HomeMy Public PortalAbout01-10-95 PLANNING COMMISSION \
e�
AGENDA
LYNWOOD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION �
REGULAR MEETING - 7:30 P.M. R EIV E D
CI OF LYNWOOU
City Hall Council Chambers CITY CLERKS OF,'-ICE
11330 Bullis Road, Lynwood, CA
J Fl i I �' ;� . ...
AM PY .
' January io 1995 7i8i9il0illi12i1�2i3i4i$i6
Carlton McMiller � ��� �
Chairperson • �C�
Errick Lee Donald Dove
Vice Chairman Commissioner
Eloise Evans Frankie Murphy � ��
Commissioner Commissioner
Jamal Muhsin John Haynes
Commissioner Commissioner
, I
C O M M I S S I N C O?? N S E L:
Michele Beal.Bagneris
Interim Deputy City Attorney
� STAFF:
Gary Chicots, Director Robert Diplock
Community Development Department Planning Manager
Art Barfield Louis Omoruyi
Associate Planner Associate Planner
Louis E. Morales, Jr. Paul Nguyen
Associate Planner Civil Engineer Assoc.
�
�
I
I
i
i
i
�
I
�
I
t:\wpfites\jan95 '
�
1 I
i
�,r
4t
January 10, 1995
OPENING CEREMONIES �
1. Call meeting to order. '
2: Flag salute.
3. Roll call of Commissioners.
4. Certification of Agenda Posting.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
l. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 83049R
Applicant: City of Lynwood
PROPOSAL:
. Staff is requesting that the Planning Commission consider
revoking Conditional Use Permit No. 83049R that allows the .
operation of an automotive repair shop at 2971 E. Imperial
Highway, in the C-3 (Heavy Commercial) zone. On October 11,
: 1994, the Commission continued their review of the CUP to its
January 10, 1995 with the following instructions: 1) the
Applicant must comply with all Conditions of Approval by the
January 10, 1995 meeting and 2) Staff will review and report
on whether the applicant has complied with the required
conditions.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff respectfully recommends that, after public testimony and
consideration by the Commission, the Planning Commission
revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 83049R.
NEW PUBLIC HEARING:
2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. CUP 154
Applicant:, American Recycling Technologies
PROPOSAL:
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use
Permit to establish a modern facility for thermal and
biological treatment of petroleum-contaminated, non-hazardous
soil at 10650 Alameda Street (Bay 10, 11, and Press Bay of
Earle M. Jorgensen Company Facility), in the M(Manufacturing)
zone.
A11 petroleum-contaminated, non-hazardous soil will be
processed and stored inside the buildings (Bay 10, 11, and
Press Bay). The building areas will have 6" thick, sealed
concrete surfaces, plus two layers of Permalon X-210 liner,
engineered and placed to control any downward migration of
' contamination to groundwater.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff respectfully request that, after consideration, the
Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution No. 2534:
l. Finding that the Conditional Use Permit Case No. 154,
; could not have a significant effect on the environment,
I and certifying the Negative Dec�aration as adequate.
2
� i
r�
2. Approving Conditional Use Permit No. 154, subject to the
stated conditions and requirements.
3.. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE N0. CUP 156
Applicant: UNOCAL Corp.
PROPOSAL:
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use
Permit to sell beer and wine for off-site consumption in an
existing gas station proposed to be converted to a convenience
store (Foodmart) at 1100o Imperial Highway in the C-3 (Heavy
Commercial) zone. The applicant's agent has requested that
this item be continued to a date to be determined in order to
resolve some design issues still remaining regarding this
site.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff respectfully requests that the Commission, after
consideration, comply with the request of the applicant's
agent to continue this item to a future date to be determined
by Staff and the applicant.
4. VARIANCE CASE NO. VAR 34 '
Applicant: Manuel Simental '
PROPOSAL:
The applicant is requesting a Variance from provisions of the
Zoning Ordinance in order to reduce the required parking for
a proposed restaurant from 47 parking spaces to 18 parking
spaces at 10320 Long Beach Boulevard, in the C-3 (Heavy
Commercial) zone.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff respectfully requests that, after consideration, the
Planning Commission approve the Variance request:
1. Certifying that the project is categorically exempt from
the provisions of the State CEQA Guidelines.
2. Finding that the strict or literal interpretation and
enforcement of the specific regulation would deprive the
applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other
properties in the same zone. •
3. Determirring that the required findings for the granting of
the Variance have been made.
4. Approving Variance Application Permit No. 34, subject to
' the stated conditions and requirements.
5. APPEAL OF SITE PLAN REVIEW CASE NO. 119
Appellant: Bruce Yingline
PROPOSAL:
The appellant is appealing the actions of the Site Plan
Review Committee reqarding Site Plan Review Case No. 119 (SPR
119). The proposal under SPR 119 calls for allowing the
operation of a concrete and green waste recycling center at
11655 Louise Street in the M(Manufacturing) zone.
3
M r DATE: January 10, 1995 I
( I n n �:, �`- �` n � - ; r ��f� � irs�
T0: PLANNING COMMISSION :: �...; .� �,'i'� : i .-�v' �U, �.eaem�'�"�'"'"
FROM: Gary D. Chicots, Director t �, r �.'�'- �1��
Community Development DeparCfien� `
BY: Robert Diplock, Planning Manager �
BY: Art Barfield, Planning Associate
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Case No. 83049 R
Applicant: City of Lynwood
Proposal•
Staff is requesting that the Planning Commission consider
revoking Conditional Use Permit No. 83049R that allows the
operation of an automotive repair shop at 2971 E. Imperial
Highway, in the C-3 (Heavy Commercial) Zone. On October 11, 1994,
the Commission continued their review of the CUP to its January
10, 1995 with the following instructions: 1) the Applicant must
comply with all Conditions of Approval by the January, 1995
meetinq and 2) Staff will review and report on whether the
Applicant has complied with the required conditions.
Facts: �
I
1. Source of Authoritv i
Section 25-25.12 of the Zoning Cdde allows the Planning I
Commission to hold a public hearing in order to reconsider, �
suspense or revoke an approved Conditional Use Permit. �
2. Backaround I
On September 17, 1993, a business licence investigation was I
initiated for the subject property to determine if business j
� license requirements and other City Code requirements were i
, being complied with by the property owner.
After a number of attempts to get the applicant to comply �
with all City requirements, staff referred the case to the ;
Planning Commission for review and possible revocation of I
the CUP 83049R. The Planning Commission heard the case on
the July 12, 1194 and continued the hearing to it's August �
meeting and then it's September meeting because it was �
determined that the owner was making serious effects to
comply with all requirements At it's meeting on October 11, i
1994, the Planning Commission determined that most of the i
conditions had been complied with and directed staff that ,
the case be returned to them at their January 11, 1995 �
meeting for final action. • i
3. Property Location �
i
The property is located on the north side of E. Imperial �
Highway, at 2971 E. Imperial Highway in the C-3 (Heavy i
Commercial) Zone.
4. Propertv Size I
The subject property is a rectangular shaped lot (
approximately 8,750 sq.ft. in size. •
i
�
�
f:�staffrpt\83049R i
%
i
i
i
1 •
I
I
i
i
5. Existing Land Use
�4 ,
The subject site is flat. The surrounding uses are as
follows:
North - Residential South - Manufacturing
East - Commercial West - Commercial
6. Land Use Description
General Plan: Zonina:
North - Residential Single Family Residential (R-1)
South - Industrial Manufacturing (M)
East - Commercial Heavy Commercial (C-3)
West - Commercial Heavy Commercial (C-3)
7. Proiect Characteristics:
The subject property contains an existing 1,118 sq. ft. one
(1) story building containing an auto glass shop and office, I
existing 2,312 sq.ft. and 377 sq. ft. structures housing I
auto and truck repair and parts storage and approximately
three (3) parking spaces in front of the auto glass shop, I
and eight (8) spaces within the truck repair area.
8. Zoninq Enforcement Historv I
I
Notice of Violation filed on 1/20/89 for abandoned and �
broken equipment, storaqe of old auto parts, no business i
license.
I
9. Public Response �
I
None of record. �
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION: I
I
1. Consistencv with General Plan �
I
The proposed land use is consistent with the existing Zoning �
Classification (C-3) and Gener'al Plan designation of �
Commercial. Therefore, maintaining Conditional Use Permit �
No. 83049, if conditions are met, will be in conformance �
with and not adversely affect the General Plan. i
2. Site Suitabilitv I
The property is adequate in size and shape to accommodate i
the proposed development relative to structures, parking, �i
walls, fences, landscaping, driveways and other development
features required by the Zoning Ordinance. �
3. Compatibilitv �
The proposed development is surrounded by commercial and
industrial uses. Residential uses exist to.the area north �
of the subject site and is separated by an ally and a block ;
wall. Therefore, the project will be compatible with the
surrounding land uses if conditions of CUP 83049 are met. �
i
4. Comoliance with Development Standards �
The proposal meets the development .standards required by the
Zoning Ordinance with respect to setbacks, lot coverage, �
building height and density. However, the existing project �
does not meet the requirements for landscaping and for �
conducting all automotive repair inside a building. �
2 I f l
I
I
contained in the Conditional Use Permit.
. 5. Conditions of Approval
The Conditions of Approval under CUP 83049 have still not
been fully met. As of staff inspection on January 6; 1995,
Condition B(Parking spaces with concrete wheel stops),
Condition C(All automotive repair conducted inside
buildinq), Condition F(Screening of vehicles awaiting
repair and Condition G(5% irrigated landscaping) have not
been complied with.
Staff inspection showed that automobiles were being worked
on in the parking apron in front of the former auto glass
shop, the parking area was full of cars and trucks under
repair or awaiting repair, the metal gate was open so all
automotive repair was visible from the street, there was a
large semi-trailer truck parked i'n the parking aisle, and
auto truck engines and transmissions were being stored along
the wall on the east property line.
In addition, the owner/lessee has not submitted a landscape I
plan or revised plot plan as requested by staff on October
17, 1994. �
6. Benefits to Communitv
The existing development, as operated, does not assist in
upgrading the surrounding area, and does not support the i
purpose and intent of the General Plan. i
7. Environmental Assessment ,
Actions by a regulatory agency to revoke a permit are �
categorically exempt under Section 15321 of the State CEQA �
Guidelines. Therefore, a Notice of Exemption has been I
prepared and filed with the County Clerk.
8. Conclusion I
As described above, the owner\lessee is still not in ;
compliance with all Conditions of the Use Permit as �
contained in Resolution No. 943. The site is currently in �
worse condition than it was when the Commission last �
reviewed this case in October, 1994. �
t
RECOMMENDATION: �
Staff respectfully recommends that, after public testimony and I
consideration by the Commission, the Planning Commission revoke I
Conditional Use Permit No. 83049. �
�
1
I
I
I
(
ATTACHMENTS: !
I
1. Location Map ' i
2. Site Plan
3. Resolution No. 943 i
4. Letter of Agreement'By Owner I
I
f:�staftrpt\f:83049r , I
I
3 I
�
I
�
I
i
; >,::.::;
,
!
- 'r>;:;
� '
i
�
i
,
�
�
i
�
.cn�.,i:atr�r
I
�
i
I
' ..
,
� ; L
I N�
�
i
( �
(
I
I
�
i
1
��
....�.. _
� ' - ,./ �
� � �
r •�.�r
..,
r „
y (� C , e
" • �
l� � ._ . ..
a o,t7a
�
8 7N/1J3diY/
'. ---_- s
d�dUV NOIl`d�O�
:e
�
�� s � �� � I �
=t � . s' - ---- � lo'-0" ^-----..--
C E� G�.O�� M�4N ¢Or�L G3LGK. WA4L '�" 6�-G N`GM cV>��J LirJl� ON T °P.f'�IOLk �FMt�
� pr 6W Y�Ywa � iil�r.'Y
.' /' j . / . ; ' � ' _ r — V
/ ' / ;
�OeK �OP E <L45Hp PJLO�L�. �� � :��
, swn�v HE ��� �
� � �or.F � � / � � �pg1Yl0 STORY �SE
� � � /�. /(OBE iEP�
r —r— I / � �.�•. Aa07 80. Ff.
/ I /. /, � .� /; . I �, /,.
� / i i�; . I / '
-� i�T � � / � / � \
� /� ' � � �� � / I / � � � I
i
. /� / / � � /�' . / EXISTINO STORAGE .
`� I j' / i I I / n=�2oo so. Fr. I
aY � / , �i
x
a �I � � � SF�iOP / � j' � I
�`� � �� � � 1 I
°a I / : � I
°° I �� � �'� _ p—_— � �
% i � I
�� � � toas aE � ' � � • � !
9 3 � AN61 FT. % �/ j�l O i
d0 i •'' � � � ,
) °ti I �� l' � ! � — �- I
�� � � / j� // / � '
1� } j / /V // ,I O O — 'I
�/ oi
; I � / / � Y % I 8 � �
-- � I / / / � / I � i� '/'� (I I I � � �
J / �� / U O �
� m O � � .
i � aa�+ o � � � / I
� Z �,�.� ,; g , ,a ,'.
_ s - --,., -- ���
� �� I � ' ( G� � — E%ISTN6 MVED MFA � �
� i �J
�4 E%ISTING 1- ILDI � I I
:9 A=i,nO�, - �
AdJT� �S _— � G �q )
� . ��� . EXISTING PAitKING SPACES (c{' o' 20'-0') �
� I — �• ' .._... _._.__.._,
� I
`y � � � / u � �
3
�Y" _. __ 2 O� �' 'O --* ' � � I
P f' _ I
4�R vuu� GA�=. qE UGPi1 �
� � �— , � � � � 0 . � I
� � � � �
_ �es� vnovostn wnsc,w�_ I d� -.. . F � � �
i � �t�-'� � � � �
� , � �._ � s
_ � �asra ooNC. sue oav�wr — ., � . � , .� - I
J ,` \ '
i r � � � � � I
p ! .. � NAnI�iGAVCGO .� 1
!. " , l' pARrYq bvAK l . �- (
�i 'r' � ' Y
r
' .� 0 � r . i de�� (EJCi�TE
�
s ' a a�
' __m4...n..'��"r� ��..
�.'_ (E)1REE9 '._".. ..
_'— ' __ . "_' � � _"____
.. _ _ . . _ . .. . . . �. � _ "'.-
. ... .. _ E%I TNOS RE�ODNSTRUCTED 81DEIM�LII ! ,-- '—_�__
�-�- ._ :._ .. ...� � . .
'___' __ __ . �
_' .' _ . .. .._ I
-� ...... _ ,. ._ / . _. ._..\ I
R (C)4'Cpn�uED LU�B .. . . ... ;
A'---� _._�----
\�.. . ..._.._ . E%IST'O MtlVEWAY AGVROACH I
�
97� 1 _MPERIAL HWY (a��G�S�LL�ILTEp ----
_ CA 90262
r. _—
f
I
I
�
I
, i ,.� . �
� �'049 �3Q�
! �- .
RESOLUTION NO, 943
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COl�MISSION OF THE
CITY OF LYNWOOD APpROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
TO ALLON THE OPERATION OF AN AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR BU$I-
NE$$ AT 2971 IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, LYNWOOD,
did WHEREA9, the Planaiag Comwisaion of the City oi Lyawood
on.theurequested ConditionaltUaeePermit1a8Sthe�sub�ectbaddreasring
WHEREA3, the Commissioa has careYully considered all
pertiaent testimonq oifered in the case as presented at the public
hearing;
WHEREA9, the Planning Divisioa has determined that the
propo�ed pro,�ect is categorically exempt irom the provisions o! �
the Caliiornia Environmental Quslity Act; I
WHEREA3, a Conditional Uae Permit is required !or tde opera- I
tioa oi aa automotive use on appropriately zoned aad sized properties I
in the.City. '
The Planning Commissioa oi the City oi Lynwood DOES fiEREBY i
RE90LVE as followe:
- Section l. The PlanninQ Commisaioa hereby finda aad con- �
cluiXea as �s;
A. The QrantioQ oi the requeated CpndiLional Use Permit I
wlll not adveriely aifect the compreheasive General �
Plaa as th� sub,�ect property ia deaignated "Commercial"
oa t6e Geaeral Plan Map; j
.H• Th� propoaed conditioaal use is ia accord with the �
developmeat standarda regulating development st4nd- I
ards regulating developmeat ia the C-3 Zone; I
C. The proposed location of the conditional use and the '
conditions uader which it would be maintained will �
not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or �
weliar�, or materially la,jurioua to properties or im- '
provements in the vicinity; !
i
D, The propoaed conditional uae will comply with each of �
the applicsble provisiona o! the Zoning Ordinance as �
stated ia the conditiona listed ia Section 2, �
8ectioa 2. The Planniag Commisaion oi the City o! Lynwood i
horeby approvea a onditional Use Permit to allow the operation I
of an sutomotive repair busiLess a� the above address, stibJect to i
the 2ollowing conditions:
A. The property st�.l? be used Sor an autanotive repair i
busineas, two(2) residences and required parkinQ •
per plot plsa aubmitted, conditions impor�d aad aay ' ;
tutur� modificaLioas tdereto; �
��B. A miaimum o! eigqt (8) oii-street parking spacea � �`�
shall be provided. 3aid parking spaces shall be ���"/
nine (9') feet by eighteen (18') feet in size, shall'���
be plainly striped on the parking lot surYace, and ��' '
shall have a concrete wheelstop placed at the head �- �
of each space; �.j-, i
I
. I
I
�, �
, , � .. • �,� _
� C, A1l sutomotive repair shall be conducted entirely
within the workshop building;
��
p! All automotive repair activities on.the site shall
dailynfined to the hours between 7:00 A,M, aad 9:00 P,6f,
E, The workshop building shall be sulficiently sound-
proofed to prev�t annoyQnce or detriment to surrounding
propertiea;
�/ F, All daniaged vehicles or vehicles awaiting repair shall
be screened from Imperial Highway by a six (8') foot
hig6 masonry wall or ieace covered with an opaque materi-
sl approved by the Community Development Director;
G, Five (S%) parcent oi the total area o1 the site shal�� ���
�approvedVby the�Comwunitynpe�elopmentgDirectora�caping � �
. H, No damaged or wrecked vehicles ahall be stored for pur-
Posea other than repair; �
I. Garbage or trush receptacles shall be stored withln a
�� t4ree (3) sided masonry enclosure six (8') feet ip II
, height. �
I
J. All debris Aad trash shall be removed from the site; I
K. The outside •toraa• ar�a at th� rear oi th� �
ahall be encloaed with a solid wall or uniforml tY '
ed board fence not lesa thaa six (8') ieet in heightp I
L. The woodea portloa oi the 2ence alonQ the rear lot �
liae shsll bs replaced with a aolid msaonry wnll aix I
(8') teet in height; g `�
61, The automotive repair b�taineas ahall be registered ;I
with the Hureau oi Automotive RepAir; ;
N. Al1 parklnQ streas shall be paved witL a hard surface �
aad •lop�d �o aa to be drained oi all auriace water; �
0. The drivearay approech to the aub�ect property ahail
be recoastructed per Citq EngineeriaQ Departmeat stand-
Old�; �
I
p. 3aid drivemaq approacd shall be �aired to the satis-
faction oi the Engineering Department; '
Q. The curb s6a11 be repaired to the satisiaction of the !
' Engineering Department; ,
A. The sidewalk shall be recon�tructed ysr City EaQiaeer- �
inQ Departmont atandarda; �
S. Tqe oil staina on the aidewalk aad ia gutter shall �
be cleaned up,
T, The suD eCt �
merged by recordation Couaty Recorde.r to I
use oi said parcels !or automotive repair; � i
U. All aecesaary licenses and permita ahall bo obtain�d
prior to opsraLioa •t �ub�ect locaLion; , ;
I
i
--_ ,
�
b�"�' _,� �^ �
, .
,� �
V. All Lynwood Municipal Codo and 'Loning Ordinance re-
quirements shall be met;
W, All required bonds for oii-site improvements (water
mains, fire hydrants, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, etc.)
shall be submitted prior to issuance of a 8usineas
License;
X. The Conditional Use Permit shall lapse and become void
if operation according to the preceding conditiona doea
not commence within ninety (90) days irom the date o1
approval;
Y. The drains leading from the roof of the worksho�to
the street shall be unclogged and recoanected;
�
Z. All Fire Department r@quirementa specified in Addendum
A shall be met,
AA. All structurea in reaidenti�l uae ahall,meet the requiremeata ot
the Housing Code.
BB. ?he ilteQal reaidential uae ahall be terminated Lmmediately.
APPROVED AND ADOPT�D Lhis 13th day of 3eptember, 1883, by
members oi the Plaaaing Coamissioa voting aa iollowa; I
AYE3: Co�i��ionu� Dov�� Raynwnd� pryor 6 Robbias �
NOES : Noa� �
i
AB3ENT: Co�is�ion�r� Hodge 6 Kan{u . I
�— (�.�`�'�'�
1r-` I
Dona ve, Chairman �
APPROVED A3 TO CONTSNT: APPROVED AS TO FORY: �
� ��� � � �
• ~ � Y I
n ra ea , o un ty E, ur eager a� aat y i
Development Director Attorney i
i
Statement of Acceptaace
All conditions and provisions of the foregoing Coaditionel Use
Permit and Reaolutioa No. 943 are hereby accepted by the uadersiQned i
applicaat, who expresaly agrees to p.eriorm aad be bouad by eacd con- �
ditioa thereof.
Date ��/— / S - � �� �-��1 (.0 � C�e�l� ' �
Signature '
_L1�!5'_ A . �AL //s1�P/D i
r nt ame �
�
�
�
' �
I
+
— -- — --- �
,�
.
,
_ ,.,._.._ •,
- - __ - - --- - _
,;,.
; , � �--�
`_
---- --_ _ _ _ _ ___ _ --_— --. _ __�
�- v s'- �j
;.
_-- __ _ _. _--- __ ____._�
__ .__ --. _ ..
� N � — �� - .---
_ . .2 �17 / _._...��-!?�lZ l� �- - _- . .. _ ._ _-- --- — .
,;,
,� �l.v w o o D Cti ---
----- ----------. _..._.__..
°; �
- --..
I
f�ercr Sr• _
_ __ _ . . _ _..._ __
11
� Ll� i� � __ 1�'��Ynovt iDur"�S c�v�G� _ -
�' 1 �-u-n '�'' ��--�,.--- ���- ��.� � n A _ �-- -- -- —
���o G�.AS�--- �T �_..__._o�.��h e , ---
J
I �1 9 U
--- --------- ----
- - -- ---- -- __----- ----
--------�-�—�-
-{ � U �_ K y�� _ -- - . _ - --_- _
__ _ - -- ---- ---- --
--- ----- - __ _. ___� _ _
��
�
_
�
_- - _ � __ _ _. ____
r,:
,.
�, !.' �." `! i -, ;� !�' r r ` � n i n
.. DATE: January 10, 1995 C1...:C.i 1 � L�VI { ._....... _ �
- To: PLANNING COMMISSION ,!: ` +'{'� �_�tl��
� C;`,._>�. i��. ����
FROM: Gary D. Chicots, Director
Community Development Department �
BY: Robert Diplock, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Case No. 154
Applicant: AMERICAN RECYCLING TECHNOLOGY INC.
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit
to establish a modern facility for thermal and biological
treatment of petroleum-contaminated, non-ha2ardous soil at 10650
Alameda Street (Bay 10, 11, and Press Bay of Earle M. Jorgensen
�Company Facility), in the M(Manufacturing) zone.
All petroleum-contaminated, non-hazardous soil will be processed
and stored inside the buildings (Bay 10, 11, and Press Bay). The
buildinq areas will have 6" thick, sealed concrete surfaces, plus
two layers of Permalon X-210 liner, enqineered and placed to
control any downward migration of contaminated to groundwater.
FACTS:
1. Source of Authoritv '
Section 25-11.3 and 25-11.2 of the�•Zoning Ordinance require
a Conditional Use Permit for uses in M(Manufacturing) zone
that are not specifically listed as permitted.
2. Propertv Location
The subject property consists of existing warehouse
buildinqs on the northeast corner of Martin Luther King Jr.
Boulevard and Alameda Street, adjacent to Sante Fe Avenue.
3. Prooertv Size
The subject property is approximately 14 acres in size.
However, the proposed project will occupy approximately 2
acres of the site.
4. Existina Land Use
The subject site is occupied by existing warehouses and
branch rail lines. The surrounding land uses are as follows:
North East-Industrial l i
South-Industrial West-Industrial
5. General Plan and Zonina I
General Plan: Zoninq: �
North-Industrial North-M I
South-Industrial South-M
East-Industrial East-M
West-Industrial West-M i
I
I
1 I
I
!
I
I
�
�
�• 6. Pro�ect Characteristics:
. The•applicant proposes to establish a soil reaycling
operation in three vacant buildings at the Jorgensen Steel
Facility at 10650 Alameda Street, Lynwood. The proposed
project would treat contaminated soils containing low level
(non-hazardous) petroleum contaminants through thermal
desorption (heating) and biological methods for return to
the site of origin or to landfills. _
The project will accept only petroleum-contaminated soils
which are considered non-hazardous as defined in Title 22 of
the California Code of Regulations. The Press Bay would be
used for soil load inspection, soil screening, oversized �
debris crushing, and storage of petroleum-contaminated soil.
Bay 10 would house the Thermal Desorption System. The north
wing of Bay ,11 would house the Enhanced Bio-remediation
' Process, and the south wing of Bay 11 would serve as storage
area for treated soil.
Trucks would access the site primarily from the Interstate I
105 Freeway via Wilmington Avenue off-ramp, Imperial
Highway, Alameda Street, and onto the Seminole Avenue
entrance to the facility.
7. Site Plan Review
At its regular meeting on Wednesday, December 28, 1994, the
Site Plan Review Committee evaluated the proposed
development and recommended approval with appropriate
mitigation measures and conditions.
, 8. Zonina Enforcement History
None of Record
I
9. Public Responses
None of record at the time this report was prepared. I
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION: I
1. Consistencv with General Plan and Zoninq
The.proposed land use is consistent with the existing
General Plan designation of Ind'ustrial and the Zoning
classification of Manufacturing. Therefore, granting
Conditional Use Permit No. 154 will be in conformance with
and 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, and other development features
required by the Zoning Ordinance. i
3. Comoatibilitv I
The proposed development is surrounded by mixture of other J
` industrial uses. Therefore, the project will be compatible I
with the surrounding land uses. The project as proposed
would not have a negative effect on the values of the I
. surrounding properties or interfere with or endanger the
public health or welfare. However, mitigation measures are
proposed to eliminate any negative effect on the �
environment.
. .
I
� I
� �
2 �
� �
,
�
I
. 4. Compliance with Development Standards
The proposal meets development st_andards required by the
, Zoning Ordinance with respect to�setbacks, lot coverage,
building height and density.
5. Benefits to Communitv
The proposal would upgrade the use of the property which is
now vacant. The new use likely would provide some local
employment opportunities.
6. Environmental Assessment
The Director of Community Development has found that,
although the proposed project could have a significant '
effect on the environment, ther.e will not be a significant
, effect in this case because the mitigation measures have
been added to the project. A Negative Declaration has been
prepared and filed in the Community Development Department,
in the Office of the City Clerk, and with the County Clerk.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff respectfully requests that, after consideration, the
' Planning Commission adopt the attached Kesolution No. 2534:
l. Finding that the Conditional Use Permit Case No.154,
could not have a significant effect on the
environment, and certifying the NEGATIVE DECLARATION
as adequate.
' 2. Approving Conditional Use Permit No. 154, subject to
the stated conditions and requirements.
ATTACHMENTS:
l. Location Map
2. Site Plan
3. Resolution 2534
' 4. Project operation Plan
5. Negative Declaration
i
�
. i
, I
I
i
I
�
�
', f\:staffrpt\wp154 � I
I
. • �
' I
I
�
I
�
3 j
�
1
. i _ _ �,o �o..��,.. �o�,�
, �.— �,o . z
� �.�.
� - �,_ � _
,
; ._.._ .:. .w
.,. � nn Y � ..a.... F1RE87pNi
. o�
........ �_.... .._... "' � BL
m + ,
�.M�o ini "'"
Y••��� SOUTNEqN
..,�.yo-. ' in �' AV
l05 � �
♦NGEL[B •'•• r .
.�..e ... > H
v.�000 � �p in
....... � ia �� 5 � ; Z� < .
-�-- „� .; d ; � SOUTH GATE �
._.�_._. .o � _,.,._.. � ; a 1
nre.. 91
TN�EEDY
' n
PROJECT SITE ' g � �I
_ � I
I
,„,,, PROJECT ;
--..° SiTE
i
� �
�..,� � � � �
: .�, � �
J i i U
toBTH ST S, CENTUqy B� 1
Z Nr, �N .. * N � wlul'/1 9 KW � ��.
� I
� O
� �
'6 B -�
< �
��' ; WATTS ' W '
� `p �
o � " �'RM1
U m : ' '., '',
�ERIAL I
CENTURY
f w ;
< LYNWOOD �
I
11YTH 8T I
<
WILLOWBR K � i
;
i
. �
FIGURE 1 '
� NO SCALE �
LOCATION MAP �
I
SOURCE: WILLDAN ASSOCIATES Negative Declaration '
City ot Lynwood �
�
(
�
�
i
i
�
.�.� —. : 1 1 .
.NL'C� 1`..-[-1 �
' ;11 ,^• r,' �� 1 1 .
. � •,1 1^ i,1 1 I
. � •.� ;
/ , ' 1 .^ r
SEMINOLE �'� �VEMUE
� �a 1'1 `11 - ' 1, � • � � ! uC i�".NC= . .
� tiJ Z� �� �� �:t:: ( G i
. 1` � ` 1 W '1 �, � r vO ,4 � I <
:� l��'¢ 1 pas5 i�_ S��y :` � i7 16 .=��' .
� ` . � 1 1 ' � � I
� _ � 'i�� / :: .
i� �-Y�� tl �6s5 I
�: . { � �,%� y � 2t i
YR � 0 L�..:;
, = i� ' 14 i
. SZ - i i � : BuY�t: I .
. � g � o` o t ' / i � . : .. �
� Y W � 13 i
R � j ,
� o 1 a � a `?/ 'r , I I i i � . B0.Y... ....::..:i I
Bms 1z' ;r� � , }r ?4 35 ;„6 I 12 u't W
`� f • .
Bar5 B¢fl,qaYB I 94Y9 F
__ : � �, ,� �f �� � - � .
� � <
N
1 ` I I
\ �{, � CEMTURY EOULEV�RD / M�RTIM WTHEN KIM6, JR. EOULEV�RD '
( �� i
'� 1 l ` � � �11C' S � '
t('" 37 ' 2 2 5i ` �
\ 1i �
�� r � ` \
. � � �
c �
1 �4 � "N��� I �`
1 f � �
` 1 �� STAEET —�
i,�
� SITE PLAN
/ ART AND JORGENSEN STEEL FACIUTIES
SOUP.CE: UNNERSAL TECHNOLOGY NETWORK. INC. ' NB(J8hVB OBCl8f8t10/]
Clry of Lynw000'
� RESOLUTION N0. 2534
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LYNWOOD APPROVING CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 154 FOR A SOfLS RECYCLING
OPERATION TO BE CONDUCTED BY AMERICAN
RECYCLING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AT 10650
ALAMEDA STREET, LYNWOOD CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, the Lynwood Planning Commission, pursuant to law,
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 will not have a siqnificant adverse effect on the
environment, and has therefore prepared and filed a Negative
Declaration for the project; and
WHEREAS, a Conditional Use Permit is required for development
of a new industrial use in the M(Manufacturing) zone, where such i�
use is not specifically designated as a permitted use; now I
therefore ,
Section 1. The Planning Commi'ssion hereby finds and i
determines as follows:
A. The site of the proposed use is adequate in size and I
shape to accommodate the structures, parking, walls, i
landscaping, driveways and other development features j
required by the Official Zoning Ordinance. i
� B. The use, as proposed, subject to conditions, will
, not have a negative effect on the values of surrounding I
properties or interfere with or endanger the public, �
health, safety, or welfare.
C. The site will be utilized pursuant to the current zoning i
regulations and site plan submitted and reviewed by the i
Site Plan Review Committee.
i
D. The granting of the Conditional Use Permit will not I
adversely affect the General Plan. I
. E. The proposed development will provide a productive use i
for currently vacant buildings, will produce local
revenue and provide local employment. I
I
Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Lynwood,
based upon the aforementioned findinqs and determinations, hereby
approves Conditional Use Permit, Case No. 154, provided the
following conditions are observed and complied with at all times. �
I
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
General
1. The proposed development shall comply with all applicable
regulations of the Lynwood Municipal Code, the Uniform �
Building Code and the Uniform Fire Code. ,
2. Any proposed subsequent modification of the subject site or i
structures thereon shall be first reported to the Community I
Development Department, Planning Division, for review. '
I
i
1 i
�
i
i
�
I
' 3. 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.
REDEVELOPMENT DIVISION
4. The project design shall provide for access and circulation of
vehicular, pedestrian, and emergency vehicle traffic in a
safe, logical and efficient manner, both to the site (off-
site) and within the site (on-site).
5. The main entrance to the primary building shall provide for
independent access to the physically impaired.
6. The street address shall be displayed in a prominent location
on the street side of the building. All address numbers shall
be easily visible to vehicular and/or pedestrian traffic. The
street address shall be no less than four (4) inches in height
and shall be of a color contrastinq to the background to which
they are attached.
7. on-site lighting shall be installed along all vehicular access
ways and major walkways. Such lighting shall be directed onto
the driveways and walkways within the development and away
from adjacent properties. '
8. The parkinq aisle width shall be twenty-five (25') feet. I
Exits from parking lot shall be clearly posted with stop I
signs.
i
9. All landscaped areas shall be landscaped with a mixture of I
ground cover, shrubs and trees, and may include decorate i
rock, sculpture, and walkways, within the major'parking area. �
1,0. within the main parking area, one (lj tree shall provided for I
each ten (10) parking spaces. The trees shall be of a species I
that provides a broad canopy.
11. All required landscaping materials shall be not less than the �
following sizes:
o Trees - at least fifteen gallon �I
(
o Shrubs - at least five gallon �
o Grounds cover - lawn shall be of sod and shall cover I
the proposed area.
12. No sign shall be erected without a sign permit.
I
13. The Director or his designee shall issue the sign permit upon �
approval by the Planning and Redevelopment Divisions. �
14. Only individual illuminated channel letters shall be �
permitted.
I
I
15. Uses with seventy-five (75') feet o� frontage on a major i
street may have monument identification signs.
16. Billboard signs are not permitted. I
�
PLANNING DIVISION I
i
17. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Post office (Lynwood main i
office) to establish the location of mail boxes serving the �
proposed development. �
I
i
2 �
i
I
• 18. The ARTS facility shall accept only p2troleum-contamipated,
non-hazardous soil as verified by a certified laboratory. �
19. The facility shall not accept either hazardous waste or soil
containing free liquid for processing.
20. If any trucks entering the facility are identified as
containing hazardous waste or free liquid, they shall not be
• permitted to leave the facility until they have complied with
all regulations pertaining to the transport of such materials,
including all documentation and labeling requirements.
21. No truck shall be unloaded until the load passes visual
inspection, a heated copper wire test and an in-house
laboratory analysis of a soil sample from the load.
22. All contaminated soil shall be processed and stored inside the
project building. •
23. The building areas shall have 6" thick, sealed concrete floor
over the top of two layers of Permalon X-210 liner. The floor
and Permalon seal shall be engineered and placed to control
any downward migration of contamination to groundwater.
24. Monitoring piping shall be installed between the double
Permalon X-210 liners to detect any possible contamination
from the ART facility to groundwater.
25. Fume hood(s) shall be installed over soil screening and
crushing operations to collect fugitive volatiles and dust
emission.
26. Stack tests on equipment shall be conducted periodically to
ensure that air quality standards are met.
27. Treated materials shall remain on site irr control bins until
verified clean by a certified laboratory.
28. ART's thermal and bio remediation processes and operations
shall be operated only as permitted by the appropriate
regulatory agencies. �
29. Detailed records shall be kept on site to verify regulatory
compliance and such records shall be•,available to the City for
inspections.
30. The project sponsor shall comply with all permit conditions
established by the California.Water Quality Control Board and
any County_of Los Angeles' National Pollution Discharqe
Elimination System permit.
- 31. The project sponsor shall comply with all permit conditions
- established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District
permit. �
;
32. The project operator shall maintain proper oxygen supply for �
_ the bioloqical process to ensure that objectionable odors are i
not created. �
33. The project operator shall provide a routing map for all I
trucks accessinq the project site showing those routes which
are_appropriate for trucks of the size accessing the site. i
34. The project sponsor shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of �
the City Traffic Engineer and the Community Development �
Department that adequate on-site par.king has been provide for i
project employees. � .
' 35. The project sponsor sha11 provide project employees with I
information regarding access to the public transportation. �
I
3 �
i
�
I
I
I
• 36. The project sponsor shall consult wzth, and obtain approval
. of, the Southern California Gas Company and Southern
California Edison Company, regarding energy consumption on the
, project site and shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
City Planning Department that the project has complied with
any energy conservation requirements or other measure�
required by the service providers.
37. The project sponsor shall include discussion of the air
' ' quality effects of energy consumption at the project site in
the project permit application to the SCAQMD.
38. The project sponsor shall comply with any permits conditions
established by the Environmental 'Protection Agency for the
propos project.
39.� The project operator sha11 maintain the following operating
records on file in the facility office on a daily basis:
' - Soil load test data and acceptance documents.
- Analytical reports from in-house and outside laboratories.
- Number of loads and weigh scale tickets accepted into the
_ facility.
- Identification of any trucks that are rejected at the
facility.
- Tonnage of soil treated daily.
- Inspection performed on all equipment.
- Weekly inspections of the facility with any comments on the
travel area, weigh scales, contaminated soil storage area,
etc.
- Description of maintenance performed on the equipment.
- Visitors to the facility,
- Any emergency or upset conditions at the facility or on
access roads within the City of Lynwood.
, 40,. The project sponsor shall prepare a Quality Assurance/ Quality '
Control plan (QA/QC) to provide a consistent set of rules to
: insure safe and efficient operation within the requirements
set by all regulatory agencies includinq the City of Lynwood,
, City Fire Department, South Coast AQMD, California Regional
Water Quality, California EPA and California OSHA. The plan I
shall identify responsibilities for the management and i
operation of the facility as well as provide guidelines for
the operation of the various components of the ART facility.
The QA/QC plan shall be submitted to the appropriate
regulatory agencies and the City of Lynwood for review and.
' approval prior to the start of project operations.
41. The project sponsor shall prepare a health and safety plan for j
review and approval by the City of Lynwood, City Fire I
Department, Cal-OSHA and other related regulatory agencies,
prior to the start of project opera�ions. A copy of the �
approved health and safety plan shaIl be kept at the
operations area and in the facility office. �
i
42. The ART facility supervisor shall be designated as the j
responsible person for management of the facility health and �
safety plan and sha11 perform weekly safety meetings to
' discuss the ongoing safety program with employees.
43. A11 personnel involved with operations at the ART i
facility shall secure a 40-hour OSHA/Hazmat training '
certificate and be required to take an 8-hour annual refresher
update. Copies of the training certificates shall be kept at
the facility as well as update refresher training documents. � �
' 44. A safety equipment storage room for storage of safety I
equipment including personnel protective clothing shall be �
constructed within the facility. Safety supplies shall be
routinely insnecte� b}� the facility supervisor for adequate i
Y I
I
�
�
' maintenance and naintenance records shall be kept on file at
' the facility office.
��. Ambient air monitoring sha11 be conducted at intervals to be
established in consultation with OSHA to determine the ambient
air quality in the vicinity of the facility and of pe:
involved c�ith the handling of the hydrocarbon-contaminated
soil. Analysis sha11 include such volatiles as total volatile
organic compounds (VOC), benzene and toluene. Air monitoring
records sha11 be kept on file at the facility office.
46. Facility operator shall conduct an on-going medical monitoring
prog'ram with monitoring records kept on file at the facility
office.
z7. Project sponsor shall demonstrate ta the satisfaction of the
. City, or a hazardous materials specialist of the City's
' choosing that ART, or the property owner, has provided
remedition of those existing hazardous materials conditions
occurring on the project site, as identified in the 1990
Dames and Moore Phase I Hazardous Material Assessment.
48. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan drawn by a
licensed landscape architect for approval by the Director of
Community Development prior to any building permit being
issued.
49. The approved amount of landscaping shall be provided,
consistent caith the approved landscape plan.
50. All landscaping shall be permanently maintained. Lawn and
- ground covers are to be trimmed or mowed regularly, with all
planted areas kept free of weeds and debris. All plantings
are to be kept in a healthy and growing condition. An
automatic sprinkler or irrigation system shall be provided and
maintained in working condition.
�1. Where vehicles are to be parked immediately adjacent to a
public or private street or alley,,a decorative masonry wall
a maximum of thirty-six inches in height measured from the
finished surface of the parking area, shall be provided.
There must be adequate landscaping to screen wall from street
view and access.
�2. Prior to the installation or construction of any fence or
masonry wall, the applicant or property owner shall obtain
a permit and submit the following information to the Planning
Division of the Community Development Department:
a. A simple plot plan showing the location of fence or
masonry wall in relation to the property lines, heiqhts,
proposed materials, and openings or gates to provide
access for vehicles and pedestrians.
b. For masonry walls a building permit shall be applied for
upon approval of the plot plan described above. All
masonry walls of any height shall meet the requirements
for masonry construction as defined in Chapter 24 of the
Uniform Building Code. A fee based on the valuation of
the proposed construction shall be paid to the Building
,� Division. • �
, 53. A11 fences or masonry walls shall maintain adequate pedestrian
' access for the purpose of safety and convenience. A thirty-
six (36) inch or three foot clear gate or opening shall be
provided to all enclosures for pedestrian and wheelchair
access. Pedestrian and vehicular access shall be provided.
5
,
' 54. All fences or masonry walls shall be required to be installed
with a finished, aesthetically pleasing side facing out toward
adjacent properties or the public right-of-way to the
satisfaction of the Director of Community Development or
his/her designee.
55. The applicant shall provide a trash enclosure with,gates
consistent with the materials and color of the main
buildinq(s) on the site of the subject property. The trash
enclosure shall be built as per Building and Safety Division
„ standards.
PARKING •
56. Parking shall be a minimum of thirteen (13) stalls for
employee and visitor parking only.
57. Each off-street parking space shall not be less than twenty
(2) feet in length and nine (9) feet in width, exclusive of
access driveways or aisles, except as noted below:
a. Any standard parking space that is immediately adjacent
to a wall, structural column, light standards, or similar
obstruction on one or both of its longer sides or in an
enclosed space shall be at leas� ten (10') feet in width
` and twenty (20') feet in length.
b. At a minimum, one parking space designed for the
handicapped shall be provided. This space may be
provided as follows: '
l. Dimensions. The minimum dimensions of each
automobile parking stall for the handicapped shall
be not less than fourteen (14) feet in width by
twenty (20) feet in length. Said stalls shall be
lined to provide a nine (9) foot parking area and a
five (5) foot loading and unloading area or;
2. Two (2) spaces may be provided within a twenty-three
(23) foot wide area, lined to provide a nine (9)
foot parking area on each side of a five (5) foot
loading and unloading area. The minimum length of
each parking space shall be twenty (2) feet.
3. Location. All parking spaces for the handicapped
shall be Iocated adjacent to the main entrance of
the facility for which the�•spaces are provided. The
,� parking spaces shall be positioned,so that the
handicapped persons shall not be required to walk or
wheel behind parked vehicles.
58. Prior to the installation, display, enlarging, modifying,
relocating or changing of signs, a permit must be obtained
from the Department of Community Development, Planning
Division.
' 59. Central heating, cooling and ventilation equipment, and all
' other mechanical devices shall be screened from public view.
Such equipment shall be screened from surrounding properties
and streets and operated in compliance with the City's Noise
' Ordinance. All means of access to the referenced equipment
shall be designed and installed so as to prevent access to
unauthorized persons and shall be approved by the Building and
_ Safety Division.
60. All security fences, grills, etc. shall be architecturally �
compatible with the design of the subject property and
adjacent buildings. In addition, no security fences, qrills,
etc. shall be installed without the'prior written approval of
the Director of Community Development and required building
6
, .
_
° permits as per plan.
61. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 1319 to insure variation and
aesthetically pleasinq color schemes for buildings in
- Redevelopment Areas along major City streets, i.e. Lonq Beach
Blvd., Atlantic Ave., Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., cr
Imperial Highway, the exterior of any building or structure
shall be painted with a color within a range of colors
approved by the Community Development Director.
62. The existing property shall be cleaned and maintained in a
neat and orderly manner at all times. Failure to comply
may result in revocation of the Conditional Use Permit.
63. Project sponsor or facility operator will eliminate graffiti
from the structures, fences and any accessory building on a
daily basis.
64. A cover sheet of approved Conditions must be attached to any
plans submitted to the Building and Safety Division.
PUBLIC WORKS
65. Dedicate a 12 ft. wide strip of property along Sante Fe Avenue
for 140.91 ft. northerly from Martin Luther King Jr.
Boulevard.
6G. Dedicate required property at the southwest corner of Sante Fe
Avenue and Seminole Avenue to accommodate a radius.
67. Construct six (6) wheelchair ramps at Sante Fe Avenue and
Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Sante Fe Avenue and
Seminole Avenue.
68. Install twenty (20) 24" box street trees per City of Lynwood
standards along Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Sante Fe
Avenue and Seminole Avenues. Tree wells to be installed
where required. Species to be determined by Public Works. A
permit to install the trees is required by the Engineering
Division. Exact locations of the trees will be determined at
the time the permit is issued.
G9. A permit from the Engineering Division is required for all
off-site improvements.
' FIRE DEPARTMENT .
No conditions for this project at this time.
Section 2. Unless extended, this permit shall become void one
hundred twenty (120) days after the uses permitted has been
abandoned or has ceased to be actively exercise.
* There shall be periodic review of the applicant's
compliance with all of the requirements, at a time
specified by the Director, but in no event longer than
twelve (12) months.
* The applicant or his/her successor in interest shall
provide evidence of qood-faith compliance with all of the
requirements at the time of said review.
* If, at the end of the time period established by the
Director or his/her designee, the applicant or his/her
successor in interest has failed to comply with all of the '
requirements, the Director or his/her designee, shall
notify the Planning Commission of his/her findings and
recommend such action as deemed appropriate, according to
the Lynwood Municipal Code.
* Construction shall commence within six (6) months from date
7
� of issuance of building permits.
* Any violation of said conditions in this resolution may
' result in revocation or modification of the Conditional Use .
Permit by the issuing body at a regularly scheduled
meeting.
Section 3. A copy of Resolution No. 2534 shall be delivered
to the applicant.
APPROVED and ADOPTED this the day of ,
1995, by members of the Planning Commission voting as follows:
AYES:
NOES: •
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Carlton McMiller
Chairperson
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ' APPROVED AS TO FORM:
�����. � � �� �
Gary D. Chi ts, Dir ctor Michele Beal Bagneris
Community Developme t Dept. Deputy City Attorney
- f:\wpfiles\cup154.res .
- 8
, �� � � .
., DATE:. January 10, 1994 /'' a ` M1 � i�� ���] �1Y, }. ��
t' f �� �
� T0: PLANNTNG COMMISSION '�� � ' � �� l� ',
FROM: Gary D. Chicots, Director �
Community Development Department
BY: Robert Diplock, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Case No. 156
Applicant: UNOCAL CORP. .
, Proposal:-
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit
'. to sell beer and wine for off-site cnnsumption in an existing gas
station proposed to be converted to a convenience store
(Foodmart) at 11000 Imperial Highway in the C-3 (Heavy.
' Commercial) Zone. The applicant's agent has requested that this
-item be continued to a date to b'e determined in order to resolve
some design.issues still remaining regarding this site.
Facts �
1. Source of Authoritv: •
. Sections 25-16.20c of the Lynwood Zoning Ordinance requires
- that a Conditional Use Permit be approved to allow
' establishments to sell alcoholic beverages.
2. Propertv Location and Size
The subject site is located on the southeast corner of
Imperial Highway and Atlantic Avenue (see the attached
location map). The subject property is an irregular lot,
approximately 14;709 square feet in size.
. 3. Existing Land Use
, The subject property is developed with a gas station service
bay and auto mechanic shop. The surrounding land uses are as
follows:
North - Commercial
South - Commercial
East - Commercial
west - Commercial .
4. Land Use Desianation
The General Plan designation for the subject property is
Commercial; while the Zoning Classification is C-3 (Heavy
Commercial. The surrounding land use designations and zoning
are as follows:
General Plan Zoning
North - Commercial C-3
South - Commercial C'-3
East - Commercial C-3
West - Commercial C-3
5. Project Characteristics
The applicant 'proposes to seTl beer and wine in a Foodmart
convenience store and provide auto gas service. An existing
1,618.76 square foot building will contain the proposed
Foodmart. The remainder of the site will retain.existing
pump islands (two), a revolving sign,, and yard lights.
1
,, ' . .
� � �� � �
6. Site.Plan Review
° l. �
At its regular meeting on September 28, 1994, the Site Plan
• Review Committee evaluated the proposed development and
recommended denial to the Planning Commission. The Committee
, determined that the proposal does not meet the distance
' requirements established by City Code (Ordinance 1306).
Section 25-16.20 requires that all off-sale liquor
establishment shall maintain a distance of five hundred feet
from any other establishment where alcoholic beverages are
sold for both off-sale and on-sale consumption,
� 8. Zonina Enforcement History
,. None of record at the time this report was prepared.
' 9.. Neiahborhood Response `
None of record at the time this report was prepared.
ANALYSIS.AND CONCLUSION
1. Consistencv with General Plan and Zonina Ordinance
The proposed land use is consistent with the existing zoning
classification C-3 and the General Plan designation of
' 'Commercial. The proposal does not meet the distance
, requirements of 500 feet between establishments selling
, alcoholic beveraqes as required under Section 25-16:20 of the
Zoning Ordinance. There are three (3) alcoholic beverage
establishments closer than 500 feet to this market: A) off-
sale.at 11022 Atlantic Avenue, B) on-sale at 11004 Atlantic
, Avenue, C) on-sale at 11020 Atlantic Avenue. ,
, 2: Site Suitabilitv
The property is adequate in size to accommodate the proposed
development. The lot/site meets current development standards
, relative to structures, parking, walls, fences, landscaping,
driveways and other feature required,by the Zoning Ordinance
except for the distance requirements per Section 25-16.20.
3. Compatibility _
The proposed development is surrounded by commercia.l uses.
Permitting the sale of alcoholic beveraqes at this site would
not be incompatible with the adjacent commerciaT uses, but '
• may have a negative effect on nearby residential areas.
° 4. Compliance with Development Standards LL
" Section 25-16.20e of the Zoning Ordinance requires that a
distance of 500 feet be maintained between an off-sale
alcoholic beverage store and other establishments selling
alcoholic beverages, as well as churches, schools, hospitals,
parks and playgrounds, and other similar consider,ation .
' points. The subject site is within 500 feet of three of the
listed consideration points. Approval of this application
would be in violation of these requirements.
2
:�
' 5. Permit Historv of Nearby Stores and Restaurants
t'_, •
Atlantic`Liquor, 11022 Atlantic Adenue , • �
�
`.A'liquor store has existed at this location since at least
1972. No Conditional Use Permit has been granted. In January� ,
19a5, staff determined that a Conditional Use Permit was not
required for a transfer or a renewal of an ABC License since
it was a legal non conforming use. According to Business
License records, this store has been in continuous operation
since 1985. .
' Viva Mexicana, 11020 Atlantic Avenue
A restaurant and bar has existed at this location since at
least 1974. Susiness License records show a business license
since 1985, except for the year 1987. In 1981 the Zoning
Ordinance was amended.to exempt bonefide restaurants from the
distance, requirements in the Ordinance providing that they
get a Conditional Use Permit.
In 1986 the Planning Commission approved a CUP for "the
continuation of operation of a restaurant and cocktail lounge
serving alcoholic beverages" at this location.
, Pescado Mojado, 11004 Atlantic Avenue
,.
On September 26, 1989 the Planning Commission approved
Conditional Use'Permit No. 22 for a restaurant serving'beer
and wine at this location. •
' Staff determined that this use was a bonefide restaurant and
therefore was exempt from the 500 f•eet distance restrictions
in the Zon'inq Ordinance. ' �
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - . . .' �
, The Community Development Director has determined that the
project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15061b (3) of
the State CEQA Guidelines as amended.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff respectfully requests that the Commission, after
consideration, comply with the request of the applicant's agent
,'to cont'inue this item to a.future date to be determined by Staff
and the.applicant.
Attachments
1. Location Map '
f:\s[aff\cup156 .
3
;`
��� DATE: January 10, 1995 �� �� � �F_;�'��a�� ��� ��, �
' T0: PLANNSNG COMMISSION r' �� ° `r� ��i!'�
l�i':vL ➢�iJ
` FROM: Gary D. Chicots, Director , a�
Community Development Department
BY: �Robert Diplock, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Variance Case No. 34
Applicant: Manuel Simental.
Proposal•
The applicant is requesting a Variance from provisions of the
� Zoning.Ordinance in order to reduce the required parking for a,
proposed restaurant from 47 parking spaces to 18 parking spaces
at 10320 Lonq Beach Boulevard, in the C-3 (Heavy Commercial)
, Zone.
Facts
1. Source of Authoritv:
Section 25-26 of the Lynwood Municipal Code requires that a •
Variance be obtained from the Planning Commission because of
special circumstances applicable to the property, and when
strict appl of the Zoning Ordinance deprives such
property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the
' vicinity and under identical zoning classification.
' Sections 25-14.6.5 Minimum Off-Street Parkinq ReQUirements of
the Lynwood Zoning Ordinance requires restaurants to have
, one (1) space for each 100 sq. ft. of gross floor area.
2. Prooertv Location and Size
' The site is located along Long Beach Boulevard and State
Street between Cherokee Avenue and Sequoia Avenue (see the
attached location map). The subject property is a irregular
lot, approximately 12,400 square feet in size. -
3. Existinci Land Use
- The subject property is developed with a 4,640 square foot
commercial building and associated parking.area. The
surrounding land uses are as follows:
North - Vacant Commercial '
South - Commercial
East - Multi- Family
West - Commercial
4. Land Use Desianation
,' The General Plan Designation for the subject property is
Commercial, while the Zoning Classification is C-3; The
surrounding land use designations and zoning are as follows:
` General Plan Zoning
North - Commercial C-3
South - Commercial C-3 '
East - Multi-Family R-3
West - Commercial C-3
'; f:\staffrpt\var34 . . �
1
_ ,
�, .
. ' 5. Project Characteristics
,
` The applicant is requesting approval of a variance to reduce
• the required on'site parking from 47,to 18 space in order to
operate a restaurant. The site is developed with a two (2)
story structure and an unstriped parking area. The site is
-, proposed to have a new two (2) story restaurant which on its
first floor will contain a preparation area, refrigerator ..
storage area, a utility room, bath rooms, and kitchen. On
its second floor, an office and storage room is proposed. The
serving area will be beneath a covered out door dining area.
. The remainder of the site is proposed to be developed with
. landscaped planter areas (at least 7% per cent of the site)
and eighteen (18) parking spaces including two (2) handicap
' spaces: .
' 6. Site P1an Review
At a special meeting on December 8, 1994, the Site Plan
Review Committee evaluated the pxoposed development and
recommended approval to the Plahning Commission. The
Commitfee determined that the_ applicant could establish a
_ hardship and justify a Variance from provisions of the Zoning
. Ordinance with respect to parking requirements for the
proposed restaurant. However, conditions'imposed by the
Committee further restricted available parking from the
required 47 parking spaces to 11 parking spaces.
7. Zonina Enforcement History
None of record at the preparation of the Staff report.
8. Neighborhood Response
None of record at the time of preparation of the staff
report.
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION
; 1. Consistency with General Plan.and Zonina Ordinance
, The proposed land use is consistent with the existing zoning
classification C-3 and the General Plan designation of
Commercial.
2. Site Suitabilitv
' The property is adequate in size to accommodate the proposed
structure. However, the lot, currently improved with a two
story commercial building, is irregular in shape and does
not allow fox required parking. The site does meets current
development standards relative to structures, walls, fences,
landscaping, driveways and other feature required by the
Zoning Ordinance.
� The applicant is currently operating a restaurant at 10350
- Long Beach Boulevard, a small, 5,000 sq.ft. triangular lot
immediately south of the proposed site at the intersection of' .
, Long Beach Boulevard and Street. This restaurant which
�, would be replaced by the proposed restaurant, currently
provides very limited off street parking.
_ The original restaurant was licensed for use in JuTy, '1993.
Since that time business has grown significantly. However, a
severe traffic safety problem has.'developed because of the
increase in business. The restaurant has five (5)
nonstandard parking spaces which are filled for most of the .
hours of business. The location of these parking spaces
causes traffic problems on State Street and Cherokee Avenue.
A reTocation of the existing restaurant to the proposed
- location would help correct this hazardous situation.
- 2
3. CompatibilitV
..
' The proposed development is surrounded by a mixture of
commercial and residential uses. Permitting the proposed -
restaurant will not have a neqative effect on adjacent
�commercial or residential uses.
4. Reauires Findinas For Grantina A Variance
Staff believes that in this case, the Commission can find;.
a. that the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement
of the specific zoning parking requirements would result
in practical difficulty or'unnecessary 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, namely
the irregular shape of the property and its location
between two major streets and a third cross street, which
do not apply generally to other properties in the same
zone; �
_ c. that the granting of the Variance will not constitute
the granting of a special privilege inconsistent with the
limitations on other properties in the same zone;
d. 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;
.
e. that the granting of the Variance,will not adversely
" affect the.orderly development of the City; ,
f. that neither present nor ant'icipated future traffic
, volume qenerated by the use of the sites uses of sites in
the vicinity reasonably required.strict or literal
_ interpretation and enforcement of the specific
requirement.
g. that the granting of the Variance will not result in
' parking or loading'of vehicles on public street in such a '
manner as to interfere with the free traffic flow of
traffic on the streets.
h. that the granting of the Variance will not create a
safety hazard or any other condition inconsistent with
� the objectives of this chapter.
5. Environmental Assessment
- The Community Development Director has determined that the
project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15061b(3)
of the State CEQA Guidelines as amended.
' f:\staffrpt\�ar34 � � . . , .
3
i
RECOMMENDATION ` �
Staff respectfully requests that, after consideration, the
Planning Commission approve the Variance Request:
A. Certifying that the project is categorically exempt
from the provisions of the Sta�e CEQA Guidelines.
B. Finding that the strict or literal interpretation and
, - enforcement of the specific regulation would deprive
the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of
other properties in the same zone.
C. Determining that the required findings for the granting
of the Variance have been made.
D. Approving Variance Application Permit No. 34, subject °
to the stated conditions and requirements.
Attachments
, 1,. Location Map
2. Site Plan
f:\statfrpt\var34. . '
4
��� .. � . � . .
LOCATION iVIAP
_ --- - _-_
__ _ _ __,,. _ 9 � _ ---- es e � eb � � w aa � .,` a� d9 ��
, . y �o � � � o ., � w ;, Cv g. � s� ,
� � Ed �V'� � c I " � Ito' I r� it � �� .
� � � O �� � 5 - oie "� W/SCONS/N � � �
- � � /y�/4 /m S 0l/� � � e � 10 g� / h .. . . .
! ' . l� JIb ' : lcio7 i d q � Iv�
� �, � ��-�o ; a � eu�0 � I dj a 67 L/1 _ D � d , 65 64
:
� . . jp� >li5 iona — `"' I ➢� � Q.,, 1.e� ^ �a�_. 6D
. . �'•/oll _ /ol � ' I .� .
� .O}]D." , n e , . OU �
. . �� � a I2! iz �� ioia.7 � 3 .
• . ' . . " � o � 3 �. �3 �7 � � 7 � ' '�A 1 � �4oi» �iai�1� 7S 79 b0
� ' - lut5�/ � IZ f� � . 1013a�
. � � im si lUi io� 3! i J g �
' � � _ � 35t o la4o� Z .. ._ _ � � MICH/GAM g � . .. . . . • . • ��.
. . , . � 353 /D�u i = i � p . . . �
9t5 ^
, . . W o , � i20 ' oa :� 9T $� : 95 94 y3 .
m
� � . �� � 35L � u9 �� �` . ,�W� � joo�o
a
� o�r Y �
� 2 2 351 IIO »9 101 � ~ /OJ�'� N .�
� y - ---_ 115 ll7 /ol3i 102 �r:�o4 : �
��• 106 107 IOb� �
� ,Ap iosf � �^
. yj `'
� 116 q /D?� � /0),79 /OJ9 0
/0
. . . O T �S�QUD�i4 �_" N . .. ,
v1
. S - �° � �i1t � oi oi .
v� /0 p b
. � � ' �� t d o � o � � 224 e� �Z19 � 218 2!7 116 1�� �
e a
. . , 5 a i25 . �� Z10 �
� .. . � 3 a �'ib3a3 1t6 r�. � i95 , �
e
• (033
. � l/ a i0 9 ���� �� K 19 /96 157 !9S 199 ZC � .
^` / o 0
� � ' � g / ' 80 °
. .. . . , . � � °� CNEROKE $ � .,�. o .� . � . .
.. , .�oi i � rs . .. .
. ''H�"� � n' 8 � 192 9 .
i
. . 11 /3 l4 � l5 rii �\ � a 1 1 I�� 18tl Ib7 , Itl6 lf �
. i 10 �� 4 '/03 � � � .
N 4, 6 .
� I 19 ` '/0 bs /67 l y/�8 1 1�' ��
J� � �
. —_��_— . zs . za z3 ; zz . zo • �� , `' 59 i�ie�� 7
` '�� '�w /� .. �, w
. \ .vois Z � Q ..i91 : �°� � C' �,E v .e . �
. . . � TENAYA � ' �
'� � a '� 3 //040 16 ., � ' W a. W
� y t , . o �y � �-0 W �o :
, ' 16 $ t7 1tl 129 � ti 7'� 3Iay1 '/aYOl61 �1�.7 I�i 15�7 �iSki. �"l
SCALEI�•Illl' ` . I . lV.. j�enS , �oY 79 160 , e � � � I . �
.. . ti �� .� ovii . . .
na y y 3d nYi �/36 � a m�o•. .�
�I �7 w u .
� , . . � . d1 41 . 4G =lis ��Y31 35 • 135 $ ID�� w llk . . i9 1 9 . �
,���� iov�; �{� ��
' J,u av> .�ov �� �n, I �� ,°�, .
- . . .I.mo 7 b � I w Q I w
*4, °� SEM/NOLE � �
-- � � o � I 2 . � •w .w .
, � . j �� V �� � u w W
. � iv � \ . .. o �� o �i � 'Y � �e �v s° � m .1 �z i�o`�R ° ia$' �`C .
'�. • o � . L.[QS�S � . .
� -,�,�.-,-----� ,
OS
_._.-- . Is �J� st 10.517' � /J/ w I m �.:
� /
� ,°',� `R g 5 �' W �., � Z . �as �._-<
� P� 61 c• 6/ 60 � e Q � 57 . 56 /0 J/ O /l0 �b //I ,
y.q � � y �� __L4DId21 a � .
?/ �� � QQ �` /O9 0 ' .
1 ' . . ' i e; I /JSJ � �1 ./ IS ` / 0 �
. � rECU,wsEN � $
CASE N0.
3
� �.
RESOLUTION N0. 2535
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
'`THE CITY OF LYNWOOD APPROVENG A VARIANCE
REQUEST (CASE NO. 34) TO REDUCE REQUIRED
PARKING FROM 47 PARKING SPACES TO 13 PARKING
SPACES IN ORDER TO OPERATE A RESTAURANT IN
THE C-3 (HEAVY COMMERCIAL) ZONE, 10320 LONG
� BEACH BOULEVARD, LYNWOOD, CALIFORNIA. �
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lynwood,
pursuant to law, held a public hearing on subject application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has carefully 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 State CEQA
Guidelines as amended; and
WHEREAS, the project is consistent with the General Plan in
that the subject site is designated "Commercial" on the General Plan
Map; and
WHEREAS, the proposed use is consistent with zoning
regulations, being located in the C-3 (Heavy Commercial) zone:
Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Planning Commission of
,°. the City of Lynwood does hereby find and resolve as follows:
A. That 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, the
' property having an irregular shape and being located
between two major streets and a cross street_which do not
apply generally to other properties in the same zone.
' C. That the granting of the Variance will not consist of the
, granting of a special privilege inconsistent witfi the
limitations on other properties in the same zone.
t ` D. 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;
and
� E: That the granting the Variance will not adversely affect
the Gity General Plan or the orderly growth and
' development of the'City.
F. That neither present nor anticipated future traffic
volumes generated by the use of site or uses of sites in
'. the vicinity reasonably require strict or literal
interpretation and enforcement of the specified
• requlation.
G. That the qranting of a Variance will not result in the
parking or loading of vehicles on public streets in such a
manner as to interfere with the flow of traffic on the
_ ,
streets.
1 .
' H. That the granting of the Varia�ce will not create a safety '
�e, hazard or any other conditions inconsistent with the
objective of this chapter.
I. That the granting of Variance wi1T provide more parking
". than currently exists and will help resolve a serious
traffic problem.
� Section 1. The following Conditions of Approval shall pertain
� to Variance Request Permit No. 34
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
GENERAL
° 1. The proposed development shall comply with all applicable
regulations of the Lynwood Municipal code, the Uniform Building
Code and the Uniform Fire Code.
2. Any proposed subsequent modification of the subject site or
� structures thereon, shall be first reported to the Community
Developmeht Department, Planning Division, for review. This
conditional use permit shall apply exclusively to the subject
restaurant.
3. The applicant, or his representative, shall sign a Statement of
Acceptance stating that he/she has read,'understands, and
,, agrees to the conditions stated herein before any building
permits are issued.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
4. Adequate access to restroom facilities shall be provided.
, Restrooms shall be signed and well lighted and confined to
restaurant users at 10320 Long Beach Boulevard.
" 5. A signage plan shall be submitted for Redevelopment Division
, approval, prior to installation. The signage plan must comply
with the Lynwood Redevelopment Agency Sign Criteria and sign
� regulations under the City Zoning qrdinance.
6. The Building Department shall examine the bathroom facilities
t�o.assure that they fully conform to all applicable codes and
" standards.
° , PLANNING DIVISION
_, 7. The proposed restaurant use shall provide a minimum of thirteen
(13),parking spaces including two (2) required handicap spaces.
8. Pursuant to Section 25-16.6 h. of the City Zoninq Ordinance,
shared parking may be secured to provide for additional parking
thus carrying out the intent of the Zoning Code and the
objectives of the General Plan.
9. Where vehicles are to be.parked immediately adjacent to a
public or private street or alley, a decorative masonry wall
' (maximum of thirty-six inches in height measured from the
finished surface of the parking area) or a berm with shrubs and
'' groundcover shall be provided. If a wall is provided, there
must be sufficient landscaping to screen wall from street ,
view . •
2 . '
f
. A' N
' 10. ,Pursuant to the City Code and the attached Site Plan, each
- off-street parking space shall not be less than twenty (20)
,.a= feet in length and nine (9) feet in width, exclusive of access
driveways or aisles, except as noted below:
• a. Any standard parking space that is immediately adjacent to
a wall, structural column, light standards, or similar
' obstruction on one or both of its longer sides shall be at
least ten (10') feet in width and twenty (20') feet in
length.
, b. Two parking spaces designed for the handicapped shall be
provided. These spaces may be provided as follows:
1. The minimum dimensions of each automobile parking
' stall for the handicapped shall be not less than
fourteen (14) feet in width by eighteen (18) feet in
length. Said stalls shall be striped to provide a
nine (9) foot parking area and a five (5) foot
loading and unloading area or;
2. Two {2) spaces may be provided within a twenty-three
(23) foot wide area, lined to provide a nine (9) foot
parking area on each side of a five (5) foot loading
and unloading area. The minimum length of each
parking space shall be eighteen (18) feet.
' 11. All,parking spaces for the handicapped shall be located
adjacent to the main entrance of the facility for which the
spaces are provided. The parking spaces shall be positioned so '
that the handicapped persons shall not be required to walk or
wheel behind parked vehicles.
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS
12. Provide an irrevocable offer of dedication for a ten (10) foot.
wide strip of property along Long Beach Boulevard.
' 13. Submit a drainage plan. Drainage plan will be checked by the
' • Department of Public Works. No permits will be issued prior to
the approval of the drainage
14_ Close existing drive approach and construct proposed drive
approach per City standard'along Long Beach Bou
15. Install four (4) 2.4" box street trees per City of Lynwood
City standard along State Street. Species to be determined by
the Public Works. A permit to install the trees is required
. from the Engineerinq Division. Exact locations of the tress
- will be determined at the time the permit is issued.
. 16. Regrade parkway and landscaping with grass on State Street and
Cherokee Avenue.
17. Underground all utilities.
18. Underground existing utilities if any modifications are
proposed for the electrical service panel. ."
' 19. All Edison vaults and structures shall be placed underground.
20. A permit from the Engineering Division is required for all
off-site improvements.
2I. All required water meters, meter service changes and/or fire
protection lines shall 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.
,. 22. No permanent sfructure shall be constructed on the proposed R/W
, dedication (wrought iron fence, footing, etc).
3
�
` 23. Applicant shall obtain at his/her cost a traffic study of the
;, vacation of Cherokee Avenue. If the vacation is warranted
, s applicant agrees to vacate street and pay. for the cost
incurred.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
24. No conditions at this time. Conditions will be determined at a
later date when application is submitted for construction.
Section 2. This permit shall become void in 120 days after use
, permitted has been abandoned or has ceased to be actively exercised
unless a request for an extension has been applied for and granted.
Section 3. A copy of this Resolution shall be delivered to the
applicant. ,
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of January, 1995
by members of the Planning Commission voting as follows:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
° ABSTAIN:
� Carlton McMiller
" Chairperson
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Gary D. Chicots, Director Michele Beal Bagneris
Community Development Dept. Deputy City Attorney
. f:�resolum\resa2535 ' . . � , ' �
. 4 ,
.�
� �
DATE,: January 10, 1995
,� r . .� ^
TO: PLANNING COMMSSSION � �6��1��;�y � i: � j�
'�;,
"� �IL�i` ll
'-'a FROM; Gary Chicots, Director C '
Community . Development Depar��� ���• �
�!
„ <:: .
BY: Robert Diplock, Planning Manager , �'
SUBJECT: Appeal of Site Plan Review Case No. 119
Appellant: Bruce Yingline
Proposal•
The appellant is appealing the actions of the Site Plan Review
Committee approving Site Plan Review Case No. 119 (SPR 119). The
proposal under SPR 119 calls for the operation of a concrete and
green waste recycling center at 11655 Louise Street in the M
(Manufacturing) zone.
Facts•
1. Source of Authoritv • �
Section 25-32 d. f.-of the Lynwood Zoning Ordinance allows
the action,of the Site Plan Review Committee to be appealed
to the Planning Commission.
2. ProoertV Location ,
The site is located on the west side of Louise Street,
between Cortland Avenue and Fernwood Avenue (See attached
location map.)
3. Propertv Size
The subject site consists of a lot which is rectanqularly
shaped and approximately 22, 680 square feet in size.
4. Existing Land Use
The property is currently occupied by a concrete jaw crusher
machine and concrete material. The surrounding land uses are
as follows:_
, • North - Residential/Industrial
South - Vacant Land/I-105
East - Vacant/Residential
West - Industrial
5. Land Use Desi4nation
The General P1an Designation,for the subject property is
Industrial while the Zoninq Classification is M
(Manufacturing). The surroundinq �and use designations and
zoning classifications are as folloWs:
General Plan: Zonina:
North - Industrial North - M •
South - Industrial/Transportation South - M ,
East - Industrial East - M
. West - Industrial West - M
1
,
9. Public Response
s
'i
On August 2 and September 6, 1994, Staff received a petition
and letters from nine (9j homeowners and businesses in the
� vicinity of the subject use registering their opposition to
the project (see Exhibit A). The properties includes 11615,
11617, 11625, 11629, 11639, 11643 Louise Street and 5431,
5433 and 5428 Cortland Avenue. This petition led to the
appeal filed before the Planning Commission.
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION:
l. Consistency with General Plan and Zonina Ordinance
The proposed land use is consistent with the existing zoning
classification of the M{Manufacturing ) Zone, and the
General Plan designation of-Industrial'. However,.the,
- proposed use potentially conflicts with Land Use Policy 3
which calls for ensuring that residential neighborhoods are
protected from the encroachment of incompatible activities or
land uses which may have a negative impact on the residential
enviranment.
� 2.' Site Suitabilitv
The property is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
proposed development relative to use, structures, walls,
' fences, landscaping, driveways and other development features
. required by the Zoning Ordinance. However, the site is not
served by developed curbs, sidewalks, and surfaced interior
streets.
3. Compatibilitv
The proposed development is surrounded by a mixture of
residential and industrial uses. Approval of this use would
be compatible with the adjacent industrial uses, but will
' have a negative effect on adjacent residential development if
certain environmental factors are not mitigated i.e. noise
and dust.
4_ Compliance with Development Standards
The proposed project has been revised to comply with the
requirements of the Site Plan Review Committee, notably to
provide adequate screeninq of the operation and a fogger
system to control dust. In addition, entrances and exits and
truck loading and unloading areas will be paved. Noise ,
measurements indicate that the operation meets the standards
, of the City's Noise Ordinance.
, 5. Benefits to Communitv
The project, as modified, will provide for the recycling of
concrete materials and provide a limited amount of local
employment.
7. Environmental Assessment
The Initial Study and Environmental Checklist prepared by
Lockman and Associates indicates that, although the proposed
project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because
modifications have been made to the project and mitigation
measures have been imposed on the project to eliminate any
potential adverse effects. A mitigated Negative Declaration
will be prepared. °
3
RECOMMENDATION•
Staff respectfully requests that; after consideration, the
� Planning Commission deny this appeal and affirm the actions of
,� the Site Plan Review Committee and the conditions imposed under
Site Plan Review Case No. 119.
ATTACHMENTS'
1. Location Map
2. Site Plan '
' 3. Conditions of Approval
. f:\planning\staffrpt\t:cup149.d � . � � � -��
x. ,
k �
�
F
.
4
, - -------- '
.� __....._.__-
: : � �
, � .
� � � LOCATION� iVIAP � � � � � �
_:.. ;.
� - L/i � � ..I.�... • Jt p • .
� % I ��ig I,i7 �6 . �S ��4 �3 12 �I 10 9 8 7 6� S 4 3 2� 1�� , �
'� Ns - < I 95 •
,; � TR._ - ; :
__ ,� yii i Y , Ji , �a � w ran `.
; f Z PARYf A � E �
_ . .. �i I \' � Y O �
� I ' r -� -��� _ .e. es- -ati . ` j :. �
.,� i . . s � ' .
�� 19 � 20 21 22' 23' 24'I25' 2E 2T 28� 29` 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 36 .
I � , POR7/ON ,C �C/
� I PORTION OF LOT l
j I � r� OF L 0 /L w�;
� ' .o , O
u+ :
� ,.
y w cv�r � b �
. J '%°' �
� � < < q.� •�;...
� .
. . . JYo � � � g � . . � � �
, � �,SY//�' . i
&
6�JriS �wu . " - �ci;'
�3rTllJlT t
. � � I i i I i p .�'i'�' �� '} 7J'
. . �fYU� . � � i i i i i r'!!L�'^'� 3YJ1
.,,. a yi_ .� ;� 4+ Si_ �. �' k� SYJy �_.svy,.•
"='g��' il� �I "= w; ��: ; �5 x,�_Y,v__
�
.. � = � I' ; � : ; : �� � = � .ry]yk� 5r�, .. .
; � i i '� n
v._ �,� A -tV.i.....
��,� a tou�s£ Sr. S o --w�: ,
.. �S ! J / - ••, '
' � � ' 1 �I. � I - I � 1 1 il � iJi�O .. ....
6 a I� I a �: i' I I ��a � fi 6 py� _ y�.�
� � �S � �� i � � � i ' � ��i �:: �� .�i� ° E'3�$Od' .�5+� .
� �q \ � . V � L �� i : �y � 1 1 � n �'iF 9/� �' 1
. y �l
e . o � " � , �i � � � � I ss�Y
� 5S h 2 u,iLi?iti__JEA�2+i_-l�Ji1 ���l+l.�.��_�.1Q.l4!_ �..�I:,';..
° � i 'wm ata � �
� �w�� Cw ffiu . ..
- �, l� � s,j d� G. J(07 .
F itiA SJ, .;''.'
r
. . O � . . _tlL.: : ..
y
. . � , q i . _"'_' '�"iA �+ ,
_ `�SSYr
. I. , . . ____ --r•' irUs:..
-w%� , �5 '
_...._ .. s P'
q
I .
�rst , � �
�
� �' �
\ N"-+,'` I ;� i` I
. J I . _- __ '� � i~ in I �.
i` i o it A
i�~ i I
� � i
� i fo
O
' . �h . . . - ' . � ....
Y e
-��.. BEAGH
L ON�
. � � �� .
e �
r
. n
$, ..
CASE N0. �
��
�
;q .
':;`
r� LYNWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION, JANUARY 10. 1995
r
The Planning,Commission of the City of Lynwood met in a Regular •
Session at 11330 Bullis Road on the above date at 7:30 p.m..
Vice-Chairman Lee assumed the chair in the absence of Chairman ,
McMiller.
Commissioners Dove, Evans, Muhsin, Murphy and Lee answered the
roll call.
Chairman McMiller and Commissioner Haynes were absent.
Also present were Planning Manager Diplock, Deputy City Attorney
Bagneris,' Associate Planner Omoruyi and Civil Engineer Associate
Nguyen.
It was moved by Commissioner Murphy, seconded by Commissioner
Evans and carried to.excuse Chairman McMiller.
Planning Manager Diplock stated the Agenda had been duly posted
• in accordance with the Brown Act.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
Vice-Chairman Lee introduced the first item on the Agenda,
Conditional Use Permit Case No. 83049R, Applicant: City of
. Lynwood:
,' Planning Manager Diplock stated this item was heard at the
Commission meetings of July, August, September and October 11,
� 1994, The Commission continued the CUP to its meeting of January
10, 1995 in order to allow the Applicant sufficient time to
comply with all Conditions of Approval.• At this time, the
i Conditions of Approval have still not been fully met. Staff
inspection on January 6, 1995 showed that automobiles were being
worked on in the parking apron in front of the former auto glass
shop, the parking area was full of cars and trucks under repair
or awaiting repair, the metal gate was open so all automotive
repair was visible from the street, there was a large semi-
trailer truck parked in the paricing aisle, and auto and truck
engines and transmissions were being stored along the wall on the
' east property line. In addition, the owner/lessee has not
submitted a landscape plan or revised plot.plan as requested by
staff on October 17, 1994.
It was then moved by Vice-Chairman Lee to open the Public Hearing
on CUP 83049.
Manuel Franco 10331 McNerney Ave. Sou�h Gate - Applicant
approached the podium �o discuss compliance/non-compliance of
conditions.
Planning Manager Diplock outlined the conditions in question,
those being:
a) A minimum of eight off-street striped parking places
with concrete wheel stops
These spaces are unusable, because there ara automob�les awaitin��
repair currently utilizing these spaces.
b) All automotive repair should be conducted entirely
within the workshop.
On at least three occasions, in the past two weeks staff has
' witnessed auto repair taking place within the parking area.
c) Ail damaged vehicles or vehicles awaiting repair shall
be screened =rom Imperial Hwy. by a six (6) fu�t nigh masonry
wall, or fence covered with material.
� Currently as ind'icated by the site plan, there is an opaque
gate,�on a portion of the premises. However, throughont the past
four inspections, the gate has remained open, allowing visibility
from the street of the work taking place inside. The applicant
' is now repairing cars on the parking apron in front uf tiie former
� auto.glass shop.
�
�`
<� � �
,
:
d) Five percent of the total area to be landscaped and '
irr'igated.
To date this has not been done.
` Commissioner pove questioned any type of partial completion to
any of these conditions.
Commissioner Muhsin questioned whether or not the applicant held
possession of a Business License.
Vice-Chairman Lee discussed previous inspections he had done at
� the site. -
_. Commissioner Evans discussed continued non-compliance of
conditions.
Hearing no further discussion, Vice-Chairman Lee closed the
` ; Public Hearing and called for a motion.
i
�. Commissioner Muhsin stated he would like to see the applicant
' given an additional thirty days to comply with conditions.
Commissioner pove stated he would also like to see the applicant
, given additional time to correct the non-compliance. •
� Commissioner Murphy spoke against any additional continuances to_
the applicant.
Commissioner pove suggested a,staff inspection two weeks intu the
� thirty day continuance.
It was moved by Commissioner Muhsin, seconded by Commissioner
Dove, to reopen the Public Hearing and grant the applicant a
thirty day continuance on CUP 83049 and instruct staff to conduct
an.on site inspection in two weeks.
ROLL CALL'
AYES: • COMMISSIONER DOVE, MUHSIN
NOES: COMMISSIONER EVANS, MURPAY, LEE
ASSENT: COI�IIdISSIONER HAYNES, McMILLER
Motion does not'pass.
It was moved by Commissioner Murphy, seconded by Commissioner
Evans to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 83049.
ROLL CALL•
AYES: • COMMISSIONER EVANS, MURPHY, LEE
NOES: CO24+lISSIOIiER MUHSIN
AS58NT: COI�SISSIONER HAYNES, McMILLER .
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONER DOVE
Motion carries.
Vice-Chairman Lee then introduced the next item on.the Aganda,
Conditional Use Permit Nc. 154, I�merican Recycling Technoloy�:'
' " Inc., Applicant.
Commissioner Murphy stated that he and Commissioner pove had
attended a workshop on January 9, 1995, presented by the
. Applicant.
Planning Manager Diplock stated the applicant is seekinq the
approval of a Conditional Use Permit to establish a facility �or
thermal and biological treatment of petroleum-contaminaced, non-
hazardous soil at Y0650 Aiar�ed� Street i:i the Manufacturing zone.
2 .
�
�
' K �
' �. �
)
All petroleum-contaminated, non-hazardous soil will be orocessec'
and stored inside the buildings. It has been determined chat
- ' there are no potential environmental impacts from the project
based on adequate safeguards, mitigation measures and conditions
of approval.
Cucnmissioner Murphy questioned the restriction on the number of
days allowable for operation, and discussed the transportation of
materials.
Commissioner Evans questioned the impact on street conditions
along Alameda caused by the additional truck traffic in the area,
and what provisions would be made for maintenance.
Vice-Chairman Lee moved to opened the Public Hearing on CUP 154.
Brett McDonald 17351 North Client Ave., Executive Vice-Presidenc
of American Recycling Technology, Inc., offered a preseat�tior_
f'or the commission, outlining the project.
Commissioner Murphy questioned bio-remediation issues, the number
of facilities currently operating within urban areas and job
' creation.
Vice-Chairman Lee discussed measures being taken to ensure that
soil would not be stored on-site.
Commissioner Murphy questicned the time frame in��olved in tce
soil recycling process and the amount of storage space required.
, Commissioner Evans stated concerns with health issues, health
hazards and OSHA guidelines. '
Andy Niles, 34 Paradise Valley, Carson, spoke in support ci tf�e
project. He discussed Health & Safety guidelines of Ar..er_c.?.r�.
Recycling Technologies and facilities located in urban areas.
The Commission and the Applicant continued discussion on
employment for residents.
A1 Walker, 701 Huntington Way, Vice-President of Facilities &
Operations at Jorgensen Steel and Director of Safety, spcke ?r.
favor of the CUP and their responsibility towards the projer_t.
Dennis Lord, District Mar.�ger for the Gas Co., spoke in favor of.
the project.
Irene Garcia 2737 E. lllth St., spoke in opposition to the CUP.
Commissioner Evans suggested a meeting between American Recycling
and the surrounding residents in order to di�cuss
answer questions and provide the residents with a cle�rar
_ understand_ng of the project.
Deputy Attorney Bagneris suggested changes -to the �roposed
Resolution No. 2534, prior to the closing of the Public Hearing
in order to clarify the language and more clearly identify the
Project Sponsor. Should the Commission concur, these changes
will be added to the Resol.ution.
° Page 1, Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby apprcveJ ii.�
Neaative Dcclarat�on and_ap�ro�•es Conditional Use Pe� :V�_ 15-^._._
. 3;
`'r
kA Z . " � . � . . � .
,
Page 1, Community Development Department General Conditian No. 1.
A second sentence would be added which will read: The Applicant
will complv with all applicable Federal State and local laws
rules and regulations including but not limited to �a_yment of
all fees related to the operation.
Page 3, Condition No. 26. Stack tests of equigmen± s'.iaii uu
conducted at least annually� or more frequently as reat!'_red b��
the Air Ouality Management District to ensure that air�u
standards are met.
� Page 3, Condition No. 29. Applicant shall deliver copies of all
�ermits issued b� other requlatory aqencies to tha Citv's
, Communitv Development Department within thirty days =�ter
issuance of such permits.
Page 4, Condition No. 36. Clarification "tc.st shall bc
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Communitv Develor�meiit
Director" rather than just the Planning Department.
Page 5, Condition No. 46. "The Applicant shall conduc ai��
ongoing medical monitorincr orogram as required bv CAL-OSHA_with
- monitoring records ke�t on file in the facility office!'.
. Page 7, Condition No. 66 Ded icate required pro�ert as de _�rm.'_n:cl
� the Denartment of Pub'ic Works at the southwest corne oi
Santa Fe Avenue and Seminole Ave. to accommodate an adeasate
radius��.
Page 7, Section 2 will become Section 3, and there would be s r.e�.
Section 4 which reads "'^he Plannin� Commission :�ereb�adu-�c =u
monitoriz� program and re�ortin� requirements to en_ �re
compliance with Conditions of Approval set forth herein. Said
proqram shall be set forc;i in Attachnent A, attr,c.`.ed r�rac� _
The citys consultant Wildan has prepared the Mitiy�*ica
Monitoring Report which will be attached. It sets fortY, che
required measures that must be re�orted on and monitored pursuant
to State Law.
A new condition if so des�red, "=:; -e^ao,��icant sha ii �CS
of emglovment agencies snd other emolovment sources �rovia��3_5�,;
the Citv and make goo f= i ensure_t:�e_rEC?_u=tnz-z,
of L�wood Residents as eml�iovees".
Planning Manager Diplock stated the applicant had requested
clarification of Condition No. 21 and stated the correct wordinq
should read:
No truck shall be unloaded until the laad passes vi:.�:nl
inspection and a copper wire tesi:. Aft�r ualaa3ing, the scil
' shall not be processed Latil it passes au in-:iansc �shor3cci.
attalysis of the soil sa�p.�.
Hearing no further discussion, Chairman Lee moved to close the
Public Hearing.
It was moved by Commissioner Evans, seconded by Ccmmissioiier
Muhsin to adopt:
RESOIi,UTION NO. 253�1 LNTTTLED: "w RESOi:�'J2IOt7 OF 'YY.F: PL1'.LiZ,Y:�C+
COMMISSION OF THE CIT': JF' LYt:�1lOO'J AIFPROVING C�S�tI�ITT.Ch'AL L'"�'
PERMIT NO. 154 FOR A SGr:,S R�.'CY�L'iNG OPERA"_`ION TO SE COND[ILSF.J 3'_°
' AMERZCAN RECXCLING TECHNOLOGIES INC. AT 10650 ALAMEDA ST.,
� LYNWOOD, CALIFORNIA".
� with amendments as_stated.
�.
1
`�
�
h
V��
, ROLL CALL'
AYES: • COMMISSIONER DOVE� EVANS, MUHSIN, LEE
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: CO2R+IISSIONER HAYNES, McMILLER -
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONER MURPEiY
Motion Carried
At this time the Commission took a brief recess.
Chairman Lee then introduced the next item on the Ager.da,
Conditional Use Permit No. 156 and called for a staff report.
Planning Manager Diplock stated the app'_ic�int has reqnes'�ea Lhat
the Commission continue th�s item to � later data •cc l�e
determined by both staff and t�e applicant.
It was moved by Commissioner Muhsin, seconded by Commissioner
Dove and carried to continue the item.
Chairman'Lee then introduced the next item ; Variance Case �?o.
34, and called for a staff report.
Planning Manger Diplock stated the app'.icant is reqne:;tir.g a .
Variance from provisions of tne Zoning Ordinance in orde:� to
reduce the number of parking spaces for a proposed restaurant
from 47 to 18 at 10320 Long Beach Blvd., in the C-3 Heavy
Commercial Zone. A plot plan submitted as part of t.•.e
application shows conditions that were imposed by Public Works,
i.e., dedications for future street widening. The applicsn� nad
to redesign the project and lost parki�ig spaces in the proccz:::
and is now down to thirtaen s�aces. St�ff has revie�:ed th:..�
� project and is recommending aprr.oval of tl�e Variance.
'� Chairman Lee discussed an existing restaurant owned by - che
applicant immediately south of the site and current problems w�th
parking conditions at that sita.
� Commissioner pove questioned the impaci on the surrouncinG
residents, the community and traffic.,
Planning Manager Diplock staced that oaie of the conditioa� of.
� approval required a Traffic Analysis of the possibility of
closing Cherokee Avenue.
Director of Community Developm2nt Chicots stated scne
alternatives to the proposed variance could be
a) Iur.ending the level of occupa^��
b) Amending the leve:. of csage
c) Utilize parking on prc��erty to :.t:e north
� d) Possible vacation of a portion of Cherokee Ave.
S;.aff could pursue these avenues with the applicant and come back
with possible modifications for review.
Chairman Lee moved to open the Public Hearing.
Man Simental 3347 C:�erokee, blis�.ie: c. owner and pruper'c�
', owner, spoice in favor of.the vsr.iance.
Chairman Lee questioned whether or not the applicant would be
w_Tling to continue this item in order to allow staff more t�.me
to work with him on the proposed.oarking problems and alternati��e
options.
Commission�r Murphy auesticned the large amount of iad:�zta�r.
inc�ocr dining area.
5
;
�-
;
After further discussion, it was moved by Commissioner Murp':y,
seconded by Commissioner Evans and carried to continue this ?`_em
to the next regular scheduled meeting oi Feh�uary 14, 1995.
Co-Chairman Lee then introduced the next iteri, An Appeal of Site
Plan Review, Case No. 119, and called for a staff report.
Planning Manager Diplock stated this is an appeal of a Site-Plan
Review, which was previously brought before the Commissicn �nd
sent back to staff for completion of the Environmental Re�!itw.
Issues involved questions of noise and dust from the uperat�o:1 of
the concrete recycling operation. The 3i�:e Ylan Review Commit�ee
required that the owner/applicant hire a consultant to review
noise and dust concerns. The Applicant has agreed to site �lan
review the proposed condition and now the neighbors are appealing
the Committees approval of this project. At this time, staff is
recommending denial of the Appeal.
It was then moved by Chairman Lee to open tiie Public Heari;iry on
the appeal or Site Plan Revi2w No. 119.
Bruce Yingline 11618 Louise Ave., Appellant, identified problems
with noise, excessive water, street flooding problems, drainaqe,
dust, and large vehicle traffic.
Chairman Lee questioned the time in which the Site Plan e,3s
approved.
Planning Manager Diplock st.iced conditior.s were established �v�en
the application was first submitted and a*_ that time. It wss
determined that additionai �nformation was needed. Anpli�:anr
complied with required infor.mation and Site Plan Review committee
approved the application with conditions.
Chairman Lee discussed road conditions in the area. Thev ar.e
badly in need of repair. He also discuse�:d Co3a �nforcc�n��.7t
citations and a stop work or�9er at this p-op�:rty.
Mr. Yingline discussed pi.les of concrete rubnle on property.
unattended parked trncks, 8eiivery trucks, dLmp trucks, and the
owners responsibility towards the upkeep of the property.
Chairman Lee discussed the cverweight vehicTes on the prope:-*_y
and the Code Enforcement history of the s�te. He also ��.sl�ed
whether or not the applicanc and business owner woulcl agree �.� a
continuance to the next re�;��izr sch�dule3 ri���ting nf Fabruary ? 4,
1995, in order to allow the Ccauaission more time for review.
Norman Robinson 35235 Nortr. 99th St., Sta3ecreak, AZ., property �
owner read aloud from a lettar written by James Murphy, Director ,
- Plant operations. It listed several concerns with the duet
levels that occur daily and �trongly reqcested revocstion u� �iia
aQproval.
Commissioner Evans questi:,ned how iong c:ie existing business oi
Mr. Robinsoas had been in un=ration.
Sergio Lopez 9602 Adoree Ec., Downey, owner and oper.ator of the
concrete and green waste recvcling center at 11655 Lou.ise Stree*_, �
spoke in opposition to the A�,peal. .
Michelle Leonard, Senior 2lanner from the fi�r.. o:' Lockm�,xa G '
ASSOCldt23 249 E. Pnmona Ri7.3� Mort2r.�� r:l�}C� S`dtECl t�13t '�C�.T_
firm had prepared tha Envirenn:aat Stedy reqLire3 by the City for.
Mr. Lopez. She stated tha�_ t��ise studies �,�ere cor.ducted b•� a� .
engineer specializing in *;�:a` field, which -aers inciuded in h�r
report. Slie spoke in suppo� �f the recycling center.
6
� _ - -- �
�
�
�
,
Mr. Lopez proposed the con�t_-uction, by his � of an eighc
foot high block wall alr,n� the propertV line in order to
eliminate some of the co;i��rns of the asrrounding residenis,
business owners and the Cor.ua�ssion.
After further discussion, it was moved by �ommissioner E••an�,
seconded by Commissioner pove and carried te con::'.n�c� the Fub�ic
Aearing of the Appeal of 5ite Plan Review Case No. 119 to '.he
regular scheduled meeting cf �ebruary 14, 1995.
It was then moved by Commissioner Evans, seconded by Commiss:�one�
Muhsin to reopen the Publi�: Haaring.
Robert (Inaudible), 114 Sant3 Anita, Long Beach epoke in favur.o_
the Appeal, because of dust, noise and flooGi.:zg conditions.
It was t�en moved by Cemr�iissioner i�urpY.V, seconc:e3 by
Commissioner pove, and car;-.`�ed t0 COP.L1.T.ilie i.i 2 �p�1cd1 Oi Sl�i'
Plan Review Case No. 119 to t`.a next reSular scl:edulec me�tir.g of '
February 14, 1995. �
PUSLIC ORAL COMMi)NICATIONS �
None !
I
COMMISSION ORALS
Commissionar pove stated coacerns with t!�e ltr.q*_h of the meatinG !
and the lace hour. �
�
It was moved by Commissic_ner Muhsin, se�onded by Co;nmissi.oner !
Evans and carried to ad�osrn to the next regulsr schedsle.d i
meeting of February 14, 199�. �
CHAIRMAN C�'�RLETON McMILLER F.?'N:'✓SD AS ^O FC3;S
' Ge.;�u::�� _.r.tor.nc�- B�gn�:i� �
;
APPROVED bS TO CONTENT: Rol�ar.t DiploCk
I
i
i
i
� � ,