PC - Item 4A - Minutes 11-15-21
Minutes of the
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
November 15, 2021
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Berry at 7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Lopez
INVOCATION Commissioner Leung
ROLL CALL Commissioners Leung, Lopez, Ung, and Chair Berry
STAFF PRESENT City Attorney Thuyen, Interim Director of Community Development Persico, Planning & Economic
Development Manager Valenzuela, Assistant Planner Wong, and Commission Liaison Huang
REORGANIZATION Election of Vice-Chair
Chair Berry opened nominations for Vice-Chair. Commissioner Leung made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lopez to
nominate Commissioner Leung as Vice-Chair.
Vote resulted in:
Ayes: Berry, Leung, Lopez, and Ung
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Roll call vote resulted in 4 Ayes and 0 Noes.
1. EXPLANATION OF HEARING PROCEDURES AND APPEAL RIGHTS
City Attorney Thuyen presented the procedure and appeal rights of the meeting.
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS
There being no comments, Chair Berry opened and closed the Public Comment period.
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. MINOR EXCEPTION (ME) 21-02 Simon Liang has submitted a Minor Exception application, requesting to construct
a new 2,446 square-foot, two-story, single-family dwelling unit with a detached three-car garage at the rear of a lot with
an existing nonconforming, single-family dwelling unit. Additionally, the applicant is requesting a 20% exception for the
--0-family dwelling unit for the construction
of a 484 square-foot attached garage. A 142 square-foot attached patio is also proposed for the nonconforming single-
family dwelling unit, which is not part of the Minor Exception. The granting of a Minor Exception is required before the
Planning Commission for new structures constructed on a lot where nonconforming structures exist. Furthermore, the
granting of a Minor Exception is required before the Planning Commission for the side yard exception, not to exceed
20%. The project site is located at 9238 Pitkin Street (APN: 8592-015-066), in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) zone.
PC RESOLUTION 21-18 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD,
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MINOR EXCEPTION 21-02, PERMITTING A
Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of November 15, 2021
Page 1 of 5
NEW 2,446 SQUARE-FOOT, TWO-STORY, SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING WITH A DETACHED THREE-CAR
GARAGE AT THE REAR OF A LOT WHERE A LEGAL, NONCONFORMING SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT
--
EXISITING WALL OF THE SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 484 SQUARE-
FOOT ATTACHED TWO-CAR GARAGE, LOCATED AT 9238 PITKIN STREET (APN: 8592-015-066), IN A SINGLE-
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Planning Commission:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 21-18 with findings, and approve Minor Exception 21-02, subject to the 27
conditions.
Assistant Planner Wong presented the Staff Report.
Chair Berry opened the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Ung questioned if portions of the property will be an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU).
Assistant Planner Wong replied no, it will be one single-family dwelling unit.
Commissioner Ung inquired if it is now a multi-unit property with the addition in the back.
Assistant Planner Wong stated it would be two single-family dwelling unit on an R-1 lot because the lot allows two units based
on the lot size.
Commissioner Ung questioned if this applied only to R-2 zones.
Assistant Planner Wong responded that the density requirement in the R-1 zone for one single-family dwelling to be constructed
needs to be 6,000 square feet. For this property, the lot is 12,000 square feet which means they can build another single-family
dwelling unit.
d that traditionally, most cities only allow one
home on a single-family zone, but Rosemead does have a unique approach which allows two if a lot is big enough.
Commissioner Lopez questioned the 20% exception on the site. He inquired if it is to continue the existing wall, so there is an
offsetting wall where they meet.
Assistant Planner Wong answered yes, that is correct. He added, the existing single-family dwelling has a five-foot side yard
setback, and the current code requires it to be six feet, so to continue that wall, the applicant requested 20% exception.
Commissioner Ung questioned if there was a reason why the wall could not jog in six feet.
Assistant Planner Wong expressed that the applicant would like to make it aesthetically pleasing to continue the wall rather
than jog in one additional foot.
Commissioner Ung noticed there is an allowance for the AC units to be within the setback.
Assistant Planner Wong stated that AC units are allowed to encroach into any setback areas no more than two feet. In this
case, the AC unit is encroaching onto the side yard setback of two feet, and from the AC unit to the side property line would
be four feet.
Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of November 15, 2021
Page 2 of 5
Chair Berry inquired about the location of the wall which required the 20% exception.
Assistant Planner Wong stated that the wall is located on the west side of the property where it indicates the new two car
garage.
Chair Berry questioned if there is a wall already along the property line.
Assistant Planner Wong replied yes, the existing single-family dwelling in the front has an existing five-foot side yard setback
and they are choosing to continue that wall.
Chair Berry questioned if the applicant would build the residents differently so there is proper setback. He inquired if the entire
wall would be right up against the property line.
Assistant Planner Wong responded that they are going to construct new walls for the entire perimeter of the property.
Chair Berry inquired if the new portion of the wall would take up an entire foot.
Assistant Planner Wong replied no, it is from the property line, and it would be dependent on the surveyor when they construct
the wall. He added, there may be a little offset of six inches from where the wall is to the wall of the garage. He also said, the
new home will meet the six-foot side yard setback and it is just the garage that is requesting 20% exception.
Commissioner Lopez questioned if this only applies to two-car garage that is requesting for the 20% exception.
Assistant Planner Wong stated that the garage is currently front facing and plans to demolish and relocate to the rear.
Chair Berry asked if the applicant wishes to speak.
Assistant Planning Wong informed the Commission that the applicant is present should they have additional questions.
Seeing no additional questions, Chair Berry open the public testimony portion of the public hearing. He asked the audience if
there was anyone who would like to speak on this matter.
Seeing none, Chair Berry inquired if we received any written comments and if there are anyone online who would like to speak.
Commissioner Liaison Huang responded that no written comment was received for this item, and there were no callers on the
line who wish to speak.
There being no public comment, Chair Berry closed the public comment period.
Seeing no additional questions from the Commission, Chair Berry requested for motion and a second.
ACTION: Vice-Chair Leung made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lopez, to:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 21-18 with findings, and approve Minor Exception 21-02, subject to the 27
conditions.
Vote resulted in:
Ayes: Berry, Leung, Lopez, and Ung
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of November 15, 2021
Page 3 of 5
Roll call vote resulted in 4 Ayes and 0 Noes.
Interim Director of Community Development Persico explained the 10-day appeal process.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. PC MINUTES 10-18-21
Commissioner Lopez made a motion, seconded by Chair Berry, to approve PC Minutes 10-18-21 as presented.
Vote resulted in:
Ayes: Berry, Leung, Lopez, and Ung
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Roll call vote resulted in 4 Ayes and 0 Noes.
5. MATTERS FROM STAFF
A. CITY OF ROSEMEAD 2030 STRATEGIC PLAN
Interim Director of Community Development Persico informed the Commission that this item will not be discussed because
there is additional information that will be forthcoming. He also provided an update on the upcoming Planning Commission
Meetings in December.
6. MATTERS FROM THE CHAIR & COMMISSIONERS
Chair Berry inquired about the old Bahooka Restaurant and the Auto Auction site. He asked if the two locations have plans for
construction and questioned if there are plans to improve the property.
Planning & Economic Development Manager Valenzuela replied that Boston Lobster will be taking over the old Bahooka
Restaurant and they are currently going through some tentative improvement plans and should be opening soon.
Chair Berry questioned if the business is planning to update the outside of the business.
Planning & Economic Development Manager Valenzuela answered that the owners are interested in doing a façade remodel
and is working with City staff.
Commissioner Lopez inquired about the open field on Walnut Grove Avenue and Mission Drive. He recalled that a park was
discussed and inquired if the City will do anything on the open field.
Interim Director of Community Development Persico referred to concept presentation (Borstein
Enterprises). He stated the applicant was going to see if they can extend their improvements along the north side of Mission
Drive to the corner that would require approval from Southern California Edison (SCE) Company. The remainder of parcel is
in SCE right of away, owned by SCE and currently does not have plans for that. He added, they hope to do some
landscape/softscape improvement on Mission Drive frontage on the opposite corner. On the southwest corner, the City is
looking at potentially entering into an agreement with SCE to do some park improvements under that portion of the right of
way.
Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of November 15, 2021
Page 4 of 5
7. ADJOURNMENT
Chair Berry adjourned the meeting at 7:20 p.m.
ATTEST: ______________________________________
James Berry
Chair
__________________________________
Commission Secretary
Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of November 15, 2021
Page 5 of 5