HomeMy WebLinkAbout1-14-92Planning Commission proceedings are tape recorded and on file in the office of the Planning Dept.
MINUTES
ARCADIA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday, January 14, 1992
The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, January 14, 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, Hedlund, Szany, Clark
ABSENT: None
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Daggett, 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
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Amato, seconded by Commissioner Szany to approve the Minutes of
December 10, 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
Secretary Silva Vergel
PUBLIC HEARING CUP 92-001 Consideration of a conditional use permit to operate a
400 S. Baldwin Ave. restaurant (Bonkers) with seating for approximately 40
(Santa Anita Fashion Park) persons.
Victor Sampson
The staff report was presented.
In response to a question from the Commission, staff said that the proposed restaurant is across from Ardella's
Pizza.
The public hearing was opened.
Victor Sampson, 10735 Des Moines Ave., Northridge, said that he is in agreement with all of the conditions
in the staff report. This will be a sit down restaurant and if somebody wants to purchase an item to go, they
will package it that way, otherwise, their customers will be dining at the restaurant.
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 was in favor of the proposed use.
Chairman Clark thought that this is a good move.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Amato to approve CUP 92 -001
subject to the conditions in the staff report.
ROLL CALL:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Amato, Daggett, Hedlund, Szany, Clark
None
Chairman Clark noted that there is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the resolution.
PUBLIC HEARING CUP 92 -002
5 W. Duarte Rd.
(Northwest corner of Duarte Rd.
and Santa Anita Ave.)
Gina S. Pilic
Consideration of conditional use permit to operate a
language center which will offer the following services:
a . One on one tutoring
b. Group lessons
c. Translation and interpretation services
The staff report was presented.
Staff stated that this would be a very low key use and would not generate much traffic. Staff is not aware of
any traffic problems at the site.
The public hearing was opened.
Gina Pilic, 246 W. 11th St., Claremont, said that they are in agreement with all of the conditions in the staff
report.
No one else spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Amato, by Commissioner Szany 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 Hedlund to approve CUP 92-002
subject to the conditions in the staff report.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
1/14/92
Page 2
ROLL CALL:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Amato, Daggett, Hedlund, Szany, Clark
None
Chairman Clark noted that there is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the resolution.
PUBLIC HEARING TM 51115
721 -727 Fairview
Bernard Hu
Consideration of a tentative map for a 24 -unit residential
condominium project.
The staff report was presented and the public hearing was opened.
Ayoub Sesar, 12 Corfu, Laguna Niguel, the architect for the project was present and remarked that they are
in agreement with all of the conditions in the staff report.
Siegfried Decoke, 731 Fairview, stated that he would prefer to see these units as condominiums. He
explained that the homeowner's association in a condominium would be able to maintain the property,
whereas, if the project was apartments, there would be greater possibility of lack of maintenance.
Staff explained that the Arcadia Municipal Code, does not differentiate between condominiums and
apartments. Both types of development have the same requirements. This procedure before the Commission,
is for the approval of a form of ownership.
No one else spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Amato, seconded by Commissioner Szany to close the public hearing.
The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Hedlund to approve TM 51115
subject to the conditions in the staff report.
ROLL CALL:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Amato, Daggett, Hedlund, Szany, Clark
None
Chairman Clark noted that there is a ten day appeal period.
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION None
TIME EXTENSION Consideration of a one -year time extension for TM 48792,
for an 8 -unit project at 125 -129 Fano Street.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
1/14/92
Page 3
The staff report was presented.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Amato to approve a six month time
extension for TM 48792, to July 10, 1992.
ROLL CALL:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Amato, Daggett, Hedlund, Szany, Clark
None
RESOLUTION 1478
A resolution granting CUP 91 -010, for the remodeling of the
front of the automotive repair garage at 125 W. Live Oak
Avenue, and the construction of a 3,956 sq. ft. retail building
at 124 Las Tunas Dr.
RESOLUTION 1479 A resolution granting CUP 91 -018, to operate a school for
Japanese students, offering consultation and seminars for
students returning to Japan at 1135 W. Huntington Drive.
RESOLUTION 1480 A resolution granting an appeal of the Santa Anita Oaks
Association's Architectural Review Board's denial of a
proposal for a new two -story single - family residence at 115
W. Sycamore Avenue.
RESOLUTION 1481 A resolution denying Application No. MP 91 -014, and
upholding a condition of approval to require a less imposing
front portico, imposed by the Architectural Review Board of
the Santa Anita Village Homeowner's Association for a new
3,400 sq. ft. two-story residence at 940 Coronado Drive.
Mr. Woolard read the titles of the resolutions.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Amato to adopt Resolutions 1478,
1479, 1480 and 1481 and to formally affirm the decisions of December 10, 1991 and the votes thereon.
ROLL CALL:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Amato, Daggett, Hedlund, Szany, Clark
None
Chairman Clark noted there is a five working day appeal period.
MATTERS FROM COUNCIL
Councilman Fasching expressed interest in having a joint meeting between the Council and the Commission to
discuss problems in the City. He asked staff what the size of the units would be in the 24 -unit condominium
project which was just approved by the Commission and was concerned with the design of the project and
Arcadia City Planning Commission
1/14/92
Page 4
asked staff to explain the architectural design review procedures. He was concerned that the proposed
project would stand out, especially since Fairview Avenue is comprised of older and conventional units.
Staff said that the tentative map that was before the Commission is only for the form of ownership. In this
procedure, the applicant is not required to provide the Commission with the design of the project or the size
of the units. Staff explained that during the architectural design review (ADR) procedure, the planner
reviews the plans and discusses the project with the Planning Director prior to approval. The Commission
will generally not see the design of the project, unless it requires modifications. In the ADR process, the
Planning Dept. determines the compatibility of the project with the surrounding areas. Specific guidelines
have been set forth for the ADR procedure, for the Planning Department to follow. These guidelines are
designed to be objective rather than subjective. Staff tries to discourage garrish developments but these
guidelines do not state that contemporary building are not permitted.
Commissioner Szany said that he would not want to stifle imagination and stated that several years ago he
met with Mary Young and the Planning Director regarding design guidelines.
MATTERS FROM COMMISSION
In response to a question from Chairman Clark, Mr. Miller stated that without statute, there is no rights to
view preservation in the U.S. or in California. The ARBs and HOAs have been given authority through
specific ordinance and resolutions of the City Council. None of those deal with the concept of view or its
preservation or maintenance. Furthermore, if the entire history was to be researched for all the associations,
there is no reference with regard to height limitations or restrictions, view preservation or maintenance;
therefore, there is no legal authority to deny a project based upon obstruction of view. It is simply a question
of legal authority to utilize the view concept. If the City and the ARBs are interested in view preservation
or maintenance, it is suggested that the resolutions be changed. The associations can promulgate what they
think are criteria and ask that they be put in the resolutions, which ultimately would have to be approved
by both the Commission and Council make that a part of their statute. This would probably require a vote of
the entire associations followed by approval of both the Commission and Council to give them authority. If
the ARB denies a second -story, due to view preservation, the property owner can claim that their property
rights has been taken without due process of law and just compensation because they are entitled to a second
story; thereby exposing the City to monetary damages. Since the beginning, the ARB has had to review
projects based on compatibility and harmony and if a second -story creates an incompatibility, is massive;
does not have the proper design; or the incompatible materials, then the request can be denied.
Chairman Clark said that the appellants had a petition with approximately one -third of the association's
signature in favor of view preservation.
Mr. Miller said that if the associations were interested in amending their resolutions to incorporate view
preservation, specific criteria would have to be adopted including line of sight, size, view factors and
findings.
Councilman Fasching stated that the Cooleys maintained a pretty good portion of the view, so they did not
completely obliterate the view. He felt that the Council is not interested in becoming involved with these
type of feuds because then nobody would be able to build a second -story, since there would always be someone
against it. It is hoped that neighbors will be able to work with each other when building second -story
additions and he thought that second -story homes and additions are gaining popularity and are back. He
felt that the ARB should be a mediator between the neighbors.
Mr. Miller remarked that in the Cooley's case, they made many changes and recognized the right to privacy,
which is not part of the Code. He said that he reviewed the Council's minutes from that meeting, and agreed
with Councilman Fasching regarding second -story dwellings. The Council determined that the addition was
compatible and harmonious. Councilman Harbicht was concerned that the ARB may feel that just because
Arcadia City Planning Commission
1/14/92
Page 5
there is an HOA, that somehow that gives them the prerogative to do whatever they want, which is not the
case. They are creatures of specific lines of authority and legally the City would be in a lot of trouble if that
was not followed.
MATTERS FROM STAFF None
ADJOURNMENT
8:15 p.m.
Secretary, Arcadia Planning Commission
Arcadia City Planning Commission
1/14/92
Page 6