Loading...
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