Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJUNE 28, 1988 7 \' . . Planning Commission proceedings are taped recorded and on file in the office of the Planning Department. MINUTES ARCADIA CITY PLANNING COMMISSIoN REGUlJIR MEETING Tuesday, June 28. 1988 The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, June 28, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Arcadia City Hall, 240 West Huntington Drive, with Chairman Dave Szany presiding. PLEDGE OF AlLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: PRESENT: ABSENT: MOllON Commissioners Amato, Hedlund, Papay, Szany Commissioner ClarK It was moved by Commissioner Papay, seconded by Commissioner Amato to excuse Commissioner ClarK from tonight's meeting. The motion passed by voice vole with none dissenting. MINUTES MOllON It was moved by Commissioner Hedlund, seconded by Commissioner Papay to approve the Minutes of June 14, 1988 ss published. The,motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. MOllON It was moved by Commissioner Papay, seconded by Commissioner Amato to read all resolutions by title only and waive reading the full body of the resolutions. The motion ,passed by voice vote with none dissenting. OTHERSATTENDlNG: Council Uaison Mary Young City Attorney Michael Miller Planning Director William Woolard Senior Planner Donna Butler Associate Planner CorKran Nicholson Secretary Silva Vergel " .. . . The City Attorney announced that the City Charter requires that for any action to be adopted or approved a majority of the entire membership must vote I" favor of he partIcular motion. If the required three. votes are not obtained the motion would fail. If the required three votes are not obtained (1) an applicant may request continuance and it is up to the Commission to decide whether or not' they want to grant it; (2) the matter could be heard and then deferred for final decision pending participation of the absent members as long as they review the records of this proceedings which would be made available to them or (3) the matter could simply go forward to the City Council. PUBLIC HEARING C:U.P. 88-015 156 W. Las Tunas Dr. Ingeborg Hellwig The staff report was presented. Staff explained that the property. maintenance condition was put in the conditions of approval to ensure maintenance. There .have been some problems with the. site ss far as maintenance and landscaping and through this procedure the City can get the necessary areas landscaped and noted that it would not be reasonable to require more landscaping. Staff felt that property maintenance is not the responsibility of the applicant but the property owner. Consideration of a conditional use permit, parking and landscaping modifications for a delicatessen with twelve (12) seats. The public hearing was opened. Mrs. Ingeborg Hellwig, 156 W. Las Tunas. stated that she was in agreement with the conditions of approval. Pat Leone, 5650 EI Monte, Temple City, asked what the hours of operation would be. In reply, Mrs. Hellwig said that her hours of operation would be from 9:00 a.m.-5:30 p.m. MellON It was moved by Commissioner Hedlund, seconded by Comm~sioner Papay to close the public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. Commissioner Hedlund wondered how the landscaping could be the responsibility of the applicant. Staff replied that the property owner is responsible for the upkeep of the site and the property maintenance. She commented that the property owner has already stated that they will be restriping the parking lot. MbllOO It was moved by Commissioner Papay, seconded by Commissioner Hedlund to approve C.U.P. 88-015 subject to the conditions in the staff report. Arcadia City Planning Commission June 28 1988 Page 2 , . . ROLL CALL: AYES: NCeS: ABSENT: Commissioners Amsto, Hedlund, Papay, Szany None Commissioner Clark There is a fIVe working day appeal period after the adoption ofthe resolution. PUBLIC HEARING T.M. 46547 153-f57 Diamond St. Sing-Wang Cheng Consideration of a tentative map for a 10- unit residential condominium project. The staff report was presented. Staff remarked that no modifications were required for this project and noted that it compiles with Code. The new regulstions don't apply to this project since it was submitted before'the new regulations went into effect. This projeCt did, go through the architectural design review procedure. The public hearing was opened. WilllamCheng, 1017 Catalpa, commented that they are in sgreement with all of the conditions in the staff report. MO"TlOl'J It was moved by Commissioner Papay, seconded by Commissioner Amato to close the public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. MO"TlOl'J It was moved by Commissioner Papay, seconded by Commissioner Hedlund to approve T .M. 46547 subjeCt to the conditions in the staff report. ROLL CAu.: AYES: NCeS: ABSENT: -Commissioners Amato, Hedlund, eapay, SZ!lny None Commissioner Clark There Is a ten day appeal period. Arcadia City Planning Commission June 28 1988 Page 3 " . . Chairman Szany abstained from this item, since he is the architect of tlie project. PUSUC HEARING C.U.P. 88-017 & ADR 88-71 748-756 Naomi Ave. Michael Pashaie Consideration of a conditional use permit for a proposed 18-unit residential condominium project to be within a general commercial zone. The staff report was presented. Staff explained that the parking adjacent to the warehouse hasn't been developed and noted that the second level of the parking structure is mostly unused. The public hearing was opened. Michael Pashaie, 324 N. Palm, Severy Hills, one of the owners of the site was present. He stated that they are in agreement with the conditions in the staff report. He cornmented that even during the peak seasons of the year; i.e. Thanksgiving and Christmas, the parking lots were never full. Last Christmas season the shopping center was in operation and the parking lot was never Completely full. The designated parking areas for the employees, which has not been enforced yet, are behind Vons and the shops to the west and they can also park on the second level of the parking structure. He noted that most of the time the parking structure is not useq. He said that the Code takes the warehouse and storage areas into consideration when determining the number of required parking spaces. He felt that since the storage areas in Vons. Ross. Hinshaws and the Music Shop are not used as retail, that should not be taken irito consideration in determining the number of required parking spaces. He said thaHhere is good flow in the center. He explained that the warehouse is served by trucks and heavy machinery and remarked that by building condominiums on the subject site the area would be improved and would enhance the community and provide a much more pleasant surrounding than a warehouse and an employee parking. M01lON It was moved by Commissioner Hedlund. seconded by Commissioner Amato to close the public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. Mr. Woolard said that the traffic study was conducted during the peak hours of the day and not the peak.season.and noted that the study added an additional 1 0% to the actual number of cars parked on the iot. The study showed that 47% of the parking lol'w8S vBcant and he felt that the available parking is adequate. Staff said that parking is based on total gross square footage and includes storage and basement areas within the complex. In answer to Commissioner Hedlund's questions. staff said that the Hinshaws building and the stores nearby have a total of 59,573 sci.ft. of stcrage area. Commissioner Papay stated that he is. satisfied with the. amount of parking spaces available. Since Code takes into consideration the storage areas in determining the number of required parking spaces. he felt that the available parking Is adequate. He remarked thatlhe distance between buildings seems to break up the units rather than having the affect of a massive wall and he noted that he liked the two-unit concept. Arcadia City Planning Commission June 28 1988 Page 4 .\ . . Commissioner Hedlund agreed with Commissioner Papay and commented that he thought that the 10' distance between buildings is reasonable and felt that It enhances the building design. Commissioner Amato was in favor of the project. MOllON It was moved by Commissioner Hedlund, seconded by Commissioner Amato to approve C.U.P. 88-017 & ADR 88-71 subject to the conditions in the staff report. ROLLCAll.: AYES: N:ES: ABSENT: ABST AlN: Commissioners Amato. Hedlund. Papay None Commissioner Clark Chairman Szany There Is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the resolution. PUBUC HEARING 41 W. Lemon Richard L. Orr dba IRC Electric Consideration of.revocation of the home occupation permit. The staff report was presented. Mike Miller reviewed with the Commission. the alternatives that are available to the Commission. He remarked ihat the Commission can suspend the license and have staff review it more thoroughly and stop the use pending the findings. The HOP would automatically be active after the designated period. The intent of the HOP is to try to keep the use as residential as possible but still allow some lead way for certain types of uses that are not In conflict with residential. Staff explained that when the HOP board ~eard this request, it approved the HOP based on the conditions that no materials be. stored on the site and that nc employees meet at the house. In inspecting the site there doesn't seem to be. storage of any materials. Staff commented thst the only letter received was by Mr. and Mrs. Williams who were unable to attend and are In favor of -the revocation. There was.one gentleman whjl Cll.lled to complain but after the first lelter was senllo Mr. Orr there have been no more complaints from film. - The public hearing was opened. Richard Orr, 41 W. Lemon, the owner of the business was present. He remarked that one of his employees Was meeting his son-in-law, who resides on the property, to car pool to a job site in Long Beach. He commented that since he has been made aware of the complaint he has asked that the subject employee meet his son"ln-law elsewhere. He indicated that there is no storage of materials on the site and all the parts are stored on the job site and all deliveries are made to the job site. He said that normally he would leave about 7:00 a.m. but due to the distance to the present job site they are forced to leave early to get there by 7:00 a.m. He described.the truck and said that it is used for transportation. He commented that they park the two trucks side by side near the fence and explained the reason for parking the trucks there and said that several Arcadia City Planning Commission June 28 1988 Page 5 " . . years ago some tools were stolen from the trucks and by parking the trucks very close to each other nobody could get to the tool boxes in the trucks. He said that the trucks and the cars are legally parked on concrete. He explsined the activities taking place in the morning and said that his wife's and daughter's cars are parked in front of the the trucks at night and early in the morning he moves his wife's car to go to the store and when he returns he parks it on the street in fron! Qf his house. When he is ready to go to work the only car he has to move is ilis daughter's to get to the trucks. He stat9cl that in the morning when he stsrts the trucks he leaves the lights off so he won't disturb his neighbors. He felt that the complaints were unjustified and said that his house is used for office only and said that he utilizes a computer and the phone In his house. He noted that in 1984 there were some work related materials being stored there but since then he has rented a storage space and keeps most of the,excess materials there. F;rancis Orr, 41 W. Lemon. said that one of the cars parked on the driveway is her car and said that four nights a week she works in the evenings and doesn't get home until about 7:00 a.m. so on four mornings her father only has to move one car. Commissioner Amato concurred with Mr. Orr and said that the trucks do carry expensive equipment and if they are lost or stolen it puts a burden on the individual. He also stated that based upon his experience most of the wO,rkers like to get to a job site early to begin work and he could see the reasoning for leaving so early to get to the job site. Commissioner Hedlund commented that this problem is sort of related to construction and it is due to HOP and wondered if it could be eliminated. He remarked that if Mr. Orr didn't have the HOP, which is a fairly restrictive permit. he probably would not have this problem. He said that the problem is probably because the trucks are parked by the fence and when he starts them in the morning it wakes the neighbors. Commissioner Papay agreed and said thatthe presence of the HOP sllows the neighbors to complsin to the City. Mrs. Ruppenthal, 45 W. Lemon. She said that Mr. Orr's business has never been bothersome to the neighborhood and noted that they are good neighbors anddon't make noise. She commented that he doesn't even turn the lights of the, truck on in the mOryling so he doesn't disturb the neighbors. She remarked that Mr. and Mrs. Williams complaints are not justified. MallON It was moved by Commissioner Papay, seconded by Commissioner Amato to close the public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. Commissioner Papay could not see any reasons to revoke the HOP especiallyslnbe Mr. Orr I)as' arranged for the employee to meet hisson.in.law elsewhere to car pool. The truck is used as transportation and he could see why he would park in the described manner to prevent burglaries. He was pleased that the applicant has resolved the storing of materials on the site. Chairman Szany felt that the original conditions of approval should apply. Commissioner Hedlund encouraged Mr. Orr tc try and prevent any problems with his neighbors. Arcadia City Planning Commission June 28 1988 Page 6 . . . MJTION It was m'Oved by Commissioner Hedlund,-seconded by C'Ommissioner Papay t'O all'Ow Mr. Orr to continue 'Operating his business fr'Om his h'Ome subject to the 'Original conditi'Ons 'Of appr'Oval 'Of the h'Ome occupati'On permit. ROLL CALl.: AYES: ~ ABSENT: Commissioners Amat'O, Hedlund, Papay, Szany None C'Ommissl'Oner Clark . - .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. -..- .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION Pat Le'One, 5650 EI M'Onte, Temple City, stated thst she is representing a gr'Oup 'Of h'Omeowners in Temple City wh'O are very upset and concemed about the present situati'On with the Dlal-A- Ride. She remarked that there are many cars parked there and when they purchased their pr'Opertles they-were unaware 'Of the changes. She said that the area resembles .Grand Central Stati'On. and w'Ondered how this pr'Oblem could be resolved. Mike Miller informed her that she sh'Ould speak t'O the City Manager's office in regard t'O this pr'Oblem. In response t'Oa questi'On fiom Ms. Leone, she was tald that the City Council meets 1st and 3rd Tuesdays 'Of the m'Onth and she could direct her concerns-to them. .. ~ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ,- -.'" .. -," .. .. --.. .. .. .. .. .. -,.. -,.. .. .. .. .. .. WAIVER OF PARCEL MAP final 1121 EI Monte and 220 W. Duarte Rd. Henry Spurgeon C'Onsiderati'On 'Of a request for waiver 'Of parcel map. RESOLUTION 1378 A resolutian waiving the requirements 'Of a parcel map for the properties at 220 W. Duarte Rd. and 1121 EI Monte Ave. The staff report and the resolution were presented. MOTIaII It was moved by C'Ommissi'Oner Hedlund, seconded by Commissioner Papay t'O approve the waiver 'Of final parcel map and t'O adopt Resolution 1378 ta f'Ormallyaffirm the decisi'Ons 'Of June 28, 1988, reflecting the flndings 'Of the Commissl'On and the v'Otes"there'On. ROLL CALl.: AYES: ~ ABSENT: Commissioners Amat'O, Hedlund, Papay, Szany None Commissioner Clark .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Arcadia City Planning C'Ommission June 28 1988 Page 7 \ . . Planning Commissio!,! discussion on: A Reversed comer lotslkey lots and new side yard setbacks to old rear yard setbacks B.. Larger R-1 lots C. Single-sided cul-de-sacs D. R-3 density and density classifications E. Design of homes for new'tracts F. C.U.P.s for liquor stores and retail store with extended hours Mr. Woolard presented the staff report and suggested taking each item separately. There has been a text amendmentinitiated on item F. He submitted several exhibits to the Commission and explained each one and remarked that the Commission should recommend'to the City Council to direct staff to prepare the appropriate text amendments. A Reversed corner lotsfkey lots and new side yard setbacks to old rear yard setbacks Commissioner Papay remarked that if someone purchases a property and wants to develop it with a cul-de-sac the neighbors should not be detrimentally affected and explsined that what was the remaining property owner's resr yard setback, may become his side yard setback. He said that developers will probably try and build as many houses as possible on a lot and: the proposed changes on the setbacks will probably reduce the nlimber of houses. He said that modifications could be granted if one could not meet the requirements. Commissioner Hedlund noted that the recent lot split on Caroline Way and Live Oak is a very good example of what Commissioner Papay is referring to. He suggested having c.u.p.s approved on all subdivisions and stated that by having thalrequirement.develci'pers will not be able to put large houses on small lots in cul-de-sacs and referred to the one situation that canie before the Commission on 152 Winnie Way. Chairman Szany said that this change would result in two front yards. Mr. Woolard indicated thai the modification procedure is used often to reduce the setbacks which in turn would 'increase the size of the house on the lot and many times they are encroaching into the special setbacks which are somewhat unreasonable; i.e. 50' from the property line. When developers come to the City, it is explained to them that they should have some idea of where the house will'be placed on the property and ,hen it can.be determined if a modification would be required. This puts the developer on notice so that maybe they will design the lots to accommodate .the houses that they would like to build on the lots. He felt that the requirements - should be set forth in the Code so there would be less discretionary actions. He said that larger setbacks on corner. lots would increase the width of the lots and increases the setliack requirement would help to mitigate the reverse corner lots. Staff recommended establishing a minimum setback of 20' on corner lots but if there is a specia,lsetback a modificetion would be required if a developer wished to. encroach within the special setback and remarked that the special setback wOiJld take precedent over the 20' setback. With the new minimum lot width of 85' there should be no problem getting a 20" setback. The consensus of the Commission. was to suggest Alternative B to the City Council which would initiate a text, amendment for the consideration of amending the setback regulations to require a greater street side yard setl1ack for reverse corner lots, so as to have new dwellings not projecting substantially in front of existing sdjacent dwellings. Arcadia City Planning Commission June 28 1988 Page 8 , . . B. Larger R-1 lots Mr. Woolard indicated that he didn't think that increasing the lot size would achieve a great deal. Commissioner Hedlund commented that the new cul-de-sacs create lots that are in excess of 7500 sq. ft. but the new lots are odd shaped. Commissioner Papay said that by increasing the minimum lot size requirement many non- cOnforming lots would be created. He thought that Increasing the minimum lot size requirement would be a substantial change and wondered if this should be delayed 10 see whether the other proposed text .amendments would remedy the problem. He recommended taking no action to Increase. the size of the lots and said that it would be a drastic change. Chairman Szany noted that the cul-de-sacs that have come before the Commission have all had lots that exceed the minimum requirement. Councilwoman Young remarked that she hss received many comments on the new proposed house on Campesina which will be 4,600 sq. ft. and said that if they were to build to the maximum allowed by Code they would be able to construct a 13,000 sq. ft. home based on the size of the lot. She noted that it has been suggested to her to limit the size of the houses. Mr. Woolard said that many of the complaints are the size of the houses in relation to the size of the lots and this can be addressed through setbacks. The consensus of the Commission was to take no action. C. Single-sided cul,de-sacs Commissioner Papay asked ii the City can adopt.a position that there should be no one-sided cul- de-sacs unless it can be proved with good suffICient reason that it makes. sense. Commissioner Papay wondered if something could be done about the frequency of cul-de-sacs and suggested a minimum distance requirement between cul-de-sacs. Commissioner Hedlund agreed and said that the cul-de-sacs should either be lined up or off set Mr. Woolard remarked that much of whst can and can not be done is set forth in the.State regulations and there is nothing that would prohibit the Commission from requiring an environmental impact report that would look at traffic issues on single-sided cui-de-sacs. when they are close to other existing streets, The problem when acting on a specific tentative map is being able to make the required.findings that State law says that hav.e to be made in order to deny something which is very difficult to do and the proposed text amendment cannot be incOnsistent with the State law. More study would be required to see what can be done to allow the Commission to make the findings required to deny a project He felt that the concerns of a single-sided cul-de-sac could be addressed with further study . Mike Miller stated that the Subdivision Map Act has specific findings that the City is must make to justify a denial. Staff said that the City can require the developer to prcve that nothing else cen be done with the property rather than being unable to secure the adjoining property. The consensus. of the Commission was to initiate a..text amendment for the consideration of adding language to the subdivision regulations which will make applications for sing ie-sided cul-de- Arcadia City Planning Commission June 28 1988 Page 9 , . . . sacs demonstrate that 1) a conventional cul-de-sac is impossible due to the surrounding development pattern (not just the inability to acquire sdjacent property), 2) that there would not be any adverse traffic/circulation impacts from such development. and .3) that existing properties adjacent to the new street will be adequately buffered. D. R-3 density and density classification Mr. Woolsrd explained that some ot-the recent condominiums with subterranean parking end up with a wall that is 6' above the adjacent grade and subsequently end up with a 8-12 feet wall and on the narrower lots developers ask for modifications to delete the landscaping next to the wall because the area would be used for driveway access. Modification for deletion of landscaping requirement would be considered rasonable if the development Is on grade but when a project is below grade more than 18., the S' landscaping should be required and the landscaping should be at the same elevation as the existing natural grsde and by doing so the landscaping will have s potential to grow over the wall and down the wall which would help mitigate the view and this would help the aesthetics of the property. He noied that the design review procedure sddresses projections that exceed 16" above the Plltio areas would not be counted for a private space. He suggested increasing the minimum walkwsy width requirement from 36. to 48. which would improve the accessibility to the units. Staff stated that the requirement for a 48. walkway has been made as a condition of approval in the architectural design review procedure but without having it in the code it may be difficult to enforce. Chairman Szany remarked that this would get the taller buildings away from narrow streets. E. Design of homes for new tracts Mr. Woolard stated that the Planning Department Is now requiring that tentstive maps for all proposed tracts clearly show the building envelope on each of the proposed lots. By showing this information, the Commission. the effected adjacent property owners/occupants. and the developer will have a better understanding of the potential impacts from the construction of any dwelling on the proposed new lots. E C.U.P.s for liquor stores and retail store with extended hours It was noted that the City Council has directed staff to prepare the appropriate text amendment foi" this item. . --. .... .. .. ..~... .. .. ~.. --- .. .. .... .-'-"""" .... ....... -'_.... .. RESOLUTION 1376 A resolution granting C.U.P. 88-014 to expand the existing restaurant to allow outdoor dining in the patio area and related parking and I landscaping modifications at 200 E. Fcothill Blvd. RESOLUTION 13n A resclution granting C.U.P. 88-012 to operate a restaurant at 181 Colorado Place. Mr. Woolard read the titles of the resolutions. Arcadia City Planning Commission June 28 1988 Page 1 0 ~ . . MOTIOO It was moved by Commissioner Papay, seconded by Commissioner Amato to adopt Resolutions 1376 and 13n to formally affirm the decisions of June 14, 1988, reflecting the findings of the Commission and the votes thereon. ROLLCALL: AYES: 1\Ce): ABSENT: Commissioners Amato, Hedlund, Papay, Szany None Commissioner Clark There is a five working day appeal period. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .."- .. .. - .. .. '- .. .. .. .. .. -'j- .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. MATTERS FROM COUNCIL None .. .. .. .. .. .. .. -.'. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. -.- .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..,.. .. MATTERS FROM COMMISSION None --- .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ~ .. .. .. .. .. -,.. ~ MATTERS FROM STAFF None ADJOURNMENT 10:00 p.m. I, '" j /'-'Aj/N/ j ~Jli:/.)'/l.MU IAIi }/Tl/../u'Y ~ Secretary, Arcadia Planning Commission Arcadia City Planning Commission June 28 1988 Page 11