HomeMy Public PortalAbout07-09-96 PLANNING COMMISSION � City o f �YNwooD �,
� � � .,,...,E.��. ��..
�,� �� �4 Ctty �Ueeting CI�aQQenges � I I I��
11330 BULLIS ROAD
LYNWOOD, CALIFORNIA 90262
(310) 603�0220
DATE: July O5, 1996
TO: Andrea Hooper - . .
City Clerk
FROM:- . Robert Diplock
Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Posting of Agenda for Planning Commission Meeting of
, - July 09, 1,996 •
I hereby certify that I, Robert Diplock, posted the official Agenda
for the Planning Commission meeting of July 09, 1996 on July O5,
1996 as required by Law. The Agenda was posted at approximately
1:15 p.m. that date on the Agenda hangers inside City Hall and in
the kiosk outside City Ha1i.
�
�
/ /
obert Diplock, Plan' ng Manager
RECEIVED (
CITY OF LYNWOOD
CITY CIERKS OFFICE
JUL X � 1996
AM P�I
7i8i9iIDilli12i1 i2i3i4i°�i6
.�
I � �
� _
� : � .�C����� t , � .
C� �`'
+ f! �-5l996 4 r
f �
AGENDA > f �-°�
LYNWOOD CITY PLANNING COM ISSIO �� �� L +
_ r ( n I
. � . ,._.c, i� � .
REGULAR MEETING - 7:30 P.Pf� J,_��/ '��
� � WL / _
City Hall Council Chambers -���� 7 7�'S �°
11330 Bullis Road, L nwood CA /�
Y ,
• July 09, 1996 --
Carlton McMiller
Chairperson
' Errick Lee Donald Dove
Vice Chairman Commissioner
Eloise Evans Richard Kuan
Commissioner
Jamal Muhsin Jamina Barnes
Commissioner Commissioner
C 0 M M I S S I O N C O U N S E L:
Michele Beal Bagneris
Deputy City Attorney
STAFF:
Gary Chicots, Director Robert Diplock
Community Development Department Planning Manager
Louis E. Morales, Jr. Art Barfield
�. Associate Planner Associate Planner
Paul Nguyen '
Civil Engineer Assoc.
f:\wpfiles\misc\july96 � �
1
1
� �_
July 09, 1996
OPENING CEREMONIES
1. Call meeting to order.
2. Flag salute.
3. Ro11 call of Commissioners.
4. Certification of Agenda Posting."
5. Approval of June 11, 1996 Commission minutes..
NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CASE N0. CUP 96-07
Applicant: Edgar Espinoza
PROPOSAL
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use
Permit to construct four attached. dwelling units with three
attached garages and one detached garage at 12430 Harris
Avenue in the R-2 (TOwn House and Cluster Housing) zone.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff respectfully requests that, after consideration, the
Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution No. 2595:
1. Certifying that the project is Categorically Exempt from
the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061b(3).
2. Approving Conditional Use Permit, Case No. CUP 96-07,
subject to stated conditions and requirements.
2. ZONE CHANGE - CASE N0. ZC 96-02 -
Applicant: Sal Preciado
PROPOSAL:
The applicant is requesting approval of a Zone Change from the
C-2 (Light Commercial) Zone to the C-3 (Heavy Commercial) Zone
for the subject property located at 3840 Martin Luther King
Jr. Boulevard, a site of approximately 33,000 sq. ft. in order
to accommodate future commercial development.
RECOMMENDATZON:
Staff respectfully requests that, after consideration, as
requested by the Lynwood Redevelopment Agency, the Planning
Commission continue this item to enable staff to work with the
applicant and neighbors to look at alternative uses for the
property and prepare an acceptable development pl�n.
3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE N0. 96-08
Applicant: Sal Preciado
PROPOSAL
f The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow
and develop a video studio/entertainment center with live
bands and dancing at 3840 Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard in
the proposed C-3 (Heavy Commercial) Zone (Zone Change
pending).
2
I _
I
i
I
� _
RECOMMENDATION
Staff -respectfully requests that, after consideration, as
requested by the.Lynwood Redevelopment Agency, the Planning
Commission continue this item to enable staff to work with the
applicant and neighbors to look at alternative uses for the
property and prepare an acceptable development plan.
4. VARIANCE NO. VAR 96-02
Applicant: Rev. Jose Sanchez -
PROPOSAL:
Applicant is requesting a variance from fence height
requirements to legalize an existing 8 ft. high section of
wrought iron fence around portions of a church and church
school and to permit completion of an 8 ft. high wrought iron
fence around a playground and parking area across the street
from the church. The fence around the playground replaces a
former 8 ft. high chain link fence.
RECOMMENDATION
"-` Staff respectfully requests that the Planning Commission', .
after consideration, approve Resolution 2597 granting Variance
No. VAR 96-02.
REGLTf.�P,R ORDER OF BUSINESS
5. SUBJECT:
Ms. Ana Brambila has requested an exemption from Zoning
Ordinance provision in order to construct a fence (4 ft. high)
in the front yard at 9957 Abbott Road (R-1 Single Family
Residential Zone).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff respectfully requests that, after review, the Commission
reject this request.
6. SUBJECT:
Ms. Maria Montes has requested an exemption from Zoning
Ordinance provision in order to construct a fence (4 ft. high)
in the front yard at 4367 Abbott Road (R-1 Single Family
Residential Zone).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff respectfully requests that, after review, the Commission
reject this request.
�
I 7. SUBJECT:
I Ability to Require Conditional Use Permit for Auto Repair
, Facility at 3800 Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard
�
� RECOMMENDATION: _
� Staff respectfully requests that, after discussion, the
� Commission direct staff to take whatever additional action
� that the Commission deems necessary.
�
' .
I
I 3
I
I
I
y ' �
� • ._ �
•
8. SUBJECT:
,
Draft Of Letter To Council Re: Approval of Auto Repair �
Facility At 3800 Martin Luther King Jr: Boulevard. �
I
I
RECOMMENDATION: �
- `
Review and discuss revised draft and direct staff to take �
whatever action is determined by the Commission. '�
i
� STAFF ITEMS �
9. Report on actions taken by the City Council on extension of �
moratorium on Automotive Uses, Owner Participation Agreement �
for Kinney Shoe Store site. �
-- - �
PUBLIC ORALS �
i
"" i
COMMISSION ORALS I
�I
STAFF ORALS �
�
ADJOURNMENT 1 �
Adjourn to the regular meeting of the Planning Commission on August l
13, 1996 at 7:30 p.m., in the City Ha11 Council Chambers, 11330
Bullis Road, Lynwood, California.
�
I
I
(
I
�
I
t
�
' f:\upfites\misc\july96 �
4
�
�_
:� ;
,
� LYNWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 11, 1996
The Planning Commission of the City of Lynwood met in a Regular
Session in the Council Chambers of City Ha11, 11330 Bullis Road,
on the above date at_7:30 p.m.
Chairman McMiller presiding.
Commissioners Kuan, Barnes, Muhsin, Evans and McMiller answered
the roll call. -.-
Commissioners Dove and Lee were absent.
Also present were Planning Manager Diplock, Deputy City Attorney
Bagneris, Associate Planner Barfield and Civil Engineer Associate
Nguyen.
Planning Manager Diplock announced the Agenda had been duly
posted in accordance with The Brown Act.
It was moved by Commissioner Muhsin, seconded by Commissioner
Evans and carried to approve the following minutes:
a) Regular Meeting, May 14, 1996
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS '
Chairman McMiller introduced the first item, Conditional Use
Permit Case No. CUP 96-02, Applicant: Rev. John R. Henderson,
Christ New Testament Baptist Church.
Planning Manager Diplock stated the applicant is requesting
approval of a Conditional Use Permit in order to replace an
existing school and day care center with a three (3) story
private school, which will be attached to an existing church,
offering grades kindergarten through eighth grade at 11820 So.
Atlantic Avenue. This case was continued from the May-1�4, 1996
commission meeting in order to allow the applicant sufficient
time to address required parking under the City Zoning Ordinance.
The owner has revised his original proposal to reduce the number
of classrooms. At this time, staff respectfully requests that
after consideration, the commission adopt the attached
resolution, approving the Conditional Use Permit, subject to the
" stated conditions and requirements.
Vice-Chairman Lee arrived at 7:38 p.m.
Chairman McMiller opened the public hearing.
Rev. John Henderson, applicant, spoke in favor of the conditional
use permit.
Commissioner Muhsin questioned whether or not the applicant
agrees with the proposed landscaping requirements, and whether or
not he would accept an increase in the percentage of lot area to
be landscaped.
Constance Albert, Member of Christ New Testament Church, spoke in
favor of the Conditional Use Permit.
Ms. Henderson spoke in favor of the Conditional Use Permit.
Commissioner Lee questioned and discussed with the applicant
• designated playground areas, the number of employees and the
number of children enrolled at the school.
Planning Manager Diplock suggestecl inclusion of a condition
designating a dual use parking/play area.
Commissioner Lee recommended inclusion of a condition designating
certain parking areas multi-purpose, in order to establish a play
area.
Deputy City Attorney Bagneris advised that such a condition could
be included to the extent alowed by the Municipal Code.
. __
� - --
Chairman McMiller then closed the Public Hearing.
It was moved by Commissioner Lee, seconded by Commissioner Evans
- to adopt:
RESOLUTION NO. 2582 ENTITLED: "A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CI.TY OF LYNWOOD APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 96-02 TO DEVELOP AND OPERATE A THREE (3) STORY PRIVATE
SCHOOL AT 11820 S. ATLANTIC AVENUE IN THE CB-1 (CONTROLLED
BUSINESS) ZONE, LYNWOOD, CALIFORNIA".
with amendments to condition�#13 and 15 as stated by the
Commission. -
ROLL CALL•
AYES: COMMISSIONER EVANS, MUHSIN, BARNES, LEE, McM2LLER
, NOES: COMMISSIONER KUAN
ABSENT: COMMISSIONER DOVE
REGULAR ORDER OF BUSINESS
Planning Manager Diplock introduced the first item, a request for
an exemption from fence ordinance requirements for a-house at
4957 Abbott Road.
Commissioner Evans questioned problems with neighbors.
Commissioner Kuan questioned existing fences on surrounding
properties.
Chairman McMiller opened the item for discussion.
Ana Brambila, applicant, 4957 Abbott Road, spoke in her own
behalf and requested the commission consider her application for
exemption.
Councilman Armando Rea, 11168 Louise Ave. spoke in support of the
applicants request for exemption from the fence ordinance.
Arturo Reyes 11149 Carson Dr., spoke in support of the applicants
request for exemption from the fence ordinance and discussed
special circumstances for each individual case.
Alex Landeros, Cortland Ave., spoke in support of the applicants
request for exemption from the fence ordinance.
After further discussion, it was moved by Commissioner Muhsin,
seconded by Commissioner Barnes to grant an exemption for the
applicant, due to significant trespassing.
ROLL CALL:
AYES: COMMISSIONER MUHSIN, BARNES, KUAN
NOES: COMMISSIONER EVANS, LEE, McMILLER
ABSENT: COMMISSIONER DOVE
Commissioner" Evans suggested the applicant seek other
- alternatives.
It was then moved by Commissioner Lee, seconded by Commissioner
Evans to approve staffs recommendation for denial.
ROLL CALL:
AYES: CONII�t2SSIONER EVANS, LEE, McMILLER
NOES: COMMISSIONER BARNES, KUAN, MUHSIN
ABSENT: COMMISSIONER DOVE
It was moved by Commissioner Lee, seconded by Commissioner Muhsin
to continue the item to the next regular scheduled meeting.
ROLL CALL•
AYES: COMMISSIONER EVANS, MUHSIN, HARNES, KUAN, LEE, McMILLER
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONER DOVE
Planning Manager Diplock then discussed the draft letter, to
,
� Council with regard to the approval of an auto repair facility at
3800 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. At this time staff is
requesting any additions or modifications the commission may
have . . � -
Commissioner Lee requested the correspondence be brought back at
the next regular scheduled meeting with the inclusion of the
Conditional Use Permit process information, and direction to
staff to update the letter with input from the Deputy City
Attorney.
Planning Manager Diplock then discussed the draft letter to the
Traffic & Parking Commission with regard to the Speed Hump Pilot
Program.-
Commissioner Evans requested Magnolia Street be included as a
part of the pilot program.
COMMISSIONER ORALS
Commissioner Kuan had no comments.
Commissioner Evans discussed Council input towards Planning
Commission items. Also suggested Commissioners familiarize
themselves more with their agendas.
�COmmissioner Barnes reported complaints of potholes and the need
for tree trimming made by Helen Silva at 3525 Euclid Ave and 3527
Euclid Ave.
Commissioner Muhsin discussed problems along Long Beach Blvd.
caused by the sprinklers at .Imperial Hwy. & Long Beach Blvd, old
bus benches along Atlantic Ave. and Long Beach Blvd. that need to
be removed, graffiti on electrical poles along Atlantic Ave. that
needs to be removed, and tree trimming problems.
Commissioner Lee questioned compliance with the conditions for
trash enclosures at the market on Atlantic. Invited everyone to
the Chambers SOth Anniversary celebration on Thursday, June 13,
1996. Also discussed.the Chamber .Installation.Dinner and the
upcoming Juneteenth Celebration. '
( Having no further discussion, it was moved by Chairman Lee,
� seconded by Commissioner Muhsin and carried to adjourn at 9:50
p m
1
i
I CHAIRMAN CARLTON McMILLER
( APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
1
1 ROBERT DIPLOCK, MICHELE BEAL BAGNERIS,
� PLANNING MANAGER DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY -
I '
I
i
�,� —
(
I
4
I
i
�
I
i
�
�
i
;
i
� n!' �- i ! r E' � �
�
�,, ,�t��_t`tU„ . �..�
DATE: July 9, 1996 t� �. ��- f;,-Z ����
'� :a � t:. •., :- 1� �� t
++` V+iV`� ittJ
� T0: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: Gary Chicots, DireCtor �///�/�
Community Development Department �' `/
BY: Robert Diplock, Planning Manager
_. Planning Division _
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit - Case No. CUP 96-07
Applicant: Edgar Espinoza
PROPOSAL:
_ The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit -
to remodel an existing residential dwelling and_-develop three (3)
one story residential dwelling units with attached two (2) car
garages for the new units and a detached two (2) car garage for
dwelling at 12430 Harris Avenue in the R-2 (TOwn House &
Cluster Housing) zone.
FACTS:
l. Source of Authoritv
Section 25-4.2 of the Lynwood Zoning Ordinance requires that
' a Conditional Use Permit be obtained for any residential
development in the 12-2 and R-3 (Residential) zones.
2. Pronerty Location
The site is located on the east side of Harris Avenue
between Carlin Avenue and Olanda Avenue (see attached
location map).
i
3. Propertv size '
I
The site consists of a rectangularly shaped lot,
approximately 11,190.06 square feet in size. �
4. Existina Land Use ;
The property is a flat parcel, developed with a single !
family residential dwelling. The surrounding land uses are ,
as follows: ;
North - Single Family Residential. ,
South - Single Family/MUlti-Family Residential. i
East - Single Family. �
West - Single Family/Multi-Family Residential. i
5. General Plan and Zoning Desiqnations '
The General Plan Designation for the subject property is �
Town House and Cluster Housing and the Zoning is R-2 (Two-
Family Residential). The surrounding land use designations i
are as follows:
- General Plan Zoning , f
i
North - Town House and Cluster Housing North - R-2 i
South - Town House and Cluster Housing South - R-2
East - Town House and Cluster Housing East - R-2
West - Town House and Cluster Housing West - R-2 i
- i
�
f\planning\staffrpt\f:cup96-07 . . ,
1
�
�
I
I
, �
.
,;
6. Project Characteristics:
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use
Permit to remodel an existing one story residential dwelling.
and develop a detached two (2) car garage for the dwelling,
and develop three (3)'attached residential units with each
having an attached two (2) car garage on the subject
property. The dwelling scheduled for remodelling will be
remodeled to compliment the new units. The attached units
' are planned for two (2) bedrooms for two units and one
bedroon for the other. Lot coverage will be approximately
twenty percent (20°s); minus walks, driveways, court area,
etc., more than 25 % of the .site wi11 be landscaped.
7. Site Plan Review
On June 25, 1996, the Site Plan Review Committee evaluated
' the proposed development and recommended approval to the
Planning Commission, subject to specific conditions and
requirements.
8. Zonina Enforcement Historv
None of record.
9. Public Response
None of record at the time,this report was prepared:
ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
1. Consistencv with General Plan and Zonins
The proposed land use is consistent with the existing j
General Plan designation of Townhouse and Cluster Housing. I
Therefore, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 96-03 will
not adversely affect the General Plan. The proposal also I !
meets the use and density regulations of the Zor.ing I
Ordinance.
2. Site Suitabilitv j
i
The subject property is adequate in size and shape to �
accommodate the proposed development relative to the ,
- proposed density, bulk of the structures, parking, walls,
fences, driveways, and other development features required �
. by the Zoning Ordinance. Furthermore, the subject property
is adequately served with the required public utilities and
offers adequate vehicular and pedestrian accessibility. �
I
i
3. Compliance with Development Standards
The proposed development meets all the development standards �
required by the Zoning Ordinance regarding off-street �
parking, front and rear yard setbacks, lot coverage, height, I
unit size, and density. I
' I
4. Compatibilitv - ,
The proposed project will be located in a neighborhood that �
is in substantial transition from single-family to multi- ;
family residences. � �
5. Conditions of Anproval �
The proposed project, subject to the conditions recommended �
by the Site Plan Review Committee, will not have a negative !
effect on the values of the surrounding properties or �
interfere-with or end'anger the public health, safety or i
welfare.
;
1
. f\planning\staffrpt\f:cup96-07 �.
I
2 il
�
I
i
i
6. Benefits to Communitv
The proposed development will add to the City's affordable
housing stock in furtherance of the policies of the Housing
Element of the General P1an.
7. Environmental Assessment -
The Community Development Department Staff has determined
that the project is Categorically Exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15061 B(3) of
the State of California Environmental Quality guidelines as
amended.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff respectfully requests that, after consideration, the
Planning Commission adopts the attached Resolution No. 2595:
" 1. Certifying that the project is Categorically Exempt
from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, Section
15061 b(3).
2. Approving Conditional Use Permit, Case No. 96-07,
subject to the stated conditions and requirements.
ATTACHMENTS
l. Location Map
2. Resolution No.2595
3. Site Plan
f:\staffrpt\cup96-07 .
3
I
• . . - _. " --- - .
. � ��-, _ __
.�• �+' �' ,...
; _ ,
- - LOCATION iVIAP � � �
r � -. ....__ _ w—'7 . """'„�l�T" � ., i � .. , ��:i�i;:.
o�- . ri I — � — iit�, �i; :
�,o � ����� y � t� tr ri ��� � �
9G — 7J.� � �fi, . _ ... ,r '?� ir v � ,' � :. :
. �° n.� � sn W u�n ' �;.
. . � I t0 '� l6 v '� . � Ir'y..,:��:
H � � I � � ;,.;,,.
S _'_'��C I � nn. p o �iw e ' I i; . I. ;.
��„� �_1�.,.�jA � � 4, .,,, / �� � `ti aB�
,,,.. ,,,.
. Jd7w�'� I FORTION � LOtf 2 �. k � � :N 1�� .
:^a � I I ; �t � �.i
�, :7 :'i � J I � � � � s. J � ''''
: . .
. . . . . er r � 7 c �' s 4 h� : a � '�
. _ ^ ' .q.._. �
CARLIN $ , ° 3 AVENUE
r J io :�... � a� �;rr ro �� �ze „ . �t j "__.;'.:;;:
rs �; ,f, � . ns n sr.0 ss. a � n �. f::':�`!�
�: O 5 < J.Y Bvr. L/�k ,�.., ,», 3 i i E d +
� f ` � s � �O � R / 1 3 �e �� 1�"j .��. I J �a Q6 �� .
� � � � �o v ssu ,� �±.�., u.,r W
, `- J „ � 17RkCT� � , ,�,N . �
> w ier � n � rr u � rs n..0 ., t m + m... Z
� � ��+1 � i3'i i : � i. " W
� ` (r � [ "C � Re.l9 . � W ���.0 w .a ` n� .�.�� .!. 67 � i Q
' : � Si ; .? � � i q ' .
- � � : l��'No /D /e Z : s � Q � �.�� „ ' S �i.i� � 66
. ro° e4 c 9 n i•Ca � o N ,,.a s ` n.�� .\\ y- x .
^i� 6 , �; 6 —
, AVENUE s :" o � '•�•
T ,,.,, • ie ae
,t " i A j �° .+� �;` '�it F � 7 0 .�` 7 ' ` . i j; � i
`o_ ..c Lc j. � ,�•.. !� 8
�sE io ii ie�n�ii i5 :... ,�... r.ir ..,� 6 � �"��.. I
•.. �
, l r� 8 ' 8 9,w. . 62
So iSI. �. Ss �o�� t .i.. .iw � ..
�y.. If K . 'Q 9 �afT• .m 9 �0 � 6� ,�
iro � // �. V ,''l,,.i'.
/O nr��' � � . i'�. :�..
ro .., ;:::::..
- ,�.., �z ° ..; . Sy s,;;;...
. is:;::;:
�u .�., ii • ,.. ' . W . ,:: : .
' y :rfi' � � SB
'l ...�. Q
� /? , n�� ' � � ��n. /2 Q�` /! .un ' � ' . 37 .� .
:�� /J .�iiev Q . �� � /3 n�u . �, . nu � ;,:r � . i
�!f .0 ,Z � rr�r �i:l�.i'..
,; - - w ,� „ . , � 3 Q ,•, :
� w' C ���n, � ,� "::,,
� / .,.., r. ,n... A! ` � ,.� U ' �:`:'�.
� .. .. •,'.. � �. r So .' -
� �AN �� �
� 1 �� , ii`.:.
i ..J►r���e�i u rue�.: $ ;:t;::'.
, :;�•.. �j ,
,.. .
' c; :.
' , .. �! � �i:i.���
� {. .
i , • . .'.i't.;.., ; ,,�`'
I .� .•' Ya . ±..
I �Y `
i • � . .. �'. �< �� G � i
I, •
d��.iFA.I�p�Ly � .,.��'��
2Jt�. ..v�IR�1: : (.,
, . �i"f'i •i.<�� A '
I �
1 . %..
1 f
1 . � � ' ._�.v . �`.
l
' �.
% �
� C A S E N 0. ,�� . .;:::.
; ��
� �.. ;::
� �:;::
, . .: .
; :����
, _
i RESOLUTION N0. 2594
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LYNWOOD APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE —
PERMIT N0. CUP 96-07 TO REMODEL AN EXISTING
DWELLING AND DEVELOP THREE (1) STORY
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS WITH ATTACHED TWO
, (2) CAR GARAGES IN THE R-3 (MULTI-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL) ZONE, LYNWOOD, CALIFORNIA.
WHEREAS, the Lynwood Planning Commission, pursuant to law,
on July 9, 1996 conducted a public hearing on the subject
application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, considered all pertinent
testimony offered at the public.hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined
that the proposal is exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15303b of the State
CEQA Guidelines as amended; and
WHEREAS, a Conditional Use Permit is required .for
" residential development in the R-3 (Multi-Family Residential)
zone.
Section 1. The Planning Commission hereby finds and
determines as follows:
A. The site of the proposed use is adequate in size and
shape to accommodate the structures, parking, walls,
landscaping, driveways and other development features
required by the Official Zoning Ordinance.
B. The structures, as proposed, subject to conditions,
will not have a negative effect on the values of
surrounding properties or interfere with or endanger
the public health, safety, or welfare.
C. The site will be developed pursuant to the current
zoning regulations and site plan submitted and approved
by the Site Plan Review Committee.
D. The granting of the Conditional Use Permit wi11 not
adversely affect the General Plan.
E. The proposed development will add to the City's
affordable housing stock in accord with the policies
of the Housing Element of the General Plan.
Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Lynwood,
based upon the aforementioned findings and determinations, hereby
approves Conditional Use Permit, Case No. 96-06, provided the
following conditions are observed and complied with at all times:
�
! . "
I
�
�
� f:reso2594 -
I 1
i
I
l
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
1. The proposed development shall comply with all applicable
regulations of the Lynwood Municipal Code, the Uniform
Building Code and the Fire Code and be in substantial
" compliance with plans on file with the Community Development
Department.
- 2. Any proposed subsequent modification of the subject site or
- structures. thereon, shall be first reported to the Community
Development Department, Planning Division, for review of
said modifications.
3. The applicant shall meet the requirements of all other City
Departments.
4. The applicant and/or his representative shall sign a
Statement of Acceptance stating that he/she has read, '�
understands, and agrees to all conditions of this resolution
prior to issuance of any building permits.
5. This Conditional Use Permit shall lapse and become void one
hundred and twenty (120) days after the use permitted has
been abandoned or has ceased to be actively exercised.
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS
6. All work shall be performed by a licensed contractor as per
plans, specifications and current codes.
7. The applicant shall contact the U.S._ Post Office (Lynwood
main office) to establish the location of mail boxes serving
the proposed development.
8. Construction shall commence within (6) months from date
of issuance of building permits. --
9. Landscaped areas are to be a minimum of twenty-five (25%)
percent of the lot area.
10. Landscaping and irrigation systems shall be installed in
accordance with a detailed plan to be submitted and approved
by the Planning Division prior to issuance of any building
permits.
� The minimum plant material shall be trees and shrubs
combined with ground cover as follows: One (1) five (5)
! gallon shrub for each 100 square feet of landscaped area;
� and two (2) fifteen gallon trees for each 500 square feet of
� landscaped areas.
�� 11. The required front, rear, and side yards shall be landscaped
' and shall consist predominately of plant materials except
! for necessary walks, drives and fences.
� _
j 12. A minimum two (2) covered.parking spaces shall be provided
for each dwelling on site.
i
13. A six (6') foot high block wall shall be installed along the
� perimeter of the property, except within the twenty (20')
, foot front yard setback. In this setback, if built, the wall
i shall not exceed a height of four (4') feet measured from
i top of curb.
; 14. No side yard shall be less than five (5') feet.
i
l i f\p�anning\reso\f:reso2594 '
!' 2
�
1
I
,
�
15. Final building elevations, including materials of
construction, shall be submitted to and approved by the
Building Official and the Planning Division prior to
issuance of any building permits.
._ 16. Before any building permits shall be issued, the developer -
shall pay $1.84 per square foot for residential buildings to
the Lynwood Unified School District, pursuant to Government
Code Section 53080.
17. All driveway and parking areas shall be paved. -
18. Acoustical construction materials shall be used throughout
the units to mitigate freeway noise to the standards and
satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division.
19. Residential structures shall have an exterior siding of
brick, stucco, wood, metal, concrete, or other similar
material other than the reflective glossy, polished and/or
rolled-formed type metal siding.
20. Prior to obtaining a-building permit, the design of any
exterior elevation changes to the building must be approved
by the Director of Community Development or his/her
designee.
21. All building elevations shall be architecturally treated in
a consistent manner, including the incorporation within the
side and rear building elevations of some or all of the
design elements used for the primary (front) facades.
22. Al1 security fences, grills, etc. shall be architecturally
compatible with the design of the subject and adjacent
building. In addition, no security fences, grills, etc.
shall be installed without the prior written approval of the
Director of Community Development.
23. Air conditioners, heating, cooling ventilation equipment,
swimming pool pumps and heaters and all other mechanical
devices shall be located within the rear yard or side yards.
I f Such equipment sha11 be screened from surrounding properties
� and streets and operated so that they do not disturb the
I peace, quiet and comfort of neighboring residen.ts, in
accordance-with the City's Noise Ordinance.
1
I 24. A cover sheet of approved conditions must be attached to
plans prior to submission to the Building and Safety
Division.
25. The owner of the site shall maintain a pro-active approach
i to the elimination of graffiti from the structures, fences
and accessory buildings, on a daily basis.
�
1 26. For the purpose of providing heating for any dwelling
� proposed, only an energy efficient forced air furnace
� or approved equivalent shall be used, and the use of any
� wa11 furnace is expressly prohibited.
I
PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
�
� 27. Submit a grading plan prepared and signed by a registered
` Civil Engineer. Grading plan will be checked by Public
Works Department. No building permits will be issued prior
� to the approval of grading plan by City Engineer.
� 28. Reconstruct damaged sidewalk, crub and gutter, drive
approach (es) and required pavement along Harris Avenue.
{ �
' 29. Reconstruct damaged and substandard drive approach (es) Per
� City standards.
i
' 3
�
i
.
' 30. Construct one (1) wheelchair ramp (s) at the southwest
corner of Carlin Avenue and Harris Avenue.
31. Proposed driveway shall be realigned so that the top "X" is
located and foot inside the property line.
32. Connect to public sewer. Each building shall be connected
•separately. Construct laterals as necessary.
33. Remove existing street tree(s).
34. Install two (2) 24" box street trees per AFWA standards
along Harris Avenue.
35. Regrade parkway and landscape with grass. '
36. Provide and install one (1) marbelite street pole with light
-- fixture, underground services and conduits,along Harris
Avenue.
35. Underground existing utilities if any modifications are
proposed for the electrical service panel.
36. A permit from the Engineering Division is required for all
off-site improvements.
37. All required water meters, meter service changes and/or fire
protection lines sha11 be installed by the developer. The
work shall be performed by a licensed contractor hired by
the developer. The contractor must obtain a permit from the
Public Works/Engineering Division prior to performing any
work.
38. Provide recent title report to ascertain that land lot
parcel to the north of the property does not have any
easements or other land rights does not go over the project
property.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
The Fire Department found no cause to establish conditions for
this application.
',
I •
.
I '
;
..
i
� _.
�
t
,
�
', f:\reso2594
�
4
'�
I
!
r
,+
Section 3. A copy of this resolution shall be delivered
to the applicant.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1996,
by members of the Planning Commis'sion voting as follows:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Carlton McMiller, Chairperson
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Gary C. Chicots, Director Michele Beal Bagneris
Community Development Department Deputy City Attorney
I
�
I
I -
I
i
�
i
I -
�
i
'
�
t:\resolutn:reso2594
I 5
{
I
�t _ _
� z
nn: t,ir�h._fT�: � P �'�.
DATE: July 9, 1996 t',': :-� �:.%•"� I:�- it �t
� ; ` ! � r ' � `�'� � ^, �..Y��
T0: PLANNING COMMISSION �
�.�i � E � J.
� FROM: Gary Chicots, Director ��
Community Development Department� ` """
SUBJECT: Zone Chanqe - Case No. ZC 96-02
Applicant: Sal Preciado
PROPOSAL: -
The applicant is requesting approval of a Zone Change (ZC 96-02)
from C-2 (Light Commercial) Zone to C-3 (Heavy Commercial Zone
for the subject property, located at 3840 Martin Luther King, Jr.
Boulevard, which encompasses approximately 33,000 square feet in
size in order to accommodate future commercial development.
FACTS:
1. Source of Authoritv
Section 25-27.1 a. of the City Zoning Ordinance allows the
property owner(s) to initiate a change in zoning boundaries
and classification.
2. PropertV Location:
The area is located on the south side of Martin Luther King,
Jr. Boulevard (MLK) between Ernestine Avenue and Bullis
- Road. (Refer to the attached location map)
3. Propertv size:
The area consists of a building located on rectangular shaped
lot, approximately 64,600 square feet.in size.
4. Existin4 Land Use:
The project, a 33,000 sq.ft. development, and the subject
area, contains a restaurant and a large activities space.
The surrounding land uses are as follows:
North - Super Market/ Residential
South - Governmental Uses/Residential
East - Single Family Residential
- West - Commercial/Retail
5. Land Use Desiqnation:
The General Plan Designation for the subject property is
Commercial while the Zoning Classification is C-2. The
surrounding land use designations are as follows:
General Plan Zoning
North - Commercial North - C-Bl
South - Commercial& Public Facility South - C-2\P-1
� East - Townhouse & Cluster Housing/ East - C-B1
Single Family Residential '
West - Townhouse & Cluster Housing West - R-2
� H:zc96-02 .
�
I
� 1
'
I
, .
Y _.
,
6. Proiect Characteristics
Within the rezoning area, the applicant intends to develop ,
and operate a video studio and entertainment center. The
Center's activities are proposed to include a stage area,
music shows (live and via direct TV), closed circuit TV
shows, rental space for dances, parties, school reunions, �,
school sports,folklorico dances, .special meetings, video
presentations, and live shows, �
7. Site Plan Review: - '
1
On June 25, 1996, the Site Plan Review Committee evaluated
the proposed rezoning. Specific conditions and requirements ',
were established for the proposal and Conditions for Approval
were made for Planning Commission consideration.
,
8. Lynwood Redevelooment Acfencv
The properties under this proposal are located in the City's
Redevelopment Project (Project Area A"). The Agency
requires review of all projects in conjunction with Planning '�
Commission approval for projects in Project Area "A° (see i
Neighborhood Response below). I
9. Zonina Enforcement Historv: �
None of record at the time this report was prepared. I
10. Neiqhborhood Response:
At its July 2, 1996 meeting, the Redevelopment Agency
reviewed this development proposal. Agency members and
neighborhood representatives registered concerns and
complaints regarding the activities being proposed. The
Agency directed Staff to work with the neighbors, concerned
citizens, and the lessee in order to resolve the issued -
raised at the meeting and prepare a proposal acceptable to
all concerned.
ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
l. Consistencv with General Plan
The proposed zone change is consistent with the General Plan
� designation, Commercial. However, the Site Plan Review
i Committee and the Planning Staff evaluated the proposal and
I surmised that if a zone change were to be granted, a broader
area should be considered in order to encourage and afford
I the opportunity for commercial revitalization and
development. Much of the Redevelopment Project Area is
i comprised of narrow lots which preclude the possibility for
creative, larger commercial scale development.
� 2. Area Suitabilitv
� The subject area is adequate in size and shape to carry out
� the intent of the Commercial designation of the General Plan,
� and accommodate the proposed development relative to the
� proposed density; bulk of the structures; parking; walls,
� fences; driveways, and other development features required by
the Zoning Ordinance. Furthermore, the subject property is
` adequately served with the required public utilities and
�� offers adequate vehicular and pedestrian accessibility.
I,
�
�
!' 2
�
l .
i
._ ..
. __ ',
3. Compliance with Development Standards
i
The proposed rezoning would enable the proposed use to be �
' consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and meets all the ,
development standards required by the Zoning Ordinance
regarding off-street parking; front, and rear yard setbacks;
lot coverage, height, and_required landscaping. However, the I
proposed use is currently inconsistent with the zoning for
the area. _, ,
I
4. Compatibilitv " �
_,
The_proposed project will be located in an area.of mixed land ��
uses. Located to the north is large grocery store. ;
Properties located to the south and east are governmental
uses and single family residential. And, to the west are �
_ developed commercial/retail uses. The type of development
currently proposed, a dance hall and entertainment center, ��
unless carefully designed and controlled may not be . �
compatible with neighborhood residential uses. After some
original problems, the recent special events at this facility ,
have been orderly and well c'ontrolled. i,
I
6. Conditions of Approval �
The rezoning proposed, subject to the conditions recommended �
by the Site Plan Review Committee, will not have a negative �
effect on the values of the surrounding properties or �i
interfere with or endanger the public health, safety or
welfare. �
I
7. Benefits to Communitv
The proposed rezoning may enhance the commercial development
in the area neighborhood and may act as.a catalyst to foster
other quality developments. However, there is a possibility
o£ adverse impact on residential development.
8. Environmental Assessment -
The Community Development Department Director has determined
that no substantial environment impact will result from the
proposed rezoning; therefore, a Negative Declaration has been
filed in the .Community Development Department and in the
Office of the City Clerk
I
1 RECOMMENDATION:
I Staff respectfully requests that after consideration, the
Planning Commission CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO ENABLE Staff to work
i ' with the applicant and neighbors to look at alternative uses and
� prepare an acceptable development plan.
1
�
i
I ATTACHMENTS
i 1. Location Map
'
V
�
�
�
+ -
; _ --
�
�, _
1 f\staffrpt\zc96-02
' .. 3
I
� ' w�-�_-{��;- � " _";.iti..-�.t��; sa v" ' " ' .
'" : s.ys -� : v�:..... .'� _ r' �' " '
�. .f;7�:' 3:-. � � :�z� `a'.:.° ..,v3.-../�.itiSr-.-�.�'��n.- '-_ "' ' - _ - ' ' :.--. ..�. - .
�:i�- . _. r•
. . .:, . -: � . -
. . . .. r"']:G " - � �;'
yit . _�_:a ; . __ ...-�i_i....�i _- _ � . � . l/ s+ii:.�ti " - .
. f^ .'-,. .. � . . _ ��
� , ' ili V � n2 � :! �� � St 'o -.� . . �. ._....�.. ...'""""' ' ' _ ' " ' " -__' . _. .
. lll o �i / d r - 4 �'.' -
� ' ° G � � j l � yJ ''� all ' 1 a� :ci �?,�`f�T'`.`:�:i'•�.
g � . Z .iv J ` lTn� � . , as , , � �
'� �3 � � y . .. � . �i :J,
� ' F m • oj iii as . � • t� � � y �9< �' dbf �. • � ��Y . �
' � h � ' - ' - - eo nni . s F �' y i � �1
i . ' q ; . ' Q' JS 1 sm. 10 _ . r, �i n I
� � V � � ' �� � � t
i i . _ //0 Ol S6 6 . :� � �� I y � �i.'t n I O
IN :d3 t�� Sm , Ia2 ID/ 200 Z) �Da" 1l) : Q�� lj � r
j! ,�. '�.,---a�, �� R . � i � y .
�' � � iu m � = s� . �. � 1 � q P �a � � .{,i. � j ' �r� A �'F�, I i
� . _ . -- � �.
x.w 1 ixo� i u �.v ^s yl i 1�yap� 60 a' � ��s r, G
'Y
) �d+ � a�" o. � ` = i
� � V �
� 1 � . . iL "� �. � � . - ' n $ 1S Y � `�, �
/70�°�`� � �
� � A _ 4 .
/d � �u �i'
�zi u y t�� i � y i
,�. ' �.e. ,,.v ,ne>
� °O /O //t N /N L7 � f� � B � ' . . � .
/�3� � . �`�'-I,
� �. � ,` .. � c c .nu.
1
P � i_ � " / �
Q, cvse .w s.�r a ° �.
/: �il. � /�� r a, o
i ' , �, .. ,�
i � , - , ,u � n,� no u, nJ z, . , es � n :• , �� .
Z' I C V DL � ,i . /� �,, ^� 9 .
. I � ✓ a
1 • � � //33� �% ��i yo 430 `� ''l' '
!' O c?�¢ io - - - � ' � � �. �9'o d �
i: . . ��� , � . Oloas ir3/O iY / � ���.T \
I : � ' . . roo ^ a � � �i r ... � t Q .. -
' - . . � ia yD ' �s lF ��a ) � ae o -i'
. F: � _
I - . - 1bn 'dK � �.d b
\� ` � I . . . � . i�,7!/ � i�.Wj . b R. q.7 "
� \) • /OI�• ,
I I � � � �� V O
' .V � o '�a p �%a7YS
� I O � ',' � � -
5cN [irr � �s:i37A i.3� i b / �
h � ioi ' se 5 ' -'��r` �
� � � � � , �� 4'YJ � � '
t� . v ize i iJFD. .��' 7
� � " , J "ms es ' �u - � eo� ��'� �� '
¢ � "' F
1 0 ' � a �� e�. o� Ii3�q ndPj lJJ
I: . . o ' ., J ei - a� o
Z ` ^
�� ♦. � ! ' i
im i �Q ,, .00
I . �f p . � . � � s � e� �4 �p J ���A /��5'.F � v J
� C1 . '�N $ WOOGGAi%H . � .
AVENUf ;
1R P �2 u,, v�,. ss_ v�� -�..o �_ s:.�,�,� . __. / l
-. � �- : ;-i � .il v
1 .. I l , M l ry J � ♦� S M 6V )q 0 4� 9�� � '
_____ ___ _____ � � 1�
. r � � :iao.r tn L._�._1 so iv�o e� � � �s�: �5� � .�.'__'_.__—_— '
um e:
• i '"�'�_ ' _ —=1" " ."_
_,------ —' _�
� , � � !'y �f ?C � : i�`�'�: i s ::!'d� i411. �
;. .
� y . ° �� �
v'� DATE: July 09, 1996 ��i��� f't!� �O
T0: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM:. Gary Chicots, Director
Community Development Departmen
' BY: Robert Diplock, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Variance Case VAR 96-02. St Philio Neri Church
Applicant: Rev. Jose G. Sanchez
Proposal:
: Applicant is requesting a variance from fence height requirements
to,legalize an existing 8 ft. high section of wrought iron fence
around portions of a church and church school and to permit
completion of an 8 ft. high wrought iron fence around a playground
- and parking area across the street from the church. The fence
around the playground replaces a former 8 ft. high chain link
fence.
Facts:
l. Reauest
Applicant is requesting a variance:
_ a. in order to retain an existing 8 ft. high wrought iron
fence around portions of a church and church school where only
a 6 ft. high fence is permitted, and
b.. to permit completion of an 8 ft. high wrought iron fence
around a playground and parking area across the street from
the church.
2. Source of Authoritv
Section 25-26.1 of the Lynwood Zoning Ordinance permits Variances
from the strict application of the terms of the Ordinance where
there are special circumstances applicable to the property.
3. Pronerty Location
The two properties are located on the north and south side of
Olanda Street between Cookacre Avenue and Stoneacre Avenue.
' 4. Zoninq Enforcement Histor,y
None of record at the time this report was completed. i
I
5. Public Response I
_ �
Staff has received no comments from the general public..At the City �',
Council meeting of June 18, 1996 the applicant spoke in favor of
the variance and requested a waiver of fees, which was granted by I
the City Council. �
__ j
I
DISCUSSION: I
The fence around the church and school on the north side of Olanda �
varies in height from 4 ft. to 8 ft. as shown on the attached �
graphic. It has been installed for several years. There is no
record of a building permit or site plan approval. The fence on the
south side, around the playground, is just being installed. All ;
fences in residential areas have a maximum height limit of 6 ft. j
Therefore, an 8 ft. fence requires a variance. I
�
�
�
�
�
•.' The special_ circumstances in this case are that the property
contains a church, a large church school and major play areas
located within a single family and multi family residential area
(area is zoned R-2 and R-3). Although this seems to,be a fairly
good residential area, the applicant cites continuing vandalism,
trash being thrown on the property and destruction of the former
chain link fence.
The fact that there are significant buildings to be protected as
well as playground areas appears to justify the installation of the
8.foot high fence. Most public schools have high fences to protect
their buildings and property. Since a major portion of this
property is utilized as a school, is appropriate that a church
school be afforded the same privileges that public schools
currently enjoy. It is reasonable to conclude that both public and
private schools should be treated as equally as possible concerning
zoning and development standards and that, in this case, a variance
can be granted.
However, since the subject fence is over 6 feet high, the Building
Code requires that a building permit be obtained for the new fence '
and those portions of the existing fence over 6 feet.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff respectfully requests that the Planning Commission, after
consideration, approve Resolution 2597 granting Variance No. VAR
96-02.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Letter from Applicant
2. Plot Plans (2)
3. Resolution 2597
upfiles\var9602.rpT �
�
�
'' _' . '- "" .
� �
� St. Phllip Neri Church
431 1 Olanda Street
�, Lynwood, California 9026Z
1'"'J �, � (310) 632-7179
June 14, 1996 �
Members of The Planning Commission _
City of Lynwood, California.
Dear members of the Planning Commission,
RE: Variance application for 8'high wrought iron fence.
Greetings from the Community and School of Saint Philip Neri.
For many years we had an 8' chain link fence that was not useful for the security
of our school and church property. Several years ago before I became Pastor of
St. Philip Neri, the chain link fence was replaced with a wrought iron fence. Our
parking lot and playground section across the streetfrom the church was not
refenced atthattime.
After three years of vandalism, trash and continual repairs to the fence in our
parking and playground section our congregation decided to replace the chain
link fence with a wrought iron fence; thereby not only making the property more
secure but more aesthetically appealing.
Since the property already contained a fence we were unaware that a permit
would be needed in order for us to install a better fence. When we were
informed that a permit was needed we appiied for it. At that time yaur office also
requested to see the permit for the fence that secures our church and school. In
searching our files we have been unable to locate a permit for the existing fence.
At this time I am applying for a variance for the fence already around our church
and school and to install an 8' fence in our parking and playground area across
the street.
I We have found that the height of the fence (8') has been extremely beneficial in
deterring vandalism, drug activities after hours, graffiti, car break-i�s during
{ church services and most important of all it keeps our children safe. Because of
� these concerns our church community was dying and the Archdiocese was
� considering closing the church and school since people were to afraid to come.
1 Three years ago when I came to this community, with the help of the Sheriff's
i
Department, I began to work with neighbors to organize Block Watch Clubs. The
�.
i
i
I
I
i
�
I
i ---
; .
;
�
�,
I ' I
I
,
t� - � L�
� I � St. Ph11Ip Nert Church
� �, I 431 1 Olanda Street -
Lynwood, California 90262
(310) G32-7179
success of these clubs has drastically improved our neighborhood and �
promoted a cohesive community of African American, Latinos, Whites and
people of other cultures working together to make our community safe for our
children.
I believe some of our citizens as well as City Officials can tell you of what we have
accomplished, since now people from all around the city attend services at St.
Philip Neri. •
Our congregation of ten thousand members are aware of our situation and we
are all praying that we will be able-to obtain the needed variances to continue
our worthwhile project, which will not only promote security but it will also serve
to add beauty to the city.
^ As a citizen of Lynwood I am committed to work to make our city a place of pride
and joy as well as model for other cities.
In conclusion, i would like to state that the previous 8' chain link fence was very
easy to climb. Many nights it was cut, causing us numerous repairs. There was
theft, vandalism, and trash throuwn on our property. Conversely, the 8' wrought
iron fence is not easily climbed, difficult to cut, promotes security and safety for
our children. People are bringing more children to our school and we have had
no more school break-ins. We have minimum problems with cars and we are -
able to keep our area cleaner. We are improving our grounds and are able to
keep our surroundings more beautiful.
Please feel free to discuss any area that I have not made clear. It is our hope
that with this explanation we will be allowed to continue our project.
' May our good God bless you and your beloved families always.
� Sincerely yours _
{ ,_� ; ��' '�; ,
„ , � � ,
'J���_ `�= ����.;.�.,.�:
�.
.. �
Rev. Jose G. Sanchez '
� Pastor
�
�
�
��
� --
i
I
I
i
1
i _
`
I
I
1
i
,
� ,
�
�
I
� _ _
' PROPOSED WROIIGHT IRON FENCE.
,� City of Lynvood.
(Rev. Jose G. Sanchez)
SA NT HILIP NERI CHD CH S SCHOOL �CONVENT � RINDERGARTE
43 1 0 anda St. � ��
12 22 toneacre St ; `
43 5 0 anda St: i
12 35 ookacre Ave CoNVEn7 �9
i
_ 12 47 ookacre Ave
" �� G' �� � . . .....
.
��
- Ca KAD E
�. usoo �' w 8 tu W w K
c�aSeT
�
� G Resr2oo �� '°� �� � �N �� coMVUrez -
Roo rt �p
� GRADE L�'��IG�R � -- -
� ` 5 -
� 6RAOC �
� 6 1�
� �,2n�C F�n� Po�.E �
7 �L � �
� p F�A7'�KOUN� '� .�n
GRl+� E
< 8 � �
� N�.cH [��pp � � �
?' ' R �°� � - oC.
'^ , Fl
� i �Mr ? �� �.
� �e _ : Q
� SCC. � KI7GHEN �npl� Wo� � � �C
� � S �
1 °o � � -
,�
'� P/�R15H W � � _ ._
HALL � a
�l < °� DI0.. �'. .
i� ,l � � RE�. "'
� � -
�� � � � i
i �
hrN �nviES STORx, .
�` R�.c.ro�Y 1 �.
' z G.
GNl1RLN ,
`b' � . GHZ.�33. �` ...� 2
Gnte 4 �' / Y
� _ �, , � � �
OLANC�A STK�GT
� F'IEI.p _
I �HU�c.H PH�KIN� �oT
I
I
1
I
�
�
City of Lynvood '
'• (Rev. 7ose G. Sanchez
� MAIN uJf�T :{2 �1p�L�l� — — — � — —
Saint Philip Neri Church r
� �� p ��L V A�V� 12601 Cookacre Av
Lynvood, Ca. 90262
� T � E � (310) 632-7179
� lPR1 ' Tract No. 7099
K!,'..f Lot 19 and NE 50 Ft of Lot 20.
I PAOPOSED &EPLAC2N8NT OP THE OLD CHAIN LINR PENCE POH _
� NROUGHT I&ON PENCE� TOTAL OF: 848'.12"
� �
� i ProDerty Line Property LSue � � �
I � - r 266.40 y �
� , I' i • _ • _ � ___ � _— 1 '.._'.. _ 1 * S� ,
LL� T � , `�1 d • '
_� � vi
I �
Z 5 . ' .. i �l I ,�6'-d' .
� .SASKET 6ALL LOUKTS �
. 1 , I; ' . ..TO 6E Pl�Jt. ' � 1
l.-Ll Y
J
� �- ... .�. . _ � � � � _ Q � i
/. � • �. .� � .� �- � j � • � I
3
� � �I
I 4b�0.�07.2���y.� N �' � .
: l • . PAJE w I�
i . � � N
�.U. J� 'J ` N ; .
(� � 3 �' ' .
q �
� �
r � 1
` H �
�; \1 ry
� � •
•
� —i ��AiN w��cR �'{,VE
__ '________' � '
� • � •
O . � .. I - ` ....... � '_'_ � _" '.___ • "'__' � _' �1
1�{ i �
� Q \ �TILEE = r
� _ `" PAR�ING �
� � �
rr�c: S T ��g .
i � � rze6
i n'"�I \� 2� 4� �24� 32� I 4_
2
I I �
� ��� 1 $� � �'El'�J'.�� L
\ Q� � _`- _ . �IOEWALK ^i_6n � t V j� �i
_ �_��
� GRA35. :�n .. . ...... .
. ..... —
' ��,_p�, " . , � y3 _ b "
_ �C�1N P� ST �� �'r
�
i %
,
� .
I � .
:, . "
,
�
;
� _
,
;
�
� .
�
;
,
,�
� _.. . ;.
�
� _
RESOLUTION NO. 2597
.�
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LYNWOOD APPROVING A
VARIANCE REQUEST (CASE NO. 96-02) TO '`'
INCREASE THE PERMITTED FENCE HEIGHT FROM
SIX (6') FEET TO EIGHT (S') FEET AROUND
CHURCH PROPERTY ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH
SIDES OF OLANDA STREET BETWEEN COOKACRE
AND STONEACRE AVENUES IN THE R-2 AND
R-3 (TWO FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY) ZONE, - .
LYNWOOD, CALIFORNZA.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lynwood,
pursuant to law, held a public hearing on the---subject
application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has carefully considered
all pertinent testimony offered at the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the existing development is consistent with the
intent of the General Plan in that community facilities are
permitted in areas designated residential on the Plan;
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined
that the proposal is exempt from provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines,
Section 15061b (3);
- Section l. The Planning Commission of the City of
Lynwood hereby finds and determines as follows:
A. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement
of the specific regulation would result in practical difficulty
or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the
objectives of the City Zoning Ordinance.
B. That there are exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved
which do not apply generally to other properties in the same
zone.
�� C. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement
of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of..
privileges enjoyed by similar types of development in the same
zone.
I
�� D. That the granting of the Variance as conditioned will
� not constitute the granting of a special privilege inconsistent
with the limitations on other properties in the same zone.
j E. That the granting of the Variance will not be
, detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or
� materially injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
� F. That the granting of the Variance will not adversely
j affect the orderly development of the City.
I Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of
�� Lynwood, based upon the aforementioned findings and the
' determinations, hereby approves Variance Case� No. VAR 96-02, -
' subject to the following conditions:
�
f:\resolutn\reso2597 � �
��
1
1
��
.
,� .
1. The applicant/property owner shall secure a Building
Permit from the Building Division of the Lynwood Community
Development Department prior to completion of the fence on the
south side of Olanda Street.
2. The applicant /property owner shall comply with all
requirements of the Building Code applicable to the construction
of this type fence.
Section 3. A copy of this resolution shall be delivered to
the applicant.
APPROVED and ADOPTED this 9th day of JULY, 1996, by members
of the Planning Commission voting as�follows:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Carlton M<cMiller, Chairperson
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
�
i Gary Chicots, Director Michele Beal Barneris
�. Community Development Dept. Deputy City Attorney
,
1
,
�
`�
I
I
� f:\resolutn\reso2597
�
�
�
' I
�
{
�
�
.
�
i
f
i 2
i
�
�
;
: �„^. . - { 5 i
� ' , ���i�VJ'% E i L16'� �4v. '
R:li rt 1
DATE: July 09, 1996 Vf1;;� �`;� E, �� !
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION "
i ,
� ,
FROM: Gary Chicots, Director �/,�, �
Community Development Department ILV
I
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION FROM FENCE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS
FOR HOUSE AT 4957 ABBOTT (R-1 RESIDENTIAL ZONE) . i
REOUEST: (
Ms. Ana Brambila has requested an exemption from Zoning Ordinance ��
provision in order to construct a fence (4 ft. high) in the front
yard at 4957 Abbott Road (R-1 Single Family Residential Zone). ��
BackQround:
�
At the Commission's June 11, 1996 meeting, the property owner at
4957 Abbott Road requested an exemption from recent Zoning �
Ordinance regulations prohibiting fences in the front yards of R-1 I
zoned property.
I
The applicant's property is located on the north side of Abbott, �
i
second house from the corner. The houses on either side have front I
yard fences - one block and wrought iron and the other is chain i
1ink, both about 4 feet high. None of the three other lots on the
- block have fences. I
After discussion, the Commission continued this request to the July
09, 1996 meeting and suggested that the applicant meet with staff
to explore possible alternatives to a front yard fence.
Discussion:
At the Planning Commission meeting of June 11, 1996, after
discussion, the Commission came up with a tie vote on granting this
request and therefore no action was taken.
The Commission then suggested that the applicant meet with staff to
look at possible alternative to a fence. Up to the time of this
� staff report (July 03, 1996), the applicant has not contacted
I
, staff.
I Recommendation:
�
' Staff respectfully requests that, after review, the Commission
� reject this request.
i
Attachments:
� l. Applicant's Letter
� 2. Applicant's Graphic
' 3. Staff Graphic
�
� -
i
� planning\pcfence4.mem
�I
.� DATE: July 9, 1996 ��:;i�iVi;"�� i}►:R'� �,1{V. � LL.!
.
`,C' TO: PLANNING_ CONIl�'IISSION G�`�E �� • v _
I FROM: Gary Chicots, Director
' Community Development Department
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Case No. 96-08
Applicant: Sal Preciado
Proposal -
The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow and
develop a video studio/entertainment center with live bands and
dancing at 3840 Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard in the C-3
(Heavy Commercial) zone. -_
Facts
l. Source of Authoritv
Section 25-10.1 f. of the Zoning Ordinance requires approval
of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a public dance hall,
" theater or concert hall.
; 2. Pro�ertv Location
� The subject property is located at the intersection of
� Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Ernestine Avenue,
southwest corner.
3. Propertv Size
The subject site -is rectangular in shape, and approximately
64,000 square-in size (400'x160').
4. Existina Land Use
The site.contains a restaurant, 6800 square feet in size, in
a 33,000 square foot building. The remainder of the
building is vacant. The site also contains a large parking
area on its west and south sides. The surrounding land uses
are as follows:
North - Commercial/Retail East - Residential
South - Public Parking Area West - Commercial/Auto Use
5. Land Use Descrintion
The General Plan designation for the subject property is
Commercial, and the zoning classification is C-3 (Heavy
Commercial). The surrounding land uses, are as follows:
General Plan Zoning
North - Commercial North - C-2
South - Public Facility South - P-1
' East - Single Family Residential East - R-1
West - Commercial West - C-2
h\pLanning�staffrpi\h:96-08 � � .
1
_.._.
�' -
6. Proiect Characteristics:
- The applicant proposes to develop and operate a video studio
and entertainment center. The center's activities are
proposed to include a stage area, music shows (live and via
direct TV), closed circuit TV shows, rental space for
dances, parties, and reunions, school sports, folklorico
dances, special meetings, video presentations, liye shows.
The project plans indicate that the subject site has a total
of 246 parking spaces. The proposed plan calls for five
(5%) landscaping of the subject site.
7. Lvnwood Redevelopment Aaency
The subject project is located in the City's Redevelopment
_. Project (Project Area "A"). The Lynwood Redevelopment
Agency requires review of all projects in conjunction with
Planning Commission approval for projects in Project Area _
"A" (see Neighborhood Response below).
8. Zonin4 Enforcement Historv
With respect to this application,. their are no violations
cited for the subject property.
9. Neiahborhood Resnonse
At its July 2, 1996 meeting, this proposal was reviewed by
the Lynwood Redevelopment Agency. During the meeting,
Agency members and neighborhood representatives registered
concerns and complaints regarding the activities.being
proposed. The Agency directed Staff to work with the
neighbors, concerned citizens, and the lessee in order to
resolve the issues raised at the meeting and prepare a
proposal acceptable to all concerned.
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION -
l. Consistency with General Plan
The proposed land use is consistent with the existing zoning
, classification of C-3 (Heavy Commercial) and the General
Plan designation of Commercial, therefore, granting
Conditional Use Permit No. 96-08 will not adversely affect
the General Plan.
2. Site Suitabilitv
The property is adequate in size and shape to accommodate
the proposed development relative to structures, walls,
fences, landscaping, driveways and other development
features required by the Zoning Ordinance. The existing
- uses i.e. restaurant and lounge, and the proposed use
combined would require a total of 329 parking spaces. The
project provides 246 parking spaces. Therefore, approval of
a Variance Request is required to be in conformance with the
parking requirements of the city, or the scope of the
activities would have to be restricted to match the
availability of parking.
Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard is a major arterial and is
well suited to carry the quantity of traffic the proposed
. development would generate. The General Plan allows for a
maximum daily capacity of traffic at 40,000 vehicles per day
(ADT) at Bu11is Road and Martin Luther King Boulevard. The
ADT al this arterial is.14,890 vehicles per day.
Approval of this proposal will not exceed the maximum ADT
for this arterial. Ernestine Avenue'is classified under the
General Plan as a local street whose primary function is to
2
.
1�� -
provide direct access to abutting properties. If access-onto
Ernestine Avenue from the subject site is closed, the
proposal will-have little traffic impact on the local
street.-
A. Traffic and Parkina. (Resoonse to Section 9)
1) Will the parking lot be for patrons only?
_The parking lot will serve patrons and employees
of the existing restaurant and the center
only, and parking on site is adequate to meet this
- need.
2) Will there be traffic control to direct cars into
and out of the parking area so that traffic will
not impact Ernestine Avenue?
The applicant proposes to close a11 access from
the subject property onto Ernestine Avenue.
3) What about parking on.the neighborhood street?
It is suggested by the Parks and Recreatiori
Department that limited parking be established for
Ernestine Avenue, and a"no parking" zone be
designated in front of a portion of the restaurant
and the proposed project in order to prevent
overflow parking along Ernestine Avenue.
4) Can the alley be blocked off to prevent traffic
onto Ernestine Avenue?
The applicant can be required to a vacate the
existing alley and block all access to Ernestine
Avenue.
5) Will there be an environmental assessment to
determine the traffic impact along Ernestine
Avenue and Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard?
See above under 2. Site Suitabilitv.
B. Securitv.
1) Will there be security outside the building?
The applicant can be required to provide security
in the parking area(s).
2) Can a curfew be enforced?
City Codes establish a curfew for minor under
Ordinance No. 1328 and is enforced by the
Sheriff's Department.
3) Will patrons be searched for weapons?
The applicant will be required to provide security
__ at the entrance of the center for major events.
C . O�erations .
1) Will this be a regional entertainment center?
The applicant's business plan indicates that the
project will attract patrons beyond the City of
Lynwood.
3
,
:
2) What is the projected opening date for the
project?
The applicant has.not indicated the opening date.
3) What will be the capacity of the center?
The Lynwood Fire Department allows a maximum of
414 persons in the facility. However, given the
variety of activities under the proposal, the
use(s) capacity is being reconsidered by the Fire
Department.
4) What are the hours of operation?
The applicant's business plan calls for the
facility to be open seven (7) days per week. �
Exact hours of operation-(s) are yet to be
determined.
. 5) How many persons will be employed?
According to the applicant, five (5) full time
employees.
6) Will their be special activities for children? '
The applicant indicates that the program remains
to be established.
3. Compatibilitv
The proposed development is surrounded by a mixture of
commercial developments, public facilities, and residential
uses. The community will benefit with the addition of a
entertainment center. However, the neighborhood expressed
concerns regarding increase traffic, noise, and parking
congestion along Ernestine Avenue and other nearby
neighborhood street. With respect to noise, Ordinance No.
1300 prohibits loud and unruly assemblage and is in effect.
In addition, the City recently sent a notice to all
residents regarding loud music and loud parties under
penalty of a fine. Neighborhood security is also an issue
raised by the neighborhood. These issues must be mitigated
by the applicant and through conditions of approval by the
, City. Ultimately the Conditional Use Permit can be revoked
if the applicant fails to comply with the conditions of
approval.
The proposal for a center is commensurate with redevelopment
of the area. With the exception of the restaur�nt, which
� has been in operation since 1991, the building has been
I vacant for approximately six years, and was used briefly as
a swap meet facility in 1987.
I
I Because of major concerns expressed by the neighbors and
I members of the Redevelopment Agency, Staff has been directed
i to review the proposed use, to identify and evaluate
� possible alternatives use, and to work with the neighbors
and the lessee to come up with a revised development
proposal that would minimize possible local impact.
�;
h\planning\staffrpt\h:cup96-OS
I
i
� � 4 ._
�� ,
.;
4. Compliance with Develoqment Standards ��
�
. The proposal conforms to the development standards required
by the Zoning Ordinance with respect to setbacks lot
coverage and building heights.
- 5. Conditions of Approval
The improvements as proposed, subject to the conditions
recommended by the Community Development Department, will �
not have a negative effect ori the values of the surrounding -
properties or interfere with or endanger the public health, ;
safety or welfare.
6. Benefits to Communitv I
The proposal will provide commercial use of the property �
and support adjacent commercial uses. However, the proposal i
has the,possibility of-severe adverse impact on neighboring
residential areas. Proposed uses may need to be modified in �,
order to minimize those impacts. I
7. Environmental Assessment 1 I
The Community Development Department has determined that the j
project as_proposed would not have a significant effect on �
the environment. Upon completion of a major review and �I
evaluation of alternatives, and possible submittal of
revised proposals, a final environmental evaluation will be
conducted and a Negative Declaration will be prepared and
filed in the Community Development Department office and in
the office of the City Clerk.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff respectfully requests that after consideration the Planning
' Commission continue this item to enable staff to work with the
project proponent and neighbors to'look at alternative uses and
to prepare an acceptable development plan. _..�
{ Attachments:
i
� 1. Location Map
, 2. Plot Plan
V
i
1
I
,
�I.
i ..
r
i
,'
i
i .
�
1
i
5
1
�
_ _ . _- - — —= , l , �: � �,< « �,�s� � - —__ E '� •�
� 1 ` I - i s T — � n o� - ro�o, ' f, '
� r \ a � �w <.. I,• I �� i� N
\� 1�Yy6.=:°v lo` �c�v �': L� �w� u`-t I �I I--_' '__ .
' s � I��- � =1 l '
�_.t( o„� _ I�,� ss �,.�o,�. � dt1
D �3nN3nr �, ' y� j
tii!r�000n� 8 � �
/ � � :�zv / • � oc * cc � ca ~ � i + yi�
� t / � � S�e� �xit , w�,�A����'Sfai.F: � , � : �.
. ll Z b6� �� y
a o
. � o rv iu C o ro . vai ° . . I
FdPU �.fcE�l n �t€n iar••
. 3 l9 00 � Si SO/ r e �I
y ,�, %9£,; `^ �c.�„ ��,r,: oz, "' � �-- ;I
0
' � 59 - 6L . 9p ^pi �1 N 5 O I
�fFrg/� n `pJ`£i: 'SG<'�/ t(„�!e�� i w1iJ 0 � +
. �a�m/ �.� '1� . I
O l� 9� O! c b [Y e' � .. . I
S � ce i, h£ „ ° � /� �'„ �
w
♦ � �� ar �� � ! /
o � « " aa �. roi � � (� t . \
. SfY'ii "a�ttrU • `^a : 9s£�� _ . � �
o °a. r �,a, uav . � �
. 0 �ne ± y� � y 60 c . /O/ :�� .
�O r �;� ��� s��� o Cbt/: � ._ . , .� � ��
� ,yC si ' a9y � . �� : pa oai SGbJf �� ; I
/P � ph£��
� � �t°6 � � 5 i� � � cr � � � os a . O '. � :
� o• ;s a etF£// . :
,�. ,. , orn o m �., ,i '� .
♦ !� (� q Q 1` 0 � 7
�/ot i / q� // i�e Y v .�C f'Q/ u L fZ/ w / 1 C! ZZ/ /Z/ 07/ 6// 0// \ � I
�/ /��. b F . � s e i
o , 'e 4 L "s / 4 � 7i�%/ � ' ��
� o . � xsri ' or as69 �.J a - � � . � :
� `' tl
/�C� ao� // I[ OG OL' Cl 7
e�A� 37 J
1
°6 'r� `� 3 0o ei/ . �
� � p �' 9 s � a i u �u � a vu an
� O° �ay:. ow �ofz.
. T` n , � : / � ,} M m /i/ °� �g ox. �
ui I
m . . / `
�� � ;� s '�'.°rn:�xi �I I� m 1 t i.
�
. � `� � 5` � s � 1(6 .
� . � a �' - . . � va/ol Ib n� � .
� � r� �, �7 '� �9 1. ` ' ' cr ! ao ari c ea�ar . � .
�� �� G.' ' / c� �y; a � a�" '(6 ``b c� I ' � s' t y • �'' r = A . sri � !
� r � x ----� ��
I ��� °4 `? �`' � I J t� ,� � �s oo e �� ':'rzi ��
T � /'r `� �[[z!a vtI �<z avL /PZ 29I mz vSP= 9VZ _� � I
U �
� Z � y `� I 'iz � G: � v os e� a to on � � � ,
� �
O : � ' �2 � .. J 'F °' �°°s � � ss , A . S iv� rii " . }
� ', 4 �° S r �['iii ac ' ;
� ; ° � F � / r '�4f�is0 4 �'' � � � o is . 2 • sv rii ( � K� ' �
r% `` fRt°or! I/ o sa � ,fL a ts ` ot , p�� � ni• 2• ori� b� ,
:_ << � �, '� °
c_..:.; �Ct�i� >: i� �Q kc r , . � . 1
-• C_ '- '. 4 0 l
L° / it / / Y z � n �
" e oI jp a e,Y/ /: i/ �. �
4
_ __ _ '. �.
. ....._ .]-�- .. ...- __
. � _ �'e\^ :4' . _ � tC: . . ' � 1 .. . ' .` � �%F
__ . . , . ... : e....�....;-�.P'
. . - :� �%: - - - ' - - -- ..,_�. . _ _ F-.-: . .:
. . . - - - " :f`. ...� r.c_- _-�z<--- - .-e�',r
, . . � -' . . . . . . '�`'-��''' ' v"-�- - . :- ='� :°," �ra� ..
_ �.,.
- - — — -- - - ;_ _�__ _
e' � 0 � O � Q� q � e � � �� � �. ' u.
. � ' � �m lu,��nr
. ` � ' rnw�{ � ' ... ....,... .
r" FS �r4 I (T:Y'�M.
� �0 " �' � � '. �/" 0 " Fl � � � � ........... ',.«..AO�.;.. '
. 4 �. . 0
e r� �, e .� �;� � ' �3 0 �� p � ".�"" .�_�.��..-- :,t;-
� � � ��]
�
vM.f�P�WF � }+ . . - '`'Yl ` o� rm�o�aa�eo '
M/N (4 �ry11. . /� . RI ' •
�� •iA ' � O � � �11 1 e � � O � � e ��\�`� � . - � �'' .
�
• �O
�� i�� ' _ 1 1
.- ����n1� �,, ,.,... _ +— J
0 9 's � �? e_
; /
� o e . e e_: � _
/ m �� o e s o e
� +�:' $ o s � -�. �.:-e- -e ' 1 +�
' / / . : m A ` �._ e...::. _�;.. : _ �-- -"— ° ' �
/� ,/ m � ! " � : :,-w ._ � .: �, n ; I ��
e � --
W / CNIIIA'I flDE�IYViIC FIffFAl�INYENi. �/ �'. O � ' e � - '-� � I � '[' .
¢ � �p� � �- j . �' I I e � � ` .
� � � f. � � � @ E+ @ � : .
' � � q. 0 � .._s� � � _
��. o". / J � e �_ e e —~.. ' � ' � .
N »+cu� :6 �. � �'- '.i �
, � _� �..�,. ,� o � ,. e .:
w — -: -
..,..•,. r o �� . • � F � � �.
A. s��s `.. n. I � Q n� ; y
� I '` �. _ � . .
r ^�' . :C�:
� f�dl
br!.I
� _ _ _ � _
. � I . M . �' . ' . R I\ , .
' IINMKIL �L.� �.
` \ I - .: . � : . � J: . � � .
` ' c(ynpr e�w
�
� � - - - - _ . ` : ; �
—_ 99�0 1.1ARTIIJ LJfN�tZ_�I�.IG pI.Vt7. " �
II ' � .. r _ y I .�..{.L.�_.�: � � j"_' �- � � �
� : ��� ��� `�'� 1 �4`` ;`�, � e �
,_ � ' , _�� � , ,�
� PL�T�PLAN '. � i �� ��; ,
; � ���-����
� � � � TR GT
., ; . ��__--- ----- -----�._ _C__-
__ __ ___
- ----
-- -- - ---- -- - __ ___ -- - --__-- ; "°` . �.:
�
� • MANA'S CAPE :
' � ' • ftESTAURANT.
' - � • AND CHAVA'8 PLACE
�
. ' oe.a
� � Ll1T�'�LH KINO
•
� . � � LINWOOO. OA
.� 1
• pOIICY
� •
. - � . . . � (�10) 669-3028
. . � . °.w`" 1 .
_ •
- •
•
�
- • , '
•
� ' r EAIINY_� I ' •
.
� � �� �
' M�I �_ I .. � •
� . •
�
:
•
•
•
•
� •
•
. . YIh11�lUAfOiE LEM1Et ' . • .x..
•
a �
CxiriK nxo �imc cxrEnuntn , . . — •
. o.� o.,a�
' . —L •
.
. 1
.
. �
� :r,. � .r•« _ ..... „ ,. . . � ' o , ,
.
• �
...v.. ' �..��../ (- ._ "' •
�1.rni. r..n.. . � . . �: u . Q ,
.._. � . . .—�c �� �
----- A . o
V= _.._.� •
� ' ,�(� o�,. o i u o�o S, �f ^+�,�„r _ �� I
� ' � � - � �"Vi iov0 �n i�o o . o � Cl
_- � ,jj ! � j
KIfGN41J ( f!^�•u •.� •' � . �• .. yui . •,R• � � II1L•:ll
. . �— ; �W t�d�: ' . . � • �
. JL ,.L�E . •
ywa�A ��IR '� : iMU •
•
; � : Icon
, � . LOYYii .•
•
UHY �
LJNOM�n .....- � � _ � � - .��;'A�; . Architects inc.
I uue • e
� M>Wf��� e 4E�n�ry� �
� �V O �YYV DNy�
. . O /u�wu.u��.q . . . •
� IMYl1Yw�Y�l4iwF�.
, • L . . • AI���tf�.�tl w�� ,
�� . . � �� � hI�MN�M1 �
I �_ I , ' � . ~1' C
�' i�
•
•
•
Iqd1� •
►=�' . _'_ � , , : ` _ .
!sr.` �, a—�-�F y 1 r� (/�_
. . P 1 U� i�1 �.'��� G t r 9� E ��Y Y o ��'
t
';, . ' _ . ."l Y �� t
� � �` � i.. r, �
DATE: July 09, 1996 ��""° E ��'
T0: PLANNING COMMISSION /�
. FROM: Gary Chicots, Director /;,/
Community Development Department4
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION FROM FENCE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS
FOR HOUSE AT 4367 ABBOTT (R-1 RESIDENTIAL ZONE)
REOUEST: -
Ms. Maria Montes has requested an exemption from Zoning Ordinance
provision in order to construct a fence (4 ft. high) in the front
yard at 4367 Abbott Road (R-1 Single Family Residential Zone).
Bac�round : _..___
On June 23, 1996, Code Enforcement gave a stop work order to the
property owner at 4367 Abbott Road for constructing a fence in the
' front yard without permits or proper approvals. The fence is
approximately 4 feet high and appears to be made of square steel
tube. The fence is over 3/4 installed.
The property is located on the north side of Abbott, the middle
house in a block of five homes. None-of the other four houses have
front yard fences, although there are existing side yard fences on
either side of the subject property.
Discussion:
The information submitted by the property owners to justify waiving
the restrictions are:
1. safety o£ children
2. cars making turns in driveway
3. avoid accidents
4. no trespassers -
5. privacy
The Zoning Ordinance provides that the restrictions may be waived
in special situations where significant trespass can be shown. The
Ordinance language is:
, !'Upon application to the Director of Community Development, a
fence, not to exceed 3 ft. if solid and 4 feet if wrought iron, may
be approved in the front yard setback area for the corner portion
of a corner lot adjacent to a major arterial street or in other
situations where it can be demonstrated that a fence is necessary
to prevent significant trespass."
._ The information -submitted by the property owner does not
demonstrate significant trespass. An inspection of the property
does not show any unusual circumstances on this lot that would make
it different from the lots on either side or all up and down Abbott
Road. There is no physical reason why there should be more cars
turning in this driveway than on any nearby lots. In fact this 1ot
is only 2 lots away from a side street, which would be a more
logical place to expect cars to turn around.
Recommendation:
Staff respectfully requests that, after review, the Commission
reject this request.
Attachments:
l. Applicant's Letter
2.,Graphic
� pcfence5.rpt
� _Ufl �� '96 0���71Pf9 UNISOURCE P.li1
't: — ^ n
� � (� f�;, :� I � 11 n rl
("i l� ��f �� J �/ � � :
E � _ , `I
lime 25, 1996 i � �
_ �
Mr. Gary D. Chicou CI r�� Q� LYPJ'�VO�JD
Communih� DevelopmentDirector Cv��'�i�1�'.. ���J. �EPT.
__ 11330 Bi�llis Road --------
Lynu•ood CA. 90261 -
Dzaz Mr. Chicots
On June :3,199f wtle my h�,band Mr. Montes was wo�fang on putting up an iroi� fuicz d�at is
4 feet high azoimd tlie ftont yazd of our property locaiul at 4367 Abbott Rd. in the ciry of Lynwood,
a person from the City of Lynwood azrived at our propexty and gavn us a dcket for uot l�avu� a pernrit.
Hc maiuoned lliat in arder to fuash up ota work we will to have to submit for e permit. The
reason whp I do not have e pernut is because I was not awaro of the niles and regiilarions tbat thc
City of Lqnw ood requires.
lu a receut wmex�arion with Emilio M. Mucga ( D'uector of Public Works) tie mairioned to me U�at I
should wiite a letter to you caplain;ng my situativn. I thougkit it woWd be bcst to give you a quick
ovesview of the reasons why 1 have decided to builda f�ce azaund my fmnt yard tliat covers
20 Ccei long b,y 50 feet wide. � �
Rea.son for installing Caicc:
• Safory of my cluldren
• Cus making turn on drive�vay
. Avoid accidents
• Nb Vespassers
• Yrivac}�
We would likc to subuut a request for a pernut to allow us to furish installii� the fence around ow
qud. In tum n e�rould like [o Lave the'ticket reniovcd from our records.
Sincercly,
Ivlaria Montes
1367 Abbott Road
Lynwood CH. 90262 � �-- �
(213) 967-b620
�
�
�'
;
;
� � ' � � ',
- --� ',
�
�
�
- I
;
I
- �
I
� _
I
�
�� --
1
'�
. 436 7
,
, _ �
!
;
,
`
,,
; AE3BOTT RD.
; -
,; �
,
�
� ,�� ��� D� i i�.i�li r�o.._...�
^F n.
r ,1. „
DATE: July 18, 1996 vt"�v:. �i�. `�--
T0: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: Gary Chicots, Director
" Community Development Department
BY: Robert Diplock, Planning Managex'•.
SUBJECT: Ability to Require Conditional Use Permit for Auto Repair
Facility at 3800 Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard
At the last Commission meeting, Commissioner Lee suggested that the
staff should require a Conditional Use Permit for the auto repair
facility at the corner of Bullis and MLK (former Mobil station).
Staff's reaction was that staff or the Commission did not have that
authority to require a CUP after the City Manager allowed the
business license to be renewed as a continuation of a previously
approved use. Only new uses can be required to secure a CUP.
� The Zoning Ordinance says:
��NO automotive uses shall be established, expanded or
relocated within the City without securing a Conditional Use Permit
and complying with the development standards specified in this
section and with all other applicable requirements and
. regulations."
The auto repair use was not establishing, expanding or relocating.
The City Attorney agreed with this conclusion, but when we told him
that the original business license was issued in error, without
securing a CUP, he pointed out that State law says that the
community is not bound by approvals issued in error. He suggested
that we might consider requiring a CUP on the grounds that the
I original license was issued improperly. We have direct evidence
from the business licenses that there was a change of use - in fact
our business license log even notes "change of use".
I
� However, Mr. Rudell pointed out that, if this went to court or to
I the City Council, the requested might overrule based on the fact
that the lessee had operated and made investments in the property
� in reliance on the original approval. In addition, the City has
� provided grants and loans to the property owner to fix up the
i restaurant and the garage - which would indicate that the City
i� believed that the use was legally established.
� Mr. Rudell suggested that the City might consider. waiving the
� processing fee to make a demand for a CUP a bit easier on the
applicant. '
' j Recommendation:
i
Staff respectfully requests that, after discussion, the Commission
! direct staff to take whatever additional action that the Commission
deems necessary.
i
Planning\cupauto.mlk
�
t
i
�
"� li�`_ �I -
�� : ,����iti�A fT� ti� ��Uo
� ._— , ,
- � ft �� i_ �tI ('F- �..
�; e �.; :_ . J.
DATE: July 18, I996
" TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: Gary Chicots, Director
Community Development DepartmentC��
BY: Robert Diplock, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Draft of Letter to Council Re: Approval of Auto Repair ,
Facility at 3800 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.'.
As the Commission directed, we have revised the draft of Commission
letter to the City Council to include the language of. the first �
draft. We also have edited out a couple of repetitive ordinance
references in order to simplify the presentation.
Recommendation:
'
Review and discuss the revised draft and direct staff to take
whatever action is determined by the Commission. ;
. i
_ I
{
I
'
ccautobs.pc �
�
�
�
I
_ " �
_ (
�
�
i
��
;; -
.�
July 16, 1996
HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL --
• City Hall
11330 Bullis Road
Lynwood, CA. 90262
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF BUSINESS LICENSE FOR ZABIETTA'S AUTO REPAIR
3800 Martin Luther KinQ Jr. Boulevard (C-2 LiQht '
Commercial Zone) -
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
The Planning Commission wishes to express concern over actions
taken to approve a business license for an auto repair facility at
3800 Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, immediately north of City
Hall at the intersection of Bullis Road. On two occasions the City
Council has imposed a moratorium on automotive uses and expressed
concern about the over concentration of automotive repair
facilities in the City. At the Council's last meeting, the
existing moratorium was extended for another year because of the
same concerns. The Commission questions why this automotive repair.
business was approved without requiring a Conditional Use Permit
and special review by the City Council to determine if the project
should be exempt from the moratorium on automotive uses.
Backaround
In 1994, a business license was issued for a Mobil Gas Station and
Snack Bar on this site. The business license was renewed as a
Mobil Station and snack bar on 2/09/95. On 4/04/95, the owner
requested a revised business license to specify use as "General
Auto Mechanic and Snack Bar°. At the time of this request for an
auto repair facility, staff should have required an application for
a conditional use permit, since it was a change of use.
On 10/02/95, staff received a letter from a representative of the
owner saying that the auto repair facility at this location had
been closed as of July 23, 1995 and asked for any refunds. A letter
was sent saying that no refunds could be made.
A week or so before 3/30/96, the current lessee came to the
Planning Department to ask about reopening the auto repair
business. Staff told the applicant that, since the business had
been closed for over 90 days, this was considered a new use, that
auto repazr was no longer a permitted use in the C-2 zone and that
there currently was a moratorium on new automotive uses.
The applicant appealed that determination to the City Manager. The
Manager's determination was that, since the 1995 business license ;
was valid until 1/O1%96, the business had not legally been �
inoperative for 90 days and therefore the application could be �
considered an extension of the existing business license. In part �
this determination was made to retain economic activity in this �I
location in conjunction with redevelopment of tYie adjacent ;
restaurant and to continue a"business friendly" environment.
i
The.Business License representative was directed to issue the �
business license as a renewal of the previous license. If this had
been treated as a new application, the automotive use could not �
have been approved.
I
Code Enforcement Actions ��
'
On 5/22/96 a Notice of Violation was sent to the current operator - �
for improper signage, sale of used cars, and trailer on rear of '
property with full electrical connections. i
I
' �
i
I
I I
r'
On 5/23/96 a Notice of Violation was sent to current operator for
improper business-license (operator not the same as name on current
business license).
On 6/02/96.a notice of non compliance was sent (for signage and
used car sales).
Conclusion
Although the Planning Commission understands the potential economic
development and business friendly environment that actions like
this create, such administrative decisions should be tempered with
the understanding that a civic standard also must be maintained to
enforce ordinances and regulations as fairly and equitably as
possible.
The Planning Commission believes that making an exception for this
business was contrary to the Council's expressed concerns--and
previous actions and that further administrative exceptions of this
type should not be made while an automotive moratorium is in
effect. All proposed new automotive uses should be required to go
through Council review prior to processing and Planning Commission
action.
Yours truly,
Carlton McMiller, Chairperson
- f:\p�anning\ccautobs.pc .