Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJUNE 12, 2001 @ . MINUTES . Arcadia City Planning Commission Tnesday, June> 12, 2001 7:15 p;m. in the Council Chambers Planning Commission proceedings are tape-recorded and on file in the office of the CommUnity Develepment-Bivisiofl. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, June 12, 2001 at 7:15p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Arcadia, at 240 W. Huntington Drive with Chalrman Murphy presiding. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: ABSENT: Commissioners Huang, Kalemkiarian, Olson, Murphy Commissioner Bruckner MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Huang, seconded by Commissioner Kalerpkiarian .to excuse Commissioner Bruckner from tonight's meeting. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. , MOTION It waS moved by Commissioner Kalemkiariiln, seconded by Commissioner Huang 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 Gail Marshall Community Development AdJTIinistrator Donna Butler Planning Services Manager Corkran Nicholson Associate Planner James Kasama AsSistant Planner Candyce Burnett Sell. Admin. Assis. Silva Vergel SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS Ms. Butler $aid the following items were distributed:. ) > Letters relating to CUP 01-011; CUP 01-012; Westfield ADR and a letter from Marlene Roth regarding Z 01 "00 1 . . )> Amendment.on page 9 of the staffreport for the Westfield proje.ct TIME RESERvED FOR THOSE IN THE AlJDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING) COMMISSION ON NUN-PUBLIC HEARINGMATTERS (5 MINUTE LIMIT PER PERSON) None 1. MINUTES of5/22/01 Chairman Murphy corrected the motion with regard to CUP 01-010. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Kalemkiarian, seconded by Commissioner Olson to approve the Minutes of May 22nd as amended. . . ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Huang, Olson, Murphy None Commissioner Kalernkiarian Commissioner Bruckner 2. PUBLIC HEARING CUP 01-011 616-618'E. Live Oak Ave. Vmcent Marco Duchetta I } Consideration of a conditional use permit to expand an existing martial arts studio. RESOLUTION NO. 1641 A resolution of the Planning Corrunission of the City of Arcadia.,grant'ing CUP 01-011 expanding the existing martial arts studio at 616-618 E. Live Oak Ave. The staff report was presented Staff indicated that . she visited the center on several different occasions and there has Dever ,been a parking problem. The parking is underutilized. The public hearing was opened.' Vincent Marco Ducllette, 616 E. Live Oak, said their students have increased and this will enable them to better serve the commUnity. Their students are 3+ years of age. Most are dropped off by parents. No one else. spoke in favor or opposition to this item. Chairman Murphy closed the public hearing. Commissioner.Ka1emkiarian said the parking. seems to be satisfactory. ArCadia CitY' Planning Commission 2 .. 6fl2Jtll . . MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Kalemkiarian, seconded by' Commissioner Huang to approve CUP 01-011 and adopt Resolution No. 1641, granting the expansion oftbe existing martial ~s studiQ subject to the conditions listed in the staff report ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Huang, Kalemkiarian, Olson; Murphy None Commissioner Bruckner Chairman Murphy noted that there is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the resolution. Appealsiare,to be filed by June 20. 3. PUBLIC BEARING CUP 01-0.12 341 E. Foothill Blvd. Robert Daggett for Mona Ermita Consideration of a conditional use permit to re-opena. drive-through retail busin.ess for the purpose of selling dairy products and related merchandise from 8:00a.m. to 8:00 p.m., 7-days a week. . The staff report was presented. COIlllll\ssioner Olson said the "no parki!lg" sign drawn onthe wall looks bad. Would it be painted? Chairman Murphy asked if the marquee sign would remain? . Mr. Nicholson replied that the walls would be painted. He said that any and all signs in the City must go through the .ADR procedure. . The public hearing was opened. Robert Daggett, 731 Fairview, asked to what extent would they have to pave the driveway? There are portions of the driveway which are in good condition and it would be unnecessary to replace those areas. The sign has been up. for 40 years. It is an icon. The applicant is requesting relief With regard to the size of the sign. He indicated the sign was approximately 20' high and..is approximately 90 sq, ft. in area per face. Mr. Nicholson said that the code allows a free standing sign to be 25' high. With regard to the driveway he indicated that the photos show that the driveway is in need of repair and should be replaced. Staff is recommendihg.a low profile, 6' high monument sign. Commissioner Kalemkiarian felt the sign and use have an ambiance even though it does not meet code. ) He thought it would be neat to keep. it. . Arcadia Cily,pranning Commission 3 6/12101 . . Mr. Daggett said the sign is in.a bad condition and needs to be repaired. It has been there for over 40 years. It clearly violates the code but it is an architectUral expression. The video rental sign'would be removed. The sign most definitely needs rehabilitation. He indicated that they did not object to the landscaping. ) Ms Butler indicated that all new uses must comply with the sign criteria. IIi the near future, the Platming.Commissionwill be getting new sign guidelines. The goal is to eliminate large signs on small lots, where monument signs might"be more appropriate. There does not appear to be any permits on file for this sign. The Coca-Cola sign is oversized and not in scale - with the site. Staff feels that they have the opportunity to bring it into> compliance. Staff is recommending a monument sign which would be more appropriate. No one else spoke infavor of or in opposition to this' item. Chairman Murphy closed the public hearing. . Commissioner Kalemkiarian said that he did not necessarily want to save the origii1al sign, be just felt that it has character. He-thought they should reduce the' height to meet code and try to salvage it. IUs fun to have this type ofa design with the older buildings only if they could'bring it scale. Mr. Nicholson said he did not want to stifle creativity but felt they could create a monument sign that would be unique and appropriate. .He said there are much larger shopping centers that do not have signs this big. Chairman Murphy agreed with staff. He felt thitt a: monument sign is definitely the way to go. Monument signs. are the. wave of the future. Pole signs are on their way out. He-suggested that stll.f:f work with the applicant to find a solution. He thought that portions of the driveway that are not in disrepair should notbe replaced. Staff did not objectto including elements from the existing,sign. Commissioner Olson asked if there would be an interchangeable sign? He liked the old sign but felt the top portion is out of scale and has been changed many times. It'is neat to have this type of a design. It would be nice if they could rehab it. Ms. Butler said they are open to. suggestions l!lld would be flexible. Elements of the existing sign could be incorporated into the new sign. It is' up to theapplicilllt to determine what they would' like to do. Again, aiL signs would be subject to ADR. It was theconseIisus of the Planning, Commission to amend conditions 2 and lto: 2. The existing asphalt paving shall be repaired and covered with an appropriate slurry seal, finish. The repair work shall be subject to the review and approval 0 the Development Services Director prior to the occupancy of the building. 3. The existing freestanding sign. which is oversized and in need of repair, shall be removed and . replaced With anew, lower profile monument sign that shall not exceed a maximum height to 6'-0" and a maximum sign area of 50 sq. ft. pefsign face. The existing freestanding sign shall be removed prior to the occupancy of the building, ) MOTION ... Arcadia City Planning Commission 4 6/12/01 , ' . . It was moved by Commissjol),~r.Kalemkiarian, sec~lnded by Commissioner Olson to adopt the Neg. Dec. and approve CUP 01-012 subject to the conditions listed in the staff report with the above amendments. . ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Huang, Kalemkiarian, Olson, Murphy None Commissioner Bruckner Chairman Murphy noted that there is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the resolutioIi. The resoiution wiUbe adopted on June 26th. Appeals are to be filed by July 5. 4. PUBLIC HEARING CUP 01-013 56 E. Duarte Rd. Larry Lachner Consideration of a conditional use permit to expand,an existing Athletic club and' add a.bee~ and wine license; CONTINUED TO 6/26/01 The public hearing was opened. -No one spoke in favor of or in opposition' to this item. 5. PUBLICHEARING CUP 01-014 630 W. Duarte Rd" #30l~303 Theresa Woo Consideration of'a conditional use permitfor a business administration and ianguage college. RESOLUTION NO. 1644 A.resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, granting CUP 01-014 for a business adminimation and language college at 630 W. Duarte Rd. The ,staff report was'presented and the public hearing was opened. Diane Chapman, Citizens Business Bank, 630 W. Duarte Rd., was concerned about the parking. There isal\yaysa parking problell1. Sometimes, they are'forced to park as far.asNaomi Arcadia City'Planning Commission s 6112/0 1 Ie No one else spoke in.favor or opposition to this item. . Chairman Murphy closed the public hearing. In response toa question by Commissioner Huang, Ms. Butler said that it is very difficult to monitor and P-Qlice where elIlployeesparkand even.more difficult to enforce. _ .__ ___ Chairman Murphy suggested that both the employees of this use and the bank be asked to park further away to. leave the spaces closest toJhe building for their patrons. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner HiIang, seconded by Commissioner Olson to approve CUP 01- 014 and adopt Reso. 1644 subject to the conditions listed in the staffreport. ROLLCALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Huang, Kalemkiarian, Olson,.Murphy None Commissioner Bruckner Chairman Murphy noted that there is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the resolution. Appeals are to be.filed by June 20. 6. PUBLIC HEARING SADROI-032 160 Eo Duarte Rei., #A Jiulin Yan, appellant . I Consideration of an appeal of the denial of a design review for 3 wall sign face-change inserts for "Tapioca Express". The staff report was presented. Staff indicated that the only issue with this sign is the color. Size is not an issue. The photo displaying the signs with different color backgroUndS is actually a separate parcel. These signs were installed over several years. This building haS manRBedto'acbieve the same background colors for its signs. Staff would like to see uniformity and. maintain it The design guidelines do.not specifically address the color -.-.. .------of ,ig.w;, although lhe", i:11t:-vmiuu:; ~I:ilt:~iu e,laoli,hillg,igll l,;uulwuily. Tlill;;"" ,mall l,;Ullllli'a~i,,1 building. It would not be a good idea to have one sign distinctively outstanding from the others. It would be out of continuity. The public hearing was opened. No one>spoke.in favor of or in opposition to thisiteri1. Chairman Murphy closed the public hearing. Abriefdiscussion ensued with regard to the color of the sign. } Arcadia City Planning Co~~sion 6 6/12/01 . . Staff indicated that the appellant is the corporate operator and has muiti-Iocations. Chairman Murphy agreed ~h staff. If they sway from uniformity it could become problematic. Commissioner Olson said the signS Ui the 99~ shopping center are mismatched. He said if this is _ permitted it would become out of control. He did not think that iust because they are a franchise this should be permitted. He felt they could make their logo work in here. Ms. Butler said the ADR addresses these types of issues. The signs in the 99~ center are old and did not go through ADR. It should be noted that the 99~ center is a separate Piece of property. With the new . regulations that staff is working on, signs will be reviewed as part of the' review for the entire complex. They are working toward achieving Uniformity in centers. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Kalemkiarian, seconded by Commissioner Olson to deny the appeal for SADR 01-032. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Huang, Kalemkiarian, Olson, Murphy None Commissioner Bruckner Chairman Murphy noted thatthere.is idive working day appeal period. Appeals are to be filed byIUne 20. 7. PUBLIC HEARING ADR 2001,001 400 S. Baldwin Ave. Design review for a proposed 276,000+ sq. ft. retail expansion to the eXlstmg Westfield Shoppingtown and ,a parking structure for 1,220 vehicles, to be located at the NE corner of the site, and to amend paragraph 9.dof Reso, 6199 to allow 6 tenant. identification panels on the multi- tenant monument signs,to be located ontheperirneter of the site, in lieu of 4 tenant identification panels. . Tht:slatf repon was prt:senlt:d. Ms. Butler discussed the items listed on Mr. Healy's letter:of JUne 12th. Page 6 - staff agreed with their request regarding posting of puolic information. Recommendation No.2 - staff agrees with a 40" high wall to: screen shopping carts Recommendation No.3 - This is a Building Code requirement and it is mandatory that they comply ) with the handicap requirements. Arcadia City Planning Commission 7 6/12101 . . RecoIllmendation No. 10 - staff disagrees with their request. Staff feels that kiosks are permanent and create clutter, while carts. are portable and would be o.k. in the plaza' area with the limitation on the number of carts. Kiosks are permitted inside the mall and as a result Seating and landscape areas have been remodeled to accommodate the kiosks. Kiosks take up a iarge area and in small areas they tend to clutter it up. Staff felt the outside area should be.devoted to creating an open air environment. Recoi:nmendation No. 11 - there. is nothing in the code that requires a fountain or some type of a public art. It is staff'sopinion that because Westfield is providing an openplaza, the fountain or public art would enhance this area RecolDmendation No. IS - this is a Fire Dept. requirement. Sprinklers would probably be noirequjred in the outside area. Ms. Butler clarified that the City previously approved up to a 600,000 sq. .ft. expansion to the-mall. The consideration before the Planning Commission is the design of the expansion. . The public hearing was opened. John Healy, 11601 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles, was present and he introduced Keith Ray and.David Doll.. This is justa continuation of what they started last fall. They have been working with varioUs retailers and. department stores. They would like to create a project. with a dynamic feel. One that will be well received by retailers. They are looking at book stores, gourmet markets, lifestyle. stores, home furnishing and furniture type uses. They want to bring in retailers that will compliment what alread y exists in the mall. . . Keith Ray, 11601 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles. What they are trying to create here would be an adjunct to the existing mall and hopefully increase their customer base. They are hoping that this outdoor area would give a sense of energy. The design has a modern flavor. There will be a food area in the center of the plaza. The entrance will have an enhanced pattern which would include seating and landscaping. They think it will have the feel of the 3rd St. Promenade in Santa Monica with different shopping experiences. They would be bringing the detail elements from the existing mall into this new area. This area would have good access' from the new parking structure which would be. located adjacent to JCPenney. They feel that would help energize that area and bring in people. / In response to questions by Chairman Murphy, Mr. Ray said this addition would be an adjunct to the existing mall. It is intended that the uses will compliment the existing retailers. They are hoping that people will come in for the experience and then experience the rest of the mall. They are hoping that '1his"'will 'provide more options. With regard. to the ingress and egress, he said the driveways are adequate. In fact there would be better circulation. The parking garage does. have direct access at both the first and second levels. The area referred by Chairman MurphYas' narrow, is 36' wide - same as a . normal city street. They feelthese wotild.add more parking choice. Chairman Murphy said he would feel better if the area would be more open. In response to a question by Commissioner 'Olson, Mr. Ray said that-they did notplan on providing valet parking all year around but would dO.80 when the situation warranted. Dave Doll. 11601 Wilshire, Los Angeles, said that kiosks are not uncommon. This is a different phenomena. This idea did not exist several years ago. They need to create excitement. They see it as } Arcadiil. City Planning Corm:ni~sion 8 6/1}101 . . an integral part of the overall atmosphere. The c()ncept of markets in a shopping center is not uncomtnon in many other countries. U.S. seems to be the only country that does not have this type of a mix. He could not understand why all of a sudden, staff has come up with a requirement of providing the fountain or public art? There are other issues llnd difficulties involved when considering a fOUIitain. He noted that the finishing details have not yet been presented to staff such as plairters, wall lights and sconc,es. This area will have a different feel than~hat ~,already ex.!.stin!L.}n .!~onse to ll_<@estion PL Commissioners, Mr. Doll said that kiosk tenants invest more and are generally long term tenants. While carts require a small amount .of investment and they have a limited selection ofitems. They would like to.have a mix of both. Chairman Murphy felt the issue of the fountain or public art could be worked out with staff Mr. Doll supported that recommendation to review the need for a fountain as the project develops. Commissioner Huang thought that a fountain is a good idea He commended staff for that .recommendation. He said that the fountain does not have to be a cascading type waterfall fountain. It could be ol).e similar to the one in City Walk where it is located in the court yard area and the water spouts out of it. The kids seem to enjoy playing in.it. Commissioner Kalemkiarian said that it is important to remember that they are not the deciding body. Thatthey will only be rnakinga.tecommendation to the City Council. Scott Sayer, 444 W. Huntington Dr., said that he reviewed the concept drawings for the project. In general, he approved of the siting and massmg of the proposed mall expansion and attached garage. However, the small scale of the submitted documents, and the absence of details, rnakes it very difficult tofullyassess.the design. The existing parking aisles ar.e not oriented toward the new entry. They are. perpendicular, running towards Robinsons-May. A pedestrian access walkway crossing at least four rows should be provided. Site improvements to pedestrian access from the south, at La Cadena, and the west, at Hugo Reid, have not been addressed. This was specifically discussed at the EIR scoping hearing, and should be incorporated. The bus stop should be directly adjacent to a mall entrance, as his now. The proposed garage light level of twenty foot-candles is much too bright. It should be a minimum of ' fiveJoot-candles and a maximum not over twelye at any point. LightJevelsat other parts oftbe site are not discussed. The center is generally under lit by current standards. . Truck maneuvering space for the loading/trash areas is too short, particularly for the market on the east side. This will cause trafik conflicts, Unless loading occurs at off-hours. Substantial landscaping will be needed on the east side, to break up the mass of the building facing the Santa Anita Racetrack. ) The plan at the courtyard entry indicates' a broad stairway. How will patrons of the market get their carts down the stairs to the parking area? The market should be relocated so that it faces directly onto the Arcadia City Planning Commission 9 6/12101 . . parking. This way, the carts will not conflict with other shoppers in the courtyard. ThiS is why you don't pirtmarkets in regional malls! Numerous building code issues have not been addressed, to the point that they will impact the conceptual design.ofthe project. For example, the new addition blocks all the exits from both levels of ..the t;.~ing .~or!h~~Lquat:k..apt" ()Ltl1~. J.ll!lll,~hpP's-,-~erti!lg~n~~exit ~auast_the prop~~J()ildiI1~ dock is possible, but it may seriously aiterthe design. -, - - .. Exit stairs from.thesecoIid level have not been indicated. Service elevators, exit corridors, electrical and telephone utility rooms, public toilet rooms, and mechanical shafts have not been indicated, even diagrammatically. Significant area Will be lost for these items. If the applicant needs to recover this square footage for hisleases and/orPerforma, how willthat inipacrthe design? - Kiosks have not been indicated in the. new concourse area Does that mean there won't be any? Parts of the concourse are only thirty feet wide, the minimum allowed without obstructions. Judging by' the number of kiosks in the existing mall, perhaps it would be prudent to plan all kioskJoc~tionsnow. In general, the concept elevations are fine. The step in the forms flanking the new entry, from the first level, back t6 the second and, eventually, back to the future third is simple and effective. Signage, however, should be strictly limited to ground floor tenants which have storefront facing directly on the parking lot. All the proposed upper level signage. creates visual clutter, and should be rejected. A number of upper level windows are shown facing the parking area These$hould be.real openings ihto tenant spaces, or at leaSt obscure glass backlit from shadow boxes three feet,deep minimum. False, unIi~ windows are not appropriate. " / ' l .J / } Neither elevations nor. paving for the. new o,utdoor courtyard have been provided. What will this space look like? This vital area needs.further articulation. At the interior; the proposed second floor walkway curving through the existing central atrium will ruin this volume, and should be rejected. Even though the cinema is noted as future, there are some critical issues regarding this ' space that must be considered now. The dashed rectangkon the plans appears to be about 50,000 square feet. This equates to about a ten screen multiplex. Ifso, it will Pave about 2,500 occupants. Per the building code, 25.00 x .3 = 750 inchesi12 = about 60 feet of total.exit stair width. Half of this figure, about thirty feet, must come from the,main theater entrydirectIy down to grade and out. This will utterly wreck the look and feel of the courtyard area, unless it is planned for now. Also, several very large stair. shafts will be needed.down through the lower floors and out. It will be very difficult .to 'accomplish this later. Locations for the theater stairs should be noted now. As concept drawings, these documents are fine, but they don't go nearly far enough to.allow planning staff to set conditiollS on the project. He urged the Planning Commission to request the applicant to submit 1/16" scale plans and elevationS, with all colors and materials noted, plus a landscape plan and lighting photometric plan. This is a very typic8.\, reasonable request on a project of this size and complexity. Rob Mathias, 816 Coronado, was concerned about the sign on BaJdwfu Ave. The existing Union 76 sign is visible fu the Lower Rancho area and he did not want to have .thesarne affect from this sign. ) -' Arcad~a City Planning Commission JO 6/12101 . . Ms. Butler said that they will only be adding a 6' high monument sign located at the driveway north of where the existing identification sign is located. It will be a low profile sign for up to 6 tenants. In rebuttal, Mr, Doll said that large plans were submitted to staff. Staff has had an opportunity to review it with them. Some of the issues raised by Mr. Sayer are not problematic. The foot-candles in the parking structure are of concern. They are concerned with their customers' safety. People will not use the parking structure if it is not well lit. They will shade it so there is not an abnormal amount of spillage outside of the deck. Chairman Murphy thought that it would be eXtremely important for the applicant to receive and review the Minutes. Commissioner Olson asked how they would deal with the shopping cart issues and where they would eventually end up. How would they retrieve them? He agreed with comments just made by Chairman Murphy with regard to receiviilgand reviewing the minutes; Mr. Doll said that is of a great deal of concern to them also. Shopping carts will not end up inside the mall. There will be dedicated areas where shopping carts would be available for pick up and drop off. They do have ways of policing shopping carts so it does not become problematic. He could not see a customer dragging a cart through Nordstrom. He did not think that truck traffic would become a problem There are loading zones throughout the property and it is hardly noticeable. Most tenants receive their shipments. Deliveries for high volume tenants are usually in early mornings. Not too manyof~heir tenants'use semi-trucks for their inventory. No one else spoke in favor or opposition to this jtem. Chairman Murphy closed the public hearing, Ms. Butler explained the distance requirements for kiosks and carts. She noted that when carts were brought into the mall, they noticed that many of the public seating area and planters, landscaping and .greenery were removed to make room for the carts and kiosks. Staff does not feel that kiosks are appropriate in the plaza area but carts are smaller and more acceptable. The large plans that were submitted did not show any kiosks. The applicant was informed in March, via a letter,.thatkiosks wouid not be appropriate in the plaza. The focal point, fountain or public art,was mentioned in the same letter. This would be<subjectto ADR.. Staff feels this element will enhance the project and make the area more pedestrian friendly. They want to create a less chittered environment, Kiosks are permanent. The 15' isle-way is a Fire Dept. requirement. There are no size restrictions on.kiosks. The City does not have jurisdiction over the interior or the mall. Commissioner Kalemkiarianwas satisfied. He felt that staffdid agoodjob. Chairman Murphy felt that kiosks are nice. He could not see why they-can't have it in this area if they already have them on the. inside of the mall. Kiosks are a nice amenity. They are fun attractions. He suggested that condition U be amended to include a fountain or any similar item agreed by staff. Commissioner Kalemkiarian felt the mixing of uses would be good. There are a lot more people in the mall but it is cluttered. Carts and kiosks would increase traffic and volume. He preferred full size trees aq,dJlIndscaping which would enhance the project. Arcadia City'Planning Commission II 61\2101 . . CommissionerK.a1emkia:rian felt the mixing of uses would.be good. There are a lot more people in the mall but it is cluttered. Carts and kiosks would increase traffic and volume. He preferred full size tree~ and landscaping which would enhance the project. 'J Ms. Butler felt the plaza area should include a focal point such as a fountain or some sort of a public art dis.Play wbl.ch.'>Vo~4!l~dA.DR .. . Comniissioner Huang felt the fa9ade of the parking structure should be enhanced, either through color scheme or another improvement, so that it is aesthetically compatible with the rest of the mall.. The parking structure should be beautified a little bit. The design should be integrated with the design of the entire complex. He felt they should add this as a condition. _ Commissioner KalemJdarlan said there .istluted pre-cast, painted metal, lighting, and plenty offull size trees. It looks a lot like the new Disney structure. He noted that they are 'only reco=ending to the City COUi1cil. Ms. Butler said that all of the comments made tonight by the Planning Commission would be incorporated and forwarded to City Council. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Kalemkiarian, seconded by Commissioner Olson to approve ADR 01-001 01-007 and forward the project to City Council. . ROLL CALL: . AYES: NOES: ABSENT: / Co=issioners Huang, Kalemkiarian, Olson, Murphy None Commissioner Bruckner 8. PUBLIC HEARING Z 01-001 1012-1026 S. First Ave. Cansideration .of a zone change from R72 (Medium Density Multiple-Family Residential) to R-I (Single-Family Residential). The staff report was presented. Ms. Butler nated that the City had received a letter. fram Ms. Roth representing the property owners of the subject property requesting the cantinuationof the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Sonja Williams, 130. Greenfield, said she is represerrting326 property owners who signed a petition in oppositionofthepropose<:l development and the GP'amendment. All of these homeowners jive in the area and are praud owners of single-family homes. They want to maintain the dignity of the area. Some of the homes in this area have received the Arcadia Be!iutiful awards. They do not want a condominium. ) in their neighbo!hood.They have same .of the be'stkepthamesin this area. They are very appreciative j of the City Councj.l far listening to their concerns and imposing a moratorium The GF must be upheld. Arcadia City Planiling Co~sjon 12 6/12/01 .., . ." . _. The proposed development would not be good for their neighborJ:lOod. They are looking forward to having single-family homes developed on these properties. Arcadia is a community of homes. She urged the Planning Commission to approve this. Bob Toben, 1 n 0 Greenfield, said he is a licensed civil engineer. Based on his calculations, he cOuldnot llee !low the~ JgtgQll19 ~ gey~Joped as they Were R~ykmsly pr9po~e.9. . . Commissioner Olson said that based on the numbers cited by Mr. Toben, it appears that there is a lot of misinformation. Ms. Butler explained that the square footage is based upon gross area. Driveway and setbacks are not deducted. Jane Hu, 10.12 S. First Ave., said..she is.the owner of one of the properties. She resides next to the gas station. She was against the proposed zone chmige. When she purchased the property 12 years ago, she purchased it as anR- 2 property: . She felt thisis unfair and that the City is taking her right away. Melanie Travler, Planning Plus, 2709 Prospect, La Crescenta, representing the owners of the subject property said they are against the proposed zone change. She asked that this hearing be continued for 60 days to allow them ample time to do a comprehensive study. There has been a lot of misinformation and it needs to be cleared up. The proposed detached Units would be owned by Arcadia homeowners. The purpose of the OP was to reconcile the discrepancy with the zoning of the. area. The proposed zone. change is not the solution to this problem. Why the rush to appr\lye this zone change? The moratorium is still in effect. The City has not ll118lyzed this issue. It appears that staff is in favor of correcting the inconsistency but not in. the manner that it is being .done. This is a complex issue and it could certainly use and benefit from the additional time and study that they would be conductin~.If the Planning Commissio~.continued iHor 60 days, they could hear .the. matter at their August 14 meeting. By that time, their study would be concluded. They would be able to assist staff with detailed information and provide a range of alternatives. They would also be able to meet with the neighbors and address their concerns. She noted that this area has been zoned R-2 for many years. Chairman Murphy asked how wotildthe 60 days of continuance be. beneficial? Ms. Traveler said they will look at the surrounding areas. A OP takes into account the compatibility of land use - commercial and residential uses. In some jurisdictions it is incompatible to put a'commercial use next to a residential use. Kirk Olson, 1209 Greenfield, said they ate new to the. area. They.feel that condominiums' would have a negative impact on their property values and depreciate their property. He was disturbed when he heard that the subject property was to be developed as a condominium No one else spoke in favor or opposition to this item. Chairman Murphy closed the' public hearing. ,) Commissioner Huang said he can see the neighbors' point of view. If he lived here, he would be opposed to having condominiums next to his home. On the other hand, it is good planning to have a buffer or a transition zone between commercial and residential uses. This is a typical solution. He m..intained his ,previous conviction thatthe proJlerty should remain R-2 and serve as a buffer. Arcadia City Planning Commission 13 6/12101 . . Conunissioner Olson was in mvor of granting the continuance to receive additional input. He' believed. that there is a lotto consider that has not been brought up yet. There is a lot to be examined. If this was to be.rezoned toR-l the property owner would be able to develop this 50' wide lot.with a very long and massive single family home with a 5' first floor setback and 10' second floor setback, This woUld be rnJI~h IDQI~ jp.!J:W!iy~ ~ w~t ~prQ1?<)~~<1 Ji.~.felt t~ !he~!lIl':J!,any<)tl1~r i~~l':!!~t ~l':l':Q. t9 be looked at and addressed. These lots have been zoned R-2 for over 50.years. There would be a trernendousimpact if this zone change is approved. 'It appears that the owners would like to meet with the neighbors and discuss their project. . Commissioner Kalerrikiarian said there haVe already been several public hearings over this issue. He was not sure. what the benefit of continuance would be. What would. additional time accomplish? The City Council is the body that will make the final decision. Chairman Murphy agreed. Atthe preVious hearing, they voted unanimously to recoinmend approva) of the GP to City CounciL He felt this would be a-good project. This is a good buffer. He did not have any problems with,the proposed project He could not see the value in. the continuance. After all, they are only an advisory body. The owner has invested a lot oftime and money into this project. He felt they need to move forward with it. It is obVious how the City Council feels about this issue. Ms. Butlerdidconfum that the City Council does. make the fmal decision. Commissioner Olson encouraged the City Council to listen to all previous and new testimony and commentsprior:to making any decision. I I MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Kalerrikiarian, seconded by Commissioner Murphy to recommend approvalofZ oi-ooUo the City CounciL ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Kalerrikiarian and Murphy Commissioner Huang and Olson Commissioner Bruckner NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 9. PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINATION Finding that the proposed C.l.P. for 2001-2002 is consistent with the General Plan, Ms. Butler presented the staff report. She explaiD.ed that the City is responSible for the solmd walls between Fifth and Secolld Avenues and CalTrans has budgeted funds to construct.the remainder of the sound walls. . MOTION -' ArcadIa Ci~ P~g Commission 14 6/12/01 . '. .J . . ') , I It was moved by Commissioner Olson, seconded by Commissioner Huang finding thilt the proposed C.I.P. for 2001,2002 is consistent with the General Plan. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Huang, Kalemkiarian, Olson, Murphy None Commissioner Bruckner MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL None MATTERS FROMPLANNINO COM:M:rSSION None MODIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING ACTIONS Commissioner Olson recapped the actions taken by Moditication Committee; ] MATTERS FROM STAFF 1. . . CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS 2. UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS Ms. Butler said that the City has obtained a constiltant to look at any inconsistency between the GP and the various zones in the City. Tom,Li was offered the Assistant Planner position.'Staff is working on updating the ADR and the multiple-fimiily regulations. ADJOURNMENT Secretary, Arcadia P g Co~sion Arcadia City Planning Commission IS 6/12101