HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem No. 2- MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24 & TRE 19-24
DATE: September 10, 2019
TO: Honorable Chairman and Planning Commission
FROM: Lisa L. Flores, Planning & Community Development Administrator
By: Luis Torrico, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: APPROVING MULTIPLE FAMILY ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW
NO. MFADR 18-04, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. TPM 19-01 (82515),
PROTECTED HEALTHY TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. TRH 18-24, AND
PROTECTED TREE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. TRE 19-24 WITH A
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) FOR A THREE-UNIT MULTI-
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT AT 135 EL
DORADO STREET
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2040
SUMMARY
The applicant, Patricia Moad, on behalf of the property owner, Pacific Oasis LLC, is
requesting approval of Multiple Family Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 18-04,
Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 19-01 (82515), Protected Healthy Tree Removal Permit
No. TRH 18-22, and Protected Tree Encroachment Permit No. 19-24 for a three-unit
multi-family residential condominium development. The proposed development and
subdivision are consistent with the City’s General Plan, Development Code, and
Subdivision Code. As an infill development project, the proposed development qualifies
for a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as
discussed later in the staff report. It is recommended that the Planning Commission
approve MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24 and TRE 19-24, subject to the
conditions listed in this staff report, and adopt Resolution No. 2040 – refer to Attachment
No. 1.
BACKGROUND
The subject site is an 8,000 square foot interior lot, located between 1st Avenue and 2nd
Avenue, off of El Dorado Street with an alley at the rear. The General Plan Land Use
Resolution No. 2040 - MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24, and TRE 19-24
135 El Dorado Street
September 10, 2019 – Page 2 of 13
Designation is High Density Residential, and the zoning of the property is R-3, High
Density Multiple Family Residential. The site is bounded by other R-3 zoned properties
to the north, east, west and south of the subject site. The site is developed with a single-
family dwelling and detached garage constructed in 1936, and an unpermitted second
dwelling attached to the garage – refer to Attachment No. 2 for an Aerial photo with Zoning
Information and Photos of the Subject Property. There are five (5) protected trees on the
subject site, four (4) of which are proposed for removal and one (1) will be preserved.
A Certificate of Demolition (COD) for the subject property was approved on January 10,
2019 – see Attachment No. 3 for the Historical Report. Based on the evaluation by an
Architectural Historian, the property does not meet any of the minimum requirements for
recognition as a historical resource nor is it eligible for listing on the California Register or
as a local landmark. The residence is not a good example of a particular architectural
style and is not representative of or associated with any important historical events or
people.
PROPOSAL
The applicant is proposing to demolish all the existing structures and construct a three-
unit, multi-family residential condominium development with surface parking – refer to
Attachment No. 4 for the Tentative Parcel Map and Attachment No. 5 for the proposed
Architectural Plans. The proposed development consists of three, two-story, French style,
townhomes. All the units will consist of three bedrooms that vary between 1,617 square
feet to 1,750 square feet. Unit #1 will have direct access from El Dorado street and access
to the two remaining units will be provided through a pedestrian walkway located on the
east side of the property, and from their associated garages (see Figure 1).
The proposed development will have an overall height of 29’-3”; therefore, the
development will be in in compliance with the maximum 30’-0” height limit. The building
will meet the minimum front yard setback of 25’-0”, and all the other setbacks required in
the R-3 zone. Each unit requires a minimum of 100 square feet of open space, which will
be provided through at-grade patios for each unit.
Figure 1 – Site Plan ALLEY EL DORADO ST
Resolution No. 2040 - MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24, and TRE 19-24
135 El Dorado Street
September 10, 2019 – Page 3 of 13
A total of eight (8) parking spaces will be provided on-site, six (6) enclosed spaces for the
three (3) condominiums, and two (2) guest parking spaces. Each unit will have direct
access from their respective garages. The garage for the front and middle unit will be
accessed from El Dorado and the garage for the last unit will be accessed from the alley.
In addition, the project will include a bicycle rack for up to four (4) bicycles, located
towards the rear of the property adjacent to the pedestrian walkway along the east
property line. Therefore, the project will be parked to Code.
In addition, the development will require removal of four (4) protected trees and
encroachment into the dripline of one (1) protected tree. The trees proposed for removal
consist of three (3) consist of Coast Live Oak trees and one (1) Yucca Gigantea tree. The
proposed development and improvements will encroach within the dripline of one (1)
protected Coast Live Oak tree, as discussed later in this staff report.
ANALYSIS
The R-3 zone has a minimum density of one dwelling unit per 2,200 square feet of lot
area, and a maximum density of one unit per 1,450 square feet of lot area. This calculates
to a minimum of three (3) units and a maximum of five (5) units for the subject site;
therefore, the proposed three-unit development complies with the density requirements
of the underlying zone. The Development Code requires two (2) covered spaces per unit
and one (1) guest space for every two (2) units. Parking for the project will be provided
at-grade and will consist of a two-car garage for each unit and two (2) guest spaces. In
addition, Development Code requires a minimum of two (2) bicycle parking spaces. The
project will include one bicycle rack with a capacity of up to four (4) bicycles located
adjacent to pedestrian walkway along the east property line. Therefore, the project will
comply with the parking requirements of the R-3 Zone. Lastly, the project will comply with
the development standards of the R-3 Zone, including but not limited to setbacks, height
and open space.
Concurrent with the subdivision application, the Planning Commission is to approve,
conditionally approve, or deny the architectural design of the proposed project. The
development will be designed in a French architectural style (refer to Attachment No. 5),
and will consist of a stucco exterior finish and flat concrete roof tile (see Figures 2 & 3).
Other architectural features will include, but not limited to, decorative window trim and
shutters, decorative corbels, and various building projections, which provide roof breaks
with multiple rooflines. The proposed French style architecture will be compatible with the
other multi-family developments on El Dorado Street and the immediate area, and the
proposed massing and scale of the development will be compatible with the existing multi-
family developments in the neighborhood. In addition, landscaping will be provided
throughout the site including the side yard to provide screening from the adjacent single-
story single-family residence east of the subject site.
Resolution No. 2040 - MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24, and TRE 19-24
135 El Dorado Street
September 10, 2019 – Page 4 of 13
Tree Removal
The request is to remove four (4) protected trees in order to accommodate the new
development (see Figure 4). Three of the four trees are of Coast Live Oak trees (#’s 1, 2
& 4 on the Arborist Report and Landscape Plan), and one (1) consists of a Yucca
Gigantea tree (#10 on the Arborist Report and Landscape Plan). See Attachment 6 for
the Arborist Report, and the figure below.
Figure 2. Proposed front elevation
Figure 3. Proposed side (east) elevation
Front
Figure 4. Landscape Plan / Tree Survey
Resolution No. 2040 - MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24, and TRE 19-24
135 El Dorado Street
September 10, 2019 – Page 5 of 13
Tree #1 has a health rating of C- and is located in the center of the proposed driveway,
and Tree #2 has a health rating of C- and is located in the center of the site, making it
difficult to develop around these trees. Tree #4 has a health rating of C- and is located
approximately one foot from the proposed building footprint. This would result in removing
approximately 50% of the tree’s roots and canopy. Tree #10 has a health rating of D+ and
is located adjacent to the east property line towards the front of the site. In addition from
not being a healthy tree and being impacted by the proposed block wall, Tree #10 does
not add much landscape value to the site.
Alternative building footprints and configurations were explored to try and preserve the
trees; however, given their location, it was difficult to develop around them and still provide
a development that would comply with the minimum density. Therefore, their removal is
warranted. As part of the approval of the project, Condition No. 3 has been added to
require that three (3) 24-inch box Coast Live Oak trees and one (1) 36”-inch box Coast
Live Oak tree be planted as replacement trees. The 36-inch box tree will be planted in the
front yard area.
Tree Encroachment
One (1) Coast Live Oak tree will be preserved as part of the development. Tree #3, as
identified on the Arborist Report and Landscape Plan, is located adjacent to the east
property line towards the rear of the site. The proposed development will encroach to
within six (6) feet of the trunk. Two (2) of the tree’s lower limbs will require removal and
approximately 40% of the tree’s roots may require removal. However, based on the
Arborist Report’s recommendations, the tree can be preserved. In the event that the tree
is damaged during construction or if it does not survive within the first 12 months after
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy from the Building Division, condition #4 has been
included to require additional replacement trees.
The proposed development will be consistent with the City’s General Plan, Multifamily
Residential Design Guidelines, Development Code, and the Subdivision Map Act. The
proposed plans have been reviewed by various City Departments, and all City
requirements shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City
Engineer, Planning & Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public
Works Services Director.
FINDINGS
Tentative Parcel Map
The proposal to subdivide the airspace for three (3) residential condominium units
requires a subdivision through the Tentative Parcel Map process – see Attachment No. 4
for Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 19-01 (82515). The proposed subdivision complies
with the subdivision regulations of the Arcadia Municipal Code and the Subdivision Map
Act, and will not violate any requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control
Board. The following findings are required for approval of a Tentative Parcel Map:
Resolution No. 2040 - MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24, and TRE 19-24
135 El Dorado Street
September 10, 2019 – Page 6 of 13
A. The proposed map, subdivision design, and improvements are consistent
with the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, and the Subdivisions
Division of the Development Code.
Facts in Support of the Finding: Approval of a three-unit multi-family residential
condominium development with a tentative parcel map to subdivide the airspace,
and the removal of four (4) protected trees and encroachment into one (1)
protected tree to accommodate such a development on an existing site are
consistent with the High Density Residential Land Use designation. The High
Density Residential designation is intended to accommodate higher-density
attached and/or detached housing types for both renter and owner households
within a neighborhood context. The R-3 zone is intended to provide areas for a
variety of medium- to high-density residential development including townhomes
and condominiums. The proposed three-unit multi-family residential condominium
development is in conformance with the City’s General Plan, Development Code,
and the Subdivision Map Act. The site is physically suitable for this type of
development, and the approval of the architectural design for the building is
compatible with the scale and character of the existing neighborhood. The
proposal will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan and is
consistent with the following General Plan goals and policies:
Land Use and Community Design Element
x Policy LU-1.1: Promote new infill and redevelopment projects that are
consistent with the City’s land use and compatible with surrounding existing
uses.
x Policy LU-4.1: Require that new multi-family residential development be
visually and functionally integrated and consistent in scale, mass, and
character with structures in the surrounding neighborhood.
B. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of
development.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The R-3 zone has a minimum density of one
dwelling unit per 2,200 square feet of lot area, and a maximum density of one unit
per 1,450 square feet of lot area. This calculates to a minimum of three (3) units
and a maximum of five (5) units for the subject property. The proposed three-unit
multi-family development complies with the density requirements. In addition, there
are no physical impediments to the development of this site for residential
condominiums.
C. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely
to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
Resolution No. 2040 - MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24, and TRE 19-24
135 El Dorado Street
September 10, 2019 – Page 7 of 13
Facts in Support of the Finding: The proposed tentative parcel map to subdivide
the air space for the three (3) condominium units is a minor subdivision of an infill
site within an urbanized area; therefore, it will not cause substantial environmental
damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause
serious public health or safety problems.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The proposed subdivision is to subdivide the air
space for a three-unit multi-family condominium development. The construction of
the three (3), multi-family residential units are being done in compliance with
Building and Fire Codes and all other applicable regulations. The proposed density
will be below the maximum allowed by the R-3 zone and the City’s existing
infrastructure will adequately serve the new development. In addition, the Project
meets all health and safety requirements, and will not cause any public health or
safety problems.
E. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of,
property within the proposed subdivision (This finding shall apply only to
easements of record or to easements established by judgement of a court of
competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative
body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access
through or use of property within the proposed subdivision).
Facts in Support of the Finding: The proposed design of the subdivision or the
type of improvements do not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at
large for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. Based
on the tentative parcel map, there are no easements on the subject properties.
F. The discharge of sewage from the proposed subdivision into the community
sewer system will not result in violation of existing requirements specified
by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The Arcadia Public Works Services Department
determined that the City’s existing infrastructure will adequately serve the new
development, and the requirements of the California Regional Water Quality
Control Board will be satisfied.
G. The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, passive or
natural heating and cooling opportunities.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The proposed tentative parcel map and three-
unit multi-family condominium development has been reviewed by Building
Services to ensure compliance with the California Building Code, which includes
requirements associated with heating and cooling requirements.
Resolution No. 2040 - MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24, and TRE 19-24
135 El Dorado Street
September 10, 2019 – Page 8 of 13
H. The proposed subdivision, its design, density, and type of development and
improvements conforms to the regulations of the City’s Development Code
and the regulations of any public agency having jurisdiction by law.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The proposed subdivision as conditioned
complies with the density requirements of the City’s Development Code, and all
the improvements required for the site and each unit will comply with the
regulations in the City’s Development Code.
Architectural Design Review
The proposed development is located within the High Density Residential (R-3) Zone,
which is intended to provide a variety of medium- to high-density residential development.
The proposed massing, scale, quality of the design and the proposed landscaping are
compatible with other developments in the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed
French style architecture, and massing and scale of the proposed development will be
compatible with the other multi-family developments on El Dorado Street and in the
surrounding neighborhood. In addition, the proposal is consistent with the City’s
Multifamily Residential Design Guidelines.
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, Planning &
Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services
Director, or their respective designees.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
It has been determined that the project site is less than five (5) acres; the project site has
no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; the proposed project will
not have any significant effects upon the environment, and the site can be adequately
served by all the required utilities and public services. Therefore, the project is exempt
under Class 32 (In-Fill Development Projects) pursuant to Section 15332 of the State
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Refer to Attachment No. 7 for
the Preliminary Exemption Assessment
PUBLIC NOTICE/COMMENTS
A public hearing notice for this item was published in Arcadia Weekly and mailed to the
property owners located within 300 feet of the subject property on Augut 29, 2019. As of
Septeber 6, 2019, no comments were received regarding this project.
Resolution No. 2040 - MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24, and TRE 19-24
135 El Dorado Street
September 10, 2019 – Page 9 of 13
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Multiple Family Architectural
Design Review No. MFADR 18-04, Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 19-01 (82515),
Protected Healthy Tree Removal Permit No. TRH 18-24, and Protected Tree
Encroachment Permit No. 19-24, subject to the following conditions, find that the project
is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and adopt
Resolution No. 2040, subject to the following conditions of approval:
1. Any required mechanical equipment, such as backflow devices, visible from the
public right-of-way shall be screened from public view. Screening may include
landscaping, solid walls or other methods deemed appropriate for the development.
The placement and height of said screening shall subject to review and approval by
the Planning & Community Development Administrator, or designee.
2. The project shall be developed and maintained by the Owner/Applicant in a manner
that is consistent with the plans submitted and conditionally approved for MFADR
18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24 and TRE 19-24 subject to the approval of
the Planning & Community Development Administrator, or designee.
3. Three (3) 24-inch box Coast Live Oak trees and one (1) 36-inch box Coast Live Oak
tree shall be planted as replacement trees. The 36-inch box tree shall be planted in
the front yard area. The trees shall be shown on the final landscape plan that is
submitted to Building Services for plan-check.
4. Tree #3, as identified on the Arborist Report and Landscape Plan shall be preserved.
The tree is located adjacent to the east property line towards the rear of the site. The
recommendations outlined in the Arborist Report, dated March 19, 2019 shall be
adhered to. If said tree is damaged and/or removed during construction, or if it does
not survive within the first 12 months after the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
by Building Services, the Planning Services Division may require two additional
replacement trees on the subject site.
5. The Owner/Applicant shall coordinate with the Public Works department for the
installation or removal of street trees per the City of Arcadia Street Tree Master Plan.
6. The Owner/Applicant shall be required to pay the following fees prior to approval of
the Parcel Map:
a. Map Fee $100.00
b. Final Approval Fee (1 lot @ $25.00 ea.) $25.00
TOTAL $125.00
7. Prior to approval of the Parcel Map, the Owner/Applicant shall either construct or
post security for all public improvements as shown on the Tentative Parcel Map
82515 and listed below:
Resolution No. 2040 - MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24, and TRE 19-24
135 El Dorado Street
September 10, 2019 – Page 10 of 13
a. Remove and replace curb and gutter along the entire property frontage.
b. Remove and replace sidewalk along the entire property frontage.
c. Remove and replace the driveway apron with ADA access per City of
Arcadia standard, offset min. of one foot from the property line to the top
of x.
d. Remove and replace alley asphalt from property line to property line
8. Prior to approval of the Parcel Map, the Owner/Applicant shall submit a separate
demolition and erosion control plan prepared by a registered civil engineer subject
to the approval of the City Engineer, and demolish all existing structures.
9. The Owner/Applicant shall submit a Grading Plan prepared by a registered civil
engineer subject to the approval of the City Engineer, or designee prior to issuance
of a building permit. The grading plans shall indicate all site improvements, and shall
indicate complete drainage paths of all drainage water run-off.
10. The project shall comply with the latest adopted edition of the following codes as
applicable:
a. California Building Code
b. California Residential Code
c. California Electrical Code
d. California Mechanical Code
e. California Plumbing Code
f. California Energy Code
g. California Fire Code
h. California Green Building Standards Code
i. California Existing Building Code
11. A building permit shall be issued prior to demolishing the existing buildings on-site.
12. Plans shall be approved by City of Arcadia Building, Planning, Engineering and Fire
Departments as well as any other applicable agencies prior to the issuance of building
permits for this project.
13. The Owner/Applicant shall submit an LID plan per County of Los Angeles 2014
standards manual to the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a building permit.
These requirements include, but are not limited to, using infiltration trenches,
bioretention planter boxes, roof drains connected to a landscaped area, pervious
concrete/paver, etc.
14. A 6” cast iron water main with 77 psi static pressure is available in the right-of way
in El Dorado St., which is capable of meeting all reasonable and expected demands
of the improvement.
15. The Owner/Applicant shall install separate water meter for each condominium unit.
A common water meter for each unit can be used to supply both domestic water
Resolution No. 2040 - MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24, and TRE 19-24
135 El Dorado Street
September 10, 2019 – Page 11 of 13
services and fire services. The Owner/Applicant shall separate the fire service from
domestic water service with an approved back flow device.
16. A separate landscape meter is required for common area landscape irrigation. The
backflow preventer on the common area irrigation shall be Reduce Pressure
Backflow Assembly as approved by the Public Works Services Department.
17. Fire protection requirements shall be as stipulated by the Arcadia Fire Department.
18. A Water Meter Permit Application shall be submitted to the Public Works Services
Department prior to permit issuance.
19. New water service installations shall be by the Owner/Applicant. Installation shall be
according to the specifications of the Public Works Services Department,
Engineering Section. Abandonment of existing water services, if necessary, shall be
carried out by the Owner/Applicant, according to Public Works Services Department,
Engineering Division specifications.
20. The subject project is tributary to an 8” VCP sewer, located in the right-of-way in El
Dorado St. and it is capable of serving demands typical to the proposed
development.
21. The Owner/Applicant shall utilize existing sewer lateral, if possible.
22. If any drainage fixture elevation is lower than the elevation of next upstream manhole
cover (460.92’), an approved type of backwater valve is required to be installed on
the lateral behind the property line.
23. The Owner/Applicant shall integrate low impact development (LID) strategies into
the site design. These strategies include using infiltration trenches, biorentention
planter boxes, roof drains connected to a landscaped area, pervious concrete/paver,
etc.
24. The Owner/Applicant shall install a trash enclosure with a one-foot clearance around
all bins, including but not limited to trash and recycling bins to the satisfaction of the
Public Works Services Director, or designee.
25. The Owner/Applicant shall comply with all City requirements regarding building
safety, fire prevention, detection, suppression, emergency access, public right-of-
way improvements, parking, water supply and water facilities, sewer facilities, trash
reduction and recycling requirements, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) measures to the satisfaction of the Building Official, Fire Marshal,
Public Works Services Director, and Planning & Community Development
Administrator. Compliance with these requirements is to be determined by having
fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval by the
foregoing City officials and employees.
Resolution No. 2040 - MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24, and TRE 19-24
135 El Dorado Street
September 10, 2019 – Page 12 of 13
26. The Owner/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.
27. Approval of MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24, and TRE 19-24 shall
not be in effect unless the Property Owner and Applicant have executed and filed
the Acceptance Form with the City on or before 30 calendar days after the Planning
Commission has adopted the Resolution. The Acceptance Form to the Development
Services Department is to indicate awareness and acceptance of the conditions of
approval.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Approval
If the Planning Commission intends to approve this project, the Commission should move
to approve Multiple Family Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 18-04, Tentative
Parcel Map No. TPM 19-01 (82515), Protected Healthy Tree Removal Permit No. TRH
18-24, and Protected Tree Encroachment Permit No. 19-24, state that the proposal
satisfies the requisite findings, and adopt the attached Resolution No. 2040 that
incorporates the requisite environmental and subdivision findings, and the conditions of
approval as presented in this staff report, or as modified by the Commission.
Denial
If the Planning Commission is to deny this project, the Commission should state the
specific findings that the proposal does not satisfy based on the evidence presented with
specific reasons for denial, and move to deny Multiple Family Architectural Design Review
No. MFADR 18-04, Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 19-01 (82515), Protected Healthy
Tree Removal Permit No. TRH 18-24 and Protected Tree Encroachment Permit No. 19-
24 and direct staff to prepare a resolution for adoption at the next meeting that
incorporates the Commission’s decision and specific findings.
Resolution No. 2040 - MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24, and TRE 19-24
135 El Dorado Street
September 10, 2019 – Page 13 of 13
If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments
regarding this matter prior to the September 10, 2019, Planning Commission Meeting,
please contact Senior Planner, Luis Torrico at (626) 574-5442, or
ltorrico@ArcadiaCA.gov.
Approved:
Lisa L. Flores
Planning & Community Development Administrator
Attachment No. 1: Resolution No. 2040
Attachment No. 2: Aerial Photo with Zoning Information and Photos of the Subject
Property and Vicinity
Attachment No. 3: Historical Report
Attachment No. 4: Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 19-01 (82515)
Attachment No. 5: Proposed Architectural Plans
Attachment No. 6: Arborist Report
Attachment No. 7: Preliminary Exemption Assessment
Attachment No. 1
Attachment No. 1
Resolution No. 2040
Attachment No. 2
Attachment No. 2
Aerial Photo with Zoning Information &
Photos of the Subject Property and Vicinity
Overlays
Selected parcel highlighted
Parcel location within City of Arcadia
N/A
Property Owner(s):
Lot Area (sq ft):
Year Built:
Main Structure / Unit (sq. ft.):
R-3
Number of Units:
HDR
Property Characteristics
1936
1,190
1
PACIFIC OASIS LLC
Site Address:135 ELDORADO ST
Parcel Number: 5779-003-009
N/A
Zoning:
General Plan:
N/A
Downtown Overlay:
Downtown Parking Overlay:
Architectural Design Overlay:N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Residential Flex Overlay:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Special Height Overlay:
N/A
Parking Overlay:
Racetrack Event Overlay:
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 generated 04-Sep-2019
Page 1 of 1
Subject site – 135 El Dorado Street
West of subject site – 129 El Dorado Street
East of subject site – 137 El Dorado Street
View from alley – looking west
View from alley – looking east
Attachment No. 3
Attachment No. 3
Historical Report
6008 Friends Avenue, Whittier, California 90601-3724 or 1941 E. Pegasus Drive, Tempe, Arizona 85283
(562) 696-3852 (CA Office and FAX) (480) 664-0682 (AZ Office and FAX)
Email = jeanette.mckennaetal@gmail.com
McKenna et al.
History/Archaeology/Architectural History/Ethnography/Paleontology
Jeanette A. McKenna, MA, HonDL
Reg. Professional Archaeologist
August 30, 2018 Owner and Principal Investigator
City of Arcadia
Attn: Peter Sun, AICP
240 W. Huntington Drive
Arcadia, California 91066
RE: 135 E. El Dorado Street, Arcadia.
Mr. Sun:
McKenna et al. recently completed an architectural assessment of the property at 135
E. El Dorado Street, Arcadia. The potential historic resource was evaluated against the
National Register of Historic Places (National Register) and California Register of His-
torical Resources (California Register) eligibility criteria. Because Arcadia does not
currently have a historic preservation ordinance that establishes local eligibility criteria,
McKenna et al. was only able to evaluate the property against the federal and state eli-
gibility criteria.
The property is not listed on the City’s property listing. My evaluation resulted in a de-
termination that this property is not eligible for listing as an “individually eligible re-
source” and, therefore, assigned the designated code of 6Z (see attached forms).
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact my office in Whittier, CA.
Sincerely,
JJeanette A. McKenna
Jeanette A. McKenna, Principal
DPR 523A (12/11) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
PRIMARY RECORD
Primary #
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 1 of 48 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, LA Co., CA 91006
*Recorded by: Jeanette A. McKenna *Date: Aug. 30, 2018 X Continuation Update
P1. Other Identifier: APN 5773-003-009
*P2. Location: Arcadia, CA Not for Publication X Unrestricted
*a. County: Los Angeles and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.)
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Mt. Wilson Date: 1995 T 1N ; R 11W; NE ¼ of NW ¼ of Sec 34; S.B.B.M.
c. Address: 135 El Dorado Street City: Arcadia, CA Zip: 91006
d. UTM: Zone: 11 (NAD 83); 405331 mE/ 3777580 mN
e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate) Elevation: 460’
East of Santa Anita Avenue; between 1st and 2nd Avenues; north side of El Dorado Street
and within a residential area of single family and multi-family residential units.
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and
boundaries)
This property was developed as a single family residential lot (50’ x 160’) with a relatively
modest 3 bedroom/2 bath residence dating to ca. 1936-1939 ( See Continuation Sheet for
additional details).
*P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP-2 (Single-Family Residential Property)
*P4. Resources Present: Building(s) Structure Object X Site
District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.)
P5a. Photo or Drawing (Photo required for buildings, structures, and objects.)
P5b. Description of Photo: (View, date,
accession #) Aug, 20, 2018 (N)
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources
X Historic Prehistoric Both
*P7. Owner and Address:
Pacific Oasis
c/o Continental Assets Mgt.
Attn: Patricia Chang Moad
patriciamoad.cam@gmail.com
*P8. Recorded by: (affiliation and address)
Jeanette A. McKenna
6008 Friends Avenue
Whittier, California 90601
*P9. Date Recorded: Aug. 30, 2018
*P10. Survey Type: (Describe)
Assessment/ Evaluation
*P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") McKenna, Jeanette A. (2018) –
Architectural Assessment and Evaluation of 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, Los Angeles
County, California 91006. On file, McKenna et al., Whittier, CA.
*Attachments: NONE X Location
Map Archaeological Record X Continuation Sheet(s)
X BSO Record Sketch Map District Record Rock Art Record Linear Feature Record
Milling Station Record Artifact Record Photograph Record X Other (List): Photos
DPR 523B (12/11) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF
PARKS AND RECREATION
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, and
OBJECT RECORD
Primary #
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 2 of 48 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, LA Co., CA 91006
*Recorded by: Jeanette A. McKenna *Date: Aug. 30, 2018 X Continuation Update
B1. Historic Name: Josephine Shaumleffel Residence
B2. Common Name: Brooks Residence
B3. Original Use: Residential B4. Present Use: Residential
*B5. Architectural Style: Minimal Traditional (Bungalow)
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) 1936-39 (3 bed/2bath) with 1,190
square feet of living space (before additions; second small residence added to garage (no
permits). Additional detail presented on Continuation Sheets.
* B7. Moved? X No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features: Detached garage to north; second residence with attached garage; drive-
way on West side of garage and accessed via the alleyway; property surrounded by single
and multi-family properties of various dates of construction.
B9a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: A.R. Hoover
*B10. Significance: Theme: Residential Dev. Area Arcadia, Los Angeles Co., California
Period of Significance: 1936-1939 (+) Property Type: Residential Applicable Criteria: NONE
(Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also
address integrity.)
This area was originally developed in the late 1920s-early 1930s as a single family residen-
tial neighborhood on lots of 50’ by 160’. Subsequently, the neighborhood has been rede-
veloped with many multi-family residential properties. The development periods are rep-
resentative of the population growth and need for affordable housing in the LA suburbs,
especially areas in the San Gabriel Valley. Arcadia was developed as a middle-lower middle
class community for working class families both before and after World War II. Many local
residents were initially employed by the Santa Anita Racetrack and associated activities.
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) NONE
*B12. References: McKenna, Jeanette A. (2018) (Sketch Map with North Arrow Required.)
B13. Remarks: Demolition and Redevelopment
*B14. Evaluator: Jeanette A. McKenna
6008 Friends Avenue
Whittier, California 90601
(562) 696-3852
*Date of Evaluation: Aug. 30, 2108
(This Space is Reserved for Official Comments)
DPR 523J (12/11) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
LOCATION MAP
Primary #
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 3 of 48 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, CA 91006
Name of Map: USGS Mt. Wilson Scale: 1:24000 Date: 1995
DPR 523L (12/11) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 4 of 48 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, Los Angeles County, CA 91006
*Recorded by: Jeanette A. McKenna *Date: August 30, 2018 X Continuation Update
DPR 523L (12/11) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 5 of 48 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, Los Angeles County, CA 91006
*Recorded by: Jeanette A. McKenna *Date: August 30, 2018 X Continuation Update
DPR 523K (12/11) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
AERIAL PHOTO
Primary #
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 6 of 48 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, Los Angeles County, CA 91006
Drawn by: Jeanette A. McKenna *Date: August 30, 2018
DPR 523K (12/11) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
STREET VIEW PHOTO
Primary #
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 7 of 48 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, Los Angeles County, CA 91006
Drawn by: Jeanette A. McKenna *Date: August 30, 2018
DPR 523L (12/11) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 8 of 48 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, Los Angeles County, CA 91006
*Recorded by: Jeanette A. McKenna *Date: August 30, 2018 X Continuation Update
DPR 523L (12/11) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency DE-
PARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 9 of 48 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, LA Co., CA 91006
*Recorded by: Jeanette A. McKenna *Date: Aug. 30, 2018 X Continuation Update
DPR 523L (12/11) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 10 of 48 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, LA Co., CA 91006
*Recorded by: Jeanette A. McKenna *Date: Aug. 30, 2018 X Continuation Update
Sanborn Map of 1924 without Improvements.
Sanborn Map of 1929 without Improvements.
DPR 523L (12/11) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 11 of 48 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, LA Co., CA 91006
*Recorded by: Jeanette A. McKenna *Date: Aug. 30, 2018 X Continuation Update
The current project area is identified as being within the historic Rancho Santa Anita and a “…part
of Arcadia Santa Anita Tract Lot 9 Block 64 …” (ca. 1887), but was previously identified as being
within Block 204 (also Lot 9) of the original subdivision.
Assessor records lists the first improvement within this property as occurring in 1936. This was
confirmed by a news article of October 17, 1936, stating the property owner, Josephine Shaumleffel
(m. Leroy Shaumleffel, a postal worker), hired A.R. Hoover to construct a dwelling and garage on
the property. At the time of the construction, the Shaumleffel family was living nearby (at 30 El
Dorado Street) and there is no evidence they ever occupied the property now known as 135 El
Dorado Street. In fact, at the time the improvements were completed, the property was listed as
133 El Dorado Street and only changed to 135 El Dorado Street later (by ca. 1940). The Shaum-
leffels developed this property as an investment.
Shortly after construction, the Shaumleffels sold the property to Rowland Eastwood (1937-1939),
who, in turn, sold the property to Arthur L. and Nell Kloeckner. The Kloechners held the property
into the 1940s, when it was sold to Dixon S. and Sarah A. Brooks. Dixon Brooks died in 1946,
shortly after the purchase, and Sarah Brooks remained on the property until her death in 1968.
Claude A. Brooks, Dixon ’s brother and a retired widower, shared the property with his sister-in-law,
reportedly living at 135 ½ El Dorado Street – the small dwelling added to the garage. Claude A.
Brooks was still on the property until ca. 1970, when he pulled a permit for electrical work. Claude
died shortly thereafter (1970), and the property went to Brooks heirs (presumably Dixon’s daughter,
Georgia Ethel Brooks Kennedy, or granddaughter, Virginia).
Permits on file with the City showed Sarah Brooks had a sewer connection completed in 1950,
along with the addition of a bedroom. This addition was apparently completed on the main resi-
dence, not the garage. The addition to the garage appeared on the aerial photographs by 1964,
indicating it was completed sometime between 1950 and 1964. Claude first appears in the local
directories in 1965, suggesting the garage addition was completed in ca. 1963-64 and present
when the 1964 aerial was taken. There is no permit for this addition. McKenna et al. surmises the
addition to the garage was completed in preparation for the Claude’s presence and with the under-
standing Claude could assist Sarah, Sarah being in her 90s in the 1960s and Claude being quite
elderly, 72 in 1965.
No records were found for the post-1970 ownership of the property, as no permits were pulled and
the later census data was not available for review. Post-1970 alterations to the property was com-
pleted without permits and, as such, the County Assessor still lists the property as a single family
residential property while it is, in reality, a multi-family residential property.
The County Assessor identifies this property as consisting of a single residence of three bedrooms,
two baths, and 1,190 square feet of living space. This description appears inaccurate, was the
DPR 523L (12/11) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 12 of 48 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, LA Co., CA 91006
*Recorded by: Jeanette A. McKenna *Date: Aug. 30, 2018 X Continuation Update
main residence at this address is much larger than 1,190 square feet and the discrepancy is likely
due to the lack of permits for the additions to the rear of the original residence.
A visual review of the neighborhood surrounding the property at 135 El Dorado Street showed that
a number of the parcels have already been subjected to redevelopment, including the property to
the west (129 El Dorado Street). In fact, many of the surrounding lots have been redeveloped as
multi-family residential properties (apartments and condominiums), infilling the area. The original
neighborhood dominated by 1920s and 1930s bungalows no longer exists.
With respect to the improvements at 135 El Dorado Street, the original 1936 residence is present,
along with the 1936 garage. However, in addition to these improvements, McKenna et al. noted
the presence of at least two additions to the rear of the main residence and a second dwelling
constructed to the rear of the detached garage. This garage addition appears to have been com-
pleted in the mid-1960s and tentatively referenced as 135 ½ El Dorado Street.
When originally constructed, the residence at 135 El Dorado Street was a 1,190 square foot resi-
dence – likely with two bedrooms and one bath, standard for a 1936 “starter home.” The resident
was designed in a “T” shape with the north/south section on the west side of the property and an
east/west ell to the east. There was a projection to the south and north of the east/west axis of the
residence. Subsequently, there were additions to the north side of the residence, resulting on a
floor plan that included three separate east elevations, each slightly shallower as they continued to
the north.
The south elevation of this main residence (facing El Dorado Street) is recessed onto the property,
resulting in a relatively deep front yard. The yard is well landscaped, exhibiting mature trees,
shaped bushes, rose bushes, and grass. There is a sidewalk and a modest curbside grass ex-
panse. The south elevation, itself, is “L” shaped with an ell on the western side and a covered
porch to the east. The roof line is a cross-gable (predominantly oriented east/west) with composi-
tion shingles (the original roof would have consisted of wood shake shingles). In general, the
residence is a raised, wood framed structure with a stucco and wood shingle finish. There are floor
vents illustrating the raised floors and attic vents beneath the roof line.
The western ell on the south elevation is squared with a low-pitched roof line (oriented north/south)
and exhibits a stucco finish with wood shingles beneath the roof peak. There is a single window
(double hung sash with 8 panes per sash. The ears on the wood framed windows are indicative of
the 1930s construction designs. The wood shake shingles are also indicative of the 1930s and
tend to be associated with the more elaborate Craftsman style. In this case, however, the lack of
many Craftsman design elements negate the Craftsman references and this structure is considered
to be a simple, minimal traditional bungalow (but not a California Bungalow).
DPR 523L (12/11) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 13 of 48 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, LA Co., CA 91006
*Recorded by: Jeanette A. McKenna *Date: Aug. 30, 2018 X Continuation Update
The east facing wall of the western ell is solid (no windows or design elements) – a flat stucco
expanse. The remainder of the south elevation is beneath the porch expanse. Here a relatively
narrow concrete porch (with a two-step rise) extends from the walkway on the eastern side of the
property to the front door. The porch roof is supported by simple 4 x 4 posts and a slightly deco-
rative corner system of triangular braces. There is no railing, but the porch is bounded by shaped
bushes providing some privacy to the front of the residence. The main entry door is a solid panel
door (not original to the residence) and the windows consist of a pair of double hung sash windows
with ears – slightly smaller than the western window and exhibiting 6 panes per sash. The windows
have wooden sills but no framing. The lack of relief around the windows suggests this residence
was originally wood sided (e.g. clapboard), but later covered with stucco (although the structure
may also have been stucco sided and the re-stuccoing of the building resulting in a loss of relief).
The western elevation is slightly overgrown, but consists of an elongated expanse that includes the
original structure and the additions to the north. The corresponding east elevation illustrated the
three separate wall expanses. To the south, the original structure is illustrated in the form of a
relatively short wall with two double hung sash windows. The gable roof line caps a triangle of
tongue-in-groove horizontal boards designed to accentuate the building height. A small vent is
below the narrow eave. Again, the windows exhibit wooden sills, but no framing or relief. The
stucco siding is rough and uneven.
The north elevation of this portion of the residence exhibits a single door (paned – 10 panes) with
a built-in screen. This doorway appears to be original to the residence and is associated with a
concrete stoop (two-step) similar in construction to the front porch. The east elevation continues
with a recessed wall with two windows. This expanse is consistent with the first addition to the
residence, dated to 1950 and credited to Sarah Brooks. The two windows include one double hung
sash windows with 8 panes per sash (similar to the window on the south elevation) and a smaller
window encased within a pop-out box is a single, fixed pane. W ood trim on the east elevation and
north elevation in this corner of the residence indicates the concrete pad associated with this area
was once covered by a patio roof, which has since been removed.
The north elevation of this addition is similar to the east elevation of the main residence, exhibiting
a north/south trending gable roof with tongue-in-groove boards accentuating the triangle beneath
the peak. There is a single aluminum slider window on this northern elevation and another door-
way recessed beneath the extended roof line. A poured concrete path leads from the corner of
the building to the doorway.
This northern elevation of the addition is interrupted by the construction of yet another addition to
the north. Here, the roof line, also a low pitched gable roof, is lower than that of the first addition,
and trends north/south. The smaller addition is shallower than the first, resulting in the third seg-
ment of the east elevations. There is a single aluminum framed sash window on the northern
DPR 523L (12/11) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 14 of 48 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, LA Co., CA 91006
*Recorded by: Jeanette A. McKenna *Date: Aug. 30, 2018 X Continuation Update
extent of the east elevation and a corresponding aluminum framed sash window on the eastern
side of the north elevation. The remainder of the east and north elevations are flat stucco. There
is no west-facing window.
The three segments of the main residence far exceed the size of the structure listed by the Asses-
sor. McKenna et al. estimates the original structure was 1,190 square feet, the first addition was
at least 400 +/- square feet, and the second addition another 150 +/- square feet, rendering the
structure approximately 1750 +/- square feet. The first addition dates to ca. 1950 and the second
likely post-dates 1970 (after the Brooks’ ownership).
Overall, the main residence has been significantly altered through the replacement of the original
roofing, the re-surfacing of the entire structure; the addition of at least two phases of construction;
and the use of various styles of windows not consistent with the pre-1950 construction.
The garage was constructed in 1936 as a fairly standard, squared structure facing the adjoining
alley. The original structure exhibited a north/south trending gable roof line with narrow eaves and
small vents below the peaks of the low-pitched roof. The original shake shingles have been re-
placed by composition shingles. At some point, the garage was extended to the north with a 4-5
foot extension with a flat roof. This extension took the garage to the property line on the alley,
negating any previous set-back. The original garage doors have been replaced by a modern alu-
minum spring-action door. A secondary entrance is located on the west elevation, consisting of a
panel door with one small window pane. A car port has been constructed to the west of the garage,
extending the depth of the garage, indicating it was constructed when the garage was expanded
or shortly thereafter. Bothe the garage and carport have concrete slabs. The garage is wood
framed and stucco sided. An uncovered parking space is located to the west of the carport. The
east elevation of the garage has no windows or doors.
To the south of the garage, and conjoining the south elevation of the garage, is the ca. 1964 dwell-
ing that had been constructed by Sarah Brooks. Referenced as 135 ½ El Dorado Street, this
structure is still being used as a residence. This structure extends the width of the original garage
and at least another 10 feet to the west – approximately 30 feet wide and 15 feet deep (450 square
feet) and consists of one bedroom, one bath, and a small kitchen.
The west elevation is under an expansion of the carport roof, resulting in a small patio accessed
from a single, solid panel door on the west elevation. There is also a a 4-paned casement, wood
framed window on this elevation. Between the door and window is an exterior aluminum cabinet
housing the water heater.
The east elevation is a flat expanse with two windows. These are relatively average-sized sash
windows. The south elevation, facing the rear yard, is the main elevation and consists of a cen-
DPR 523L (12/11) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 15 of 48 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 135 El Dorado Street, Arcadia, LA Co., CA 91006
*Recorded by: Jeanette A. McKenna *Date: Aug. 30, 2018 X Continuation Update
tralized doorway behind a steel security door, and four windows. Three of the windows are double
hung sash designs with 2 panes per sash. There are no ears on the windows, indicating that date
later than the main residential sash windows. A smaller window is present to the west of the door-
way and consist of a modern vinyl frames casement window. All of the windows have wooden sills,
but no framing and no relief from the stucco siding. The overhang on the south elevation is deep
(2 feet +), providing some protection from the elements. This addition is constructed on a concrete
slab and surrounded by additional concrete.
The rear yard is not well maintained. There are a few trees, but there is no grass and few bushes.
The area is obviously used (children’s toys, etc.), but not landscaped as the front of the property.
McKenna et al. assessed this property in compliance with the standard guidelines presented in the
federal NEPA and state CEQA regulations. There are four main criteria. McKenna et al. found this
property was not associated with an significant historical events (Criterion A), nor associated with
any significant persons in national, state, regional, or local history (Criterion B). With respect to
architecture, the improvements are standard and consistent with the tens of thousands of 1930s
minimal traditional bungalows constructed in Los Angeles County. No unique materials were used
and the construction is simple and plain. There have also been significant alterations, including
but not limited to, re-roofing, re-surfacing of the walls, additions, alterations, inclusion of non-historic
materials, and unpermitted construction. The loss of architectural integrity and the absence of
associations with any significant architect or builder negates the applicability of Criterion C. Lastly,
the lack of any evidence of archeological resources negates the applicability of Criterion D. Over-
all, the property has failed to meet any of the required criteria and, therefore, McKenna et al.
has determined the property is not significant and ineligible for recognition as a historically
important cultural resource. The demolition of he existing improvements and the redevel-
opment of this property will not constitute an adverse environmental impact.
2YHUYLHZRI(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ (
2YHUYLHZRI(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ :
2YHUYLHZRI5HVLGHQFHDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1:
2YHUYLHZRI5HVLGHQFHDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1
2YHUYLHZRI5HVLGHQFHDW (O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 11(
2YHUYLHZRI5HVLGHQFHDW (O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 11(
2YHUYLHZRI5HVLGHQFHDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 11(
2YHUYLHZRI5HVLGHQFHDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 66(
2YHUYLHZRI5HVLGHQFHDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6
2YHUYLHZRI5HVLGHQFHDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6
2YHUYLHZRI5HVLGHQFHDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6
2YHUYLHZRI5HVLGHQFHDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6
2YHUYLHZRI5HVLGHQFHDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 66:
2YHUYLHZRI5HVLGHQFHDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 66:
2YHUYLHZRI5HVLGHQFHDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 11:
2YHUYLHZRI5HVLGHQFHDW (O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1
6RXWK(OHYDWLRQRI5HVLGHQFHDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1
/DQGVFDSHG<DUGDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1(
/DQGVFDSHG<DUGDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1
/DQGVFDSHG\DUGDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1(
6LGHZDON)URQWLQJ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ :
6RXWK(OHYDWLRQRI(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1:
:DONZD\(QWU\WR(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1
'HWDLORI6RXWK(OHYDWLRQRI(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1:
0DLQ(QWU\RQ6RXWK(OHYDWLRQ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 11:
3RUFK'HWDLORQ6RXWK(OHYDWLRQ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ :
3RUFKWR(QWU\RI5HVLGHQFHDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ :
6RXWKHDVWHUQ&RUQHURI5HVLGHQFH(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1:
(DVW(OHYDWLRQRI(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1:
:LQGRZ'HWDLO6RXWK(OHYDWLRQ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ (1(
:LQGRZ'HWDLO6RXWK(OHYDWLRQ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ (1(
(DVW(OHYDWLRQ:LQGRZ'HWDLO(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 11:
*DWHG(QWU\WR5HDU<DUG(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1
(DVWHUQ3URSHUW\%RXQGDU\ZLWK7UHH/LQH(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1
(DVW(OHYDWLRQRU5HDU$GGLWLRQWR5HVLGHQFH(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ :1:
5HDU(QWU\RQ1RUWK(OHYDWLRQ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6
6WRRSWR5HDU(QWU\1RUWK(OHYDWLRQ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6
&RQMRLQLQJ&RUQHURI1RUWKDQG(DVW(OHYDWLRQV(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6:
6HSDUDWLQJ&RQFUHWH6HJPHQWV5HDU<DUG(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 11:
2YHUYLHZRI<DUGDQG5HDU'ZHOOLQJ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1
(DVWDQG1RUWK(OHYDWLRQVRI5HVLGHQFH(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6:
1RUWKHUQ$GGLWLRQWR5HVLGHQFH(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ :
$GGLWLRQDO(QWU\WR5HVLGHQFHDW$GGLWLRQ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ :6:
0RGHUQ:LQGRZRQ5HDU$GGLWLRQ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ :
1RUWK(OHYDWLRQRI$GGLWLRQWR5HVLGHQFH(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6:
2YHUYLHZRI(DVWHUQ(OHYDWLRQ V (O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6
1RUWK(OHYDWLRQRI5HDU$GGLWLRQ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6
2YHUYLHZRI5HDU<DUG$UHD(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6(
6PDOO5HVLGHFHWR5HDURI3URSHUW\ $GMRLQJLQJ*DUDJH (O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ (
&RYHUHG3DUNLQJ$UHD$GMDFHQWWR*DUDJH(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1(
2SHQ3DUNLQJ$UHDDORQJ$OOH\(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1
2YHUYLHZRI$OOH\IURP(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ :1:
2YHUYLHZRI$OOH\IURP(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ (
:HVW(OHYDWLRQRI*DUDJHDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6(
&RQYHUWHG*DUDJHDQG%D\'RRUDW(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6(
(DVW(OHYDWLRQRI*DUDJHDQG$GGLWLRQ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6
:LQGRZVWR5HVLXGHQFH$GGHGWR*DUDJH(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 66:
6HFRQGDU\(QWUDQFHWR*DUDJH(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6(
:HVW6LGHRI5HDU'ZHOOLQJ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6
2YHUYLHZIR<DUGIURP'ULYHZD\(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6(
0DWXUH7UHHVLQ<DUGRI(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6
6RXWK(OHYDWLRQRI6PDOO5HDU'ZHOOLQJ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1(
6RXWK(OHYDWLRQRI6PDOO5HDU'ZHOOLQJ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ (1(
&RQFUHWH:DONZD\LQ5HDU<DUG(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6
9LHZIURP)URQW+RXVHWR5HDU+RXVH(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 1
%RDUG,OOXVWUDWLQJ2OG&RYHUHG3DWLR6XSSRUW1RUWK(OHYDWLRQ(O'RUDGR6WUHHW$UFDGLD&$ 6
Attachment No. 4
Attachment No. 4
Tentative Parcel Map No. 19-01 (82515)
! "#$%$
! "#$$
&
%''
(
& $$
&
) *
* *
+**
* *
*
*
)
* *
+
*
)
,
*) *
)
- #! "
- #!"
$$ . !$
"
! "/'!"
*
)
)*
%0% 1*
#
*# )
*
)
# )
#
#
#
*
# )
*
# )
23456$78
$$
! "
'$(
&
%$$
9:##'
$$(
(&
&
%$$
!$"%#
%#$$#$$%
-!
"
&'.
' &.
&$.
*
+
+
'
%
*
* *
)
)$#
$
* *
) 1 **
+$
$
'
* *
1
'1
'1
'1
'1
*
)
;
;
;
;
;
;
1< *
*'=
*
%
*
'$
Attachment No. 5
Attachment No. 5
Architectural Plans
! "#$
" "
% &
'"(
)
*+
,
- "".
/0*1* 1'
2"34"(
)
'
*
3
-
2
+
.
4
3" 1
"
25 .
. "
"
'
*
2
25
'5
'5
'5
'5
6
6
6
6
6
6
.57
'8
+
.
4
3
-
'"
**
(,
,
- "".
%3"3&*-412233
* 3
+9
)22+349
81,7(/'25$'2675((781,781,7$//(</27&29(5$*(6800$5<
727$//$1'6&$3('$5($ 6)
6)2)0(',80:$7(586(3/$176
6)2)/2::$7(586(3/$176
6)2)121(:$7(586(2108/&+
+$5'6&$3(,1)52176(7%$&. 6)
$//2:('6)25
DATE REVISIONS
SCALE
DATE
PROJECT NO.
DRAWN BY
CHECKED BY
SHEET NO.
OF 1 SHEETTWO TREESDESIGN, INC.(PDLO 3-UNIT CONDOMINIUM135 ELDORADO STARCADIA, CA. 9100608-30-2019
CPLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN SERVICESCALIFORNIA RLA#58401832 SAN DIEGO ST. WEST COVINA, CA. 91790AS SHOWN
P1873&+,$&+(1 *3(51*12
ÁÁ
ÁÁLANDSCAPEPLANTING PLANL-1
Attachment No. 6
Attachment No. 6
Arborist Report
Attachment No. 7
Attachment No. 7
Preliminary Exemption Assessment
Preliminary Exemption Assessment FORM “A”
PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT
1. Name or description of project: MFADR 18-04, TPM 19-01 (82515), TRH 18-24 and TRE 19-
24 – A tentative parcel map for a three-unit residential
condominium development with a Categorical Exemption under
the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”)
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):
135 El Dorado Street (1st Avenue & 2nd Avenue)
3. Entity or person undertaking
project:
A.
B. Other (Private)
(1) Name Patricia Moad, Applicant
(2) Address 133 E. Saint Joseph St
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: 15332 – Class 32 (In-fill development project)
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:
September 10, 2019
Staff:
Luis Torrico, Senior Planner