PC - Item 4A - Minutes of September 16, 2019Minutes of the
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
September 16, 2019
'The regular meeting of thio Panning Commission was called to order by Chair Eing at 7:00 pm in'the IGily Hall Council
Chambers,
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Commissioner Berry
INVOCATION — Commissioner Vuonig
ROLL CALL — Commissioners Berryjang, Wong, Vice -Chair Lopez and Chair Eng
�i
!on Sedretaty Lockwood.
t 5XP�LANATtONOPHtAANO�kWEDukt�tMO,*i*LRtdHI
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE
None
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
#
0. 0
M10
Chair Eng asked if there were any questions or comments for staff.
Commissioner Tang stated It looks 'like the nonconforming its the side yard setback of Unit #1 and Unit #2 on and asked'
if that was correct,
Assistant Planner Wong replied yes„ units #1 and 2 have substandard setbacks, and in addition, there is a substandard
building separation between the detached tern -c r garage with Unit #1,
Commissioner Tang asked' ghat is the required and what is currently,
Assistant Planner Wong asked for clarification if Commissioner Tang was referring to the building separation.
Commissioner Tang stated he is referring to both the setbacks arid buildingsaparatiom
�»� �w, � � w � r., .��� e � ��• -� Www
•it #21 Ka added
orr missioner Vuoing referre4"'Othe fire prevention notes orad stated that it seemed that the proposed additions meet
fire code and asked,staff to explain the municipaN code ' I this access way is viable for emergency vehicles when
necessary e� 6 t1ni'thilrd unit.
Assistant, istaint Plannere Wong stated staff routed the plans to the Fire Department for review and they did not issue any
comme is pertaining to fire accesg onto the property.
Commissioner T n asked on a property like this"nth free differervt uuriib, is it the property owner responsibility for
maintaining the common area like the driveway.
Assistant Planner Wong, r" plied yes, in would be the property owner`
Chair Eine stated currently the setback is nonconforming' because the City updated the code, She questioned if the
setback would have conformed when it was constructed in 1955 but became nonconforming due to Municipal Coda
updates.
Assistant Planner Wong replied yes.
Chair Eng asked if there were any further quost"uons for staff
None
Chair Eng opened the public Hearing and invited the applicant to the podium,
E=
ior`Exception process, He e T
ling the unit in the front and
ie family, He added) haat his gr
ilt, and his sister and nephe
be their family compound, an(
it in the back because
be luring in the front unit,
ng in the rear unlit, He
"lanning Commission.
In
n1 to another
ti years and
"led by three
sntly residing
en a year, to
Chair Eng thanked Mr. Hu and stated he had answered her question because she was going to ask if the units will be
owwner-occupied.
Commissioner Vuong asked staff how many parcels are similarly designed like this in the City for driveway access and
what is normally Fine Code's requitement for driveway access if you Fame multiple units on a parcel,
Planning & Economic Development Manager, alen uela replied that typically a driveway is 18 - 20 feet. She added,
through the agency distribution process, this project wwas,,, drrt to the Fire Department and if there had been major
concems, they would let .staff know', She explained that `during the building plan check, process, this will main be
reviewed by the (Fire Department.
Commissioner Tang thanked lir, Hu for sharing his story with three generations diving here and it is common story in
Rosemead where we have ai lot of multi-farnily'dwwellin , units as well as long term residents that have been living here
for multiple years; He added as families grow, you have to find room to Crouse them and thanked lir, Hu for sharing
his story again,
"ice -Chair Lopez thanked Mr. f Hu also and stated he has lived in Rosemead fair 44 years. He added he has thought
of selling his home from time to time, but his grandkids tent him no, it"s going to be theirs.
Chair Eng thanked Mr. Hu and asked if thane was anyone else wishing to speak on this item.
None
Chair Eng closed the Public Hearing, 9,he ,asked if the Planning Commission had any further questions or comments
for staff,
None
Chair Eng asked for a motion.
Commissioner Berry made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Tang, to ADOPT Resolution No.1g-1t0`with
findings and APPROVE )Minor Exception 19-09, subject to the 31 conditions..
'foto resulted in
,dyes;
Berry, Eng, Lopez, Tsang, and Wong
Noes:
A
Abstain:
Ione
Chair Eng opened the public Hearing and invited the applicant to the podium,
E=
ior`Exception process, He e T
ling the unit in the front and
ie family, He added) haat his gr
ilt, and his sister and nephe
be their family compound, an(
it in the back because
be luring in the front unit,
ng in the rear unlit, He
"lanning Commission.
In
n1 to another
ti years and
"led by three
sntly residing
en a year, to
Chair Eng thanked Mr. Hu and stated he had answered her question because she was going to ask if the units will be
owwner-occupied.
Commissioner Vuong asked staff how many parcels are similarly designed like this in the City for driveway access and
what is normally Fine Code's requitement for driveway access if you Fame multiple units on a parcel,
Planning & Economic Development Manager, alen uela replied that typically a driveway is 18 - 20 feet. She added,
through the agency distribution process, this project wwas,,, drrt to the Fire Department and if there had been major
concems, they would let .staff know', She explained that `during the building plan check, process, this will main be
reviewed by the (Fire Department.
Commissioner Tang thanked lir, Hu for sharing his story with three generations diving here and it is common story in
Rosemead where we have ai lot of multi-farnily'dwwellin , units as well as long term residents that have been living here
for multiple years; He added as families grow, you have to find room to Crouse them and thanked lir, Hu for sharing
his story again,
"ice -Chair Lopez thanked Mr. f Hu also and stated he has lived in Rosemead fair 44 years. He added he has thought
of selling his home from time to time, but his grandkids tent him no, it"s going to be theirs.
Chair Eng thanked Mr. Hu and asked if thane was anyone else wishing to speak on this item.
None
Chair Eng closed the Public Hearing, 9,he ,asked if the Planning Commission had any further questions or comments
for staff,
None
Chair Eng asked for a motion.
Commissioner Berry made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Tang, to ADOPT Resolution No.1g-1t0`with
findings and APPROVE )Minor Exception 19-09, subject to the 31 conditions..
'foto resulted in
,dyes;
Berry, Eng, Lopez, Tsang, and Wong
Noes:
done
Abstain:
Ione
,absent.
bone
93
1 i It
ILI Fwatalgi 11MR-5141,561NOW Ms., 'ME 0;
B.:
,Associate Planner Lao presented the staff report.
Chair Eng asked if there were any questl6hs, or comments for staff.
Commissioner, Tang referred to the lot line discrepancy and asked what it means, what is the process, and what does
the applicant need to do.,
Associate Planner Lao stated on Sepytember 27, 2018, the,vious applicant applied for a lot fine ad ustment to
pre i
unmerge the lots. In staffI s,,review of the current entitlements, it was determined that tyle property owners were not
description was inconsistent, therefore, the applicant is currently woridng with the Public Works Department to
complete a C6dificate of Compflahcd,'which provides a record thatthe City is determining that each parcel was created
legally.
Commissioner Tang, asked if the previous owner had owned both properties and didn't have a fence to separate the
two properties, so they made, a, makeshift line.
Associate, Planner Lao replied no, its still the same property owners and it was a fivingtrust, and currently it is an LLC.
Chair Eng asked if staff knows why the lots were originally merged,
Associate Planner, ILao replied staff does not have any record of why the lots were merged.
Chair Eng asked ff staff K there is record that the lots had previously been separate parcels and they had been tied
together.
... ............
Associate Planner Lao irepiled yes,
Chair Eng asked if this is anew owner or is it indicated that they just changed the title of ownership,
Associlate Planner Lao replied it is the same owners it just went from a trust to an LLC.
Chair Eng stated the homes mfill be two-story homes and she noticed that there are other, two-story homes in the
neighborhood. She asked in terms of height, will the proposed height conform with the other, two-story homes inthe
area.
Associate Planner Lao replied yes, they are very similar.
Chair Eng asked If are both homes are proposed to be 3,000 square feet each and If they are similar to the other
homes,
Associate Planner ILao replied the other homes range from 2,100 square feet to 2,EGO square feet,
Chair En;g referred to Condition of Approval 25 and 37. She read Condition of Approval 35, "A Certificate of Compliance
for the Lot Line Adjustment to unmerge two lots shall be recorded Ihefore the issuance of a building perrhit". She asked
if thatshould be meant to say "building permiW or "building permit," or does It need to be just one permit,
Associate Planner Lao replied it only needs to say one permit because there are two resolutions and each project is
separate. ,
Chair, Erg asked if "permit' is inconclusive of all permits such as the derno, excavation, and the other req uired permits.
Associate Planner Lao replied yes,
Chair Eng referred to Condition of Approval 37 and read "Detailed construction requirements will be determined after
a full Building Divislon plan review'. She asked staff what the purpose, of this condition of approval is,,
Associate Pla:nnerLao replied this condition of approval was given by the Building Official, IBrad Filehmann, and when
the applicant submit their plans, the Building Officialis requidng detailed construction plans and grading plans,
Chair Eng clarified that is something that the Building Official is requesting after the Planning Commission has
determined this item this evening'.
Associate Planner Lao replied yes.
Chair Eng asked if patios are included in the upstairs units,
Associate Planner Lao replied no,
Chair Eng asked if the Planning Commission had! any further questions or comments for staff,
None
Chair Eng opened the, Public Hearing and invited the applicant to the podium,
Eric Tsang, Designer for this project stated that he may answer any questions the Planning Commission may have,
61
Chair Eng asked if either one of these homes be owner-oocoo6d.
-rwliekyr a
Chair Eng asked If there were any further questions or comments.
None
Chair Eng asked the Planning Commission if there were any further comments or questions,
None
Chair IN closed the Public Heading and asked for a motion,
Commissioner Berry made a motion, seconded by Vice -Chair Lqpez, to ADOPT fes oMlon No, 19-08 with
findings and APPROVE Design Review 1903, subject to the " conditions.
Vote resulted In:
Assistant (
Noes, He it
Berry, Eng, Lopez, Tang, and Wong
None
None
None
�mmunity Development Virelotoir IKirn st6i
C. DEMON RVft 1*0�4 Kim U
d,the vote passes with a vote of 5 Ayes and 0
Notice and, explained the 1 0 -day appeal process,
ation for a Design Review to construct a new
itlh an attached thiree-car Sarage.Thegranting
lilW
................
I
74MV037 -j
ig=oft IM ;ji ja Wp � T
Associate Plariner Lao presented' the M report.
M
. . . ...........
A
None
Chair, Eng opened the Public Hearing and asked if there was anyone wishingto speak on this item.
None
Chair Eng closed the Public Hearing: and asked for a motion,
Vice-Chalir Lopez made a motion, seconded by Commissioner''Wong, to ADOPT Resolution No. 19-09 with
findings and APPROVE Design Review 19-014, subject to the 37 conditions,,
Vote resulted In:
Ayes,: Berry, Eng, Lopez� Tang, and 'anong
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Assistant City Managori Community Development Director Kim stated the motion passes with a vote of 5 Ayes and
0 Noes., He reminded the applicant to remove the onsite Public Hearing Notice and explained t,he 10 -day appeal
process,.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR I
A. PC MINUTES B-19-19
Commissioner Tang made a motion, seconded by Vice -Chair Lopez, to approve PIC Minutes 8-16-19 as
presented.
Ay0s.,
Berry, EnI Lopez, Tang, and Vluong
Noes:
None
Abstain:
None
Absent:
None
0
Award and the C4bf Roi6m064 lsinolud6d as one fthe'ohwis��
Chair Eng owgraWted stWandl WMW them good luck.
6. A&db#MIS"En
Chair Eng thanked= nd, also congratulated Community Development Director Ben Kim on his recent promotion to
,Assistant Cfty Manager,
T, ADJOURNMENT
Chair no adlourned the Mannino Commission meefinaart ,710 pm.
in
Nancy Eng
Chair
ATTES'T:
Rachel Lockwood
Commission: Secretary
8