The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDecision LetterV, October 4, 2017 d Herand derSarkissian 520 E. Glenoaks Blvd, Unit D Glendale, CA 91207 SUBJECT: Major Administrative Modification — AM Major 17-15 C, t `y O� PROJECT ADDRESS: 218 Las Tunas Drive (formerly 2700 Gilpin Way) ArcadiaDear Herand derSarkissian: The Development Services Department has denied the request to construct a Development second driveway that would be a substandard circular driveway, as shown below Services in Figure 1, to accommodate a new single-family residential development at 218 Department Las Tunas Drive. The development received prior entitlements under the 2700 Gilpin Way address, but the project site has since been reassigned to a new address, 218 Las Tunas Drive. Attached are the site plans, and other supporting exhibits. Jason Kruckeberg Assistant City Figure 1: Site Plan Manager/ Development Services ,.,, 179.60 -- arc = —=�• " Director- -----�—._ m » to PL i 154.50 wC _ N us TUNAS NWIE i The comment period for the Notice of Pending Decision ended on September 25, 2017. Staff received one letter of opposition from a neighbor during the comment period. The neighbor's raised concerns regarding the project's impact on uniformity of development for circular driveways and the potential hazards the new circular driveway would introduce on Las Tunas Drive. Modifications 240 West Huntington In addition to requesting a second driveway, the driveway does not meet other Drive development standards as shown in Table 1, including the minimum distance Post Office Boxfrom the front property line and it exceeds the maximum hardsca a requirement Arcadia, CA 91066-666-6 021 p p y P q (626) 574-5415 of 40% within the required street -side yard setback area. Because the (626) 447-3309 Fax modification requests include reduction to the landscaping area, the entire www.ArcadiaCA.gov project is subject to a Major Administrative Modification. Table 1: Project Modifications Modifications Development Code Sections 9 feet inside edge instead of the 9103.07.050(H)(4) required 25-feet. Exceeds 40% maximum hardscape 9103.07.050(G)(4)(d), and in front and street side setbacks. 9103.09.040 B 1 b Use of turf block for driveway paving 9103.07.050(G)(1) material instead of cement concrete. Use turf block to meet both 9103.07.050(G)(1), landscape, and driveway 9103.07.050(G)(4)(d), and minimum. 9103.09.040 B 1 b The project site is a reverse corner lot located within the zone R-1 (10,000) that had one driveway located on Las Tunas Drive at the rear (east) of the site. The subject lot is approximately 12,166 square feet. Its dimension of approximately 68 feet wide by 179.5 feet in length with a 164.5 frontage on Las Tunas Drive exceeds that of the required length by almost 80% making up for a 10% shortfall in minimum lot width. A new 5,065 square -foot two-story house is currently under construction, which includes a 23 -foot wide standard driveway off of Las Tunas Drive. To ensure that circular driveways are designed properly and retain the intended shape, the required circular driveway minimum setback is 25 feet measured to the inside edge, and the application requests a significant reduction to nine feet. In addition, the minimum hardscape along the street side yard area is 40%, which the project exceeds by 20 square feet. Findings Pursuant to Development Code Section 9107.05.050, a Major Administrative Modification may be approved if at least one of the three required findings can be made: Secure an appropriate improvement of a lot 2. Prevent an unreasonable hardship 3. Promote uniformity of development Based on the facts presented by the applicant, and review and analysis by staff of the modification requests, none of the findings can be made for the proposed driveway, as stated below. Secure an appropriate improvement of a lot The proposed substandard circular driveway would not secure an appropriate improvement to the lot because it would be situated too close to the property line at 9'-0" instead of 25'-0" as required per Code and exceed the maximum hardscape of 40% along the required street -side yard setback area. The City Engineer also determined that the proposed request creates an unsafe improvement to the site since the addition of the another driveway would impede on traffic safety and left turn restrictions. Therefore, staff determined that the design and location of the proposed driveway is not an appropriate to the site or to the existing traffic patterns along Las Tunas Drive. 2. Prevent an unreasonable hardship The Applicant stated that the additional driveway is necessary to maneuver their vehicles out of the site in a forward motion. The applicant's further justification for the circular driveway includes safety and convenient of vehicular ingress and egress to the property, and to garage that is located off of Las Tunas Drive. The applicant further stated that the circular driveway is "inbound" only and therefore capable of minimizing traffic safety impacts. Since the City has no ability to control, monitor, and therefore ensure, inbound/outbound-only driveway access, staff cannot support the proposed project. Staff cannot support the modifications to accommodate a new substandard circular driveway since there are safety concerns with the location of the proposed circular driveway, the substandard configuration is not consistent with the other circular driveways along Las Tunas Drive, and the westerly driveway approach creates a traffic safety issue. The property owners also designed their house and site to have the garage for the new residence off of Las Tunas Drive rather than Gilpin Way. For these reasons, there is no hardship to warrant a substandard circular driveway. 3. Promote uniformity of development The Applicant compared his request to other residential properties that had a circular driveway, including commercial properties such as gas stations and drive-thru restaurants, and how he felt they were similar to the proposed driveway. Staff analyzed these residential addresses; however, none of those driveways were comparable to the applicant's overall proposal since they were not located as close to the front property line. It was unreasonable to compare a residential driveway to a driveway on a commercial zoned property since they have different development standards and requirements. Furthermore, none of those driveways required a modification as they were all in compliance with the code at the time they were approved. The application is the first modification request for a circular driveway in a residential zone since the Development Code was updated in 2016. Development Code Section 9107.01.040(B)(2) (Burden of Proof and Precedence) of the Development Code specifies, "The granting of a prior permit either on the subject property or any other property within the City does not create a precedent and is not justification for the granting of a new permit under current review." In addition, the City Engineer's decision not to approve a curb cut permit for the circular driveway is due to the location of the raised center median directly across the property on Las Tunas Drive, and the addition of the another driveway would impede on traffic safety and left turn restrictions. Approval of a substandard circular driveway on Las Tunas Drive for the property would actually change the uniformity of the development pattern found on other residential properties with a circular driveway, therefore, the finding cannot be made. Environmental Analysis The proposed project qualifies as Class 5 Categorical Exemption for an accessory structure and a minor alteration in land use limitations from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines. There is a ten (10) day appeal period for this application. The appeal period ends on Monday, October 16, 2017 at 5:30 p.m. Please note that City Hall will be closed on Friday, October 13, 2017. To file an appeal, a completed Appeal Application form must be submitted to the Community Development Division along with a $600.00 appeal filing fee. You may visit the City's website at www.ArcadiaCA.gov/noticesanddecisions to view this letter. If you have any questions regarding the above approval after October 10, 2017, please contact Vanessa Quiroz, Assistant Planner at (626) 574-5422 or by email at VQuiroz@ArcadiaCA.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Communi Development Division/Planning Services ry n He an s'`' Lisa L �' lores Con Planner Planning/Community Development Administrator c: Mr. and Mrs. Liang, Property Owners Chih-Hung Hsia ALL GRADES TAKEN FROM SURVEY 3650 S.F. TOTAL SIDEYARD AREA BY TRI -TECH ENGINEERING 1117 S.F. PAVED 30% -. ASSOCIATES, 883 S.F. TURF BLOCK 24% DENIED EX]bT HOUSE _ I -JOB # 150315, DATED 3 / 18 115 2533 S.F. LANDSCAPED 69% _ - -- _ FRONT SETBACKS OF THE NEXT TWO RESIDENCES y EXISTING WU IIT, OCT O 4 201.71 FENCETOREMNN I EXIST. GALA FENCE j (Bl'B9E) RANOOMBELGIPN - - WALL TOftEMNN (35f 1 feG E� planning Servii es PAVERS BY REMOVE EXIST. CMU CORONADO STONE FENCE WALL _ COMPANY-12'X1B- 6'L-HIGHFENCE8 CCHNEROF 'r o,A City of Arca I a AND R'XIW GATE.SWILAATO EXRNEROFTING HOUSE (359 e) NEW FENCE WALL 79.50 / G-. (W' (3 6) n aN. da i ye.tl p IaIM a.. nn .rt _/ d EXISTING TREES _.TO NR—CAN TREE w AI MIN ppa'mi1�1 p 1�. - \ LElpypB , Y 11 a10 en-' I _ (360.41) V/ 4(36030) 1 -\ EXISTING CMU FENCE TO REAPJN III---111AAAllL..n . -- y I ..�• rsnWlarvino I GARAGE IWILIAMSER TREE TO NOWAIN TREE TO fiL%SAIN _- \ VIM t6'3'i26 J } ,;-T HIGH FENCE& a"R 16 �1� A+o GATESIWLARTO �� x f J �'•'� an __, .... rcT359 Z_15) A JERPGE FRONT SET34Crc d LANDSCAPING \ j tIP / END OF EXISTING SIDEWALK '1 w+oscAPLNG , _ EXISTING SIDEwALKTo REMNN CLEAR L L ." L L. _.. �. �v ��(� RECEIVED SRHT LINE � CLEM BIGHTLwf 16450' IANOSCAPINO (B6'6CF� LANDSCAPING DRIVEWAY (49993) / j /.' Ili LANDSCAPING - _ TC(33B9S) - EXISTING TSB MNLBO%SEE ❑ - -... AUG 2 4 2017 — _ :.�^. , W w WORK IN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYB RIGHTO TC(35865) u u TC(]59.30) _.-_ .' a `� SEPARATE PERM gN DRIVEWPOFGIRB `� PERGTY OF PRCMIP 35892 �m mm ?lPE �- C3%.]q 19614J2•TC(359.D7! - -- &N •-- --- Planning Services STANDARDS SITE PLAN LAS TUNAS DRIVE N — SCALE: 118"= P-0" wa. �alw wNEwncwwm scoxc.Euxroas+aX,oe..N — txtcHaA:EA --- uwscrewo \ .,.��w.AEIWE _ TYPICAL CURB 9.Ir a, TYPICAL PILASTER City of Arcadia FENCE BY SEPARATE PERMIT A-1 G 9iswEw Snonrowicxl,¢ -- - nESlrcxEewwdnvuaaxoa f / / / _-__\ - -fIS BiVNEWCMW T4 6iO:E VExEExiO%MiM I¢91OExtE- _... Ep - dNGE MNI.�X9PL4Y,PY. M,W -- . \ pa: MaCKMNx,LGP o 4 e � - _ wmnauaeum w�a. i•X?axcvE - :acR ewacawxoow 1=3w.ai'uaoexce ro , e 71 N L eo a a o e o e o c e oe n4 I - SCALE: at TYRPILASTER i mEI+B- aI MAILBOXDETAIL u• IA.t MAILBOXPILASTER PLAN (s nE-t G- n-. TYP. FENCE&GATE LL•IAiION urz'= e He and derfaerkissian aurae bdwNWItKN@=mFeRO nw RESIDENCE for MR. & MRS. LIANG 1..APW.TMC1'<9 ueVAXa JANETTE LIANG GOKIN INVESTMENTS INC SITE PLAN & SITE DETAILS �E BME A-1_