Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFEBRUARY 14, 1989 '.-..:r r.' . . t. Plat/ning' ommission proceedings are tape recorded and on file in the office of the Planning Department ! MINUTES ARCADIA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION REGUlAR MEETING Tuesday, February 14, 1989 The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, February t4, 1989 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Arcadia City Hall, 240 West Huntington Drive, with Chairman Papay presiding. PlEDGE OF AllEGIANCE ROLL CALL: PRESENT: ABSENT: Commissioners Clark, Szany, I'apay Commissioners Hedlund and Amato WDTlON Motion was made by Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Szany to excuse Commissioners Amato and, Hedlund from tonight's meeting. The motion passed ,by voice vote with none dissenting. MINUTES WDTION It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Clark to approve the Minutes of January 24, 1989 as published, The moti,on passed by voice vote with none dissenting, OTHERS ATTENDING: Councilwoman Mary Young City Attorney Michael MiHer Planning Director William Woolard Senior Planner Donna'Butler Associate Planner, Will Wong The City Attorney announced that the Planning Commission is subject to a City Charter provision that in order for any action to be approved requires a majority of the entire membership of the Commission, The entire membership is live. Because lhere are two members absent this evening it means for any action to be approved or denied it will require three votes. In case any of the applicants feel they might want to request a continuance, such a request would be considered by the Commission. P.C. Minutes 2/14/89 Page I . . CONTINUED PUBUC HEARING T.M. 47234 1715.1723 South Baldwin Avenue Steven Yuan Consideration of a tentative map to create a one'sided cul.de-sac with eight new single- family lots The staff report was presented. In response to Commissioner Szany's question, staff indicated that there was no .special setback along Baldwin Avenue. The setback would be 10'-0. because this is nora reverse corner lot It was noted that Public Works Is requiring a 5'-0' easement along Baldwin Avenue .because Baldwin Avenue only has a 5'-0' parkway. Ken Huang, 1266 East Las Tunas Drive, engineer representing the developer, spoke in favor of the proposed tract map. He Indicated that the water problem has been solved and the East Pasadena Water Company' will be able to provide water to the site. Mr. Huang stated that Lots 1 and 7 could be made to comply with code by readjusting the lot lines. They agreed with all the conditions set forth in the staff report. Commissioner Clark asked what the future might be for' developing the south side of" the street? Mr. Huang indicated It.could'be difficult because some of the lots are substandard and there is'a church south of the site. J. N. Harris, 700 Call1ta Street spoke in opposition to the proposed subdivision. He felt the quality of life in the City has gone 'straight to hell'. It was his opinion that the main sewer line serving this area is overtaxed and antiquated. What they were doing now Is admiral' but it is too late. George Willetts, 730 Callita Street asked if there would be a wall around the property and what was proposed along the south side of the street? Staff answered .that a wall was proposed along the north and south property lines. There is an existing wall along the west property line. A six foot wide paved strip is proposed along the south property line. Robert Longo, 734 Callita Street noted that the lot was clearly not wide enough for a double sided cul- de-sac, however, he questioned why the street was located on the south side of the lot; he would like to see the street located on the north side adjacent to the properties on Callita Street. He noted that the properties on Lemon are quite deep and would not be as 'impacted by a subdivision as the properties on Callita. He had no objections to the development but wanted. to see the street on the north side. Chairman Papay noted that putting the street on the north side would create several difficulties: (1) It would make the separation between CallitaStreet and the new street only 120 feet apart which is unacceptable, and (2) if he lived on Callita he would not want streets on both sides of his property. The person who would live at the corner would have streets on three sides of their property. Mr. Longo indicated that with the lots adjacent to their lots, the houses will be looking down into their back yards. Bill Mack, 748 Callita Street was concerned about the traffic impact on the intersection of Callita Street and Baldwin Avenue. He thought the area would be quite impacted by the added traffic flow created by having the new street. P.C. Minutes 2/14/89 Paoe 2 . . Harold Ellis, 1504 South Eighth Avenue questioned if there were any variances or modifications being considered tonight? The Planning Director indicated they are asking for some modifications such as the length of the cul-de- sac and the width of the street. The section of the code that governs this is not the variance section of the code; It Is in the subdivision regulations and that section of the code allows for the Planning Commission and in some cases the City Council to make modifications to those subdivision requirements. The City Attorney indicated that Is not a deviation, modification or variance to the municipal code as Mr. Ellis is describing it. Second of all, to be legal, all zoning codes allow for deviations, modifications and variations to the zoning code. Mr. Ellis Indicated that the zoning ordinance deals with that fairly clearly which everybody seems to want to ignore. He noted that single-sided streets have always been a problem. He thought they should bring in two cul-de-sacs from Lemon Avenue In lieu of bringing one in from Baldwin Avenue then the whole area could be intelligently developed with two cul-de-sacs leaving enough room on Baldwin Avenue to put a new row of conforming lots fronting on Baldwin Avenue which would not create any traffic problems. You would have room enough to put in two complying cul-de-sacs In lieu of one non- complying cul-de-sac. Once you put the single-sided cul-de-sac into this particular area, any reasonably intelligent subdivision of the remaining portion of it is pretty well squashed out of the picture. It is the Planning Commission's job to plan' ahead. The Planning Commission should be able to recognize .the fact that this is not an appropriate. subdivision for ihis particular area and this property oan be much better used In the future by bringing cul-de-sacs In only from Lemon Avenue. To approve the single-sided cul-de-sac there will be a 500 foot long block wall on the south side, which will sooner or later have weeds and trash along the bottom of it. It will not be maintained. There. is a problem with every one of these similar cul-de-sac streets. It is not a good plan and it is not good planning; It is not good development and it is not good for the future of Arcadia to develop this as a single-sided cul,de- sac. Ken Huang spoke in rebuttal noting that the property Is underdevel.oped. He said that putting the street on the north side is not good planning because of .the way the topography of the land is. and also persons on Ca!lita would have the noise from the traffic behind them. In regards to developing the cul-de-sacs off of Lemon, they do not own the property on Lemon Avenue. Commissioner Szany asked if there was any way to redesign this to make Lots 7 and 1 conform to code? Mr. Huang said it might be possible. Commissioner Szany asked if the owner would have any problems with building a decorative block wall around the property and withri1aking some-of these houses. single-story' homes? This would break up the streetscape, plus it may take care of concerns from a few of the neighbors regarding privacy. Mr. Huang indicated there was no problem with the decorative block wall, however, he could not answer the question regarding the homes. Staff read a letter that had been received from Mr. and Mrs. Roger Lockie, 712 West Callita indicating that this property has been long neglected and an eye sore and they welcome. development in the area as long as the cul-de-sac Is located on the south side of the property. P.C. Minutes 2/14/89 Page 3 . . M:lTON Motion was made by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Clark to close the public hearing. Motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. Commissioner Clark stated he did not particularly like one-sided cul-de-sacs, but this existing property is in a state of disrepair and neglect This particular proposal has the possibility at some future date of having the south side developed. He would like to see lots 1 and 7 comply with code. Chairman Papay asked if bringing lots 1 and 7 into compliance with code would present a problem. Staff indicated that' it appeared possible to bring the lots into compliance. Commissioner Szany Indicated he would like to see decorallve block walls. The only place to put the street is where it Is located. He noted that they are putting In eight lots where in the same amount of property on Call ita, they have 11 lots. This is the longest cul-de-sac he has seen and he would like to see the streetscape broken up by constructing two or three single-story homes and he would like to see the homes design so the back of the houses were not all similar. He thought that overall the proposed development is less dense than the street to the north. 90% of. the lots to the north (on Callita) do n'ot conform to the code; some are under 6,000 sq. ft. He would like to see all the lots meet all code requirements unless It effects the design. Chairman Papay commented he concurred with Commissioners Clark's .and Szany'scomments. He thought varying the house height to try to break up the look was a good idea. lots 1, 7 and 8 could be one story homes; however, he was not sure how that could be put into the conditions. Commissioner Szany indicated he would like to see three single-story homes to break up the streetscape. He thought this would also help the privacy of the other houses on Callita. The Planning Director said this could not be done. The Commission and Council do not have any design review authority on subdivisions. The exception would be if the developer agrees to it. The public hearing was reopened: The Commission asked the applicant if they he w.ould be willing to redesign lots 1 and 7 to comply with code and build three single-story homes in the development? Ken Huang indicated that he felt they could redesign lOls 1 and 7 to comply with code, however, he could not agree to three single-story homes because the developer was not here. Chairman-Papay noted that-as Mr. Woolard-stated, the'Commission would..like-to hear-whalthe developer's opinion is as to whether or not they would be willing to build three single-story houses. The City cannot impose that condition unless the developer was willing. Mr. Huang asked if the developer says 'no' what happens;? Chairman Papay said they stili have to take their vote. Commissioner Szany said they could have the vote tonight and work with staff from this point on. He noted thal'lhe developer was asking for some concessions and the Commission was asking for some concessions also. He noted the Commission was willing to bend a little bit if the developer can meet some of'lhe concerns. P.C. Minutes 2/14/89 Page 4 . . Chairman Papay stated that il' would be best to continue the public hearing in order to allow Mr. Huang the opportunity to talk to the developer regarding the three single-story homes and the compliance for Lots 1 and 7. This should be fully aired before the deCision is made. The City Attorney noted that the absent commissioners would be able to review the records of this proceeding and they would be able to participate and vote. Robert Longo, 734 Callita asked questions regarding the wall height that is proposed between the new homes and the properties on Callita. Is the Commission going to do anything to preserve privacy for the existing houses and the new homes? The Planning Director indicated that the wall heights are normally 6'-0. measured from the lowest adjacent grade. In this case the grade of the properties are .approximately the same and you would end up with a six foot wall separating either property. The walls can be higher, however, normally when they are higher a modification is required to build a wall in excess of 6'-0", such as an 8'-0' high wall but most of the time when that is done both parties want the wall higher. In a case like this if everyone along Callita wanted an 8'-0' high wall that could be made a condition of approval of this map. M:lTlON Motion was.made by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Clark to continue the public hearing on T.M. 47234 to the next meeting of February 28. Motion was passed by voice vote with none dissenting. At the February 28th meeting the map should be revised to reflect the changes in Lots 1 and 7 and if Mr. Huang or the Developer can come back. with an answer as to what the thoughts are on the streetscape questions which have been raised regarding one-story dwellings. In response to questions from the public, staff advised that a map will be available for review on Tuesday, February 21st. PUBLlC;HEARING T.P.M. 89-02 1219-1227 South First Avenue Angelo Possemato Consideration of a tentative parcel map for a proposed lone line adjustment The staff report was presented. Angelo Possemato, 160 EI. Dorado, Arcadia, the applicant, spoke in favor of the proposal.. He noted that ihey wished to .add 10'-0' to the rear of the property at 1227 South First Avenue. They a9reed to all the conditions set forth in the staff report. No one else wished to speak on this issue. M:lTlON Motion was made by Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Szany to close the public hearing on T.P .M. 89'02. Motion .was passed by voice vote with none dissenting. Commissioner Clark had no problems with the lot line adjustment. P.C. Minutes 2/14/8.9 Page 5 . . ~TPN Motion, was made by Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Szany to approve Tentative Parcel Map 89-02 with findings Aland A.2. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Clark, Szany, Papay None Commissioners Amato, Hedlund Chairman Papay indicated that there is a ten day appeal period on this maller. PUBLIC HEARING T.M. 47199 1,14,120 California Street Hsu & Associates Consideration of a tentative map for an eight unit residential condominium The staff report was presented. Noone was present to speak in favor of or against the proposedapplicaticin. ~TPN Motion was made by CommissionerSzany, seconded by Commissioner Clark to close the public hearing. Motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. Commissioner Clark indicated that it was a nice development. ~TPN Motion was made by Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Szany to approve Tentative Map 47199 with the findings A.l through A.4 as stated in the staff report. ROll. CALl. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Clark, Szany, Papay None Commissioners Amato, Hedlund Chairman Papay indicated there is a ten day appeal period PUBLIC HEARING C.U.P.87-023 758 WeSt. Anoakia Lane Anoakia School Consideration of revision of condition 23 of Resolution 1360 to allow one additional year for the use of temporary trailers for classrooms The staff report was presented. In response to Commissioner Clark, it was indicated that the year starts and ends in August. The building code variance was granted in August and they are requesting this ahead of iime in order to insure that before they install the sprinkler system they will have another year's use of the buildings. P.C. Minutes 2/14/89 Page 6 . . Dave Pinkerton, representing the owner of the property spoke in favor of the time extension. There was clarification of severai' issues. He noted the sprinkler work has been started and they were hoping to complete everything by the 17th. No one else wished to speak regarding this application. tvOTION Motion was made by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Clark to close the public hearing. Motion was passed by voice vote with none dissenting. Commissioner Clark noted that if they were willing to comply with the points the Fire Chief raised he did not have any problems with granting a one year extension. tvOTON Motion was made by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Clark to approve the revision of Condition 23 of Resolution 1360, to allow one additional year for the use of temporary trailers as classrooms and direct staff to prepare the appropriaie resolution setting forth the specific findings and conditions of approval s'!t forth in the staff report and to change condition 23 of Resolution 1360. ROLL CALL AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Clark, Szany, Papay None Commissioners Amato, Hedlund AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION None MATTERS FROM COUNCIL None --------------------~--------- MATTERS FROM COMMISSION There was discussion regarding design review on single-family subdivisions (cul-de-sacs) with more than three houses. The Planning Director asked if it is equitable to limit the new development to single story, if an existing adjacent property owner can add a second story addition to his house? Commissioner Szany said this is not on a mass basis. He .felt a developer should compromise by putting in 'single-story development. P.C. Minutes 2/14/89 Page 7 . . Chairman Papay noted that without saying you can go to all two stories if you came in where the designs, were sufficiently different and the back walls had ins and outs, we would be willing to approve this. If one or two neighbors are really up in arms about a development perhaps we should limit some of the homes to single-story. The City Attorney stated that approvals of subdivisions are under the Subdivision Map Act and the threshold quesUon is whether you can Impose as a,condition of-Subdivision Map approval what he calls aesthetically oriented subjective design r,eview. You want 10 look at'that very carefully. II is going to be difficult because the courts have been very clear the past few years If you start, Il)'lposlng conditions with regard to a subdivision map that are not reasonably related to the impact of the project (they are referring to the physical impact ,of itl, it can be deemed a laking of property, 'Now that is not necessarily the case, and that is the threshold question and this should be investigated before it is discussed any further before the Council or anyone else. Does Ihe City have the authority or power to exact that kind of condiUon under the Subdivision Map Act? We can do the legal and practical analysis of it. There was further discussion regarding Ihis issue. The Planning Director indicated that the design aspect should not be within the map act; however, it can be done in other ways such as "single-family, multiple-lot development" design review. The City Attorney noted thaI even though the courts have been more difflcull as to what you can exact through the Subdivision Map Act process, they have been more liberal in supporting aesthetics and appearance and Ihat type of thing as rationale for poliee power. They rule that aesthetics alone is sufficient to impose requirements. Commissioner Clark asked the City Attorney to investigate what alternatives there are, for architectural design review of single-family residential development. MATTERS FROM STAFF None ADJOURN WENT 9:00 p.m. 'IJl-.f.f /, ~.:-< Q., / ~c- '.ih{rb:Yi.i f..I ,17J//,;;7/.4.._ Secretary of the Planning Commission P.C. Minutes 2/14/89 Page 8