PC - Item 3A - Exhibit I V
EXHIBIT "I"
i
I
i
i
i
•
Minutes of the •
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
October 19,2015
• (Approved by the Planning Commission on 11-2-15)
• The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to.order by Chair Tang at 7:00 p.m.in the Council
Chambers,8838 F.Valley Boulevard.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—Commissioner Herrera
INVOCATION--Commissioner Eng
ROLL CALL—Commissioners Dang, Eng, Herrera,Vice-Chair Lopez and Chair Tang
ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS PRESENT:City Attorney Murphy,Community Development Director Ramirez,Associate
Planner Valenzuela,Assistant Planner Hanh,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 AUDIENCE •
None
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. DESIGN REVIEW 14-02, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14-01, AND PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR
NECESSITY 14-02 - On July 20, 2015 the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing for Design Review 14-02 and Conditional Use Permit 14-01 to allow the development of a one-
story 2,400 square foot 7-Eleven convenience market with an Off-Sale Beer and Wine (Type 20)
Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) license. The store proposes a 24-hour operation with no alcohol
sales after 11:00 p.m. Since the project site is located within a census tract with undue concentration
of alcohol licenses and within a high crime reporting district, the application also included a request •
for a determination that the alcohol license will serve the Public Convenience or Necessity(PCN 14-02)
as required by State ABC. At that hearing the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project
and received testimony from members of the public. In response to public testimony, the Planning
Commission decided to continue the item to the meeting of September 21,2015 so that the community
had more opportunity to give input. The Commission further encouraged 7-Eleven to do neighborhood
outreach and bring back crime statistics for the two existing 7-Eleven stores(7-Eleven at 4800 Temple
City Blvd.in Temple City and 7-Eleven at 10009 Valley Blvd.in El Monte).
On September 21,2015,the Planning Commission reviewed a letter from Thrifty Oil Co. requesting that
the Planning Commission continue the public hearing-to the regular meeting of October 19,2015. The
letter stated that more time was needed for public outreach.At that meeting the Planning Commission
unanimously approved to continue the public hearing to the regular meeting of October 19,2015.
On October 13, 2015, Thrifty Oil Co. submitted a second letter. requesting that the Planning
Commission continue the public hearing to the regular meeting of December 7,2015.The letter states
that although 7-Eleven and Thrifty Oil Co.have made good progress on their outreach efforts,they only
recently have been able to obtain foreign language speakers to assist with the translation of the
1
•
•
•
Chinese language. It is recommended that the Planning Commission move to continue the public
hearing to the regular meeting of December 7,2015.
Community Development Director Ramirez presented the staff report.
Chair Tang asked if the Planning Commission had any questions or comments for staff.
None
Chair Tang opened the Public Hearing and asked if there was anyone wishing to speak or comment on this item.
Resident Brian Lewin expressed concern with the approval of this extension and requested that the applicant will not
be allowed any further extensions than the one being requested. He explained that the extension of this
item inconveniences the concerned residents that would like to attend the meeting, has made arrangements to
attend,and then are told the item will not going to be presented after all. He requested that if this item is too be
extended to December 7, 2015, that it actually be heard on this date. He referred to the staff report regarding
the crime statistics and requested that it include calls for service and not just arrest or reported crime for the two 7-
- Eleven's near the proposed site. He also requested that the Planning Commission consider including crimes and
calls for service as well as Code Enforcement interactions for the two(2)existing 7-Eleven's in Rosemead.
Chair Tang asked if there are any further questions or comments.
None
Chair Tang closed the Public Hearing and asked if the Planning Commission had further questions or comments.
None
Chair Tang asked for a motion.
Vice-Chair Lopez made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herrera,to continue the public hearing to the •
regular meeting of December 7,2015.
Vote resulted in:
Yes: Dang,Eng,Herrera,Lopez,and Tang
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Community Development Director Ramirez stated the motion passes with a 5 to 0 vote to Continue this item to the
December 7,2015 Planning Commission meeting.
B. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT 15-06
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CODE AS RELATED TO MASSAGE ESTABLISMENTS IN THE
. CITY OF ROSEMEAD— During the 2014 legislative session the Legislature passed, and the Governor
signed AB1147 relating to massage establishments. This bill restored the ability of cities and counties
to regulate massage establishments and establish land use controls as of January 1,2015. As a result,
Municipal Code Amendment 15-06 is a City initiated amendment that proposes to amend the zoning
provisions of the Rosemead Municipal Code, Title 17("Zoning"), to require that massage businesses
obtain Conditional Use Permit for operation in a C-3(Medium Commercial)zone.
•
2
• PC RESOLUTION 15-15 — A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
• COUNCIL ADOPT MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT 15-06 AMENDING SERVICES USES —RESTRICTED
IN TABLE 17.16.020.1 OF SECTION 17.16.020 FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVISING LAND USE CONTROLS
FOR MASSAGE SERVICES.
Staff Recommendation — Based on"the analysis and findings contained in this report, it is
recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No.15-15,a resolution recommending
that the City Council ADOPT Municipal Code Amendment 15-06, amending Title 17 "Zoning" of the
Rosemead Municipal Code to require a Conditional Use Permit for massage services under Services
Uses—Restricted in Table 17.16.020.1 of Section 17.16.020("Commercial District Land Uses and Permit
Requirements").
Community Development Director Ramirez presented the staff report.
Chair Tang asked if the Planning Commission had any questions or comments for staff.
• Commissioner Dang referred to the third page of staff report and read the Public Notice Process and asked for
•clarification in regards to"greater 1000".
City Attorney Murphy explained that this is designed to not overly burden the finances of the City. He stated state
law says, if more than 1,000 envelopes would have to be mailed, then rather than mailing the 1,000 envelopes and
incurring the postage charge,you can publish it in the newspaper instead.
•
Commissioner Dang thanked staff for the clarification. •
Commissioner Eng asked if there is currently a moratorium on Massage Establishments.
Community Development Director Ramirez replied yes.
Commissioner Eng asked what impact would this have on the moratorium.
Community Development Director Ramirez stated that the Planning Commission is only making a recommendation to •
the City Council and City Council will be the approving body for this ordinance and responsible for the terminating the
moratorium.
Commissioner Eng asked that staff's intent of the conditional use permit will be in lieu of.
Community Development Director Ramirez replied an Administrative Use Permit(AUP).
Commissioner Eng asked if anything is being done to update the existing ordinance based on the new legislation.
City Attorney Murphy explained there are two parts to the regulation of Massage. First is to the regulation of the
siting of a massage establishment. He explained the only change to the zoning code is that a Massage
establishment will have to come to this body for its approval of its site. He added all the other remaining restrictions
already in the code will continue to apply, based on the analysis of the AB1147 that appear to be appropriate. He
stated there are some changes to the business license process that will be consistent with the AB1147, but the
business license process is not something within the Planning Commission's jurisdiction since it has nothing to do
with land use.
3
r
1
1
I
I
•
Commissioner Eng asked if Massage Establishments are currently permitted in one type of zone only. •
Community Development Director Ramirez replied it is allowed in two (2) zones, which are C-3 (Medium
Commercial)and CBD(Commercial Business District)zone if it is a mixed-use project.
Commissioner Eng asked if both zones will fall under the conditional use permit.
Community Development Director Ramirez replied no. She explained if it is in a CBD zone, then it can only be an
accessory use to a health spa,and is not allowed as a stand-alone.
Commissioner Eng asked because this will require a conditional use permit, are there standard conditions of
approval that have been prepared.
Community Development Director Ramirez replied no, that is not something currently done with conditional use
permits. She added that when staff receives the first conditional use permit, then it will be discussed with the City
Attorney to see what it may contain legally.
Commissioner Dang referred to the mixed-use zoning and by right of accessory use and asked if there is a definition
of an accessory use.
' Community Development Director Ramirez replied yes.
Commissioner Dang asked if there was a certain percentage.
Community Development Director Ramirez replied it is 25%.
Commissioner Dang asked if the person administrating the 25%need to be a licensed person.
Community Development Director Ramirez reminded Commissioner Dang that it is to a health spa and when you
have a massage technician they will have to be certified.
Chair Tang asked if the Planning Commission had.any further questions for staff.
None
•
Chair Tang opened the Public Hearing.'
Resident Brian Lewin stated he appreciates having the change from an AUP to a CUP for Massage
Establishments. He recommended the following items be addressed and changes to be considered to 5.24 1).
Prohibition on internal locking doors, 2). 5.24.60 Provision J - restrictions regarding marijuana, 3). Section Q
prohibiting security cameras, and 4).Addressing table showers. He commented that there has been 10 months to
review 5.24 and the only thing that was changed was to require a CUP instead of an AUP. He recommended
changes to the wording in the Sign Ordinance and requested staff revisits 5.24 for some possible improvements.
Chair Tang asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak on this item.
None
Chair Tang closed the Public Hearing.
•
4
i
•
City Attorney Murphy stated that Chapter 5.24 falls under the business license aspect and changes will be going
directly to the City Council. He added because those do not fall under the land use itself, but to the operation of the
business, staff decided not to bring those forward. He stated staff did look at the changes of the business license
aspects of massage regulations and those will be going before the City Council along with any recommendations
made by the Planning Commission in regards to land use aspect.
Commissioner Eng stated that Mr. Lewin did bring up some good points and would like to encourage staff
to investigate and incorporate them into the business license process.. She stated she appreciates that this is not a
[and use issue,but would like to acknowledge Mr. Lewin for bringing up those concerns.
Chair Tang asked if there were any further questions or comments.
None
Chair Tang asked for a motion.
Commissioner Eng made a motion, seconded by Vice-Chair Lopez, to ADOPT Resolution No. 15-15, a
resolution recommending that the City Council ADOPT Municipal Code Amendment 15-06,amending Title 17
"Zoning" of the Rosemead Municipal Code to require a Conditional Use Permit for massage services under
Services Uses - Restricted in Table 17.16.020.1 of Section 17.16.020 (Commercial District Land Uses and
Permit Requirements).
Vote resulted in:
Yes: Deng,Eng,Herrera,Lopez,and Tang
•
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
•
Community Development Director Ramirez stated this item passes 5 to 0 and-will be heard next at the City Council.
C. DESIGN REVIEW 15-04 AND MINOR EXCEPTION 15-08 - Marie Oldendorff and Maria Martinez have
submitted an application for a Design Review(DR)and Minor Exception (ME), requesting to construct
additions to an existing legal, nonconforming single-family dwelling unit with a substandard side yard
setback, nonconforming side wall, and a total floor area over 2,500 square feet.The proposed project
includes a new attached three-car garage. The subject property is located at 3206 Ivar Avenue (AIN:
5289-017-043)and in the R-1 (Single-Family Residential)zone.
PC RESOLUTION 15-17 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW 15-
04 AND MINOR EXCEPTION 15-08, PERMITTING A 1,040 SQUARE FEET ADDITION TO AN EXISTING
LEGAL, NONCONFORMING SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT WITH A SUBSTANDARD SIDE YARD
SETBACK, NONCONFORMING SIDE WALL, AND A TOTAL FLOOR AREA OVER 2,500 SQUARE FEET.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 3206 IVAR AVENUE (AIN: 5289-017-043), IN THE R-1
(SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ZONE.
Staff Recommendation -it is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 15-
17 with findings, and APPROVE Design Review 15-04 and Minor Exception 15-08, subject to the 22
conditions.
Assistant Planner Hanh presented the staff report.
•
5
i
i
I
•
Chair Tang asked if the Planning Commission had any questions for staff.
Commissioner Eng referred to the substandard setback of 2.3 and asked what the standard setback is.
Assistant Planner Hanh replied the existing setback is at 3 ft.3 in.and they will need 6 ft.
Commissioner Eng asked if the addition will not change that setback, it's just extending it.
Assistant Planner Hanh replied the addition will conform to today's code and will not alter the existing nonconforming
setback.
Commissioner Eng read what was being added and asked if the three-car garage is included.
Assistant Planner Hanh replied no.
Commissioner Tang asked for clarification of the Minor Exception process in regards to legal nonconforming homes
from previous Planning Commission discussions.
Community Development Director Ramirez explained that Minor Exceptions can be approved at staff level, and they
do not usually appear before the Planning Commission,but because this application has a Design Review it did.
City Attorney Murphy explained that the Planning Commission made some recommendations to City Council
regarding the ordinance for the Minor Exceptions and there was discussion on what types of nonconformity changes
would fall into the Minor Exception process.
Community Development Director Ramirez clarified that discussion was if someone has a legal nonconforming
property and if they wanted to build a new structure. She explained that City Council approved that with
the additional requirement of obtaining authorization and approval of all their neighbors.
Chair Tang asked if that applies to the homeowner who wants to build a detached garage.
Community Development Director Ramirez replied that applies to anyone wishing to add a new home, structure,
accessory unit,etc.
Commissioner Lopez asked if the existing home will be able to stay as legal nonconforming.
Community Development Director Ramirez replied City Council stated they were comfortable with it staying legal
nonconforming as long as they have the approval of all the neighbors.
Commissioner Tang referred to sheet A2 in regards to the wet bar and asked if there is a memo or anything in the
•
municipal code that defines a wet bar.'
Assistant Planner Hanh replied there is not, but the Building Code may have one and he will check with the building
official.
Chair Tang opened the Public Hearing and asked if there is anyone wishing to speak on this item.
Community Development Director Ramirez invited the applicant to the podium.
Representative Hipolito Serrano stated he is present to answer any questions the Planning commission may have.
6
I
Chair Tang asked the Planning Commission if there were any questions for the applicant.
None
•
Chair Tang closed the Public Hearing and asked the Planning Commission if there were any further questions or
comments.
Commissioner Eng stated she would like to compliment and thank the Designer for tying the whole house with the
addition.
Vice-Chair Lopez made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herrera,to ADOPT Resolution No. 15-17 with
findings,and APPROVE Design Review 15.04 and Minor Exception 15-08,subject to the 22 conditions.
•
Vote resulted in:
Yes: Deng,Eng,Herrera,Lopez,and Tang
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
'Community Development Director Ramirez stated the motion passes 5 to 0 vote and explained the 10-day appeal
process.
D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 15-04-San Fernando Music Inc. has submitted a Conditional Use Permit
application requesting approval for a new music and dance school located at 3303 Del Mar Avenue,
Unit B,in the C-3(Medium Commercial)zone.
PC RESOLUTION 15-16 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT 15-04,TO OPERATE SAN FERNANDO MUSIC SCHOOL, LOCATED AT 3303 DEL MAR AVENUE
IN THE C-3(MEDIUM COMMERCIAL)ZONE(AIN:5286-030-034). •
•
Staff Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 15-
16 with findings,and APPROVE Conditional Use Permit 15-04,subject to the 19 conditions outlined.
Associate Planner Valenzuela presented the staff report.
Chair Tang asked if the Planning Commission had any questions or comments for staff.
Commissioner Eng asked if there will be any other tenants that will be occupying the building.
Associate Planner Valenzuela replied yes"Unit A"has an office use.'
Commissioner Eng asked how long the applicant been operating at this site. •
Associate Planner Valenzuela replied the application process was submitted one(1)year ago.
Commissioner Eng stated there are residents to the north and west of this site and asked if the City has received any
complaints.
•
Associate Planner Valenzuela replied no,the City has not received any complaints for this location.
Chair Tang asked what the current use of"Unit A"is.
Associate Planner Valenzuela replied it is an office use.
Chair Tang asked staff if they knew the reason why the lease was not renewed by the Garvey School District.
Associate Planner Valenzuela replied that question may deferred to the applicant.
Chair Tang opened the Public Hearing and invited the applicant to the podium if they are present.
Property Owner Daniel Dang and Applicant Sandra Dan stated they are present to answer any questions the
Planning Commission may have.
Commissioner Eng asked what the time frame is for most students. •
Applicant Sandra Dan replied 5:00 pm to 9:00 pm.
Commissioner Eng stated there are four(4) classrooms available and asked if all four(4)classrooms will be used.
Applicant Sandra Dan replied no only three(3) rooms will be occupied.
Commissioner Eng asked if the school currently operates Monday through Saturday.
Applicant Sandra Dan stated they are open Monday through Thursday and Saturday's.
Commissioner Eng asked if the school has future plans to operate on Sunday's.
Applicant Sandra Dan replied no.
Commissioner Dang asked staff to clarify if the conditional use permit application is to use a studio.
Associate Planner Valenzuela explained. the applicant is requesting to operate a school and the Municipal Code
requires a conditional use permit for anything over 2,000 square feet.
•
Chair Tang asked the applicant why their lease was not renewed at Duff School.
Applicant Sandra Dan replied they were told the building was going to be used for something else.
Chair Tang asked if they have been operating this business at this location for about one(1)year.
Applicant Sandra Dan replied yes.
Chair Tang asked when the school gets the most traffic from students.
Applicant Sandra Dan replied 5:00 pm to 9:00 pm.
Chair Tang stated the school meets the parking requirements and asked if parents drop the students off or do
the parents stay there and wait.
8
Applicant Sandra Dan replied it is half and half,some parents stay and some will come back to pick the students up
•
after class.
•
Chair Tang asked if parking has ever been an issue.
Applicant Sandra Dan replied no.
Property owner Daniel Dang stated he would like to thank staff for all their help.
Chair Tang asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak on this item.
None
Chair Tang closed the Public Hearing and asked if the Planning Commission had any further questions or comments.
None
Chair Tang asked for a motion.
Vice-Chair Lopez made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herrera,to ADOPT Resolution No. 15-16 with
findings,and APPROVE Conditional Use Permit 15-04,subject to the 19 conditions outlined.
Vote resulted in:
Yes: Dang,Eng,Herrera,Lopez,and Tang
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Community Development Director Ramirez stated the motion passes 5 to 0 and explained the 10 day appeal
process.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Minutes of 9-21-15
Commissioner Dang stated he has a correction to page seven (7),fifth(5th)paragraph down, it should say structural
slab not social slab.
Community Development Director Ramirez stated staff can make that correction.
•
City Attorney Murphy stated that is consistent with the rest of the page so it can be done.
Vice-Chair Lopez made a motion,seconded by Commissioner Herrera,to approve PC Minutes of 9-21-15 with
correction.
Vote resulted in:
Yes: Dang,Eng,Herrera,Lopez,and Tang
No: None
9
i
I
Abstain: None _
Absent: None '
Community Development Director Ramirez stated the motion passes 5 to 0.
5. MATTERS FROM STAFF
Community Development Director Ramirez announced the date,time, and location of the upcoming "Trunk&Treat"
community event.
6. MATTERS FROM THE CHAIR&COMMISSIONERS
Commissioner Eng referred to the property located on Valley Boulevard and Walnut Grove on the southeast corner,
and stated there are two posts with four (4) different signs. She added one is pointing to City Hall, Dinsmoor
Heritage House, the Library, and requested when the City is ready to develop that parcel that be made to be more
eye pleasing.
Community Development Director stated she will let Public Works know.
Commissioner Dang commented that the debris that he mentioned at the last Planning Commission meeting has
been removed, it was located on Glendon Way and Rosemead Boulevard. He thanked Community Development
Director Ramirez for submitting the CRM.
Commissioner Herrera stated she will not be present at the November 16, 2015 Planning Commission because she
will be on vacation. She commented the residential property located on Muscatel Avenue and Marshall Street has
been worked on,but the colors do not match,and asked what the status is.
Community Development Director Ramirez replied that the property owner is currently working with the Building
Division in regards to the building code violations.
Chair Tang commented that the UFC Gym parking lot pavement is not level and he noticed that there is a large dip in
the asphalt. He asked staff if there is a requirement that businesses level the pavement.
Community Development Director Ramirez replied they do not necessarily have to level the pavement, but they do
have to restripe it and keep it clean. She added it may not belong to the UFC property because that site is two
parcels with separate owners.
7. ADJOURNMENT
The next regular Planning Commission meeting will be held Mo day, No -■ ber 2,2015, . 7.00 p.m.
y-z,,,'-'-- .
{41its. •
John Tang
ATT T: Chair
yetLe tb:iiii,y-7/(---
Rachel Lockwood
Commission Secretary
10