Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6-9-92Planning Commission proceedings are tape recorded and on file in the office of the Planning Dept. MINUTES ARCADIA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, June 9, 1992 The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, June 9, 1992, 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, Huang, Clark ABSENT: Commissioner Hedlund MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Amato, seconded by Commissioner Daggett to excuse Commissioner Hedlund from tonight's meeting. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. MINUTES MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Amato, seconded by Commissioner Daggett to approve the Minutes of May 12, 1992 as published. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. OTHERS ATTENDING: Councilman Bob Margett City Attorney Michael Miller Planning Director William Woolard Assistant Planning Director Donna Butler Chairman Clark and Commissioner Amato commented that the purpose of this meeting is to come up with ideas to discuss with the Council. Commissioner Clark said that based on comments by staff, the Commission might be premature on some of the items, since Council has not had an opportunity to discuss these issues. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW A Commercial Areas Councilman Margett felt that the Commission might be in the need of some direction. The ideas that will be forwarded to Council will be appreciated. In response to comments by Commissioner Daggett, Councilman Margett said that they will hopefully discuss design review as a whole for the commercial zones. Council does not want to impose too many regulations or to infringe on people's property rights. Commissioner Clark felt that the problem should be identified and said that he would like to see a group of people, from the community and business establishments get together and discuss this, after the problem is clearly delineated. Mr. Woolard distributed a hand out explaining the plan review and the plan check process for commercial /industrial and multiple- family projects. The design review process is City-wide and the regulations are in the Code as to what is required. For the commercial /industrial and multiple - family projects, there is a design review that is generally reviewed by staff if the project complies with Code requirements. If it requires a modification, then the Modification Committee has final approval or if a CUP is needed, then the Commission has final review of the project. Within the downtown area, there is additional review and Redevelopment staff provides inputs in the design review. For new buildings, in this area, the plans go to Council for concept approval. In addition, a downtown revitalization area has been identified, one block south and north of Huntington Drive, which have specific colors and materials requirements. In that area the City tried to create a theme or harmony between the projects by the use of materials and colors. In the downtown area, there is greater control vs. the rest of the City, due to the specified colors and materials allowed. In the Architectural Design Review regulations, there are 22 items listed that staff uses to try to evaluate a project ranging from roof lines, exterior lighting, landscape and loading facilities. Staff has the authority to deny a project through the architectural design review process and have done so on a couple of projects. The design review process does not set forth specific architectural styles. Councilman Margett felt that by having a specific theme, it gives direction as to what the City is looking for in the future. He thought that maybe the City's theme could be based on the race track, like a "Kentucky" theme. He said that the Council is interested in providing interest in bringing more commerce into the community. Ms. Butler indicated sometimes it is very difficult to define a theme but a theme does provide a city with specific design standards. The City needs to be clear about what is acceptable and what is not in both commercial and residential zones. Ms. Butler indicated that it is difficult in Arcadia to develop a theme because the existing buildings have no particular style. That is when the use of certain materials and colors may be used to assist in developing a theme. Mr. Woolard said that the City has photos of desirable projects and ones that are not acceptable. When a developer approaches the City, these photos are shown to give the developer an idea of what to present to the City. Commissioner Clark thought that input from the community would be necessary prior to moving forward with a specific theme. He thought that the problem should be defined prior to proceeding. Mr. Woolard thought that the Chamber might be able to assist with by input from merchants or representatives from different areas. Commissioner Daggett wondered how to define architectural design that is desirable for the community and if the preference is in place, how would it be implemented? What would be the process for design review? He felt that a more detailed design review vocabulary should be established and said that specific regulations should be established for future developments in the City. Commissioner Huang thought that energy and resources should be towards a specific area. He said that the design guidelines in the City of Whittier, have been implemented in the downtown area and have been successful and he felt that was because of grants /loans offered to the property owners without the owner having to increase rents. Commissioner Daggett remarked that maybe a specific theme would be difficult to enforce but suggested desirable treatments of common areas that the City would like introduced. He noted that the regulations and designs should be implementable and economically feasible. Arcadia City Planning Commission 6/9/92 Page 2 Chairman Clark said that based upon tonight's conversations, it seems like the Commission agrees upon looking further into design guidelines which would include community involvement. B. Residential Areas - Not in Homeowners Associations With regard to architectural design review in residential areas, Mr. Woolard stated that there is design review for residential homes when it is within homeowners association area. Some materials were given to the Council when the Baldwin Stocker area was trying to form a homeowners association and Council adopted some guidelines for the formation of associations. The guidelines that were approved, were actually less restrictive than any of the existing associations, in terms of size of area, numbers of households, properties. Council was looking for 60% approval and they could not get that in the Baldwin Stocker area. People wanted to be able to regulate what their neighbor was doing, but they did not want the regulations to effect them. Subsequently, the regulations were changed for residential zones, increasing the setback requirements, building height, etc. to protect the homeowners. In response to questions from Commissioner Amato, Mr. Woolard indicated that there should be equal treatment throughout the City. The volume of projects could be overwhelming for the Planning Commission to review because the review would entail new homes as well as exterior remodeling. Mr. Miller stated that Dave Szany's wife, was heavily involved with that project. They would meet periodically for this purpose. The existing homeowners associations are creatures of a particular historical evolution, where there were existing homeowners associations formed, through the CC & Rs and when they expired, the homeowners carne to the City to create delegated design review. That historical difference, is enough to justify two systems within the City. Certain rights have been delegated to the homeowners associations but property owners have the appeal rights to the City which is set up by ordinances. Chairman Clark suggested a Committee consisting of a Planning Commissioner as well as area residents. He remarked that because construction activity has slowed down, many of the changes made in the Code are not evident. Mr. Woolard said that when this was researched by calling other cities, it was discovered that most of the cities that had architectural design review boards generally had a fair representation of people from design professions serving on the boards. He noted that there are several new homes that are being built which are being built under the new regulations and there are still some under construction under the old regulations. He indicated that possibly a separate commission would have to be formed to review the projects. In many cases, sale of homes are contingent on approval of plans and the additional review would increase the length of the review process. In working with design review projects for commercial and multiple - family projects, a lot of time is spent at the counter discussing the project with the developer. Commissioner Amato wondered if it is wise to spend staff time on review of projects and Commissioner Daggett indicated that he is usually on the other side of the counter and he appreciates the time that is spent with him during design review. Ms. Butler said that by having design review, the public should be aware that the process will take longer and it is difficult to find people willing to serve on the board. She is aware of a city that does have design review for individual homes and the staff time involved is significant. In the Village area, there is a problem with getting volunteers to serve on the board. She stated that to have a good project, the planners spend a lot of working with the developer. In reply to a question by Chairman Clark, Mr. Woolard said that even after the regulation changes in the residential zones, there will still be homes built that will be large. Mr. Miller said that the architectural review board can exercise discretion to preclude a development that meets all of the zoning code, if it is not compatible or harmonious. He reviewed a case in San Francisco, Arcadia City Planning Commission 6/9/92 Page 3 where a massive house was denied by the court, even though it complied with all of the zoning regulations but was not compatible or harmonious. Ms. Butler felt that before anything is implemented on architectural design review a lot of discussion is needed. For instance, when a project is proposed in an area with primarily ranch style homes, will other types of architecture be permitted. She suggested review of floor area ratio and lot coverage. Commissioner Huang thought that design guidelines are very important. Mr. Woolard said that some of the biggest complaints in the recent years has been from people who have applied for plan review by the associations, and felt that some of the decisions that are being made are arbitrary. Mr. Miller said that on occasions, staff has had to meet with the associations, because on occasions they were being arbitrary and started legislating and passing their own rules that counter the City Codes. Ms. Butler stated that zoning guidelines are very important because both the property owner and the architect are made aware of what can and can not be done. CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION DEADLINES Mr. Woolard discussed the maintenance of construction sites and said that the Chief Building Official has requested that the building inspectors police these sites for maintenance. There are some problems when projects are halted but building inspectors are able to take care of most of the on -going projects. The ones that are stalled, the City tires to resolve the problem by going through the architect or owner. Ms. Butler said that a survey showed that other cities do not require bonds on new construction because it would be difficult to determine the amount of the bond and who will clean the site. The Building and Code Enforcement divisions have been successful in getting property owners to clean up sites such as the one on Holly and Duarte. Mr. Miller said that on some occasions office conferences have been set up and on a couple of instances criminal charges have been filed but it is difficult to legislate financial success. CIVIC CENTER MASTER PLAN REVIEW Mr. Woolard explained that in 1985, the Council hired the firm of Wendel, Mounce to look into a new civic center and due to the high cost, they decided to put the project on hold. At this point there is no master plan but since then the City has acquired the Armory site. There are a number of different changes that have taken place that would lead to a different civic center plan than what was proposed in 1985. Discussion ensued about an auditorium in the City and its size, location, parking and usage. It was determined that until the School Board election, all plans would have to be placed on hold. Commissioner Amato remarked that if the School Board does not have the finances to maintain the auditorium, then they should place the auditorium on the library site, which would put it close to the high school and they would not have to maintain it but they could utilize it whenever there was a need. NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROCEDURES FOR CITY -OWNED PROPERTY Commissioner Daggett remarked that if a private property is a nuisance the City will clean up the site but what would happen if the property was City owned? Would the same rules apply? Arcadia City Planning Commission 6/9/92 Page 4 Mr. Woolard said that there are City owned property and Redevelopment Agency owned property. Any clean up of properties located in the redevelopment area would require Agency approval of funds to have either Public Works or an outside firm dean up the site. Other City owned properties are maintained by Public Works. The Commission discussed the aesthetic problems with water pumps, especially the one in front of the Town Center Building and how to screen them with landscaping from public view and still have them accessible to both the Fire and Water Departments. PAPER FLOW BETWEEN CITY DEPARTMENTS, COMMISSIONS & COUNCIL Commissioner Daggett asked how one could relay a good idea to the Planning Department or City Council? As a resident and a Commissioner, he would like to be more involved with the City. Chairman Clark said that if one of the Commissioners has an idea, he should contact the Planning Department and ask that item be placed on the agenda (under "Matters From Commission ") to be discussed at the next meeting. Mr. Miller said that any idea should be presented to the Commission and the Commission could decide whether to forward it to the Council. The Commissioners may contact other Commissioners to have an item placed on the agenda. In response to a question from Commissioner Huang, Mr. Miller said that the Commission can not act on an idea but can give direction to staff. The Commission should be careful not to violate the Brown Act. Mr. Woolard said that the Councilman Liaison could relay the message to Council. If there is anything that involves a lot of staff time, the direction should be from Council. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION None MATTERS FROM COUNCIL In a poll taken by Councilman Margett, it was felt that there is no advantage to having seven Commissioners and that the Planning Commission functions well with five members. With regard to the definition of quorum, Mr. Miller said that one of the revisions to the Charter which will come up in September, is that the vote of the majority of members present can pass a motion vs. the majority of the number of the Commission. Chairman Clark suggested having a separate Commission as the architectural review board instead of adding two more Commissioners to this body. Commissioner Amato agreed and said that he served on the Commission when the Commission consisted of seven members, and the meetings lasted longer and a lot of the remarks seemed to be repetitious. Mr. Woolard said that with an addition of another board, more staff members would be necessary. The Commission would not be able to handle architectural design review even with the addition of two Commissioners. Arcadia City Planning Commission 6/9/92 Page 5 MATTERS FROM STAFF Ms. Butler summarized the actions taken by the Modification Committee. ADJOURNMENT 9:00 p.m. I. Secretary, Arcadia Planning Commission Arcadia City Planning Commission 6/9/92 Page 6