HomeMy WebLinkAbout9-10-91Planning Commission proceedings are tape recorded and on file in the office of the Planning Dept.
MINUTES
ARCADIA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday, September 10, 1991
The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, September 10, 1991, at 7:30
p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Arcadia City Hall, 240 West Huntington Drive, with Chairman Tom
Clark presiding.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Commissioners Amato, Daggett, Hedlund, Szany, Clark
ABSENT: None
MINUTES
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Amato, seconded by Commissioner Szany to approve the Minutes of
August 27, 1991 as published. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting.
OTHERS ATTENDING:
Councilman George Fasching
City Attorney Michael Miller
Planning Director William Woolard
Assistant Planning Director Donna Butler
Assistant Planner James Kasama
Secretary Silva Vergel
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING CUP 91 -007
The southwest corner of Huntington Dr.
and Second Avenue
WLA Arcon, Inc. and
Schaefer Brothers
Consideration of a conditional use permit to construct two
three -story office buildings with modifications. One office
building will contain 16,667 sq. ft. and be located 93' -0" from
the residential property to the south; the other building
will contain 25,000 sq. ft. and be located 50' from the
residential properties to the south.
In response to comments from the Commission, staff said that the applicant did not clarify whether the trash
enclosure or the stair well going down to the subterranean parking would block visibility for the nine parking
spaces that backed out onto the alley. It was noted that nothing will be changed south of the alley. The
ventilation pylons will be 10'. At First and Huntington the pylons is used as sign and is nicely disguised.
The public hearing was opened.
Warren Lortie, President of WLA Arcon, Inc., 18652 Florida, Suite 200, Huntington Beach, the architect of the
project spoke in favor of the CUP. He stated that based on their past experiences, the underground level
parking will be utilized by staff and professionals. The employees of the building want the shaded parking
and on occasions they have had to label the parking "tenants only" and intend to do the same here. They feel
that access from the site is most direct from the alley which has access from either First Ave. or Second Ave.
For the people coming in the morning and leaving in the afternoon this would be the most direct way to get on
and off the site. They do not want the traffic causing any problems with the pedestrian clients and patients
who will be using the upper level parking. The design is very simple such that there is no cross isle and no
area where pedestrian traffic is forced to cross in front of a tunnel or a ramp. Although staff has stated that
they would like to have the parking mixed between the two buildings, they will be providing "visitor only"
parking spaces for each building. He noted that the submitted plans show how they have provided extra
room at the top of the ramp so that when a car comes up and daylights, it is in a position off the alley with
full vizibility in all directions. There is also additional ramp area at the bottom so when cars come down to
the bottom there is nothing obstructing view. He remarked that the columns have been minimized at the
bottom of the ramp. The guard rail at each side of the parking ramp will be utilized at all of the openings,
i.e., stairway and planter openings, and will be the same type of railing used at the office building at First
and Huntington and will be painted anodized bronze and mounted on a 6" to 8" curb. The plants will then
grow through those openings which will be visible through the parking structure and allow light to enter the
structure. The minimum walkway width will be 3'. He stated that staff has an alternative plan that
reduces the parking by 5 spaces but they are not prepared to make any comments since they have not had the
opportunity to review it.
Jim Schaefer, Mark Schaefer Assoc. (CPA), 55 E. Huntington, Arcadia, remarked that he is the on site
manager for the building at First and Huntington. Their building is adjacent to the parking district, has one
level of subterranean parking and one level of ground parking behind the building. Both entrances to the
parking are immediately off the alley. He noted that several of their tenants came to their building because
of the availability of the parking. There are times that both parking levels are filled to capacity and they
have been forced to utilize the parking district. He said that based on that experience he did not think that
the parking should be reduced just to have the building built because it would create possible negative
impacts for tenants, patients and the residents living in the area. Most visitors park on the above grade
parking and reducing the parking spaces by 5 -10 spaces would mean a reduction of 13 -14% of the parking on
the main level. They anticipate that they will have many medical offices there and they do not want
elderly, people with children and sight problems to have difficulty finding parking spaces. He thought
that many of the patients who visit the doctors in this building will be residents of the City and if there is
not ample on -site parking, they will be forced to park on the residential street or park on Huntington Dr.
which is already very congested especially during the racing season. They have proposed the major access to
the underground parking via the alley; by using the major access from Huntington Drive there will be
potential hazard for the pedestrians, whereas there are not many pedestrians utilizing the alley. To have a
maximum number of parking is very important and he urged the Commission to allow the maximum number of
parking allowed there and to consider the potential negative impact if the parking was reduced.
Howard Schaefer, 225 S. Lake Ave., M -183, Pasadena, said that in designing this building they took into
consideration the existing traffic in the area. He remarked that based on Barton Ashman's traffic study the
worst of congestion occured at the intersections of First and Huntington and Second and Huntington. They are
very concerned with the amount of traffic at those intersections. Staff felt that it would not be a good idea to
utilize the alley and use Huntington Drive instead but they disagree with that because that would increase
traffic on Huntington. There are 2 entrances off of Huntington Drive which would primarily be used for the
surface parking for visitors of the building. The worst congestion is heading east on Huntington Dr. between
4:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m.. That is when most of the employees are leaving the building. Since they anticipate
that tenants would be parking at the lower level, they will be coming up from the ramp and they would
encourage them not to exit on Huntington Drive and add to the tremendous congestion that already occurs
there, especially during the racing season. They are concerned that there will be traffic problems with
people trying to exit from the parking lot onto Huntington Drive. If somebody wanted to go northbound on
Second, he would have to make a right turn and immediately get over to the left hand lane to make the turn.
They also fear that there would be congestion at the left hand turn lane going northbound on Second and that
they would be adding to the congestion. So, they prefer to have the ramp going out to the alley and
encouraging traffic to go on to the secondary streets such as First and Second Avenue. This will cause
additional traffic on the alley but that is how the alley is being utilized by all other business with alley
access. The utilization of the alley would avoid additional traffic onto Huntington Drive. Staff suggested
moving the ramp closer to the building which would take up more space but they do not want to lose any
parking spaces and they are concerned that there will not be adequate on -site parking space and will
probably utilize the alley to park.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
9/10/91
Page 2
No one else spoke 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.
Commissioner Szany remarked that Barton Ashman recommended that the building on the site be no more
than 40,000 sq. ft. and the total of these two buildings is approximately 2,000 sq. ft. more than the suggested
size. He preferred the interior ramp and thought that it would make automobile circulation a little less
complicated and noted that the alley which is 20' wide is too narrow for all that traffic. He said that this
building will be here for many years and thought that the size should be reduced. He remarked that the nine
parking spaces in the rear should be for "employees only ". He said that there is a possibility that the trash
enclosures may not work since they have to have a 15' setback. He commented that it is a good looking
building and a nice enhancement for that corner.
Commissioner Hedlund was concerned about Second Avenue, the left turn from the alley going northbound on
Second. He thought that this would be making a bad situation worse.
Commissioner Amato suggested making a "right turn only" from the alley to Second Avenue. He disagreed
with Commissioner Szany with regard to the internalized ramp and thought that would create problems.
Commissioner Daggett spoke in favor of the request. He noted that he counted all the parking spaces on all
the alleys in the downtown area, i.e, alley between Santa Anita /First between Huntington /Wheeler, alley
between Santa Anita /First and Huntington /Alta, alley between Huntington /Alta between First /Second. He
remarked that he did not think that the conditions would be any more horrendous than what presently
exists. He stated that it would be better to have a car coming out of the darkened lower level parking onto a
brightly lit surface environment, to come to an automobile right of way such as an alley as opposed to
internally where there could be pedestrians.
Chairman Clark stated that this is a bad intersection and regardless of what is done, there will be some
problems. The extension of the property and the elimination of the landscape will help but there will be
problems with people trying to make a left turn. With regard to the ramp, he remarked that he would prefer
a north /south ramp because of pedestrian traffic.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Daggett, seconded by Commissioner Amato to approve CUP 91 -007
subject to the conditions in the staff report with the deletion of conditions 4 and 5 which relate to the
internalized ramp.
ROLL CALL:
AYES: Commissioners Amato, Daggett, Clark
NOES: Commissioners Hedlund, Szany
ABSENT: None
Chairman Clark noted that there is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the resolution.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
9/10/91
Page 3
PUBLIC HEARING TM 50793
2427 -2431 S. Baldwin Ave.
Hsin -Hua (James) Tang
Consideration of a tentative map for an 8 -unit residential
condominium project.
The staff report was presented.
In response to questions from the Commission, staff said that 6 of the units will be 2,046 sq. ft. and the other 2
will be 2,063 sq. ft.
The public hearing was opened.
Michael Chen, 2225 W. Commonwealth, Alhambra, the engineer of the project, stated that they are in
agreement with all of the conditions of the staff report.
No one else spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Hedlund, seconded by Commissioner Szany to close the public hearing.
The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Hedlund, seconded by Commissioner Szany to approve TM 50793
with the conditions in the staff report.
ROLL CALL:
AYES: Commissioners Amato, Daggett, Hedlund, Szany, Clark
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Chairman Clark noted that there is a ten day appeal period.
PUBLIC HEARING Z 91 -009
All properties identified in the
attached Exhibit "A"
Consideration of a zone change from R -1 7,500 (single -
family residential, with a minimum lot size of 7,500 sq.
ft.) to R -1 12,500. This proposal changes the required
minimum lot size fro any new lot from 7,500 sq. ft. to 12,500
sq. ft.
This zone change affects new lots only. If this zone change
is approved, any new lot proposed in these areas must
comply with the minimum lot area of 12,500 sq. ft.
The staff report was presented and the public hearing was opened.
Neil Bosmen, 510 W. Las Tunas Dr., asked how this zone change was initiated.
Staff explained that the City Council directed staff to propose this zone change. There have not been any
subdivisions proposed. At the request of the City Council, staff did a study looking at the large lot
neighborhoods which the City would like to preserve and prevent, if possible, cul -de -sacs from coming in
that are incompatible with the larger lots in the area.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
9/10/91
Page 4
No one else spoke 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.
The consensus of the Commission was favorable.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Amato to recommend approval of
Z 91 -009 to the City Council.
ROLL CALL:
AYES: Commissioners Amato, Daggett, Hedlund, Szany, Clark
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION None
MATTERS FROM COUNCIL None
MATTERS FROM COMMISSION None
MATTERS FROM STAFF None
ADJOURNMENT
8:30 p.m.
.'�
•
Secretary, Arcadia Planning Commission
Arcadia City Planning Commission
9/10/91
Page 5