Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-23-21 PC MinutesARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, MARCH 23, 2021 CALL TO ORDER Chair Wilander called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. on Zoom. She informed the public of Zoom's "raise hand" feature for public comments. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL PRESENT (Via teleconference): Chair Wilander, Vice Chair Lin, Chan, Thompson, and Tsoi ABSENT: None SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS Planning & Community Development Administrator Lisa Flores announced that staff received four (4) late correspondence related to Agenda Item No. 1 and one (1) late correspondence related to Agenda Item No. 2 which will be read into the record during the public hearing section for each item. PUBLIC COMMENTS (5 minute time limit per person) There were none. PUBLIC HEARING Resolution No. 2076 — Denying the Appeal of Site Plan and Design Review for Single -Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 19-29 for a proposed first and second story addition to an existing one story residence with a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) at 139 Laurel Avenue Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2076 Appellant and Property Owner: Xinwnen Zhang and Vivian Li Chair Wilander introduced the item and turned it over to Senior Planner Luis Torrico to present the staff report. Mr. Torrico answered several questions of Planning Commissioners. Chair Wilander asked if the Appellant would like to speak on the item. Kongzhen Li responded on behalf of the Applicant and explained the need for a newly renovated, two-story residence to accommodate their family. Chair Wilander opened the public hearing. There were six (6) callers in opposition of the item: 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. 1) Lily Liu: The second story addition poses a serious privacy concern and is out of character with the neighborhood. 2) Molly Hetick and Mehdi Tadayon: The second story addition will look out of place and block views of the San Gabriel Mountains; privacy issues also need to be considered; the expansion of the residence can be done without adding a second story; the property owner has never lived at the subject site, and it is being used as a short-term rental. 3) Carol and Gerald Wuenschell: The proposed two-story residence will detract from the single - story ranch -style character of the neighborhood; expansion can be accomplished by adding to the rear of the house. 4) Sanjay and Radhika Rao: The main concern is privacy; the neighborhood consists of single - level houses and this characteristic should be preserved; the Appellant offered no valid reasons for the second story addition. 5) Sally Shaw: The style of the proposed item looks out of character; it will obstruct the mountain views; the property is being used as a rental, which is a concern for the family-oriented neighborhood. 6) Joan Bloomfield: The subject site is over -built as it is and has not been maintained for years; the property appears to be vacant, the second story addition will upset the entire neighborhood. Ms. Flores read two emails into the record that were received prior to the meeting from residents who did not speak during the public hearing. The first email was from Jin Wang who was in support of the item, and the second email was from Patricia Ruyter who was in opposition. Chair Wilander asked if the Appellant would like to respond to any of the comments. Mr. Li responded that the additions will be done according to the City's regulations and take into account the health and safety of the Appellant's family and neighbors. Commissioner Chan inquired as to why the Appellant did not adopt or follow the recommendations made by Staff and the City's architectural consultant. The Appellant did not respond. MOTION- PUBLIC HEARING It was moved by Vice Chair Lin, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to close the public hearing. Without objection, the motion was approved. DISCUSSION Commissioner Thompson stated that the architectural style, mass and scale of the item are inconsistent with the existing structures in the neighborhood, and do not comply with the Development Code, General Plan, or Design Guidelines. It also impacts privacy to neighboring properties. The City's architectural consultant provided recommendations which were not adopted. He agreed with Staffs recommendation to deny the Appeal. 3/23/2021 Commissioner Chan expressed his disappointment in the Appellant's unwillingness to work with Staff and follow Staff's recommendations. He hoped the Appellant will work on finding an acceptable solution. Commissioner Tsoi concurred with Commissioner Thompson and Commissioner Chan, and noted that the Appellant should be able to accommodate the square footage needed within a one-story structure by removing the swimming pool. Vice Chair Lin stated that he has no issues with the second story addition; however, an expansion of the residence could be accomplished by a single -story addition. He found it unfortunate that the Appellant's architect did not explain why Staffs recommendations were not adopted. Chair Wilander acknowledged the neighbors' reluctance to the proposed additions given that the neighborhood seems to be very cohesive and a two-story structure will impact privacy. The City went above and beyond to work with the Appellant, but the plans submitted were not in compliance with the City's guidelines. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Vice Chair Lin to adopt Resolution No. No. 2076, denying the Appeal of Site Plan and Design Review for Single -Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 19-29 for a proposed first and second story addition to an existing one story residence with a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) at 139 Laurel Avenue ROLL CALL AYES: Chair Wilander, Vice Chair Lin, Chan, Thompson, and Tsoi NOES: None ABSENT: None 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 April 2, 2021. 2. Resolution No. 2075 — Approving Multiple Family Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 20- 05, Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 20-05 (83240), Protected Healthy Tree Removal Permit No. TRH 2O-08, and Protected Tree Encroachment Permit No. TRE 20-20 with a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a 13 -unit multi -family residential development at 901 W. Duarte Road Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2075 Applicant: Eric Tsang, on behalf of the property owner, 901 Duarte LLC Chair Wilander introduced the item and turned it over to Assistant Planner Edwin Arreola to present the staff report. Mr. Arreola answered several questions of Planning Commissioners. Chair Wilander asked if the Applicant would like to speak on the item. Architect Eric Tsang spoke on behalf of the Applicant. 3/23/2021 Chair Wilander opened the public hearing. There were no callers for this agenda item. Ms. Flores read one email into the record that was received prior to the meeting from Nayan Pandya, a neighboring resident who was opposed to the item and concerned with privacy and traffic impacts due to the development. Chair Wilander asked if the Applicant would like to respond to the comment. Mr. Tsang responded that adequate foliage will be provided and act as a privacy screen for neighboring residents; the City's noise limits will be followed during the development; and the driveway to the entrance of the project site will provide sufficient parking space as to not obstruct traffic. MOTION- PUBLIC HEARING It was moved by Commissioner Chan, seconded by Commissioner Tsoi to close the public hearing. Without objection, the motion was approved. DISCUSSION Commissioner Tsoi complimented the architectural design of the project but expressed concerns regarding the encroachment upon one Oak tree. Mr. Arreola explained that the pruning of the Oak tree will remove more than 30% of its existing canopy and the Arborist Report recommended several protective measures. Commissioner Thompson stated that the 20 x 20 foot garages are functional for the development, the Carolina Cherry Trees will provide privacy along the west and north property lines, and that the item warrants approval. Chair Wilander agreed that the architectural design of the project is well thought out and she would be inclined to support the item. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Tsoi to adopt Resolution No. No. 2075, approving Multiple Family Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 20-05, Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 20-05 (83240), Protected Healthy Tree Removal Permit No. TRH 20-08, and Protected Tree Encroachment Permit No. TRE 20-20 with a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a 13 -unit multi -family residential development at 901 W. Duarte Road ROLL CALL AYES: Chair Wilander, Vice Chair Lin, Chan, Thompson, and Tsoi NOES: None ABSENT: None 4 3/23/2021 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 April 2, 2021. 3. Resolution No. 2074 — Approving Minor Use Permit No. MUP 20-03, Architectural Design Review No. ADR 19-13, and Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 20-03 (83042) with a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a new mixed-use development with 12 residential units above 3,480 square feet of ground floor commercial uses located at 122-128 E. Live Oak Avenue Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2074 Applicant: Thomas Li, Prestige Design, Planning, and Development Inc., on behalf of the property owner, North America DongHeng Holding Inc. Chair Wilander introduced the item and turned it over to Associate Planner Christine Song to present the staff report. Commissioner Chan expressed concerns over traffic volume in the alley and inquired about the safeguards against speeding. Deputy Director of Development Services and City Engineer Phil Wray explained that the City can include speed limit signage in the alley but does not anticipate the project site to generate a lot of traffic. Commissioner Thompson inquired about the monthly parking fee of $60 per month. Mr. Wray stated that parking stalls will be managed by the HOA and can be purchased separately from the residential units. This measure will reduce the number of vehicle miles travelled (VMT) as required by the City's VMT Guidelines and the SVGCOG Evaluation Tool Report. Chair Wilander added that the monthly parking fee is intended to incentivize the use of public transportation. Chair Wilander asked if the Applicant would like to speak on the item. Mr. Li spoke on behalf of the property owner and stated that the design is in full compliance with Code. In response to Commissioner Thompson's inquiry, he added that the parking arrangement is a way to encourage alternative transportation and reduce the number of vehicles on the project site. Chair Wilander opened the public hearing. There were no callers for this agenda item. MOTION- PUBLIC HEARING It was moved by Commissioner Chan, seconded by Commissioner Tsoi to close the public hearing. Without objection, the motion was approved. 5 3/23/2021 DISCUSSION Vice Chair Lin stated that the parking arrangement is an interesting attempt to encourage public transportation and he is curious to see the result. Commissioner Tsoi expressed concerns regarding the common trash enclosure on the ground floor and the lack of setback requirements for the private balconies on the east and west sides of the project site. Commissioner Thompson stated that while he feels the VMT analysis does not provide relevant mitigation measures, the development is a welcomed addition that will revitalize Live Oak Avenue. Commissioner Chan echoed Commissioner Tsoi's concern regarding the shared trash enclosure and Commissioner Thompson's apprehension about the parking arrangement; nonetheless, he agreed that the development is a positive addition to the area. Chair Wilander concurred with her fellow Commissioners that the development is a well-designed and welcomed addition, but requested that the City install speed limit signage in the alley. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Tsoi, seconded by Vice Chair Lin to adopt Resolution No. No. 2074, approving Minor Use Permit No. MUP 20-03, Architectural Design Review No. ADR 19- 13, and Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 20-03 (83042) with a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a new mixed-use development with 12 residential units above 3,480 square feet of ground floor commercial uses located at 122-128 E. Live Oak Avenue ROLL CALL AYES: Chair Wilander, Vice Chair Lin, Chan, Thompson, and Tsoi NOES: None ABSENT: None 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 April 2, 2021. CONSENT CALENDAR 4. Minutes of the March 9, 2021 Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Vice Chair Lin to approve the minutes of the March 9, 2021 Planning Commission Regular Meeting. ROLL CALL AYES: Chair Wilander, Vice Chair Lin, Chan, Thompson, and Tsoi NOES: None ABSENT: None 6 3/23/2021 MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL LIAISON Council Liaison Cheng announced that the vaccination center located in Rosemead is currently in operation and those in need of a vaccine can contact him for more information. A total of 300,000 masks will be given to the Arcadia Unified School District for its teachers and students as schools begin to reopen. He also encouraged everyone to take action against negativity by giving back to the community. MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSONERS Commissioner Chan inquired as to whether there have been any reported cases of anti -Asian attacks within the City of Arcadia given the recent rise in anti -Asian hate crimes. Assistant City Manager Jason Kruckeberg responded that he had spoken to Police Chief Roy Nakamura and confirmed that there have been no reported cases; the City is on alert and will keep tracking. MATTERS FROM ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY Assistant City Attorney Maurer informed the Commissioners of a new bill, AB 69, that will significantly impact local control. If passed, it will allow an appeal of housing development decision to the California Department of Housing and Community Development. He will continue to monitor how the bill progresses. MATTERS FROM STAFF INCLUDING UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS Ms. Flores announced that there is one item pending for the April 13, 2021 meeting: a modification to the second story of an existing home that is located within a Homeowners Association. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission adjourned the meeting at 7:20 p.m. to Tuesday, April 13, 2021, at 7:00 p.m. on Zoom for the next virtual meeting. Marilynne WUilander Chair, Planning Commission 1 ATTEST: _ r� Lisa Flores Secretary, Planning Commission 3/23/2021