Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

A roll call, please.

Chairperson Lopez?

Here, present.

Chairperson Cuevas is absent today. I apologize. Commissioner Morales? Present. Vice Chairperson Lomeli? Present. And Chairperson Medina?

Present.

And we do have a quorum for tonight's meeting.

Thank you.

Anybody to proceed?

Next item is the Pledge of Allegiance. Can you please stand? One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Moving right along. Do we have any corrections to the agenda?

There are no corrections to the agenda for tonight's meeting.

Thank you. Next item is a public comment.

Yes. Good evening, chair, members of the commission. At this time, the public may address the planning commission on any items listed on the agenda, including non-agenda items that are within the planning commission subject matter jurisdiction. State law prohibits the planning commission from acting or entertaining extended discussion on a topic that is not listed on the agenda for tonight's meeting. Please show courtesy to others while providing public comments and direct all comments to the chairperson. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Director Palome. Do we have any public comment?

We do have speaker cards for item two.

Thank you. Next item would be the staff communications.

There are no staff communications. Thank you.

Next item would be the approval of minutes for the planning commission meeting held June 17th, 2025.

I'd like to make a motion to approve the meeting minutes from Planning Commission held on June 17th of 2025.

Can I get a second, please?

I'll second.

Thank you. Can I get a roll call?

Yes. Commissioner Lopez?

Present. Aye.

Commissioner Morales? Aye. Vice Chairperson Lomeli? Aye. And Chairperson Medina?

Aye.

And motion passes.

Thank you so much. And the next item would be to open the public hearing for the public hearing, starting with the first item. with the draft ordinance for a zoning code amendment to modify the Montebello municipal code chapter 17 and establish a view shed ordinance overlay.

Yes, Mr. Chair. Commissioners, item two before you this evening is a continued matter from the meeting that was held on June 17th of this year. And this is regarding a request to adopt resolution number 0825, recommending that the city council approve a zone code amendment to add the view sit preservation overlay in the Montepulio Municipal Code. The purpose of the overlay is to protect and preserve public and private views of natural features such as ridge lines, hillsides, and culturally or visually important landmarks. Emily Fernandez will provide an update. I believe she has some good information to share with the commission. So, Emily.

Hi, good evening, everyone. Good evening, Chair, members of the Planning Commission, and the public. The item I will be presenting is a continuation of the June 17th Planning Commission meeting regarding the proposed viewshed ordinance. The item is a city-initiated text code amendment to amend Chapter 17 of the Montebello Municipal Code to add Chapter 17.41 viewshed preservation to protect and preserve significant public and private views. So in efforts to enhance community livability and celebrate Montebello's unique visual character, the city is taking steps to protect the scenic views that contribute to its identity and quality of life. This request is for the Planning Commission to recommend approval to City Council for this ordinance to establish a viewshed preservation overlay. The viewshed preservation map highlights areas that are built on elevated slopes or have scenic views, with the proposed to preserve views of mountainous areas, ridgelines, skyline vistas, city lights, and significant cultural landmarks that are valued by residents and visitors. The focus is to maintain the community's aesthetic character and access to scenic views through adding limitations on improvements that include new structures or additions that block views and to manage vegetation that grows into view corridors. This will be accomplished by adopting a viewshed overlay that establishes specific requirements for properties located in the designated viewshed protected areas. During the last Planning Commission meeting held on June 17th, there were many questions asked by the Planning Commission that I'll give a little bit more clarification on today. The first question was regarding who has overall authority to define protected views, so the City Council will consider and authorize the final adoption of the Viewshed Preservation Ordinance and Map. When asked how this ordinance will affect new single-family homes, every situation will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and staff may determine a proposed multi-story structure, may obstruct views, and therefore require a visual impact analysis. Question three was whether new homes will need to conform to a specific style or be limited to a single story. New homes will not need to conform to a specific style or to a single story, although staff may require changes if a view obstruction is identified. Question four, explore the possibility that there is a disagreement with the Planning Commission's interpretation. That appeal would be reviewed by the Planning Commission, and that decision may be appealed to the City Council. Note that the director's determination does allow for exemptions for unique situations. Question five refers to enforcement of the ordinance. The ordinance will be primarily complaint-driven, evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The next question pertains to certain color or sizes for fences and vegetation. This ordinance does mean that fences will be subject to review of color and size, and vegetation may also be subject to a similar review. When asked if the project will require a professional, if staff determines that a proposed structure or fence may obstruct views, a viewshed analysis would be required to be completed by a professional. The last question asks about repairs or updating existing features. To answer that question, existing non-conforming structures may be maintained under the zoning code. Full replacements may require compliance with the viewshed ordinance. So based on comments provided during the last meeting, we have incorporated changes to the ordinance, including adding or altering definitions related to unfinished wood and reflective exterior materials. To keep consistency with the front yard fencing requirements, staff has determined to add a three foot solid height limitations to solid fence, hedges, walls, or any obstruction, or six feet limitations if the material is non-view obscuring. Solid walls, fences, hedges, or obstructions over three feet will require a visual impact analysis. This is an example of what a visual impact analysis can look like. The analysis should show the view that will be affected with the addition of a structure or a fence. If the project does require a visual impact analysis and is determined to have an effect on the view, the applicant will be required to incorporate measures that will minimize visual impact, such as additional setbacks or add architectural features that blend with the natural environment. On July 26th, the city of Montebello hosted the annual Downtown Street Fest. The planning department hosted a booth for this event to gain feedback regarding the proposed viewshed ordinance. During this event, 184 community surveys were completed providing feedback for the proposed ordinance. Based on the survey, 70% of people did not know that the city of Montebello was proposing a viewshed ordinance, and 66 did not know what a viewshed ordinance was. When asked how important it is to preserve views, 80% said that preserving views are very important. Based on the survey, the most important views to preserve are hillsides, open space, and views from public parks. When asked if restrictions on new development would be supported, 89% said yes. Only 5% were not concerned that new development could block or impact scenic views. Question seven asked potential challenges with the viewshed ordinance, and some answers included two-story buildings or development blocking sunlight. Question eight asked for specific locations or views, and the most common answers were hillsides adjacent to the 60 freeway, bluff road, and parks. Case number PC-2025-006-ZCA is considered exempt per the Common Sense Exemption 15061, as CEQA only applies to projects that have potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. And CEQA Section 15-303 related to new constructions or conversions of small structures. The public hearing notice was published in the daily journal on June 5th, 2025. And along with the meeting, the planning department hosted a booth at the summer street fest to gain public opinion. And we were also there to answer any questions regarding the ordinance. Additionally, there will be a pop-up that's scheduled prior to the city council consideration. The staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 0825, recommending to the City Council to amend Chapter 17 of the Montebello Municipal Code to add Chapter 17.41, Viewshed Preservation Overlay, and to find and determine that the item is exempt pursuant to 15061, Common Sense Exemption, and Section 15303, related to new constructions or conversions of small structures. So thank you. That concludes my presentation.

Thank you so much. Do we have any questions for Sal? No, okay. I know we do have some speaker cards, and we can open public comment. Yes, please.

All right, I will call Felipe Acuna.

Yes.

Please state your name for the record. You will have three minutes at the time that you begin. Felipe Acuna.

I'm here to speak on the overgrowth and the view blockage issue. I'll just read this. Overgrowth vegetation can lead to a variety of problems, including, but not limited to, pest infestation, fire hazards, structural damage, health issues. It can also obstruct views and access and contribute to drainage problems. Now, these views that most people in our city pay for, being that I am a realtor here, they'll pay $20,000, $30,000, $50,000 for that home just because of the view. And like anything else, you order a cheeseburger, you pay extra for the cheese, you want that cheese on that burger. These people want those views because that's what they paid for. Now, pest and disease problems. Thick foliage provides shelter and breeding grounds for pests like rodents, insects, mold, and the potential for leading to infestation and spread of disease. I know that in this area here in Montebello Hills, because of what happened up in the new construction, a lot of those rodents are now coming down the hill. I've had complaints from clients say, what happened? Where did all these rodents, where did all these animals come from? And because of the overgrown vegetation that their neighbors have, they're living in there. Now, fire hazards, which is a big one to me. is their overgrowth in vegetation, especially dry brush. Some of your neighbors do not water the trees or the foliage that's up on the top of the hill if they live on a tier. They just let it grow, let it grow wild, and it's dry. I even had the fire department come to my house and review it, and they said, because there's nothing in the code, I can't do anything about it. But I understand this is a fire hazard. Trees behind my house, bushes are 10 feet tall. And half the time they're dry. But nobody can do anything about it because there is nothing in the books to help. Okay? And I've had code enforcement over there tell me the same thing. There's nothing we can do. We have nothing that will help us get to where you want to be. Okay? Structural damage. Because of the overgrowth, the roots get under the fences. The roots can get under the foundation, cause damage. Okay? Okay? Obstructive views, again, that's one of the main reasons I'm here. Overgrowth can obstruct and block pathways in and out. If you have an easement through the property so the electrical company can get through there, guess what? With all that vegetation, they can't even do their job. Drainage issues. With the mosquito issues that we had here recently, the vegetation holds water. Whole water, obviously it draws in mosquitoes, it draws in mold, which obviously can cause health issues for the surrounding community. Allergies and health concerns.

I'm sorry, sir, do you mind wrapping it up? We're done with three minutes.

Yes, yes. And again, the wildlife issue. We have coyotes, we have raccoons, skunks that come in. I have a video of two coyotes that came into our yard and bit my Frenchie. Okay, so that is a real problem, not only to our animals, our pets, but to our community. Thank you. Thank you.

Our next speaker will be Maria Knox. Please state your name for the record. You will have three minutes. Thank you.

Good evening, Chair and Commissioners. My name is Maria Knox, and I'm here just to express my support on the approval of the resolution. I was very impressed with the presentation that this young lady did, answering all your questions, and also the gentleman that just spoke on the many reasons why it should be approved. And mainly, Montebello, the name says it all, right? the view from the hills when I walk is beautiful. A lot of people buy homes up in the hills because of the view. And if it gets blocked, then it defeats the purpose of spending so much money buying a house up in the hills. So I'm here just mainly to express my support on the approval of the resolution. Thank you.

The next speaker will be Alexandra Buscegno. Please state your name. You will have three minutes. Thank you.

Hi. Good evening, Planning Chair, Commissioners, and staff. My name is Alexandra Briseño, and I live in North Montebello. And I just wanted to tell you today that I don't know. I requested if you guys would see the brochures of when the Brighton Hills development was completed. in construction. And I want you to know that there's a black banner. This document shows the nine plans of the different types of homes that you could acquire in the Brighton Hills development. And the big banner says Brighton Hills, and it says New Skyline Series is what they used to call the homes. And it read, live in hillside luxury with sweeping panoramic views. So that was a major selling point to drive people to come to buy homes in Montebello, and I just wanted to point that out. Somebody gave me this vintage brochure, so that was really nice. Another lady, because she has mobility issues, she asked me to tell you guys two things. She said, hey, let them know that... They used to refer to the area when it was first constructed as Little Switzerland or the French Riviera. I've never been to the French Riviera. I don't know what it looks like, but she insisted I tell you guys this, so I am. And then she also said that there used to be two large signs, one on Westmoreland and Wilcox that read, Welcome to Brighton Hills. And there was another one on Germain and Lincoln. So she... She says she misses those. What happened? Why did they take them down? So anyway, just wanted to communicate that. And then also say, Emily, that was an excellent job. And thank you planning department for, I didn't know you guys were going to do what you did at the street festival. That's awesome that you guys did that. Thank you. And also another question, in the meeting minutes, did that include the letters that folks submitted regarding the ordinance? It included the letters? Okay, I didn't see them. Okay, I will take a look.

As part of the previous meeting, they were included.

It did include the letters? Okay, okay, I'll take a look. What was the other thing I wanted to say? I guess that's it. I just wanted to let you guys know that, yeah, people buy for the views, and let's protect them. I think it's fair, and that's it. Thank you very much.

Just a quick point of clarification. The letters are part of the record. They may not be part of the minutes, but they're part of the record.

Our next speaker is Hambar Karmeliani. Please state your name for the record. You'll have three minutes. Thank you, sir.

Good evening, Chair, Commissioners. My name is Hambar Karmeliani. I live in 1505 El Camino Drive in Montebello, which more famous as a racquet mountain one homeowners association. So we have 163 properties. I'm a president of the association, maybe last 15 years volunteering. So about maybe 75, 80% of the properties has a view So I met many real estate brokers. I always get involved in the house going for sale. So real estate, every two minutes, mentioning the view. View, view, view, view, view. So that makes sense that everybody loves you. So nobody talks about privacy. Oh, you have a private. You can run naked. Nobody see you. You're perfect. Nobody say that one. So what happened? I cannot speak from all of them, but if necessary, I can bring up together maybe 80 homeowners to fill up this empty place. But maybe next time because I got very short notice about today. So I totally support the ordinance of the view protection because it's very important. So especially when view properties, the regular prices, it's over $50,000 to $70,000 more. So that one means more property taxes. That's one more financial budget to the Montebello City, which one I support very, very strongly. I support our police department, anyone from janitor all the way to mayor. Support everything. So I just... want to be supporter for the view protection ordinance. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Amber. Our next public speaker will be Mr. David Matunga. Or should I say Mr. Treasurer? Please state your name. You have three minutes. Thank you.

Yes, it's unusual for me to be on this side of the podium here. My name is Dima Tonga. Felipe is my neighbor. We share the same lot. When I started to live in my property, I was able to see the city of Long Beach off on the second floor. On the whole second floor, you can see wonderful views. All I see now is this wall of green foliage. I try to trim it myself because it's going over to my side of the house, damaging my fence. I talked to the owner on the other side about him trimming it and he doesn't want to do it, but it does impact my property value. If I was to sell that property, one of the selling points would be the view. It kind of stops me from putting a second balcony so I can enjoy the view because my property has a beautiful commanding view of the whole back area. Beautiful. when there's no foliage. In addition to that, it's also a fire hazard. This recent fires in Altadena comes to mind. The foliage is so thick there, anything can unite it and the whole block will go. And plus the fact we do have a vermin problem there. I've seen coyotes come in and out of the foliage, and that's also very concerning. Those are the byproducts of that foliage. So I'm in favor of them clearing it out so we can better view, and the side benefits would be, well... no fire hazard, no vermin. So I'm in favor of this motion. So that's all I got to say. Thank you for your time. Thank you, David.

That concludes our public comments.

Thank you. Next, I'm gonna go ahead and close public comment and bring it back to the commission for discussion. I think the last time we met, Our goal was to help produce a sort of a common sense regulation when it came down to this ordinance, right? We wanted to protect views as well as people's rights to their property, to what they have now. I do have one point of clarification, and this was mentioned last meeting. but this ordinance applies to privately owned trees and foliage, right? It does not include public trees. That is correct. That is correct. Okay. How does that affect protected trees? Like an oak tree? Like an oak tree or, yeah.

So the city, we don't have an ordinance like other cities do where they actually call out these protected trees. We would use whatever state guidelines are available, but that would be analyzed on a case-by-case basis. Gotcha. Yeah.

I don't have anything else. I know commissioners, you guys have any point of discussion?

I have a question. Um, I think we discussed it last time, but I still have a question about the, uh, the payment of how, of how this, uh, of keep would, would happen in terms of if it's, uh, Neighbor complaint based or if it's, I know one of the comments earlier were outside of privately owned spaces, right? The question of outside of private city owned trees or foliage. So how does the upkeep get paid for that? Is it 50-50 for neighbors? Is it solely on the owner or how does that work?

That's a great question. It would depend on the actual situation. Typically, if the ordinance is approved and there is a requirement to remove the vegetation, then I'm just using visitation, but it could be a number of things. The Code Enforcement Division has a process where they would go out, they would contact the party that's subject to the complaint, and they would be asked to... remedy the situation, ultimately trying to close the case. And then it would be escalated, right? But the cost would be on the property owner that has the issue. at that point with regard to this ordinance. In addition to that, if it was a new, let's say a new project, it would have to go through a review process, whether through planning and building and safety, and then they would review it to see how it comports to the ordinance and the regulations. So there would be no added cost other than the typical fees that are associated with processing a permit.

Thank you.

Any other questions for staff?

Yeah, so maybe this was already mentioned, but just to clarify one of the speakers from just moments ago, how would a, for say, citizen who lives up in a scenic view area who has a complaint, for say, of overgrown vegetation, and would this ordinance TRIGGER ANYTHING THAT HOMEOWNERS CAN DO IN ORDER TO GET THIS VEGETATION REMOVED FOR, SAY, IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S GOVERNMENT, I MEAN CITY OWNED. YEAH.

EMILY, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I BELIEVE WE'VE EXEMPTED ANY CITY TREES, ANY OBVIOUSLY INFRASTRUCTURE, THEY'RE EXEMPT FROM THE ORDINANCE, YES.

Any other questions for staff? Okay, can I get a motion?

I'll motion to approve the ordinance for a zone code amendment to modify Montebello Municipal Code Chapter 17 and establish a view shed preservation overlay. Resolution number 08-25 recommending the City Council approval zone code amendment number PC 2025-000-ZCA, amending Chapter 17 of the Montebello Municipal Code, adding Chapter 17.41, Boucher Preservation Overlay.

Thank you.

And to determine and find that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, CEQA, pursuant to the common sense exemption set forth under Section 15061B3, which provides that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Considering that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that adding a viewshed preservation overlay will have a significant effect on the environment and persuade to CEQA section 15303 related to construction and location of limited numbers of new small facilities or structures. and the conversion of existing small structures that are consistent with the city's general plan, policies, and zoning regulations.

Thank you. Can I get a second?

I'll second that.

Roll call, please.

Of course. Commissioner Lopez? Aye. Commissioner Morales? Aye. Vice Chairperson Lobelli? Aye. Chairperson Medina?

Aye.

And motion passes. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you for everybody that came to support the motion, appreciate it. We'll go ahead and move on to the second or third item on the public hearing.

Yes, Mr. Chair, item three on tonight's agenda pertains to a proposed conditional use permit to allow the reconfiguration of an existing full-service auto dealership, Ford of Montebello, located at 2747 Via Campo. Daniel Ruiz will present this item tonight.

GOOD EVENING, CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THE PUBLIC. TONIGHT I WILL BE PRESENTING CASE NUMBER PC2025-0005-CUP, A REQUEST TO MODIFY CUP07-71. THIS REQUEST WILL ALLOW THE APPLICANT, THE FORD MONOBELLO, TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATELY 21,850 SQUARE FOOT FIRST FLOOR EDITION CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 30 NEW INDOOR SERVICE BAYS A VEHICLE DISPLAY AREA, RESTROOMS, A LUNCHROOM, AN ELEVATOR, AND AN EQUIPMENT ROOM FOR THE ELEVATOR, AS WELL AS AN APPROXIMATELY 29,300 SQUARE FOOT ROOFTOP PARKING AREA CONSISTING OF 57 STANDARD PARKING SPACES AND A SEPARATE INVENTORY PARKING AREA AT THE EXISTING FORD MONOBELLA AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP LOCATED AT 2747 VILLA CAMPO. On May 21st, 2025, Rohrer Architecture, the representative for Florida Montebello, the applicant filed a conditional use permit application to modify CUP07-71 to add approximately 30 service bays and various impertinent structures at 2747 Via Campo, the project site, within a new 21,800 square foot FIRST FLOOR ADDITION TO THE EXISTING FORT MONTENOBELO AUTO DEALERSHIP AND TO CONSTRUCT THE NEW 29,300 SQUARE FOOT ROOFTOP PARKING AND INVENTORY ABOVE THE FIRST FLOOR ADDITION. ON MAY 22, 2025, STAFF ISSUED A THEMED COMPLETE LETTER. THE AREAL MAP IN THIS SLIDE SHOWS 2747 VIA CAMPO WHICH FOR REFERENCE IS LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF VIA CAMPO AND NORTH GARFIELD AVENUE NEXT TO CALIFORNIA STATE ROUTE 60, THE POMONA FREEWAY. The project area for the proposed conditional use permit modification is identified by the yellow star and the total combined lot area of the site is 117,900 square feet. The project area is currently developed with an automobile dealership originally approved in 1971, approved under CUP 07-71. The current square footage of the existing building at the site is 33,705 square feet. With the proposed improvements, the total square footage of all structures at the site will be approximately 85,977 square feet. If this CUP request is approved, the previous CUP entitlement modifications will remain in effect. The project elevations shown here demonstrate what the proposed service structure will look like if approved. The first floor of the proposed structure is intended to be used for the approximately 30 proposed service bays, an inventory display area, and other accessory areas. The second floor of the proposed structure will consist of a total of 57 parking spots and an inventory parking area. Combined, the first and the second floor of the proposed structure will total approximately 51,150 square feet, with the maximum height of the structure reaching 34 feet and 10 inches for the elevator tower, with the height of the rooftop parking area ranging from approximately 22 to 25 feet, depending on which elevation the height is measured from. The structure is proposed to be constructed primarily of gray concrete blocks with metal composite panels, as shown in the elevation drawings included here. 2747 Via Campo is on C2, general commercial, and is surrounded by the California State Highway 60 to the north and commercially zoned properties to the east and the west. Additionally, to the south of the project site, the Our Lady of the Miraculous Meadow Catholic Church is located within the R1 zoning designation with the Civic General Plan land use designation. Excluding the church, the immediate surrounding land uses are designated general commercial, which is fully compatible with the proposed automobile service area expansion. It is not anticipated that this specific proposal will have an adverse impact on adjacent or budding properties, and mitigation measures are included within the project to ensure that the Our Lady of the Miraculous Metal Parish is notified in writing of the activities associated with the construction of the proposed project. REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW CASE NUMBER PC-2025-0005-CUP IS CONSIDERED A PROJECT FOR THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT CEQA DEFINITION. An initial study slash mitigated negative declaration was previously prepared and approved by the Planning Commission on August 2nd, 2016 for proposed modifications at the project site. The initial study mitigated negative declaration determined that with mitigation measures, the potential environmental impacts can be reduced to a significant threshold of less than significant. An addendum to the previously approved initial study slash MND was prepared for the proposed project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act CEQA Guidelines Section 15164A, and none of the conditions calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR under Section 15162 have occurred. On July 24th, 2025, the public hearing notice was mailed to owners within the 300-foot radius from the exterior boundaries of the subject property. And on July 21st, 2025, the public hearing notice was published in the Montebello News. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt resolution number 09-25, approving the modification to conditional use permit number 07-71, with conditions to allow the reconfiguration of the existing automobile dealership located at 2747 Via Campo, including the construction of approximately 30 new indoor service bays and related or pertinent structures within a new 21,850 square foot first floor addition, along with an approximately 29,300 square foot rooftop parking and an inventory area for the property located at 2747 Via Campo, ADDITIONALLY, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINE AND FIND THAT THE FOREGOING ACTIONS WILL NOT INCLUDE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES AND OR CAUSE SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS TO THE ENVIRONMENT AS DESCRIBED IN CEQA SECTION 15162, NOR RESULT IN ANY NEW IMPACTS OR INCREASE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BEYOND THOSE IDENTIFIED IN THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AND THEREFORE APPROVAL OF THE ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY PREPARED MND IS APPROPRIATE. Thank you. This concludes my presentation. I am available for questions or comments as are the representatives for the proposed project.

Thank you. Any questions for staff?

I have a question. Please. Will the entrance to the service area or, you know, service entrance off Via Campo, will that still remain the same?

Yes, there is still an entry where it was previously. There's a buffer of separation in between where the structure will be actually placed. But it has the same two entrances as what was there before.

Because I'm a... A Ford owner. And that's where I get my service done. And sometimes I try to avoid it because I remember how narrow that service entrance is. And the experience I had there was that there were too many cars there parked. And to get out, I had to reverse instead of going around. And it's very, I don't know how the planning was there. And yeah, that was kind of an experience before.

So that's why I'm trying to see here on the site plan.

Is that still remaining the same?

I mean, in this case, there is an additional rooftop parking area that will be proposed. I believe that should clear up some of the additional inventory parking that is spread out throughout the entire first floor as it is now. In this case, as you enter, I mean, that would be up to the Fort of Montebello to where they place their vehicles, but there is additional inventory parking for them. There's also an additional 57 parking spaces for them on the roof. I think that should help to alleviate some of the traffic congestion that you've noted.

I don't know if the board is here and hearing, but thank you. It's not a complaint.

I'm sure we can ask the representative once they tell us about it. My question is to the R1 zone. Even though it's an R1 zone, it's It has a commercial use, be it the church?

It has a church and it's also a school for the church on that property to the south.

But there aren't any proposed changes necessarily adjacent to that lot line?

So in this case, the Planning Commission last year, the Planning Commission approved the project that was a modification to this site as well. But the applicant decided not to proceed with that project that's proposed last year. In that case, it was closer to the south. I would say that that project had more of an impact. to the adjacent church due to it was a lot more approximately a lot closer to the church. In this case, the modification is being shifted to the north. So I would argue that it will have less of an impact to the adjacent church.

Thank you. And one last question for staff before we hear from the applicant. Is this going to be within the view shed ordinance? Within the boundaries? No. No?

I'm not sure if it's within the viewshed ordinance or not, but as a part of the mitigated negative declaration, it did analyze the aesthetic impact to any of the visual surroundings. And it was determined as a part of the environmental analysis that there would not be an impact to any visual aesthetics in the vicinity. Good to know.

Good to know.

But we're confident that it's not going to be within the map, the overlay area.

My eyesight's not all that good. I believe it's in this, I believe the location's in this area here. Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you so much. Any more questions for staff?

No?

Thank you very much, and I'll give the owners an opportunity to maybe tell us a little bit more about the project.

Thank you.

Do I have to open public comment?

GOOD EVENING, CHAIRMAN AND STAFF. MY NAME IS ROBERT PLANT. I'M FROM 1206 VIA LA MESA IN SAN CLEMENI. I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROJECT SINCE 2016. THE ORIGINAL DESIGN WE WERE LOOKING TO MOVE THE SERVICE DRIVE TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BUILDING. IN THE SECOND GO AROUND we decided to keep the service drive where it currently is. We're trying not to change many of the the physical presence of the building. So when customers come in, they're familiar with it versus changing it all up on them. It does pose a little bit of confusion for them. A little bit about my background. I was a facility architect at Galpin Motors from 2003 to 2017. 2017, I retired and Ford Motor Corporation grabbed me and said, we need you to work on this Ford store and this Ford store. So I do a lot of Ford store work. I'm very proud of this project. I've been working with the owners again since 2016. We think we have a very good proposal. We've downsized some of the facility. We've really worked on the flow around the site. We're going to try to correct some of the issues that you have by moving the inventory. other places. A couple of other things that have recently happened. The owner is in the process of purchasing another service building, which is on the other side of town, back over by the maple property that I was in here on earlier to put a warehouse on. That property, we're looking at somewhere between 12 and 18 service bays, which will take some of the load off of this building and also give you the opportunity where you can, we're working on that now, where you could bring your car in at that location, which is a much quieter neighborhood than where the dealership is now. One of the main design factors moving the building, moving the service from the rear to the front was the advantage of being on the freeway. The freeway is really important to a car dealership. It's a lot of free advertisement. By putting the deck up front, we can raise the cars up higher. We'd like to light the deck so that you can see it more from the freeway. It'll give it more of a superstore appearance. Several of the Ford stores away from the freeways have closed around the L.A. County area and Orange County area. This store is not. The store's service activity just keeps growing. A key to any community a lot of times is its car dealerships. Many times when I've been in there, it's like, wow, there's the Caltrans fleet. They're all in there for service. Same thing with your fire department. So I think this is going to be a very positive move for your city. The fact that the service is behind eight inch concrete walls will help reduce the sound in the community. We're currently there. basically what's called California stalls where the stalls face, you know, the, uh, extremities of the site and the sound migrates into the community. In this case, the sound is going to be more concentrated. Um, and then the cars parked on the roof and hopefully this will clean up a lot of the traffic issues with it. In addition to the other buildings that the owner is looking at should help bring that kind of down. Um, One of the key purposes with the other building is to move some of the big truck that they work on to the other site. The trucks are difficult to move around on a small site like this one. This is one of the, I'll say, narrower, more constrained sites that I've worked on. I've got a couple of these that are in Hawaii that are similar, but you usually don't see them like this in California. You usually have a lot more land. With that, the materials on the building are all basically from the Ford pallet. Again, I tried to give it more of a Ford feeling. Any questions you might have with me on the project?

Do you anticipate, you said that the combination of constructing this building and other buildings that are not necessarily within the city of Montebello will alleviate some of the traffic, for lack of a better word, that goes into the building.

That is a purpose, right? The staff even has a tougher time trying to move the cars around and sell cars in this very restricted property. I know the owners for years have been trying to buy surrounding properties with no luck.

Gotcha. And the reason I was mentioning is that I travel that street often. And oftentimes there's the traffic that's making a right turn onto Wilcox, heading eastbound on Pomona, backs up to behind the dealership. So I would just hate to make that worse with additional trips.

When I came to Gallup and they had a really big problem with their service drive, their service drive, they're taking about 300 cars a day. The service drive traffic was crossing over Lancashire and or not Lakersham, was crossing over Roscoe and was causing a lot of problems with both pedestrian traffic and what have you. I reworked the traffic drive for them. We widened it. One of the key things was basically scheduling the appointments coming in. We ended up with a call center at that particular store where pretty much they only allowed a few people to come in just off the street. The majority of the people were basically scheduled throughout the day. That way it's not, 30 cars coming all at once, trying to drop their car off at the seventh thing, take their kids to school. You schedule them through the day and you break that traffic down to where it becomes a little bit more manageable. Those are things I've talked, you know, on the side with the owner on, you know, trying to calm that down. That will help. You're starting to see more and more of that. And it's getting easier and easier with people using the internet with their cell phone of scheduling and making appointments versus everything is haphazard. You just show up and hope your car gets serviced that day.

Thank you. I have a question. Will there be any other entrances from the side lot, I guess closer to Garfield side, which I believe is where the Dollar Tree is and the other stores?

We can't cross over the property line into their property. The owner would love to, to take test drives with the customer cars that come in, but the adjacent owner has not been exactly friendly.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

I don't have any other questions for you, sir. Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

I do have one point of clarification for staff and I apologize, I should have done this earlier, but the reason this item is before us is because it exceeds the 5,000 square foot threshold. correct, or is it asking for other aspects?

So in this case, the project, the Fort Amato Bello already had a previously approved conditional use permit. In this case, because they're modifying the site in a way that we thought was not in substantial conformance with anything that was approved there previously, that's what triggered the modification to the site. Typically, when a conditional use permit is required for a project, a separate site plan review is not simultaneously required. So it wasn't necessarily the threshold, but staff determined that this was a major modification that would merit bringing it back to the Planning Commission for review and approval.

Understood. Okay. But aside from that, they're not asking for reduced yards? They're not asking for an increase in height?

No, technically, there was an original project, or an original that had so many modifications, but in 2016, the Planning Commission approved the 112,000 square foot structure that would have actually been a three-story structure. In this case... The staff or the project applicant has continued to modify that version of the project. And so this is actually a downscaled version of what was originally approved by the Planning Commission back in 2016. But because they haven't proceeded with the approval or with the actual construction of the site, they've had to continue to come back for modification. And so at this point... Fingers crossed that this is actually built and constructed.

Gotcha. Now, as part of the original CUP, were there any restrictions, developmental restrictions that would limit height, area, things like that?

No, so the original CUP was very vague. It was approved back in 1971, so there wasn't too much language restricting it. In this case, the project... The height restrictions that it would have to abide by is what the current municipal code says, and the project is consistent with the height restrictions that are in place now. Technically, in a commercial zone, The height needs to be accommodated by the floor area ratio that's allowed for the site. But in this case, or if you're adjacent to R1, the portion of a structure within 15 feet of the residential portion will not be allowed to exceed 35 feet. But aside from that, there is technically no height restriction aside from what can be accommodated by the FVR in the commercial zone. Understood. Thank you. Thank you.

I don't have any more questions. Any questions for staff? Can I entertain a motion?

I'll entertain the motion to- I'm sorry, give me one second.

Let me close public comment. Is there any public comment? Do you want to open the public hearing? Let me open public comment.

We do not have any speaker cards for public comment. If anyone in the audience would like to speak, please approach the dais. Thank you.

No public comment. I guess I want to close public comment and bring it back to the group for a motion.

I motion to approve the modification to conditional use permit number 07-71 to authorize a reconfiguration of the existing Ford of Montebello automobile dealership located at 2747 Villacampo, including the construction of an approximately 21,850 square foot first floor addition consisting of approximately 30 new indoor service bays, a vehicle display area, restrooms, a lunchroom, an elevator, and an equipment room for the elevator, as well as an approximately 29,300 square foot rooftop parking area consisting of 57 standard parking spaces and a separate inventory parking area proposed project. And the secret determinations.

The secret determinations.

Oh, and and determine and find that the foregoing actions will not include substantial changes or cause significant effects to the environment as described in Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act. Guidelines nor result in any new impacts or increase the significance of environmental impacts beyond those identified in the previously approved initial study mitigated negative declaration. Case number CUP07-71, MOD02-16, and therefore approval of the attached amendment to the MND is appropriate.

Thank you, and I will second. Can we get a roll call, please?

Commissioner Lopez?

Aye.

Commissioner Morales? Aye. Vice Chairperson Lomeli? Aye. Chairperson Medina?

Aye.

And motion passes.

Thank you. Okay, that looks like it's our final public hearing item. WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ORALS. ARE YOU PLANNING COMMISSION ORALS? NO? I WANT TO WELCOME OUR NEW CITY ATTORNEY.

I DON'T WANT TO TAKE ARNOLD'S SPOT, SO I AM THE DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE COMMISSION. THANK YOU. MARINA RAMIREZ, BY THE WAY.

WELCOME. WELCOME. OTHER THAN THAT, ANY Nope. Our next item would be to adjourn the meeting. Thank you so much.