HomeMy WebLinkAbout8-28-90Planning Commission proceedings are taped recorded and on file in the office of the Planning Dept.
MINUTES
ARCADIA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday, August 28, 1990
The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, August 28, 1990 at
7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Arcadia City Hall, 240 West Huntington Drive, with
Chairman Larry Papay presiding.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Commissioners Amato, Hedlund, Szany, Papay
ABSENT: Commissioner Clark
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Amato to excuse
Commissioner Clark from tonight's meeting. The motion passed by voice vote with none
dissenting
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Amato to read all resolutions
by title only and waive reading the full body of the resolution. The motion passed by voice vote
with none dissenting.
MINUTES
Mike Miller noted that he was absent from the Planning Commission's August 14th meeting.
Commissioner Hedlund noted that the votes on page 8 should be reversed.
Chairman Papay said that the Ayes should have been Commissioners Amato, Clark and Szany and the
Noes were Commissioners Hedlund and Papay.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Amato, seconded by Commissioner Hedlund to approve the
Minutes of August 14, 1990 as amended. The motion passed by voice vote with none
dissenting.
OTHERS ATTENDING:
Councilman Joseph Ciraulo
City Attorney Mike Miller
Planning Director William Woolard
Assistant Planning Director Donna Butler
Associate Planner Wilfred Wong
Assistant Planner James Kasama
Arcadia City Planning Commission
8/28/90
Page 1
The City Attorney announced that the City Charter requires that for any action to be adopted or approved a
majority of the entire membership must vote in favor of the particular motion. If the required three
votes are not obtained the motion would fail. If the required three votes are not obtained (1) an applicant
may request continuance and it would be up to the Commission to decide whether or not they want to grant
the continuance; (2) the matter could be heard and then deferred for final decision pending participation
by the absent members as long as they review the records of these proceedings which would be made
available to them or (3) the matter could simply go forward to the City Council.
Chairman Papay remarked that the public hearing for the General Plan would be moved to the last
public hearing to allow the other public hearings to be heard first.
PUBLIC HEARING CUP 90 -011
152 -154 E. St. Joseph St.
Michael Toshima & Greg Garcia
Consideration of a conditional use permit for an
automotive garage.
The staff report was presented.
Staff noted that presently there are gates crossing over at the rear driveways and due to that one
additional condition is being added that all driveways shall remain open during business hours. This
will be the first project that is being required to store all vehicles inside. this has been discussed
with the applicant. Staff has always required that the work be done inside the building, however, in
the past we have not required that customers' vehicles to be stored inside.
The applicant would have to provide air ventilation systems per the Building Code. This is a condition
because of the limited number of on -site parking spaces.
The public hearing was opened.
Mike Toshima, 1265 Elm Avenue, San Gabriel, and Greg Garcia, 2070 La France Ave., S. Pasadena,
were present. They noted that the existing trash enclosure is more than large enough to hold two bins
and if they need to, they can have the trash picked up more than once a week. They were in agreement
with all of the conditions in the staff report including having all the driveways open during business
hours.
In response to Commissioner Szany's question, Mr. Toshima explained that they will be doing
electrical and mechanical work on the vehicles. The most eastern door,where the lifts are, will be
utilized most often. He thought that the parking spaces in front of the doors are marked as a loading
zone.
Chairman Papay thought if they were to use the eastern most door more frequently, that could be made
the loading only zone and stripe the western part of the lot.
Mr. Toshima noted that there is enough room to store 12 -15 cars inside and also work on cars.
Phelps Wood, 1433 St. Albans, San Marino, owner of the building, stated that there are 36 parking
spaces in the rear lot and this is a large building, half of which will be leased to the applicants. There
are two overhead doors which have no parking spaces in front of them, both to the extreme east and
west of the building. He said that the building which they will be leasing is 6,000 sq. ft. and he did not
Arcadia City Planning Commission
8/28/90
Page 2
think they should be limited to six employees. In response to a question from Commissioner Szany,
Mr. Wood said that there are 5 parallel parking spaces on the alley.
There were no other persons desiring to speak in favor of or in opposition to this item.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Hedlund, seconded by Commissioner Amato to close the public
hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting.
Commissioner Amato said that if the Commission was to approve this CUP with 6 employees, they
should be able to ask for an increase, if there are no complaints and problems at a later date.
Staff remarked that if they had more employees and no complaints were received, the Planning
Department would not be aware of the violation.
Commissioner Szany said that he liked the idea of having all the work done inside and if there did not
seem to be a parking problem, he would not object to increasing the number of employees.
Chairman Papay noted that presently there are vacancies at the site and after they are occupied there
could be parking problems which could put more constraints on the applicant.
There was discussion regarding the adequacy of the trash enclosure.
William Woolard, the Planning Director, said that the condition could be modified to "all trash shall be
maintained in trash enclosures ".
Chairman Papay said that they have the option of frequent trash pick ups.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Amato to approve CUP
90 -011 subject to the conditions in the staff report with the above mentioned conditions.
ROLL CAW
AYES: Commissioners Amato, Hedlund, Szany, Papay
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Clark
Chairman Papay noted that there is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the
resolution.
PUBLIC HEARING TPM 90 -008 Consideration of a tentative parcel map creating two lots
380 W. Camino Real from one.
Wayne & Virginia Clark
The staff report was presented and the public hearing was opened.
Wayne Clark, 380 W. Camino Real, said that he is in agreement with all of the conditions in the staff
report.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
8/28/90
Page 3
Jack Raymond, 60 W. Lemon, the engineer of the project was present to answer any questions.
There were no other persons desiring to speak in favor of or in opposition to this item.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Amato to close the public
hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting.
Mr. Woolard said that condition 8 states that "any existing structures either be altered to comply with
the required setback if the new old dwellings are demolished" and explained that if the existing house is
retained, the portion of the building on Holly will have to be removed to comply with setbacks. If the
buildings are to be demolished then the new homes will have to comply with existing requirements.
There is a special 40' -0" setback on Holly.
Mr. Clark said that a decision has not been made whether to demolish the buildings or not but any
proposal will be discussed with the Planning Department.
Commissioner Szany said that it complies with Code and gives an opportunity to clean up the corner.
He was concerned about the affect that this might have on the adjacent properties.
Chairman Papay said that the two new lots will exceed Code requirements.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Hedlund to approve TPM
90 -008 subject to the conditions in the staff report with the above mentioned conditions.
ROLL CAW
AYES: Commissioners Amato, Hedlund, Szany, Papay
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Clark
Chairman Papay noted that there is a ten day appeal period.
PUBLIC HEARING TM 49847
840 Golden West
Pacific Eagel Development, Inc.
Consideration of a tentative map for a 5 -unit residential
condominium project.
The staff report was presented and the public hearing was opened.
Elias Sakali, 1740 E. Huntington Dr., Duarte, the engineer of the project representing Loren Phillips
and Associates, said that they are in agreement with all of the conditions in the staff report.
There were no other persons desiring to speak in favor of or in opposition to this item.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Amato to close the public
hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
8/28/90
Page 4
Staff remarked that most of the units will have three bedrooms.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Amato to approve TM
49847 subject to the conditions in the staff report.
ROLL CAW
AYES: Commissioners Amato, Hedlund, Szany, Papay
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Clark
Chairman Papay noted that there is a ten day appeal period.
CONTINUED PUBUC HEARING
GENERAL PLAN
Consideration and review of the Revised General Plan,
which contains the Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Open
Space and Conservation, Parks and Recreation, Safety and
Noise Elements and Spheres of Influence.
The staff report was presented and the public hearing was opened.
Harold Ellis, 1504 S. Eighth, said that the plan as proposed is very general, vague and not very
specific and needs to give definite direction that the City should take. He felt that the plan is very
evasive and that it should be utilized as a guide for the City. Some of the studies that are used are from
1987 and even 1975 which are old and obsolete. He said that Orange Grove Avenue should be made as a
scenic route through the City before all the beautiful trees are torn and the street is widened. He said
that if the City is displeased with single -sided cul -de -sacs, then they should not be approved unless
there is a physical barrier preventing the development. He thought that the plan should be sent back
to staff for updated data. He said that there are enough people in Arcadia and the City should take into
consideration that additional people translate into more traffic, pollution, water, trash, noise
problems. He thought that the only way to keeping the density down is to take positive steps to limit
more people from coming into the area. He stated that in some parts of town a developer can build an
8 -story residential building and he thought that that is absolutely ridiculous. He felt that at the
present rate, there is no need to make any new developments, just replacing the existing development
will have a very substantial impact on the quality of life in the City. He noted that if a developer
doesn't have ample room on a lot, then the project should be denied and the City should not approve
substandard lots.
Craig Pearson, 2424 Albert Way, said that he was in agreement with Mr. Ellis's testimony. He asked
what is a Density Bonus Ordinance which is discussed in Part 6, Page 14, under Objectives?
Staff explained that a Density Bonus Ordinance is required by the State, to grant a developer additional
units on a project provided they are for low and moderate income housing.
Mr. Pearson remarked that by allowing this type of a development it would be further density, traffic,
pollution and added stress on the City. He thought that the plan should address issues such as traffic,
monster houses and overdevelopment.
Staff stated that every city is committed to offer the Density Bonus Ordinance and the City does not
have an option. This is a requirement by the State to offer low and moderate income housing. If a
Arcadia City Planning Commission
8/28/90
Page 5
developer does not want to provide low and moderate housing, they are not going to get a density bonus
but it is the State's way of trying to provide a range of alternative housing which a lot of cities are
unable to do.
Mr. Woolard said that the City does not have an option and has to provide this type of a program. He
noted that the City would like to hear about issues such as monster homes, traffic and pollution which
can be addressed in the General Plan.
Mr. Pearson said that in Section 1.4, Objectives, what is the definition of mixed use projects which is
being proposed along Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road?
Staff said that a mixed use project is a mixture of commercial and residential type of developments
which would be providing alternatives to housing and possibly lower income housing.
Mr. Woolard said that a mixed use project does have benefits and explained that sometimes when a
residential use is close to commercial areas, which are generally along major transportation lines,
where they may be able to use the alternative transportation, rather than drive their car, it would
actually reduce some of the problems that occur with growth in Southern California.
Mr. Pearson asked what is "planned unit development" and said reading the definition in the General
Plan, he interprets it to mean the breaking up of large lots to smaller lots.
Staff said that for single - family developments, Code requires a minimum of 3 acres before a planned
unit development can be considered. Recently, Council approved a planned unit development on North
First Avenue on R -1 and R -2 lots, which could have allowed 60+ units but with the planned unit
development they will be building 40 units. The planned unit development allows for flexibility and is
used where a conventional subdivision can't be done.
Mr. Pearson said that the plan needs to be more specific and he felt strongly about restricting the
cutting of mature trees or encouraging proper landscaping of projects.
Mr. Ellis said that the General Plan should be something that is utilized and not just be put on the shelf
after its adoption. He asked for a 60 day continuance to allow him to get public input to allow him time
to get the word out to the public regarding these hearings.
There were no other persons desiring to speak in favor of or in opposition to this item.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Amato to close the public
hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting.
Chairman papay asked if a public hearing had been scheduled before the City Council on this item?
Staff remarked no public hearing had been scheduled before Council. A tentative schedule was to have a
hearing before the Council on September 18th, however that has changed and there is no specific date
at this time. After the Planning Commission has made their comments, there will be incorporated into
a resolution which is forwarded to the City Council.
Chairman Papay commented that what has been done is to consolidate all the documents into one single
document.
Staff indicated that was correct and this was an update which separates the text from the technical
appendix. So that the major document contains the meats and guts of the plan.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
8/28/90
Page 6
Commissioner Szany was concerned that somebody purchasing several Tots in the Baldwin Stocker area
would be able to put a cul -de -sac in and reduce the sizes of the lots to 12,000 sq. ft. and still comply
with Code and noted that presently there are lots that are 30,000- 40,000 sq. ft. in size. He felt that
the General Plan should address that. He stated that the lot split that was heard by the Commission is
an example of what he is referring to and commented that this could set a precedent. He also thought
that the trees should be included. He thought the General Plan should include a policy which would
encourage the preservation of large lots.
Commissioner Amato said that he would like this item to be continued so it can be reevaluated and
thought that he would like to have the hearing postponed until after the joint meeting with Council.
In response to Chairman Papay's comments Councilman Ciraulo stated that he likes the idea of
postponing the Commission hearing until the Council and the Commission have met.
In response to questions from Chairman Papay, Mr. Woolard stated that there are no time constraints.
Commissioner Hedlund said that he did not like to chop up large lots and create smaller lots and would
like to address the density bonus and would like to discuss that with City Council. He was also
concerned with one -sided cul -de -sacs and the increase in traffic generated by them.
In answer to Chairman Papay's question, Mr. Miller said that the Supreme Court decisions on several
cases in the last five years have indicated that if you go too far in your regulatory action, and that is a
judgment call, the government has to pay the compensation for it. In certain cases the Supreme Court
has said that in certain situations this could be deemed to be taking of property and the government
would be liable for financial damage.
Staff thought that there are several items on the agenda for the joint meeting with Council and did not
think that there would be ample time to discuss the General Plan especially since it is a major project.
Commissioner Amato commended staff for doing an excellent job in preparing the Revised General Plan
but felt that it should be continued to allow for more public input.
Chairman Papay said that he would like to get Council's reaction to the Commission's ideas and said that
if the Council is opposed to some of the ideas then it would be useless to pursue it. He remarked that he
would like to see Council's general response to some of the issues.
Councilman Ciraulo agreed with Chairman Papay and felt that it would be a good idea to get an overall
feeling of how most of the Council feels and did not think that they would get into specifics in the joint
meeting.
Mr. Woolard said that staff will try to address everybody's concerns and will then forward all
comments to Council. Staff is not looking for a consensus at this point from the Commission, but for
individual input.
The consensus of the Commission was to discuss the matter briefly with Council and get direction from
them. It was noted that the joint meeting with Council is on October 16th and the next Planning
Commission meeting following the meeting would be on October 23rd, which would also allow for more
public input.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Hedlund, seconded by Commissioner Szany to re -open the public
hearing. The motion passed by voice with none dissenting.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
8/28/90
Page 7
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Hedlund, seconded by Commissioner Szany to continue the
public hearing to October 23, 1990.
ROLL CAW
AYES: Commissioners Amato, Hedlund, Szany, Papay
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Clark
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION
Harold Ellis, 1504 S. Eight Ave., was pleased with the Commission's action of the General Plan. He
said that he would like to get more public input. Recently San Francisco denied a development due to
incompatibility with the neighborhood and said that he would write to them and get the appropriate
ordinance and he would then submit it to the City. He thought that this type of an ordinance, if adopted,
would give the authority to deal with developments such as single -sided cul -de -sacs which tear up the
neighborhoods.
Alvin Albe, 458 W. Palm, said that the public is not aware of what the Commission is trying to
achieve. The public is not aware that issues such as traffic, noise and pollution can be addressed in the
General Plan and by continuing the hearing, the Commission is making the right decision. He stated
that he would try to inform his neighbors of the hearing. He thought that this should be more
publicized and it should be noted that the issues that are being considered can be addressed by the
public and can have an impact on the Commission's thought process.
Staff said that a copy of the General Plan is available to check out from the Planning Dept. and also at
the library.
Chairman Papay said that everything that is being discussed is in general terms and are generalized
criteria of necessity and the specifics come with specific properties.
Mr. Woolard said that this document is a policy guiding document for future growth and development in
the City. He said that comments made should be productive criticism of the plan and the comments
should be constructive. The public should state their concerns and what they think the City can do to
address them. The General Plan is not going to solve traffic and mansionization and it will only point
out problems. Subsequent zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations or other Code changes will bring
about the changes that are deemed necessary and identified in the plan.
Mr. Miller said that when the General Plan is adopted and in place, it is only a guideline and it does not
have the ultimate force of law. The subsequent implementation items will be the ones that will be
enforced. Zone changes and text amendments require public hearing process, introduction and adoption
of ordinances which will go through and during this process, depending on the outcome of the public
hearings, some of those items may not necessarily be implemented.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
8/28/90
Page 8
TIME EXTENSION
CUP 89 -011
29 E. Huntington Dr
The staff report was
conditions are met.
MOTION
Consideration of a 6 -month time extension to comply
with all of the conditions of approval for the expansion
. of the Steerburger Restaurant.
presented and it was noted that they will not be able to occupy until all the
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Amato to recommend a 6-
month time extension to February 8, 1991, subject to the condition that they do not occupy or
utilize the new building portion of the building until the conditions have been completed and if
they continue to utilize the area, the Planning Commission can initiate proceedings for the
revocation of the CUP.
ROLL CAW
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Amato, Hedlund, Szany, Papay
None
Commissioner Clark
RESOLUTION 1441
Mr. Woolard read the title of the resolution.
MOTION
A resolution denying an appeal and upholding the Santa
Anita Village Homeowners Association's denial of a
proposed two -story, dwelling at 717 Cortez Road.
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Amato to adopt Resolution
1441 and to formally affirm the decisions of August 14, 1990 and the votes thereon.
ROLL CALL:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Amato, Hedlund, Szany, Papay
None
Commissioner Clark
Chairman Papay noted there is a five working day appeal period.
MATTERS FROM COUNCIL None
MATTERS FROM COMMISSION
Commissioner Szany indicated that he would be unable to attend the September 11th meeting.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
8/28/90
Page 9
Mr. Miller said he did not think that the case that Mr. Ellis was discussing went to the Supreme Court
and thought that it was denied a hearing. It did have some fairly unique factors; however, it could have
some applicability to the City of Arcadia.
Commissioner Szany did not think that the density bonus factor would be utilized in Arcadia since the
price of land is very expensive.
Mr. Woolard said that if the General Plan was adopted then a specific density bonus ordinance would
have to be adopted that sets forth how and when the bonuses would be applicable. Generally, these
apply to large projects as opposed to smaller scale but it will have to be looked into and it would be
part of the implementation of the General Plan.
MATTERS FROM STAFF None
ADJOURNMENT 9:25 p.m.
f?'`.' /.
Secretary, Arcadia Planning Commission
Arcadia City Planning Commission
8/28/90
Page 10