Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNOVEMBER 22, 1994 I~' i.J. . , . It ~ MINUTES Arcadia City Planning Commission Tuesday, November 22, 1994 7:15 P.M. in the CouncilChambers Planning Commission proceedings are tape recorded and on file in the office of the Planning Division. The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, November 22. 1994 a17:1s p.m. in the Council Chambers of the'Arcadia City Hall. 240 West Huntington Drive. with Chairman Bob Daggett presiding. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: MOnON Commissioners Bell, Clark, Kalemkiarian, Murphy, Daggett Commissioners, Huang and Kovacic It was moved by Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Kalemkiarian to excuse, Commissioners Huang and Kovacic from tonight's meeting. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting, SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS Staff distributed a letter received from Mr. Zonver w~h regard ,to the first public hearing on the agenda. Mr. Miller remarked that Condition 2 of Staffs recommendaiion on the text amendment for the sidewall< dining,~em 2 should be amended to 'in addition to the liability insurance, other protection as deemed necessary by the City Attorney may be required;" QUESTIONS FROM PLANNING COMMISSION CLARIFICATION OF AGENDA ITEMS None TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON NON-PUBLIC HEARING MATTERS - (FIVE MINUTE TIME LIMIT PER PERSON) None 1. MINUTES OF 10/25/94 Commissioner Murphy noted that the vote on page'S of the Minutes is incorrect. since he did not vote in favor of the project. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Clark, seconded,by Commissioner Murphy to approve the Minutes as amended. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. ., ., . . " I '.1 OTHERS ATTENDING: Council Member Barbara Kuhn City Attomey Michael Miller CommunitY Development Administrator, Donna Butler Planning Services Manager, Corkran Nicholson Associate Planner, James Kasama Assistant Planner, William Stokes Assistant Planner, John Halminski Secretary, Silva Vergel PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. PUBLIC HEARING TA 94-006 & Z 92-003 Consideration of a text amendment to the Arcadia Municipal Code to establish aR-H (Residential Hillside Single. Family) zone designation and regulations, and To rezone.the following areas to.the R-H (Residential Hillside Single-Family) zone: A. TheH-M& D (Residential Mountainous Single-Family and Architectural Design) zoned,hillside area north and west of Canyon Rd. (not including'Wildemess Park) and B. The R-1 & D 10,000 (Second One-Family 10,000 sq. fl.) zoned hillside area'west of Santa Anita Canyon Rd. The staff report was presented. Mr. Miller said the Commission should open the public hearing and take'any testimony from the audience and then determine whether to continue the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Victor Zonver, 2127 Canyon, said hewill be the most affected by the new development that Mr. Martinis planning. There will be 12 homes there that do not exist now. He will have 'a view of homes instead of the beautiful hillside. He wasconcemed with the wildlife there and mentioned seeing coyotes and mountain lions. This development would destroy their environment. He was concerned aboulthedrainage problems and the access to .the homes which will be off of Canyon Rd. especially during the rainy season. Heaskedthatthe Commission preserve the beauty.andnbt destroy what is there. Richard Palmer, 2073 Carolyn Dr. remarked that hewould hate to,see the hillside developed. He,.did not want homes built there and said he has seen the affects of hOmes buill on ,hillside and.to him thatis not aesthetically pleasing. Mr. Miller explained that the current law permits the owner to develop the hillside. The proposed amendment will only restrict the regulations and will address the concems. He said the development of the lot is not what the Commission is considering tonight. The Commission is looking into making further requirements in developing the hillside property in the City. These new regulations will be in lieu of the existing regulations. . Ms. Butler said the owner may develop the property under present regulations but the proposed amendment will provide lor a betlerdeveiopment. Ralph,Bicker, Chairman of the Architectural Review Board (ARB), 101 While Oak, said some of the residents are under the impression that the ARB has, approved the construction of the new homes. The ARB has not approved the development and only discussed ti1e concept approximately a year ago with the property owner. The.homeownerS association (HOA) is concemed'W~h the access road and the development and with having 12 homes off 01 one winding road. It appears that the property owner is trying to. maximize on the property but they do not want another 'Bluth Hill' and he. suggested that they reduce it by ll. couple of lots. Arcadia City Planning Commission 11/22/94 Page 2 . ) ,\ , . . Vem Chinon, 1211 Via Bonlte, Sierra Madre, said she lives adjacent to the owner's development in Sierra. Madre. She .felt their development has had a definite impact on Sierra Madia's hillside and feared of the affects from a development of this size and the Impacts during a flood, earthquake and was concerned with erosion. She urged ihe Commission to not make their decision lightly and consider what they are approving. Larry Kallis, 2131 Canyon Rd., said his driveway access is off of Canyon Rd. and during the,raJny season, it is very difficult and scary to ingress and egress onto Canyon. On occasions, people have hit mail boxes because they were unable to slow down and wasconcemed With the additional problems due to the proposed development. Malcolm Symonds, 2209 Cielo Pl., said that he is a civil structural engineer and they.are aware of environmental problems. that they were unaware of many years ago. He did not want this development to be constructed incorrectly. He asked that the owner or his representative give a brief overview of the project and speak about his plans of development to answer some of the questions andconcems raised by the neighbors and residents. He indicated that he hikes up those hills and is aware of the erosion and problems caused by floods and noted:thatthere have been many cars that have gone over the site at Chantry Flats. He wondered what would happen during an earthquake or fire and asked if the Commission has considered the safety issues? He felt a development would worsen the situation. He thought that a twelve lot development would have.a negative impact. on the area and it should be described In detail prior to having it approved. Ms. Butler responded that this' is not a development plan before the Planning Commission rather the review of proposed new' regulations which are more stringent than the, existing. No formal application for development of the hillside has been submitted to the City. When the owner proposes.adevelopment then a public hearing will be held to discuss that proposal but the City is not considering a development of the site at this time. Mr. Miller expapded on Ms. Butler comments andsaid'thatlhis.is the beginning stages and if a development is proposed anEIR would be required to determine the Impacts on the area. Mr. Bicker said that he helped prepare the Pasadena Hillside ordinance and understands the technical information and suggested that staff explain the. differences between the existing and proposed regulations. Staff explained that the current ordinance was adopted in 1977. Since then the Whispering Pines Estates were developed with this ordinance and staff felt tha.t a number of improvements were needed. Staff .contacted the two neighboring cities with hillside ordinances and the,proposed ordinance was drafted utilizing Monrovia:s and Sierra Maare's hillside ordinances. The ordinance considers prior improvements, the, use of slope categories, the actual density in the area, the analysis of slope degree in area. The density would be 1 unit per 7 'acres which is In line with the 12 lots mentioned.. The,ordinancewould also include the review of the architectural features and the Building envelope rather the setbacks. Other areas would be to review the lot. area, contour grading; is it split level pads r,llher than cut and fill. The landscaping must be mature at the onset and will use nature to camouflage the draining facilities. Chairman Daggett remarked that the Commission is looking at the Draft ordinance and not a specific development. Gayle Hutton, 2127 Canyon Rd.,said she lives nearthe.Flood Control Channel and was concerned that the Flood Control Channel could not handle a light rain, if.all the mature lands,caping was to be cleared. She thought that it is ridiculous that for someone~s financial benefit, this naturaJ area would be cleared and felt there. is disregard for nature. Chairman Daggett remarked that the Commission is not considering the development of the hillside at this time but the ordinance affecting development of the hillside. Lisa Zonver, 2127 Canyon, said that she feltlhe Key word is "moratorium" and a.sked why it was imposed? She said that in speaking with Mr. Martin, he indicated thatthe.homes would be around $1,000,000 and remarked there are plenty of homes'priced in that range that are for sale, why do we need 12 more? Barbara Hall, Civiltec Eng., 855 Foothill Blvd., Monrovia, said they have conducted studies to see what would be most appropriate for the area. and are working with staff to propose a development which would comply with the revised ordinance. The homes will be consistent with other homes in the neighboring hillsides. Mr. Symonds asked if Ms. Hall could illustrate where the road and streets would be. Chairman Daggett stated that the. road is. nota subject of Commission's concern. The Commission is not empowered to go that far beyond the sphere of this agenda. . Arcadia City Planning Commission 11 /22/94 Page 3 . ) . . ., MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commission Murphy to continue the public hearing to June 27, 1995. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Bell, Clark, Kalemkiarian, Murphy, Daggett None . Commissioners Huang and Kovacic Commissioner Kovacic came at 8:00 p.m. 3. PUBLIC HEARING MP 94-011 & ADR 94-013 158 Alia SI. Nimer Matta Consideration of modifications for a 3-unitresidential condominium project. The staff report was presented. In r~sponse to questions by Commissioner Kovacic. staff said the requested modifications are typical of ones required for the development of lots with a narrow width. Even if the developer was to reduce the number of units~ the same modifications would still be'pecessary. The development complies with the density permitted. He said that 1 guest parking spaces is required for each two units. Mr. Nicholson briefly explained the history of the multiple family regulations and said that in the early 1980's the Code was revised and the density regulations were brought back into, the Code. The public hearing was opened. Nimer Matta, 1233 S. Eighth, said after trying several altematives, the proposed plans are the best plans for the:site with a narrow width. Without the requested modifications, this lot cannotbe developed. The, design is compatible'with the other units in the area and will fit in well. James Lutz, 162 Alta,.JlC spoke in opposition and said they have a problem with slugs and leaches and feared, that this two-story dwelling would block the sun, which he felt wouldbea health.hazard. Mr. Matta indicated that the driveway would be located on the east side of the property, adjacent to 162 Alta: No one else spoke In favoror.in opposition to this item. MOTION It was moved Commissioner'Kalemkiarian and seconded by Commissioner Kovacic to close the public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. Inore,sponse to questions by lhe Commission, staff said the site is developed with a nonconforming single.family residence and is zoned R;3. Ms. Butler commented that since the property is zoned for multiple-family development, if the owner wanted to develop the lot with a single-family house, he would need a zone variance. Commissioner Kovacic referred to Mr. Lutz's Objection and wondered If the building height could be rediJced. Arcadia City Planning Commission 1 i /22/94 Page 4 ., ~ . . 'i Ms. Butler responded t~at the proposed building height is below the allowable height i.n the R-3 zone. The overall heightofthe subject buildingwould be approximately 24'-0' above the existing grade (27'-0" to the top of all chimneys), whereas Code permits a 35'-0" building height. Commissioner Clark commented thatin his experience on the Commission, in the subject area, many nonconforming older homes have been replaced with nice developments. The Commission raised itsconcems.to the City Council with regard to the number 01 modifications that were needed for these narrow lots and Council felt that it is better to grant the modifications rather than combining the lots and increasing the density. The requested modifications are not major and this is a nice development. Commissioner Murphy was in favor of the proposal and said it is consistent with many of the buildings in the area. The Commission expressed .concems with the color of the trim as depictea on the submitted rendering and the applicant'agreed to tone the color of the trim down to one approved by the Planning Division. MOTION It was approved by Commissioner Kovacic, seconded by Commissioner Clark to approve MP 94-011 subject to the conditions in the staff report with the additional condition that the Planning Division approve the color scheme and roof material of the project and they be more compatible and harmonious than ones on the color board. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Bell, Clark, Kalemkiarian, Kovacic, Murphy, Daggett None . Commissioner Huang Chairman Daggett noted there is alive working appeal period. Appeals'should be filed by Thursday, December 1. 4. PUBLIC HEARING MP 94-010 & ADR 94-010 1034-1 046. Arcadia Ave. J. Don Crenshaw Consideration of modifications for a 10,unit residential condominium project. The staff report was presented and the public hearing was opened. Don Crenshaw, 126 St. Joseph, said two years ago 17-units were proposed and approved but the owner faced financial problems and was unable to develop. The proposed plan has less density and he felt it will have less impact. Commissioner.Murphy was pleased with less density. Mr. Crenshaw felt the proposal is a better development than the previous design and that itwould sell better. He explained that each unit is approximately 2,000 sq. ft. with 100 sq. ft. of storage space. The trash and utility structure are not located near the living area. He described the common area as open with sitting area and lots oflandscaping which will be shared by all the tenants. . MOTION It was moved by COmmissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Kovacic to close the public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. In response to comments from the Commission, staff said that Code requires that 2.% of the lot area be.designatedas common or recreational area. Staff's experienCe is that although this space is provided for the use of the tenants, it is not generally used because each unit has its own private open space. Arcadia City Planning Commission 11/22/94 Page 5. -" ~I . . " Commissioner Clark preferred this type of a project to one which is a long building and noted that the density of this type of a project is low as compared to the latter. He liked having individual patios for the units and felt this a good development. He did not have any objections to the requested modifications. Staff noted thatthe Code would permit 17-units on this property. Commissioner Kalemkiarian agreed with Commissioner Clark but was concemed with the backout space for the guest parking spaces. Commissioner Murphy liked the detached unit and said the project is/aid out very well. MOTION " was approved by Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Murphy to approve MP 94-010 subject to the e conditions in the staff report. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Bell, Clark, Kalemkiarian, Kovacic, Murphy, Daggett None Commissioner Huang Chairman Daggett noted there is a five working appeal period. Appea'ls should be filed by Thursday, December 1. 5. PUBLIC HEARING TA 94-010 Consideration of a text amendment amending Section 9275.6.1.2 requiring a conditional use permit for businesses with four or more arCade game machines. The staff report was presented, Ms. Butler explained that one of the Councilmembers.appealed.the BusinessUcense Board's approval of a req'uest for the placement of game arcade machines at a business in the 142 E. Duarte Rd. The Business License Board felt that the machines Were incidental to the existing business and the applicant complied with. the City's current regulations. Mr. Miller said that three oftheCouncilmembers felt therewas:no reason to deny this request and could nofjustify approving the appeal. . In'response to comments from the Commission, Ms. Butler commented tharthe Fire Department has requirements for minimum access clearance and they check them periodically. One requirement.isthat they are.at least 500' from any school and that children are not allowed to play games during school hours. The primary use will be on week-ends, holidays.and after 3:QO p;m. The.Cityreceived complaints that some establishments were permitting children to play .before3:00 p,m. and at the request of the Business License Officer, the Police Dept. conducted a spot survey of all business which have game machines to see if any businesses were ailowing children to play the game machines during the school hours. Their report concluded. that at no time did the officers observe any violations of the Arcadia Municipal Code, especially with regard to school children being on the premises during school hours.' She went on to.say that some machines can have as many as six persons playing at anyone time. The Business License Review Board 'Issues licenses for game machines for specific locations and not for a "specific" game machine, because machines.col1stantly change, depending on their popularity. Commissioner Clark thought this text amendment is a good idea. Commissioner Kovacic preferred limiting the number of game machines to two instead of three without a conditional use permit. He also remarked thaU is unsightly when.the machines are placed against windows and the backs of them are visible from the street. Arcadia City Planning Commissi()n 11/22/94 Page 6 .. I . . \ MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Bell to recommend approval of Text Amendment 94-010 to the City Council. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Bell, Clark, Kalemklarian, Kovacic, Murphy, Daggett None Commissioner Huang Chairman Daggett noted there is a five working appeal period. Appeals should be filed by Thursday, December 1. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW AND COMMENT 6. Reportlo Planning Commission regarding sidewalk dining. l:he.staff report was presented. Ms. Butler explained that this text amendmentls for sidewalk dining on public right-of-way. At a.later date, regulations will be proposed'for.sidewalk dining on private property. She said that many communities allow sidewalk dining in the public right-of-way with special permits which adds visual interest,.pedesttian quality and economic vitality of the City's business distticts. Mostcities do not allow.alcoholic beverages because it would be difficult to monitor. The Commission wondered if heaters or canopies would be permitted and Ms. Butler said that the Fire Department had not recommended utilizing them but stail would approach them again regarding their use. Commissioner.Kovacic asked if additional parking would be requiredfot outside dining? He could.visualize.a "creative applicant" placing many seats outside without having ample parking. Ms. Butler replied the City would like to encourage this type ola use which can be beneficial to a City and wouid not want to create additional requirements. The City would like to be "business friendly".. make the process uncumbersome,and as easy as possible for businesses. If problems arise, the Code can be amended. Staff said that sidewalk dining would be the primary use and would be seasonal. Commissioners Belland Murphy remarked that in the.il1terest of stimulating business, heat lamps would help. The.consensus of the Commission was to utilize heat lamps if safety permits. Ms. Butler replied that all cities prohibit the use of the lamps on the. right-of-way although they can be used on private property. Commissioner Bell questioned condition 9 with regard to planterslbarriers and Ms. Butler answered thilt place chains or similar items that allow for more seating would be permitted. MATTERS FROM crt v COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL REPORTS / ANNOUNCEMENTS / STATEMENTS Councilmember Kuhn noted that labor negotiations are undelWay with the Police and Fire Departments. With r~gard to the formation of a homeowners association in the.parts of the City without one, she said that the Council felt that if the residents of those areas are interested in having an association, then they should be the ones.approac~ing.the City for it and not the City attempting to create.one, Arcadia City Planning Commission 11/22/94 Page 7 , '/ . . ! MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS/STATEMENTS 1 . Discussion regarding the Planning Commission's second meeting in December. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Kovacic, seconded by Commissioner Bell to cancel the Commission's second meeting in December. . ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Bell, Clark, Kalemkiarian, Kovacic, Murphy, Daggett None Commissioner Huang Commissioner Clark reported thatSavon on Foothill Blvd. has all their windows covered with window signs and.asked n someone could check,it? Ms; Butler replied that one ofthe Code Services. Officer will inspect it. MODIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING ACTIONS Commissioner Clark recapped the Modification Committee meetingsactioris. MATTERS FROM STAFF 1 . CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS 2. UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS Ms. Butler recapped the City Council~s latesl:actionsand the upcoming items before the Planning Commission, 3. RELOCATION APPEALS BOARD ORIENTATION Presentation By Pete Kinnahan and AI Kalian (No action Is required) Mr. Pete Kinnahan, Economic Development Supervisor indicated that the. Planning Commission will serve as the Relocation Board when and nsucha board is necessary. He stated that.the City in t~epast h~s re.located 55 residents and 20 businesses successfully and attributed that to the relocation consultant. He then introduced Mr. AI Kalian who worked with the previous relocation consultant but now is working as an independent consultant. Mr. Kalian explained in detail the different options'of relocations and how each would be processed. ADJOURN Arcadia City Planning CommisSion 1.1/22/94 Page. a