Loading...
PC - Item 4A - Minutes of March 16, 2015Minutes of the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING March 16, 2015 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Eng at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Commissioner Lopez INVOCATION - Commissioner Tang ROLL CALL - Commissioners Lopez, Tang, and Chair Eng ABSENT — Commissioner Herrera ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS PRESENT: City Attorney Murphy, Development Director Ramirez, Associate Planner Valenzuela, Assistant Planner Hanh, Planning Intern Lao, and Commission Secretary Lockwood. 1. EXPLANATION OF HEARING PROCEDURES AND APPEAL RIGHTS City Attorney, Greg Murphy, presented the procedure and appeal rights of the meeting. 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE Resident Brian Lewin announced that the 710 Alternative's Environmental Report and Study has been released by Metro Caltrans. He added comments will be accepted from the public regarding the document until July 6, 2015 and requested everyone view the document at (www.metro.net/sr710study) and make comments. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14 -06 -Yuan Yuan Chen of Moonlight Bar and Restaurant has submitted a Conditional Use Permit application requesting approval for a new On -Sale General (Type 47) ABC license in conjunction with a bona fide public eating establishment, located at 4501 Rosemead Boulevard, in the C -3 (Medium Commercial) zone. PC RESOLUTION 15 -03 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14 -06, A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL FOR A NEW ON -SALE GENERAL (TYPE 47) ABC LICENSE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A BONA FIDE PUBLIC EATING ESTABLISHMENT. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 4501 ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD, IN THE C -3 (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL) ZONE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION - Based on the analysis and findings in this report, it is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution 15.03 and APPROVE Conditional Use Permit 14 -06 with findings, subject to thirty -one (31) conditions of approval. Planning Intern Lao presented the staff report Community Development Director Ramirez introduced Planning Intern Annie Lao and announced that Annie has accepted another position for another organization and will be leaving the City of Rosemead. She thanked Annie for all her hard work and wished her well. Chair Eng congratulated Ms. Lao and asked the Planning Commission if they had any questions or comments for staff. Commissioner Tang asked for clarification on the definition of what an On -Sale General (Type 47) ABC license is. Planning Intern Lao replied (Type 47) is the on -sale of beer, wine, and distilled liquor, in conjunction with a bona fide public eating establishment. Commissioner Tang asked if the previous restaurant'Bahooka" have a similar type of ABC license. Associate Planner Valenzuela explained that "Bohooka" did have an ABC license, but it had been approved by the County and was grandfathered in, therefore, the City did not have a Conditional Use Permit for them. Commissioner Tang asked if any issues had occurred while " Bahooka" had their ABC license. Associate Planner Valenzuela replied the Chief of Police did not have any comments. Commissioner Lopez referred to the hours of operation and asked why the restaurant is going to be open so late during the week. Planning Intern Lao replied staff did speak to the Chief of Police about the hours of operation and he did not comment on them. She referred to Condition of Approval number twenty -three (23) and read it to the Planning Commission, which referred to the Chief of Police having the authority to modify the hours of operation. Community Development Director Ramirez addressed the Planning Commission and explained that the applicant has requested the hours of operation and they may ask the applicant the question. Chair Eng asked if "Bohooka" also had a Type (47) ABC license. Associate Planner Valenzuela replied yes. Chair Eng commented that "Bohooka's" had been in the City for a lengthy time and she did not recall hearing of any incidents at this location. She asked staff if they knew what their operation of hours were. Planning Intern Lao replied the hours of operation were Sunday through Thursday 11:00 am to 11:00 pm, and on Friday and Saturday they were 11 :00 am to 1" 00 am. Chair Eng stated the restaurant provides seating for three hundred and eighty -nine (389) patrons and asked staff if that included the bar area. Planning Intern Lao replied yes. Chair Eng referred to the site plan and stated it indicates sixty-five (65) parking spaces and asked if this is per the current code. Planning Intern Lao replied yes. Chair Eng asked what is the current code standard for restaurants. 2 Planning Intern Lao replied the current code standard for restaurant is any restaurant that is more than 2,000 square feet in floor area, which "Bohooka" is, requires twenty (20) spaces for the first 2,000 square feet and then one (1) space per 200 square feet thereafter. Chair Eng asked based on that calculation if there is sufficient parking that meets code. Planning Intern Lao replied the applicant only needs fifty -three (53) parking spaces and they have a surplus of twelve (12). Chair Eng referred to the back of the property and stated there are signs posted this site, and asked staff if there is a shared parking agreement. Associate Planner Valenzuela replied that question can be deferred to Chair Eng referred to Condition of Approval number eight (8) in regards plans to remove any of the mature trees. Planning Intern Lao replied no. parking, which is next to asked if there are any Chair Eng commented that the trees serve as a shield for light and noise issues and if there is an intention to remove them, requested it be considered the replacement's intention is to serve the same purpose. She referred to Condition of Approval number fourteen (14) regarding signage and commented there has been a lot of concerns with old signage not being removed. She stated that the language in Condition of Approval number fourteen (14) does not address the removal of old signage and recommended it be revised to include it or add Condition of Approval number fourteen (14) to Condition of Approval number thirty (30). She read Condition of Approval number thirty (30) regarding site maintenance issues and asked if Condition of Approval number fourteen (14) can also be included. Associate Planner Valenzuela stated the Planning Division has received a new sign plan for this restaurant and the applicant is rehabilitating all the signs. She added staff has not approved it because we are waiting for all these improvements to take place. Chair Eng confirmed that staff is satisfied that removal of old signage will not be an issue. Associate Planner Valenzuela replied yes, it will not be an issue. Chair Eng asked the Planning Commission if they had any further questions for staff. None Chair Eng opened the Public Hearing and invited the applicant to the podium. Representative Stanley Szeto and the applicant approached the podium and Mr. Szeto stated they have read all the Conditions of Approval, they have no objections, and there are a lot of maintenance conditions they will be addressing. He addressed the Planning Commissioner's question regarding the "Bohooka" having a Type (47) ABC license and reported he believes they did have one and explained the premise has been vacated for a while. He added Type (47) ABC licenses have substantial value and the previous tenant did not sell it to them; and instead, took it with them, and put it in surrender status to sell to another buyer. He explained they are applying for their own Type (47) ABC license and will have to buy it from someone else. Chair Eng asked the Planning Commission if they had any questions or comments for the applicant. Commissioner Lopez stated the hours of operation are from 11:00 am to 2:00 am during the week and asked why the applicant wants to stay open so late during the week. Representative Szeto stated the applicant, which is present this evening, indicated that some patrons may get off of work late and would like to go to a late dinner. Commissioner Lopez asked what happened to all the fish that the "Bohooka" had in fish aquariums. Representative Szeto replied he does not know. Chair Eng asked what experience does the proprietor have in operating a food service restaurant with a full bar Representative Szeto replied (on behalf of the applicant) that she has another restaurant in San Gabriel located on Del Mar Avenue and Valley Boulevard in a shopping center. Chair Eng stated the restaurant is called "Moonlight Bar and Restaurant" and the Type (47) ABC license is an incidental to the food sales and asked why the word "bar" precedes restaurant. Representative Szeto replied that the plans restaurant precedes bar and it should be "Moonlight Restaurant and Bar ". Chair Eng stated she wanted to make sure that the restaurant is the primary business and the bar is actually incidental. Representative Szeto stated that is the way it should be otherwise there would be all types of ABC restrictions and if they did not have a kitchen, they would not be able to serve or allow minors. He added they would also not be able to apply for a Type (47) ABC license and it would have to be Type (48) ABC license. Community Development Director Ramirez stated that the plans submitted by the applicant say's "Moonlight Bar and Restaurant ". She addressed the representative and applicant and stated if the plans are incorrect, then they will have to submit new plans with the correct name on it. She asked the applicant to confirm if the correct name of the restaurant is "Moonlight Restaurant and Bar" so that the Planning Commission may be clear on what is being requested. Representative Szeto stated yes, it should be "Moonlight Restaurant and Bar ". Chair Eng asked when the larger shifts are being scheduled. Representative Szeto stated they will be scheduled in the evening between 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm. Chair Eng asked when they will anticipate beginning serving alcohol. Representative Szeto replied they serve alcohol all day and last call will be around 1:15 am and added most people do not drink in, the morning. Chair Eng asked the Planning Commission if there were any further questions or comments. None Representative Szeto stated that it is required that all staff, management, and supervisors take a training seminar with ABC on the handling and service of serving alcohol. 4 Chair Eng stated that serving alcohol is for the convenience of the patrons and asked if there is any type of entertainment. Representative Szeto replied no, there is no entertainment of any type and it is a restaurant with a commercial kitchen. Chair Eng asked for clarification on the parking lot towards the back near the trash enclosure where she saw signs pointing that it is for hospital parking and asked if that is correct. Representative Szeto responded for the applicant stating that the parking is shared only during the day with the hospital, in the evening it is for the restaurant. Chair Eng asked when the restaurant anticipates opening. Applicant Chen stated they would like to open as soon as possible. Chair Eng thanked the applicant for taking the time and making the investment. Community Development Director Ramirez referred to a question by the Chair, in regards to entertainment, Conditions of Approval number's seventeen (17) and eighteen (18) address that issue and read them to the Planning Commission. Chair Eng stated that a speakers request has been submitted for this item and called Brian Lewin to the podium. Resident Brian Lewin stated in regards to signage he is glad staff is satisfied with the signage plan submitted to the Planning Division. He added that based on what he has seen around the City he recommends that a requirement be added that old signage from previous businesses be removed. He also recommended this language, "Any furnishing sign or sign structure not part of and or consistent with the approved project design and signage plan approved by the Planning Division shall be removed and addressed to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of a business license". He named three locations within the City that old signage of previous businesses have not been removed and stated if this requirement is added, you would ensure that these issues would be dealt with upfront and Code Enforcement would not have to make multiple visits to make the applicant comply. He added this will help with the appearance of the City and also help Code Enforcement. Associate Planner Valenzuela stated prior to approving new signagestaff does require the applicant to remove existing signage, all residue of the previous signage, and repainted before approving it. She stated staff tries their best before approval to get these issues taken care of. Chair Eng asked what is done in terms of a follow -up. Associate Planner Valenzuela replied follow -up inspections are completed on signs also Chair Eng asked if there were any further questions or comments on this item. None Chair Eng closed the Public Hearing and asked the Planning Commission if there were any further questions or comments for staff. None Chair Eng referred to the ABC map included in the staff report and she counted seven (7) but the staff report states there are five (5) ABC licenses for this census tract and asked staff to clarify which is correct. Associate Planner Valenzuela replied staff checked the ABC's website and this census tract only has five (5). Chair Eng asked the Planning Commission if there was any further discussion. None Chair Eng asked for a motion. Commissioner Tang made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, to ADOPT Resolution 15 -03 and APPROVE Conditional Use Permit 14 -06 with findings, subject to thirty -one (31) conditions of approval. Vote resulted in: Yes: Eng, Lopez, and Tang No: None Abstain: None Absent: Herrera Community Development Director Ramirez explained the ten (10) day appeal process. She thanked Planning Intern Annie Lao for all her hard work and wished her well. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14 -04 - Jiajie Li has submitted a Conditional Use Permit application requesting to establish an automobile rental use, without automobile repair. The proposed project will include interior tenant improvements. The project site is located at 4237 Rosemead Boulevard, in the C -3 (Medium Commercial) zone. PC RESOLUTION 15 -02 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 14.04, TO ESTABLISH AN AUTOMOBILE RENTAL USE, WITHOUT AUTOMOBILE REPAIR. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 4237 ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD, IN THE C -3 (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL) ZONE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 15 -02 with findings and APPROVE Conditional Use Permit 14 -04, subject to the twenty -seven (27) conditions of approval. Assistant Planner Hant presented staff report Chair Eng asked the Planning Commission if there were any comments or questions for staff. Commissioner Tang asked how long the current establishment has been vacant. Assistant Planner Hanh replied it has been vacant for one (1) year and three (3) months. Commissioner Tang asked what was the previous business establishment prior to the current establishment today and if it was a "Budget Car Rental" establishment. 0 Assistant Planner Hanh replied it was a public eating establishment called "Cafe AM and PM" and before that it was a "Thrifty Car Rental ". Commissioner Tang asked how long has it been since "Thrifty Car Rental" was located there. Assistant Planner Hanh replied "Thrifty's Car Rental" business license expired on September 30, 2012. Commissioner Tang asked if any renovations need to be completed to the interior of the building to revert this back to a car rental establishment. Assistant Planner Hanh replied the only interior tenant improvements include a counter top and minor electrical work but nothing substantial. Commissioner Tang asked if a car rental establishment requires a trash enclosure and commented he did not see one on the site plan. Assistant Planner Hanh replied there is not a specific requirement for that. Commissioner Tang asked where they would dispose of their trash. Assistant Planner Hanh replied this is an existing building and stated a condition of approval can be added to include a trash enclosure. Commissioner Tang recommended that would be best considering this is a business establishment and he does not see it on the site plan and he does not know where they would throw away their trash. Commissioner Lopez referred to the staff report where it states there will be no automotive repair and asked how will the automobiles be maintained on -site, will they be washed or taken off -site. Assistant Planner Hanh replied the automobiles will be taken to an off -site car wash. He added there will be no car washing, automotive repair, or service on the site. Commissioner Lopez asked if there will be any type of chemicals used on that site. Assistant Planner Hanh replied no. Commissioner Tang referred to Condition of Approval number twenty -five (25) and stated it does allow washing vehicles but only the vehicles used as rentals. Community Development Director Ramirez referred to Condition of Approval number twenty -five (25) and stated it is allowed and it has been allowed for other car rental facilities. She explained they usually do that in the morning, but they do have to comply with all State and Federal clean water laws and the City's NPDES requirements to ensure for no run -off into the storm water. Chair Eng asked if the property has any type of separator for the oil and water. Assistant Planner Hanh replied he does not have that information and that question can be deferred to the applicant. Chair Eng stated information is important due to storm water concerns. She stated that was her only question and asked the Planning Commission if there were any other questions for staff. None Chair Eng opened the Public Hearing and invited the applicant to the podium. Representative Peter Wang for applicant Jiajie Li stated this establishment was a previous car rental and his applicant is trying to re -open it as the same type of business. He addressed the question of car washing and stated Ms. Li has already prepared a contract with a local car - washing facility, cars will be driven there directly, and there will be no car washing on -site. He stated she has already made an arrangement with a local car dealership to store extra vehicles in route to be picked up or returned to the site, so that there will be no overnight parking on -site. He stated he appreciates the work Assistant Planner Hanh has put into this project and the Planning Commission for taking the time to listen. He added the applicant has read, understands, and agrees to all the Conditions of Approval. Chair Eng thanked the Mr. Wang and the applicant for taking the time and making the investment and it is important to have small businesses. She asked if this business going to be affiliated with alarger car rental franchise or is it a smaller independent operation. Representative Wang replied currently it is a small operation and hopefully it will expand in the future. Chair Eng asked if there was an off -site facility for additional cars because the staff report states there will only be seven (7) cars on site. Representative Wang replied yes and explained Ms. Li has already made arrangements with a local car dealership and car -wash facility. Community Development Director Ramirez explained when this location was "Thrifty Car Rental" it was approved under the old code and was not regulated. This is now regulated under the new code, as a result, is required to apply for a Conditional Use Permit; whereas, "Thrifty's" did not require one. Chair Eng thanked the representative and applicant and asked if there were any follow up questions for the applicant. None Chair Eng called speaker request Alicia Servin to the podium. Resident Alicia Servin stated her concern is traffic and she understands there is a new code and has been revised since "Thrifty's Car Rental ". She stated "Thrifty's Car Rental" went out of business in 2012 but it had been vacant for sometime after and asked Assistant Planner Hanh if he had that information. Assistant Planner Hanh replied he does not have information on how long it was vacant and only has information based on the expiration of the business license records. Resident Servin explained there was an overflow of automobiles at that time, traffic was bad, cars that did not fit on the lot were being parked and left on their street, and there was a mess. She clarified with staff that with this establishment only seven (7) cars are being allowed on this lot at any given time. Community Development Director Ramirez replied yes. Resident Servin asked for clarification if the car washing has been sub - contracted to be done elsewhere, it will not be done at this site. 9 Community Development Director Ramirez stated for clarification the applicant can, if they choose to, wash those cars on their property, but they have stated they have a contract to take the cars to a car wash. She added they do not have to continue that practice and if they wanted to wash their cars on site, then they can do that. Resident Servin asked congestion of cars should not be a concern because there is only seven (7) allowed. Community Development Director Ramirez replied that is correct and explained if the applicant starts to park more than that on -site, or if they start parking them on the street, then you would just have to notify the City. Resident Servin stated she does not want it to get to that point and welcomes anyone that wants to start a business and bring in revenue into the City. She added she has lived here for many years and expressed that she and her neighbors love their City, their street, and they do not want the traffic congestion, which they have been getting already from the church, the school, and the five -story hotel on Mission Drive. She stated they all park on their street and her concern is traffic. Community Development Director Ramirez encouraged Ms. Servin it that starts to happen, please contact the City. Resident Servin stated she is here now and if there is a problem she will come back. Resident Michael Placencia stated he is present this evening and his wife Nancy Placencia is at work but he does have permission to speak for her. He expressed he is against this car rental facility because of the past history of "Thrifty Car Rental ". He stated that when they were operating the people that rented cars would leave the cars they came in right in front of their properties. He explained sometimes their cars would stay there for days but when street sweeping days came around they were moved. He stated that they would park their cars in a way that it would be difficult to get out of their driveways. He expressed traffic is a concern and is increasing especially at the intersection of Rosemead Boulevard and Mission Drive. He stated because of this Lawrence Avenue is being used as a bypass to avoid the traffic signal and they are driving too fast, so it has become a safety issue for the residents on Lawrence Avenue that have to back out of their driveways. He expressed concern that if this car rental establishment is allowed it will increase traffic and cars will be parked and left in front of their homes on Lawrence Avenue. He stated that the residents of Lawrence Avenue have approached the City and requested speed bumps, but they were told that they could not be installed because emergency vehicles need that street as a bypass without speed bumps to be able to navigate their vehicles. He stated there are many cities with speed bumps that emergency vehicles can still go through. i He added the reason they requested speed bumps is for safety issues of speeding cars going through. He stated they have also requested a stop sign at the corner of Ivar Avenue and Lawrence Avenue but they were told there was a stop sign and yellow crossing already. He explained at that corner going West on Lawrence Avenue and when you come up on Ivar Avenue you can only turn left or right and you can't see the cars going north on Ivar because cars allowed to park up to the corner. He expressed that it is getting more difficult to make that turn. Chair Eng thanked Mr. Placentia for expressing his concerns and asked if he had appeared at a Traffic Commission meeting in the past to express his traffic concerns to them. Resident Placentia replied no and explained he called the City and that was the information given to him. Someone from the audience spoke but it was not audible. Community Development Director Ramirez stated she can give this information to the person in charge of the Traffic Commission and have them contact Mr. Placentia directly. Resident Placentia asked if this item is allowed will all his concerns /issues be dealt with afterwards. Community Development Director Ramirez replied no, and explained his concerns with stop signs and speed bumps are issues that the Traffic Commission oversees and she will have someone contact him. She added he may have to attend a Traffic Commission meeting, which is held on the first Thursday of every month. She explained that if there is not an agenda the Traffic Commission may not meet and requested a contact name and number to have someone contact him directly. Resident Placentia stated he may be contacted and his information is on the Speakers Request form. He asked for clarification on what the twenty -seven (27) conditions of approval are. Community Development Director Ramirez stated that they are conditions that the property owner needs to abide by. Resident Placentia asked if the issue with customers leaving their own personal cars on the street is one of those twenty -seven (27) conditions. Community Development Director Ramirez replied no, and explained that the street is public right -a -way and anybody can park on it. She added what can be done is to work with the property owner to encourage their customers are renting a car not to leave their personal vehicle parked on the street. Resident Placentia expressed that he wants to make sure it is known that there were issues with the previous car rental business. He added that people were leaving their cars for days at a time and parking in a manner that does not allow you to get out of the driveway. Community Development Director Ramirez added that the Traffic Commission can also address his concern with cars being parked too close to driveways. She added that it may be possible that the curbs be painted red on each side of his driveway as one of the methods that could possibly address that problem. Resident Placentia asked if that could be one of the conditions of approval. Community Development Director Ramirez replied that this is a public street and the Planning Commission does not oversee public streets they oversee private properties. Commissioner Tang recommended that the City and Code Enforcement be contacted if there are concerns with public right -a -way parking. Resident Placentia stated that most of the business is done on the weekends and Code Enforcement does not answer their phones on the weekends. Chair Eng thanked Mr. Placentia for his comments /questions. Resident Ronnie Ayala stated there is a problem with overnight parking and referred to the U -Haul business, the hotel, the college /adult school (on I Rosemead Boulevard), and he explained that excess parking overflows onto Lawrence Avenue. He stated that he would prefer a reputable business such as Hertz Car Rental and expressed small independent businesses have not done well at this location. He referred to washing of cars and stated you do need a run -off for drainage so it does not clog up the sewer. He stated that the residents of Lawrence Avenue are serious about this issue and have considered submitting a petition with the support of all his neighbors to show the Planning Commission how strongly they feel about this item. Chair Eng thanked Mr. Ayala for his comments /questions. Resident Brian Lewin stated the Water Board is getting stricter about requirements on what is allowed to go out into the streets. He stated the City needs to consider being a little more progressive in terms of addressing car washing on sites, especially on sites that do not have any oil and water separators, clarifiers, and that are designed to drain into the streets. He recommended that the Planning Commission consider some type of requirement that if they want IN to wash cars on -site, that they develop some type of containment and disposal plan for approval by the City Engineer, so that way the City knows what they are doing and when they do this. He added he understands that current car rental businesses do not have this requirement, but he is talking about going forward for those places that do or if the existing ones do significant modifications. He stated it would be appropriate to do this just for the benefit of storm water quality and keeping it on site. He added nothing elaborate just something that shows they know what they are doing and they have a plan to contain it and how to properly dispose of it. Community Development Director Ramirez stated that is a requirement staff is willing to put into a condition of approval if that is what the Planning Commission would like. Representative Wang addressed the Planning Commission and stated that he also has been a resident of Rosemead in the past and he can understand the concerns regarding traffic from the neighbors. He stated that is why they made arrangements with a local dealership for the overstock of cars. He explained that there may be occasionally more than seven (7) vehicles on site due to drop -off's and pick -ups' of vehicles. He stated that they will do their best to keep only seven (7) vehicles on the site but from time to time there may be more and explained they will need a little time to bring and remove the vehicles from the premises. He added they will try to make sure that they will not occupy the public streets and he is familiar with clarifiers but car washing is not their primary business. He explained the main objective is to keep the product clean and they will probably dust it from time to time, but the car will be sent to the car wash. He stated they are not going to wash cars on site and they are not going to overstock cars, this is a small business, which the owner is trying to set this location as its first headquarter with the hopes of continuing as a dealer enterprise to provide revenue, increase local job opportunity, and be a good neighbor. Resident Luis Sanchez stated he has lived on Lawrence Avenue for thirty (30) years and that there are parking limitations on that street but they are not enforced. He expressed if they were enforced and ticketed it would solve a lot of problems. He added what is enforced is street sweeping and then the residents are the ones getting the citations. He reported that in the past when "Thrifty Car Rental" was present there were also long car haulers bringing in the cars and they would stay there for a half hour and created safety concerns. Chair Eng asked Representative Wang how the cars will be delivered to your site. Representative Wang replied that based on availability the car will be driven from the storage lot where they are stored and driven to the site to be delivered for the scheduled pickup. He explained that they will have to schedule a return time but unfortunately they cannot control the return time. Chair Eng asked if there are any plans to use car haulers for deliveries or returns, or will they be driven individually to the site. Representative Wang replied they will be driven individually to the site. Community Development Director Ramirez addressed the applicant and reminded them that that are only getting approval for seven (7) rental spaces and if you have more than that start showing up, then they will be violating their Conditional Use Permit. She stated they will have to time the delivery and return of vehicles appropriately. Representative Wang stated he understands and explained that the timing cannot be exact and they will try their best to get the cars returned. He added this is a car rental facility and everything may not be exact but they will meet the conditions of approval. Resident James Berry stated in regards to parking concerns parking structures for the customers to park and leave their cars. business. there are other car rental agencies that have other He asked if that is the case here with this proposed 11 Community Development Director Ramirez replied no. Resident Berry asked if there was anywhere for their customers to park. Community Development Director Ramirez replied they have three (3) parking spaces for customers. Resident Berry expressed he now understands the public concerns. He recommended if the applicant has an off -site location to store cars, then perhaps they can also have an off -site location for customers to leave their cars. He asked if the applicant will be offering any type of pick -up service at the customer's home because some car rental agencies offer that, so that customers do not have to leave their cars. He stated that he knows this is a small business but these suggestions are ways to help alleviate traffic conditions. Chair Eng asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak on this item. None Chair Eng closed the Public Hearing and asked the Planning Commission if there were any follow up questions for staff. Commissioner Tang asked if an additional condition of approval will be included requiring a trash enclosure. Community Development Director Ramirez replied yes. Commissioner Tang asked if the condition of approval regarding the washing of cars also include the water drainage containment plan. Community Development Director Ramirez replied yes. City Attorney Murphy explained the best way to include the trash enclosure is to add Condition of Approval number twenty -eight (28). He also stated Condition of Approval number twenty -five (25) addresses car washing and it reads, "All washing and detailing of automobiles parked on site for rental shall comply with State and Federal clean water laws and the City's NPDES requirements ". He stated after it should say, "The applicant shall be required to supply to the City Engineer and the City Engineer shall be required to approve a water drainage containment plan prior to any washing and /or detailing taking place on the site." He stated the last sentence shall continue to state, "No washing or detailing of automobiles not parked on site for rental shall be allowed on site. He stated that way it is all bundled as one condition of approval. Chair Eng asked if Commissioner Tang if this meets his satisfaction in regards to the addition of those two conditions of approval. Commissioner Tang replied yes. Chair Eng asked Representative Wang and Ms. Li (applicant) if they are agreeable to those changes to the condition. Representative Wang and Ms. Li replied yes. Chair Eng stated this site is a small and narrow lot and asked staff if a trash enclosure is included will it impact parking. 12 Community Development Director stated they will have the applicant work with the waste disposal company to situate the best way to enter and exit the site and staff will discuss the options with the applicant. Chair Eng asked the Planning Commission if there were any further comments or questions. Commissioner Tang stated he sympathizes with the residents that live on Lawrence Avenue. He added the Planning Commission hears the same concerns when businesses want to come into the City and with businesses wanting to expand. He explained the Planning Commission has the challenge of businesses being pinned next to neighborhoods similar to theirs in Rosemead and the Planning Commission strongly urges those businesses to work with the neighbors and encourage the customers to park in the spaces allowed for customers. He stated he hopes the applicant present this evening will work with the neighbors in addressing that matter and it is a public street so it cannot be regulated on who gets to park there. He stated hopefully the City will do a good job in regulating those restrictions. He expressed he does not want to not approve businesses and unfairly punish the business, when they haven't even opened up their doors yet. He added hopefully this will be a mutual benefit to the community. Chair Eng stated she concurs with Commissioner Tang's sentiments. She stated the concerns with parking, traffic, and circulation is a major issue for the City. She stated that parking structures are needed; and she has been recommending them. She added the biggest challenge for the Planning Commission is the unique, layout of the City with so many commercial areas abutting residential areas. She stated the City has been putting in a lot more effort in addressing traffic and looking for solutions and will continue to do so She said the applicant has heard the neighbors' concerns and hopefully the applicant is open to being approached, work with them, sympathize, and do what they can to help. She thanked the applicant, audience, and asked the Planning Commission for a motion. Commissioner Tang made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, to ADOPT Resolution No. 15.02 with findings and APPROVE Conditional Use Permit 14.04, subject to the twenty -eight (28) conditions of approval. (Modification made by the Planning Commission to Condition of Approval number twenty -five (25) and Condition of Approval number twenty -eight (28) was added). Vote resulted in: Yes: Eng, Lopez, and Tang No: None Abstain: None Absent: Herrera Community Development Director Ramirez explained the ten (10) day appeal process. C. MODIFICATION 14 -01 AND ZONE VARIANCE 14 -01 - Zosimo and Nelia Pascasio submitted a Modification application requesting to expand their existing adult care facility (Rosemead Villa) and a Zone Variance; application requesting to deviate from the required number of parking spaces. The subject property is located at 9025 Guess Street, in the R -1 (Single - family Residence) zone. On May 5, 2014, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing for Modification 14 -01 and Zone Variance 14 -01. Due to insufficient information on how the Department of Social Services (DSS) regulates the Rosemead Villa business operation and neighboring resident complaints, the Planning commission continued the public hearing to a date uncertain. PC RESOLUTION 14 -07 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MODIFICATION 14- 01 FOR THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING ADULT CARE FACILITY AND ZONE VARIANCE 14 -01 REQUESTING TO DEVIATE FROM THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES LOCATED AT 9025 GUESS STREET, IN THE R -1 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ZONE. 13 STAFF RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 14 -07 findings, and APPROVE Modification 14 -01 and Zone Variance 14 -01, subject to the twenty - three (23) conditions of approval. Lily Valenzuela presented staff report. Chair Eng asked the Planning Commission if there were any comments or questions for staff. Commissioner Tang requested an overview of what the applicant is planning to expand. Associate Planner Trinh explained that the applicant currently has three buildings, in one of the buildings there is an office space where they are adding two additional beds. She stated they are constructing a new building to the rear of the property "Building C' where they are incorporating four beds, two beds each room. Commissioner Tang stated there is a total of three additional bedrooms and two additional bathrooms. Associate Planner Trinh replied yes. Commissioner Tang asked what standard is used by the surrounding cities to regulate these types of facilities. Associate Planner Valenzuela replied the 'applicant submitted documents from the County Community Care Licensing for the Department of Social Services (DSS) which regulates all the facilities throughout Los Angeles. She stated the applicant acquired Title 22, which; regulates their business and has been submitted as an attachment. Staff also contacted Leah Theophile, the licensing representative for this project, who indicated that they do comply with the regulations. Commissioner Tang asked if there was indication on how many restrooms were required for the number of beds and square footage. Associate Planner Valenzuela replied there are not any requirements. Chair Eng thanked staff and the applicant for taking the time to address a lot of the concerns discussed during the May 5, 2014 Planning Commission meeting. She asked if the bedrooms will meet the minimum required square footage. Associate Planner Valenzuela replied yes. Chair Eng asked if this item is approved by the Planning Commission and not appealed will the applicant still need to get the expansion approved by the Department of Social Services and the Fire Department. Associate Planner Valenzuela replied yes and explained that staff contacted Leah Theophile who stated the applicant has submitted their applications but it cannot be processed until it is approved by the City. Chair Eng clarified that this is the first step and asked if the applicant has been operating this business since 1996. Associate Planner Valenzuela replied yes. Chair Eng stated she was contacted by a resident and they referred to Title 22, Section 80087.1), which requires an isolation room for use by residents that are ill, and asked staff if this applies to this residential facility. 14 Associate Planner Valenzuela replied she does not think so, but going through the process of the Department of Social Services, if it is required, the applicant may have to eliminate two (2) beds to create that room. Chair Eng asked if the Planning Commission had any other questions or comments. None Chair Eng opened the Public Hearing and invited the applicant to the podium. Applicant Nelia Pascasio thanked the Planning Commission and staff for giving her and her husband a second chance to address the concerns /questions they may have. Commissioner Tang asked when the peak hour for parking for this facility is. Applicant Pascasio replied there is not a peak hour because there are hardly any vehicles parking on the lot except for her car when she visits and her husbands. She explained that there are not any providers that visit the facility and if they do it is in the late afternoon. She added the parking lot is empty most of the time because their residents do not own vehicles. Commissioner Tang asked if the parking spaces available are used by staff. Applicant Pascasio replied no and explained that staff does not own cars., Chair Eng asked Nelia Pascasio what is their current occupancy. Applicant Pascaiso replied twenty -two (22). Chair Eng asked Mrs. Pascasio to explain why they are requesting the expansion. Applicant Pascasio explained that there are so many disabled people that need housing and for the last twenty years they have been involved in helping the developmentally disabled and mentally challenged individuals. She stated there is not enough housing and they would like to provide more housing for these individuals. Chair Eng asked if all the residents living at this facility are under treatment and take medications. Applicant Pascasio replied yes, it is required that they take their prescribed medications. She explained if they do not comply, then they are asked to leave the facility; and staff is trained to know if the residents are not taking their medication. Chair Eng asked Mrs. Pascasio to explain the improvements that have been made to the property to address some of the concerns. Applicant Pascasio explained they have constructed a 6'foot concrete fence running from the East and the West side along the building to help with the noise. She stated they have also ordered dual -pane windows, which will be installed when they receive them. Chair Eng asked if she had also instituted a complaint program. Applicant Pascasio replied yes and explained after the Planning Commission hearing in May 2014, they decided to log every complaint that the next door neighbor reported. She stated since May 2014 to March 2015 there were a total of eight (8) calls and the calls were made by Judy Chien. She explained the nature of the calls were in regards 15 to talking loud at 6:00 am and coughing. She explained that you cannot control coughing, especially if they are all smokers, and they will not quit smoking because it helps them from hearing voices. She stated another complaint was from radio /music being too loud but she explained the music came from another apartment building having a Thanksgiving party. Chair Eng asked the applicant if they made efforts to address the complaints. Applicant Pascasio replied yes and explained when it is coughing they will take the resident to the doctor right a way to get the appropriate medicine. She stated they also move the resident to another area even if they don't want to, which is a violation of their rights. She stated if they get caught by the Department of Social Services they could get penalized for doing that. She stated that is a few examples of what they have done and her husband is on the site eight (8) hours a day, everyday. She explained in the evening the night nurse is required to check every noise, but they are not noisy, and if you would drive by you would not know a boarding facility; was there because it is so quiet. Chair Eng stated her concern is the quality of life and she would like to see a better quality of life for the residents. She stated that Mrs. Pascasio has taken some steps to achieve that and asked her to explain them. Applicant Pascasio stated they are constructing two gazebos, a basketball court, and picnic tables. She explained they are trying to do improvements so that their quality of life is increased. She expressed that they hope they do not keep violating their personal rights. Commissioner Tang referred to the loitering and littering of cigarette butts, which was discussed at the May 2014 Planning Commission meeting, and asked what has been done with those concerns since then. Applicant Pascasio replied they have staff that cleans that from time to time but she does not think that the cigarette butts in the parking lot are all created by the residents of "Rosemead Villa' . She stated they do their best to keep the parking lot and sidewalk clean. She added it is a clean facility and no one loiters in front of the parking lot and no one smokes there. Resident Judy Chien stated she lives next door to "Rosemead Villa" and she does not agree with what the applicant has stated. She stated there is still noise and it happens at 2:00 or 3:00 am and she will have to call the facility to request the screaming /noise be stopped. She stated that she has had to call the police because the staff does not take care of it and when she calls to complain she is told the boss is not there. She stated she has called numerous times and has not been able to talk with the boss and is given numerous reasons. She stated cigarette butts are still a problem as they are on her property and sidewalk and she ends up being the one that picks them up. She stated when the concrete fence was installed they were told at the last minute it was going to be installed and they were inconvenienced because they were leaving for vacation, and had to tie their dog up. She stated since the fence has been installed the noise is 70% better but it is still noisy. She expressed that littering of cigarette butts is still an issue, loitering in front is still going on, she is the one cleaning it up, and there are also two black cats that are always in her front yard and not being taken care of. Chair Eng asked for confirmation that the noise level has improved Resident Chien stated yes, it has improved by 70% but it is still noisy, and there is trash, and she feels it is dangerous. Resident Wilson Chien stated he would like to report that he called Temple City Sheriff's because he found a man sleeping in between his property and the "Rosemead Villa" property. He expressed he was scared and did not know who this man is, it was cold, the ambulance had also been called, and he stated it is dangerous. He added this information can be confirmed by calling Temple City Sheriff Station. �11 Chair Eng requested the applicant return to the podium to address these concerns. Applicant Pascasio stated they do not have cats at the facility and animals are not allowed. She explained the residents are asleep at night and staff does a head count every evening so she does not know who Mr. Chien is referring to. Chair Eng asked if the maintenance person cleans on a daily basis. Applicant Pascasio replied yes. Commissioner Tang asked if this facility is more of a residential facility rather than a care facility. Applicant Pascasio replied yes it is an adult residential facility. Commissioner Tang asked if they still administer medications to the residents. Applicant Pascasio replied yes. Commissioner Tang asked how they get their clients. Applicant Pascasio replied clients are referred by the hospitals and they conduct a prescreening. Commissioner Tang asked if this is not a nursing facility and it is a residential facility, what controls you have over the clients in terms of what they can or cannot do. Applicant Pascasio replied they cannot be controlled because that is a violation of their personal rights. She explained they are required to comply with the house rules such as: don't create any disturbances at the facility, take their medications, and keep; the' curfew rules She added they cannot be treated like a child, you have to listen and talk to them. Chair Eng referred to the unannounced inspection to their facility in "2010" and asked what the results of that inspection were. Applicant Pascasio replied they always meet Title 22 regulations, Social Services inspect the buildings, the yard, repairs to the building, the medications to make sure there are no errors, and the personnel files are checked to make sure staff has been fingerprinted and has had CPR training. She added they passed their inspection. Chair Eng asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak on this item. None Chair Eng asked staff how many notices were sent out for this item. Associate Planner Valenzuela replied for the first hearing forty -three (43) were sent out and this hearing there were forty -one (41) sent out. She explained the reason for that is if one owner owns two properties the APN numbers are consolidated. She added that had not been done the first time. Chair Eng asked if there were any complaints, comments, or letters received in regards to this item when the notices were sent out. Associate Planner Valenzuela replied no. 17 Chair Eng asked for clarification that Building "C" will be in the back of the property with four (4) beds and Building "D" will have two (2) bed and there will be a total of six (6) additional beds. Associate Planner Valenzuela replied yes. Chair Eng referred to Exhibit "A" PC Resolution 14 -07 and stated there is a correction needed and explained it states eight (8) additional beds throughout the Resolution and it will need to be corrected to state six (6) additional beds. Chair Eng asked if the Planning Commission if there were any further comments or questions. Commissioner Tang commented that this is a different type of challenge in a residential capacity dealing with the quality of life. He expressed that the applicant has not satisfied their commitment in regards to the quality of life for his next door neighbors. He stated that in good conscience he cannot support or vote in support of this item. Commissioner Lopez stated he agrees with Commissioner Tang. He referred to the incident where the man was found sleeping in between the properties and the police were called, and asked if this man was a resident of "Rosemead Villa ". Community Development Director Ramirez stated staff did not receive this information prior to this meeting, so they did not have a way of looking that up. Chair Eng stated she personally has had a personal experience of a loved one and people with disabilities /mental illness are a part of the community. She added there is a major lack of these, type of facilities and being able to live independently is a part of their recovery. She added when someone gets diagnosed with a mental illness it is not something they want and they lose a part of themselves. She stated when someone suffers from a mental illness they are usually placed in jailor in the streets, and it is facilities like this that gives them hope. She added this facility has been in existence since "1996" over twenty (20) years and in that time there has not been any evidence that the proprietor who has experience, does not know what they are doing. She stated there has not been any major issues or concerns` reported. She referred to her sister and the incident that happened to her and stated she has not heard of anything like that happening at this facility. She stated she advocates for the quality of life for the residents and neighbors and she applauds the applicant for taking the time, investment, and effort to address the noise issue and to install the block wall. She stated they counsel the residents and they instituted a complaint procedure which is a good thing. She stated forty one (41) public notices were mailed out and one (1) resident that showed up to speak against this item. She added if this facility was not managed and poorly ran, then this room would be filled with residents. She supports the additional six (6) beds in hopes that it gives individuals an opportunity to reside at this facility than to be put in a jail or in the street, which would cost more in terms of economics, cost, and quality of life. She stated these individuals deserve a better quality of life and as a community we should have compassion and asked what if this was your family member or friend. She pointed out that we are all taxpayers, she supports this application, and asked her colleagues to consider all the information. She added this is the first step the applicant will need to get approved and they will still need to get the approval from Department of Social Services to review if the extension is appropriate. Commissioner Tang stated this is not an easy project to consider and he understands the need for housing for a lot of these clients that live there and would like to live there. He added that this is a R -1 zone where many single - families reside and this is a very dense, small, and narrow street. He stated that the expansion will only grow in density and that is not what the R -1 zone was designed for. Chair Eng questioned where should these residential facilities be located, should they be put in industrial zones where they are not part of the community. 18 Commissioner Tang expressed that he is concerned that this expansion will create an issue with neighboring residents. Community Development Director Ramirez reminded the Planning Commission that this is an allowable use in the R- 1 zone. Commissioner Lopez expressed that the facility is not the issue and his concern is that the neighbor still has complaints about noise and that tells him that the applicant is not addressing that a night shift needs to be there monitoring the patients that need to be monitored. Chair Eng stated they are residents, they are not patients Commissioner Lopez stated they are patients if they are taking medications and they are in a facility that monitors their medications. He added they have the privacy act to allow them to leave the facility, but the issues of smoking in front of the facility or neighboring homes, throwing cigarette butts on the sidewalk or facility, and making loud noises shows that this is a facility that needs to monitor them. He stated that the applicant has already stated that if they do not take their medications they will be asked to leave. He stated he is for the facility but he is also for letting the neighbors know that they are caring enough to make sure that their quality of life is great, but at the same time the neighbors need to feel their complaints are being addressed. He stated there may only be one resident present this evening but that is enough. He added that he will support and vote in favor of this item but expressed the neighbors' complaints need to be addressed. Community Development Director Ramirez noted the one person that spoke against the noise did report that the block wall that was installed did reduce the noise; by 70 %. She explained that the dual windows have not been installed yet, they will be installed, and permits have been pulled. Staff has spoken with the contractor and once they are installed they will reduce the noise even more. She explained the applicant also moved the smoking area to the back of the facility away from the neighbors as a solution. She asked the City Attorney if a condition of approval can be placed in regards to cigarette butts in the front of the property to be cleaned once or twice a day. City of Attorney Murphy replied yes, a condition of approval may be placed requiring cleaning the street facing portion of their own property daily, such as trash, debris, or basically anything other than the planters or cars that may be parked there to keep it in a neat and clean condition. He referred to the condition addressing landscaping and stated a condition could be added for human created debris in the street facing area. He stated that is used for commercial uses and for a medical type use, so a residential care facility would be an acceptable condition. Community, Development Director Ramirez stated staff did speak with the Chief of Police Lt. Somoano in regards to this site, because of the neighbors' concerns /complaints. He is in support of this project, the expansion, and did not have any concerns. Chair Eng thanked Community Development Director Ramirez. She also thanked Commissioner Lopez and stated she appreciates and shares his concerns. She reminded the Planning Commission that when this application was presented at the May 5, 2014 Planning Commission meeting a lot of concerns had been discussed and the applicant has taken the time, effort, and investment to continue and not give up. She stated since the block wall has gone up the noise has been reduced by 70 %, the double paned windows are scheduled to be installed, and a complaint procedure was implemented. She stated those are efforts by the applicant that need to be recognized and give credit for. Community Development Director Ramirez stated this application was ready to come back to the Planning Commission a few months back but the applicant requested it not be presented because they wanted to install the block wall first, and they wanted to make sure a contract had been drawn for the double paned windows and they 19 were ordered. She stated that staff would like to make sure all the facts are known for the Planning Commission to make their decision. Chair Eng thanked Community Development Director Ramirez and asked for a motion. City Attorney Murphy modified current Condition of Approval number fourteen (14) and added a sentence to include, "The parking area and other street facing area shall be cleaned of trash and debris on a daily basis." He stated that should cover what is needed. Chair Eng asked the applicant if the expansion of Condition of Approval number fourteen (14) to keep the parking area and other street facing area shall be cleaned of trash and debris on 'a daily basis is acceptable. Applicant Pascasio replied yes. Commissioner Lopez made a motion, seconded by Chair Eng to APPROVE Modification 14 -01 and Zone Variance 14 -01, subject to the twenty -three (23) conditions of approval. (Modification made by the Planning Commission to Condition of Approval number fourteen (14)): Vote resulted in: Yes: Eng and Lopez No: Tang Abstain: None Absent: Herrera Community Development Director Ramirez asked the City of Attorney if the majority of City Attorney Murphy replied yes, the majority of quorum is approved and this item is passed Community Development Director Ramirez explained the 10 day appeal process. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of December 15, 2014 B. Minutes of March 2, 2015 quorum will be allowed. Commissioner Lopez made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Tang, to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. Vote resulted in: Yes: Eng, Lopez, and Tang No: None Abstain: None Absent: Herrera 5. MATTERS FROM STAFF Community Development Director Ramirez announced the date, time, and location of the next Community Area Watch Committee and invited all to attend. She also announced the date, time, and location of the City of Rosemead Easter Eggtravaganza sponsored by the Parks & Recreation Department. 20 6. MATTERS FROM THE CHAIR & Commissioner Tang stated the sign located by the 10 Freeway in Rosemead Place the letter "E" and "M" is still not working. Community Development Director stated she has been in contact with the property owner and they are aware of the sign and will be repairing all their signs that need it at the same time. She stated they should be done by the end of this month. Commissioner Lopez referred to a freeway sign located on Ramona and freeway sign had been removed. Community Development Director Ramirez stated she believes Caltrans freeway signs. She added she will check and find out for Planning Comrr Planning Commissioner Lopez stated there is graffiti on Rosemead Boulevard, as you make the quick right turn or Earlswood and Rosemead Place on the curb. Community Development Director Ramirez stated she will put in Chair Eng stated on Walnut Grove on the long time. Community Development Director Ramirez replied she.ki and will submit a "CRM' for that one also.' Chair Eng stated she received a letter regarding a petitior She stated that the letter is alleging that they are installing coming At Grove and asked if the graffiti on the s to be contacted to remove graffiti on ier Lopez. off the 10 Freeway going South on rd. He stated there is also graffiti on for graffiti removal. is graffiti that has been there for a Furniture" that she is referring to I installations of cell towers at County Fire Stations. Fire Station No. 4. Community Development Director Ramirez stated this will be owned and operated by the County and, as a result, the City does not have any authority over the use or the zoning of it, so thereby they are allowed to do it. She explained it is for a'public safety communications that is being installed county wide for the fire, police, and so forth for emergencies. She stated they are exempt from the City of Rosemead Zoning Code. Commissioner Lopez asked if the City has any authority on how or what is built on the cell tower. City Attorney Murphy stated when cities and counties own properties in each other's jurisdictions and as long as the property is being used in a government purpose and there are some exceptions to that, but the Zoning Code and General Land Use Authority does `not apply. He added that it is most often seen when counties build within cities or sometimes you will see cities in another jurisdictions buying land for recreation purposes or having water reservoirs or other similar things. He added there is not a way that the City can control how they build them and he knows of some cities that have asked their local chiefs to see if anything can be done but there is not any mechanism to ask them to do other than what they are going to do, which is unfortunate. Chair Eng asked as private citizens can they raise their protest. City Attorney Murphy replied yes. 21 Chair Eng addressed the Planning Commission and stated we will need help with that because there are thirty -nine (39) wireless facilities in a 5.5 square mile City. She also requested staff ask applicants to submit site plans if possible, so that they may be projected during the Planning Commission meetings because they are helpful to visualize for the Planning Commissioners and audience. Community Development Director Ramirez stated staff can ask the applicant to see if they have that. She explained for residential properties they do not normally have it because they do the plans themselves on smaller scales. She added they can discuss this with each application. Chair Eng stated if it is possible and feasible for the applicant to provide that it would be great. She added with the software and technology available today the applicant may be able to do it. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:11 p.m. The next regular Planning Commission meeting will be held on Monday, April 6, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. ATTEST: Rachel Lockwood Commission Secretary Nancy Eng Chair 22