HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes - 2004/01/13 - Regular" I N I T I A T I O N :
1 . C A L L T O O R D E R
P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N
M I N U T E S
J A N U A R Y 1 3 , 2 0 0 4
P u r s u a n t t o t h e A g e n d a p o s t e d J a n u a r y 8 , 2 0 0 4 , C h a i r m a n L e B e r t h o n c a l l e d t h e
m e e t i n g o f t h e P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n t o o r d e r a t 7 : 3 0 p . m . o n T u e s d a y , J a n u a r y
1 3 , 2 0 0 4 .
2 . P L E D G E O F A L L E G I A N C E T O T H E F L A G
3 . R O L L C A L L
P r e s e n t : C o m m i s s i o n e r s : Y u , S e i b e r t , G r i f f i t h s a n d L e B e r t h o n
A b s e n t : C o m m i s s i o n e r B l u m
C o m m i s s i o n e r S e i b e r t m o v e d t o e x c u s e C o m m i s s i o n e r B l u m f o r c a u s e , s e c o n d V i c e
C h a i r m a n G r i f f i t h s
A l s o P r e s e n t : C i t y A t t o r n e y M a r t i n , C o m m u n i t y D e v e l o p m e n t D i r e c t o r D a w s o n ,
a n d S e n i o r P l a n n e r W i l l i a m s
4 . T I M E F O R T H O S E I N T H E A U D I E N C E W H O W I S H T O S P E A K
5 . C O N S E N T C A L E N D A R :
A . A P P R O V A L O F M I N U T E S N o v e m b e r 2 5 , 2 0 0 3
R E C O M M E N D A T I O N : A P P R O V E A S S U B M I T T E D
C o m m i s s i o n e r S . i b e r t - M o v e d t o a p p r o v e t h e c o n s e n t c a l e n d a r a s c o r r e c t e d , s e c o n d e d b y
V i c e C h a i r m a n G r i f f i t h s a n d u n a n i m o u s l y c a r r i e d .
6 . U N F I N I S H E D B U S I N E S S : N o n e
7 . N E W B U S I N E S S :
A . P U B L I C H E A R I N G : A C O N D I T I O N A L U S E P E R M I T T O A L L O W T H E
O P E R A T I O N O F A N A U T O M O T I V E R E L A T E D B U S I N E S S
I N T H E H E A V Y C O M M E R C I A L ( C - 3 ) Z O N E .
S I T E :
C A S E N O . :
5 5 2 6 R O S E M E A D B O U L E V A R D
C O N D I T I O N A L U S E P E R M I T 0 3 - 1 5 4 7
Planning Commission
January 13, 2004
Page 2
APPLICANT:
IMPORTPARTS.COM
5526 ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD
TEMPLE CITY, CALIFORNIA 91780
APPLICANT'S
REPRESENTATIVE: STAN SZETO
SZETO & ASSOCIATES
2714 STINGLE AVENUE
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA 91770
PROPERTY OWNER: SD SD CORPORATION
5500 ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD
TEMPLE CITY, CALIFORNIA 91780
RECOMMENDATION: 1) HEAR STAFF REPORT
2) HEAR THOSE FOR AND AGAINST
3) NEGATIVE DECLARATION
4) ADOPT RESOLUTION
Director Dawson — summarized the Staff report dated January 13, 2004.
Commissioner Seibert — Asked is the owner of the carwash was going to operate the business.
Director Dawson — Stated that he has not.
Commissioner Seibert — Stated that the owner is leasing the building out to someone else who
is going to operate this business. Asked if there were additional units besides the four units on
the subject site that should have been removed a long time ago. Stated that the garages
would need to go as well.
Director Dawson — Stated that was correct.
Chairman L e Berthon — Asked Director Dawson about a sale pending on this property.
Director Dawson — Stated it was not pending but listed for sale.
Chairman Le Berthon — Asked if it was currently under single ownership and if the whole site
was for sale. Asked if what was granted tonight would be binding upon any future owner(s)
without any further hearing.
Director Dawson — Stated that was correct.
Commissioner Y — Asked if the entire parcel was for sale or just a portion of it.
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2004 \PC MINUTES January 13, 2004.doc
•
•
•
Planning Commission
January 13, 2004
Page 3
• Director Dawson — Stated that the entire property was being offered for sale, which includes the
carwash property. Stated that the importance for the lot combination recommendation is that it
would not be in the City's best interest to have the lots sold separately because the result would
be smaller, narrower lots.
Senior Planner Williams - Narrated and showed the video
Vice Chairman Griffiths — Stated that it does not show the vehicular access to the building.
Asked if the work is to be done inside and how the cars would maneuver in and out of the
building.
Senior Planner Williams — Stated that the driveway shown in the video serves as access to the
site, but that a 180 - degree turn is required to get into the bay.
Chairman I e Berthon — Asked if there were any questions of Staff and opened the Public
Hearing.
Stan S7eto, 2714 Stingle Avenue, Rosemead — Stated that he has read the staff report and the
applicants are in agreement except for conditions Number 2 and 3 regarding the lot
combination and the demolition of the non - conforming residential structures. Stated that they
were not aware of the agreement in 1976 and feel that these two issues are land use issues.
•States that perhaps the Planning Commission can direct Staff to directly deal with the property
owner in this matter because the applicant does not have the ability to require the property
owner to take care of these two items.
Commissioner Seibert — Asked is the owner of the carwash was present.
Stan Szeto, 2714 Stingle Avenue, Rosemead — Stated that he was not present.
Chairman I e Berthon — Asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of the project.
Jaen Minh, 5596 Rosemead Rlvd_, Temple City — Stated that he has a few questions. Stated
that he works at Importparts.com and asked why the Conditional Use Permit was contingent on
those conditions.
Chairman I e Berthon — Stated that conditions regarding that property were set a long time ago
and they have not been complied with. Stated that the Planning Commission can make its
determination based upon whether the property owner has complied with conditions previously
established for that property.
Vice Chairman Griffiths — Stated that the Conditional Use Permit goes with the land and that
would make the owner involved.
Director Dawson — Asked what type of equipment is sold and what types of installations take
• place at the subject site.
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2004 \PC MINUTES January 13, 2004.doc
Planning Commission
January 13, 2004
Page 4
Ben Hunh, 5526 Rosemead Blvd.. Temple City — Stated that basically it is minor lighting and S
modifications.
Chairman Le Berthon — Asked if anyone wanted to speak in favor or in opposition to the
project.
Vice Chairman Griffiths - Moved to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Commissioner
Seibert and unanimously carried.
Chairman I e Berthon - Closed the Public Hearing and began discussion.
Chairman Le Berthon — Asked Director Dawson about the conditions imposed and if they were
intended to be against the property owner.
Director Dawson — Stated that was correct.
Chairman Le Berthon — Asked if it was appropriate in this case that the property owner is not
present before the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Seibert — Stated that the property owner signed the application.
Director Dawson — Stated that there was a previous Code Enforcement situation under a
different ownership. Stated that a previous occupant was utilizing one or more of the garages
that were intended for the occupants of the apartments for their auto related work. Stated that
it falls back onto the property owner and that as a City, we go back to the property owner to see
that it gets corrected.
Commissioner Seihert — Stated that the owner of the property is also the applicant because
he signed the application for the Conditional Use Permit. Stated that this seems as good a
time as any to abate the units that should have been abated 20+ years ago. Stated that he
concurs with all the conditions and added a condition that the four unit building also be
demolished and the 7 -car garage be removed.
Director Dawson — Stated that one of the conditions Staff imposed was for the demolition of
the units to occur by June 30, 2005.
Commissioner ibert — Stated that he would like to see it occur sooner, based upon the
operation of this business.
City Attorney Martin — Stated that he would suggest amending condition Number 2 and 3 and
add a new condition Number 4 and that all of the conditions should be preceded with wording
to read "This C.U.P. shall not become effective for any purposes until if
Commissioner Seihert — Stated that is fine, but he would still like to see a time limit on it.
City Attorney Martin — Stated that the Conditional Use Permit does not become effective until
they do it.
N: \Word \Department\CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2004 \PC MINUTES January 13, 2004.doc
•
"
P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n
J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 0 4
P a g e 5
C o m m i s s i o n e r S e i b e r t S t a t e d t h a t w e s t i l l w a n t t o g e t r i d o f t h e n o n - c o n f o r m i n g u n i t s , e v e n
i f t h e y d o n o t c o n d u c t b u s i n e s s a s p r o p o s e d .
C i t y A t t o r n e y M a r t i n S t a t e d t h a t i t c o u l d b e t a k e n a s a n a b a t e m e n t o r n u i s a n c e c a s e .
C o m m i s s i o n e r S e i b e r t S t a t e d t h a t w a s a l o n g p r o c e s s .
C i t y A t t o r n e y M a r t i n S t a t e d t h a t t h e y c o u l d r e j e c t t h e a p p r o v a l .
C h a i r m a n 1 e B e r t h o n S t a t e d t h a t t h i s c o u l d b e s u b j e c t t o a n u i s a n c e h e a r i n g , e v e n n o w
w i t h o u t a n y i m p o s i t i o n o f f u r t h e r t i m e l i m i t s .
C i t y A t t o r n e y M a r t i n S t a t e d t h a t i f t h e y r e j e c t i t , t h e C i t y c o u l d g o a f t e r t h e p r o p e r t y o w n e r
a s a n u i s a n c e m a t t e r .
C o m m i s s i o n e r Y u S t a t e d t h a t t h e y a r e s u g g e s t i n g t h e a p p r o v a l i s c o n t i n g e n t u p o n t h e
r e m o v a l o f t h e u n i t s .
C h a i r m a n 1 e B e r t h o n A s k e d i f h e c a r e d t o i m p o s e a n y f u r t h e r d e a d l i n e s .
" C i t y A t t o r n e y M a r t i n S t a t e d t h a t i t d o e s n o t b e c o m e e f f e c t i v e u n t i l t h e y w i s h t o e x e r c i s e t h e
C U P .
C o m m i s s i o n e r S e i b e r t S t a t e d t h a t i t i s u p t o C o d e E n f o r c e m e n t f r o m t h a t p o i n t o n .
C o m m i s s i o n e r Y t t S t a t e d t h a t h e c o n c u r s w i t h C o m m i s s i o n e r S e i b e r t b u t w o u l d l i k e t o a d d
a t i m e t a b l e o n t h e r e m o v a l o f t h e f o u r u n i t s .
V i c e C h a i r m a n G r i f f i t h s S t a t e d t h a t h e c o n c u r s . S t a t e d t h a t b o t h t h e f i v e u n i t s o n t h e
c a r w a s h p r o p e r t y a n d t h e f o u r u n i t s o n t h e s u b j e c t s i t e s h o u l d b e d e m o l i s h e d . S t a t e d t h a t
h a v i n g i t d o n e i n t h i s m a t t e r c a u s e s i t t o b e d o n e s o o n e r a n d h e i s i n f a v o r o f t h a t . S t a t e d
t h a t h e r e c o g n i z e s t h e h a r d s h i p o n t h e r e n t e r s , b u t t h e o w n e r n e e d s t o c l e a n u p h i s a c t .
C h a i r m a n 1 e B e r t h o n S t a t e d t h a t h e c o n c u r s .
C i t y A t t o r n e y M a r t i n - M o t i o n t o a d o p t t h e d r a f t r e s o l u t i o n w i t h t h e f o l l o w i n g c h a n g e s t o
N u m b e r 1 , 2 , 3 a n d a n e w N u m b e r 4 . E a c h w i l l b e p r e c e d e d w i t h t h e f o l l o w i n g
p h r a s e . . . " T h i s C . U . P . s h a l l n o t b e c o m e e f f e c t i v e f o r a n y p u r p o s e u n t i l t h e f o l l o w i n g h a v e
b e e n a c c o m p l i s h e d . . . . " .
C o m m i s s i o n e r S e i b e r t S t a t e d t h a t w a s t h e m o t i o n , s e c o n d e d b y V i c e C h a i r m a n G r i f f i t h s
a n d u n a n i m o u s l y c a r r i e d .
" C h a i r m a n 1 e B e r t h o n S t a t e d t h a t t h e r e i s a 1 5 - d a y a p p e a l p e r i o d t o a p p e a l t h e d e c i s i o n o f
t h e P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n t o t h e C i t y C o u n c i l .
N : \ W o r d \ D e p a r t m e n t \ C D D \ M I N S \ P C M I N U T E S 2 0 0 4 \ P C M I N U T E S J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 0 4 . d o c
Planning Commission
January 13, 2004
Page 6
Vice Chairman Griffiths — Stated that if the property owner does not do anything that something
is placed on a future agenda to ensure that something happens relative to these issues.
City Attorney Martin — Asked if there was a follow -up motion to state that if this is accepted the
problems will be resolved and if it is rejected by the owner, then the recommendation is that
City Council follow through on a nuisance abatement.
Commissioner Spilled. moved the motion, second by Vice Chairman Griffiths and unanimously
carried.
B. PUBLIC HEARING: A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 10,407 SQUARE FOOT,
TWO -STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDING WHICH WOULD
BE USED AS A PRIVATE EDUCATIONAL LEARNING
CENTER. THE BUSINESS WOULD BE LOCATED AT
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF CALLITA STREET AND
ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD (6539 ROSEMEAD
BOULEVARD). THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN
THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C -2) ZONE.
SITE: 6539 ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD
CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 03 -1533
BUSINESS ADDRESS: LILY LEARNING CENTER PROJECT
6539 ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD
TEMPLE CITY, CALIFORNIA
PROPERTY OWNER: KA CHUNG FOGG
702 LA VIDA LANE
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91007
ARCHITECT: LEO WU
67 EAST LIVE OAK AVENUE, #201
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006
APPLICANT: KOU TI CHEN
3609 LOCKSLEY DRIVE
PASADENA, CALIFORNIA 91107
RECOMMENDATION: 1) HEAR STAFF REPORT
2) HEAR THOSE FOR AND AGAINST
3) NEGATIVE DECLARATION
4) ADOPT RESOLUTION
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2004 \PC MINUTES January 13, 2004.doc
"
P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n
J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 0 4
P a g e 7
D i r e c t o r D a w s o n S u m m a r i z e d t h e S t a f f r e p o r t d a t e d J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 0 4 a n d r e a d t h r e e l e t t e r s
o f o p p o s i t i o n t h a t w e r e s u b m i t t e d t o t h e P l a n n i n g D e p a r t m e n t o n J a n u a r y 1 2 , 2 0 0 4 .
C o m m i s s i o n e r S e i b e r t A s k e d D i r e c t o r D a w s o n i f t h e n o r t h s i d e o f C a l l i t a S t r e e t w a s S a n
G a b r i e l o r C o u n t y a r e a a n d w h a t t h e z o n i n g i s .
D i r e c t o r D a w s o n S t a t e d t h a t i t i s i n t h e C o u n t y a r e a a n d t h a t t h e z o n i n g i s p r o b a b l y
r e s i d e n t i a l R - 1 .
C i t y A t t o r n e y M a r t i n A s k e d D i r e c t o r D a w s o n a b o u t t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e , a n d t h a t
w h a t h i s c o n c l u s i o n w a s a b o u t t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l i m p a c t s o f s u c h a p r o j e c t a n d w h e t h e r o r n o t
a N e g a t i v e D e c l a r a t i o n w a s a d e q u a t e .
D i r e c t o r D a w s o n S t a t e d t h a t a N e g a t i v e D e c l a r a t i o n w a s s u f f i c i e n t .
C i t y A t t o r n e y M a r t i n A s k e d D i r e c t o r D a w s o n w h y h e w a s n o t r e c o m m e n d i n g a n E I R .
D i r e c t o r D a w s o n S t a t e d t h a t a l t h o u g h t h e p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t c o u l d h a v e a s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t o n
t h e e n v i r o n m e n t , i t i s n o t a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t t h e r e w i l l b e a s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t i n t h i s c a s e b e c a u s e
o f c e r t a i n m i t i g a t i o n m e a s u r e s t h a t h a v e b e e n a d d e d t o t h e p r o j e c t . S t a t e d t h a t a t t h e S t a f f
" l e v e l , S t a f f f i n d s t h a t t h e r e i s a l i m i t e d c o n c e r n a n d t h a t i f t h e r e w e r e m a n y c o n c e r n s ,
w i d e s p r e a d c o n c e r n s o n m u l t i p l e f r o n t s , t h e n S t a f f w o u l d h a v e r e q u i r e d a f u l l E I R . S t a t e d t h a t
i n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r i n s t a n c e , t h e r e i s a l i m i t e d c o n c e r n a n d t h a t r e a l l y r e v o l v e d a r o u n d t r a f f i c a n d
p a r k i n g a n d t h a t i s w h y t h e C i t y r e q u i r e d t h a t t h e a p p l i c a n t p a y f o r a n d h a v e t h e C i t y c o n d u c t a
t r a f f i c a n a l y s i s . S t a t e d t h a t w i t h t h e t r a f f i c a n a l y s i s h a v i n g b e e n d o n e a n d i f a m i t i g a t i o n
m e a s u r e i s i n c l u d e d t h a t l i m i t s t h e s i z e o f t h e b u i l d i n g , t h e n t h e S t a f f i s c o n t e n t t h a t i t c o u l d b e
a p p r o v e d w i t h a N e g a t i v e D e c l a r a t i o n .
C o m m i s s i o n e r Y u A s k e d D i r e c t o r D a w s o n i f t h e a p p l i c a n t p a i d f o r t h e t r a f f i c a n a l y s i s b y a n
e n g i n e e r a p p r o v e d b y t h e C i t y .
D i r e c t o r D a w s o n - - S t a t e d t h a t t h e t r a f f i c e n g i n e e r h a s a s t a n d i n g c o n t r a c t w i t h t h e C i t y a n d h e
a n s w e r s t o t h e C i t y , n o t t o t h e a p p l i c a n t .
C o m m i s s i o n e r Y u S t a t e d t h a t t h e t r a f f i c s t u d y r e f e r s t o t h e n u m b e r o f p u p i l s b e i n g 1 5 0 a n d
t h e r e a r e t w o a t t a c h m e n t s i n t h e p a c k e t ; o n e s a y s 1 5 0 s t u d e n t s a n d o n e s a y s 2 0 i n t h e
m o r n i n g a n d 8 5 i n t h e a f t e r n o o n , f o r a t o t a l o f 1 0 5 . A s k e d i f t h e t r a f f i c s t u d y w a s b a s e d o n 1 5 0
p u p i l s .
D i r e c t o r D a w s o n S t a t e d t h a t i t w a s b a s e d o n t h e h i g h e r n u m b e r o f 1 5 0 .
C o m m i s s i o n e r Y u A s k e d i f t h e r e w a s a n y d i s c u s s i o n t h a t w o u l d h a v e t o b e m a d e n o w t h a t
" t h e n u m b e r o f s t u d e n t s h a s b e e n r e v i s e d .
N : \ W o r d \ D e p a r t m e n t \ C D D \ M I N S \ P C M I N U T E S 2 0 0 4 \ P C M I N U T E S J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 0 4 . d o c
Planning Commission
January 13, 2004
Page 8
Director Dawson — Stated that the traffic analysis was conduct based upon the 150 -pupil count, •
although the applicant might be able to clear up the inconsistency.
Commissioner Seibert — Asked Director Dawson why a lot consolidation was not part of the
conditions.
Director Dawson — Stated that in this case they are going to build a building across the lot lines,
however, a lot consolidation would be a reasonable condition to impose upon the project.
Chairman 1 e Berthon — Asked Director Dawson about the condition that the building be
reduced in size, while maintaining the same architectural design. Asked if it was possible
without re- examining the plans.
Director Dawson — Stated that the idea was to reduce the overall size of the building, while
maintaining the same architectural style. If the Planning Commission were uncomfortable with
that, it would not be a problem to require that the revised plans come back and be reviewed by
the Planning Commission.
City Attorney Martin Stated that if it is not going to be cut down by 10% as indicated, then we
have no jurisdiction because it might require a EIR.
Director Dawson — Stated that the Staff would contend that the project couldn't be approved if it
were not reduced because of the environmental analysis, unless a full EIR was completed.
Chairman 1 e Berthon — Stated that the second question he has is with respect to the hours of
operation and the days of operation. Stated that he noted that they were going to conduct
business on Sundays. Asked if there is anything the Planning Commission could do to restrict
the hours and days of operation to Monday — Friday or Monday — Saturday.
Vice Chairman Griffiths — Stated that it is only in the morning hours that work would be
conducted on the weekends. Stated that the application indicates that it is only the morning
hours for seven days and the evenings for five days.
Commissioner Seibert — Stated that they will be open until 8:00 p.m. on the weekdays.
Chairman le Berthon —Asked if there were any more questions of the Staff. Opened the Public
Hearing.
Carlos Parrague', 36 West Main Street, Alhambra , CA, 91801— Stated that he has read the
Staff Report and agrees with 90% of the recommendations. Stated that they have concerns
regarding two of the conditions set forth and would like to address those concerns as well as
other concerns. Requested to have a continuance on the Public Hearing if issues arise that
could not be addressed and needed to be presented at a later date. Stated that the conditions
that they have an issue with are Number 2 that require the total size of the building not to
exceed 9,292 square feet and condition Number 3 limiting the number of students at any given
time to 105. Stated in regards to the first issue about the total size of the building, it is based
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2004 \PC MINUTES January 13, 2004.doc
Planning Commission
January 13, 2004
Page 9
• on the traffic analysis prepared by Transtech. Stated that the report uses the Temple City
Educational Center as a comparison (went on to paraphrase the report). Asked the Planning
Commission to reconsider this issue. The Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Transtech
Engineers specifically points out that there is ample on- street parking available during the hours
of operation. Stated that the Temple City Education Center, which was used as comparison,
shares a 27 -space parking lot with an insurance company and another small business.
Stated that the Lily Learning Center would provide shuttle service to accommodate
transportation, so this drastically limits the need for parking. Stated that this facility is zoned
commercial and some commercial uses would generate a lot more traffic than this use. Stated
that limiting the number of students would penalize the Lily Learning Center for being
successful.
Chairman Le Berthon — Asked about the objections with respect to number of students and if
he would move on to that issue.
Carlos Parrague', 36 West Main Street, Alhambra , CA, 91801— Stated that they are required
to build the building according to the building code, and that requires making accommodations
for 348 students. Stated that that is an expensive proposition and if they are being limited to
105 students, but they have to build to 348 they should have some kind of relief from the
Building Code. Stated that this could be a shopping center and they are open on Sundays.
Stated that they would have limited hours on Sunday.
• Chairman 1 e Berthon — Asked if anyone wanted to speak in favor of the project.
Richard Duban, 6515 Rosemead Blvd_ San Gabriel, CA 91775 — Stated that he owns the
property next door to the subject property and that he believes that if the property is zoned C -2,
then it seems that it should be commercial and not used for non - conforming houses. Stated
that in the previous action the Planning Commission wanted to get rid of the non - conforming
structures. Stated this is along the lines of what is being accomplished in the City. Stated that
it would enhance the neighborhood and make Rosemead Boulevard better.
Chairman 1 e Berthon — Asked if anyone wanted to speak in favor or opposition to the
Conditional Use Permit.
Shaun I arsuel, 8971 Callita Ave San Gabriel, CA 91775 — Stated that the traffic report did not
focus on the impact of Sultana intersecting with Rosemead and Callita Street. Stated that if
you reexamine the report they examine twelve separate turning movements at that particular
intersection, but if you factor in Sultana Avenue, an additional eight possible traffic movements
are added. Stated that without taking this fact into consideration the traffic study is worthless
due to the unique traffic conditions at the site. Stated that adding the extra traffic generated
from the learning center would only create more conditions that are not mentioned in the report.
Stated that there are bushes on Rosemead that make a left turn very dangerous. Stated that
at the other end of Callita is Emperor Elementary School and they already have traffic issues.
• Stated that he did not feel this was the place for a learning center.
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2004 \PC MINUTES January 13, 2004.doc
Planning Commission
January 13, 2004
Page 10
Commissioner Seibert —Asked Mr. Larsuel if his objections would be as strong if there was a •
different type of use going in there since the property is zoned for commercial development.
Shaun Larsuel, 8971 Callita Ave San Gabriel, CA 91775 — Stated that he considered that.
Stated that a suggestion would be that the Planning Commission consider no access off of
Callita Street, only Rosemead Boulevard. Stated that would alleviate any type of overflow
going up and down Callita, interacting with Sultana, if access were limited to Rosemead
Boulevard.
Commissioner Seibert — Asked if that were a condition for the school, would that help alleviate
traffic concerns?
Shaun 1 arsuel, 8971 Callita Ave San Gahriel, CA 91775 — Stated that it would help.
Chairman I e Berthon — Asked if anyone else wanted to speak against granting the Conditional
Use Permit.
Robert Ridley, 8846 E. Callita St., San Gabriel, CA 91775 — Stated that his concerns were
about two issues; safety and overall appearance. Stated that this is a very bad intersection and
when you make a right hand turn southbound onto Rosemead there is poor visibility. The curb
should be painted red. Stated that he supports the idea of no access on Callita Street. Stated
that he supports the condition regarding loitering and would suggest signs. Asked if the facility
is going to close down at night and lock its facility so that there will not be overnight parking.
Stated that he also had a concern regarding appearance; this project intensifies the use of the
property and changes the current use from residential to commercial. Stated that he would like
the impact on the residential neighbors reduced. Asked what the height of the western wall
would be, what material would be used and if mature trees should be placed along that wall.
Asked about the signage facing the residential neighborhood, if any. Stated that any
development there should be in scale with the surrounding residential uses.
Chairman Le Berthon — Asked if anyone else wanted to speak against granting the Conditional
Use Permit.
Dale Mendoza, 8840 Callita St _ San Gabriel, CA 91775 — Asked when the property was zoned
commercial. Restated previous concerns regarding the traffic.
Director Dawson — Stated it has been that way for many years.
Mark Briskie, 8862 Callita St., San Gahriel, CA 91775 — Stated that the parcel is unique
because it ends in a residential area. Stated that in the report it states that Callita Street is
predominately a residential area. Stated that he does not feel the traffic study really shows the
traffic problem on Callita Street and Emperor. Restated previous concerns regarding the traffic,
landscaping and hours of operation.
Chairman I e Berthon — Asked if anyone else who spoke would not repeat issues already
addressed and only mention matters not addressed previously.
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2004 \PC MINUTES January 13, 2004.doc
"
P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n
J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 0 4
P a g e 1 1
K e n n e t h W a g n e r , 8 8 0 8 C a l l i t a S t . , S a n G a b r i e l , C A 9 1 7 7 5 S t a t e d h i s c o n c e r n a b o u t s t r e e t
c l e a n i n g a n d t h a t h e r a r e l y g e t s h i s s t r e e t c l e a n e d b e c a u s e o f o n - s t r e e t p a r k i n g . S t a t e d t h a t
t h e r e a r e o t h e r l o c a t i o n s t h a t h a v e b e e n v a c a n t f o r y e a r s a n d a s k e d i f t h e a p p l i c a n t s h a v e
l o o k e d a t o t h e r s i t e s .
1 1 1
" " "
- 1
- " -
A "
S t a t e d t h a t w h e n t h e r e i s e m e r g e n c y
a c t i v i t y i n t h e a r e a , e m e r g e n c y t r a f f i c c u t s t h r o u g h C a l l i t a e n r o u t e t o M u s c a t e l . S t a t e d t h a t
a n o t h e r i s s u e i s t h e k i n d o f l i g h t i n g t h a t w i l l b e i n s t a l l e d . A s k e d i f t h e r e w a s g o i n g t o b e p a r k i n g
l o t s w e e p i n g l a t e a t n i g h t .
K a t h y P e r i n i , 6 4 1 5 N . M u s c a t e l , S a n G a b r i e l , C A 9 1 7 7 5 S t a t e d t h a t s h e i s a T e m p l e C i t y
r e s i d e n t b u t s h e i s a l s o t h e p r i n c i p a l a t E m p e r o r S c h o o l . S t a t e d t h a t i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e t r a f f i c
c o n c e r n s f o r t h e r e s i d e n t s d u e t o E m p e r o r S c h o o l , t h e n e w u s e w o u l d g e n e r a t e a d d i t i o n a l
t r a f f i c . S t a t e d t h a t s h e w a s c o n c e r n e d a b o u t s o m a n y s t u d e n t s a d j a c e n t t o a S t a t e H i g h w a y .
S t a t e d t h a t s h e w a s c o n c e r n e d a b o u t s t u d e n t s w a l k i n g d o w n C a l l i t a t o t h e f a c i l i t y .
M i c h e l l e S h a o , 8 9 0 7 C a l l i t a S t . , S a n G a h r i e l , C A 9 1 7 7 5 S t a t e d t h a t s h e h a d c o n c e r n s a b o u t
t h e t r a f f i c a n d s a f e t y i s s u e s f o r t h e r e s i d e n t s .
C i n d y S i m m e r s , 8 9 5 2 F C a l l i t a S t _ , S a n G a b r i e l , C A 9 1 7 7 5 S t a t e d t h a t s h e h a s m a n y
" c o n c e r n s s u c h a s t h e o n e s p r e v i o u s l y s t a t e d . S t a t e d t h a t s h e i s c o n c e r n e d a b o u t p r o p e r t y
v a l u e a n d a l s o t h e i m p a c t o n h e r a b i l i t y t o q u i e t l y e n j o y h e r p r o p e r t y . S t a t e d t h a t h e r c o n c e r n s
r a n g e f r o m t h e t r a f f i c , t h e h o u r s o f o p e r a t i o n , t h e l i g h t s , t h e s e c u r i t y s i t u a t i o n , t h e b l o c k w a l l
t h a t m i g h t i m p e d e h e a b i l i t y t o e v e n b a c k o u t o f h e r d r i v e w a y , w h i c h i s d i r e c t l y a d j a c e n t t o t h e
p r o p e r t y l i n e . A s k e d h o w m u c h d e m a n d t h e r e i s f o r t h e n u m b e r o f l e a r n i n g c e n t e r s t h a t a r e
a l r e a d y i n T e m p l e C i t y . S t a t e d t h a t s h e w o u l d r a t h e r h a v e a c o m m e r c i a l b u i l d i n g t h e r e t h e n
h a v e a v a c a n t b u i l d i n g . S t a t e d t h a t s h e w o u l d l i k e a n o f f s e t o f a b o u t t e n f e e t f o r t h e b l o c k w a l l
s o t h a t s h e c o u l d a t l e a s t s e e i f s o m e o n e i s c o m i n g d o w n t h e s t r e e t a s s h e b a c k s o u t o f h e r
d r i v e w a y . R e s t a t e d p r e v i o u s c o n c e r n s r e g a r d i n g t h e t r a f f i c a n d s a f e t y i s s u e s .
P a u l L i n e b a c k , 8 9 3 0 E _ C a l l i t a S t . S a n G a b r i e l , C A 9 1 7 7 5 S t a t e d t h a t h e a g r e e d w i t h a l l t h e
c o n c e r n s b o u g h t u p . S t a t e d t h a t t h e r e i s n o t e n o u g h f o c u s o n t h e i s s u e o f w h a t s t u d e n t s d o
o n c e t h e y l e a v e t h e b u i l d i n g . S t a t e d t h a t t h e n e i g h b o r s s h o u l d h a v e s o m e s a y o n w h a t g o e s
i n t o t h e c o m m u n i t y b e c a u s e i t c o u l d a d v e r s e l y i m p a c t t h e i r n e i g h b o r h o o d . A s k e d i f t h e
n u m b e r o f p e o p l e w h o d i s a g r e e w i l l h a v e a n i m p a c t o n t h e d e c i s i o n r e a c h e d b y t h e P l a n n i n g
C o m m i s s i o n .
C h a i r m a n L e B e r t h o n S t a t e d t h a t t h e r e a s o n s a r e b a s e d o n m e r i t .
A l f o n d o C i l a t a , 8 8 0 8 C a l l i t a S t . S a n G a b r i e l , C A 9 1 7 7 5 S t a t e d t h a t h e a g r e e s w i t h a l l o f t h e
r e a s o n s s t a t e d f o r n o t a p p r o v i n g t h e p r o j e c t . S t a t e d . t h a t h e w a n t e d t o s h a r e a p e r s o n a l
e x p e r i e n c e a b o u t t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n . S t a t e d t h a t w i t h i n f o u r y e a r s , a c a r h a s a l m o s t h i t h i m t h r e e
t i m e s w h e n h e t u r n s l e f t o n C a l l i t a .
N : \ W o r d \ D e p a r t m e n t \ C D D \ M I N S \ P C M I N U T E S 2 0 0 4 \ P C M I N U T E S J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 0 4 . d o c
Planning Commission
January 13, 2004
Page 12
Jenny Lei, 8926 Callita St San Gabriel, CA 91775 — Stated that the intersection is very short •
and how could a left turn be made into the building. Restated previous concerns regarding the
traffic and safety issues.
-.1 I.
- • _ -
1-
-111 -
A •
— Stated that she wanted to know why
other residents of Temple City do not know what is going on and why only the residents being
impacted are notified. Stated that she lives further away but is still concerned. Stated that she
is against it because of traffic issues. Stated she is disgruntled and wants to leave the City.
Mary Chen, 8937 Callita St. San Gabriel, CA 91775 — Stated that she thinks it is dangerous to
use Callita with Rosemead. Stated that she hopes they will look into other sites. Stated that
the security and safety of residents and students is more important than profit. Stated that if
the learning center was approved, it could be one story instead of two stories.
Amy Huynh, 8914 F. Callita St San Gabriel, CA 91775 — Stated that she was concerned with
the hours of operation and the fact that they are open on weekends.
Ric Reed, 6628 N. Mus .at .I Av ._, San Gabriel, CA 91775 — Stated that the concerns
expressed are accurate. Stated that it is an uncontrolled intersection; there are stop signs.
Stated that there is a residence behind the site. Stated that the lot behind the project is a
residential lot. Stated that many of the residents had no idea that property was zoned
commercial. Stated that for the last 50 years that property has been used as residential.
Stated that he questions what is going to happen to this facility when it is no longer a learning
center. Restated previous concerns regarding the traffic and safety issues.
Shaun Larsuel, 8971 Callita St, San Gabriel, CA 91775 — Stated that perhaps extending a
point (the triangle point) on the east end of Sultana at the corner of Rosemead and Sultana,
slightly south so that no one from Rosemead could make a left turn into that neighborhood.
Stated that might solve a lot of problems.
Director Dawson — Showed the City boundaries on the map.
Gino Brunengo, 9495 Pentland Street, Temple City — Asked if the additional cars were going to
be parked in San Gabriel (L.A. County). Stated that when school drop -off takes place, the
parent's backup into the street and do not use the designated drop off or pick up area and
block a lane. Restated previous concerns regarding the traffic and safety issues.
Director Dawson — Stated that Rosemead Boulevard is a State highway and if the people
would like to see a red curb, they could contact Caltrans, because they have direct control over
the State Highway.
Chairman I e Berthon — Invited the applicant to come up for rebuttal.
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2004 \PC MINUTES January 13, 2004.doc
Planning Commission
January 13, 2004
Page 13
• Carlos Parrague', 36 West Main Street, Alhambra , CA, 91801— Stated that he sympathizes
with the people but the property is zoned commercial. Stated that the traffic report indicates
that with or without the facility there is going to be an increase in traffic. Stated that there are
other alternatives to the property such as a shopping center and that would generate more
traffic and more trash and it is allowed in a commercial zone. Stated that the safety issues are
not within the control of the applicant or the City. Stated that they will work with the City and
residents to be as safe as possible. Stated that the west wall could be replaced with
landscaping, if preferred. Stated that they want to lock the parking lot at night and they do not
want overnight parking. Stated that material the architect chose for the building was meant to
be aesthetically pleasing. Stated that this is a low volume use compared to other uses. Stated
that for street cleaning, perhaps it could be worked out for closing one day a week to allow for
street cleaning, maybe half a day. Stated that this school is open to all ethnic groups and not
restricted to anyone.
Commissioner Seibert - Moved to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Vice Chairman
Griffiths and unanimously carried.
Chairman I e Berthon — Closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Seibert — Asked the City Attorney about the possibility of a full EIR for this
project.
• City Attorney Martin — Asked Director Dawson if having now heard all of the evidence, does he
stay with the Negative Declaration or do you feel that an EIR would disclose more information
that would be of value.
Director Dawson — Stated that in terms of the environmental analysis, he would stay with Staffs
original determination that a Negative Declaration is sufficient in this case. Stated that the
property is designated as commercial on the City's General Plan and is zoned commercial.
You could have a wide variety of uses that would have a lot of ingress and egress traffic, such
as a 7 -11 or a gas station. Stated that this kind of a use does not have substantial impacts on
the neighborhood except during the peak user times, which tend to be in the morning and late
afternoon. Stated that these issues are disclosed and addressed in the traffic report.
City _Attorney Martin — Stated that some of those other alternative uses could be permitted
without a Public Hearing.
Director Dawson — Stated that in terms of potential adverse environmental impacts, he would
stay with the Negative Declaration and with the mitigation measures set forth. Stated that he
listened to the testimony and if the Planning Commission were going to approve this
application, Staff would suggest six additional conditions as well as the original conditions.
City Attorney Martin — Asked the Planning Commissioners if they feel the Negative Declaration
recommended by Director Dawson is justified or if they could get more information from a full
E.I.R.
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2004 \PC MINUTES January 13, 2004.doc
Planning Commission
January 13, 2004
Page 14
Commission _r ib — Stated that he felt the E.I.R. might give a little more information. •
City Attorney Martin — Stated that the study that was conducted was made unilaterally and if it is
an E.I.R. there is an interchange of ideas.
Vice Chairman Griffiths — Stated that the only issue that would be of interest to him in an E.I.R.
is strictly traffic and parking. Stated that traffic is the problem and a full -blown E.I.R. would
interest him for the traffic portion only. Stated that this is a commercial zone and it has been for
a while. Something is going to be built there and a lot of the uses do not require a Public
Hearing. Stated that something scaled back might be a better compromise. Stated that there is
no street parking and that the traffic is bad at the corner. Stated that some adjustment of the
scale and size of the building might be a worthwhile consideration. Stated that he would be
inclined to deny the project without prejudice and allow the applicant to look at it again and
come up with something that would fit a little better.
Chairman I e Berthon — Asked Vice Chairman Griffiths, with respect to the proposed condition
that the size of the building be reduced to the 9,292 square feet; would that meet with his
approval?
Commissioner Y , — Stated that this is a very controversial proposal, but the property is zoned
C -2 and there needs to be a balance of the property owners right to develop versus the
neighbors desire to have something else. Stated that many developments can occur on this
property without a hearing. Stated he does not see a need for a full E.I.R.. Perhaps the
applicant would want to have another traffic study conducted but he feels the traffic study was
well done even if there is some disagreements. Stated that he is in favor of approval with the
conditions proposed.
Chairman I a Berthon — Asked Director Dawson about the six additional conditions other than
those mentioned in the Staff Report.
Director Dawson — Stated that the following were six additional conditions that might address
some of the concerns expressed during the public hearing:
1. Revised architectural plans as well as any proposed signage shall back before the
Planning Commission.
2. That the three lots be combined into one lot.
3. That the parking lot and building lighting be shielded from the residential uses and
adjacent properties.
4. That no overnight parking be allowed on the site.
5. That the block wall proposed along the west property line be limited to a maximum
height of three feet within the front 20 feet back from the Callita Street property line.
6. That the block wall be stuccoed on both sides to match the texture of the building.
Stated that in terms of maximum number of pupils, the traffic analysis was done on 150 and
that was the applicant's request.
N: \Word \Department\CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2004 \PC MINUTES January 13, 2004.doc
•
"
P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n
J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 0 4
P a g e 1 5
C h a i r m a n L e B e r t h o n S t a t e t h a t w i t h t h o s e a d d i t i o n a l , c o n d i t i o n s , i n c l u d e d i n t h e
R e s o l u t i o n , w o u l d C o m m i s s i o n e r Y u b e i n f a v o r .
C o m m i s s i o n e r Y u S t a t e d t h a t h e i s i n f a v o r .
V i c e C h a i r m a n G r i f f i t h s S t a t e d t h a t i f t h e a p p l i c a n t c o m p l i e s w i t h t h e s e a d d i t i o n a l
c o n d i t i o n s a s w e l l a s t h e o r i g i n a l c o n d i t i o n s , h e c a n v o t e i n f a v o r .
C o m m i s s i o n e r S e i b e r t S t a t e d t h a t i t i s a c o m m e r c i a l a r e a t h a t i s g o i n g t o b e d e v e l o p e d
o n e w a y o r a n o t h e r . S t a t e d t h a t h e d o e s n o t h a v e a p r o b l e m w i t h t h e s c h o o l . S t a t e d t h a t
h e d o e s n o t f e e l p a r k i n g i s a c o n c e r n . S t a t e d t h a t t h e i n g r e s s a n d e g r e s s i s a p r o b l e m a s
w e l l a s t r a f f i c i n t h e a r e a . S t a t e d t h a t o v e r a l l t h e u s e i s p r o b a b l y o n e o f t h e b e t t e r u s e s f o r
t h a t p a r c e l . S t a t e d t h a t h e w a s a l i t t l e c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e S u n d a y o p e r a t i o n a n d d o e s n o t
t h i n k i t s h o u l d b e a l l o w e d . S t a t e d t h a t t h e r e s h o u l d b e o n e d a y o f r e l i e f f o r t h e
n e i g h b o r h o o d .
C h a i r m a n L e B e r t h o n A s k e d C o m m i s s i o n e r S e i b e r t i f h e w a s p r o p o s i n g a n a d d i t i o n a l
c o n d i t i o n t h a t t h e r e b e n o c l a s s e s h e l d o n S u n d a y .
C o m m i s s i o n e r S e i b e r t S t a t e d t h a t w a s c o r r e c t a n d w i t h a l l o f t h e a d d i t i o n a l c o n d i t i o n s , h e
c o u l d v o t e i n f a v o r .
C h a i r m a n L e B e r t h o n S t a t e d t h a t h e c o n c u r s w i t h t h e o t h e r C o m m i s s i o n e r s a n d t h a t h e i s
a l s o c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e t r a f f i c s i t u a t i o n . S t a t e d t h a t i n d e e d t h i s p a r t i c u l a r l o t i s z o n e d C - 2 .
S t a t e d t h a t w i t h a l l o f t h e a d d i t i o n a l c o n d i t i o n s a s p r o p o s e d , h e c a n v o t e i n f a v o r o f t h e
C o n d i t i o n a l U s e P e r m i t .
V i c e C h a i r m a n G r i f f i t h s m o v e d t o a p p r o v e C o n d i t i o n a l U s e P e r m i t 0 3 - 1 5 3 3 w i t h a l l t h e
c o n d i t i o n s a s s t a t e d a n d w i t h t h e N e g a t i v e D e c l a r a t i o n a s p r e p a r e d , s e c o n d e d b y
C o m m i s s i o n e r S e i b e r t a n d u n a n i m o u s l y c a r r i e d .
C h a i r m a n 1 e B e r t h o n S t a t e d t h a t t h e m o t i o n c a r r i e s a n d t h a t t h e a c t i o n o f t h e
C o m m i s s i o n i s s u b j e c t t o a 1 5 - d a y d a y a p p e a l p e r i o d b y t h e a p p l i c a n t o r a n y o n e w h o
w i s h e s t o a p p e a l t h e c a s e .
N : \ W o r d \ D e p a r t m e n t \ C D D \ M I N S \ P C M I N U T E S 2 0 0 4 \ P C M I N U T E S J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 0 4 . d o c
Planning Commission
January 13, 2004
Page 16
8. COMMUNICATIONS: None
9. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS: None
10. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chairman Le Berthon adjourned the meeting at 9:55
p.m.
ATT ST:
Secretary
Chairman
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2004 \PC MINUTES January 13, 2004.doc