Montebello council upholds planning commission denial of 15‑home Casa Bella del Sur proposal

The Montebello City Council on the evening of Oct. 27 voted 4‑0 to uphold the planning commission's denial of a land use proposal for 301 Jack Mart Drive, a project the applicant called Casa Bella del Sur that would have replaced an existing single‑family home with 15 two‑story detached homes.

Supporters of the project, which the applicant described as 15 market‑rate single‑family homes sold to individual buyers, said the development would provide moderate‑income ownership opportunities and improve a long‑vacant parcel. Victor Sanchez, the project representative, said the proposal included private streets, a pocket park, and design conditions proposed after community outreach. "This project represents a responsible community‑shaped solution that delivers moderate rate housing and aligns with Montebello's general plan," Sanchez told the council.

Opponents — including multiple nearby residents and speakers representing the neighborhood — said the parcel could not support the proposed density without harming parking, privacy and neighborhood character. Speakers raised concerns about lot sizes, driveway lengths, potential conversion of garages or creation of accessory units, and the absence of a committed developer. Jorge Martinez, a resident who said he lives nearby, told the council that the planning commission had already reviewed and denied the variances and urged the council to uphold that decision.

The applicant told the council the property owner, William Molinari, had attempted earlier and larger proposals and that the 15‑home plan was a compromise developed after outreach. Sanchez said the project team had carried out door‑to‑door outreach, mailed notices beyond the required radius, and held three community meetings; he also presented six new conditions of approval addressing privacy, design consistency, smart‑ready features (EV chargers, solar readiness), traffic mitigation (a contribution not to exceed $30,000 for a new stop sign at Jackmore and Third Street), homeowners association rules to address parking, and an active‑transportation enhancement (a bike lane and perimeter block walls).

Council discussion focused on legal and procedural limits (including what is allowed under state law commonly referenced as SB 9 and subdivision rules), whether the proposed conditions would prevent later conversions to accessory units, and whether the community outreach had been sufficient and accurate. City staff clarified that an administrative SB 9 lot‑split scenario could yield eight units without discretionary review; subdivision into more parcels would require discretionary approvals.

After public comment and rebuttal, a councilmember moved to uphold the planning commission's denial. The motion was seconded and passed on roll call: Councilmember Romero, Councilmember Peralta, Councilmember Alonso and Mayor Melendez voted "aye." Mayor Pro Tem Tamayo was recused from the item because she reported a property interest within 500 feet of the subject site and left the dais before the hearing.

The action preserves the planning commission's denial of the requested variances; no alternative entitlements were approved. The applicant and opponents were present during the hearing and were allowed a rebuttal period before the council's vote.

Votes at a glance

- Motion to uphold the planning commission's denial of entitlements for Casa Bella del Sur (301 Jack Mart Drive): Passed, 4‑0 (Romero, Peralta, Alonso, Melendez). Mayor Pro Tem Tamayo recused.

Background and context

The applicant proposed a 1.38‑acre (presentation stated roughly 60,000 sq. ft.) subdivision for 15 detached homes in a neighborhood zoned R‑1 adjacent to multifamily development to the east. Opponents pointed to assessor records and site plan details showing much smaller individual lot footprints (some below 2,400 sq. ft. in the presentation) and argued the plan would intensify parking and traffic pressure in South Montebello. Proponents said the alternative would be by‑right development that could lead to more units (for example, eight lots with ADUs) and that the owners had a right to a market‑oriented sale of the entitled property.

What the council decided

Council members concluded that, given the planning commission's findings and the concerns raised by neighbors about density, privacy, parking and consistency with neighborhood character, the commission's denial should stand. No substitute approvals, amendments or conditions were adopted by the council at the meeting.

What happens next

The planning commission denial remains in effect. The applicant may pursue further appeals or revise the proposal and return to the city; any new application would be subject to public hearings and the city's established discretionary review processes.