more outstanding applications for subdivisions/flag lots are there. Associate Planner Trinh replied these are the last two(2). Community Development Director Ramirez added that there were three (3) but one of them cancelled so these are the last two(2). Commissioner Lopez asked how long the applicant has before they can submit drawings/blueprints to the Building Department before this application expires. Associate Planner Trinh replied subdivisions are approved for two(2)years. Community Development Director Ramirez explained the applicant may request an extension after the two (2) years for up to an additional two(2)years. City Attorney Murphy explained that the period of time is not to actually put homes on the lot, but the period of time for a subdivision map or in this case a parcel map, is the time in which they have to meet the conditions of approval and record the final map. He stated once the final map is recorded, and in this case two (2) parcels of property that was once one (1), those two parcels can sit idling by forever or it can be developed immediately. He explained all that is being determined this evening is whether or not the division of one parcel into two is appropriate and if so under what conditions and those are the conditions that are before the Planning Commission. Commissioner Lopez asked a question but it was not audible. Community Development Director Ramirez and Associate Planner Trinh replied that is correct. Chair Eng referred to the staff report, page three (3), under Development Standards and read a paragraph stating the subject parcel is zoned R-1 (Single-Family Residential)and asked if the existing zone is R-2. 6 Associate Planner Trinh explained it was a typo. Chair Eng referred to this project and asked if this application is only for the subdivision and there are not any improvements proposed at this time. Associate Planner Trinh replied yes. Chair Eng asked if the minimum driveway width is different for a conventional lot verses a flag lot. Associate Planner Trinh replied it depends. For conventional lots with the driveway leading to the garage door, then you need at least 25 feet. She added if the driveway leads to the garage,which is placed in the rear then you would only need 12 feet, so it varies. Chair Eng asked what the minimum driveway width is for a flag lot. Associate Planner Trinh replied under the flag lot requirements,a two-lot subdivision will require 15 feet. Chair Eng asked if there will be two separate driveways when this project is completed. Associate Planner Trinh replied yes. Chair Eng asked where the garage/driveway will be placed on the conventional lot. Associate Planner Trinh replied the applicant does not know yet. Chair Eng referred to the Resolution and stated under section two (2) the parcel map number is incorrect and recommended it be corrected. She also asked if the City will need to record a covenant for the maintenance of the driveway. Associate Planner Trinh replied no. Chair Eng asked if there were any further questions or comments for staff. None Chair Eng opened the Public Hearing and asked applicant to the podium. Representative/Property Manager Simon Ung stated he is here to answer any questions the Planning Commission may have. Chair Eng asked if he knew when the lots would begin to get developed. Property Manager Simon Ung replied as soon as possible. Chair Eng stated she had no further questions and asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak on this item. None Chair Eng closed the Public Hearing. She asked if the Planning Commission had any further comments or questions. 7 None Chair Eng asked for a motion. Commissioner I Lopez made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herrera,to ADOPT Resolution 14-14 with findings and APPROVE Tentative Parcel Map 71858,subject to the sixty-seven(67)conditions. Vote resulted in: Yes: Eng,Dinh, Herrera,Lopez,Tang No: None Abstain: None Absent: None Community Development Director Ramirez explained the 10-day appeal process. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of September 15,2014 Chair Eng requested a total of three(3)corrections to pages seven(7)and eight(8). Commissioner Lopez made a motion,seconded by Commissioner Herrera,to approve the Minutes of September 15,2014 with corrections to pages seven(7)and eight(8). Vote resulted in: Yes: Eng, Dinh,Herrera, Lopez,Tang No: None Abstain: None Absent: None 5. MATTERS FROM STAFF Community Development Director Ramirez announced that the Assistant Planner position for Community Development Department has been filled by Cory Hanh and he officially begins on October 2, 2014. 6. MATTERS FROM THE CHAIR&COMMISSIONERS Commissioner Lopez reported that while he was visiting the Senior Housing he noticed that there was no air conditioning in the hallways and observed a leak on the third(31 floor. He asked staff if there is a way to check the Conditions of Approval to remedy these issues. Community Development Director Ramirez stated staff is aware of the issues and has spoken with Levine Management. She added there has been a call to the have the air conditioning repaired. In addition she explained that there was a leak in the plumbing and as a result part of the ceiling had to be removed to air out before it could be repaired. Commissioner Herrera announced the date, time, and location of the "Bright Light Night" event sponsored by the Rosemead Chamber of Commerce. She announced the activities that will take place and stated if there is anyone that has a talent or would like to volunteer to please contact her. 8 Chair Eng thanked staff for their participation and time for the Fall Fiesta. She stated that she had the opportunity and attended a previous Planning Commissioner's Academy sponsored by the League of Cities, which was very educational and informative. She added that in 'March of 2015"there will be another Planning Commissioner's Academy in Newport Beach and encouraged the Planning Commissioners to attend if possible. She asked staff what is the status of the Wal-Mart HVAC concerns that the neighboring Delta Avenue residents had discussed at a previous Planning Commission meeting. Community Development Director Ramirez stated she has not heard anything from Wal-Mart. Chair Eng announced that the upcoming week will be Mental Illness Awareness week and expressed the importance being educated on this topic. She also announced the date, time, and location of the"NAMI WALKS' event that she will be participating in and invited everyone to attend. 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. The next regular Planning Commission meeting will be held on Monday, October 20,2014,at 7:00 p.m. C :/' _ NO- Nancy �� Eng Chair A ST: Rachel Lockwood Commission Secretary 9