Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPRIL 28, 1998 L r . MINUTES . Arcadia City Planning Commission, Tuesday, April 28, 1998 7:15 p.m.in the Council Chambers Planning Commission proceedings are tape-recorded and on file in the office of the Community Development Division, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia,met uuegular session on Tuesday, April ,28, 1998 at 7:15 p,m, in the Council Chambers of the City of Arcadia, at 240 W. Huntington.Drive with Chairman John Murphy presiding, ROLL CALL: PRESENT: ABSENT: j Commissioners Bruckner, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Sleeter, Murphy Commissioner Bell MOTION It was moved by Conurtissioner Sleeter, seconded by Commissioner Huang to excuse Commissioner Beil from tonight'.s meeting, The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting, OTHERS ATTENDING: City Attorney Michael Miller Community Development Administrator Donna Butler Planning Services Manager Corkran Nicholson Assistant,Planner John Halminski Secretary Silva Vergel SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS Ms, Butlerindicated that a letter was distributed with regard to item #2 on the agenda, requesting that this item be continued until June 9th, TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON NON-PUBLIC HEARING MATTERS (5 MINUTE LIMIT PER PERSON) None MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Sleeter, seconded by Commissioner Bruckner to read the resolutions by title only and waive reading the full body of the resolution, The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting, . . 1. MINUTES of4/15/98 Commissioner Bruckner remarked that the word "should" should be changed to "would" on the second to the last paragraph on page 4 of the Minutes, Chainnan Murphy had a correction on page 7, which should have stated that "800 people would have to spend $10,00 each for the Fanner's Market to be successfuL" MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Bruckner, seconded by Commissioner Huang to approve the Minutes of April 28111 as amended, ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: j Commissioners Bruckner, Huang, Sleeter, MUrphy None ' Commissioner Bell Commissioner Kalemkiarlan AT THE REQUEST OF THE APLICANT ITEM #2 IS BEING , CONTINUED TO MAY 12TH. 2, PUBLIC HEARING CUP 98-007 188 Las Tunas Dr, Homer Yen Architects : Consideration of conditional use pennitto redevelop an existing building, (Santa Anita Lanes) into 2-3 restaurants, retail stores and asupennarket.selling alcohol for off-site consumption, The public hearing was opened to take any testimony prior to continuing the public hearing, No one spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item, MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Bruckner, seconded, by Commissioner Huang to continue the public hearing to the Planning Commission's,June9th meeting, ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Bruckner, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Sleeter, Murphy None Commissioner Bell Arcadia City Planning Commission 2 4/28198 3. PUBLIC HEARING A-Oo& & ADR 97-024 900 Sunset Blvd. Homer Yen Architects . Consideration of modifications for a l4-unitI'eSidential condominium project, This application is being reheard because it was determined that there was inadequate notification of the original public hearing'on November 25, 1997, The staff report was presented, Staff indicated that the modifications are the same and have not changed, The public hearing was opened. Homer Yen, 805 W, Duarte Rd" was presentto answer any questions, ~ Thad Vreenlancl, 1049 Fairview, was present and said he was ,representing several property owners, They had concerns with the grading, Several truckloads of dirt have been brought in and as a result the pad is much higher, He was concerneg of their loss of privacy due to the increased grade, He asked that ifit is approved, the lights be projected down so that the lights won't project down into their bedrooms, He was concerned regarding the drainage and questioned the integrity of the existing wall, He asked if the 7 utility poles could be reconstructed since the lot is presently vacant and the poles would be inaccessible after construction, He wondered if they could provide underground utility for the existing poles? He asked how would a fire truck go -down these narrow driveways in case of an emergency? There are no plans to have any fire hydrantS, He said they did not object to the requested modifications. ; Mr, Miller stated that this property is zoned for this type ofa development. All of the concerns that were raised would be addressed by the various departments, Staff addressed the concerns that were, raised. It, was noted that a building permit has been issued for this project. After inspections, they met with the property owner and issued a "Stop Work Order" until the Civil Engineer redesigned the grade, The grade has been lowered and now the site sustains it's own drainage, He indicated that in some instances sumppumpnre. utilized to drain the water, He stated that a perimeter wall is required in all multiple-family. projects subject to the review and approval of Planning, 'The existing wall would be permitted to remain if it complied with Code, He also questioned the integrity of the wall, Whether it could remain or not was questionable? In regard to the landscaping between the two properties, he sltid that the Planning Commission could require trees and shrubs as a condition of approval, The City does not have any jurisdiction or authority over utility poles" New projects are required to proVide undetgroundservice, With regard to the fire issues, he stated that' each unit is required to be individual!y sprinkled and connected to the. Fire Dept. In an emergency, emergency vehicles would only approach within the first 200' of the driveway, Plans are required to be reviewed and approved by the,Fire Dept. and they do not feel that fire hydrants. or standpipes are necessary because each unit is individually sprinkled, Arcadia City Plarming Commis!lion 3 4/28/98 He went on to say that staff p!rs this type of a development to onetg continuous building that complies with code. The locations of trees are the last part of the review, They can meet with the neighbors to address their concerns and possibly plant 24" box trees that would provide some type of an immediate relief. This type of a process haS been successful with other projects, In response to a question by Commissioner Huang, staff saId that the homeowner~s association is responsible for the property maintenance of the entire property including the private areas, Cynthia Fall<, 1049 Fairview, illustrated the continuous disregard of the applicant to the neighbors and City codes. She said when they drained the pool, they did in incorrectly aild consequently flooded the neighbor's yard, they had to deal with a mosquito problem as a result, Asbestos was not cleared properly and they showed absolutely no care and concern with regard to how it was removed, She also thought that now would ,be the ideal time to take care of the utility poles and remarked that she contacted Edison to inquire about the removal. No one else spokein favor of or in opposition to this item, , , MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Kalemkiarian, seconded by Commissioner Huang to close the public hearing, The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting, Commissioner Kalemkiarian said they need to focus on the issues that the Planning Commission has jurisdiction over, Many of the concerns that were raised were addressed by staff and he noted that the neighbors were not opposed to the requested modifications. He thought that if they planted additional landscaping and trees that would mitigate some of the privacy concerns, Chainnan Murphy felt that the concerns raised by the neighbors were adequately and properly addressed by staff, Resaid they need to rely on staff so the issues are addressed prior to final, Commissioner Sleetenemarked that he was the person who made the motion for approval in November. He felt at that time that this was one of the better projects that he, had seen and his feeiings have not changed, The density is very low as compared to whatthey could build and still comply with Code. He drove by this property prior to demolitions and saw many mature trees that provided privacy to the neighbors and thought that it would be'nice if the plan would include additional landscaping, MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Bruckner, seconded by Commissioner Huang to approve MP 97- 008 & ADR 97-024 subject to the conditions in the staff report with the additionai'condition that additional trees and landscaping be incorporated into the pian to the satisfaction of Planning Services, ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Bruckner, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Sleeter, Murphy None Commissioner Bell Arcadia City planning Conunission 4 4l28/98 . . Chainnan Murphy noted that there is a, five working day appeal period, Appeals are to be filed by th Tuesday, May 5 . 4. PUBLIC HEARING MP 98-005 1035 Hampton Rd, Anne Ma Consideration of an appeal of the Rancbo Santa Property Owner's Association's denial of a proposed two-story, 10,l99sq,ft, home, In addition, the applicant is requesting a modification to pennit arront yard setback variation of 55' -0" to 69'-0" in lieu of 86~ -6" required for the new home, The staffreport was presented, Staff remarked that the landscaping in the parkway is maintained by the property owners, The size of the proposed house is 10,199 sq, ft, He explained the average grade is 9' higher than street level. Tbe building height is measured from the average of the existing grade level. The rear yard setback is 35', i 1 The public hearing was opened, Tom Dargan, 319 Cioverdale, Los Angeles, was the property owner's representative, He corrected the staff, report and said that the house is not 10,199 sq, ft, The house is 8,000 sq. ft., the garage is 1,000 sq, ft, and the open patio area is 1,000 sq, ft, He indicated that a 7,800 sq. ft, ho\Jsewas approved for this property in 1988, The bull<: of the proposed house would be almost at the same location as the existing house, The covered porch will e?ttend out, They will not be changing the grade. They will be relocating one oak tree, He explained that the property is divided iI!to three sections with the new proposed house;i.e, 1/3 of the lot would be the front yard, 1/3 occupied by the house and the other 1/3 by the rear yard area, With the exception of.thefrontyard setback, they will be complying with all of the zoning requirements, Modifications are to be granted when there are unusual circumstances, i,e" one of the adjacent neighbor's has an wi.usually large front yard setback (96') and their front yard setback is derived by taking the average of the two adjacent properties, If they were to comply with the setback and move the house back they would be losing many more oak trees that would be in the way of the house in addition tathe extensive grading that would.be required, Ms, Ma wQuld like to have a pool in the back yard one day and they would like to keep the backyard as it has been proposed. He thought that it should be noted that the ARB Chainnan, Mr, Schiavone, requested and received a front yard setback modification, Ifhe was granted one, why can't Ms, Ma? The ARB requited that they obtain 8 signatures and they were able to get 4, The two adjacent property owners, one neighbor across the street and one in the rear have all signed letters in favor of this request, He pointed out the two adjacent neighbors, who would be most impacted by the new home, have given their approval. As a. compromise, he,offered to. reduce the square footage, as per the ARB's request, and provide a 7.1' front yard setback This would mean that they would lose a few feet from eacb room, He noted that the purpose of the ARB is to assure quality development and he felt tbat this new home would be .Arcadia City Phuming Commission s 4/28198 ~nstructed with high quality mlrial. He submitted a photo of a hometpasadena, similar to the one that is being proposed, John Schiavone, 1005 Hampton Rd" Chainnan of the ARB, explained their reason for denial of the proposed house which in their opinion was oversized, grossly intrusive and incompatible with the neighborhood, This is a massive house, Staff brought it to their attention the square footage of the house, Each plan that was broughtto them was a minimum of 8,000 sq, ft, The front porch is 27.' high - almost as high as the top of the two adjacent homes, The homes across'the street are 7' below street level. He said that the applicant's representative did not want to take the time with the ARB to discuss their concerns and was not open to their suggestions, They did not feel that the applicant meets the intent of the Homeowners Association's resolution, The ARB had brought in a miniature model showing the proposed home and the two existing adjacent homes and he illustrated the mass of the new proposed home and it's appearance after construction and how large it would be in comparison, The property slopes up from'the street and he showed how the house would appear toa person40n the other side of the street. H,R, Stoke, 1040 Hampton, opposed the new house, He said the Planning Commission is not being given the full picture by Mr, Dargan, The house is not compatible and too ,high, He said that Mr, Schiavone's property is a corner lot and should not be compared to this property. The applicant's advocate ignored the resolution and ARB suggestions at all times, Mr, Dargan felt that the only authority that the ARB had was to review the proposed materials and once they approved that then there was nothing else for them to review or approve. He never wanted to work with the ,ARB , Mr, Dargan has indicated that he,has an approval letter from the neighbor across the street who is out oftheCountw The ARB has requested on several occasions to see this letter but Mr,Dargan has norprovided it. He corrected a comment made by Mr. Dargan and said that the ARB did not agree to a 71' front yard setback, The 71' front yard set back was approved for the house that was proposed in 1988, He could not see a justification for approving the front yard setback. They felt that a smaller house would be much more appropriate, The hollse is 42' high from the street level. The subject oak tree has an 18" diameter, and it is being, asked to be removed to accommodate a second ,garage, Io,his observations,Ms, Ma does not utilize her present garage and wondered why a second garage would be necessary? He explained that recently they had a gathering there, and the Cars were parked on the driveway and on the street and the garage was not utilized, With regard to the F.AR he stated that this house will have a 300/0 F,A,R, ratio, but most of the, homes in the area only have a 7-8%F,AR There is absoluteiy no relation and comparison with the proposed house and what is existing'in the neighborhood, He urged the Planning Commission to deny the appeal and remarked that this is not the time or the place to make compromises, Dr. Costarella, 1044 Singiilgwood, spoke in opposition, He said that as a result of another ilew construction, one property owner removed and relocated 3 mature large oak trees and after a few years the trees died, This house will not fiUn the neighborhood, He made reference to several other large homes in the area that did nor fit in and he did not want to see another one, Mike Downer, 1032 Hampton, HOA member, spoke in opposition, He said that his home is directly across the street from the subject property, He would be the one most impacted because when he looks Arcadia.City Plamting Conunission 6 4128'98 out of his front door, he will be !ng this house, He'was certainlynole neighbor who lives across the street that signed the letter of approval. The Planning Commission should deny this appeal because if they approve it then the resolution has absolutely no meaning, The applicant should redesign and go back to the ARB for their review, Walter Williams, 967 Hampton, said that he is a relatively new neighbor and he moved into this area due to the atmosphere. The homes blend in well but this house would be inconsistent with the neighborhood, In rebuttal, MJ', Dargan said that both of the homeowners whose homes are depicted in the model have signed approval letters for the proposed house, He pointed out that anyone in this area could add a second-story, Thus, he failed to see the significance of the model. In the packet, a petition was included and if the nl!1lles of the people that do not reside in the area and the duplicate nameS were excluded there would only be a few people in opposition. The proposed house would not obstruct anyone's view, He was satisfied with his attempts to comply with the ARB's requirements and reiterated that this would be a high quality development. He did not think that this would set a precedent and said there are many similar large type homes in this HOA, He thought the ARB had too much discretion and said that he always provided them with all information that they requested, He even offered to reduce the size of the columns and put in a curved porch, He asked the Planning Commission to approve the appeal. ' No one else spoke infavor of or in opposition to this item. MOTION !twas moved by Commissioner Bruckner, seconded by Commissioner Huang to close the public hearing, The motion passed by voice 1I0te with none dissenting. Staff said that the building heightisdetermined by the width of the lot, He noted thaUhe required.front yard setback is 86,S' and the 71' would not comply with code, MJ', Miller said the resolution is a City resolution giving authority to the ARB to review projects, The requirements in the resolution 'are over and beyond what'is required in the zoning code, In response to a question by the Commission, staff said that their objection was mostly to the porch area Which he feltis incompatible, There are no other homes in this area that have a similar type porch, Commissioner Bruckner said that to him the incompatibility goes beyond the porch. He thought that the new house would not be harmonious or in'proportion with the other homes in the neighborhood, Commissioner Kalemkiariansaid in this HOA there are many large homes, although, in the immediate sfr'eet there are no similar type homes, There are very large homes on Singingwood Dr, He did not want to stifle anyone's creativity 'and remarked thatmiU1y of the homes in the area are older homes, Mr, Miller said that this resolution has been applied successfully for many years, Obviously, the concept of what is harmonious and is in character is subjective, Although, it is important that decisions are based upon facts, a structure's compatibility can,a\so be taken into consideration, Arcadia'City Planning Commission 7 4/28/98 Staff stated that there are 13 hOt on the block and none are massive. "large homes that have been mentioned were approved by other boards, In his opinion, Mr. Schiavone has appropriately applied the resolution to this project, Chairman Murphy thought that the ARB has been fair in its decision making process, They have offered to the applicant Ii nlimber of alternatives and have reviewed their plans, In his opinion, the home is over powering and he agreed with the ARB's decision, The house is too large for this location, CorrtmissionerKalemkiarian. agreed, Mr, Miller thought that the resolution has been applied properly and appropriate fmdings have been made, MOTION !twas moved by Commissioner Bruckner, seconded by Commissioner Sleeter to deny theabpeal ofMP 98-005 and uphold the ARB's decision to deny the 10,199 sq. ft. house and direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution for adoption incorporating the Planning Commission's discussion, findings and thedesign'criteria as.noted in pages 3 and 4 of the staff report, ROLLCALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Bruckner, Huang, Kalemkiarian, 8leeter,Murphy None Commissioner Bell Chaiiman Murphy rioted that the resolution for this project would be approved on May 12th, There will be a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the resolution, Appeals are to be filed by Tuesday, May 19 ' 5. PUBLICHEARINGTPM98-006 1034-68. First Ave, TritechAssoc, Consideration of a tentative parcel map creating a four lot single-sided cul~de-sac from two existing Jots, The staff report was presented, Staff said that code recommends 150' between interesting streets but due to the limited number of lots on tbis cul.de-sac it was deemed acceptable to waive that requirement, There are other similar situations and there have notbeen any problems, There will be a 6' high block wall on the north side of the cul- de-sac and there will be landscaping planted, The wall will have to comply with the visibility standards, Ms, Butler indicated that staff does not encourage private streets, The public hearing was opened, Arcadia City Planning Conunission 8 ~f2Si98 Tom Cao, Tritech Assoc" 735 .!merson. Monterey Park, was in agrelnt with all of the conditions in the staff report. No one else spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item. MOTION It'was moved by Commissioner Huang, seconded by Commissioner Sleeter to close the public hearing, The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting, Commissioner Huang thought it would bea good subdivision and thought the situation was unique, ,Staff explained that they deCided not to take the Traffic Engineer's recommendation regarding intersections alignment and to reverse'the plan due to the unusual shape of the lot and if the plan was inverted a dead space would be created, on the north side of the street, Staff was concerned with who would be responsible for the maintenance of this void space. This is a better use of the property even though it does not meet the separation requirement. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Bruckner, seconded by Commissioner Sleeter to approve TPM 98-006 subject to the conditions in the staff report, ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Bruckner, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Sleeter, Murphy None Commissioner Bell Chairman Murphy noted that there 'is a ,ten day appeal period, Appeals are to be tiled by Monday, Mily 11th, NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 6, RESOLUTION NO, 1565 A resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, granting CUP 98- 006 to operate a tutorial center at 22 W,LiveOak Ave, Ms, Butler read the title of the resolution, MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Bruckner, seconded by Commissioner Sleeter to adopt Resolution No, 1565 and formally affirm the decisions of April 15th and the vote thereon, Arcadia City Planning,Commission 9 4128198 ROLL CALL: . . AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Bruckner, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Sleeter, Murphy None Commissioner Bell Chainnan Murphy noted that there is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the resolution, Appeals are to be tiled by Tuesday, May Sib. MA TIERS FROM CITY COUNCIL None MAITERS FROM PLANNING COMMlSSON Chainnan Murphy indicated that he attended the Fanner's Market and it was a success, He talked with the President of the ABA who indicated they had a lot of different plans to improve it. MODIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING ACTIONS Commissioner Bruckner recapped the actions ,taken by the Modification Committee, MAITERS FROM STAFF L CITY COUNCIL ACTONS 2. UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Miller commended the Planning Commission for their thorough discussion of the ARB 's appeal and the detailed,findings that they made, He .infonned the Planning Commission that the property owner of 270 Orange Grove appealed the City's decision denying their subdivision ahd they are seeking to have the courts correct what they thought was an inappropriate decision, Ms, Butler recapped the upcoming projects before the Planning Commission, She stated that ,the Santa Anita project is being reviewed by the City's consultant and she anticipated that the Planning Commission 'would be holding their public hearings on this item sometime in November or December, ADJOURNMENT 9:15 p,m, ecretary, Arcadia Planning Commission Arcadin City PliUUling Conunission 10 4128,98