Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPTEMBER 13, 1994 " ,1 l" I . . MINUTE,S Arcadia City Planning Commission Tuesday, September 13, 1994 7:15 P.M. in the Council Chambers Planning Commission proceedings are tape recorded and on file in the office of the Planning Division. The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia mel'in regular session on Tuesday, September 13,1994 at 7,:15 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Arcadia City Hall, 240 West Huntington Drive, with Chairman,Bob Daggett presiding. ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: Commissioners Bell, Clark, Huang, Kalemkiariani Kovacic, Murphy, Daggett None SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS Ms. Butler distributed revised copy of the staff report forthe first public hearing on the agenda. 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 MINUti:STIME ,LIMIT PER PERSON~ None MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Kovacic to read all resolutions by title only and waive reading the full body of the resolution. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. OTHERS ATTENDING: Council Member Barbara Kuhn City Attorney Michael Miller Community Development Administrator, Donna Butler Assislant Planner, William Stokes Assistant Planner, John Halminski Secretary, Silva'Vergel 1. PRESENTATION TO FORMER COMMISSIONER HAROLD HEDLUND A "Certiticate 01 Appreciation" was presented to, former Commissioner Hedlund for his many y,ears of service to the City. Commissioners Clark and Kovacic thanked Mr, Hedlund for his many years of service. Mr. Hedlund thanked the Commission and asked that the Commission try to follow the code and stay away from variances. , . . I I 2. MINUTES OF 8/23/94 MOTION It was,moved by Commissioner Murphy, seconded by Commissioner Kalemkiarian to approve the Minutes of August 23, 1994 as publishecl. the motion passed by voice vote wnh none dissenting. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING MP 94-008 705 W. Callita Craig Peterson Consideration of side and rear yard modilications ior a second-floor addnion to the main dwelling. The staff report was presented. In response to a question by the qommlssion, staff said that a new notice was mailed to the surrounding property owners informing them of both the side and rear yard modilications. He indicated that the property oWl)er would not be able to build large enough rooms without modifications. Code requires a12' side yard setback for the second floor, however, the existing easterly setback is 10' and the proposed setback for the wester1yside is 10', The public hearing was opened. Craig Peterson, the applicant, 705 W. Callna, said their design Is the same floor plan as ,the property across the street. Prior to the plan check sUbmntal, they discovered that they would need a modillcatlon In order to build'aqhe existing setback of 10', By'reduclng the,setback, the rooms would be only 8' wide. He indicated'that they would like the addition to align wnh the, setback of the e)(lsting house. He explained the archhectural treatments to Commissioner Kovacic. Noone else spoke In favor or In opposition to this hem. MOTiON It was moved by Commissioner Clark"seconded by Commissioner Kalemkiarian to close the public,hearing. The motion passed by voice vote wnh none dissenting. Commissioner Kovacic did not have any problel11S whh, the project but wondered what the Code is trying to achieve? He said that just because there are nO neighbors complaining, he did not think that isa good reason ,for approval.. Mr. Miller explained that code allows for f1exibiltty of reasonable modifications. It gives the Planning Commission the opportunity to exercise reasonable f1exibilhy. Commissioner Kovacic asked what is the justification for granting this modification? Commissioner Clark explained that when the cOde was changed, n was geared toward new construction. The Council and Commission were trying to prevent "monster homes". Neither the Council nor the Commission Intended to Prevent people from having the opportunity to expand, He felt this was a reasonable request and would have minimal impact. In response to a question by the Commission, Ms. Butler indicated that there is no architectural design review in this area of the Chy. Ms, Butler lurther commented a justilication for the modilication is the narrowness of the lotwhlch impacts the side yard and the fact that the rear of this property abuts a convalescent home. Commissioner Murphy remarked that this Is a nice improvement, Arcadia Chy Planning 'Commission 9/1 3/94 Page 2 ,~ . . l- . MOTION Itwas moved by Commissioner Clark, sec<indedby Commissioner Huang to approve MP 94-008 subject to thecOnd~ions in the staff report. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Bell, Clark, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Kovacic, Murphy, Daggett None Chairman Daggett noted there is a live wOrking appeal period - appeals should be filed by September 2t . 4. PUBLIC HEARING TM 51887 468 W. Huntington Dr. Raoul Sedky Consideration of a tentative map lor an8-un~ residential condominium project. The staff report was presented. In response to a question by Commissioner Clark, stalfsaid that the tentative map procedure allows the developer to subdivide and sell the un~s and dO,es not'involve arcMectural design review of fhe project. Accordirig to staff "the tentative map process, approves four lines ona piece of paper:" Staff noted that during the modlticationprocess, the neigllbors expressed concems over density and the location of-windows and th,ese concems have already been addressed. Staff stated that the applicant wiil have to comply w~h all cond~ions lrom City Departments which are incorporated as the overall,approval of the subdivision,and development. Ms. Butler explained that this procedure determines the use of the property as condominium purposes. The public hearing was opened. Raouf Sedky, 2549 Canyon Oak Dr., Los Angeles, the developer, said that he is in agreeinenlwlth all 01 the conditions in the staff report. Sheryl Phipps, 800 La Cadena, asked if this would be the last time the public would have the opportunity to make comments regarding this project and the landscaping? Ms. Butler said that the landscaping is not an issue duringthe,tentative map procedure. As part.oUhe overall design approval, the applicant wiilbe required to submit a landscaping and tree preservation plan which wiil be reviewed by slaff. As of this date, landscaping and tree preservation plans have not been submitted. Ms. Phipps explained that,she was concerned about the landscaping and who has control over the types of trees and shrubs - the City or the developer. Ms, Butler further explained thalthe tree preservation plan will be reviewed and staff tries to preserve as many trees as feasible, The City reviews and has final approval of plans submitted by the applicant. Commissioner Kovacic was surprised and wondered why the Planning Division does not want comments from the neighbors? Especially, since no landscaping and tree preservation plan,has been submitted. It seemed to him that the Planning Division would welcome comments from the neighbors. He felt that if the Planning Division does not accept comments lrom the neighbors, one might get the impression that staffwiil be getting together w~h the developer to work Oul a deal because it has. already gone through the publiC hearing procedure and that is not the case. Ms. Butler said that the,neighbors may make recOmmendations and staff wiil take that into consideration but It is staff who has .final'approval of the plans. Even It the applicant adhered tothe recommendations by the neighbors and staff, there is nothing preventing the applicant Iro,m removing it after the project has been completed. As a result of the previous public hearing, staff is well aware of the neighbors' concerns and feelings. Staff does not ignore the Arcadia City Planning Commission 9/13/94 Page 3 " . . \ concerns of the neighbors but the developer cannot be required to save a tree that might be in the way of the development. Noone else spoke in lavor or in opposnion to this nem. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Kalemkiarian to close Ihe public hearing. The .motion passed by voice vote wilhnone dissenting. Commissioner Kalemkiarian was conlident,that the tree preservation plan will address the neighbors' concerns. Commissioner Murphy said this process is to allow the developer to subdivide and nothing else. Commissioner Clark Indicated that ,this is an R~3 zoned /ot and there is no reason to deny the tentative map, Commissioner Bell Inquired If staff, takes into consideration view preservation and shadows casted by the development? Ms. Butler answered by saying that there is nothing in Ihe Code regarding the above. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner MlJrphy,secondedby Commissioner Huangto'approve TM 51887 subjeclto the condltions'in the staff report. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ASSENT: Commissioners Bell, Clark, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Kovacic, Murphy, Daggett None Commissioner Kovacic Chairman Daggett noted there, is a ten day appeal period - appeals should be'filed by September 23, 5. PUBLIC HEARING TA 94-009 'Consideration of a text amendment revising the noticing procedures for, text amendments'to require noticing 01 property owners within a300 foot radius when the text amendment involves a specffic piece of property. The staff reportwas presented. In answer to the Commission's questions, Ms., Butler said the notice,is published in the local paper. This text amendment affects the race track property, which is the only property in the City that is zoned S-1. Ms. Butler explained that t~e proposed text'amendment came about asa result of the te~ amendment:allowing special events at the race track. Because of the possible' impacls' of this text amendment" both the City Council and Planning Commission expressed concern that the pubic hearing notice was only published in the paper and was not sent to property owners within the area who would be most affe,cled. As a result of the above request, the City notffied all the property owners wnhin ~1 000' radius of the ext!lrior boundaries of the race track as part of their special event request, Most of the Cnyapplicaticms require that property owners within a 300' radius be notnied but because of the nature of the events being held at the race track and the limned number of property owners within the 300' radius, staff felt that increasing the radius would be mOre appropriate and would notify more affecledproperty owners that would not otherwise fall wnhin the 300' radius and be notified. Ms. Butlerindlcated'that the mall property is not part of the race track parcel and they would not be subject to this text amendment because that property, is not zoned S- 1,. Arcadia City Planning Commission 9113194 Page 4 I \ The public hearing was opened.- No one spoke in favor or in opposijion to this item. The hearing was closed wijhout a motion. COmmissioner Kovacic was concerned because the section proposed by staff only requires notification of all property owners wijhin 1000' radius and nothing has been mentioned about publication in the newspaper. . ... Ms. Butler replied that under the "text amendment" section of the.code. n states that notices must be published but if the Commission would like to add that wording in this section. staff can add if. Mr. Miller thought that was a good suggestion. MOTION It was moved by COmmissioner Clarl<, seconded by Cominissioner Kalemkiarian 10 recommend approval 01 TA 94,009 to the Cijy Councilwilh the additional condijion that "all notices be published inthe newspaper." ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Bell, Clarl<, Huang,Kalemkiarian, Kovacic, MiJrphy, Daggett None CONSENT ITEMS 6. PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINATioN That Ihe sale of Ihe Flood Control property adjacent to 2533 S. Doolittle is consistent wijh the General Plan. The staff report was presented. In answer to COmm'issioner Kalemkiarian's question, staff stated that Ihe request is to purchaselhe Flood COntrol property located directly behind 2533 S. Doolittle. Ms. Butler explained that property owners contact the County and express interest in purchasing the Flood Control property and the Planning Commission's approval is part of the process of the sale. MonON It was moved by Commissioner Murphy, seconded by Commissioner Kalemkiarian determining that the sale of the Flood Control property adjacent to 2533 S. Doolittle is consistent wijh the General Plan, ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: COmmissioners Bell, Clarl<, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Kovacic. Murphy, Daggett None 7. RESOLUTION 1515 A resolution of the Planning Commission of the City 01 Arcadia, California, granting C,U.P. 94-008, to operate a,credij and finance vocational school at 41 E. Foothill Blvd. Ms. Butler read the title of the resolution. Arcadia Cijy Planning COmmission 9/13/94 Page 5 . ) . . '\ MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Kalemkiarian, seconded by Commissioner Clark to adopt Resolution 1515. and to formally affirm the decision 01 August 23, 1994 and Ihe voles thereon. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Bell, Clark, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Kovacic, Murphy, Daggett None Chairman Daggett noted there is a live working appeal period - appeals,should be filed by September 21 , MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL CllY COUNCIL REPORTS.! ANNOUNCEMENTS / STATEMENTS Council Member congratulated Mr. Hedlund lor his accomplishments. MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS/STATEMENTS Commissioner Kovacic wondered about condilion 2 of the resolutlonwhich was adopted and asked about Us implementation? Ms. Butler indicated that the City, has the authorUy throughout the duration of the CUPtoschedule a hearing for the revocation of the CUP'ff the business is not being'operated as per the CUP condilions. The City would have to notny the property owner and then schedule a hearing before the Planning Commission. MODIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING ACTIONS Commissioner Kovacic recapped the Modffication Commillee's actions and explained the actions laken. He cOmmented that he feilthat Ihe Planning Commission 'should review parking modffications for commerclai buildings such as the one on the Modification Commillee'sagenda lor the property at212 E. Foothill. MATTERS FROM STAFF Wilh regard to comments made, by Commissioner Kovacic, Ms. Butler indicated,thaHtaff tries to discourage citizens from applying lor requests that are not appropriate. Specffic findings are required for modilications. If there is no significant reason to grimt:amodilication then it should not be approved. It is up to the applicant to showjustnication 01 the request and why it should be granted. 1 . CITY COUNCil ACTIONS Ms, Butler gave a brief summary 01 the actions taken atlhe City Councirs lastr1)eeting and the items that were before them for Consideration, 2, UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS Ms. Butler announced the. applications that have been'liIed and will be before the Commission as public hearings. ~ ADJOURNMENT Arcadia Cily Planning Commission 9/13/94 Page 6