Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3 - PC Minutes for 8-22-17, 9-12-17, and 9-26-17 ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Tuesday, August 22, 2017 Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the City’s Planning Services Office located at 240 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California, during normal business hours. CALL TO ORDER - Vice Chair Chan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Arcadia Council Chamber. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioners, Lewis, Thompson, and Chan ABSENT: Commissioner Lin It was moved by Commissioner Lewis, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to excuse Commissioner Lin from the meeting. Without objection the motion was approved. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS The Commission received one correspondence relating to Agenda Item 2 from the Appellant. PUBLIC COMMENTS (5 minute time limit per person) There were none. PUBLIC HEARING Vice Chairman Chan announced that the public hearings items listed on the Agenda will be presented out of order. The change is reflected below. 3. Resolution No. 2001 – Approving Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 17-03 (76053) and Multiple Family Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 17-06 with a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for an eight unit residential condominium development at 141-145 Alice Street Applicant: Mr. Robert Tong Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2001 Planning/Community Development Administrator, Lisa Flores introduced the item and turned it over to Assistant Planner, Vanessa Quiroz who presented the staff report. Vice Chair Chan opened the Public Hearing and asked if the applicant would like to speak on this item. Applicant Mr. Robert Tong responded. Vice Chair Chan asked if anyone else would like to speak in favor of the item. No one responded. Vice Chair Chan asked if there was anyone who would like to speak in opposition of the item. 2 8-22-17 No one responded. MOTION – PUBLIC HEARING It was moved by Commissioner Lewis, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to close the public hearing. Without objection, the motion was approved. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Lewis, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to adopt the amended Resolution No. 2001 – Approving Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 17-03 (76053) and Multiple Family Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 17-06 with a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for an eight unit residential condominium development at 141-145 Alice Street ROLL CALL AYES: Commissioners Lewis, Thompson and Chan NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Lin There is a ten day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, September 5, 2017. 4. Resolution No. 2000 – Approving Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 17-02 (74938), Minor Administrative Modification No. MINOR AM 17-11, and Multiple Family Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 17-01 with a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a three unit residential condominium development at 116 Bonita Street Applicant: Mr. Leo Wu of Archfield Inc. Architects Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2000 Planning/Community Development Administrator, Lisa Flores introduced the item and turned it over to Associate Planner, Jordan Chamberlin who presented the staff report. Vice Chair Chan opened the Public Hearing and asked if the applicant would like to speak on this item. Mr. Jason Yen of EGL responded on behalf of the applicant. Vice Chair Chan asked if anyone else would like to speak in favor of the item. No one responded. Vice Chair Chan asked if there was anyone who would like to speak in opposition of the item. No one responded. MOTION – PUBLIC HEARING It was moved by Commissioner Lewis, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to close the public hearing. Without objection, the motion was approved. 3 8-22-17 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Lewis to adopt Resolution No. 2000 – Approving Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 17-02 (74938), Minor Administrative Modification No. MINOR AM 17-11, and Multiple Family Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 17-01 with a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a three unit residential condominium development at 116 Bonita Street ROLL CALL AYES: Commissioners Thompson, Lewis and Chan NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Lin There is a ten day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, September 5, 2017. 1. Resolution No. 1991 – Approving Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 17-02 (74941), Multiple Family Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 16-10, and Protected Tree Encroachment Permit No. TRE 16-54 with a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a ten unit residential condominium development at 837-841½ W. Huntington Drive (Item was continued from the April 25, 2017, meeting) Applicant: Mr. Scott Yang Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 1991 Planning/Community Development Administrator, Lisa Flores introduced the item and informed the Commission that this item was continued from the April 25, 2017, Planning Commission meeting at which time the Commission closed the public hearing. If the Commission chooses to reopen the public hearing, they can formally make a motion to re-open the hearing. With that, Ms. Flores turned it over to Associate Planner, Jordan Chamberlin who presented the staff report. It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Lewis to reopen the public hearing. Vice Chair Chan opened the public hearing and asked if the applicant would like to speak on this item. Project Architect, Mr. Pison Netsawang responded on behalf of the applicant. Vice Chair Chan asked if anyone else would like to speak in favor of the item. No one responded. Vice Chair Chan asked if there was anyone who would like to speak in opposition of the item. The following residents responded: Ms. Haihong He 4 8-22-17 Mr. Mark Chang Mr. Simon Lorona Vice Chair Chan asked if the applicant would like to speak in rebuttal. Mr. Pison responded. MOTION – PUBLIC HEARING It was moved by Commissioner Lewis, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to close the public hearing. Without objection, the motion was approved. DISCUSSION Planning/Community Development Administrator Ms. Flores asked the Commission since they have concerns regarding the trees along the rear property line, if they would like to add a condition of approval stating, “The trees along the rear property line shall be at a minimum height of 10 feet and the trees shall be of sufficient number to provide screening across the rear property line.” Vice Chair Chan asked Ms. Flores if it would be possible to add a condition of approval requiring that the trees be planted prior to construction to help mitigate dust and privacy issues. Ms. Flores explained that it would be difficult to impose such a condition because the site has to be leveled and graded and there is a possibility that the trees might not survive during this process. Commissioner Thompson suggested another option is to have the applicant install a 10 foot construction fence along the property line in lieu of the required 6 foot construction fence. Ms. Flores stated that the condition of approval could be added. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Lewis, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to adopt Resolution No. 1991 – Approving Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 17-02 (74941), Multiple Family Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 16-10, and Protected Tree Encroachment Permit No. TRE 16-54 with a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a ten unit residential condominium development at 837-841½ W. Huntington Drive, and amended to include the two added conditions of approval as read by Ms. Flores. ROLL CALL AYES: Commissioners Lewis, Thompson and Chan NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Lin There is a ten day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, September 5, 2017. RECESS/RECONVENE Vice Chair Chan called for a recess at 7:55 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 8:01 p.m. 5 8-22-17 2. Home Owners’ Association Appeal No. HOA 17-01 with Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) appealing the Santa Anita Oaks Home Owners’ Association Architectural Board Chairperson’s denial of a new circular driveway at 1231 San Carlos Road (Item was continued from the June 27, 2017, meeting) Appellant: Tom and Ellen Fu-Crosby Recommended Action: Deny the Appeal and Uphold the ARB Denial Planning/Community Development Administrator Lisa Flores introduced the item and presented the staff report. Vice Chair Chan opened the public hearing and asked if the Appellant would like to speak on this item. Appellant Mr. Crosby responded, and explained that he has lived in his home for the last 14 years and one of the main reasons he bought his home was because it had a circular driveway. He decided that he wanted to retire and that is what prompted him to build a new home on the same lot that will suit his retirement needs. He had his designer use the same configuration that included the circular driveway when he created the plans for his new house. When he submitted his plans to the Architectural Review Board (ARB), he was told that since he was building a new house, a circular driveway would not be permitted. He was under the assumption that since the original house had a circular driveway it would be grandfathered and allowed to be built with his new house. He mentioned that several homes in the area have circular driveways and that two homes built in the last few years after he originally submitted his application, have been allowed to be built with circular driveways. Given that, he thought he would be able to keep his circular driveway. At that point he submitted his application to request to keep the circular driveway to the ARB. The ARB denied his application and that is why he is appealing their denial to the Planning Commission. He stated that the suggestions made in the staff report have been incorporated into his plan. Vice-Chair Chan asked if anyone else would like to speak in favor of the item. Mr. Scott Carlson, Appellant’s attorney responded. Mr. Carlson wanted to point out that it appears that the Home Owner’s Association (HOA) Architectural Review Board (ARB) has adopted their own policy that does not allow circular driveways to be built for new projects in their HOA. He stated that the HOA ARB does not have the power to do that and that would be something that would have to be determined by the City. Vice-Chair Chan asked if there was anyone who would like to speak in opposition of the item. The following residents responded: Mr. Vince Vargas, Santa Anita Oaks HOA member, stated that Mr. and Mrs. Crosby participated in two ARB meetings; one in early 2015 and another time in April of 2017 for the same current application. In addition to that they also hired a designer that was very conversant with the requirements of new residential development in the Santa Anita Oaks. Regarding the current application it was determined by the ARB that the circular driveway should be eliminated from the proposal of the new two-story house and that a 6 8-22-17 single driveway would better conform to the current neighborhood specific standards of the Santa Anita Oaks as well as to the character of the neighborhood to enhance the overall appearance of the house. The basis for the ARB’s decision in this case is clearly established in the authority and power granted to the HOA to exercise plan review authority as stated in Resolution No. 6770. Other official City documents refer to the power of the authority of the HOA which includes the City’s General Plan and the Arcadia Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines. The General Plan states that in addition to application of the City’s guidelines the five (5) Home Owners Associations in Arcadia can enforce private neighborhood specific design standards. The Associations have played an important part in preserving the character of the residential neighborhoods in the northern part of the City. They could have chosen to remodel their home and keep their circular driveway, but the chose to build a new home. Mr. Crosby chose to get the house first and eliminate the circular driveway and after he gets the house approved then at a later time file a Short Review form to get the approval for the circular driveway. That should not be the way the system works. The Oaks ARB decision to deny the short review application is consistent in applying the various policies and regulations. In addition, some of the circular driveways are not managed well by the property owners and there are cars, boats, trucks, motorcycles, RVs, and commercial vehicles parked on the circular driveways. In the Resolution it says that part of the authority in the design review process is that if the HOA or ARB sees a negative trend they are allowed to address that trend. The HOA and ARB have properly executed their authority and powers over the design review by properly following all current procedures and evaluation of the proposed application relative to the Design Guidelines, Resolution No. 6770, and the Santa Anita Oaks neighborhood specific standards and ultimately the goals of the Arcadia General Plan. Mr. Jack Lynch, Santa Anita Oaks ARB member, pointed out that majority of the homes in the Santa Anita Oaks area have straight driveways. He is in opposition to this item because Mr. and Mrs. Crosby along with their designer went through several meetings with the ARB and were fully aware that the circular driveway was not allowed because they built an entirely new home. Regarding the properties that Mr. Crosby mentioned that were allowed to have or maintain circular driveways: one property went through a minor remodel, and the other one was a rebuild. Since Mr. and Mrs. Crosby’s house was completely demolished it is considered a new home; therefore, they cannot have a circular driveway. He mentioned again that the homeowners in that area do not want circular driveways and expect the HOA to enforce that restriction. It is his opinion that the lack of having a circular driveway will not affect the property value. Mr. Alan Crawford, a neighbor of the subject property, stated that he has lived in his home for 21 years. Throughout that time the residents at the subject property of 1231 San Carlos Road have always parked at least two-to-three large cars on their former circular driveway and rarely parked their cars in the garage. If they are approved for the new circular driveway he fears that they will continue to park multiple cars on the driveway creating the look of a parking lot. He stated that he agrees with the statements made by Mr. Vargas and Mr. Lynch. Vice Chair Chan asked if the Appellant would like to speak in rebuttal. 7 8-22-17 Appellant Mr. Crosby and his attorney Mr. Carlson responded. Mr. Crosby addressed the issue about his property not being leveled on the south side. Mr. Carlson disagreed with the comments made by the HOA and ARB members and stated that they do not have the authority through Resolution No. 6770 and their HOA policy to prohibit circular driveways. The standard in the City Code provides some entitlement to allow for circular driveways, and it supersedes Resolution No. 6770 and the HOA policy. He addressed the public comments relating to parking issues and blight, he does not believe that prohibiting a circular driveway is the proper way to remedy those issues, and straight driveways have the same issues. Commissioner Lewis asked the applicant, Mr. Crosby, questions regarding the square footage of the new house compared to the previous house, and was his intent to build a new house as his retirement home. Mr. Crosby responded to Commissioner Lewis question and plans to retire in this house. He further stated that he would have not build a new house had he known he could not keep his circular driveway. MOTION – PUBLIC HEARING It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Lewis to close the public hearing. Without objection, the motion was approved. DISCUSSION Commissioner Thompson stated that ARB and HOA are the most harmonious and compatible areas within the City. He explained that there are three things to consider when reviewing land use: General Plan, Development Code, and Design Guidelines. Excessive hardscape and nuisance parking is not a red herring and does pose a real problem. The ARB has done a great job in keeping their neighborhoods as harmonious and compatible as possible. The statement that the ARB does not have the authority to deny the circular driveway is incorrect. The Resolution says that the ARB Chair or designee shall have the authority to approve hardscape in the front and street yard sides. The ARB definitely has the Authority and staff is proper in their recommendation in denying the Appeal. If we were to approve this appeal it would be prejudicial to the entire neighborhood and the developers who have followed the rules. He is sympathetic to Mr. and Mrs. Crosby’s circumstances, but the ARB and Architects worked to get together on what is allowable. To come back after the original decision was approved with the straight in driveway and try to get the circular driveway approved is disingenuous and he is opposed to approving the appeal. Commissioner Lewis stated that she agrees with Commissioner Thompson in that the HOA and ARB have the authority to make the decision that they made. However, there are a couple of “exceptions” that should be noted. If this home were located anywhere else other than next to the wide intersection, her decision would be to deny the appeal. Because of that intersection, which she travels through that area frequently, the circular driveway with the ability of ingress/egress on the south side of the property is much safer. Because they are longtime residents, and the fact that they want to stay where they currently live and have lived for 16 years changes her perspective. Furthermore, it is not a spec house that will be sold by the developer. Had there not been a circular driveway, it would change her decision. As far as parking on the driveway, she did not 8 8-22-17 have any concerns with that. For these reasons, she felt she could approve the driveway. Vice Chair Chan stated that he agrees with Commissioner Thompson regarding design review process and the HOA authority and that it was very possible the property owner, Mr. Crosby, may have not fully understood his choices when he removed the circular driveway from the original proposal. During his site visit he did notice that there was a new house at 1101 San Carlos Road with a circular driveway. He understands the sentiments regarding circular driveways, however, he also believes circular driveways have an exclusive appearance that is often found in higher-end neighborhoods. Assistant City Attorney Mr. Michael Maurer stated that the Planning Commission should base their decision with what was presented in the record and that the request is consistent with the City’s design guidelines. MOTION – First Motion It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, to uphold the ARB Denial of the circular driveway, and deny Home Owners Association Appeal No. HOA 17-01, with a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), appealing the Santa Anita Oaks Home Owners’ Association Architectural Board Chairperson’s denial of a new circular driveway at 1231 San Carlos Road, the circular driveway is not consistent with the City’s Design Guidelines and with City Resolution No. 6770. The motion did not receive a second. MOTION – Second Motion It was moved by Commissioner Lewis, seconded by Vice Chair Chan to approve the Appeal and overturn the ARB denial of the design; therefore, approving Appeal No. HOA 17-01 with a Categorical Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), finding that the proposed design is consistent with the City’s design guidelines, and City Council Resolution No. 6770, and secure an appropriate improvement to the lot. ROLL CALL AYES: Commissioners Lewis and Chan NOES: Commissioner Thompson ABSENT: Commissioner Lin There is a ten day appeal period after the approval of the item. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, September 5, 2017. CONSENT CALENDAR All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and can be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the Commission, staff, or the public request that specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion and action. 5. Minutes of July 25, 2017, Arcadia Planning Commission Regular Meeting Recommended Action: Approve 9 8-22-17 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Lewis to approve Consent Calendar Item 5, approving the July 25, 2017 Planning Commission Regular Meeting minutes. ROLL CALL AYES: Commissioners Thompson, Lewis and Chan NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Lin MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL LIAISON City Council Liaison Beck was not present. MATTERS FROM PLANNING COMMISSIONERS The Planning Commissioners did not have anything to report. MATTERS FROM ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY Assistant City Attorney Mr. Maurer did not have anything to report. MATTERS FROM STAFF INCLUDING UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS Planning/Community Development Administrator Ms. Lisa Flores reported that there are two items scheduled for the upcoming September 12, 2017 meeting; one item is a five-unit condominium on California Street and the other item is a modification to a new single-family house on Lenta Lane. Ms. Flores reported that the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change for the properties on Foothill Boulevard the Planning Commission reviewed a month ago will be presented to the City Council at their September 5, 2017, meeting. That night the Council will be also discussing the draft Historic Preservation Ordinance during their study session. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned the meeting at 9:23 p.m. to Tuesday, September 12, 2017, at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber at 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia. ___________________________ Zi Lin Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Lisa Flores Secretary, Planning Commission ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Tuesday, September 12, 2017 Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the City’s Planning Services Office located at 240 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California, during normal business hours. CALL TO ORDER - Chair Lin called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Arcadia Council Chamber. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioners, Thompson, Chan, and Lin ABSENT: Commissioner Lewis It was moved by Vice-Chair Chan, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to excuse Commissioner Lewis from the meeting. Without objection the motion was approved. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS Staff did not have any supplemental information. PUBLIC COMMENTS (5 minute time limit per person) There were none. PUBLIC HEARING All interested persons are invited to appear at a public hearing and to provide evidence or testimony concerning any of the proposed items set forth below for consideration. Separate and apart from the applicant (who may speak longer in the discretion of the Commission) speakers shall be limited to five (5) minutes per person. The applicant may additionally submit rebuttal comments, at the discretion of the Commission. You are hereby advised that should you desire to legally challenge in court any action taken by the Planning Commission regarding any Public Hearing item, you may be limited to raising only those issues and objections you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. 1. Resolution No. 2002 – Approving Administrative Modification Commission No. PC AM 17-02, Single Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 16-12, and Protected Tree Encroachment No. TRE 17-27 with a Class 3 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a 2,625 square-foot, Farmhouse style, two- story residence at 2318 Lenta Lane Applicant: Ms. Tingting Lu Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2002 Planning/Community Development Administrator, Lisa Flores introduced the item and turned it over to Associate Planner, Jordan Chamberlin who presented the staff report. Chair Lin opened the Public Hearing and asked if the applicant would like to speak on this item. Applicant Ms. Tingting Lu responded. Chair Lin asked if anyone else would like to speak in favor of the item. No one responded. 2 9-12-17 Chair Lin asked if there was anyone who would like to speak in opposition of the item. Arcadia resident, Mr. Allen Kizuk responded. Chair Lin asked if the applicant would like to speak in rebuttal to the opposition. The applicant declined. MOTION – PUBLIC HEARING It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Vice-Chair Chan to close the public hearing. Without objection, the motion was approved. MOTION It was moved by Vice-Chair Chan, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to adopt Resolution No. 2002 – Approving Administrative Modification Commission No. PC AM 17-02, Single Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 16-12, and Protected Tree Encroachment No. TRE 17-27 with a Class 3 and Class 5 Categorical Exemptions under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a 2,625 square-foot, Farmhouse style, two-story residence at 2318 Lenta Lane. ROLL CALL AYES: Commissioners Chan, Lin, and Thompson NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Lewis There is a ten day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. If adopted, appeals are to be filed by 4:30 p.m. on Friday, September 22, 2017. CONSENT CALENDAR All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and can be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the Commission, staff, or the public request that specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion and action. 2. Minutes of August 22, 2017, Arcadia Planning Commission Regular Meeting Recommended Action: Approve Chair Lin stated that he was not in attendance at the August 22, 2017 Planning Commission Regular Meeting; therefore, he would like to table the approval of the subject minutes to the next meeting when there is a quorum present. MOTION It was moved by Chair Lin, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to table the approval of the August 22, 2017 Planning Commission Regular Meeting minutes to the October 10, 2017 meeting when there is a quorum present since Commissioner Chan will be absent at the next meeting. Without objection, the motion was approved. PLANNING COMMISSION REORGANIZATION 3. Elect a new Chair and Vice-Chair of the Planning Commission for Fiscal Year 2017-2018 Recommended Action: Approve the selection of a new Chair and Vice-Chair to serve through June 2018. 3 9-12-17 Planning/Community Development Administrator, Lisa Flores mentioned that Commissioner Lewis sent her an email and recommended Vice-Chair Chan as the Chair and Commissioner Thompson as the Vice-Chair. Chair Lin called for nominations for Chair’s position of the Planning Commission. Commissioner Thompson nominated Vice-Chair Chan as the Chair. There were no other nominations. Without objection, Vice-Chair Chan was elected as the new Chair. Chair Lin called for nominations for Vice-Chair. Chair Chan nominated Commissioner Thompson for Vice-Chair. There were no other nominations. Without objection, Commissioner Thompson was elected as the Vice-Chair. ROLL CALL AYES: Commissioners Chan, Thompson, and Lin NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Lewis MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL LIAISON Council Liaison Beck provided an update on the redistricting process and how it will impact the City’s General Municipal Election scheduling. MATTERS FROM PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Vice-Chair Thompson announced that he emailed everyone the information for the Appraisal Institute 50th Annual Litigation Seminar to be held at Santa Anita Park and he hoped that everyone can attend. He asked Ms. Flores if the Commission can be informed when there are Administrative Modification applications in order to review the applications for the potential of calling-up to the Commission if deemed necessary. Ms. Flores responded and informed Vice-Chair Thompson that can be done. MATTERS FROM ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY Assistant City Attorney Mr. Maurer reported on a recent case, Lynch vs. California Coastal Commission, that went up to the Supreme Court and the case held that a property owner that develops a property based on conditions of approval cannot challenge those conditions of approval after the property is constructed; therefore, if a property owner wants to challenge conditions of approval, they cannot construct the property until the challenge is sorted out. He added that the court noted in doing that, that it expects the ruling will reduce litigation against public agencies on the theory that people will have to choose one or the other. The other item he discussed was the legislature relating to SB 649 that will limit the City’s ability to regulate small cell sites. MATTERS FROM STAFF INCLUDING UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS Ms. Flores reported that the upcoming Agenda items for the September 26 meeting include one item relating to a Conditional Use Permit for a personal training facility at 36 W. Live Oak Avenue. She reported that two items the Planning Commission acted on at the last meeting have been appealed to the City Council; one is relating to the Home Owners Association Appeal for 1231 San Carlos Road that is scheduled to be presented to the City Council at the October 17, 2017, meeting and the other item is relating to the Multiple-Family Design Review project located at 837-841 ½ W. Huntington Drive that is scheduled to be presented to the City Council at the October 3, 2017 meeting. She also provided an update on historic preservation. 4 9-12-17 ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned the meeting at 7:31 p.m. to Tuesday, September 26, 2017, at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber at 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia. Zi Lin Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Lisa Flores Secretary, Planning Commission ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Tuesday, September 26, 2017 Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the City’s Planning Services Office located at 240 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California, during normal business hours. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioners Thompson, Lewis, and Lin ABSENT: Chair Chan It was moved by Commissioner Lin, seconded by Commissioner Lewis to excuse Chair Chan from the meeting. Without objection the motion was approved. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS Staff did not have any supplemental information. PUBLIC COMMENTS (5 minute time limit per person) There were none. PUBLIC HEARING All interested persons are invited to appear at a public hearing and to provide evidence or testimony concerning any of the proposed items set forth below for consideration. Separate and apart from the applicant (who may speak longer in the discretion of the Commission) speakers shall be limited to five (5) minutes per person. The applicant may additionally submit rebuttal comments, at the discretion of the Commission. You are hereby advised that should you desire to legally challenge in court any action taken by the Planning Commission regarding any Public Hearing item, you may be limited to raising only those issues and objections you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. 1. Resolution No. 2003 – Approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 17-11 with a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a 5,044 square-foot personal training gym at 36 W. Live Oak Avenue. Applicant: Ms. Julie Tu Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2003 Planning/Community Development Administrator, Ms. Lisa Flores introduced the item and turned it over to Economic Development Analyst, Mr. Tim Schwehr who presented the staff report. Vice Chair Thompson opened the Public Hearing and asked if the applicant would like to speak on this item. Applicant Ms. Julie Tu responded. Vice Chair Thompson asked if anyone else would like to speak in favor of the item. No one responded. 2 9-26-17 Vice Chair Thompson asked if there was anyone who would like to speak in opposition of the item. No one responded. MOTION – PUBLIC HEARING It was moved by Commissioner Lewis, seconded by Commissioner Lin to close the public hearing. Without objection, the motion was approved. DISCUSSION Commissioner Lin stated that the applicant feels that they need to expand their business and he does not see any determint in doing so. The proposed use is an appropriate use for the existing neighborhood and he is in favor of adopting Resolution No. 2003. Commissioner Lewis stated that she is in agreement with Commissioner Lin, that this is an appropriate use for the neighborhood. Her only concern was relating to security, but the applicant explained a staff member will always be present at the site. Provided that she is in favor of approving this item. Vice Chair Thompson stated that he agrees with both of the Commissioners statements. He added that Condition No. 1 provides a reasonable restriction on the intensity. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan. He agrees with the comments listed in the staff report relating to revitalization of the district. The use is compatiable with the surrounding uses in the area. He is in favor of the proposal. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Lin, seconded by Commissioner Lewis to adopt Resolution No. 2003 – Approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 17-11 with a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a 5,044 square-foot personal training gym at 36 W. Live Oak Avenue subject to the conditions listed in the staff report, and amended to include the revision to Condition No. 1 to state: “There shall be no more than thirty (30) people at the personal training facility at any time, including without limitation gym staff, trainers, patrons, and management.” ROLL CALL AYES: Commissioners Lin, Lewis, and Thompson NOES: None ABSENT: Chair Chan There is a ten day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. Appeals are to be filed by 4:30 p.m. on Friday, October 6, 2017. CONSENT CALENDAR All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and can be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the Commission, staff, or the public request that specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion and action. 2. Minutes of September 12, 2017, Arcadia Planning Commission Regular Meeting Recommended Action: Approve 3 9-26-17 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Lewis to table the approval of the September 12, 2017, Planning Commission Regular Meeting minutes to the October 10, 2017, meeting when all the Commissioners are present. Without objection, the motion was approved. ROLL CALL AYES: Commissioners Lewis, Lin, and Thompson NOES: None ABSENT: Chair Chan MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL LIAISON Council Liaison Beck was not present. MATTERS FROM PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Commissioner Lin thanked Planning/Community Development Administrator Ms. Flores and Deputy Development Services Director/City Engineer Mr. Wray for helping him earlier in the day with an issue that arose at his residence regarding a contractor that partially blocked the exit of his garage while the contractor work ed on a neighboring property. Vice Chair Thompson commented that he watched the last City Council meeting and noticed that the City Council did not adopt any of the Planning Commission’s proposals or recommendations relating to the Canyon Road project. MATTERS FROM ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY Assistant City Attorney Mr. Maurer was not present. MATTERS FROM STAFF INCLUDING UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS Planning/Community Development Administrator Ms. Flores reported that there is currently no public hearing items pending for the October 10, 2017 meeting, but there is Conditional Use Permit application for a learning center at 909 S. Santa Anita Avenue that may be scheduled for the October 24, 2017 meeting. She announced that staff is coordinating stakeholder interviews with the Planning Commissioners for the Citywide Design Guidelines Update. Regarding Historic Preservation, the Planning Division will be hosting two community meetings in early November and a notice will be sent to the Commission notifying them of the dates. Last, the City Council will be conducting interviews for a new Planning Commissioner on next Tuesday, October 3, at 5:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned the meeting at 7:27 p.m. to Tuesday, October 10, 2017, at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber at 240 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia. Kenneth Chan Chair, Planning Commission ATTEST: Lisa Flores Secretary, Planning Commission