Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem No. 1_MP 14-14_2236 Hollis LaneDATE: September 8, 2015 TO: Honorable Chairman and Planning Commission FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Tim Schwehr, Management Analyst SUBJECT: CONTINUANCE OF MODIFICATION APPLICATION NO. MP 14-14 AND SINGLE-FAMILY ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. SFADR 14- 95 WITH A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) FOR A NEW 2,525 SQUARE- FOOT, TWO-STORY RESIDENCE WITH REDUCED FRONT AND REAR SETBACKS AT 2236 HOLLIS LANE Recommendation: Denial SUMMARY The applicant, Mr. Marvin Fong, Project Designer, is requesting approval of the architectural design review, and front and rear setback Modifications for a new 2,525 square-foot, two-story, Craftsman style residence at 2236 Hollis Lane. Construction of one, single-family residence and the Modifications are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). It is recommended that the Planning Commission deny the proposed project. BACKGROUND The subject property is a 7,569 square-foot lot, zoned R-1 with a minimum lot size of 7,500 SF and currently improved with a one-story, 624 square foot residence. The property is one of seven lots on Hollis Lane, which is a 25-foot wide private road off of Longden Avenue, and is a one-sided cul-de-sac. Hollis Lane is a private street with a reciprocal driveway easement across the westerly 25 feet of these properties. Six of the properties, including the subject lot, are developed with small, single-story residences. The property at 2224 Hollis Lane is a two-story, 926 square-foot residence. All seven of the houses on this private street have substandard (i.e., less than the current 25-foot requirement) rear yard setbacks ranging from 5’-0” to 15’-0”. At its regular July 14, 2015 meeting, Modification Application No. MP 14-14 and Single- Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 14-95 was presented before the Planning Commission for a new 2,525 square-foot, two-story Craftsman style residence with the following three Zoning Modifications requested for this project: MP 14-14 & SFADR 14-95 2236 Hollis Lane September 8, 2015 Page 2 of 7 A. A 10’-4” rear yard setback for an attached trellis, and a 15’-0” rear yard setback for the first-floor living area in lieu of 25’-0” required; B. A 30’-6” second-story rear yard setback in lieu of 35’-0” required; and C. A 39’-2” front yard setback for a covered porch in lieu of 47’-11” required, based on the average front yard setback of the two immediate neighbors on this street. After hearing public testimony, which included significant opposition to the project from the surrounding neighborhood, the Commission voted 3-1 with one Commissioner position vacant at the time, to continue the item to the August 11, 2015, meeting to allow the applicant and neighbors to meet and discuss the proposed design and Zoning Modifications and evaluate alternatives. The Planning Commission wanted the applicant to explore a compromise with the surrounding neighborhood prior to making a decision. At the August 11, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting, the applicant requested a continuance to allow the opportunity for further discussion with the surrounding neighborhood. The Planning Commission also took testimony from several residents in continued opposition to this project. The Planning Commission granted a continuance of this item to the September 8, 2015 meeting. At the August 11, 2015 meeting, the Planning Commission also asked staff to provide additional background information and analysis of the site and surrounding neighborhood, provided below: What are the existing setbacks of the other homes on Hollis Lane? The existing front and rear yard setbacks for each home on Hollis Lane is shown on page A-02 of the architectural plans. The front yard setbacks range from 46’-10” to 59’- 8”, and the rear yard setbacks range from 10’-0” to 16’-0”. The side yard setbacks are approximated at between 5’-0” and 10’-0” for each house depending on the individual floor plan. What are the lot coverages of the other homes on Hollis Lane? The lot coverages on this block are estimated to range between 13% and 25% based on LA County Assessor’s data for house and lot sizes, and staff estimates of the areas of porches and garages (which are not listed in the Assessor’s data or in city permit records). Excluding the private street from the lot coverage calculation, the lot coverages range from approximately 17% to 33%. Would the residence comply with the 30-degree plane if applied from the east- side of the easement? No, the front porch and second-story would encroach through the 30-degree plane as approximated below. MP 14-14 & SFADR 14-95 2236 Hollis Lane September 8, 2015 Page 3 of 7 What is the development history of Hollis Lane? The City’s permit records do not include a specific record of the initial development of Hollis Lane, but it appears that Hollis Lane was first developed in 1949 as a single property (530 E. Longden Avenue). The property was later subdivided into seven separate lots with one residence each. According to the evaluation for the Certificate of Demolition process that is required for homes that are older than 50 years of age, the Architectural Historian determined that the house at 2236 Hollis Lane was constructed in 1949 and is one of the many housing tracts developed in Arcadia during the boom construction period after World War II. Hollis Lane was created by the seven (7) home owners of the street using the frontage of their properties to create a community lane, which is the private street today. The homes constructed on the sites remain more-or- less unchanged from their original construction, with the exception of the adjacent property to the north at 2230 Hollis Lane, which constructed a 674 square-foot, one- story addition and a 400 square-foot garage in 2012. What are the rear yard setbacks of the Lenta Lane and Fifth Avenue residences adjacent to the Hollis Lane properties? The Lenta Lane residences abutting the backyard of the seven Hollis Lane properties have rear setbacks that range from approximately 10’-0” to 20’-0”. The setback of the property at 2231 Lenta Lane, which abuts the rear lot line of the subject property, has a rear yard setback of approximately 10’-0”. The Fifth Avenue residences that abut the west-side of Hollis Lane have rear yard setbacks of approximately 30’-0” to 35’-0”. CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED DESIGN At the July 14, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting, the Planning Commission directed the applicant to meet with the surrounding neighbors to discuss the proposed project and attempt to come to a compromise on the design which all could agree to. The MP 14-14 & SFADR 14-95 2236 Hollis Lane September 8, 2015 Page 4 of 7 applicant organized a meeting with the neighbors on August 5, 2015. At this meeting, the applicant and neighbors were unable to reach a compromise on a revised project. The applicant has chosen to proceed with the original design proposal for the residence with one minor change to reduce the depth of the front porch by 12-inches, thereby reducing the requested front porch Modification by 12-inches to 40’-2” in lieu of 47’-11” required. An additional 16-foot tall California Oak Tree has also been added to the proposed front yard landscaping as a response to privacy concerns raised by the adjacent westerly neighbors. The revised plans have also been corrected to show Hollis Lane as 25’-0” in width instead of 20’-0” as was incorrectly shown on the original design plans; this error was pointed out to the Planning Commission by staff at the July 14, 2015 meeting. This correction to the width of Hollis Lane does not alter the front yard setback dimension, which is taken from the easterly property line and was correct on the original plans. Attachment No. 1 shows the revised architectural plans with these changes. A letter from the owner of the subject property, Mr. Johnney Zhang, was submitted on August 31, 2015 and explains the rationale for proceeding with the original design plans with only minor changes to the front porch and landscaping (Attachment no. 2). Mr. Zhang indicates in this letter that as an additional privacy mitigation measure he is willing to plant new cypress hedge trees on any of the neighboring properties per the property owner’s request. Mr. Zhang also indicates that he will continue to reach out to the surrounding neighbors prior to the September 8, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting, and will speak at the hearing to update the Planning Commission on the status of these discussions. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENTS Two additional public comments have been submitted since the original continuance from the July 14, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting. The first public comment is a petition letter signed by 52 neighbors of the subject property submitted August 10, 2015. The petition letter states opposition to the design and Modification requests. The petition also states the proposed project may be in violation of several additional municipal code sections, as cited in the letter. Staff has reviewed these code sections and determined that the proposal is not in violation of them. Arcadia Municipal Code Sec. 9113.1 is from the City’s subdivision regulations and only applies to the minimum size requirements for the subdivision of new property, and not to development standards for single-family residential properties. As such, the lot coverage and front setback requirements are to include the easement area, and the proposed project complies with the 35% maximum lot coverage requirement, and the front yard setback/30-degree angle requirement as taken from the west property line. An argument can be made that for massing and design reasons, the easement area should be excluded when applying setbacks and lot coverage development standards. If applied to the subject property, the building footprint of the proposed design would need to be reduced by 316 square feet to comply with the maximum 35% lot coverage allowed for two-story residences; the front setback of the porch and house would need to setback an additional 2’-1” in order to meet the minimum 25’-0” setback from the MP 14-14 & SFADR 14-95 2236 Hollis Lane September 8, 2015 Page 5 of 7 edge of the easement where the street begins; and the second-story would need to be eliminated from the design to comply with the 30-degree angle requirement, or a rear yard Modification would need to be granted for the second-story. The second public comment was submitted by Ms. Sherilee Pocino, the resident and property owner of 2300 S. Fifth Avenue. Ms. Pocino’s comments include floor plans for an alternative design for the subject property that would comply with the front yard setback requirement and the second-story rear yard setback requirement. To accomplish this, the total number of bedrooms is reduced from four to three; the size of the house is reduced from 2,525 square-feet to 2,185 square-feet; the front porch is significantly smaller in size; and the lot coverage is reduced from 30.5% to 25.8%. The plan also notes that the revised design would have a 34% lot coverage if the 25’ street easement is excluded from the total lot area. No elevations are provided of the alternative design. Ms. Pocino’s public comment also includes written suggestions to reduce the plate heights of the proposed residence; eliminate the second-story gabled roofs; and remove and replace the existing Carrotwood tree that is within the rear yard area with a healthier and more esthetically pleasing tree. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS Section 9292.1.4 of the Arcadia Municipal Code states that the purpose of the Modification procedures is for the following: 1. Secure an appropriate improvement of a lot; 2. Prevent an unreasonable hardship; or 3. Promote uniformity of development. Based on the direction of the Planning Commission to seek a compromise, it is staff’s opinion that more significant revisions to the original design are needed in order for the Planning Commission to make one of the three findings required to approve a Zoning Modification. The applicant’s proposal to reduce the front porch depth by 12-inches, and add new landscaping to the front yard of the subject property and any neighboring properties that request it, does not go far enough towards a reasonable compromise between the applicant and the property owners and residents of the surrounding neighborhood. Revising the porch to comply with the front yard setback requirement, and revising the second-story to comply with the rear yard setback requirement, would more substantially address the issues raised by the neighborhood and would be more consistent with the direction given by the Planning Commission at their July 14, 2015 meeting to find a common middle-ground for this project. Based on this analysis, staff recommends the Planning Commission find that the project does not meet any of the purposes for a Modification, and deny the proposed applications. MP 14-14 & SFADR 14-95 2236 Hollis Lane September 8, 2015 Page 6 of 7 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This project involves new construction of one, single-family residence with minor alterations to land use limitations, and qualifies for a Categorical Exemption per the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines. PUBLIC NOTICE Public hearing notices for this item were mailed to the owners of those properties that are located within 100 feet of the subject property on July 2, 2015. Because this item was continued twice to a date certain, no additional public notice is required. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission deny Modification No. MP 14-14 and Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 14-95, based on a finding that the project does not meet any of the purposes for a Modification. If the Planning Commission intends to approve these applications, staff recommends that the project be subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, health code compliance, emergency equipment, environmental regulation compliance, and parking and site design shall be complied with by the property owner/applicant to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director, or their respective designees. 2. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officials, officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or conditional approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and/or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or conditional approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and/or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officials, officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 3. Approval of MP 14-14 and SFADR 14-95 shall not be of effect unless on or before 30 calendar days after Planning Commission approval of the applications, the property owner and applicant have executed and filed with the Community Development Administrator or designee an Acceptance Form MP 14-14 & SFADR 14-95 2236 Hollis Lane September 8, 2015 Page 7 of 7 available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve the project, the Commission should approve a motion to approve Modification No. MP 14-14 and Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 14-95 and determine that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), subject to the conditions set forth above, or as modified by the Commission, based on the findings that the Modifications will secure an appropriate improvement of a lot, will prevent an unreasonable hardship, or will promote uniformity of development, and that the proposed design is consistent with the City’s Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this project, the Commission should approve a motion to deny Modification Application No. MP 14-14 and Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 14-95, based on the evidence presented, and state the finding(s) that the proposal does not satisfy with reasons based on the record. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the September 8, 2015 hearing, please contact Management Analyst, Tim Schwehr at (626) 574-5409, or Tschwehr@ArcadiaCA.gov. Attachments: Attachment 1: Revised Architectural Plans Attachment 2: Original Architectural Plans, July 14, 2015 Meeting Attachment 3: Letter to PC from Property Owner Mr. Zhang, dated August 31, 2015 Attachment 4: Additional Public Comments Attachment 5: August 11, 2015 PC Meeting Minutes & Staff Report Attachment 6: July 14, 2015 PC Meeting Minutes, Staff Report, & Letters of Opposition Attachment No. 1 Attachment No.1 Revised Architectural Plans Attachment No. 2 Attachment No.2 Original Architectural Plans reviewed at the July 14, 2015 PC Meeting Attachment No. 3 Attachment No.3 Letter to PC from Subject Property Owner Mr. Zhang, dated August 31, 2015 August 31, 2015 Honorable Chairman and Planning Commission City of Arcadia 240 West Hun@ngton Drive Arcadia, CA 91066 Re: 2236 Hollis Lane, MP 14-14 Dear Honorable Chairman and Planning Commission: We are the owner/developers of 2236 Hollis Lane in Arcadia. We have proposed a beau@ful, craNsman style home for the lot, and have requested three en@tlement modifica@ons to accommodate this design. We understand that a neighbor of the property has submiQed a sample of a poten@al site footprint that would not require the requested three en@tlement modifica@ons, and based on this evidence, you advised the Planning Staff to modify its prior recommenda@on suppor@ng our requests. While we are disappointed that many of the neighbors on Hollis Lane have misconstrued what we are trying to do for the neighborhood, we understand the confusion and wish to clarify why we are reques@ng three modifica@ons from the code. A HOUSE CAN BE BUILT WITHOUT ANY MODIFICATIONS It is completely true that we can build a home at 2236 Hollis Lane without any modifica@ons. We have acknowledged this fact, and the original staff report als acknowledged this fact. Under a by-right scenario, we can develop a buildout of 2,490 s.f., as compared to our proposed design of 2,525 s.f., subject only to Design Review. Thus, the site has approximately 2,500 s.f. of development capacity, whether or not you approve our design. Our modifica@on requests have been made to accommodate a family-friendly, high quality design that will improve the neighborhood, and not to increase square footage or overbuild the neighborhood. Each of our requests is detailed below. Front Setback Modifica@on Hollis Residence Arcadia LLC 626-507-7777 Info@Zhanggroup.com 2705 S Diamond Bar Blvd,Suite 398,Diamond Bar,CA 91765 We have requested a front setback modifica@on to accommodate a porch on the proposed craNsman design home. This setback modifica@on is proposed only to improve the design and massing of the front of the home, and does not provide any livable space and does not increase the size of the home or provide addi@onal square footage. Instead, the front setback modifica@on allows for addi@onal visual depth between the front of the home and the porch, making the front of the home actually appear further back than it is. This modifica@on actually increases the construc@on costs of the home, but was added because the depth will create a visually appealing context for the neighborhood. Second Story Rear Setback Modifica@on A second story rear setback modifica@on has also been requested. Under the current code, and based on the massing and ar@cula@on of the current design, this setback is required to provide a four-bedroom home. This fact is acknowledged in the original staff report; without a modifica@on, only a three-bedroom home can be built using this design. Building a three-bedroom home with the quality design features we propose is economically impossible. Thus, we have requested this modifica@on. While a home can be built without this setback, it will unlikely be a home of the quality design we have proposed based on our aQempts to improve overall massing and ar@cula@on. We are aware, however, that any second story design can result in privacy concerns. To that end, we are preserving the exis@ng Carrotwood tree on the rear of the property, and have added addi@onal trees to the rear property line. We are also happy to provide plan@ngs of Cypress trees, as requested, to any neighbor who believes that the second story may create a sightline into their property. Rear Setback Modifica@on We have requested the rear setback modifica@on to accommodate square footage, consistent with almost every home in the neighborhood. This request demonstrates the inconsistency in the challenges to this project; almost every home in this neighborhood either has grandfathered setbacks or benefits from modifica@ons. We are unclear as to wh our modifica@on requests are any different, or should be any different, than any oth neighbor’s request. We are aQemp@ng to bring a beau@fully-designed home to the neighborhood that acknowledges how special this area is, and hope you will support our efforts to do so. We look forward to discussing the project with you on Tuesday, September 8, and hope to have a fruidul conversa@on. In the mean@me, we have been reaching out to neighbors to explain what we are hoping to do for the neighborhood and will update you on those conversa@ons at Tuesday’s hearing. Sincerely yours, Johnney Zhang C.E.O Attachment No. 4 Attachment No.4 Additional Public Comments Attachment No. 5 Attachment No.5 August 11, 2015 PC Meeting Minutes & Staff Report DATE: August 11, 2015 TO: Honorable Chairman and Planning Commission FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Tim Schwehr, Management Analyst SUBJECT: CONTINUANCE OF MODIFICATION APPLICATION NO. MP 14-14 AND SINGLE-FAMILY ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. SFADR 14- 95 WITH A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) FOR A NEW 2,525 SQUARE- FOOT, TWO-STORY, CRAFTSMAN-STYLE RESIDENCE WITH REDUCED FRONT AND REAR SETBACKS AT 2236 HOLLIS LANE – THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE JULY 14, 2015, MEETING Recommendation: Continue the public hearing to the September 8, 2015, Planning Commission meeting At its regular July 14, 2015, meeting, a public hearing was held for Modification Application No. MP 14-14 and Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 14-95 for a new 2,525 square-foot, two-story, Craftsman-style residence with requests for reduced front and rear setbacks – the staff report for the July 14, 2015, meeting is attached. After hearing public testimony, which included opposition by several neighbors, the Planning Commission voted 3-1 to continue the item to the August 11, 2015, meeting to allow time for the applicant and neighbors to meet to discuss the proposed project, and see if an agreement could be reached among the parties. On Wednesday, August 5, 2015, the applicant submitted the attached letter to request a further continuance. The letter states that the applicant met with the neighbors to discuss the project, and that additional time is needed to allow the applicant and owner to consider what changes will be made to the proposal. A continuance of the public hearing is subject to approval by the Planning Commission. It is recommended that the Planning Commission grant a further continuance to the September 8, 2015, meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission should reopen the public hearing, receive any public testimony, and approve a motion to continue the hearing to the September 8, 2015, meeting. Attachments Attachment No. 6 Attachment No.6 July 14, 2015 PC Meeting Minutes, Staff Report, & Letters of Opposition DATE: July 14, 2015 TO: Honorable Chairman and Planning Commission FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Tim Schwehr, Associate Planner SUBJECT: MODIFICATION APPLICATION NO. MP 14-14 AND SINGLE-FAMILY ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. SFADR 14-95 WITH A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) FOR A NEW 2,525 SQUARE- FOOT, TWO-STORY RESIDENCE WITH REDUCED FRONT AND REAR SETBACKS AT 2236 HOLLIS LANE Recommendation: Conditional Approval SUMMARY The applicant, Mr. Marvin Fong, Project Designer, is requesting approval of the architectural design review, and front and rear setback Modifications for a new 2,525 square-foot, two-story, single-family residence at 2236 Hollis Lane. Construction of one, single-family residence and the Modifications are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve the proposed project, subject to the conditions listed in this staff report. BACKGROUND The subject property is a 7,569 square- foot lot, zoned R-1-7,500, and currently improved with a one-story, 624 square- foot residence. The property is one of seven lots on Hollis Lane, which is a 20- foot wide private road off of Longden Avenue, and is a one-sided cul-de-sac – see Attachment No. 1 for an aerial photo and zoning information. Hollis Lane is an easement across the westerly 20 feet of these properties. Six of the properties, including the subject lot, are developed with small, single-story residences. The property at 2224 Hollis Lane is a two-story, 926 square-foot residence. All seven of the houses on this private street have substandard (i.e., less than the current 25-foot requirement) rear yard setbacks ranging from 5’-0” to 15’-0”. MP 14-14 & SFADR 14-95 2236 Hollis Lane July 14, 2015 Page 2 of 7 In 2012, the adjacent property to the north at 2230 Hollis Lane constructed a 674 square-foot, one-story addition, and a 400 square-foot, attached, two-car garage to the existing 814 square-foot residence (SFADR 11-47). This addition included an Administrative Modification to align the new garage and addition with the existing substandard 10’-0” rear yard setback and the substandard 5’-0” southerly side yard setback (MA 11-30). No other recent additions or alterations have been made to the other homes on this private street. The owner of the subject property, Mr. Johnny Zhang, also owns the adjacent property to the south at 2240 Hollis Lane, and has stated that he would like to redevelop that property with a new two-story residence in the near future. A Certificate of Demolition was approved on February 23, 2015, for the existing 624 square-foot residence. The evaluation by an Architectural Historian found that the existing residence has no historical significance because it is common in type and style. The Historian’s report is included as Attachment No. 3. PROPOSAL The applicant is proposing a new 2,525 square-foot, two-story, Craftsman-style single- family residence, with an attached 441 square-foot, two-car garage, a 173 square-foot, front porch, and a 148 square-foot, attached rear yard trellis. A rendering of the front of the proposed house is shown below, and the architectural plans are included as Attachment No. 2. The applicant is requesting approval of the following three Zoning Modifications for this project: A. A 10’-4” rear yard setback for an attached trellis, and a 15’-0” rear yard setback for the first-floor living area in lieu of 25’-0” required; MP 14-14 & SFADR 14-95 2236 Hollis Lane July 14, 2015 Page 3 of 7 B. A 30’-6” second-story rear yard setback in lieu of 35’-0” required; and C. A 39’-2” front yard setback for a covered porch in lieu of 47’-11” required, based on the average front yard setback of the two immediate neighbors on this street. ANALYSIS The proposed residence includes four bedrooms, three and a half bathrooms, a family room, a living room/dining room, a kitchen, a laundry room, and an attached two-car garage. The 2,525 square-feet of livable area is relatively small for a 7,569 square-foot lot compared to current development trends. However, because 1,500 square feet of the lot is the 20-foot wide private street, the net usable lot area is 6,069 square feet. The front yard setback requirement for the subject property is 47’-11” from the west property line (i.e., 27’-11” from the private street) based on the average front yard setbacks of the two adjacent neighbors on this street. All seven of the properties have front yard setbacks that exceed the 25-foot minimum when measured from the actual property line as shown on sheet A-02 of the attached architectural plans. The small lot size and large front yard setback requirement results in a small buildable area for this lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting the three Modifications to allow portions of the residence, front porch, and rear trellis to encroach into the first-story front setback, and first and second-story rear yard setbacks. Modification Request A  A 10’-4” rear yard setback for an attached trellis, and a 15’-0” rear yard setback for the first-floor living area in lieu of 25’-0” required. This Modification request is consistent with the substandard, first-floor, rear yard setbacks of the other residences on this private street, which range from 5’-0” to 15’-0”. Approval of this Modification provides a reasonable building area while allowing the ground floor livable area to comply with the front yard setback requirement and side yard setback requirements. Approval of this Modification will secure an appropriate improvement of the lot, prevent an unreasonable hardship, and promote uniformity of development. Modification Request B  A 30’-6” second-story rear yard setback in lieu of 35’-0” required. This Modification request will allow the residence to have three upstairs bedrooms consistent with contemporary standards, and also helps to provide adequate articulation and modulation of the building mass. The required second-floor setbacks of 47’-11” at the front, 35’-0” to the rear, and 15’-0” on the sides, results in a narrow 45’ by 17’ second floor buildable area. Allowing the second-story to encroach into the rear yard setback enables the residence to comply with the front and side yard setback requirements. Privacy impacts to the adjacent residence to the rear will be minimal due to the existence of a large 30-foot tall Carrotwood Tree at the northeast corner of the MP 14-14 & SFADR 14-95 2236 Hollis Lane July 14, 2015 Page 4 of 7 subject property, and a 10-foot tall hedge on the adjacent property to the rear. As an additional mitigation measure, the applicant will plant a 20-foot tall California Oak Tree at the southeast corner of the lot. This tree will provide additional privacy screening and softening of the second-story mass. Approval of this Modification will secure an appropriate improvement of this lot, and prevent an unreasonable hardship. Modification Request C  A 39’-2” front yard setback for a covered porch in lieu of 47’-11” required, based on the average front yard setback of the two immediate neighbors on this street. The livable area of the residence will comply with the front setback requirements. This Modification is to allow an authentic-looking, Craftsman-style porch to be built at the front of the residence. The proposed porch will have a 19’-2” setback from the 20’-0” wide private street at its closest point, with the majority of the porch setback 22’-0” from the private street. As such, the house will have an adequate front yard area. The applicant will also plant a new 16-foot tall California Oak Tree at the northwest corner of the front yard that will provide a substantive landscape feature between the porch and the private street. A reduced front yard setback is appropriate because Hollis Lane is a cul-de-sac, and a tapering of the front setbacks towards the end of a cul-de-sac is an acceptable development pattern. Approval of this Modification will secure an appropriate improvement of this lot. Architectural Design Review Single-Family Architectural Design Review approval is also required for the subject proposal to ensure that the design is consistent with the City’s Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines. These applications are being reviewed by the Planning Commission under Arcadia Municipal Code Section 9252.2.11, which requires that Zoning Modifications for a new dwelling be subject to the approval of the Planning Commission, or the City Council upon appeal. The proposal is Craftsman in style based on the architectural features and materials that include shingle and batten siding on the exterior walls, an asphalt shingle roof, open rafter eaves, shallow gabled roofs, dark, warm colors, a large front porch with tapered columns, stone and wood accent materials, and brown, semi-divided window panes – see Attachment No. 2 for the Architectural Plans. The proposed floor plan is properly modulated and articulated to break up the building mass. The proposed design is consistent with the City’s Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines and compatible with the homes in the neighborhood – see Attachment No. 4 for photos of the surrounding properties. FINDINGS Section 9292.1.4 of the Arcadia Municipal Code states that the purpose of the Modification procedures is for the following: MP 14-14 & SFADR 14-95 2236 Hollis Lane July 14, 2015 Page 5 of 7 1. Secure an appropriate improvement of a lot; 2. Prevent an unreasonable hardship; or 3. Promote uniformity of development. As detailed in the analysis section of this report, each of the Modification requests will secure an appropriate improvement of a lot, prevent an unreasonable hardship, and/or promote uniformity of development. The architectural design of the building is consistent with the City’s Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines and with the surrounding neighborhood. It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Modification No. MP 14-14, and Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 14-95, subject to the conditions listed in this report. All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, health code compliance, emergency equipment, environmental regulation compliance, and parking and site design shall be complied with by the property owner/applicant to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director, or their respective designees. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This project involves new construction of one, single-family residence with minor alterations to land use limitations, and qualifies for a Categorical Exemption per the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines. Refer to Attachment No. 5 for the Preliminary Exemption Assessment. PUBLIC NOTICE Public hearing notices for this item were mailed to the owners of those properties that are located within 100 feet of the subject property on July 2, 2015. As of July 8, 2015, no comments were received in response to the public hearing notices. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Modification No. MP 14-14 and Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 14-95, with an exemption MP 14-14 & SFADR 14-95 2236 Hollis Lane July 14, 2015 Page 6 of 7 from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, health code compliance, emergency equipment, environmental regulation compliance, and parking and site design shall be complied with by the property owner/applicant to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director, or their respective designees. 2. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officials, officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or conditional approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and/or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or conditional approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and/or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officials, officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 3. Approval of MP 14-14 and SFADR 14-95 shall not be of effect unless on or before 30 calendar days after Planning Commission approval of the applications, the property owner and applicant have executed and filed with the Community Development Administrator or designee an Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve the project, the Commission should approve a motion to approve Modification No. MP 14-14 and Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 14-95 and determine that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), subject to the conditions set forth above, or as modified by the Commission, based on the findings that the Modifications will secure an appropriate improvement of a lot, will prevent an unreasonable hardship, or will promote uniformity of development, and that the proposed design is consistent with the City’s Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines. MP 14-14 & SFADR 14-95 2236 Hollis Lane July 14, 2015 Page 7 of 7 Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this project, the Commission should approve a motion to deny Modification Application No. MP 14-14 and Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 14-95, based on the evidence presented, and state the reasons why the project does not meet any of the purposes for Modifications, and/or is not consistent with the City’s Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the July 14, 2015 hearing, please contact Associate Planner, Tim Schwehr at (626) 574-5422, or TSchwehr@ArcadiaCA.gov. Approved: Attachment No. 1: Aerial Photo with Zoning Information Attachment No. 2: Architectural Plans Attachment No. 3: Architectural Historian’s Report Attachment No. 4: Photos of the Subject Property and Surrounding Properties Attachment No. 5: Preliminary Exemption Assessment Attachment No. 1 Attachment No.1 Aerial Photo with Zoning Information Overlays Selected parcel highlighted Parcel location within City of Arcadian/a n/a n/a n/a Property Owner(s): Architectural Design Overlay: Downtown Overlay: Special Height Overlay: Parking Overlay: Lot Area (sq ft): Year Built: Main Structure / Unit (sq. ft.): General Plan: R-1 (7,500) Number of Units: LDR Zoning: Property Characteristics 1949 624 0 2236 HOLLIS LN Johnny Zhang Site Address: This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. Report generated07-Jul-2015 Page 1 of 1 7,569 Attachment No. 2 Attachment No.2 Architectural Plans Attachment No. 3 Attachment No.3 Architectural Historian’s Report Attachment No. 4 Attachment No.4 Photos of Subject Property & Surrounding Properties SUBJECT PROPERTY ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE NORTH ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE WEST LOOKING NORTH FROM SUBJECT PROPERTY ALONG HOLLIS LANE EXISTING MATURE CARROTWOOD TREE AT REAR OF SUBJECT PROPERTY TO BE PRESERVED Attachment No. 5 Attachment No.5 Preliminary Exemption Assessment Preliminary Exemption Assessment\2010 FORM “A” CITY OF ARCADIA 240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT (Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption) 1. Name or description of project: MP 14-14 & SFADR 14-95 2. Project Location – Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15’ or 7 1/2’ topographical map identified by quadrangle name): 2236 Hollis Lane, between Longden Ave & Rodell Place 3. Entity or person undertaking project: A. B. Other (Private) (1) Name Marvin Fong (2) Address 1111 ½ Highland Oaks Dr. Arcadia, CA 91006 4. Staff Determination: The Lead Agency’s Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the Lead Agency's "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)" has concluded that this project does not require further environmental assessment because: a. The proposed action does not constitute a project under CEQA. b. The project is a Ministerial Project. c. The project is an Emergency Project. d. The project constitutes a feasibility or planning study. e. The project is categorically exempt. Applicable Exemption Class: 5 – Minor Alteration in Land Use Limitation f. The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption: g. The project is otherwise exempt on the following basis: h. The project involves another public agency which constitutes the Lead Agency. Name of Lead Agency: Date: 6/20/15 Staff: Tim Schwehr, Associate Planner