Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJUNE 27, 1995 .' . . MINUTES Arcadia City Planning Commission Tuesday, June 27, 1995 7:15 P.M. in the Council Chambers Planning Commission proceedings are tape recorded and on file .in ihe office of the Community Development Division. The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met.in regular session oil Tuesday, June 27,1995 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 Beil, Clark, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Kovacic, Murphy, Daggett None SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS None TIME RESEFlVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON NON-PUBLIC HEARING MATTERS (FIVE MINUTES TIME LIMIT PER PERSON) None OTHERS.ATTENDING: City Attomey Michael Miller CcimmunityDevelopment Administrator, Donna Butler Assistant Planner, William Stokes Assistant Planner, John Halminski Secreiary, Silva Vergel MOTION It was 'moved by Commissioner Bell, seconded by Commissioner Kovacic.to read all resolutions by title only and waive reading the tullbody oftheresolution. The.motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. 1 . MINUTES OF 6/13/95 Commissioner Kovacic noted that his comments on page 6 should be changed to read ....did not intend to place the supports. to go in the driveway,..' MOTION Itwas moved by Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Kovacic to approve the Minutes of June 13, 1995 <IS amended. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. . . PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING TEXT AMENDMENT 92-006 AND ZONE CHANGE 92-003 A report to the Commission regarding discussions with W. Lawson Martin III, (property owner) for possible residential develoRments of undeveloped, hillside area. , The staff report was presented. Ms. Butler explained that a ,Specific Plan can take the place of zoning regulations by Government Code and staff feels that they can be more specific in Specijic Plan than addressing the entire property in the zoning regulations. Zoning regulations are general regulations but a Specific Plan can be very precise in the types of requirements that the City would want on a specific parcel of land. It is a better tool to use for this particular property than ,zoning regulations because it is-more precise than a texl'amendment or the zone change. Mr. Miller remarked that this area is owned by one person. When the City began the process to revise the hillside ordinance and got into the public hearing process with regard to this text amendment and the zone change, the property owner expressed an interest in working with the City. Since the property is under one ownership,and they were willing to work with the City to tailor something that perhaps would be more beneficial to both parties, the property owners entered into various'agreements to continue the public hearing., Their engineers and attomey met with City staff and are coming up with a proposal that is more restrictive than this w:ould have 'been, yet . meets the various concems of the, different parties. If that works, this is probably lmnecesllary. The Commission is not losing any discretionary authority. The Commission will have a full say on all aspects of the application including the specific plan. In response to questions by the Commission, Ms. Butler said that both the, City Council and the Planning Commission will review the subdivision and ,R-M pennitsas well as the specific plan, Staff will. look at this, from the environmental aspect and recommends that,the Commission table these appliCations. She noted that both applications can be broughtback to the.,Commission if the agreements do notworkoutand all the residents would again be renoticed. The public hearing was opened. No one spoke ih favor of or in opposition to this item. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Clark,seconded by Commissioner Huang to closethe'public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with:none dissenting. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Kovacic, seconded by Commissioner Clark to table this item due to imminent submittal of a development proposal by the property owner. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Bell, Clark, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Kovacic, Daggett None 3 . PUBLIC HEARING MP 95-002 309 W. Naomi, Mr. and Mrs. Chang Consideration of a 12'-4" easterly side yard setback in lieu' of the 18'-0" required fora second-story room addition buill without pennits. The staff report was presented. Arcadia City Planning Commission 6/27/95 Page 2 . . Staff showed a Video of the property which illustrated the extent of the addition and the work that was done and what is still remaining to be done. Staff explained how this was discovered. One of the City's Building Inspectors, noticed trucks parked on the driveway and walked to the back of the property and saw the additi,on' which was almost completed. He called the office and found. that there were no p.ermits issued. When a "Stop Work Order" was issued, they would not indicate who the contractor was on the job. Had they come to the City, they would have been advised of the modifications. ThE:! first floor is in compliance, but the second floor is not. The whole addition is new. Staff went on to explain that the same praperty .owner was issued a "Stop Work Order" in 1992 for the illegal canstruction of a,500 sq. ft., detached recreation building which currently exists on the site. They secured the appropriate building permits after being informed by the City of their violation. Because .of his past experience with the City, the owner was fully aware of the CitY'S requirements for additions. In cases like these where the building has been constructed without obtaining City approval, the property owner is charged double for the building permits and plan check fees to cover the additi.onal costs to have the engineer inspect il. The City's structural engineer indicated that in order for them to determine the .integrity of the addition, they would have to do'extensive investigation to see whether it complies. This would be done either by x-rays or saw cut the foundation. The plans before the Commission were the .ones that were on site for the contractor to use to construcl'lhe addition. ,Ms. Butler further explained that the property owner would have to put money on deposit with the City to cover expenses incurred from the structural engineer for either x-ray or taking of pore samples. They will also have'to pull everything off the walls because it is difficult to determine what is behind the walls that have already. been erected. There are a list of items that do not appear to be done to Code and after the inspection, the structural engineer would ttieClProvlde the City with alisl. The engineer can do an inspection by rem.oving a portion of the interior and exterior walls. This will be'a very costly, and major investigation will be required to determine if the work that has already been done complies. In response to the C.ommissions' comments, Mr. Miller said they are in violation of the Code and if it is requested that his office can liIe'a,.criminal action. That sometimes evolves into a plea or a disposition of ' the case through which the City derives to additional revenues but there has not been any decision made to pursue thatyel. There are possible Civil type remedies but it is best to weigh the advantages and to determine What'you are trying to achieve. The contractor can: be' reported to the State's C.ontractor's Board. Commissioner Murphy felt that $2900 which is the double fee amount would not be sufficient to cover the costs that the City will incur. . Ms. Butler explained that the ~2900 double feeJs for someone wha does ,wark withaut securing the appropriate permits. hi,additiontothisfee,ihey will be charged for the.structural engineer's time and any necessary testing. Staff noted that on May 11th, the Building Inspector noticed.the violationand a "Stop Work Order"was issued. There has been no work done on the 'property, since the stop wDrkDrder. On June ~st, .one 01 the items that the "StDp Work Order" was. issued fDr was cDmplied with, I.e. the carport extensiDnwas remDved. The public hearing was opened. Cathy Chang, 309 W. NaDmi, said.sheis the prDperty .owner.. She explained that the addition 'is for her parents-in-law who are planning on visiting. this summer and will probablY'stay for a few months. When they were visiting here last, their home was very small and since her father-in-law is disabled, and this'time they will be here far several months there is more of a need to accommodate him. With regard to the recreation roam addition, she indicated that once they discovered they needed permits, they came ta the City and .obtained them. Taking into consideration that her parents-in-law will arrive next week and their experience with the recreation room, they felt they did not have enough time to go through the proper procedure and her husband decided to go ahead and take, a chance and hopefully haVe it finished by the time they arrive. Although they do care about the Code and the City's laws, they needed to expedite this addition because of the impending visil. Arcadia City Planning Commission 6/27/95 Page 3 . . c.ammissianer Murphy remarked that it is distressing that they wauld blatantly mave ahead with the praject, and disregard the rules and regulatians that all residents must adhere ta. He feund it reprehensible, even thaugh they knew .of the process, they diil not ge threugh the proper channels. In respanse ta questiens by the Cammissian, Mrs. Chang stated, that the cantractar was the same .one that canstructed the recreatien roam. The Building Inspecter infarmed them that the cantractar is nat licensed. In 'answer ta a questien by the Cammissien, staff said that the Building Sectien discovered that the cantractar is net a licensed cantractar. Araf Laran, said he designed the preject far the Changs. He was unaware afthe canstructien because he assumed they wauldabtain City approval. Ta his knowledge, they were gaing ta submit the plans ta the City. He was unable ta fallaw thraugh because atthe'time he prepared the plans, he was unemplayed. After he campleted the plans he began warking'as a draftsman. He said the staff repart indicates that due to the 90' width, there is ample roam ta accammadate theadditian but because .of the size .of the paal and the large hausethe,anly place they cauld place the stair case was around the fire place. There is limited space fer the additian. Due ta the need far a handicap bathroam, they needed ta extend 'the additian 16'; Althaugh they had ather allernatives, the propasal wauld be the best aptian and meet their needs. In respanse ta Cammissianer Kavacic's questians, Mr. Laran said'that.he isa student and is nat a licensed architect and presently warks in a structural,engineering .office. He was unaware that madificatians wauld be required and did nat advise Mr. Chang that madificatians might be needed. He did discuss the need ta .obtain permits with the praperty .owner and during the ,initial pracess .of designing the plans it was intended that the plans wauld be submitted. He advised him .of the process it takes ta approve plans and passibly having ta resubmit plans far carrectians. APparently the property .owner decided:taproceed withaut appraaching the. City, after his services were dane. He.assumedthatthe structure shauldnat exjend past the existing setback and failed ta check with the.City's requirements but,he knew that if there were any. problems with the plans, aJlcethe Changs came tathe City, the City wauld infarm them. Mrs; Chang explained that in their culture, 'men' take care .of all the problems and wamen's apinians are,nat warth much and tlley da nat participate in making decisians. She advised her husband ta come ta the City and ta praceed with this praject legally but because they'were running aut ,.of time, he chase ta ga through with the.additian withaut City appraval and taak a chance. She indicated that her husband is a real nice man and askeci that theCammissian nat ta hald this against him'and nat ta penalize him too much. He did remave the carpartandthe dish antenna when he was infarmed. She thaught their .only vialatian naw is the setback. Na .one else spake in favar .of .or in appasitian to.this item. MOTION It was maved by Commissianer Kavacic, secanded byCammissiaher Murphy ta clase the public hearing. The matian passed by vaice vate'with na!1edissenting. Inrespansela'a questian by Cammissianers, Ms. Butler said' that a I,icensed architect is nat required 1.0 draw up. plans but.in this case, a structural engineer wauld haveta prepare all necessaryspeeilicatians, A hameawner can canstruct as .owner/builder as long as'anyane he emplayees has warkers campensatian insurance .or the owner will haveta pravide adequate insurance. Staff remarked,that ta the best .of. his knawledge, plans have nat been submitted ta the City. Cammissianer Clark feltthatlheadditian shauld have been buill ta Cade and he cauld nat see haw he cauld suppart this request. CammisslanerKavacic agreed and did nat blame 'Mrs. Chang al1d said that her husbandshauld nat have taken a chance. This was nata mistake; it was a calculated dee,isian an Mr. Chang's part ta try ta escape campliance and a penalty shauld,beimpased. He was made aware .of the procedure in 1"992. In his'apinian, he did nat hear a gaad justificatian 1.0 apprave the appeal. Cammissianer Kalemkiariansaid this is a blatant attempt 1.0 circumvent what shauld have been dane praperly. He wandered il'a stiffer penalty sheuldbe impesed? Arcadia City Planning Commissien 6/27/95 Page 4 . . Commissioner Murphy said putting aside the manner in which the property owner went ahead with the addition, isn't what is before the Commission the.setbackissue? The setback modification is minor and he shared the views of the Commissioners. He did not think that the view from the street is obtrusive. Thiswill cbstlhem dearly in both time and money. Commissioners Bell and Kovacic disagreed with Commissioner Murphy. Commissioner Kovacic went on to say that this isa major deviation from Code and asked if the Commissioners remember comments made by a previous Commissiorler whose parjing remarks were not to grant anymodificatibns and although he realizesthaUs not entirely possible, a 5' modification is major. . Commissioner Murphy agreed with Commissioner Kovacic, but reiterated .that the setback modification is minor and it is not a new second story just the extension of the existing. He did not think the request by itself is that unusual. Commissioner Kovacic feared that approving this would set a precedent and he did not want to set this kind of a precedent, unless there is a pressing need for it. He was concerned thatthe plans were drawn by someone who does not have the proper license, at leastfrom a structural point of view. How will theGity be !issured that it is a safe structure? He thoughHhis would have to begin from scratch to get a proper assurance that this will be a safe structure. Commissioner Murphy'asked if the safety of the'structure is what is. before the Commission? Commissioner Clark interjected and said the setback is before the Commission. Since the setbackregulations were changed, there have been a few requests for modifications, but none were requesting a 33% relief. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Clark to deny MP 95-002 on the basis that it would not secure an appropriate improvement in that it does not comply with the setbacks. The motion died.duelo a lack of a second. MOTION It was moved by'Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Kovacic to deny MP 95-002 based on FindingsD.1, D.2 and D.3. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Bell, Clark; Huang, Kalemkiarian, Kovacic, Murphy,Daggett None Chairman Daggett noted there is a five working day appeal period. Appeals are to be filed by July 5th. 4. PUBLIC HEARING MP 95-003 300 Santa Cruz Rd. Danny Kammerer Consideration ofthe following modifications for a two-story addition: A.A 10'-0' southerly side yard setback in lieu of 13'-3' for the second-story addition. B. A 5'-0' northerly side yard setback in lieu of 6'-9' for a first-story garage addition. C. A 2"3'-0' front yard setback in lieu of 25'-0' for two new bay windows. The staff report was presented. Commissioner Kovacic compared the previous request to. this one and asked why staff feels this should be approved? Arcadia City fillanning Commission 6/27/95 Page 5 " . . Staff discussed this request with the Building Inspecter, whe believed that if thesecend fleer additiens was meved averta camply with the setback, a majar interiar retrofitting wauld need ta take place ta suppert the'additien. The adjacent property .owner had na abjectians tathe request. The 6'-9" setback is 10% .of the width .of the lot. Ms. Butler explained thatthis is a much narrawer lat as comparedta the previaus praperty. With having a narrow 'Iat, it is samewhat difficult ta camply with the requirements. Either the madificatian cauld be granteil .or the property .owner might have ta reduce the size .of the additian, due ta the width. Staff laaked at the request and the .overall affect .of it. She indicated that the bay windaw wauld camply with Cade if they were cantilevered but due ta the faundatian encroaching-inta the setback the request is nec€lssary. The public hearing was. .opened. Danny Kammerer, 300 SantaCruz Rd., felt he was at a disadvantage being the secand public hearing en the agenda fallawing the previaus request. He read and submitted a letter .of approval by the neighbarwha wauld be mast affected. The reasan they are seeking the medificatian is because the hause weuld need substantial retrafitting ta accammadate the secandflaar if it was maved aver. This request will accammodate the prapased secand f1aar plan and provide a sizable space far the bedraams. He indicated that his present garage is' small and when his wife's vehicle is in there, it is difficult t.o.ga around it. He.felUhe request taaccammadate the baywindew was miner and wauld allow them ta give a visual break up efflatwall areas.. He did nat want his hOuse ta laak like abax and wanted it ta blend in with the neighbarhaad. His request will allaw him ta da the.additian and pravide samething functianal far them. Ne.one else spake in:favaraf or in appasitian ta this item. MOTION It was maved by Cammissiener Clark, secanded by Cammissianer Huang taclese the public healing. The matian passed by vaice.vate with nane dissenting. Cammissianer Kevacic was pleasedte see. that Mr. Kammerer went through the praper channels. Cammissianer Murphy remarked that it certainly makes a difference if things are dane.the rightway. MOTION It was maved.by.CemmissienerMurphy, secanded by Cemmissianer Huang ta approve MP 95-003 subject ta the canditiens in the staff repert. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Cammissieners Bell, Clark,Huang, Kalemkiarian, Kavacic, Murphy, Daggett Nene Chairman Daggett neted there is a five werking'day appealperied. Appeals must be filed by July 5th. 5 . PU.BLlC HEAR.ING MP 95-004 311 Cambridge Dr. Walt:Petreske Consideratien .of a 12'-0. seutherly secend-fleer side yard setback in lieu .of 16'-0" fer the enclesure of an existing secend-f1eer balceny.area. The staff repert was presented. Staff said the additien was discevered and a "Step Werk Order" was issued en May 10th. The preperty .owner was given ten daysta cemply. The Ranche Santa Anita Resident's Asseciatien (HOA) appreved their request an May 16th subject te the Planning Commissien'sapproval .of the medificatien. The public hearing was .opened. Arcadia City Planning Cemmissien 6/27/95 Page 6 . . . Tsung-Tao Tuan, 311 Cambridge, said his family moyed to this house recently from Temple City. His father had always wanted them to live in Arcadia and was able to help him purchase this house. They obtained a roofing permit and when the Building Inspector noticed the enctosure, they issued a 'Stop Work Order.' They were not trying to take a chance or to get away with anything. The enclosure is aciually better for the neighbors because it provides them with more privacy. Had they realized thatthis would need City approval, they would have obtained it prior to construction. There is only one electrical outlet there which already existed but they did add a telephone line. In ,reSponse to questions by the Commission; Mr, Tuan said the roofing contractor informed him that a permit would be required for the reroof. Paul Mailing, 316 Oxforcl;osaid he lives directly behind Mr. Tuan. He did not have any objections with the enclosure. He indicated that he 'thought'itwas odd that a young lady approached'them aller the construction had begun and asked them to review and approve their plans. He fell the City should make an effort and inform people that permits are needed for certain constructions. He could not understand why they had to go through this process, aller the enclosure is almost completed? Ms. Butler explained that they had to secure approval from the HOA and:theirapproval was subject'tothe Planning Commission's approval of the setback request. This is the process that they must go through, in order to get approval. This,is nolthe,normalprocedure for approvaL In mostcases,approvalsare granted, prior to construction. Commissioner Murphy remarked that just because the projecUs completed, doesn'fmean that they can bypass this procedure. They have to go through the right channels. . Sarah Mailing, 316 Oxford, said they did not object to their construction but were surprised and felt that it was unusual that the,young lady approached them seeking their approval, aller itwasalmost complete. Chairman Daggett remarked that the Commission will be considering the modification and not the aesthetics of the balcony. He noted that this is not normally how things are done and the proper steps were not followed. In most cases construction begins aller approvals have been obtained. No one else spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Murphy. seconded by Commissioner Kovacic'to close the public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. In 'answer to a question by Commissioner Huang, Ms. Butler noted that they obtained approval from the HOA aller they were informed of the violation. Staff noted thatthe Building Sedion will ,not issue a "final' until everything is done to their satisfaction. Commissioner Clark indicated that this is a small area that already existed but now will be enclosed with walls. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Murphy, seconded by Commissioner Clark to approval of MP 95-004 subject to ilie conditions in the staff report. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Bell, Clark, Huang. Kalemkiarian; KovaCic, Murphy, Daggett None Chairman Daggett noted there is a five working day appeal period. Appeals are to be filed by July 5th. Arcadia City Planning Commission , 6/27/95 Page 7 " . . NON PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 6. PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE Conditional Use Permit. 94-006 16 E. Huntington Dr. Paul Zdara, Club 101 Sports Bar & Grille A report to the Commission regarding the posting of a uniformed security offi.cer on Friday and Saturday nights. The report was presented. Capt. Hinig 6fthe Arcadia Police Dept., reported.that since the last time he was before the Planning Commission there have been no complaints. However, just this'past weekend complaints were received by neighbors who were disturbed'by noise a the site. They responded and found that the back door was opened from inside, and there was a live band playing; They were !nstructed to .close the door and the owner, Ms. Zdara, who ha~ b!len very cooperative, stopped the music and complied. He said she has done everything possible to comply with the CUP but felt that during the summer, tt\eywould receive more complaints because the residents.will be leaving their windows open at night time and the noise will. bofher them. He thought the problems were probably due to the construction on Huntington Dr. and the parking situation. In response to a question. by Commissioner KoVacic, Capt. Hinig said there is nothing prohibiting them from having a live band and remarked.lhat this has been the only complaint they have received. Ms. Buller'indicated that staff would provide another report in 3 months. The public hearing will be scheduled in October unless the situation reverSes. 7. RESOLUTION NO. 1525 A resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia,.granting CUP 95-003 for a restaurant at 166 E. Huntington Dr. Ms. Butler read thetille of the resolution. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Kalemkiarian, seconded by Commissioner Kovacic to adopt Resolution 1524, arid to formally affirm the decision of June 13, 1.995 and the votes'thereon. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Bell, Clark, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Kovacic, Murphy, Daggett None . Chairman Daggett noted there is a five working day appeal.period. Appeals are to be filed by July 5th. MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL REPORTS.! ANNOUNCEMENTS'/ STATEMENTS None Arcadia City. Planning Commission 6/27/95 Page 8 . . . MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS/STATEMENTS .Commissioner Clark stated thanhis might be his last meeting and said this has provided a great opportunity to be involved. He has. been a Commissioner lor a total 01 B years, 2 years in the 70s and the remainder with .his present term. He suggested that the Commission look at projectscarelully belore granting approvals. He fell stall has been very helplul and supportive. Commissioner Bell commended the Recreation stall lor saving her daughter who was attending a youth lunction. Apparently her daughter was eating and talking and began choking,ona piece 01 food and their skilled stall was able to come to her rescue, The Commission thanked Commissioner Clark for his years of service and felt they have benefited from his sense,of objectivity and expertise. The Commission expressedconceril that two 01 the public hearings tonight involved construction which had taken place prior to obtaining pennits.. They thought that residents should be made aware of the rules and regulations. Commissioner Huang thought he might be able to help and said he is a board member at one of the Chinese newspapers and would speak.with them and a lew other Chinese papers and ask them to'run an article. He asked that the City do a folloW up. Ms. Butler indicated that staff already has a procedure of infonning residents who live in an HOA. Utilizing the water billing printout, a letter is senttq each new homeowner in these areas infonning them that their home is in an HOA and the respective resolution is sent to,them. Commissioner Clark'said the Board 01 Realtors could !J,lso becoriiacted.and stall can ask for their help. Commissioner Kovacic said the City is concerned with unsale structures and, people should also be made aware potential hazards. Commissioner Murphy lelt there should be penalties iO'!iddition to the double'fee to-cover City's costs. He suggested that staff come up with'a fonnula. The Commission agreed with Commissioner Murphy's ,recommendation and Commissioner Huang said it would be very useful to him when he approaches the Chinese media, because in addition to infonning them of the rules and regulations, it will be ' helpful to tell them ofthe penalties and consequences, il they fail do follow. Mr. Miller said staff can prepare a report for Council to adopt imposing fees for violations. Stall is constantly looking for ways to recoup costs. Stall.can take this as a recommendation and if Council directs staff to pursue this then stall will proceed. Council Member Ulrich introduced himself and said that he was recently appointed by the Council to serve Bob Margett's reinainingtenn. He will be sworn in on July 11 tho MODIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING ACTIONS Commissioner Kalemkiarian recapped the Modification Committee's actions. MATTERS FROM STAFF 1 . CfTY COUNCIL ACTIONS Ms. Butler gave a briel summary 01 the actions taken at the City Council's, meeting and the Items that were before them lor consideration. Arcadia City Planning Commission 6/27/95 Page 9 , > 2. . UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS . Ms. Butler announced the applications that have been filed and will be before the Commission as public hearings. In response to a question by Commissioner Kovacic, Ms. Buller said initially there were a lot of concerns expressed over the Albertson's Market on live Oak but since it has been opened, things have been running smoothly. ADJOURN TO JULY 19, 1995 oJ . ~ Arcadia City Planning Commission 6/27/95 Page 10