HomeMy Public PortalAbout04-12-94 PLANNING COMMISSION l �
����- �
AGENDA
LYNWOOD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - 7:30 P.M.
City Hall Council Chambers � `� '� � �`�`�
11330 suiiis Road Lynwooa, ca R E!� E �V E D I
CITY OF LYPaI��/OOU
CITY CLERKS OFFICE
ApTil 12, 1994 �, ,..,..-
Rr� , ;_: }
' Ahl PM
7i8�9iIDillil2ili2i3i4i3i6
Errick R. Lee
Chairperson ,{� ``L. ��
� � ��
l ' � C��' �l� � �/1.��
Carlton McMiller ponald Dov J'
Vice Chairman Commissioner
Eloise Evans Joyce Hurley
Commissioner Commissioner
Jamal Muhsi.^.- Frankie Murphy
Commissioner Commissioner
C O M M I S S I O N C O U N S E L•
Michele Beal Bagneris
Interim Deputy City Attorney
, ' STAFF:
I
Sol B1��mPnfe;d,.Director Robert Diplock i
Community Development Department Planning Manager {
Art Barfield Louis Omoruyi I
Associate Planner Associate Planner I
i
Louis E. Morales, Jr. Paul Nguyen �
Associate Planner Civil Engineer Assoc. j
�
1
I
f
i
�
i
;
I
f:\upfiles\apr94
1 f
I
I
1
�
�.ti ,
�
April 12, 1994
OPENING CEREMONIES
A. Call meeting to order.
B. Flag salute.
C. Roll call of Commissioners.
D. Certification of Agenda Posting.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARZNG:
l. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. CUP 139
Applicant: Watts Health Foundation
COMMENTS:
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use
Permit and an associated Zone Change (from C-2 Commercial to
H-M-D Hospital Zone) in order to establish a Women and
Children Rehabilitation Center in an existing vacant
convalescent hospital structure at 3598 Martin Luther
King Jr. Boulevard in the C-2 (Medium Commercial) zone. This
case was continued from the March 8, 1994 Planning Commission
meeting in order to investiqate the possibility of providing
additional parking and resolving other concerns raised in the
hearing.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff respectfully requests' that, after consideration, the ,
Planning Commission deny this application due to an inadequate �
' parking supply which is inconsistent with Municipal Code
requirements, inadequate ingress and egress to project parking �
which is provided exclusive from an alley, and an inadequate �
off-street van loading and unloading area. i
2. ZONE CHANGE - CASE N0. ZC9 �
Applicant: Watts Health Foundation ;
i
COMMENTS: �
The applicant is requesting approval of a Zone Change (ZC 9) (
from C-2 (Commercial) to H-M-D (Hospital, Medical and Dental) �
in order to establish a Women and Children Residential
Recovery Center on a 45,00o square foot parcel, which contains
a one-story, existing vacant convalescent hospital building on I
the west side of Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard at Norton
Avenue. �
RECOMMENDED ACTION: �
I
Staff respectfully requests that after consideration, the �
Planning Commission:
i
i
1. Find that the area proposed for Zone Change from C-2
(Commercial) to H-M-D (Hospital-Medical-Dental) is �
inadequate in area for parking and off street loading and j
unloading and provides inadequate on-site circulation, !
and
�
2. Deny the proposed Zone Change, Case No. ZC 9. �
;
i
f:�wpfiles\apr94 ' � �
2 I
�
_ I
i
:d_
��
3. VARIANCE CASE NO. VAR 26
Applicant: Mario S. Rios
COMMENTS:
The applicant is requesting a Variance to reduce the required
rear yard from twenty feet (20') to four feet (4') to complete
and legalize construction of a two (2) bedroom dwelling with
an attached two (2) car garage at the rear of 12435 Harris
Avenue in the R-2 (Two-Family Residential) zone. This case
was continued from the February 8, 1994 meeting to allow the
applicant to redesign his project under Conditional Use Permit
No. 137.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff respectfully requests that after consideration, the
Planning Commission deny this application.
4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. CUP 137
Applicant: Mario S. Rios
COMMENTS:
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use
_ Permit to complete development of a one (1) story dwelling
with an attached garage at 12435 Harris Avenue in the R-2
(Two-Family Residential) zone. This case was continued from
the March 8, 1994 meeting to allow the applicant to redesign
his project.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff respectfully requests that, after consideration, the I
Planning Commission determine that the applicant has not
complied with directions to redesign and resubmit this �
• proposal and deny this application. I
I
NEW PUBLIC HEARING: I
5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 138 I
Applicant: St. Francis Medical Center �
�
COMMENTS:
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use
I
Permit to develop a 69,000 foot, two (2) story birthing �
center, in conjunction with a major hospital complex to be I
located at 3630 Imperial Highway, in the H-M-D zone. The
birthing center will replace an,existing facility in the ;
hospital complex. i
RECOMMENDED ACTION: I
f
Staff resp,ectfully requests that, after consideration, the i
Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution No. 2500. '
1. Finding that the Conditional Use Permit Case No. 138, I
will not have a significant effect on the environment and i
certifying the negative declaration as adequate. �
2. Approving Conditional Use Permit No. 138, subject to the �
stated conditions and requirements. �
i
f:\wpfiles\apr94 '
�
�
" 3 ,
I
i
'
I
r
:�,
Z
6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. CUP 142
Applicant: Pastor Leroy G. Toliver
COMMENTS•
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use
Permit in order to re-establish a church and create Sunday
School and office space on existing vacant church property at
11400-11416 California Avenue in the R-2 (Two-Family
Residential) zone.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff respectfully requests that, after consideration, the
Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution 2510.
l. Certifying that the project is Categorically Exempt from
the provision of the State CEQA Guidelines as amended by
Section 15061b(3).
2. Approving Conditional Use Permit Case No. 142, subject to
the stated conditions and requirements.
7. VARIANCE CASE NO. VAR 30
Applicant: Earle M. Jorgenson
COMMENTS:
i
The applicant is requesting a Variance to increase the height
of a proposed wall from eight (8') feet to fourteen (14') feet
along the rear lot line of property at 10313 Alameda Street in i
the M(Manufacturing) zone, Lynwood, California.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: +
I
Staff respectfully requests that, after consideration, the I
' Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2512 approving the �
' Variance request. i
i
1. Finding that a hardship has been established that would i
require a Variance for Case No. 30 as determined by �
Section 25-26 of the City of Lynwood Zoning Code.
2. Finding that grantinq of the Variance as conditioned will
not constitute the granting of a special privilege �
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in �
the same zone. I
I
3. Finding that granting of the Variance will not adversely ,
affect the orderly development of the City. I
i
4. Finding that there are exceptional or extraordinary �
circumstances or conditions applicable to the property j
involved which do not apply generally to other properties (
in the same zone. �
I
8. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT CASE NO. GPA 9
Applicant: City of Lynwood �
COMMENTS: !
The City of Lynwood is proposing to amend the General Plan �
designation from Town House & Cluster Housing to Commercial ;
for six parcels of land totaling approximately 100,000
square feet located on the west side of Atlantic Avenue north
of Carlin Avenue in order to accommodate future commercial and �
or mixed use development. A Zone Change (ZC 10) to CB-1 is
being processed concurrently in order to make the zoning !
consistent with a revised General Plan Designation.
4 ,
i
I
�
�
��.
,.;
�
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff respectfully requests that after consideration, the
Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2516 recommending
approval of General Plan Amendment No. GPA 9.
9. ZONE CHANGE CASE NO. ZC 10
Applicant: City of Lynwood
COMMENTS:
The City of Lynwood is proposing a Zone Change (ZC 10) from R-
2(Two Family Residential) to CB-1 (Controlled Business) for
five parcels of land totalling approximately 127,000 square
feet located on the west side of Atlantic Avenue north of
Carlin Avenue. This rezone is necessary in order to bring the
zoning into consistency with a proposed General Plan Amendment
_ (GPA 9) for the same property to accommodate future commercial
and/or mixed use development.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff respectfully requests that after consideration, the
Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2517 recommending
approval of Zone Change ZC 10.
I
REGULAR ORDER OF BUSINESS: I
I
10. GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY. SALE OF CITY OWNED PROPERTY ON THE i
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LYNWOOD ROAD AND LINDBERGH AVENUE �
Applicant: City of Lynwood
COMMENTS: I
I
The City is proposing to sell three parcels of City owned �
property on the southwest corner of Lynwood Road and Lindbergh i
Avenue to the Lynwood Redevelopment Agency to assist in the �
development of three affordable single family homes.
RECOMMENDED ACTZON: �
Staff respectfully requests that, after consideration, the I
Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2515 finding that the
proposed sale of three City owned parcels to the Lynwood �
Redevelopment Agency for the future construction of three '
single family detached dwellings is consistent with the ;
Lynwood General Plan and direct staff to transmit this j
resolution to the City Council and the Lynwood Redevelopment �
Agency. (
j
I
COMMENTS I
PUBLIC ORALS I
COMMISSION ORALS '
STAFF ORALS I
• Report on Automotive & Fences/Walls Subcommittees. ;
ADJOURNMENT �
I
Adjourn to the regular meeting of the Planning Commission on May
l0, 1994 at 7:30 p.m., in the City Hall Council Chambers, 11330 i
Bullis Road, Lynwood, California.
f:\upfiles\apr94 i
5
�
R
� DATE: April 12, 1994
�}
� To: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: Sol Blumenfeld, Director� .
Community Development Depa ment
BY: Robert Diplock, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Case No. 139
Applicant: WATTS HEALTH FOUNDATION
PROPOSAL:
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit ,
and an associated Zone Change (from C-2 Commercial to H-M-D
Hospital Zone) in order to establish a Women and Children
Residential Rehabilitation Center in an existing vacant
convalescent hospital structure at 3598 Martin Luther King Jr.
Boulevard in the C-2 (Medium Commercial) zone. This case was
continued from the March 8, 1994 Planning Commission meeting to
this meeting in order to investigate the possibility of providing
additional parking and resolving other concerns raised in the
hearing.
FACTS:
1. Source of Authoritv
The proposed use is not a permitted use in the C-2 zone and
a Zone Change request (to H-M-D) is being processed
concurrently. The H-M-D zone permits convalescent homes by
right and institutions for treatment of alcoholics upon �
securing a Conditional Use Permit. If the Planning ,
Commission determines that the proposed use is conditionally I
permitted in this zone, then a Conditional Use Permit is i
required, under Section 25-13.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. !
I
2. Propertv Location I
The subject property consists of an existing vacant �
convalescent hospital building on the west side of Martin �
Luther King Jr. Boulevard at Norton Avenue (see attached �
location map).
3. Pronertv Size
i
The subject property is approximately 45,000 square feet in I
size. i
4. Existina Land Use
�
The subject site is an existing vacant convalescent '
hospital. The surrounding land uses are as follows: !
North-Commercial East-Commercial/Residential '
�
South-Commercial/Residential West-Residential !
5. General Plan and Zonina �
General Plan: Zonina: !
North-Commercial North- CB-1 I
South-Commercial South- R-3/H-M-D �
!
East-Commercial/Residential East- C-2/R-2/R-1 +
West-Multi-Family Residential West- R-3/P-1 �
i
t:\staffrpt\cup139aa.2 � �
1 �
i
I
I
I
!
f
.1
' 6. Proiect Characteristics:
The applicant proposes to establish a Women and Children
Rehabilitation Recovery Center in an existing vacant '
convalescent hospital building. Uhuru Women and Children's
Residential Center will provide comprehensive alcohol and
drug treatment services to chemically dependent women and
their children in a residence setting.
The center will provide a twenty-four hour, seven days a
week intensive Rehabilitation Recovery Program for up to one
year. The Center will be staffed twenty-four hours by
approximately thirty (30) Alcohol and Drug Treatment
Specialists, in three eight hours shifts. All clients
movement and activities (external and internal) will be
closely monitored by staff. The program is equipped to
, provide van transportation for clients throughout the
community. Twenty-four hour security will be utilized to
assure safety of the program participants .
The occupancy requested is 50. The property contains
fifteen (15) parking spaces, courtyards, play areas,
twenty-four (24) rooms with 2 beds each, eleven (11) rooms
with 3 beds each and twelve (12) rooms with 4 bed each.
There are seven activity rooms, storage rooms, a laundry, a
kitchen, plus a conference room, offices and restrooms.
on April 4, 1994, the applicant submitted a revised site
plan showing a parking layout for 18 parking spaces which
consists of 9 compact, 8 standard, 1 handicapped and 1 van
loading space.
7. Site Plan Review
At its regular meeting on Wednesday, December 22, 1993, the
Site Plan Review Committee evaluated the proposed
, development and recommended denial by the Planning
Commission because of inadequate parking and access and
circulation problems.
The proposed use is deficient in parking. Only 15 parking ,
spaces are provided on site or 18 as revised. During the day
most of these parking spaces would be used by staff and �
possible van parkinq. Additional special staffing come in ;
for treatment sessions. There would be very little or no
parking available for visitors, additional staff or any �
client that might be dropped off or picked up by private
automobile. All access to the parking on this site is �
through the alley which provides poor circulation.
i
Due to overcrowded parking conditions in the surrounding i
area, inadequate parking for the proposed use will further �
impact the existing parking problems in the area.
8. Zonina Enforcement History ;
None of Record '
9. Public Responses I
No written submittals at the time this report was prepared. ;
A number of persons spoke in favor of the project at the
March 8, 1994 public hearing.
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION: I
l. Consistency with General Plan and Zonina �
�
The proposed land use is consistent with the existing �
General Plan designation of Commercial. However, the
proposed use is not permitted in the C-2 zone. A rezone to '
i
2
�
I
•
�� H-M-D is required if the Planning Commission determines that
the proposed use is essentially similar to an "institution
,�° for the treatment of alcoholics", which is a permitted use
in the H-M-D zone with a Conditional Use Permit.
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. However, the site cannot
provide adequate parking and there is poor traffic
circulation with access only through the alley. The revised
van loading area is adequate in size but its location at the
end of the building does not permit a full turning movement,
and necessitates backing out of the parking space across a
public sidewalk. The parking spaces are very narrow which
may create a hazard with adjacent parking.
3. Comnatibility
The proposed development is surrounded by a mixture of
commercial, residential, and hospital-medical-dental uses.
Therefore, the project will be compatible with the
surrounding land uses. However, the project as proposed may
have a negative effect on the values of the surrounding
properties which are undergoing substantial revitalization
with improvements on the adjacent St. Francis Medical Center
campus.
4. Comoliance with Develonment Standards i
i
The proposal meets development standards required by the !
Zoning Ordinance with respect to setbacks, lot coverage, j
building height and density. If the proposed use were to i
locate in this facility, the building will be required to �
meet Title 24 (Access and Energy) and ADA Code requirement.
The major problem with this site is inadequate parking and �
poor traffic circulation. There are no specified parking !
requirements in the Zoning Ordinance for residential �
alcohol and drug treatment facilities. If this facility is
considered similar to a general hospital, approximately 50 I
parking spaces would be required (1 space per patient
bed). Medical/dental offices require 1 space per 250 square '
feet or approximately 72 spaces for the proposed use. The ;
previous use, a convalescent hospital, required only 1 space I
per 5 beds or a total of 10 spaces. !
The applicant proposes to bring clients to the facility and �
transport them off site for doctor visits, home visits, I
etc., by van, with staff, 50 patients and their children, I
visitors and special staff providing treatment or training,
however the vicinity is impacted with heavy parking demand
and the proposed development may worsen parkinq conditions �
if parking is undersupplied on-site. !
On April 4, 1994 the applicant submitted a letter �
(attached) stating that they have made an effort to locate '
off street parking as requested by the Commission but have
not been successful. No additional parking is proposed to be ;
provided, thus the proposal continues to be deficient in I
parking.
'
�
It is unlikely that the area shown in the revised parking �
layout could accommodate 18 parking spaces. Also, the
Municipal Code does not allow for more than 20% to 25%
compact spaces and then only for projects with at least one �
hundred and fifty (150) parkirig spaces. The parking issues �
still exist and has not been resolved. �
I
I
3
�
1
#'
t
''' 5.' Benefits to Communitv
�f
' The proposal would upgrade the use of the property which is
, now vacant. The new use likely would also provide some
local employment opportunities. However, the area in which
the proposed use is•to be located is undergoing substantial
revitalization with a soon to be completed 60,000 sq. ft.
Medical Office buildinq and 27,OOO,prenatal faaility on the
St. Francis Medical Center Campus. The proposed use can
potentiaTly create conflict with the surrounding medical-
office neighborhood. In addition, the vicinity is impacted
with heavy parking demand and the proposed development may
worsen parking conditions in the area if minimum code
requirements are not fulfilled.
6. Environmental Assessment
Staff has found that no substantial environmental impact
' will result from the proposed development; therefore, a
• Negative Declaration has been filed in the Community
Development Department and in the Office of the City
Clerk.
RECOMMENDATION
� Staff respectfully requests that, after consideration, the
Planning Commission deny this application due to an inadequate
parking supply which is inconsistent with Municipal Code
requirements, inadequate ingress and egress to project parking
which is,provided exclusive from an alley, and an inadequate
,off-street van loading and unloading area.
' ATTACHMENTS: �
. l. Location Map
2. Site Plan
3. Description OE Project Scope
` � �� f�:staffrpt\cup134aa.2 �
4
_ _.:..�
.
��. � _
�r I
� LOCATION iVIAP
2 r � � �� ryIy I � I �
� � ` � w', oV m�i `� ti �' .. q � :y.I K qy S n h �n i � �n � � .
� n n. 50 t �an :. � " �� 2n �i 30���•I��I�I• I• I�I•b�150 � � � i .��� . .
n
h
ti ABBOTl ° y o' . qO.1D - ° o � '
m � �
� � � xiPrS . )ao -� .
� ".`, 35 3�1 . . / - .� , _� � ,° � ,s '"ira,
, O�OJAC� � � � � � ;J . / i/� , e h 21 � ��I:
� � � . 10 � � I.
� •y, ,. � . t /d�v � /�
� . � y ,�p � . , . � � o` .
i�Y 6 Q� ' io o ra .../a9co
o�„ h 2 p S ie f ' � o�
Q 2� 'J p
G /o7P0
1 6 m 6 >f
.c y io7�ol B 6.1 /o�.
. ' �� � . . 6 5 m � � � io�ov �� y � Y� .
�'Y� � 5 Z ii:]�AC� o�o �P1� ' 0��� 'U3
aa g 5 ip�ev� : � I0 /0`
., �'
'�'Sti �� �` o v� r �� f �° i c
6 �( � /0 80 /I
�yR/ 1^g d � ro G /�i �, �!3 � ° � 0 /c.
6 .. v m� . ien n�i:osz o o i:
a' r� !'�� v . .. $ : I//8f � /7o�P � f Y 3� Af
�S �w � .� us � na.oz �s . fi402 . n.:.
ALMA '
� y `5� ,a r"''�� 9 a ,� � r b [�5 t o 3 c C � ° _ �
. -
� • ,��\ �e " �� � � ° 3 �� 1 . � �.o��b. , /�.�. �0�9 O6 .�
. � . 6 ^ �� �1^��'� r �� /1 )�� � � /D � b .
�� � � �,^,� 1 , f � r '�� 6�� • `� �° A -
. � e � � �� �a ` ^� \ a �_ _ �
. �� �b `, �J; �
� y . si Mo- � . �. . ` /o �>, NiO4 ' � .
� � O
� ,�. easvroa 8 r ,,b � i i� za ` o$� Q A_
g b z �� <o Y� , a ,�a y � � ' i 3 Zio� ' '
r
'� � , �' a � � �Ssg ss � � `� ,p ( ei I+ � ' ,, G a
� J/ l0 29 2! f 26 10` b /� . { 0, 1 OfY j. g 39��fy� . i
.. ne rto eo eo �os a � J '�� y ` � �, i
_ ^ ALLEY I J , � ' '
' I6.)i �t ] • ' " �)1 f60 -!E ` f 4 O �
�O �
G� _ � 2 e9
� JI . ry 6J � 64 � 3f 66 67 6C w � .� � N ' ` w� • 4 � e O� .,.
o n
5��3 356 ,ii/'3Sll 3.Si"i 3S8 3Sd1 lf5 ° � '
` lp ,fiq � � ,g.r u)s SPI� \ . � , ' � � I
� � AVENUf h'� � w M7RTON . AVE. �:�.
- ,ee<•�✓ . i . . �
�o sa to .ro so sa so o R,v a �. .va4� - �'� I
� I � � 25 � �/�o p f q A �N �' �
�y' � � p � � °o I � a - o I ry � � � � /R a ' �' ?'. .ur. � 3aa S
} O �9 J � �a ,�
�� � M mI M�� M MM M � , ` s ''�� 3 ���� .ey, >�� C• 6 ��� s
I 1 �
.� �� I � eo � �o I w. ��. � sa n� I so ueo � 3 ��OJ7 1 � �`.•�`'� ` .� s :• .
' � � �� � �
�( M�� I'`� � I . "� ,��" �$ ' �
�� �� � 4 W' � _ `' �y r � Y �: . ��� �� /���q I
,•b �l s ro MiM�MI (� \o \� MI� /�h�,� .4 3 �� iy �..,, 1 e ����� �
/\ �� z
, fp j0 BC !D 50� so So So So Stj 0 ��' /- . . p o Ti.� i
.. h..�.. � . . O �Z� �
J`� l.b 5 �LtY2-FS'-� $ ' o ,./� -.::' � i ^ �� �
. Sr�'t� p G �1�� '. ���
. ��, a 3 •�pl: `6.� �
. . 4 ��'�� � 1Z � i , ,
. . . . . 0 5 � . . i
n ' b �
n
� � . - � �� � � . . '
. � "� ,�\ M1 . , i
N Q OP j1tD P I'� � , •. �
�o/[ i-.ioo' .. ,�P6 . . . . . I
, . . . .. � ` .... ,:1`+� Y 1" 1, . . - ..
�
�
I
CASE N0. � '
� �
�
--i
,
��
t;;��,.�..-
,4� ' DATE: April 12, 1994
�
TOt PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: Sol Blumenfeld, Director�
Community Development Dep tment
BY: Robert Diplock, Planning Manger
SUBJECT: Zone Chancie - Case No. ZC 9
� . Applicant: WATTS HEALTH FOUNDATION
PROPOSAL:
The applicant is requesting approval of a Zone Change (ZC 9) from
C-2 (Commercial) to H-M-D (I3ospital, Medical and Dental) in
order to establish a Women and Children Residential Recovery
Center on a 45,000 square foot parcel, which contains a one story
existing'vacant convalescent hospital building on the west side
of Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard at Norton Avenue.
FACTS:
1. Source of Authoritv
Section 25-27.1 a. of the City Zoning ordinance allows the
property owner(s) to initiate a change in zoning boundaries
and classification. Section 25-24.1 authorizes the Planning
Commission to determine if a use not specifically listed
shall be deemed a permitted or Conditional Use in any zone.
2. Property Location:
, The subject property consist of an existing vacant
convalescent hospital building on the west side of Martin
Luther King Jr. Boulevard at Norton Avenue (see attached .
Location Map).
3. Property size•
The subject property is an irregular shaped lot,
' approximately 45,000 square feet in size.
4. Existinq Land Use:
The subject property is an existing vacant convalescent
hospital. The surrounding land uses are as follows: •.
North - Commercial
South - Commercial/Residential
East - Commercial/Residential
- West - Residential �
5. Land Use Desiqnation:
The General Plan designation for the subject property is
Commercial while the Zoning Classification is C-2. The
surrounding land use designations are as follows:
General Plan Zoning
North - Commercial North - CB-1
South - Commercial South - R-3/HMD
• East - Commercial/Residential East - C-2/R-2/R-1
West - Multi-Family Residential West - R-3/P-1
1
r
6. Proiect Characteristics � �
� �
The Zone Change is propbsed in order to allow for a Women
and Children Residential rehabilitation Center in an
existing •:25,000 square foot vacant_ convalescent hospital
building. The Municipal Code does;not contain provision for
a drug rehabilitation centes. The proposed use is not
specifically permitted in the H-M-D Zone but could be found
to be permitted if the Planning Commission determines that
it is similar to a permitted or conditionally permitted use,
in this case "an institution for the treatment of
alcoholics".♦ A residential drug and,aZcohol recovery center
is not specified as a permitted use in the H-M-D zone and
would require Commission determination that the proposed use
is essentially similar to the listed use of."institutions
for the treatment of alcoholics" and'could be found to be a
permitted use upon securing of a Conditional Use Permit.
7. Site Plan Review:
On December 22, 1993, the Site P1an Review Committee
evaluated the proposed zone change and recommended approval
to the Planning Commission, if the Commission determines to
approve the associated Conditional Use_Permit (CUP No. 139).
8. Zoning Enforcement Historv:
None of record for this use at th'e time this report was
prepared. _ �
. r. , �
9. Public Response: .
.
None of record at the time this report was prepared.
ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
1. Consistencv with General.Plan and Zonina �
The proposed land use is consistent with.the existing
General Plan designation of commercial: However, the
proposed use is not permitted in the existing zoning
classification (C-2). The proposed development would require
a Zone Change and'a Conditional Use Permit or a.Municipal
Code amendment to include the�.proposed use in.the C-2 or
- H-M-D zone. � . :
2. Site Suitability
� The property is adequate in size and shape to accommodate
the proposed development relative to structures, walls,
fences, landscapinq, and other development features required
by Zoning Ordinance. �However, the site cannot provide
adequate parking and bhere is poor traffic circulation with
access only through the alley. The revised van loading area
is adequate in size but its location at the end of the
building does not permit a full turning movement, and
necessitates backing out of the parking space across a
public.sidewalk. The parking spaces are very narrow which
may create a`hazard with adjacent parking:
3. Compliance with Development Standards
The subject area is adequate in size and shape to carry out
the intent of the H-M-D zoning category and can accommodate
the proposed development relative to the proposed density,
bulk of the structures, walls, fences, and other development
standazds required by the Zoning Ordinance. However the
proposed development cannot provide adequate.parkinq and on
site circulation,• and'proposes substandard off street
loading and unloading.
2
, l
�.
�e'� , DATE: „April 12, 1994
� TO: . , PLANNING COMMISSION .
FROM': Sol Blumenfeld, Director� - � '"
Community Development Dep tment
BY: � Robert Diplock,,Planning Manager �,
SUBJECT: Variance Case No.. 26 `
Applicant: Mario Saldana Rios, . �
Pr000sal• . ' �, , _
The applioant is requesting a Variance.to reduce the required
, rear yard from twenty (20') to four.(4') feet to complete and
legalize construction of a two (2) bedroom dwelling with.an
attached two (2).car garage at the rear of 12435 Harris Avenue in
the R-2,(Two.Family Residential) zone, Lynwood, California. This
case was continued from the February 8, 1994 meeting. to allow the
applicant to redesign his project under Conditional Use Permit
No. 137.
. Facts
1. Source of Authoritv: „ ,
Section 25-26.of the Lynwood Municipal Code permits a
Variance to be obtained from the Planning Commission when
there are special circumstances applicable to the property, .
and.when strict application of the Zoning Ordinance deprives
such�property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the
vicinity and under identical zoning classification.
2. Propertv Location and Size .
The site is located on the west side of Harris Avenue between
Carlin Avenue and Olanda Avenue (see the attached location
map)-: The subject property is a rectangular lot,
approximately 11,151 square feet (63'x177') in size.
3. ExistinQ Land Use �
The•subject site is current.ly developed with a single family
dwelling and a partially ,developed second unit with an
attached to a partially converted two (2) car garage. The
, surrounding land uses are follow:
North - Multi-Family/Single Family Residential
, South - Multi-Family Residential
East - Single Family Residential
west - Single Family Residential
4. Land•Use Descriotion ,
The General Plan designation for.the subject property is Town
House and Cluster Housing,, while the Zoning Classification is
R-2. The surrounding land use designation and zoning are as
follows:
General Plan Zoning
North - Town House &.Cluster�Housing R-2 .,
South - Town House &.Cluster Housing R-2 �
East - Town House &,Cluster Housing R-2
,West. - Town &:Cluster Aousing R-2 .,.
f:�staffrpt\var
1
m... r.,. . . .�,m�...
�;� ApYll 12, 1994
�` DATE:
p7,ANNING C�MMISSION
TO: '�L
�'� Blumenfeld, Director �jtment
Sol pevelopment Dep�lY'
FROM� community
Robert Diplock,
Planning Manager
BY� Case No. 137
Conditional Use Permit Rios
SUBJECT: Applicant: Mario Saldana
roval of a Conditional Use Permit
• p%p�sal' with an
requesting aPP story dwelling the R-2
licant is o f 1 Avenue in
The app ment a °ne � the
to complete develop o f 12435 Harris continued from
arage at the rear This case was n his
attached 9 Zone• the applicant to redesig
` (Two-Family Residentia to allow
February g, 1994 meeting
, project.
Bac_ k�una' ranted applicant's
1994, the Planning Commission 9 a redesigned
on February $� osal and resubmit Ordinance.
request to withdraw his PrOp uirements of the ZonMaSch 16, 1994
n bY,
project that would meet the re 1994 Commission meeting•
Appllcant was instructedthe Apr 1t12he redesig
in order to be heard at liCant
g, 1994, Staff sent a'letter to the aPP1994 in'
lans by March 16, 1994.
On February ril 12,
indicating that he must submit revco� ssion on Ap licant
order to return to the St ff nt a letter to the apP
On February 14, 1994, ro ect. The
listing what was needed for the redesi lansfbh1Marpch716, 1994.
letter also restated the need to submit p Y
on March 14, 1994, staff faxed the February 14th letter to the,
applicant's consultant. No plans were submitted by MarCh 16,
1994.
on March ai, 1994 staff sent a letter to the dpp1lCant �skl�g
whether the applicant WlShfld t0 '
before the Commission, or 2 1 � contlnue his 1ppli�ation
) withdraw his application. During
the week of.March 2oth, Staff called the applicant and his
consultant to obtain a response to previous*inquires. However,
neither the applicant or consultant could be�reached. As of the
date of this report, staff has not been contacted by the
applicant or his consultant and no plans have been submitted.
Facts•
1. Source of Authorit :
Section 25-4.2 of the Lynwood Municipal Code reciillreS thdt
Conditional Use Permit be obtained for any residential
development in the R-2 (Two-Family Residential) Zone.
2• Pro ert Location•
The subject site is located on the west side of Harris Avenue
between Carlin Avenue and Olanda Avenue (see attached
Location Map),
3 • Propertv Size
, The sub q ct pro ert is gular lot, approximately
11,151 s uare feet ( 3'x 177 ) c n size.
f:�staffrpt\cup137 � � �
1
, _
t` ' . . ' '. .. . . � �
p/ ' ..
'F 4. Existina Land Use:
,j � The subject site is currently developediwith a single family
: dwelling, and a partially developed second unit with an
attached , partially converted, two ('2) car garage. The
surrounding land uses are as follows:
North - Multi-Family/Single Family Residential
South - Mu1ti-Family Residential
East - Single Family Residential
' West - Single Family Residential .
� C 5. Land Use Desianation:
The General Plan Designation for the subject property is Town
House and Cluster Housing, while the Zoning Classification is
R-2. The surrounding land use designations and zoning are as
' follows:
General Plan Zoning
`. North - Town House & Cluster Housing North - R-2
South - Town House & Cluster Housing South - R-2
East - Town House & Cluster Housing East - R-2
� West - Town House & Cluster Housing West - R-2
6. Proiect Characteristics:
The applicant had proposed to complete development of a
. 997.6 square foot, one (1) story residential dwelling with an
attached two (2) car garage by converting .an illegally
r_onstructed garage and carport to a portion of a residential
' constructed garage and carport area to.an,illegally converted '
- storage area. At the Planning Commission meeting of February
:. 8, 1994, the applicant withdrew this proposal and indicated
� that he wished to submit a redesigned proposal that would
meet all zoning requirements.
J. Site Plan Review �
, At its regular meeting on December 22, 1993, the Site Plan .
Review Committee evaluated the'original proposal and
` recommended denial to the Planning Commission. The Committee
determined that the proposed development could be built in
• such a way that there wouTd be no need to reduce the required
rear yard given the size of the lot and placement of the
. existing dwelling.
'"8. Zonina Enforcement Historv
' On March 22, 1993, the Code Enforcement Division cited the
property owner for the illegal conversion of.a garage to a•
residence, illegal security bars and doors, illegal garage,
and illegal carport.
On.April 14th and 26th, 1993, Planning Staff reviewed the
� applicant's plans and requested that the plans be redesigned.
� On May 12, 1943, the Code Enforcement Division issued a Final
Notice to the property owner to correct violations.
' 9. Public Response
None of record at the time this report was prepared.
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION:
1. Consistency with General Plan
The proposed land use is consistent with the existing zoning ,
classification R-2 Two-Family,Residential and the General
Ylan designation of Town House and Cluster Housing.
2 .
�
' l 2. Site Suitability
'' � The property is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
�� proposed development relative to structures, parking, walls,
, fences, landscaping, driveways and other developmept £eatures
required by the Zoning.ordinance. However, the original
_. °' proposal which called for the existing dwelling unit and.
dwelling unit to be located toward the rear of the site, did
• not meet rear yard requirements.
3. Comoatibilitv •
The proposed development is surrounded by a mixture of uses,
with multi-family residential north and south of the subject
site, and single family dwellings to the east and west. The
, uses in this.asea have rear yards, thus making the proposal
'. incompatibility with the rear yard characteristics of the
neighborhood
°. 4. ComAliance with Development Standards
The�original proposal met the development standards required
by the Zoning Ordinance with respect to setbacks, lot
, coverage, building height and density. However,�it did not
meet the rear yard required of the Zoning Ordinance. Under
-. , another application, the applicant.requested approval of a
Variance to reduce the required rear yard from twenty (20')
" to four (4') feet. '
5. Benefits to Communitv
The original proposal will not assist in upgrading the
residential uae in the area and did not support the
residential goals of the General Plan.
The improvements as proposed, providing only a four (4') foot
rear yard, would have a negative effect on the neighborhood
', and on would of the surrounding properties and interfere with,
' or endanger the public health, safety, or welfare.
, 6. Environmental Assessment
The Di'rector of Community development has determined that
the project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to State CEQA
_ Guidelines as amended by Section 15061b (3). .
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff respectfuily requests that, after consideration, the.
Planning Commission determine that the applicant has not complied
with d'irections to redesign and resubmit this proposal and deny
.this application.
,, 3
ATTACHMENTS:
l. Location Map
� _ , . ,
<
- f:\staftrpt\tup137 � - � . . . � �
' 3 .
w , ..
,
., k .
;
� � LO�ATION 6VfAP
: . .. 6 . .. . �. .
. , . _ . sG ' ' .
. . , T W G'�^� , , . ,
o ` �
� h �1 , ��w� Gil _'.
� , � � , ` 0 � � � . . . .
4 qo���
. , . '� ��` / p'
. � � ' � h 'i��� 'fp � '[� .
. , . � `\s � . +1 � / `
. `�� e7 / �' :.
. � ../ � ' �� � r O , a ::
� r,� b :.�.�� $/ / (� y � ',,�. a �6 �
�� ' � r ,� Ot da r � ➢) e3 .� ., �� y �� • �! uN L .�' � 't ' "" � O7 0
' a .. �= e: 2� zs°`� ir 'e �� �.
, �� O o R = � 1 � = . ' J �s � j 2 . �
� ,� s � Jy ::� z . '�� "` ��:„
i (�/ l o . l. a ` N� ,..
. �. .� s, ` °j � / .
. ` ' . n�'� ' ' �R�� � "� �o� �> $ `� � ' ` '� �� ri. � � ..
� �� s\ S J �p v � �"P3 . � // �� �� j � �Q ; /' o �'>�a�� ♦ � ' if?r
ri �Ci' I� � o � / TR ? a � w v `.
. r \ Q . s � ( 3 S ° , 3 P �
' � � � ry 5 ^� J : � s.?i_ r Sr l ,.�° to .o ! f 'y srar � . �.
�I. � �. : s>o J /° z ' S � T b
. 5 j . e J,� b .+ �� Y�lo � � � .96B 9 4 .�»� $� ��� �� t.:� � 3 � x d , � f
. ' ?a � "� . . O � ' /D � A � 4 P '� ` [f / V v !a
b � e ` s �p � 4 •r j� ��: 2
. : t � s. .Q`/c N s �pi @va� ' _ � . ��.,� ; he ry J � 6_ � - �
G . 4 c ' . . ' v .f � � . �i�. ° �
� 9\ ���� e 0 i �. ` ` e 'i1 � � J ti Q ♦'x. 1 .r ,.14 � . .
�. o _ . 3 :� .S Cn , a . v ' y «
�' ♦ 9� �o�� 1 t .h �'c f � � ' � �'r•ta � ♦ '� •� i
� ii �' 1 , g Q p ry f b
'Y . b .�� e /�J� i G t�� h � �_ '�' ' ,L S O ` , S .�a � ` '�a , � is... . .
. �rri; � iJ 1 �.. 1 � �°�� ' 'z o �.°e 6� � ..
�i R � 2 S 2 �t
. ,.. _. o. o ''•+, O y 6"�a> 66 .
. , a4.: s. 8 a �'� j � � \\ •�
. . . . ,:• � '"+�a 6s-
l
' 9 t ,.' � , . g ,P. _.
. . . . .� „ �.t� �6a -
. < � - /o � 0 9 =:e, � � 6
. . xz.� x� 9 .,ii o. 3
_ ' ' , e / . ' . .,
� �rr 6I
, . . . ,� C// '�r�y' '�rb ' /j A . � ` .
' I xx.4- . *ea6/ .
� . � i� n? r m (' i>a�� // /I 0 . .
. , y � � J � , �O
.. . , , � ,�� /3 . �ei� � . � '� .' . .
�t ` 2
. � .� r. c e Q ��-'� ��. / °�:�� �i... 'S'9 , .
� a 2 � �� 4 '
. / v:., �s>e �,7 ,� �.ee . O �9
. �� . � i� yy �1��� . � , a� .
. ' �� >t.� .' � � '
�.. • O S�
� � L/� a /a � � �. � � l\:_ .
���
.!N ��` s�'°=„ tt s
' ,�;�; 3 � ° ••.
' v. ..( s .
. ` ��'
. , � o Sa
x
�o,� , .,oe
�.
CA�SE � �
_ N0 _
.
l�J 3
�. � �. � �
i
DATE: April 12, 1994 �
'1 � � ,
•� 1 TO: PLANNING COMMZSSION
FROM: Sol B1'umenfeld, Director�
Commuriity Development Dep tment
BY: Robert Diplock, Planning Manager
SU&7ECT: Conditional Use Permit Case No. 138
Applicant: St. Francis Medical Center
Proposal•
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit
to develop a 69,000 square foot, two (2) story birthing center,
in conjunction with a major hospital complex located at 3630
Imperial Highway, in the HMD zone. The birthing center will
replace an existing facility in the hospital complex.
Facts•
1. Source of Authoritv
Section 25-13.8 of the Lynwood Municipal Code requires that
all new buildings or structures developed in the HMD zone
obtain approval of a Conditional Use Permit from the
Planning Commission.
2. Propertv Location I
i
The property is located in the Hospital, Medical, and Dental j
(HMD) 2one on the south side of E. Imperial Highway, at
Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. The property presently i
houses St. Francis Medical Center (medical facilities, �
parking structures and power plant and associated
" structures). The site for the proposed birthing center is �
a surface parking area located at the corner of Imperial �
Highway and Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard. See attached
location map.
I
The proposed facility lies within an area covered by the St. �
Francis Medical Center Master Plan on file with the �
Community Development Department. I
3. Property Size ;
The subject property is an irregular shaped lot
approximately 12.64 ± acres. '
4. Existincr Land Use ;
The subject site is flat, containing St. Francis Medical
Center and parking garage structures. The surrounding uses ,
are as follows: i
North - Commercial South - Public Park �
i
East - Hospital, Medical, West - Commercial/ I
Parking Garage Structures Residential
�
;
�
f:�staffrpt\tup138 �
�
I
. 1
i
i
I
'
• � , 1
�
5. Land Use Description
�
General Plan: ` Zonina:
North - Commercial North - HMD, CB-1
South - Public Park South - Public Facility
East - Commercial/ East - HMD, R-3
Townhouse
and Cluster Housing
West - Commercial/ West - C-2 (General
Multi-Family Commercial)/R-3
Residential (Multiple Family
Residential)
6. Proiect Characteristics:
As a part of an approved St. Francis Medical Center Master
Plan and modernization of the existing on-site birthing
facility, the applicant proposes to develop a 69,000 square
foot, two story birthing center. The facility will contain
32 beds with 20 beds in an intensive care unit. The center
will contain 20 Labor/Delivery/Recovery units and 32 newborn
bassinets. The center will be connected to the main Medical
Center via an at grade land connector. The existing access
point on Imperial Hiqhway will service the building as well
as an on-campus roadway to an on-site parking structure.
The Lynwood Municipal Code requires a total of 468 parking
spaces for the St. Francis birthing center, or one (1)
parking space per bed. Based on a traffic impact analysis
and parking study for the medical center (including the
proposed birthing center), prepared in December, 1993, 937
on site parking spaces will be available for the Medical
Center. The Municipal Code requires 468 parking spaces for �
the proposed birthing center. After, deducting surface '
, parking removed by the proposed building, and eliminating
off-site parking, a surplus of 99 parking spaces will be �
available to St. Francis Medical Center campus. i
The applicant has filed a landscape plan for the proposed I
birthing center for review. The plan calls for an
additional 16,420 square feet of landscape area, or an I
increase of 26 per cent over existing landscaped areas on �
campus.
i
7. Site Plan Review
�
At its regular meeting on March 30, 1994, the Site Plan' '
Review Committee evaluated the proposed development and
recommended approval to the Planning Commission, subject to'
specific conditions and requirements. i
i
8. Zonincr Enforcement Histo� ;
None of record. �
9. Public Response
None of record.
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION: i
1. Consistencv with General Plan �
The proposed land use is consistent with the existing Zoning �
Classification (HMD) and General Plan designation of i
Commercial. Therefore, granting Conditional Use Permit No.
138 will be in conformance with and not adversely affect the '
General Plan.
!
,
2
i
�
I
,,
�
�
2. Consistencv with Medical Center Master Plan
�ti
The proposed land use is consistent with the approved goals
and policies of the St. Francis Medical Center Master Plan.
Therefore, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 138 will be
in conformance with and not adversely affect the Medical
Campus master plan.
2. Site Suitabilitv
The property is adequate in size and shape to accommodate
the proposed development relative to structures, parking,
walls, fences, landscaping, driveways and other development
features required by the Zoning Ordinance.
4. Compatibility
The proposed development is surrounded by a mixture of
commercial and hospital, medical and dental uses. There is
a public park to the south; to the north, south and west of
the proposed use are commercial uses; and to the east are
hospital, medical and dental uses. Therefore, the project
will be compatible with the surrounding land uses.
5. 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 and CMP requirements.
6. Conditions of Approval ��
The improvements as proposed, subject to the conditions
recommended by the Site Plan Review Committee, will not have
a negative effect on the values of the surrounding �
properties or interfere with or endanger the public health, �
safety or welfare �
I
,7. Benefits to Communitv �
The proposal will assist in upgrading the Hospital, Medical,
Dental uses of the property provide improved medical '
services, and support the purpose and intent of the General '
Plan. I
8. Environmental Assessment j
Staff has found that no substantial environmental impacts
will result from the proposed developmen,t; therefore, a '
Negative Declaration has been filed in the Community i
Development Department and in the office of the City Clerk. �
RECOMMENDATION: I
I
Staff respectfully request that, after consideration, the �
Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution No. 2500: ,
1. Finding that the Conditional Use Permit Case No. 138, I
will not have a significant effect on the environment
and certifying the negative declaration as complete.
2. Approving Conditional Use Permit No. 138, subject to I
the stated conditions and requirements.
ATTACHMENTS• I �
I
1. Location Map - �
2. Resolution No. 2500
3. Site Plan
- f:.�staffrpt\cup138 . �
3
�
(
�
��� �n� �oN
�
N
' ,n• +
/
. . ..,.a� i�
h ri.
n Ni
�i �q �
�
•..
� - 7,
4 / �
+ 3 ��� 3j't sf
"� N
��;/' �/„ f�0��
o� t�•
�.; � ,x
.., � � .
/i '-°
. a,o
�\ '•.
�„ ±
' rr �G
ti1
�sd�
o �� M N'� �
I �
I y �
/ `IW �I
`r3r 41
���`` I I
� I i
�` I I I
'� �r�\� � x �GCI . ��
/ ♦ u
�~� r �r ��` W'ir � >' � � ��
�� s ,.
3n,v3.1 r
.� y�_ i �' p iy s i J �` i'
�
s�,
_k
�a I
0
� r
�
S �S g, J
e �5+
��
n�
. ` �
' In � �
� Nl°- ,.
y d��
�����
s a �
i �� q
5 ,��
�✓
� / ,�e
. \
r
o� d
,�
.
♦° P ^ � ^
. � �,.
� �
� '�c� ; a
V I �
i �
dq
r
�,. .. � 3 I�e \
.
N �qi� ` 9 i ' � . * \ � ,� r � o , n � �p
� /° "� r r� . a / "V h cqL
N p� \
a „ a�d
mn
i
��� . NQIdKW d:�
� R ��
Z •
�
ddU1! NOIl`d�0�
�
�.
,
_; �
._ ,.
�
�
;,
RESOLUTION NO. 2500
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LYNWOOD
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.
138 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 69,000
SQUARE FOOT, TWO (2) STORY BIRTHING
CENTER IN THE HMD (HOSPITAL, MEDICAL,
AND DENTAL) ZONE.
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 negative effect on the
environment, and has therefore declared a Negative Declaration
for the project; and
WHEREAS, a Conditional Use Permit is required for
development of a new commercial use in the area designated as
Commercial under the General Plan and in a HMD (Hospital, Medical
and Dental) zone.
Section 1. The Planning Commission hereby finds and
determines as follows:
A. The site of the proposed use is adequate in size and �
shape to accommodate the structures, parking, walls, �,
landscaping, driveways and other development features as
required by the Official Zoning Ordinance.
i
B. The structures, as proposed, subject to conditions, will �
not have a negative effect on the values of surrounding
� properties or interfere with or endanger the public, i
health, safety, or welfare. i
i
C. The site will be developed pursuant to the current ;
zoning regulations and site plan submitted and reviewed �
by the Site plan Review Committee. �
D. The granting of the Conditional Use Permit will be in �
conformance with and not adversely affect the General
Plan.
I
E. The proposed development will ,aid in aesthetically I
upgrading the area and will act as a catalyst in �
fostering other quality commercial developments in the i
surrounding area. �
Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City o.f Lynwood, I
based upon the aforementioned findings and determinations, hereby
approves Conditional Use Permit, Case No. 138, provided the i
following conditions are observed and complied with at all times.
i
i
i
I
I
i
i
�
f:�resolutn�reso2500 � ��
I
1 �
I
I
, �
�
!
, COMMiJNITY 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
Development Department, Planning Division, for review.
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 proposed project located in Redevelopment Project Area
"A" shall be presented to the Redevelopment Agency for
approval.
5. 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).
6. The development shall be of a quality and character which 'i
enhances and harmonizes with existing developments located
in the surrounding area. �
i
7. The proposed design shall be compatible with existing �
developments in the area in terms of scale, height, bulk,
materials, colors. �
8. The main entrance to the primary building shall provide for
independent access to the physically impaired in accordance !
with Title 24.
9. The street address shall be dis la ed in a �
P y prominent
location on the street side of the building. All address '
numbers shall be easily visible to vehicular and/or i
pedestrian traffic. The street address and room numbers �
shall be no less than six (6) inches in height and no less
than 3/4 inch stroke width and shall be of a color �
contrasting to the background to which they are attached, �
subject to review and approval of Fire Department. �
I
10. 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. �
11. The parking aisle width shall be twenty-five (25') feet.
Exits from parking lot shall be clearly posted with stop '
signs.
12. No sign shall be erected without a sign permit. �
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 i
permitted.
�
15. Billboards signs are prohibited.
16. There shall be a 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 12 months.
�
I
2
r
�
�
17. The applicant or his/her successor in interest shall provide
`i evidence of good-faith compliance with all of the
requirements at the time of said review.
18. 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.
PLANNZNG DIVISION
19. The Congestion Management Program Plan (CMP) requires that
the project provide the following to the satisfaction of the
Director of Community Development:
a. A bulletin board, display case, or kiosk displaying
transportation information located where the greatest
number of employees are likely to see it. Information
in the area shall include, but is not limited to, the
following:
1. Current maps, routes and schedules for public
transit routes serving the site;
2. Telephone numbers for referrals on transportation
information including numbers for the regional
ridesharing agency and local transit operators;
3. Ridesharing promotional material supplied by
commuter-oriented organizations;
4. Bicycle route and facility information, including
regional/local bicycle maps and bicycle safety I
information;
5. A listing of facilities available for carpoolers, �
vanpoolers, bicyclists, transit riders and I
pedestrians at the site. �
I
b. Not less than 8.5� of the total number of required i
parking shall be located as close as is practical to the �
employee entrance(s), and shall be reserved for use by �
potential carpool/vanpool vehicles, without displacing r
handicapped and customer parking needs. This
preferential carpool/vanpool parking area shall be �
identified on the site plan upon application for �
building identified on the site plan upon application �
for building permit, to the satisfaction of the City of
Lynwood Community Development Department. A statement ,
that preferential carpool/vanpool spaces for employees �
are available and a description of the method for �
obtaining such spaces must be included on the required
transportation information board. Spaces will be '
signed/striped as demand warrants; provided that at all ?
times at least one space for projects of 50,000 square �
- feet to 100,000 square feet will be signed/striped for I
carpool/vanpool vehicles.
i
c. Preferential parking spaces reserved for vanpools must I
be accessible to vanpool vehicles. When located within �
a parking structure, a minimum vertical interior !
clearance of 7'2" shall be provided for those spaces and
accessways to be used by such vehicles. Adequate !
turning radius and parking space dimensions shall also
be included in vanpool parking areas.
i
I
�
3
.
��
�
d. Bicycle racks or other secure bicycle parking shall be
provided to accommodate four bicycles per the first
50,000 square feet of non-residential development and
one bicycle per each additional 50,000 square feet of
non-residential development. Calculations which result
in a fraction of .5 or higher shall be rounded up to the
nearest whole number. A bicycle parking facility may
also be a fully enclosed space or locker accessible only-
to the owner or operator of the bicycle, which protects
the bike from inclement weather. Specific facilities
and location (e.g. provision of racks, lockers, or
locked room) shall be to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Director.
20. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Post Office (Lynwood
main office) to establish the location of mail boxes serving
the proposed development.
21. This Conditional Use Permit shall lapse and become void one
hundred and twenty (120) days after the Conditional Use
Permit has been abandoned or has ceased to be actively
exercised.
22. Construction shall commence within six (6) months from date
of issuance of building permits.
Landscaoinq
23. The applicant is required to submit a landscape plan drawn
by a licensed architect subject to the review and approval
of the Director of Community Development prior to issuance �
of a building permit.
24. A11 landscaped areas shall be landscaped with a mixture of �
ground cover, shrubs and trees, and may include decorative '
rock, sculpture, and walkways, within the major parking i
area, subject to review and approval of the Community ;
Development Department.
25. Landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance �
i
with a detailed plan to be submitted and approved by the 1
Planning Division prior to issuance of any building permits. �
The minimum plant material shall be trees and shrubs I
combined with ground cover as follows: one (1) five (5) �
gallon shrub for each 100 square feet of landscaped area; �
and two (2) fifteen gallon trees for each 500 square feet of �
landscaped areas: �
26. The amount of landscaping required shall be provided and I
consistent with the proposed landscape plan. '
I
27. All other existing mature trees and other significant
vegetation should be preserved and integrated into the �
landscape plan to the satisfaction of the Community �
Development Director or his/her designee. I
28. All landscaping shall be permanently maintained. Lawn and i
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 irrigation system shall be provided and maintained '
in working condition. ;
29. Where vehicles are to be parked immediately adjacent to a' I
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. Zf
a wall is provided, there must be minimum landscaping to �
screen the wall from street view and accessibility. i
I
'
4 i
A
f
�
30. Prior to the installation or construction of any fence or
masonry wall within any zone, the 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, heights,
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 iiefined 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.
31. All fences or masonry walls shall be required to 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 in accordance with Title
24. Pedestrian and vehicular access shall be provided.
32. 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 Community
Development Director or his/her designee.
33. The applicant must provide trash enclosures consistent with I
the materials and color of the main building(s), with gates, '
on the site of the subject property. The trash enclosure I
shall be built pursuant to 25-16.7 of the Municipal Code. j
- Parkina
i
34. Provide one (1) parking space per bed. Adhere to the �
Findings and Conclusion (regarding parking) under the Draft
Traffic Impact Analysis and Parking Study for St. Francis
Medical Center in the City of Lynwood, California, December, �
1993 (Ref. No. 9310.05), i
35. If provided, each off-street parking space shall not be less �
than twenty (20) feet in length and nine (9) feet in width,
exclusive of access driveways or aisles, except as noted
below: I
i
a. Any standard parking space that is immediately adjacent !
to a wall, structural column, light standards, or I
similar obstruction on one or both of its longer sides �
or in an enclosed space shall be at least ten (10') feet �
in width and twenty (20') feet in length.
b. At a minimum, two parking spaces designed for the
handicapped shall be provided. These spaces may be '
provided as follows:
1. 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 I
five (5) foot loading and unloading area or; " i
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 (20) feet.
I
5 i
} ,
c� -
. �� .
�, 3. Location: 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 and shall be posted
with appropriate handicap signage.
36. The parking lot plan for the subject site shall have a
circular-flow arrangement without dead-end aisles when
possible. •�
'� 37. The applicant shall submit elevation drawings to the
Planning Division showing the exterior building design,
' including the specification of colors, and materials. Prior
' to the issuance of building permits, the design of the
subject building including color and materials, must obtain
, approval by the Director of Community Development.
' 38, 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.
' 39. Central heating, cooling ventilation equipment, pumps and
heaters and any such mechanical devices shall be screened
. from public view. Such equipment shall'be screened from �
surrounding properties and streets and operated so that they
do not disturb the peace, quiet and comfort of neighboring
residents, in accordance with the City's Noise Ordinance.
AT1 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.
40. All security fences, grills, etc. shall be architecturally
compatible with the design of the subject and adjacent
' buildings. In addition, no security fences, grills, etc.
shall be installed without the prior written approval of the
Director.of-Community Development and required building
permits as per plan.
41. The existing property shall be cleaned and maintained in a
_ sanitary condition pending construction and shall be
maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all times.
Failure to comply may result in revocation of the •
, Conditional Use Permit.
42. Applicant will maintain a pro-active approach to the
elimination of graffiti from the structures, fences and any
accessory building, on a daily basis.
Maintenance of sidewalk, parking area, gutters and any '
surrounding area will be done a minimum of twice a day �j
(before starting operations and before closing). �
i
., 43. A cover sheet with approved conditions must be attached to �
plans prior to submission to the Building and Safety
Division. I
I
44. Any violation of said conditions in this resolution may
result in revocation or modification of the Cohditional Use
„ Permit•by the issuing body at a regularly scheduled meeting.
PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEER DIVISION �
45. Submit a copy of the property deed or recent title report to �
the Department of Public Works, ,
� �
� f:\resolutn\reso2500 . , . I
�
�
6 i
i
I
�
-
;,
a
46. Dedicate required property at the southeast corner of
Imperial Highway and Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard to
accommodate an ADA approved wheel chair ramp.
47. Submit a grading plan prepared and signed by a registered
Civil Engineer. The grading plan will be checked by the
Public Works Department. No building permit will be issued
prior to the approval of a grading plan by the City
Engineer.
48. Reconstruct damaged curb and gutter along Imperial Hwy.
49. Connect to public sewer. Each building shall be connected
separately. Construct laterals as necessary.
50. Underground all utilities.
51. All Edison vaults and structures shall be placed
underground.
52. A permit from the Enqineering Division is required for all
off-site improvements.
53. 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.
FIRE DEPARTMENT �
I
i
54. Provide F.D.C. on the Imperial side of the building (Fire I
, Department Connection). �
55. Provide four (4) foot accessible gate on the Martin Luther I
King, Jr. Boulevard side for the Fire Department use only. I
56. Submit sprinkler plans to the Fire Department for plan +
check.
I
�
I
I
I
�
i
i
I
�
I
I
i
�
I
� i
, I
f : \resol utn\reso\2500
�
7
? J�
F�,
�{
Section 3. A copy of Resolution No. 2455 shall be delivered
to the applicant.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 1994, by members
of the Planning Commission voting as follows:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Errick R. Lee
Chairperson
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM: I '
i
i
' I
I
�
Sol Blumenfeld, Director Michele Beal Bagneris
Community Development Department Deputy City Attorney
i
I
�
I
i
(
i
�
I
I
�
�
t:�resolutn\reso2500 � ' , �
�
8 �
I
� DATE: April 12, 1994
H
To: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: Sol Blumenfeld, Director�
Community Development Dep tment
BY: Robert Diplock, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Case No. 142
Applicant: PASTOR LEROY G. TOLIVER
PROPOSAL:
l
The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit
in order to reestablish a Church, and create Sunday School and
office space on existing vacant Church property at 11400 - 11416
California Avenue in the R-2 (Two-Family Residential) zone.
FACTS
1. Source of Authoritv
Subsection 25-9.1d of the Lynwood Municipal Code provides
that a Conditional Use Permit is required to establish
churches, synagogues, temples, and other places used for
religious worship.
2. Property Location I
The subject property consists of an existing vacant church, I
two four (4) units apartments and a single family dwelling �
on the southeast corner of California and Mulford Avenue �
(see attached location map), i
3. Prooerty Size
i
The subject property is approximately 36,000 square feet in �
, size (200 ft. X 180 ft.). !
4. Existina Land Use �
The subject site contains an existing vacant church, two i
four (4) units apartments and a single family dwelling. The �
' surrounding land uses are as follows: ;
i
North - Two-Family Residential �
South - Two-Family Residential I
East - Two-Family residential
West - Two-Family residential I
5. General Plan and Zonina
General Plan: Zonina• I
I
North - Townhouse & Cluster Housing North- R-3
I
South - Townhouse & Cluster Housing South- R-3 I
East - Townhouse & Cluster Housing East - R-3 I
West- Commercial West - C-2
I
i
f;\staffrpt\cupi42a '�
I
I
1 I
i
�
:�
_, 6: Prolect Characteristics:
•
The applicant proposes to reestablish a church and create
Sunday School and office spaces on an existing vacant church
property. The applicant will remodel the two existing four
(4) unit apartments for offices, conference rooms, and
Sunday School rooms in the operation of the Church. The
single family dwelling on site is to be demolished to
provide for additional parking spaces. A total of 55 parking
spaces are provided for the proposed use.
On June 14, 1983, a Conditional Use Permit was issued to the
previous owner for the Church and to move on two (2)
multi-family units. However, the CUP lapsed after one year
because the Conditions of Approval were not complied with.
A Tentative Parcel Map was approved on the same date, but
it was never completed or filed for review. A time
extension was requested but denied because of code
violations. Therefore the original CUP and Map approval are
no longer valid.
City ordinance required that when Conditional Use Permits
are granted, the applicant must bring property into
compliance with current ordinance requirements.
7. Site Plan Review
At its regular meeting on Monday, March 28, 1994, the Site
Plan Review Committee evaluated the proposed development and
recommended approval by the Planning Commission subject to
certain requirements and conditions. i
8. Zonina Enforcement Historv '
On November 20, 1991, the City found the structure at 11410 ;
California Avenue to be unsafe, declared a nuisance, and
required demolition. At the time this report was prepared ;
the structure has not been demolished. Other violations �
include a number of Building Code violations.
I
9. Public Responses i
Ms. Roberta Rees, 3548 Mulford Avenue called to ask about �
the proposal. She has concerns about the operation of the I
Church. There were no other public responses at the time �
this report was prepared. )
f
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION: I
l. Consistencv with General Plan and Zonina '
The proposed land use is consistent with the existing I
General Plan �designation of Townhouse and Cluster Housing. j
The proposed use is permitted in the R-2 zone with a �
Conditional Use Permit. • ,
2. Site Suitabilitv !
i
The property is adequate in size and shape to accommodate ;
the proposed development relative to structures, walls, �
fences, landscapinq, and other development features
required by the Zoning Ordinance. However, it may be �
necessary to consolidate the parcels on the site in order to �
have a single lot for the proposed use. There are adequate
parking spaces on site for the use. I
,
3. Compatibilitv '
The ro osed �
p p project is surrounded by predominately �
residential development and will be compatible with the �
surrounding land uses. The project as proposed would not
i
2 I
I
I
�
� '
,�;
; have a negative effect on the values of the surrounding
�, properties or interfere with or endanger the public health
'" or welfare.
4. Compliance with Develooment Standards
The proposal meets development standards required by the
, Zoning Ordinance with respect to setbacks, lot coverage,
building height and density. There is adequate parking on ,
site for the proposed use.
� 5. Benefits to Communitv
The proposal would upgrade,.the use of the property which is
now vacant. The new use likely would upgrade the aesthetic
quality of the site and neighborhood.
6. Environinental Assessment �
The project is Categorically Exempt from the provisions of
. the State CEQA Guidelines as amended by Section 15061b(3).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff respectfully requests that, after consideration, the
� Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution 2510: �
A: Certifying that the project is categorically exempt
_ from the provision of the State CEQA Guidelines as
amended by Section 15061b(3).
B. Approving Conditional Use Permit Case No. 142,
. subject to the stated conditions and requirements.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Resolution No.2510
3. Site Plan
�� � . t:istaffrp[icup142a � �
- 3'
: i
_. . _ . __ _ _ _ _. - --
_ __.. __._ __ _.__`.._____
•--- -..._ .-- - - -�--- ._.._----
_ --- -
� � e ___ ..— ............ ....._— _,,,,,_
'i:
_ ? �,,�
..�
's4
L4CATION iVIAP Y `�
;�
,.`.
� � . . '__ h -... a iI o � � d ' �fi :'9 %r '° �o a "' � ;9 'n a3O . .
IL ' � Ml+l "' ^' "' im "' ro ioo� Y q �� I� M � 4 h '� h I� MI � ti ��' �.,
f7 I� h. � n �C� M m
Uo zos toe zo� zo5 z�s z�a z� zoz zoi �� zcb i5y i9i
t� m i,�� � � " i �
,��6 -- � � 0ti I , •
l ,o - I o
� i i
l , i n� 3 i i , .�:;:
�.�p I I I ���3P � � `; r,: ,_
� t0 � � 1�23ti,o, I � .
� 62 ��y� ��4 �145 1bfL 161 t6d Z�9 �77k),� n,17/ I \ �77I� \ 27 y 3 ^ t7�
' p 1 � a ��I n � ro i�.. � n �+ ' �1� . C/TY b I `� ^ 4�� "l 4� b b b I 'o io v sl ��, ..
�'jM m I ^+ ro m 11i?,� . M �^�S n�r.�"� �n m I�y A �a I n I o l..�iy M o
� - � i ifer X�r 10 � � .� /� wm w • � ea - - so so � (O s "] cn .
� i''
" SANBORN N , •�„� y.,.:::.;.
� q so so � � w s � s� ao .a so - . - • • . � iii:;i::.,�;:
° � aL ol r�y �
ti w s � m �. .,� .s .� .s � � � a �, ,.;:., :,, ;,
= M M l��i .S �ol Vl �, y I� � IN T IT � I� v.s � l.:•:.'i:':
ti M M I 12 a� �� �y �"1� h �h 1'1 � M � I� � �:.,
Iti m h M �'1 :: i:•:::•
' �' vz z�i no mr ee za�s z�a � z� zs� zd `;�'
�" ` C� ; —� i�3iY � � � �
, ��, ii��s; 8$� I I I �`.i`tSi..
�i� "' � � , e � Y9`.;;:,;-
0
�� • • N. � i �1331� '�!lJdo . I � � in?i':i+•._?
�v iis i � a n aay � ` � j 'f • • ::; ' �i� :'
-fi6 ��"' � � 94 341 .3.�3 � i '^3J! 9Q5 J46 � 30�1 �3�8, � 'S3q9 9.{0 i 3� ' %: �.;;;:::�;
n rt...:: �. ,
y r.p ;.;,.,.
� r h �a y b h �v �,o a ; •: • ;,,;.
j �i5u v �, � r' °�I so �� \8 `� �' l, a o I � I. n�, � n' "°� � M.^�
7 � � , � � � �'o ' ro M "` '
�� � � �� MULFORO n ,
' '�� . � s ��ssi lOj, J° , � „� ,ro 4 - - � ' � ' �
C� 1 �
, � O p g m � � � ^S 7 �� � I T h� M ^ J I M �
, d ",w'lya � 3�6 ; I 36l 390 31`5 ��i1 3�1 � 39
� ,w� �. �,n.. o �` s� i� �� � I � � �
,��'
5'n �, " � e �, � r : , � � <;
'D m �� )� ��� . Q � ...
��s Y �
' �rdl� �11 ` T �., - n s � � � �
�� u ,,� � . ar� ' ((�� I 77 \ � ise Q ae.� �, � r��� M e�i � ��z �e� � �-a�a Ma� �s;•;•;'s:;_
� U 6 ; 4 : !)) 71' p � � � � ,.� n n ` � ��o I M M� . � �° � " „� •o h h b � y ;::: ' „-:;' I
J .� 3 I $ ro r? C�ry� \° y M I M a�� M `� �., ..�::'.�::
� • ��L' .1 i� %� JO So U ��1 'JO �so M M so : So M M }'!!�.l:ti., i
� .,: ...
� - iiii:•i.wfi
'R6/ ;� . 3D�� � PLATT' ' ' q
A S:':,i'k:
/9:.:. .`
� �'' �. � :. $ � � @ °!} t h `o o � .� n � W io v ... i:: �:,::;
� � � n � ^f �n � � � 1 �
� yp • n � i�' b I �n b� r�3t n ' n "� + �o � b 5 /i
�•' >» ' �� �ui ... �
`4, '°� " �,Y�, , � "
N {�
� j `� •i t �Irva I � I �� l/YS y �LY6 �i
, . � .� � y I � . '�� � � //H¢ i4:ti.'`.� . I
� �� t � / . D7rv,ty � i/ GS I:i'�.'���;
� i � �
l �� ��va �; r.,:
n �',$:. •'
a , �; �, � �1 � Ty� r>.;,:.:..
, b ,2 � h, ro I n �h� � soe �l9 a ,.;,�•.:�':.
C' J1�'o � �7 n,%� Jpy �� � /Y7
T M��w v o < q' �J � \ ii:i•:' i
'il � n. J � ° � „ ia n1 a � � �G7 � // v � � •�0!::.,.
�' c..�� �e �r,U `O ti � ` l, s , U �• l' �I
r,s' ;' �a ��/ '� � M �� y e �l, ,, � � py r�;:;.! 1
/ ^J �h '7° � � v '>. 1 5 + � " 'S$
ao � � p� ny � r ' ^�'M '// � Q R/iyB�� i:47�,.:�:! I
o!si li! � e� »9 p i
� 0� 110 � � w O ��z
� S�s X �. ya � �� i � �..
� eo J g 7iv� �� Jcz ��' � S i>:>:` ; I
_ o d� sr� � xw � ie�� � i, "+ ;:•,.,
� � Jl .,,� . ..
s'y 'M � ^ s SJy �IM ST � '�' ii::::i!��',
� � /�J �y rry 0. $ y/E � � � i, F. , 1 I �i i'' � �� �''.
so � M ro yp! �� p � '
.r,,. �� o. 5�5 � �/IYPO ' I �f`j 4 ; .
. . _ i�ea7/ o � 1.� too �//fo$?„ �.
' ';'>:,�.:�� � �
I
" , ` ' I
CASE N0. ;`: ,
�, ;
�.: i
_�. __.___�._�.__._._._... .
__....___ __. .____._ -- --.. . ..,_ _ . �
�
!
�
RESOLUTION NO. 2510
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LYNWOOD APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 142 FOR THE
REESTABLISHMENT OF A CHURCH, SUNDAY
SCHOOL AND CHURCH OFFICES ON AN EXISTING
VACANT CHURCH PROPERTY IN THE R-3
(MULTI-FAMILY) ZONE, AT 11400 - 11416
CALIFORNIA AVENUE, LYNWOOD, CALIFORNIA.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lynwood,
pursuant to law, held a public hearing on the subject
application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has carefully considered
all pertinent testimony offered at the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the project is consistent with the intent of the
General Plan designation of Town House and Cluster Housing; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined
that the proposal is exempt from provisions of the State CEQA
Guidelines, Section 15061b (3), as amended.
Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of
Lynwood hereby finds and determines as follows:
A. .That the granting of the proposed Conditional Use
Permit will not adversely affect the General Plan.
B. That the proposed location of the Conditional Use
is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning
Ordinance and the purpose of the 2one in which the
, site is located.
C. That the proposed location of the Conditional Use
and the conditions under which it would be operated i
or maintained will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious. �
to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
i
D. That the proposed Conditional Use Permit will comply '
with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning �
Ordinance as stated in the conditions below. �
I
�
i
Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Lynwood I
approves the proposed project subject to the following I
conditions: +
COMMIJNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT i
1. The proposed development shall comply with all applicable I
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 Director �
of the Community Development for review and approval.
3. The applicant shall meet the requirements of all other City � i
, Departments. �
I
I
. j
1 �
I
I
�
'
�;
K � 4. The applicant and/or his representative shall sign a
" , Statement of Acceptance stating that he/she has read,
understands, and agrees to all conditions of this approval
prior to issuance of any building permits.
PLANNING DIVISION
5. The applicant shall demolish and remove the existing sub-
standard Single Family Dwelling, and shall obtain the
- necessary permits from the Building and Planning Division.
6. All repairs, improvements, alterations, and additions to
all existing structures shall be constructed in accordance
with applicable regulations of the Lynwood.MUnicipal Code,
,. the Uniform Building Code and the Uniform Fire Code.
• 7. Applicant shall correct all Building Code violations and
deficiencies identified in the Meland & Associate
investigation of June 17, 1991, relating to the apartment
buildings and church to the'satisfaction of the Senior
Building Inspector and the Code Enforcement Manger.
8. Landscaped areas are to be a minimum of twenty-five (25%)
percent of the lot area.
� 9. Landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance
with a detailed landscape plan to be submitted and approved
' by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance
of any,building permits.
l0. The minimum plan�t material shall be trees and shrubs
combined with ground cover as follows: One (1) five (5)
gallon shrub for each 100 square feet of landscape area; "
and two (2) fifteen (15) gallon trees for each 500 square "
feet of landscaped area.
11. The required front, rear, and side yards shall be
, landscaped.pursuant to Condition No. 9 except for necessary
walks, drives and fences.
12. No side yard shall be less then five (5') feet.
�
13. A minimum fifty-five (55) parking spaces shall be provided
for the proposed development.
14. The parking area shall have sufficient illumination for
security,; however, all out door lights shall be directed
. away from adjacent streets and properties.
15. All driveway and parking areas shall be paved.
16. Construction shall commence within six (6) months from date -i,
of issuance of building permits.
17. Prior to the installation or construction of any masonry ' j
wall, the property owner shall obtain a permit. and submit �
the following information to the Planning Division: '_ i
. a. A simple plot plan showing the location of the masonry �
wall in relation to property lines, plus wall lengths, i
proposed materials, and all openings .or gates to �
, provide access for vehicles and pedestrians. i
, i
b. For masonry walls (as defined in subsection 25-2.1) a ;
building permit sha1T be applied for in addition to the
permit described above. All masonry walls of any �
height shall meet the requirements for masonry
construction as defined in Chap.ter 24 of the Unified ` �
Building code. A fee based on the valuation of the �
proposed construction shall be paid to the Building �
Department. , �
z �
� I
1
�
I
a
J
c. All masonry walls shall maintain adequate pedestrian
+ access for the purpose of safety and convenience. A
thirty-six (36) inch or three (3) foot clear gate or
opening shall be provided to all enclosures for
pedestrian and wheelchair access. Pedestrian and
vehicular access shall be provided separately.
d. All masonry walls shall be installed with a finished,
aesthetical pleasing side facing out toward adjacent
properties or the public right-of-way.
DESIGN
18. Roofs shall be constructed with a non-reflective material
of either concrete tile or clay tile.
19. The office/classroom/church structures shall have an
exterior siding of brick, stucco, wood, metal, concrete, or
other similar material other than the reflective, glossy,
polished and/or roof-formed type metal siding.
20. All front yard setbacks must be measured from inside the
street dedications.
21. All security fences, grills, etc. shall be architecturally
compatible with the design of the subject and adjacent
buildings. In addition, no security fences, grills etc.
shall be installed without the prior written approval of
the Director of Community Development.
22. Air conditioners, heating, cooling, ventilation equipment, i
swimminq pool pumps and heaters and all other mechanical
devices shall be located within the rear yard or street i
side yard of a corner lot. Such equipment shall be �
screened from surrounding properties and streets and �
operated in accordance with the City's Noise Ordinance. I
23. The owner of the site shall maintain a pro-active approach �
to the elimination of graffiti from the structures, fences �
and any accessory building, on a daily basis. • �
24. A cover sheet of approved Conditions must be attached to i
plans prior to submission to the Building and Safety
Division.
25. The existing property shall be cleaned and maintained in ,
sanitary condition pending construction and shall be i
maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all times.
Failure to comply may result in revocation of the approved �
Conditional Use Permit.
26. For the purpose of providing heating for any dwelling I
proposed, only an energy efficient forced air furnace shall '
be used. The use of any wall furnace is expressly ;
prohibited. �
I
PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT �
�
27. Provide documentation that lots composing the property were I
legally tied together to the satisfaction of the Department �
of . Public Works. After reviewing the documents, the ;
Department of. Public Works may require the submission and �
recordation of a map or lot merger. �
28. Submit a grading plan prepared and signed by a registered �
Civil Engineer. Grading plan will be checked by Public I
Work Department. No building permits will be issued prior �
the approval of grading plan by the City Engineer. �
I
3 I
I
�
29. Dedic�te require a 10 foot wide strip of property along
� Califo�nia Avenue.
• 30. Dedica�`te required property at the southeast (SE) corner of
Ca�ifoYnia Avenue and Mulford to accommodate a radius.
.. , i
31. Unde�ground existing utilities if modifications are
prdpds`ed for the electrical service panel.
' 32. A permit from the Engineering Division is required for all
off-site improvements.
33. 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.
,.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
The Fire Department found no cause to establish condition
" for this project at this time.
'- Section 3. A copy of this resolution shall be delivered to
the applicant.
APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of , 1994, by members
: of the Planning Commission voti.ng as follows:
AYES:
�
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN: I
,
'
I
Errick R. Lee, Chairperson
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM: !
� � � ;
Sol BlumenfeTd, Director Michele Beal Barneris i
Community Development Director Deputy City Attorney j
i
- i
i
I
, . �
, _ I
i
�
� I
d
i
� � � f:\resolutn\reso2510 � . I
I
i
i
4 I
, I
�
�
- i
I
I
�
t ,
' DATE: pril 12, 1994
�; .
TO: � LANNING COMMISSION
�,
FROM: � ol Blumenfeld, Director�
� ommunity Development Dep tment
�
SUBJECT: �Variance Case No. 30
'.Applicant: Jorgensen Steel Company
, Proposal� i
The applicant is requesting a Variance to increase the height of
, a proposed wall from eight (8') feet to fourteen (14') feet
along the rear lot line of property at 10313 Alameda Street in
' the M(Manufacturing) Zone, Lynwood, California.
Facts '
1. Source of Authoritv.
„ Section 25-26 of the Lynwood Municipal Code requires that a
Variance be obtained from the Planning Commission when •
, special circumstances apply to the property, and when strict
application of the Zoning Ordinance deprives such property of
° privileges enjoyed by other prop'erty in the vicinity and
under identical zoning classification.
2: Propertv Location and Size
The site is located at 10313 Alameda Street between 103rd
Street and 107th. It is a nearly rectangular shaped,parcel of
approximately 382,000 square feet or 8.77 acres.'
3: Existing Land Use
The subject site is surrounded by the following land uses:
North - Industrial
`South - Vacant Industrial
East - IndustriaT �
„ West - Residential/SChool ;
4. Land Use Description
General Plan Zonina
, � North - Industrial/ City of
Residential Los Angeles
' South - Manufacturing M
East - Industrial City of
South Gate
West - Residential City of
Los Angeles
5. Project Characteristics
The applicant proposes to construct a fourteen (14') high
concrete tiltup wall running 890 feet along the western
property line in order to provide security, suppress noise
' and dust that may be generated by the use, and protect the
- residential uses adjacent to and to the west of the subject
property.
The property is currently used as a scrap'metal yard. It'
contains a metal building .with offices and a loading dock,
approximately 15,000 square feet in size, a 10,000 square
foot isolation pad, and a concrete covered trench running
through the center of the property, The property is
� . , 1.
l
° surrounded by an existing eight (8'') foot high chainlink
fence. The applicant is also proposing to construct an eight
(8') foot high masonry wall, running along the Alameda Street
and 103rd Street sides of the property.
6. Site Plan Review
At its regular meeting of March 30, 1994, the Site Plan
Review Committee reviewed and recommended approval of the'
Variance request. •
7. Zonina Enforcement Histor�
None of record at the time of preparation of the staff .
, report.
8. Neiahborhood Response
On March 10, 1994 Kettering & Krussman, in conjunction'with
_ Earle M. Jorgensen Inc,. mailed 25 letters to property
owners adjacent to the subject property requestinq support
for the variance request. Ten property owners responded to
the request. Eight property owners .support ttie request and
, two letters were returned as not deliverable. No property
, owner indicated opposition to the request.
Staff has notified the residents of the homes adjacent to the
proposed wall and have received no comments either for or
against this proposal. �
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION
l, Consistencv with General Plan
_ The existing use of the property is consistent with the
existing zoning classification (M) and the General Plan
� designation of Manufacturing.
�
� 2. Site Suitabilitv
The site is suitable in size to accommodate the requested
concrete wall and the existing uses.
3. Comoatibilitv
The Zoning ordinance requires a solid fence or wall with a
. minimum"height of six feet when property used for
; manufacturing purposes abuts residential property,. Other
ordinance provisions require either an 8 ft. wall, fence or
hedge between residential and non residential uses.
" Therefore we must consider that an eight foot wall has been "
determined t'o be compatible with residential uses.
. The proposed fence of fourteen (14') feet is higher.than
. would normally be permitted by the ordinance in this �
situation. However, special screening and buffering
`. considerations exist for the subject use which should be
_ considered in connection with compatibility issues for the
proposed Variance request.
� Staff has received no objections to the fence from adjacent
residents.
4. Combliance with Development Standards
Findingsc
Pursuant to Section 25-16.6 (e) 4, fences located on the
property line abutting the rear yard of a residential use
shall be no less eight (8') high and no more then fifteen
(15') feet in height provided that the fence is not higher
then the top of the first floor plate of the adjacent
residential
. : z '
, i
; ,
` building. The fence should be high enough to screen the
residential use from the negative impact of the non- .
n� ``residential use. '
, The proposed fence height of fourteen (14') feet will provide
^ the adjacent residential uses protection from dust and noise
created by the existing use on the subject property. The
proposed fence will also provide security for both uses.
An examination of this application reveals that the proposed
' fence carry out the intent of the Zoning Ordinance with
respect to fences as a separation or buffer between sensitive
uses.
_ The subject property is unique with respect to other
industrial uses in the City. Based on Staff survey of
industrial areas in the City, the subject property is the
only industrial property not separated by a,street or alley .
' from adjacent residential use.
Thus, granting this Variance would not set precedent in the
Cify as the increase fence height would only apply to the
. unique circumstances surrounding the subject property and the
adjacent residential uses.
5. Environmental Assessment
. The Community Development Department Staff has determined
that the project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section
15061 b(3) of the State of California Environmental Quality
' Act of 1989 as amended. �
RECOMMENDATION
Staff respectfully requests that, after consideration, the
Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2512 approving the
Variance request:
A. Finding that a hardship has been established that would
requiYe a Variance for Case No. 30 as required by
Section 25-26 of the City of Lynwood Zoning Code.
B, Finding that granting of the Variance as conditioned '
will not constitute the granting of a special privilege
incqnsistent with the limitations on other properties in
the same zone. .
C. Finding that granting of the Variance will not adversely
affect the orderly development of the City.
' . D. Finding that there are exceptional or extraordinary
cir'cumstances or conditions applicable to the property
involved which do not apply gener'ally to other
properties in the same zone.
Attachments
1., Location Map
. 2. Resolution No. 2512
3. Plot Plan
��� � f:\staffrpt\var30 . � � ,
. . 3 "
; ; , _
;_.
� _ . --
I � . . � : . . ... . .. '� .. :
� � . . � � . . .. . . '. -�� . • '_ .����.�.. .
ryf
�
� . � . . � . � . . , �p� . F- J . . . . .
Z
. . . . .- ' � . . '. W � ._
� � _ � V _L
� . . . . . . P O . ' . ..
. . . . . . . � ♦ .
�
j BK. _ � -
_._.... . ..
6207 ST. ;? _ � �
i _ --'-" "_ _ . - - .
p !9
� _ � n/ � 4 �
' . � ' � 659. � , . � � � S,qar" . .
/� / p,l:p,hAEDA� R ?
3 �'
I�i� � � 2 0
. . .. �� 60 N 63 � � 3.50 k. s�68
I � �
� F" 5 26 � , � . ''.
� � �
y b i
.� . ' - , N � 2 � s � ' PO0 � �
� ; > 23. /9 \ .
I 4 �
! � � s o M N 9 •� sr �Mp� o � f
i r .. � . T . LV ` p -. ,
�� '� o� 8 k�. arc. . G
�; O . — fi oy sosa ,
� ` .
� ` �
'i � � \ 9O f % ' .
' Q \ �� ` O
I c.� �����__-___ z
i o . :
; J . W
�
� �
PARCEL MAP•. . _ : ' . Q
' P:M..242-54=55 � \
�
, . ' . ,;
_ -, " <
RESOLUTION N0. 2512
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LYNWOOD APPROVING A
VARIANCE REQUEST (CASE NO. 30) TO '
INCREASE THE REQUIRED FENCE HEIGHT FROM
EIGHT (8') FEET TO FOURTEEN (14') FEET
AT 10313 ALAMEDA STREET, IN THE M
(MANUFACTURING) ZONE, LYNWOOD,
CALIFORNIA.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lynwood,
pursuant to law, held a public hearing on the subject
application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has carefully considered
all pertinent testimony offered at the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the project is consistent with the intent of the
General Plan in that the subject site is classified M
(Manufacturing) zone.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined
that the proposal is exempt from provisions of the State CEQA
Guidelines, Section 15061b (3), as amended.
Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of
Lynwood hereby finds and determines as follows:
A. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement
of the specific regulation would result in practical difficulty
or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the
objectives of the City Zoning Ordinance.
B. That there are exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved
which do not apply generally to other properties in the same
zone.
C. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement
of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of
privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same
zone.
D. That the granting of the Variance as conditioned will
not constitute the granting of a special privilege inconsistent
with the limitations on other properties in the same zone.
E,. That the granting of the Variance will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or
mateXially injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
, .. . ;
F. That the granting of the Variance will not adversely �
affect the orderly development of the City. �
Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of I
Lynwood, based upon the aforementioned findings and the �
determinations, hereby approves Variance Case No. 30, subject to I
the following conditions:
- I
, i
I
I
I
I
I
i
f:\resolutn\reso2512 �
. I
1 !
. ;
. i
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ,
" 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 Director of
the Community Development for review and approval.
3. The applicant shall prepare a revised plot plan with corner
cut, signing and landscaping shown for review and approval
, by the Director of Community Development and meet the
requirements of all other City Departments.
4. The applicant and/or his representative shall sign a
_ Statement of Acceptance stating that he/she h'as read,
understands, and agrees to all conditions of this approval
prior to issuance of any building permits.
PLANNING DIVISION
5.. The owner of the site shall maintain 8 pro-actibe approach
- to the elimination of graffiti from the structures, fences
, and any accessory building, on a daily basis.
6. A cover sheet of approved Conditions must be attached to
p2ans prior to submission to the Building and Safety
DiVision.
7• The existing property shall be cleaned and maintained in
sanitary condition pending'construction and shall be
maintained in a neat and orderly manner at a1T times.
Failure to comply may result in revocation of the approved
Variance. "
PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
The Department of Public Works and Engineering found no cause to
establish conditions for this proposal.
' FIRE DEPARTMENT
The Fire Department found no cause to establish conditions for
_ this.request.
�
. i
�
, �
_ . I
. �
�
I
,
�
I
i
,
� i
� ;
: � f:\resolutn\reso2512 � � � � � � i
�
. , . , _. . z . ;
I
,
i
_ - � �
I
� ,
�
, '
�
I
,
- Section 3. A copy of this resolution shall be delivered to
- the appl•icant.
, APPROVED and ADOPTED this_____ day of _____, 1994, by
'members of the Planning Commission voting as follows:
AYES:
NOES:
' ABSENT: .
ABSTAIN:
. Errick R. Lee, Chairperson
�APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sol Blumenfeld, Director Michele Beal Barneris
Commuriity Development Dept.
, . f::\resolutn\reso2512 � '
. 3
, 6�s �
� �r � .
1
DATE: i April 12, 1994
T0: I COMMISSION
FROM: Sol Blumenfeld, Director �
Community Development Depa ment
BY: Robert Diplock, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment - Case No. GPA 9
Applicant: City of Lynwood
PROPOSAL:
The City of Lynwood is proposing to amend' the General Plan
designation from Town House & Cluster Housing to Commercial for six
parcels of land totalling approximately 138,000 square feet located
on the west side of Atlantic Avenue north of Carlin Avenue in order
to accommodate future commercial and or mixed use development. A
Zone Change (ZC 10) to CB-1 is being processed concurrently in
order to make the zoning consistent with,a revised General Plan
designation.
FACTS:
1. Source of Authoritv
Section 65358(a) of the State Planning and Zoning Law states that
"..if it deems it to be in the public interest, the legislative
body may amend all or part of the adopted General Plan" and the
Lynwood Municipal Code requires the Planning Commission to hold a
public hearing and report on every proposed plan amendment.
2. Propertv Location: I
The area is located on the west side of Atlantic Avenue, north of �
Carlin Avenue (see attached location map).
3. Prooerty size i
The area consists of six rectangular lots, totalling approximately
138,000 square feet. �
4. Existing Land Use:
The subject area contains a vacant retail structure, an existing �
market and laundromat, a vacant lot and a lot with a rear �
residential structure. The surrounding land uses are:
North - Church, Multi-Family Residential,Auto Repair �
South - Vacant Commercial
East - Motel, Multi-Family Residential, Commercial
West - Vacant, Residential �
5. Land Use Desicxnation: !
The General Plan designation for the subject property is Townhouse i
& Cluster Housing while the Zoning Classification is R-2. The
surrounding land use designations and zoning are as follows:
General Plan Zoning i
North - Commercial North R-3, CB-1 ��
South - Multi Family Residential South - R-3 ' !
East - Commercial East - CB-1 '
West - Townhouse & Cluster Housing West - R-2
, �
6. Proiect Characteristics ,
i
The project is a proposal to change the General Plan land use �
designation from Townhouse and Cluster Housing to Commercial for
six parcels on the west side o.f Atlantic Avenue totalling �
I
�
11
,
Avenue. The total area proposed to be changed is approximately
138,000 sq.ft. The change is designed to accomodate future
commercial. and/or mixed use commercial-residential develoment on
the site.
The Planning Commission previously considered and approved a
similar proposal for this property on November 9, 1993 which was
later denied by the City Council, primarily because no
comprehensive development proposal had been presented by the
applicant.
7_ Site Plan Review
On July 1, 1993, the Site Plan Review Committee evaluated the
original proposed General Plan Amendment and associated zone change
and deemed it appropriate to recommended approval to the Planning
Commission, subject to specific conditions and requirements.
However, further evaluation by the Site Plan Review Committee and
Staff led to a recommendation of denial.
On March 28, 1994 the Site Plan Review Committee reviewed Site Plan
115, a project associated with this General Plan amendment. The
proposal is to refurbish the existing vacant Kinney Shoe Store to
create a large fabric store. The store will be renovated, the
parking area will be resurfaced and new awnings, sign treatment, '
landscaping, and lighting will be provided. �
The Site Plan Review Committee recommended approval of this i
project: I
I
8. Redevelopment Actencv Review �
Because this General Plan amendment covers property within j
Redevelopment Project Area A, on April 5, 1994, the Lynwood �
Redevelopment Agency reviewed the development proposal connected to �
this Plan Amendment and associated Zone Change. �
The Redevelopment Agency approved the proposed project but I
recommended that any site plan approval or Zone Change be �
conditioned upon the property owner entering into an Owner's
Participation Agreement with the Redevelopment Agency to insure
that the Project Area will be developed consistent with the �
policies and ob�ectives of the Lynwood Redevelopment Agency.
9. Zonina Enforcement Historv• i
None of record at the time this report was prepared. However, the i
vacant structure at 12217 Atlantic Avenue has been broken into and
vandalized.
i
10. Public Resoonse
i
�
None of record at the time this report was prepared.
ISSUES AND ANALYSIS �
1. Background and Analysis
The subject parcels are part of a larger area designated Townhouse �
and Cluster Housing in the 1990 General Plan revision. Much of the
area contains good quality single family and multi family
residential development. At the time it was felt that this area '
could,appropriately be maintained and strengthened as a residential �
area and that the commercial frontage along Atlantic eventually
could be converted to residential use.
�
I
I
i
T
Since that time, there has been little interest in major
residential development on the subject property. Most development
interest has been in utilizing the existing commercial frontage
along Atlantic. The Community Development Department attempted to
combine housing objective with market forces and formulated a major
mixed use development proposal utilizing senior housing over top of
commercial uses. That project was not accepted, in part because of
the senior housing component.
Along with limited development interest, the�City has assisted in
refurbishing a neighborhood market on the northwest corner of
Atlantic and Carlin, strengthening the commitment to commercial
, uses along Atlantic Avenue at least for the near future.
Given these facts, it is appropriate to consider utilizing the
Atlantic Avenue frontage for commercial uses, at least on an
interim basis. Mixed use (commercial/residential) development
. would also meet the goals and objectives of the General Plan and
the Redevelopment Agency.
The owner of the largest parcel in this area has submitted plans to
refurbish the existing vacant Kinney Shoe Store and create a large I
fabric store. The store will be renovated to provide a modern �
retail facility. The owner has budgeted approximately $250,000 for I
renovations and business start up costs. Staff has worked with the I
owner on the proposed renovation which will include new awning and �
sign treatment, landscaping, lighting and resurfacing of the i
parking area. �
i
Although this is not a comprehensive proposal for the entire I
project area, staff believes that this is an appropriate interim
use that would permit economic activity on the site until
comprehensive redevelopment plans can be prepared and implemented.
The investment in the subject property would be limited and would
not hinder the comprehensive redevelopment of the entire area in �
the future.
This proposal will facilitate meeting the goals of the Redevelop- �
ment Area Commercial Rehabilitation Program by providing an I
attractive commercial activity in a building that is currently �
vacant. The proposed use potentially could be incorporated into �
future mixed use development. � i
When the fabric store development proposal was reviewed by the i
Lynwood Redevelopment Agency, the Agency recommendd that any site I
plan approval or zone change should be conditioned upon the �
developer entering into an Owner Participation Agreement with the �
Agency to insure that any future development will be consistent i
with .redevelopment plan for the project area.
i
Staff is currently working on a plan for the entire Atlantic i
corridor and will schedule the preparation of a project,area plan
for all the land around the Atlantic/CarTin intersection, including '
mixed use and residential development, as part of the Atlintic ,
Corridor Plan. '
I
The Plannin Commission �
g previously considered and approved a
proposal to restore the frontage along Atlantic to a Commercial
designation on November 9, 1993. This proposed General Plan �
Amendment is identical to that previous proposal.
i
2. Consistencv with General Plan (
I
The proposed General Plan Land Use designation is appropriate for �
the existing and proposed commercial uses on the site and does not �
conflict with adjacent General Plan designations. It creates a I
commercial node at this intersection, restricted by the non I
commercial designations to the north and south. j
i
In addition, the proposed Zone Change implements the following �
General Plan Land Use Goals and Policies:
I
i
�
,
;�
' Goal 4: Plan for new patterns of land use which complement the
overall character of existing uses and which offers
opportunities for the compatible development of vacant
and underutilized parcels.
Goal 5: Encourage the development of new commercial and retail
uses in locations where hey can most efficiently provide
Lynwood residents with needed products, services and
employment opportunities.
Policy 5: Discourage the proliferation of strip commercial
development by focusing retail activity on significant
nodes along major boulevards adjacent to residential
neighborhoods.
3. Area Suitabilitv
The subject area is adequate in size and shape to support
significant commercial or mixed commercial/residential development.
The lots are capable of accommodqting typical commercial densities,
providing required parking, landscaping and other development
features required by the Zoning Ordinance. In addition, the
subject property is adequately served with the required public
utilities and offers good vehicular and pedestrian accessibility.
4. ComAliance with Development Standards
Any development proposed under the proposed Commercial General Plan i
designation would be required to comply with all the development I
standards specified in the Zoning Ordinance. �
5. Compatibilitv �
r
The proposed Plan Amendment is located in an area of mixed land ,
uses. Located to the north are multi-family dwelling units, a I
church, and an auto repair shop. The property immediately to the i
south is vacant and designated for multi family residential I
development. To the east are commercial uses and to the west are �
multi-family and single family residential development. !
I
The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have a negative effect i
o the values of the surrounding properties or interfere with or �
endanger the public health, safety or welfare. I
6. Benefits to Communitv I
The proposed Zone Change will facilitate meeting the goals of the I
Redevelopment Area Commercial Rehabilitation Program by providing �
an attractive commercial activity in a building that is currently i
vacant. The upgraded development may act as a catalyst to foster
other commercial development and will provide limited local j
employment. ;
7. Environmental Assessment �
The Community Development Department Director has determined that �
o substantial environment impact will result from the proposed �
General Plan Amendment; therefore, a Negative Declaration has bee �
filed i the Community Development Department ad i the Office of the �
City Clerk
�
RECOMMENDATION: �
i
Staff respectfully requests that, after consideration, the Planning j
Commission adopt Resolution 2516 recommending approval of General I
Plan Amendment GPA 9. i
i
ATTACHMENTS
1
1. Location Map
2. EXHIBIT A. ,
i
1
�
, . 1 . .
LOCATION MAP
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN/REZONING AMENDMENT
,
. ��.. tifi h� ' .�a.. �R. �� vIAVINIA
(• ��l C� Ck .�; .
� ia • ia (' ..� �' ,.4,: .m.
_� � � 1�.�-� I �� n � � � ~ ~� . � � 4� .re O; ` .
ZUVIHIA — � e1��iar� .— ` I � INIA �� T���� / O Q�� i4VE. r� p o .
o i � �i— -� $ � �,
.... • i ir . �`�k --
p X y � ' " s /�� ar �'a ' NA 3. ��jf! O p� . //O �
w L �t '' !. I ' V � • � s YO.I 1 o I l�ia roo y
r i O � � . � � � � � �I � �� O 1�{:�O � J � I �
� I = �o zv m� �Z` C � . m .
�� p O� � O � O� r ..d =O� � c sei�:ar�� � a 0
�r=-`-+ �. i ., "�... ' _ �Qs CO RCIAL � -� ,
e« .. p a � x u
� C � . Q„ 0 A p g � On ' "_ _- •--- (CB 1) � � O
h � � I! e � � � �N� O .
'j � w � �Q ` -� ` � y � � Q O
F ��� s • s nv P �
�p ` ,,,, � s� ^ � g � �
J
. ' st1LL/W .S'LZ�� �. 1.�� ______7/lf ��
� - � , qO' o .. �
� �/ 1 y` p bb �
� - I 6 � ///f � I Q
\
�' a a � o Q u a� s � T Sf� =' i � A �� ----$ " �:�' �O ' �
O O O O O O � � �� � �CpMMERCiAL m o
cs a r r a n n w� il � � I
. . r .I ,. � °• I .A.I QN I . .
TOV�jd �USE� (CB-1j �
� '. i h i i i�N� OMMERCI � I
� O� � i O�� i p� p E� H 2USINd I
� -, y � �or�K•w`.. � ' � �- ) __ r,,. ---- '
y , � � � � ��--- n,i _ -- O
i o i 1 i eI i ' �. -- v �� � . N ���.
� 1 ' I �O V . ' i
it I ' � ` �F 1 'I i I I �' ol� �`�_ '_'n'� . ,
O`� j j .�� � I j I R ` � � j >: '� W O .,,
` � I � � � � .� � � � � �� �,O( ��D'' A o ��I '
�. � � I I � I :�� C0� Ct F�< = r��� �., ;, ;� I
� 1 I I I. I � m „ i
os no 'n va f+ m• a( ar ' .a.w ••.r�� � �o » . �•• _ � - 1 ` P SO � �
. N �i. •
�� �� : ' tsnt ,�' , se 1.., j
i.✓� ' \ �; N � 8 � UPLM: 1 �y_ .uii � a � � ;
, `URLW . Si . IyE CARUN :.,I � AVEa '+ s �Lp,aK r I
. „a.:. .a.,,
�' aom . � 60 r � ,�,' i
. ��Ut�' � fl = � � �
� y c. o _ N � a i
� � o
.�"' �
••+ � .,,.:
m .... �I
u j� � � . '�
;
__..
__--- . .._ . __ _—_. _ - -.— . _ i
�
f
.,._.-.�.....'.�.._�--. _ .. . ..- ._ �� I
i
�
GR C � �
;
� 2 !0
� C �� � �
��OYAJyljlvwvi.`�Y4 ... . . _ ••.• � •.• � . � • �_ .... � ....r �� r.
_ �
( 1'" "
Y
}.
- �
1.
C��`�x� . . . , y ,
j� , f ,
�
t • � '�� r �' � %' / ��% / �- �
'� . . _ -- -
5tree�t E(eva
��N LYNWOOD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
6
�!
• RESOLUTION NO. 2516
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LYNWOOD RECOMMENDING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE LYNWOOD GENERAL PLAN
PERTAINING TO ASSESSORS PARCELS NO. 5,6,7,32,
33 AND 34 ON PAGE 12,_ BOOK 6186, LOCATED IN
LYNWOOD, CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lynwood,
pursuant to law, held a public hearing on the proposed amendment to
the General Plan land use designations for Assessors Parcels No.
5,6,7,32,33 and 34 Page 12, Book 6186, changing the designation
from Townhouse and Cluster Housing to Commercial; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has carefully considered all
' pertinent testimony offered at the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has determined that commercial use of
this property would be consistent with the goals and policies of
the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Community Development has determined
that the proposal will not have a negative effect on' the I
environment, and has thereby declared a Negative Declaration for
the project; and
i
Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Lynwood I
hereby finds and determines as follows: �
A. A commercial designation of this property: would be �
compatible with surrounding land use. i
B. The subject site would accommodate future commercial �
development due to its size, location, and proximity to other i
commercial land uses. i
i
C. The General Plan Amendment to Commercial would be
consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan. ,
I
D. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not be
detrimental to the properties surrounding the site. ,
I
Section 2. The Planninq Commission of the City of Lynwood,
based upon the a£orementioned findings and determinations, hereby I
approves General Plan Amendment Case No. GPA 9, and recommends City !
Council adoption of a resolution changing the General Plan map �
designation for this property from Townhouse and Cluster Housing to
Commercial. �
�
i
Section 3. A copy of this resolution shall be filed with the �
City Clerk. I
I
;
�
�
1 �
i
,�
� �� . , . �. . .
APPROVED and�ADOPTED this day of ,
1993 by members the Planning Commission voting as follows:
' AYESs
NOES:
ABSENT:
, ABSTAIN:
Errick R. Lee, Chairperson
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM: I
, � li
Sol Blumenfeld, Director Michele Beal Bagneris I
Community Development Dept. Deputy City Attorney I
_ I
' � �I
- i
j
i
: . . 1
,
�
. �
i
, !
' I
; . I
. i
, f:\upfiles\9pa_res � - �
j
. _ , I
. . . . � . �. � i
� - � . . � . ' . .�
, i
I
i
I
' 2 I
�r,
, �,
DATE: April 12, 1994
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION �
FROM: Sol Blumenfeld, Director�
Community Development Dep rtment
BY: Robert Diplock, Planninq Manager
SUBJECT: Zone Change - Case No. ZC 10
Applicant: City of Lynwood
PROPOSAL•
The City of Lynwood is proposing a Zone Change (ZC 10) from R-2
(Two Family Residential) to CB-1 (Controlled Business) for six
parcels of land totalling approximately 138,000 square feet located
on the west side of Atlantic Avenue north of Carlin Avenue. This
rezone is necessary in order to bring the zoning into consistency
with a proposed General Plan Amendment (GPA 9) for the same
property to accommodate future commercial and/or mixed use
development. I
FACTS• I
�
1. Source of Authoritv I
Section 65860 (c) requires that, in the event that a Zoning �
Ordinance becomes inconsistent with the General Plan because of an I
amendment to that plan, the Zoning Ordinance shall be brought into '
consistency within a reasonable period of time. I
2. Prooerty Location: I
The area is located on the west side of Atlantic Avenue, north of I
Carlin Avenue (see attached location map) and comprises Assessors '
Parcels 6186-12-5,6,7,32,33, and 34.
3. Property size i
�
The area consists of six rectangular lots, totalling approximately i
138,000 square feet. �
�
4. Existina Land Use: �
The subject area contains a vacant retail structure, an existing �
market and laundromat, a vacant lot and a lot with a rear �
residential structure. The surrounding land uses are: !
North - Church/ Multi-Family Residential/Auto Repair �
South - Vacant Commercial �
East - Motel, Multi-Family Residential, Commercial �
West - Vacant, Residential �
5. Land Use Designation: �
The General Plan designation for the subject property is Townhouse �
& Cluster Housinq while the Zoning Classification is R-2. The I
surrounding land use designations and zoning are as follows:
General Plan Zoning I
North - Commercial North R-3, CB-1 '
South - Multi Family Residential South - R-3 I
East - Commercial East - CB-1 i
West - Townhouse & Cluster Housing West - R-2 I
6. Proiect Characteristics I
i
The project is a proposal to change the zoning on six parcels of �
1 I
;
,
, .
' land from R-2 (Two Family Residential) to CB-1 (Controlled
Business) on the west side of Atlantic Avenue north of Carlin
Avenue. The total area proposed to be changed is approximately
138,000 sq.ft.. The change is designed to accommodate future
commercial and/or mixed use commercial-residential development on
the site.
The Planning Commission previously considered and approved an
identical zone change for this property on November 9, 1993 which
was later denied by the City Council, primarily because no
comprehensive development proposal had been presented by the
applicant.
7. Site Plan Review
On July 1, 1993, the Site Plan Review Committee evaluated the
original proposed General Plan Amendment and associated zone change
and deemed it appropriate to recommended approval to the Planning
Commission, subject to specific conditions and requirements.
However, further evaluation by the Site Plan Review Committee and
Staff led to a recommendation of denial because no development
proposal had been submitted.
On March 28, 1994 the Site Plan Review Committee reviewed Site Plan
115, a project associated with this General Plan amendment. The
proposal is to refurbish the existing vacant Kinney Shoe Store to
create a large fabric store. The store will be renovated, the
parking area will be resurfaced and new awnings, sign treatment,
landscaping, and lighting will be provided. ,
The Site Plan Review Committee recommended approval of this
project. i
8. Redevelopment Aaencv Review I
i
Because this General Plan amendment covers property within
Redevelopment Project Area A, on April 5, 1994, the Lynwood
Redevelopment Agency reviewed the development proposal associated �
with this proposed Zone Change.
The Redevelopment Agency approved the development proposal but I
recommended that any site plan approval or Zone Change be
conditioned upon the property owner entering into an owner i
Participation Agreement with the Redevel'opment Agency to insure
that the Project Area will be developed consistent with the �
policies and objectives of the Lynwood Redevelopment Agency. i
i
9. Zonincr Enforcement History '
None of record at the time this report was prepared. However, the �
vacant structure at 12217 Atlantic Avenue has been broken into and i
vandalized. '
i
10. Public Resoonse �
None of record at the time this report was prepared. �
ISSUES AND ANALYSIS �
�
1. Background and Analysis '
!
The subject parcels are part of a larger area designated Townhouse �
and Cluster Housing in the 1990 General Plan revision. Much of the �
area contains good quality single family and multi family �
residential development. At the time of the Plan revision it was '
felt that this area could appropriately be maintained and
strengthened as a residential area and that the commercial frontage i
along Atlantic eventually could be converted to residential use.
Since that time, there has been little interest in major d
2 �
'
_ �
. , d
� rop Most ontage
sub7ect p ert �ommercial f artment
{� den ti a l d evelop u t l iz T'g Co m m u n it Y 1 Devel m a Y ket fop es and
terest has Avenue• ' o bjecti ve osal utilizin9 s e n ior
resi been The wit h not
ln ptlantic h t roP ro�ect was
a lon9 t combine ed use de�elOpmen p That c omponent.
of commer�lal uses
attempted of the Senior housin4 Sted in
ulated a ma7�r mix
form o ver top has of
hous ed ln part becausel t the City corner
� ' intereon� the nOr commerO
accep a
F ted dhborh od marKet the � tment
� l i m i ommi
P Alon9 With a nei9 thenin9 future.
� ishin9 �arlin� stren9 or t h e near Zing the
refurb at least f, utili an
Atlanti anAtlantic �' to �onsideat least on
'�t uses alon9 ropriate uses, o ment
� it ?s aPP el P
facts, for commerc Y ai�Plan and
r Given th frontag �ommercial/ of the Gener.
� Atlanti� basisue thexg°als and objectives
6 interi also mee tted plans to
would ment Agency• has Submi a larqe
the Redevel this area create
est parO in ghoe Store and modeYn
. � o f the larq Kinney vated to provide a
The owner vacant $250 p00 for
the existins ore will be reno
r efurbish The budgeted approxi With the
� fabric store• The owner has �osts. Staff has woYked
usiness start uP Will include resurfacingand
� retail facility. landscapinq
renovations and b and sign treatment,
owner on the proposed renovation which
�; the-parKing area, new awning
; lighting• the entire
Althouqh this is T10t a compYehensive proposal f0I 1
' project area, staff believes that it is an appropriate 1t1te'Llm uS2
1 tnat woula permit economic activity on the Slte UT1t11 COT(1pr8�12T1S1Ve
redevelopment plans can be;prepared and implemented. The investment
E in the subject property would be limited and would not hinder the
� comprehensive redevelopment of the entire area in the future.
� This proposal will facilitate meeting the goals of the Redevelop-
� ment Area Commercial Rehabilitation Program by providing an
� attractive commercial acfivity in a building that is currently
� vacant. The proposed use potentially could be incorporated into
future�mixed use development. �
„ I when the fabric store g ev�lop he A eno �Sal was revieWed by the
Lynwood Redevelopment A enc
; plan approval or zone change sh uld Y recommended that an
_ I developer enterin be conditioned y Site
g into an owner Participation Agreement u with the
Agency to insure that any future development will be consistent
, with any redevelopment plan for the Project Area.
` Staff is currently workin
'' corridor and will schedule g°n a plan for the entire
for.all the land around the A lantic/Ca lin intersection Atlantic
mixed use ' P 7ect area plan
and residential' development, as � lncluding
Corridor Plan, part op
� , the Atlantic
, ' The Planning Commission
proposal to Previously considered and a
'designation onstore the frontage along Atlantic Pproved a
_ : Amendmerit NOVember 9, 1993, tO a �ommercial
is identical to that This proposed General Plan
? previous proposal.
t ?. Consistenc with the General Plan
�
R! The proposed Zone Chan e
�, designation proposed under General�PlantAmendment the
S1 does not conflict land use
Cc addition the with adjacent General Case GPA 9, and
ch P1an.Land Use Goal s sed Zone Change im Plan designations. In
• and Policies- plements the following General
; ,
! Goal 4: Plan for -
AT� . c ri � of land use which complement the
� overall
1. ;
opportunities for the compatibleu development f vacant
2 .
. 3
I
j
,..r ..,. .
i ._....._ ..... ... . . . .. . . _ ...,._ ... .. .. . ,... _�.::_,:. ,,. u:.W�.......:
�
� OI �� 6��� �QN �5��
�
�b�'� r ��•-.v
• ��� �
.� � � f � : lt ITI
"ry , b ?. `eF Z
st
—�
�e
��
„ .... , �,.
f �� ✓�>r ,
— .'T!]i� . 8 � i
�
• r - • �� _-' `�
_°+,.., � --r"-.� w4�- m
r .. i . c ---z,-` �� , ,� T m
_ ;, �..
v: rrui �, t r� '�..0 I' rt
. �N��O V ./ ��.
' :�` CiPY�
� < )!.t / r
,r �
' � '� T/>
� r Z
_ �'t �� °
:<' D � o
,� n :;,:
f 5
Y 'lIC � w
. s� '�q��i �
L 'Ge�u v
.,� �/C7ci:,
,
� f1ICl �
�
1v � i �1/�) 4 '
4 ��
�, i,�
� � lL
' d1N1�d
� .., '
�
t �a� '
,
�
�
.,:�� i
d�dU1! NOIld�O�
+�.�
i � -
� '
...:s:,:::�e"sc��"
�' 55Ee °2::?.::=-::e: ��:ee:E
•Y� ���%����•
� �
•�������i�i����������:� • � : i� � �
�����ii������������� — _
• ������� i �i '
��� � ���������� � ������ �— . I
•_. �\� ��������������I������ ���� �i����i�iii� I •
�� � � �ii ���������� /�� -- i• �
� �i���� •• ����������������� _ � — I I I II
��Y � I � �
:::::a:: - ' II�
' � :::: : :::: �. . ��� ' ' �
::;::::. ::::: I
::::.:::; � :::::
�=:::::� '
� .:ta... -�
R_�� `
: v � .,
�� �
�.o � : }.� c ? "
'1�?Si�:� -i� Y_'�.��,:�f'
, l 1V��1�.:.':_..�._�:.
. $� ' �:4i�..
� �� ` ,�••• � ` 4
�T. -y �.
.. �_+.`/.� � ^'�f i.. �..
^� � �,�
� �
• � � '
� � � 9 •,.::i.
��� j
( � .
.��
,` L
1 �
�
! '� /�
�' � , � � �.
I � ' � ,` ! 1 ' ' 1
, / y � ; �
� f � i � � 'y / � �
�� . . . . ' --
� Street �[eva
�t
`�N LYNWOOD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. .
------ - - - - -- - -- ��
��
;� .
' RESOLUTION NO. 2517
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LYNWOOD RECOMMENDING AN AMENDMENT
` TO THE LYNWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO THE
OFFICIAL ZONING ORDZNANCE CHANGING THE ZONING
, OF ASSESSORS PARCELS'NO. 5,6,7,32,33 AND 34 ON PAGE
- 12, BOOK 6186, LOCATED IN LYNWOOD, CALIFORNIA
,, WHEREAS, the City of Lynwood has proposed an amendment to the
` Lynwood Municipal Code pertaining to the Official Zoning Ordinance,
changing the Zoning classification for Assessors Parcels No: 5,6,7,
p 32, 33 and 34 Page 12, Book 6186, from R-2 (Two Family Residential)
to CB-1 (Controlled Business); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lynwood,
pursuant to law, held.a public hearing on a proposed amendment, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has carefully considered all
pertinent•testimony offered at the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the subject site is currently classified as R-2 (Two
Family Residential which is inconsistent with a General Plan -
designation of Commercial; and ,
` ' WHEREAS, the subject property is located within Redevelopment
Area "A" : arid .
WAEREAS, the Lynwood Redevelopment Agency has approved
commercial development of this property subject to property owners
- entering into an owner Participation Agreement with the Agency; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Community Development has determined _
that the proposal will not have a negative effect on the
environment, and has thereby declared a Negative Declaration for
the project; therefore ' ` '
Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Lynwood
� hereby finds and determines as follows:
A. The current zone classification of the subject property
is inconsis£ent with a General Plan designation of Commercial:
B. The subject site would accommodate proposed commercial
development due to its size, location, and proximity to other
- commercial land uses. •
C. The zone change to CB-1 (Controlled Business) would be
consistent with a General Plan designation of Commercial.
D. The proposed zone change will not be detrimental to the
properties surrounding the site.
Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Lynwood,
based upon the aforementioned findings and determinations, hereby
approves Zone Change No. ZC 10, and recommends City Council
adoption of an ordinance changing the zoning of Assessors Parcels '
5,6;7,32,33 and 34, Page 12, Book 6186 from R-2 (Two Family
,- Residential) to CB-1 (Controlled Business) and a resolution
requiring property owners of these six parcels'to enter into an
Owner Participation Agreement with the Redevelopment Agency prior
. to issuance of a Building permit for construction or remodelling
of structures located on these parcels.. .
Section 3. A copy of this resolution shall be delivered to
the City Clerk.
1
�
4 �,
APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of ,
1993, by members of the Planning Commission voting as follows:
AYES:
NOES: .
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Errick R. Lee, Chairperson
APPROVED TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sol Blumenfeld, Director William Rudell
Community Development,Dept. Interim City Attorney
� � f:\upfiles\xt10 � � � � �
z
i� `p '\ �
' w J��.�° � %1 12 , 1994
. �/ Ap � �
DATE� �NNING COMMISSION
T �' M / Sol Blumenfeld, Director �,(z
FR� � Community Development Depa���ment
Robert Diplock, Planning Manager
I SUBJECT: General Plan Conformity Sale of City Owned Propertv on
the Southwest Corner of Lvnwood Road and Lindberah Avenue
i' ,
Applicant: City of Lynwood
e PROPOSAL:�
� ' ,
The City is proposing to sell three parcels of City owned property
� on the southwest corner of Lynwood Road and Lindbergh Avenue.to the
Lynwood Redevelopment Agency to assist in the development of three
affordable single family homes.
FACTS: ,
l. Source of Authoritv
Section 65402 (a) of the California Government Code
provides that no real property shall be acquired or dispose of
for any public purpose until the location, purpose and extent
of the acquisition or disposal is submitted to and reported
t upon by the planning agency as to conformity with the General
Plan.
2. Propertv Location
The subject parcels, Assessors Nos. 6171-021-901, 902 and 903,
are located on ,the_ southwest corner of Lynwood Road and
Lindbergh Avenue. '
3. Proqertv Size -
The three parcels total approximately 15,000 sq.ft. in size.
4. Existina Land Use
The subject parcels are vacant and the surrounding land use is
all single family dwellings.
5. General Plan and Zonina
The General Plan designation is Single Family Residential for
the property and all of the adjacent area. The zoning is all
R-1 except for several parcels of R-3 zoning across the street
to the northeast of the property.
6. Proiect Characteristics
The City is proposing to sell 3 parcels of land to the Lynwood
Redevelopment Agency for fair market value ($105,000). In
turn, the Agency will resell the property to a developer to
build 3 units of single family housing, priced to meet the
Dept.of Housing and Urban Development's guidelines for
moderate income housing. The units will be approximately
1.500 sq. ft. two story contemporary design with tile roofs.
Redevelopment Agency involvement in the project will permit
the City to receive credit towards satisfying the City's
affordable housing obligations under State Redevelopment Law.
11
,�
�
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION:
The sale and development of this property is consistent with the
Land Use Element of the General Plan in that the purpose is single
family residential in an area designated for that use. The housing
type (single family detached), lot sizes and residential densities
are consistent with those identified in the General Plan.
The proposed development, by adding three new single family
dwellings in an existing single family neighborhood, will assist
in achieving Land Use Goal #3, "Preserve the stable, single family
character of Lynwood's residential communities".
The proposal also meets the following Housing Element Goals:
Goal 2: '�Maximize development of available vacant City land for
infill housing development to meet low/moderate income
housing needs".
Goal 6: •"Increase the supply of low and moderate income housing
utilizing local, state or federal funds to develop
affordable housing in the City".
The proposal also helps to achieve Goal l, to "provide an
additional 175 housing units over the next five years ...:.... for
moderate to high income households...".
The land sale and proposed development does not conflict with any
of the Goals, Policies and programs of the other Elements of the
General Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff respectfully requests that, after consideration, the Planning
Commission adopt Resolution No.2515 finding that the proposed sale
of three City owned parcel to the Lynwood Redevelopment Agency for I
the future construction of three single family detached dwellings " �
. is consistent with the Lynwood General Plan and direct staff to i
transmit this resolution to the City Council and the Lynwood ',
Redevelopment Agency.
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
�
i
I
�
. ,
I
i
I
. I
;
i
I
I
F:PLANNING\65402agy..rpt . �
4� �
,#
RESOLUTION NO. 2515
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LYNWOOD
MAKING A FINDING OF CONFORMITY TO THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE SALE OF
CITY OWNED PROPERTY TO THE LYNWOOD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
WHEREAS the City of Lynwood proposes to sell three parcels of
City owned property, specifically Assessor's Parcels No. 6171-021-
901, 902 and 903, to the Lynwood Redevelopment Agency, and
WHEREAS this sale is for�a public purpose, that is, the
creation of three units of assisted affordable single family
housing, and
WHEREAS the California Government Code, Sections 65402 (a)
requires a review and report by the Planning Commission on
conformity to the General Plan of any acquisition or disposal of
real property by a local agency for any public purpose, and
WHEREAS, the Lynwood Planning Commission, pursuant to law, has
reviewed the location, purpose and extent of this proposed sale in
• relation to the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs of the Lynwood
General Plan, and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined
that such review and report is Categorically Exempt from !
environmental review under the California Environmental Quality �
Act, now therefore �
i
Section 1. The Planning Commission hereby finds and I
determines as follows:
I
I
1. that the sale and development of this property is consistent
with the Land Use Element of the General Plan in that the
purpose is to create single family residential uses in an area
designated for that use. '
I
2. that the housing type (single family detached), lot sizes and j
residential densities are consistent with those specified in �
the General Plan. ,
3. that the proposed development, by adding three new single
family dwellings in an existing single family neighborhood,
will assist in achieving Land Use Goal #3, "Preserve the I
stable, single family character of Lynwood's residential
communities".
4. that the proposal is consistent with Goal 2 of the revised �
Housing Element: "Maximize development of available vacant �
City land for infill housing development to meet low/moderate %
income housing needs".
I
5. that the proposal is consistent with Goal 6 of the revised �
Housing Element: "Increase the supply of low and moderate ,
income housing utilizing local, state or federal funds to I
develop affordable housing in the City". �
6. that the proposal helps to achieve Goal 1 of the revised �
Housing Element, to "provide an additional 175 housing units I
over the next five years ........ for moderate to high income
households...". • .
7. that the Tand sale and proposed development does not conflict
with any of the Goals and Policies of the other Elements of �
the General Plan.
i
I
�
i
.;
-Y
b
:�
Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Lynwood,
based upon the aforementioned findings and determinations, hereby
determines that the proposed sale of the three subject City owned
parcels to the Lynwood Redevelopment Agency is consistent with the
adopted Goals, Policies and programs of the City General Plan.
Section 3. A copy of Resolution No. 2515 shall be delivered
to the City Clerk.
APPROVED and ADOPTED this 12th day of April, 1994, by members
of the Planning Commission voting as follows:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
•�
Errick R. Lee, Chairperson I
I
;
. �
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM: �
i
'Sol Blumenfeld, Director Michele Beal Bagneris �
Community Development Dept. Deputy City Attorney i
i
I
'
i
�
i
�
,
�
f:\upfiles\planning\65402agy.res . I
4 !
i
, I