HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes - 2005/11/08 - RegularPLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
NOVEMBER 8, 2005
• INITIATION:
1. CALL TO ORDER
Pursuant to the Agenda posted November 4, 2005, Chairman Blum called the
meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, November 8,
2005.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners: Le Berthon, Griffiths, Seibert, Yu, Blum
Also Present: City Attorney Martin, Community Development Director
Dawson, Senior Planner Lambert and Assistant Planners
Gulick and Fang and Public Safety Officer Ariizumi
Absent: None
4. TIME FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK
•
At this point, no one came forward to speak.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES October 11, 2005
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS SUBMITTED
B. REQUEST: TIME EXTENSION REQUEST FOR TPM 060710
SITE ADDRESS: 5646 -5652 SULTANA AVENUE
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE ONE -YEAR REQUEST IN WHICH TO
RECORD THE FINAL MAP
ENGINEER:
EGL ASSOCIATES
11819 GOLDRING RD. # A
ARCADIA, CA 91006
• Commissioner Griffiths recused himself from voting on the minutes because he was
absent from the meeting of October 11, 2005.
Planning Commission
November 8, 2005
Page 2
• Commissioner Seibert - Made a motion to approve the minutes of October 11, 2005,
•
seconded by Vice - Chairman Yu and unanimously carried.
Commissioner Seibert - Made a motion to approve the one -year request to record
Tentative Parcel Map 060710, seconded by Vice - Chairman Yu and unanimously
carried.
6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE
7. NEW BUSINESS:
A. PUBLIC HEARING: THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER
RECOMMENDING CERTAIN CODE AMENDMENTS
TO REGULATE AND RESTRICT THE PARKING AND
STORAGE OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES.
AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE PLANNING
COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER A DEFINITION OF
RECREATIONAL VEHICLES, RESTRICTING RVS
FROM BEING PARKED IN THE FRONT YARD AREA
OR A STREET SIDE YARD AREA OR WHERE THE
RECREATIONAL VEHICLE BLOCKS ACCESS TO A
REQUIRED GARAGE. CONSIDERATION WILL
ALSO BE GIVEN TO RV CANOPIES AS WELL AS
ON- STREET PARKING RESTRICTIONS. CERTAIN
EXCEPTIONS WILL BE CONSIDERED TO ALLOW
FOR LOADING AND UNLOADING OF
RECREATIONAL VEHICLES AND TO ALLOW A
TEMPORARY PERMIT TO ACCOMMODATE
VISITORS. OTHER RELATED ITEMS MAY ALSO BE
CONSIDERED.
SITE:
RECOMMENDATION:
CITYWIDE
1) HEAR STAFF REPORT
2) ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF
3) OPEN PUBLIC HEARING
4) CLOSE PUBLIC. HEARING
5) RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
6) ADOPT RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING CODE
AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO RV PARKING
• Chairman Blum — Asked Staff for the report.
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES November 8, 2005.doc
"
"
P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n
N o v e m b e r 8 , 2 0 0 5
P a g e 3
D i r e c t o r D a w s o n - G a v e a p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e s t a f f r e p o r t .
C h a i r m a n B l u m A s k e d i f t h e r e w e r e a n y q u e s t i o n s f o r t h e S t a f f . O p e n e d t h e P u b l i c
H e a r i n g . A s k e d i f a n y o n e w a n t e d t o s p e a k .
K e n G o r d o n , 1 0 4 1 5 K e y w e s t - S t a t e d t h a t h e i s t h e f i r s t v i c e - p r e s i d e n t o f W i n n e b a g o
T a s k a T r a v e l e r s A s s o c i a t i o n o f A m e r i c a a n d i n C a l i f o r n i a t h e r e a r e o v e r 2 0 0 m e m b e r s
l o c a l l y . S t a t e d t h a t h e p r e s e n t e d t h e C i t y A t t o r n e y w i t h a d o c u m e n t , w h i c h w a s
d i s t r i b u t e d , t o t h e P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n e r s . H e r e a d t h e d o c u m e n t t h a t w a s s e v e r a l
p a g e s l o n g t o t h e P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n . ( T h e P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n e r s e a c h h a d a
c o p y o f t h e d o c u m e n t ) . O v e r a l l , h e i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e C o u r t s d e t e r m i n e d t h a t C i t y ' s m a y
n o t r e g u l a t e R V p a r k i n g a n d t h a t h e w a s o p p o s e d t o t h e r e g u l a t i o n s .
C h a i r m a n B l u m S t a t e d t h a t t h e P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n e r s r e a d t h e i n f o r m a t i o n a n d
t h a t i t p e r t a i n e d t o a 1 9 7 7 O h i o C o u r t o f A p p e a l s a n d i n d i c a t e d t h a t w e a r e n o t h e r e t o
t a l k a b o u t t h e l e g a l i t y i s s u e . H e s t a t e d t h a t a t t h i s p o i n t w e a r e n o t h e r e t o s p e a k a b o u t
t h e l e g a l i t y o f t h e i s s u e a n d t h a t t h e P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n a l s o h a s i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m
t h e O f f i c e o f t h e A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l f r o m t h e S t a t e o f C a l i f o r n i a f r o m 1 9 9 2 t h a t m a y
r e f u t e s o m e o f t h o s e i s s u e s , b u t t h e P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n i s n o t g o i n g t o t a l k a b o u t t h e
l e g a l i s s u e s a t t h i s p o i n t a n d w o u l d l i k e t o p r o c e e d .
. . . I
- S t a t e d t h a t t h e C i t y o f H u n t i n g t o n B e a c h h a d t h e i s s u e
o f R V P a r k i n g R e g u l a t i o n s a n d t h a t h e p r e s e n t e d t h e s a m e d o c u m e n t t o t h e m a n d t h e y
c o n s i d e r e d t h e m a t e r i a l s h e p r e s e n t e d .
J i m I a w , 9 5 2 1 W e d g e w o o d - S t a t e d t h a t h e r e a d t h e d r a f t o r d i n a n c e a n d t h a t t h e
p a r a m e t e r s t h a t w e r e w r i t t e n s e e m t o b e s a t i s f a c t o r y t o b o t h s i d e s a n d e s t a b l i s h
r e a s o n a b l e p a r a m e t e r s .
J o h n E m a n a l l i , 9 8 4 2 K e y w e s t S t . S t a t e d t h a t w h e n p e o p l e i n v e s t i n p r o p e r t y t h e y
s h o u l d a b i d e b y e x i s t i n g l a w . S t a t e d t h a t h e o w n s a t r a i l e r t h a t h a s b e e n p a r k e d i n
f r o n t o f h i s r e s i d e n c e f o r m a n y y e a r s a n d h a s n e v e r h a d a n y c o m p l a i n t s . S t a t e d t h a t
s i n c e h e b o u g h t t h e p r o p e r t y h e w a s a l l o w e d t o h a v e h i s t r a i l e r p a r k e d o n - s i t e a n d t h a t
s h o u l d n o t c h a n g e . Q u o t e d s o m e v e r b i a g e f r o m t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t a n d t h e F i f t h
A m e n d m e n t . S t a t e d t h a t h e i s o p p o s e d t o t h e r e g u l a t i n g o f R V p a r k i n g o n p r i v a t e
p r o p e r t y . S t a t e d t h a t p r o v i d i n g a n a m o r t i z a t i o n p e r i o d w o u l d b e a p o s s i b l e s o l u t i o n , b u t
t h a t 6 m o n t h s i s t o o s h o r t . S t a t e d t h a t a n o t i c e s h o u l d b e g i v e n t o p e o p l e p u r c h a s i n g
r e a l p r o p e r t y i n T e m p l e C i t y s t a t i n g t h a t t h e r e m i g h t b e a f u t u r e o r d i n a n c e n o t a l l o w i n g
R V p a r k i n g o n t h e i r p r o p e r t y . S t a t e d t h a t h e f e l t t h i s w a s d i s c r i m i n a t i o n a g a i n s t R V
o w n e r s .
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 5 \ P C M I N U T E S N o v e m b e r 8 , 2 0 0 5 . d o c
Planning Commission
November 8, 2005
Page 4
• Bruce Bertram, 5033 Fratus Dr. — Stated that he has owned his property for 31 years.
Stated that he is a law- abiding citizen and does not try to break the law. Stated that he
did not feel the Planning Commission should take away his property rights. Stated that
he was against the regulating of RV parking. Stated that he felt that the City was
discriminating against RV owners. Stated that RV's can provide emergency services to
a family during a natural disaster. Stated that he felt the regulations were
unconstitutional and violated several of his rights. Stated that he felt that this was a
form of over regulating and where does it stop.
John Shaw, 6453 N. Livia — Stated that he has had an RV in the past and that he
parked in the rear yard portion of his yard. Stated that under the proposed regulations,
he would not be able to have an RV parked where he has for several years. Stated that
during the 20+ years he had his RV parked in the driveway, he never had any
complaints. Stated that driveways lead to garages and under the proposed regulations
people would not be able to park their RV in their driveway.
Ron Knohles, 4921 Fiesta Avenue - Stated that he *did have a concern about parking
his RV in his driveway but spoke to his neighbors and they did not mind his RV parked
in his driveway. Stated that he called the City of Arcadia to ask if they had any
regulations about parking RVs on private property and Arcadia said that they did not
except for on the street.
• Diane Wilson, 10925 Wildflower Rd. — Asked if all of the pictures shown would be in
violation.
Chairman Blum — Stated that they were just typical pictures of RVs in Temple City.
Diane Wilson, 10925 Wildflower Rd. — Stated that she agreed with the safety aspects of
blocking windows for ingress and egress but not with some of the other regulations
being considered. Stated that she felt the regulations about the canopies were
appropriate if they also addressed canopies for vehicles and did not single out RV
owners. Stated that she felt it was unreasonable to say that she cannot park her RV in
her driveway if it blocked the garage. Stated that she felt that a view - obscuring fence
was not the way to handle vehicles in the rear yard. Stated that she did not agree with
the idea of allowing only one recreational vehicle per property. Stated that her RV
could take her and some of her neighbors in the event of an emergency. Stated that if
you have to approve regulations that restrict the ability to park an RV on your own
property then a grandfather clause should apply for existing homeowners and the new
regulations should apply for new homeowners.
Dian Loufek, 5625, Robinhood Ave. — Stated that she is concerned about the
regulations only allowing one recreational vehicle per property.
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES November 8, 2005.doc
Planning Commission
November 8, 2005
Page 5
• Raymond Cuevas, 5239 Camellia Ave. — Stated that he is a fire fighter and that his RV
is an emergency measure. Stated that he did not feel the diagram of examples told
the entire story. Stated that his family could survive for several days or even weeks in
the event of an emergency with his RV.
Steve Ent7e1, 9914 Workman Avenue — Stated that he has had a tent trailer for 15
years and now has a 20 -foot trailer. Stated that his parents also live in Temple City and
he moved his trailer to his parent's home. Stated that he spent the money to upgrade
his parent's home to accommodate both recreational vehicles and now there is a
possibility that he would be breaking the law. Stated that he cannot afford to store his
RV and did not agree with the proposed regulations.
John Rohlfson, 4850 Kauffman Avenue — Stated that he does not see why this issue is
being brought up because it has been brought up before. Stated that he felt this was
unconstitutional. Stated that many people cannot afford to park their RV at a storage
place. Stated that he did not agree with the regulation of RVs.
Henry Ransons, 9147 Wedgewood Lane - Read a letter that he wrote into the record.
(Gave a copy to City Attorney Martin). State the he was opposed to the RV regulations
as proposed.
• Al Ramirez, 5630 McCulloch — Stated that he agrees with most of the comments made
by other speakers. Stated that he did not feel that RVs bring down home values.
Stated that his neighbors do not have a problem with his RV. Stated that RVs are not
taken care of on storage Tots. Stated that RV parking is a selling point for realtors.
Stated that storing an RV could cost about $200.00 per month.
Charlene White, 4913 Halifax Rd. — Stated that she has a motor home and a canopy.
Stated that the canopy protects the RV from sun damage. Asked who would be
enforcing this issue. Stated that on her street there is overnight parking and people are
not cited. Stated that she did not feel City money should be used defending frivolous
lawsuits that could result from these regulations.
Fred Cessna, 4934 Camellia — Stated that he has an RV but the regulations would not
affect him in anyway. Asked what the City was trying to achieve by over regulating
private property. Stated that he did not feel the that RVs were damaging to the
neighborhood and that other things were worse, such as overgrown weeds, multiple
vehicles in the front yard, etc.
1111 11 A
•
.u-
— Stated that he was against the proposed regulations
and agreed with all of the previous speakers.
V.K. Torrani, 6013 Hart Avenue — Stated that he does not have an RV but has a
• vending truck and has been cited several times. Stated that he did not agree with
enforcing any regulations on vending trucks.
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES November 8, 2005.doc
Planning Commission
November 8, 2005
Page 6
Chairman Blum - Asked if anyone else wanted to speak about the matter.
Tony Sack, 10065 Green St.— Asked how many of the Commissioners owned an RV.
Asked the definition of storage. Stated that he moved to Temple City so that he could
park an RV at his property. Stated that it is very expensive to park an RV at a storage
yard.
Chairman Blum - Stated that he has owned an RV. Asked if anyone else wanted to
speak on the matter.
John Emanalli, 9842 Keywest St. — Stated that if you require view - obscuring fences
then you create a hiding place for criminals and you do not have an open view. Stated
that he did not feel the grandfather clause was a good idea because in the future if he
wants to sell his property he felt the RV parking feature was a selling point.
Al Ramirez. 5630 McCulloch — Asked when this item would come up to the City Council
and if the public would be notified.
Chairman Blum — Stated that a public notice would be published in the newspaper.
Stated that all speakers would get a notice mailed to them.
• Frnie Barbosa, 9132 Hermosa Dr., - Asked about the number of complaints received
•
and if they exceeded the number of RV owners present at the meeting.
Commissioner Seibert — Made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by
Commissioner Griffiths and unanimously carried.
Chairman Blum — Stated that the Public Hearing was closed. Began discussion.
Chairman Blum - Stated that he appreciated the input received by the public. Stated
that many of the things brought up by the public were discussed previously and that this
was not an easy process. Stated that over a period of time there have been code
enforcement complaints and that enforcement was becoming more of a problem; that is
why the Planning Commission was asked to take a. look at the problem and come up
with some possible remedies.
Commissioner Griffiths — Stated that the Planning Commissioners did not all agree on
many of the items discussed and that the City Council wanted a recommendation for
them to reach a decision. Stated that a lot of good information came up at this meeting.
Stated that the garage blocking might be difficult to enforce and needs to be more
definitive. Stated that there needed to be more clarification. Stated that part of the
problem is that just as monster homes have gotten out of hand over the years, now
RVs are also getting larger than they were before and this is a good time to start to
address the issues. Stated that oversized RVs have not been a problem in the past but
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES November 8, 2005.doc
Planning Commission
November 8, 2005
Page 7
• perhaps they are beginning to become a problem and this would be a good time to
address some of the issues that these oversized RVs create. Restated that he felt that
blocking the garage with an RV could be made a rule if it was a rule against blocking
the garage with other things. Stated that he is generally in favor of most of the rules but
they need to be fine - tuned.
Chairman Blum — Asked Commissioner Griffiths if in summary he had a problem with
the ordinance because of the regulation about blocking a garage and the limitation of
one RV per property.
Commissioner Griffiths - Stated that was correct and another issue that was not
mentioned was the issue of living in an RV.
Commissioner Seihert — Stated that he disagreed with Commissioner Griffiths a little bit
on the blocking of the garage. Stated that inoperable vehicles are not allowed to block
a garage. Stated that an RV is similar because often it is not being moved. Stated that
he does agree with the consideration for two RVs per lot if they are both parked on the
rear portion of the lot. Stated that when you are doing a Zoning Code amendment, we
have to look at the community as a whole. Stated that the restrictions and rules and
regulations are an attempt to be fair to everyone in the community. Stated that grand
fathering clauses normally do not work very well and that enforcement can be difficult
• unless there is a covenant recorded against the property, and generally property
owners do not want to do that. Stated that grandfathering was not a reasonable
solution and that giving some time, perhaps 6 months to one year is probably the way
to transition to the new ordinance.
Commissioner Le Berthon — Stated that this issue is not being brought up to punish RV
owners but because of an outgrowth of complaints by citizens of the community.
Stated that the Planning Commission was given the task to come up with regulations.
Stated that the Planning Commission spent a lot of time trying to come up with good
regulations. Stated that specific discussion occurred about parking in front of garages
and not all Planning Commissioners were in agreement. Stated that further
consideration will be given by the City Council on this issue as well as the possibility of
allowing more than one RV per lot. Stated that further modifications could be made to
the draft ordinance as written.
Vice - Chairman Yu — Stated that he would also like to echo the other Commission's
comments. Stated that new issues have been brought up that has influenced his
opinion. Stated that there are many people that did not come to the meeting that have
different opinions and those opinions are also being taken into consideration. Stated
that he did not feel comfortable with the blocking garage issue and is willing to
reconsider that. Stated that he is not very comfortable with the grand fathering issue
and would like to consider a longer period of time than six months but is not sure how
long. Stated that as far as having more than one RV on the lot, if you can meet all of
the regulations, then you should not be limited to one RV. Stated that he was unsure if
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES November 8, 2005.doc
Planning Commission
November 8, 2005
Page 8
• the RVs affect property values. Stated that he agrees with the regulations on canopies
being treated as permanent structures and that canopies for vehicles are not legal at
this time and that there is no discrimination toward RV owners.
•
Chairman Blum — Stated that there are three issues that have been discussed:
1) garage blocking; 2) Two RVs per lot and 3) the length of time for grandfathering.
Stated that he would like to go through all of the issues so that the City Council can
have a clear recommendation.
Chairman Blum — The first item discussed was:
Recreational Vehicles: for purposes of this section, recreational vehicles
shall mean a motor home, travel trailer, truck camper, or camping trailer,
with or without motor power. designed for human habitation for
recreational, emergency, or other occupancy. Recreational vehicles shall
include either self - propelled, truck mounted, or permanently towable
vehicles or equipment. The following shall be considered recreational
vehicles: Motor homes, trailers, boats, tent trailers, toy haulers and
u • - - • • • - • - • • • I -• •• ,I•• • - • • •. •-
excluded, provided such vehicles are not stored for a period of time longer
than 72 hours within any 30 -day period.
Chairman Blum — Asked if everyone was in favor of keeping that language in. All
Planning Commissioners indicated that they were in favor of retaining that language.
Chairman Blum — The next item discussed was:
►•
•- •- 1. - • • • -• • •- ••
•. I.
•- .•
area; RVs shall not be parked between a dwelling and a public street and
shall not be parked closer to the street than a plane drawn along the
building wall, which is closest to the RV parking space.
Chairman Blum — Asked if everyone was in favor. of keeping that language in. All
Planning Commissioners indicated that they were in favor of retaining that language.
Chairman Blum — The next item discussed was:
RV parking and storage shall be prohibited in any instance where it blocks
access to required garage parking
Chairman Blum — Asked if everyone was in favor of keeping that language in. All
Planning Commissioners indicated that they would like the language to be changed to
read as follows:
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES November 8, 2005.doc
"
P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n
N o v e m b e r 8 , 2 0 0 5
P a g e 9
R V p a r k i n g o r s t o r a g e s h a l l b e p r o h i b i t e d w h e r e i t b l o c k s a c c e s s t o
r e q u i r e d g a r a g e p a r k i n g , u n l e s s t h e R V i s p a r k e d b e h i n d a p l a n e d r a w n
a l o n g t h e b u i l d i n g w a l l o f t h e d w e l l i n g p a r a l l e l t o t h e s t r e e t .
C h a i r m a n B l u m T h e n e x t i t e m d i s c u s s e d w a s :
R V p a r k i n g a n d s t o r a g e s h a l l b e a l l o w e d b e h i n d t h e f r o n t y a r d a r e a a n d
b e h i n d t h e f r o n t p l a n e o f t h e h o u s e , p r o v i d e d t h e R V i s s c r e e n e d b y a s i x
f o o t h i g h v i e w o b s c u r i n g f e n c e , w a l l o r g a t e ; n o s c r e e n i n g s h a l l b e
- " - "
. " 1 " - -
" " " " . - " " I . "
l o t o r t i e r e d l o t w h i c h i s s i t u a t e d b e h i n d a f r o n t h o u s e .
C h a i r m a n B l u m A s k e d i f e v e r y o n e w a s i n f a v o r o f k e e p i n g t h a t l a n g u a g e i n . A l l
P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n e r s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e y w e r e i n f a v o r o f r e t a i n i n g t h a t l a n g u a g e .
C h a i r m a n B l u m T h e n e x t i t e m d i s c u s s e d w a s :
" 1 " 1 - - . . " 1 . - " - " . " - " - " . - " . - " " -
T h e p a r k i n g o f a n y r e c r e a t i o n a l v e h i c l e s h a l l b e i n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e
r e q u i r e m e n t t h a t 2 0 % o f t h e l o t b e r e t a i n e d a s p e r m e a b l e a r e a .
C h a i r m a n B l u m A s k e d i f e v e r y o n e w a s i n f a v o r o f k e e p i n g t h a t l a n g u a g e i n .
D i s c u s s i o n w a s h e l d a n d i t w a s d e c i d e d t o o m i t
W i t h t h e o m i s s i o n o f t h e l a n g u a g e s h o w n s t r i c k e n o u t , A l l P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n e r s
i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e y w e r e i n f a v o r o f r e t a i n i n g t h e r e m a i n i n g l a n g u a g e .
C h a i r m a n B l u m T h e n e x t i t e m d i s c u s s e d w a s :
F o r s a f e t y p u r p o s e s , r e c r e a t i o n a l v e h i c l e s s h a l l n o t b e p . r k e d i n a n y
l o c a t i o n t h a t w o u l d e f f e c t i v e l y b l o c k e x i t i n g f r o m a r e q u i r e d b e d r o o m
w i n d o w ; n o R V s h a l l b e p a r k e d o r s t o r e d s o a s t o c r e a t e a v i o l a t i o n o f a n y
r e q u i r e d B u i l d i n g o r F i r e C o d e .
C h a i r m a n B l u m A s k e d i f e v e r y o n e w a s i n f a v o r o f k e e p i n g t h a t l a n g u a g e i n . A l l
P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n e r s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e y w e r e i n f a v o r o f r e t a i n i n g t h a t l a n g u a g 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 5 \ P C M I N U T E S N o v e m b e r 8 , 2 0 0 5 . d o c
Planning Commission
November 8, 2005
Page 10
• Chairman Blunt — The next item discussed was:
•
•
• .I•• - • • 1• • •- -• • -• I I- -.11- • I •I
•- II.1-1
• / • 1 . 1 • 1 • • II" . •
• - •.
.I•. • .I•
• I• -•. . •I
•11 1 I-
• I 1 • • • - illloJllrllWevir
a.VLT1U L JWJLut. iU r11. it •f'J l'JI1IRlll i.. VJ 1•rUl:1 ,J.I Il'J1M■ldl!lllIW;. lllI• RRlll
Chairman Blum — Asked if everyone was in favor of keeping that language in. All
Planning Commissioners indicated that they were in favor of retaining a portion of that
language but removing the stricken out portion indicated above.
Chairman Blum — The next item discussed was:
Any recreational vehicle, which is in violation of the above, enumerated
restrictions and regulations shall be brought into compliance with the
above restrictions within a period of six months from the effective date of
this ordinance.
Chairman Blum — Asked if everyone was in favor of keeping that language in. All
Planning Commissioners indicated that they were in favor of retaining the language but
would like to change the six months to read twelve months, with that change the
language was acceptable.
Chairman Blunt — The next item discussed was:
- • .1 . I - • • J 10 -• 11
•- . • J '• - - • : •- 10
parked in otherwise prohibited locations or places:
For loading and unloading purposes, a recreational vehicle may be
parked in the front or street side yard for up to two 72 -hour time
periods within any 30 day period or
A temporary permit may be obtained for visitors to park in
otherwise prohibited parking areas for a period not to exceed one
week, plus a one week extension. No more than two such permits
shall be issued per year for any given address and a temporary
•- is 1. •- • - • -- . II •- - .• IS •
separate Resolution
Chairman Blum — Asked if everyone was in favor of keeping that language in. All
Planning Commissioners indicated that they were in favor of retaining the language.
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES November 8, 2005.doc
Planning Commission
November 8, 2005
Page 11
• Chairman Blum — The next item discussed was:
LIMITATIONS OF USES:
A. Vehicles:
•
C- ... - - • ••. - •-• •� G
9361: LIMITATIONS OF USES:
A. Vehicles:
- - • • - • 1 . 1 • . 11 - S - I - • 1
Chairman Blum — Asked if everyone was in favor of keeping that language in. All
Planning Commissioners indicated that they were in favor of retaining the language as
written.
Chairman Blum — The next item discussed was:
MAINTENANCE OF PROPERTY; NUISANCES:
Recreational vehicles including trailer, campers, boats, tent trailers, toy haulers
and other similar equipment stored for longer than two 72 -hour time periods
within any 30 -day period
Chairman Blum — Asked if everyone was in favor of keeping that language in. All
Planning Commissioners indicated that they were in favor of retaining the language as
written.
Chairman Blum — The next item discussed was:
REGARDING RV PARKING:
No RV as defined in Section 9332 of the Zoning Code shall be parked on any
public street(s) for a period longer than erg Of two 72 -hour period(s) within any
30 -day period.
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES November 8, 2005.doc
Planning Commission
November 8, 2005
Page 12
• Chairman Blum — Asked if everyone was in favor of keeping that language in. All
Planning Commissioners indicated that they were in favor of retaining the language as
written but would like the word one stricken out.
•
•
Commissioner Seibert — Made a motion to recommend to the City Council the Zoning
Code Amendment to establish RV regulations as changed and as presented and
amended, seconded by Commissioner Le Berthon and unanimously carried.
B. PUBLIC HEARING: THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER A
ZONING CODE AMENDMENT TO CREATE A
MIXED USE ZONE. A MIXED USE ZONE WOULD
ALLOW BOTH COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL
LAND USES ON A SINGLE DEVELOPMENT SITE.
THIS ACTION WOULD RECOMMEND THAT A
MIXED USE ZONING CLASSIFICATION BE
CREATED. IT WOULD NOT REZONE OR
RECOMMEND THE REZONING OF ANY PARCEL
OF LAND.
SITE:
RECOMMENDATION:
CITYWIDE
1) HEAR STAFF REPORT
2) ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF
3) OPEN PUBLIC HEARING
4) CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
6) RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
7) ADOPT RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING
A CODE AMENDMENT TO CREATE A
MIXED USE ZONING CATEGORY
Chairman Blum — Asked Staff for the report.
Director Dawson - Gave a presentation of the staff report.
Vice - Chairman Yu — Asked Director Dawson if each developer that wanted to use the
MUZ designation would have to come in with a rezoning application if this MUZ zone
was established.
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES November 8, 2005.doc
Planning Commission
November 8, 2005
Page 13
• Director Dawson — Stated that was correct and that along with the rezoning application
there would need to be a Development Agreement and a Precise Plan.
Chairman Blum — Asked if the MUZ zone was a standard tool that other cities use.
Director Dawson — Stated that it is used in other cities. Stated that a lot of neighboring
cities use this type of land use tool for mixed -use projects.
Chairman Blum — Asked if there were any questions for the Staff. Opened the Public
Hearing.
Joan Vizcarra, 5632 Golden West - Stated that many people who attended the meeting to
speak against this item left because of the length of the first item. Stated that she could
not think of anything worse for Temple City than mixed use and that she has seen this in
other cities but it does not belong in Temple City; it does not fit the City and is not good
for the City. Stated that it will destroy the fabric of the City.
Kohayl o. 6149 Camellia — Stated that she as against the mixed -use zone in Temple
City. Stated that Temple City already allows mixed -use on a portion of Las Tunas and
that the developer should buy land where the zoning already exists. Stated she felt that
the mixed -use zone took away from possible retail establishments and that putting
condos on the Edwards site would be a big mistake. Stated that she felt the developer for
• the Edwards site was trying to buy his way into Temple City.
James Harden, 4946 Temple City Blvd. — Stated that he is a retired firefighter and a four
story residential building will cost the City because of the equipment that is necessary for
the Fire Department. Stated that he was opposed to mixed -use zoning in Temple City and
felt that most residents would not want it either. Stated that he felt that the property
values would go down if this zone were created. Stated that the residents of Temple City
did not want things to change and were happy with the way things are.
•
Ernie Barbosa, 9132 Hermosa Drive — Stated that the City Council seems to paint the
picture that the Planning Commission will decide if the mixed -use zone will pass. Stated
that he did not think that mixed -use zoning was good for Temple City and that more
public services would be needed if mixed -use projects were built. Stated that many of the
businesses in Temple City do not have enough parking currently and that creating 50
additional residential properties will create an even bigger parking problem.
Dash Sheenh — Asked Director Dawson if the City of San Marino had mixed use? Asked
if the City of Arcadia had mixed use? Stated that he felt that the report was inaccurate by
stating that neighboring cities have mixed use. Asked the City Attorney if he had any
connection with the Edwards project or if there was any conflict of interest on his behalf.
City Attorney Martin — Stated that there is no conflict of interest. Stated that at one time
he was an attorney in the same building as Mr. Montgomery.
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES November 8, 2005.doc
"
P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n
N o v e m b e r 8 , 2 0 0 5
P a g e 1 4
D a s h S h e e n h S t a t e d t h a t h e h a s s p o k e n t o m a n y p e o p l e i n T e m p l e C i t y a n d t h e y a r e
a g a i n s t t h e M U Z z o n e a n d a l s o a g a i n s t t h e E d w a r d s p r o j e c t a n d t h a t t h e y h a v e s p o k e n
a b o u t g o i n g t o c o u r t i f t h e s e p r o j e c t s a r e a p p r o v e d . S u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e C i t y w a s c r e a t i n g
t h e M U Z z o n e f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f t h e E d w a r d s p r o j e c t .
H e n r y W a l p u s , 5 7 4 9 A g n e s A v e - S t a t e d t h a t h e h a s b e e n i n T e m p l e C i t y s i n c e 1 9 6 2 .
S t a t e d t h a t a l l o f t h e s e w e r l i n e s a r e a b o u t 5 0 y e a r s o l d a n d a r e b e i n g o v e r l o a d e d .
S t a t e d t h a t t h e s t o r m d r a i n s a n d s e w e r s a r e b e i n g o v e r l o a d e d . S t a t e d t h a t T e m p l e C i t y
c o u l d h a v e m o r e c o n s t r u c t i v e p r o j e c t s t h a t d i d n o t i n v o l v e c o n d o m i n i u m s .
C h a i r m a n B l u m S t a t e d t h a t i t i s t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y 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 h e a r
i s s u e s f i r s t a n d t h e n m a k e a r e c o m m e n d a t i o n t o t h e C i t y C o u n c i l . S t a t e d t h a t t h e C i t y i s
l a r g e l y r e s i d e n t i a l a n d t h a t w h a t i s b e i n g a d d r e s s e d w i t h t h e M i x e d U s e i s s u e i s a s m a l l
p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e C i t y t h a t i s d e s i g n a t e d a s c o m m e r c i a l .
M a t h e w W o n g , 9 0 1 5 H e r m o s a D r i v e S t a t e d t h a t h e a g r e e s w i t h t h e o t h e r s p e a k e r s .
S t a t e d t h a t T e m p l e C i t y i s a s m a l l u n i q u e c o m m u n i t y t h a t s h o u l d n o t h a v e m i x e d u s e .
S t a t e d t h a t a l t h o u g h t h e E d w a r d s p r o j e c t i s n o t b e i n g d i s c u s s e d , t h i s i s s u e d o e s h a v e
r e l e v a n c e t o t h e E d w a r d p r o j e c t a n d t h a t a m a j o r i t y o f t h e a u d i e n c e i s t r y i n g t o s t o p t h a t
p a r t i c u l a r p r o j e c t . S t a t e d t h a t t h e P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n c o u l d p o t e n t i a l l y h e l p t h e
r e s i d e n t s t h a t a r e o p p o s e d t o t h i s p r o j e c t . A s k e d i f t h e i t e m c o u l d b e c o n t i n u e d t o a l a t e r
d a t e .
J i m C l i f t , 6 0 1 2 E n c i n i t a A v e n u e S t a t e d t h a t o n t h e G e n e r a l P l a n t h e r e i s a n a r e a t h a t
i n d i c a t e s t h e c i r c u l a t i o n o f C i t y s t r e e t s . S t a t e d t h a t h i s c o n c e r n w a s t h a t t h e c o l l e c t o r
s t r e e t s w o u l d b e c o m e m o r e l i k e s e c o n d a r y a r t e r i e s i f t h i s M U Z z o n i n g w e r e a d o p t e d .
C h a i r m a n B l u m S t a t e d t h a t t h o s e a r e c o n c e r n s t h a t n e e d t o b e a d d r e s s e d .
F e r n a n d o V i z c a r r a , 5 6 3 2 G o l d e n W e s t S t a t e d t h a t o n e o f t h e p r e v i o u s s p e a k e r s ,
M a t h e w W o n g , s a i d i t b e s t a n d t h a t e v e r y o n e u n d e r s t a n d s t h a t t h e h e a r i n g i s f o r t h e M U Z
z o n i n g o n l y . S t a t e d t h a t t h e g r o u n d w o r k i s a c t u a l l y b e i n g l a i d f o r t h e G a l l e r i a a n d t h e
r e s i d e n t s a r e a w a r e o f t h i s . S t a t e d t h a t i f t h e r e w e r e s o m e w a y t o t a k e a v o t e , t h e C i t y
w o u l d s e e t h a t t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e p e o p l e a r e o p p o s e d t o t h i s i t e m . S t a t e d t h a t p e o p l e a r e
b e c o m i n g v e r y u p s e t b e c a u s e o f t h e E d w a r d s p r o j e c t a n d i f t h e M U Z z o n e w e r e
e s t a b l i s h e d , t h e n t h e G a l l e r i a p r o j e c t w o u l d f o l l o w .
C h a i r m a n B l u m S t a t e d t h e r e a r e m u l t i p l e i s s u e s t h a t t h e C i t y i s t r y i n g t o a d d r e s s a n d
t h a n k e d M r . V i z c a r r a f o r h i s c o n t i n u e d i n v o l v e m e n t w i t h t h e C i t y .
M a r y K o h a y k o , 6 1 4 9 C a m e l l i a S t a t e d t h a t w h e n M r . C o l e w a s t h e C i t y M a n a g e r t h e r e
w e r e b i g c o m m u n i t y m e e t i n g s t h a t a l l o w e d f o r T o t s o f i n p u t f r o m t h e p u b l i c , n o t j u s t f i v e
m i n u t e s a t a t i m e . S t a t e d t h a t s h e f e l t t h a t a c o m m u n i t y m e e t i n g l i k e t h a t s h o u l d b e h e l d
r e g a r d i n g t h i s i s s u e b e f o r e a r e c o m m e n d a t i o n i s m a d e 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 5 \ P C M I N U T E S N o v e m b e r 8 , 2 0 0 5 . d o c
Planning Commission
November 8, 2005
Page 15
Charles Mountain, 6106 Reno Avenue — Stated that adding businesses is a good for
Temple City but mixed -use is not a good choice for Temple City. Stated that
condominiums at a commercial location will take away for potentially new shopping
choices.
Dash Sheenh — Stated that he really appreciates the new businesses that have come to
Temple City such as Applebees and that it was too bad that the City Manger who brought
them here has now been fired.
Chairman Blum — Stated that the City Staff is working hard to bring in businesses and that
not all of the efforts are apparent yet. Asked if anyone else would care to speak.
Commissioner Griffiths made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Vice -
Chairman Yu and unanimously carried.
Chairman Blum — Closed the public hearing and began discussion.
Commissioner Le Berthon — Stated that this is a touchy subject but that the Planning
Commission is responsible to make a recommendation to the City Council. Stated that
there are not hidden agendas but that a decision needs to be made on the MUZ zoning
issue. Stated that all other projects are unrelated at this point. Stated that State Law
requires that all City's have an approved Housing Element. Stated that this zone might
be helpful in getting State approval of the Housing Element. Stated that the MUZ zone
would allow an additional tool for the City to use. Stated that he felt that the MUZ zone
should be established and that he recommended approval of the Code Amendment to
the City Council.
Commissioner Seibert — Stated that Commissioner Le Berthon put it very well; all of the
other concerns such as sewer, traffic, etc. will be examined individually on a project -by-
project basis and at this time, we are just looking at establishing a Mixed Use Zone and if
a recommendation should be made to the City Council to adopt the Zoning Code
Amendment. Stated that he felt that the MUZ zone should be established and would
recommend adoption of an amendment to the City Council.
Vice - Chairman Yu — Stated that he felt the same way and did not have a problem with
MUZ and felt that it brought vitality to the City and is a useful tool. Stated that he is in
favor of the Mixed Use Zoning and would recommend so to the City Council.
Commissioner Griffiths — Stated that he is pretty much in agreement with this concept and
that it would be advantages to the City to have a tool to use for mixed -use projects.
Stated that the issue has no connection to any specific development project. Stated that
he is in favor of approving the Mixed Use Zoning classification and recommending a
Code Amendment to the City Council.
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES November 8, 2005.doc
Planning Commission
November 8, 2005
Page 16
Chairman Blum — Stated that he also felt it was a land use tool that should be available
and that he is in favor of creating the Mixed Use Zone and recommending the Code
Amendment to the City Council.
Commissioner B hon — Made a motion to approve the Negative Declaration and
adopt the draft resolution, seconded by Commissioner Seibert and unanimously carried.
Chairman Blum — Stated that the recommendation to create the MUZ zoning overlay was
approved on a 5 to 0 vote.
8. COMMUNICATIONS: None
9. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS: None
10. ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Blum adjourned the meeting at 10:30 p.m.
ATTEST:
-7- tary/
•
0_422.-12)ati
Chairman
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES November 8, 2005.doc