Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes-11-17-10 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING DOWNEY CITY PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2010 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER, 11111 BROOKSHIRE AVENUE DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA 6:30 P.M. I.A Regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held November 17, 2010. After the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, roll was called at 6:30 p.m. II.COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Fernando Vasquez, District 5 TerryLambros,District4 Michael Murray, District 1 Robert Kiefer, District 2, Vice Chairman Louis Morales, District 3, Chairman ALSO PRESENT: Brian Saeki, Community Development Director John Perfitt, Assistant Community Development Director William Davis, City Planner Mark Sellheim, Principal Planner David Blumenthal, Senior Planner Jessica Flores, Associate Planner TheresaDonahue,Secretary III.MINUTES: It was moved by Commissioner Lambros, Seconded by Commissioner Kiefer and passed by a vote of 3-0-2, with Commissioners Lambros, Kiefer, Morales voting “Aye” and Commissioners Vasquez and Murray abstaining, to approve the Minutes of November 3, 2010. AGENDA CHANGES: IV.CommunityDevelopment Director Saeki informed the Commission and members of the public that public hearing item #3, the Planned Sign Program for property located at 8077-8111 Florence Avenue, had been continued to the Commission’s next meeting, December 1, 2010. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL ACTION: V.Mr. Saeki reported that the City Council, at their regular meeting held November 9, 2010, voted unanimously to approve the Resolutions for the DDA and Density Bonus applications for the Verizon building project, known as “The View”. He shared with the Commissioners that the City Council had been presented Option 1, only, since the applicant had been able to find the funding to bridge the potential financing gap. CONSENTCALENDARITEMS: VI. 1.Request to submit Final Map for Tentative Parcel Map No. 09-71146, resubdividing eight (8) lots into three (3) lots that involve the properties at 8233 through 8255 Firestone Boulevard, on property zoned Downtown Plan (Overlay Zone) with the Central Business District serving as the underlying zone. It was moved by Commissioner Lambros, seconded by Commissioner Murray and passed by a 5-0 vote, to approve Consent Calendar Item #1. PUBLICHEARING ITEMS: VII. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITNo. 08-29 1. Location:10924 Paramount Boulevard Owner/Applicant:Ricardo M. Vazquez/Carico Investments, LLC Authorized Agent: WalterVazquez Staff: William Davis PLANNINGCOMMISSIONMINUTES, NOVEMBER 17, 2010 – PAGE 1 Page 2 CEQA:As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this request has been found to be Categorically Exempt from CEQA, per CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301 (Class 1, Existing Facilities). Request:A six month review for an existing restaurant (Downey Brewing Company) with alcohol sales (Type 75, On-Sale General, Brewpub) and live entertainment, on property zoned C-3 (Central Business District). Chairman Morales opened the public hearing for Conditional Use Permit No. 08-29. Ms. Donahue affirmed proof of publication. William Davis, City Planner, presented staff’s report and accompanying PowerPoint. He noted that the applicant had been able to submit plans for the trash enclosure just today. He reviewed the outstanding conditions of approval, as well as those that the applicant had completed during the past year, pointing out that the recently submitted plans did not include the patio enclosure/gates and required signing. Mr. Davis stated that although staff’s recommendation is to begin revocation procedures, the applicant will want the Commission to consider additional information. Mr. Davis let the Commission know that the patio enclosure plans must include the necessary hardware to secure the patio for serving alcohol, as well as the required roofing materials. Sergio Vazquez, applicant’s representative stated he was a part of the corporation known as Downey Brewing Company, and was representing Walter Vazquez. Mr. Vazquez explained that staff’s recommendation to revoke the Conditional Use Permit had nothing to do with any ABC violations, nor violations on the property, but instead was related to a scheduled six (6) month review and the delayed completion of required work. He then explained the numerous expenses the company has had with the building in order to keep it open, to include: termite damage in the building, but also extensive termites in the pine trees, requiring the trees removal; the annual Fire Inspection uncovered that the hood system was not to code and required $10,000 in upgrades, and 30-days to complete; plus the leaking roof improvements were necessary and immediate. Mr. Vazquez, providing an exhibit of the patio, explained one delay was due to problems with their original contractor, but once they secured another contractor, everything moved along. He claimed that once the plans are approved they would expedite the completion of the trash enclosure within three (3) days. Mr. Vazquez appealed to the Planning Commission for another 60 days to complete all the required conditions of approval. He assured the Commission that 60 days would be sufficient time. He stated that the grease receptor installation required detailed plans, and that he had contacted numerous potential contractors who had come to the City and after speaking with the various departments had declined the job. However, their last contractor has assured that he’ll complete the There being no further comments, nor anyone wishing to address the Commission on this matter, Chairman Morales closed the public hearing. Planning Commission comments: The Planning Commissioners discussed how the applicant’s delays were exacerbated by numerous required upgrades, ie. Fire Department’s required kitchen upgrades, expenses due to tree removals caused by termites and delays due to hiring an unqualified contractor. They asked Mr. Vazquez if he’d stayed in touch with the City during these situations. He replied that he had. Commissioner Kiefer stressed to Mr. Vazquez that he’d been given 12 months thus far to complete the conditions of approval, and he wanted the applicant to successfully finish them without any further delays. Mr. Vazquez responded that they also were anxious to move beyond these demands. The Planning Commissioners commented that Mr. Vazquez had shown good faith in his pursuit of completing these requirements by conscientiously staying in-touch with the City representatives, and noted that the goal is to complete them all within 60 days, weather permitting. Community Development Director Saeki suggested the Commission continue the item 60 days to a date certain. This date would be January 19, 2011. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, NOVEMBER 17, 2010 – PAGE 2 Page 3 It was moved by Commissioner Murray, seconded by Commissioner Lambros and passed by the full Commission, to adopt a Minute Action continuing the hearing to January 19, 2011. SITE PLAN REVIEW 08-131 & CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT No. 99-34. Rev A 2. Location: 11625 Paramount Boulevard Owner/Applicant: University Bible Fellowship Church Authorized Agent: Isaac Kim Staff:DavidBlumenthal CEQA:As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this request has been found to be Categorically Exempt from CEQA, per CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301 (Class 1, Existing Facilities). Request: A Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit request to construct a 504 square foot addition to an existing church, on property zoned C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial). Chairman Morales opened the public hearing for Site Plan Review No. 08-131 and Conditional Use Permit No. 99-34, Revision A. Ms. Donahue affirmed proof of publication. Senior Planner, David Blumenthal, presented staff’s report and accompanying PowerPoint. He stated staff supported the requested addition for the reasons outlined in staff’s report, noting staff was able to make the seven findings for the Site Plan Review and the four findings for the Conditional Use Permit, (as per pages 6 and 7 of staff’s report). He noted that no correspondence had been received regarding this item. Mr. Isaac Kim, pastor of University Bible Fellowship Church, addressed the Commission, explaining that the proposed enclosed patio area will be utilized as a greeting, or social meeting area. Mr. Kim stated that he had read and agreed to the conditions of approval. Chairman Morales invited the public to address the Commission on this matter. No one came forward. There being no further comments, Chairman Morales closed the public hearing. The Commissioners stated that the applicant’s request was perfected sound and a good use of the open area; also commented that no negative impacts are expected to be cause by the addition. They agreed that the enclosed patio will provide a benefit to church members. It was moved by Commissioner Kiefer, seconded by Commissioner Lambros and passed by a 5-0 vote, to adopt Resolution No. 10-2687 approving the Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit applications allowing for the church addition. Chairman Morales stated the action of the Planning Commission will be final unless the matter is appealed to the City Council, with the appropriate fee, within the specified time period as set forth in the City’s Ordinance. PLN-10-08122 (PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM) 3. Location: 8077-8111 Florence Avenue Owner/Applicant: Blanca, LLC Authorized Agent: Jim Simington/Ecosign, Inc. Staff:JessicaFlores CEQA:As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this request has been found to be Categorically Exempt from CEQA, per CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301 (Class 1, Existing Facilities). Request: A Planned Sign Program for the location and appearance of signs within a multi- tenant office building on property zoned C-P (Professional Office.) Chairman Morales noted staff’s recommendation is to continue the public hearing for PLN -10-08122 to 12/1/10, per the applicant’s request. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, NOVEMBER 17, 2010 – PAGE 3 Page 4 It was moved by Commissioner Lambros, seconded by Commissioner Murray and passed by a unanimous vote to adopt a Minute Action, continuing the public hearing to December 1, 2010. PLN-10-08025 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT) 4. Location: 9520 Telegraph Road Owner/Applicant: Western Latin American District Church of Nazarene Authorized Agent: Mitchell Bryant on behalf of Coastal Business Group for T-Mobile Staff: Jessica Flores CEQA:As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has been prepared for this application and is available for review. Request: AConditional Use Permit request to install a new wireless telecommunication facility consisting of six (6) panel antennas within an existing church tower (Iglesia Del Nazareno), and related ground-mounted equipment behind a new block wall, on property zoned R-3 (Multi-Family Residential). Chairman Morales opened the public hearing for PLN-10-08025 (Conditional Use Permit). Ms. Donahue affirmed proof of publication. Jessica Flores, Associate Planner, presented staff’s report and the accompanying PowerPoint. She indicated staff’s support, as per the conditions of approval provided in attached Resolution No. 10-2689. Mitchell Bryant, Coastal Business Group, 16460 Bake Parkway, Ste 100, Irvine, speaking on behalf of T- Mobile, complimented Ms. Flores’ efforts in her correspondence with them. He stated that the proposed structure would generate only minimal noise. Responding to questions from the Commission, he noted that the equipment would be screened by an enclosure, but may not have a roof to it; once approved, it would take approximately 45-60 days to install; the system itself has a 30-year life-span, and modifications were to be expected due to changes in technology, but those would be difficult to predict; the new service is required to meet the continued capacity demand of customers, providing internet use on phones and for the transfer of data. Chairman Morales invited members of the public to address the Commission. No one came forward. There being no questions/comments regarding staff’s recommendation and conditions of approval, Chairman Morales closed the public hearing. The Planning Commissioners stated their overall support for the wireless facility stealthed within the church tower, noting they supported providing the necessary coverage to meet the public’s increased cellular demands. It was moved by Commissioner Lambros, seconded by Commissioner Murray and passed by a unanimous vote, to adopt Resolution No. 10-2689, approving PLN-10-08025 (Conditional Use Permit), as presented. Chairman Morales stated the action of the Planning Commission will be final unless the matter is appealed to the City Council, with the appropriate fee, within the specified time period as set forth in the City’s Ordinance. PLN-10-08101 (SITE PLAN REVIEW) 5. Location: 12254 Bellflower Boulevard Owner/Applicant: Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. Authorized Agent: Pamela Steele/Keith Carwana/Hogle-Ireland, Inc. Staff:MarkSellheim CEQA:As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this request has been found to be Categorically Exempt from CEQA, per CEQA Guidelines, Section 15311 (Class 11, Accessory Structures). PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, NOVEMBER 17, 2010 – PAGE 4 Page 5 Request: A Site Plan Review application to consider the design and improvements of a photovoltaic solar panel energy system for the Kaiser Independence Park Administrative Building, on property zoned M-2 (General Manufacturing). Chairman Morales opened the public hearing on PLN-10-08101 (Site Plan Review). Ms. Donahue affirmed proof of publication. Mark Sellheim, Principal Planner, presented staff’s report and the accompanying PowerPoint. He indicated staff’s support for the proposal. He also stated the applicant has requested the Commission modify language for Condition No. 6, adding “or to be determined by the City Building Official”, following the first sentence of the condition. Mr. Sellheim noted that staff, however, did not support the modification. Pam Steele, applicant’s representative, Hogle-Ireland, 1500 Iowa St., Riverside, addressed the Commission, noting she’d brought along their technical expert, Chris Dewitt. She presented a PowerPoint summarizing the project and its benefits, noting that Kaiser has their administrative offices at this site and this project is in line with Kaiser’s green energy policy commitment to reduce their carbon footprint. Ms. Steele shared that the US Green Building Council encourages (gives “LEED points”) shaded parking structures, (structure will cover 316 parking stalls) and the panels are designed to catch the maximum sunlight by not shading each other; although they will be removing six (6) existing light standards, they will be replacing them with under-canopy lighting. She said that although it is an energy conservation program, they are not pursuing the LEED certification. She clarified that the parking lot drive aisles would be modified slightly due to the location of the carport support columns, but they would still meet the 25-foot aisle width; that the shade provided by the solar-paneled parking structure will be an additional benefit. In regards to Condition No. 6, she asked that the Commission allow them to discuss it further with staff, so they would not have to return to the Planning Commission, explaining that in keeping with State guidelines (Civil Code Section 714) their goal is to limit the costs for aesthetic improvements to no more than $2,000. She also asked that the Commission reconsider Condition No. 5, “that the landscape plan be prepared by a licensed landscape architect”, to keep costs down, since they are only changing existing trees and plants for like plants. Commissioner Lambros questioned staff regarding the Condition which requires that a licensed landscape architect prepare the landscape plan. Community Development Director Saeki responded that the City could modify the condition removing the provision for a “licensed landscape architect. He affirmed that modifying this would not violate City Code. Commissioner Murray asked Ms. Steele if the State was funding the project. In responding to Commissioner Murray, she wished to express appreciation to staff because they expedited this project and timelines must be met; she explained that the solar panels are very expensive, require regular maintenance to keep the dust off, but they are warranted for 25 years. Commissioner Vasquez noted Ms. Steele’s request to eliminate Condition No. 6 is two-fold: one is cost and the other is their interpretation of Civil Code Section 714. He asked the cost of the overall project; whether the applicant had received legal direction and whether it was based on case law? Ms. Steele noted the project’s valuation is roughly $4,000,000.00; and the fee associated with Condition No. 6 is $40,000; and yes, they had sought legal advice and there have been legal decisions on this issue, but she wasn’t sure of case law. Additionally, she noted that other cities had elected to waive such fees. Commissioner Vasquez asked if the City had waived the fee on previous projects. Mr. Saeki responded that he was not aware of any waivers, and identified projects that had complied with the city ordinance. He also noted that the City has provided numerous plan check fee reductions for PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, NOVEMBER 17, 2010 – PAGE 5 Page 6 energy-conservation projects; however the Art in Public Places requirement is not one of them. Commissioner Murray stated he did not want to set a precedent relieving this requirement. Mr. Saeki added, fee reductions are not within the purview of the Planning Commission, but rather the City Council. He stated that it is the City’s position that this fee applies. Commissioner Kiefer inquired if the panels emit noise. Ms. Steele said “no”, just a minor noise for the inverters, and referred it to Mr. DeWitt. Chris DeWitt stated there would be minimal noise, similar to that of the cell tower equipment. Commissioner Murray asked if birds would be injured by the solar panels. Ms. Steele said “no”. Chairman Morales invited testimony from the public. No one came forward to discuss the item. Commission discussion: Chairman Morales stated that this was a very good project, noting the building has gone from a simple tilt- up warehouse to one with very nice facades. He said the issue is what to do regarding Condition No. 6. Commissioner Vasquez commended Kaiser and Hogle-Ireland for this project; wished more businesses would go this way; noted that Edison provides rebates to convert to alternative energy and the long-term benefits far outweigh the immediate cost. He said he was reluctant to modify Condition 6, however, and would prefer seeking a legal opinion. He did not believe it to be within the Commission’s purview. Commissioner Murray stated he also was 100% in support of this project; he supports modifying Condition No. 5, but stands behind staff in retaining Condition No. 6. Commissioner Lambros also commended Kaiser for the project. She supported modifying Condition No. 5 and would refer any modifications to Condition No. 6 to City Council. Commissioner Kiefer stated this was a fantastic project. He noted the landscaping changes were acceptable, since it will still be landscaped beyond the Code requirements. He also noted that this is an exceptional example of a business investing in its future by converting to renewable energy. He said he was in support of modifying Condition No. 5. It was moved by Commissioner Vasquez, seconded by Commissioner Lambros and passed by a 5-0 vote, to adopt Resolution No. 10-2690, modifying Condition No. 5 as addressed. Chairman Morales stated the action of the Planning Commission will be final unless the matter is appealed to the City Council, with the appropriate fee, within the specified time period as set forth in the City’s Ordinance. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS VIII.: 1. Mr. Saeki stated that the City’s first Dine-in-Downey event would be held tomorrow night, November th 18, 5:30 to 9:00 p.m. and encouraged everybody to come. 2. Commissioner Kiefer asked for a report regarding the road construction/project on Paramount Boulevard, south end of the City. 3. Commissioner Lambros commented that the traffic on Lakewood Boulevard is horrible. Mr. Saeki noted that the Lakewood Boulevard project is a complete re-grind and overlay and will be so until the beginning of the year, then the construction will move north of Florence. 4. Commissioner Murray asked for an update of Tierra Luna project. Assistant Community Development Director provided an update, noting that the City has been working on the previous EIR, with some changes that will be brought to the Commission in the first quarter of 2011, with focus on commercial retail, commercial office and a hotel component. He noted that the City is actively pursuing tenants. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, NOVEMBER 17, 2010 – PAGE 6 Page 7 Commissioner Murray agreed that retail makes sense, noting the success of Downey Landing. Mr. Perfitt noted that although certain buildings must be retained due to their historical significance, some of the buildings may be demolished. Commissioner Murray asked that the broken windows be addressed. Mr. Perfitt stated that this matter has been referred to Code Enforcement and will be improved. 5. Mr. Saeki informed the Commission that Downey’s Portos is more successful that had been anticipated, with between 2,500 to 5,000 customers per day. Commissioner Lambros commented that she was very interested in hearing about the Porto family at the ribbon cutting. She was very proud to hear about them. 6. Commissioner Murray expressed his congratulations to Commissioner Vasquez on his successful run to City Council. Commissioner Lambros noted that they had stated their comments last meeting, as well. 7. Commissioner Vasquez thanked the public, the Commissioners and staff for all the knowledge they’d imparted over the years to his benefit. OTHER BUSINESS: IX. No other business was addressed. ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDA: X. No additional items were addressed. ADJOURNMENT: XI. There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, the Commission adjourned at 8:20 p.m., to December 1, 2010 at 6:30 p.m. at Downey City Hall, 11111 Brookshire Avenue, Downey, Ca., APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of December, 2010. Louis Morales Louis Morales, Chairman CITY PLANNING COMMISSION I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Minutes were duly approved at a Regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 1st day of December, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kiefer, Vasquez, Lambros, Murray, Morales ABSENT: COMMISSIONER: None Theresa Donahue Theresa Donahue, Secretary CITY PLANNING COMMISSION H:\PLANNING\PC Minutes-2010\Nov 17, 2010-Minutes.doc PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, NOVEMBER 17, 2010 – PAGE 7