HomeMy WebLinkAboutOCTOBER 22, 2002
,
/.
.
MINUTES
.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
Tuesday, October 22, 2002
7:IS p.m. in the Arcadia Library
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 in regular session on Tuesday, October 22, 2002
at 7:00 p.m in the Arcadia Library of the City of Arcadia, at 20 W. Duarte Rd., with Chairman Olson
presiding.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Baderian, Hsu, Lucas, Wen, Olson
None
OTHERS ATTENDING
Council Member John Wuo
Community Development Administrator Donna Butler
Senior Plamier Jim Kasama
Associate Planner Joe Lambert
Senior Administrative Assistant Silva Vergel
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS
Ms. Butler distributed, a memo regarding item no. 5 on tbeagenda and revised sheets for TA 2002-004.
TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING
COMMISSION ON NON-PUBLIC HEARING MATTERS (5MINUTE'LIMITPER PERSON)
None
MOTION
1t was moved by Chairman Olson, seconded 'by Commissioner Baderianto read all resolutions
by title only and waive reading the full body of the resolution. The motion passed by voice vote
with none dissenting.
I. MINUTESl&Sro2
Commissioner Hsu asked that his comments on page 11 be amended to read "...one another and
suggested a separate density standard to apply toward affordable housing program."
r
.
.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to approve the
Minutes of October 8th as amended.
ROLL CALL:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Baderian, Hsu, Lucas, Wen, Olson
None
2. PUBLIC HEARING TPM 2002-019
18 E. Colorado DUE TO THE RECENTLY ADOPTED MORATORIUM,
Paul Lee THERE WILL BE NO PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM.
Consideration ofa tentative parcel map for a 2-unit residential condominium project.
3.
PUBLIC HEARING TPM2002-020
200 S. Third Ave.
Hank: Jong
DUE TO THE RECENTLY ADOPTED MORATORIUM,
THERE WILL BE NO PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM.
-. --
Consideration ofa tentative parcel map for a 3-unit residential condominium project.
4. PUBLIC HEARING TPM 2002-021
408 W. Fairview
Hank Jong
Consideration ofa tentative parcel map for a 2-unit residential condominium project.
The staff report was presented and the public hearing was opened,
KeviD (last name was not indicated), representing Hank Jong, 11823 Slauson, Santa Fe Springs, said
they are in agreement with all of the conditions in thestaif report,
No one else spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item.
Chairman Olson closed the public hearing.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to approve TPM
2002-021, subject to the conditions in the staffreport and file negative declaration
ROLL CALL:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Baderian, Hsu, Lucas, Wen, Olson
None
Arcadia City Planning Commission
2
10122102
.
.
Chairman Olson noted that there is a ten day appeal period. Appeals,are to be filed by November 4th.
S. PUBLIC HEARING
618 Gloria Rd.
Mark and Alison Johnson
Consideration of an appeal of the Santa Anita Oaks Homeowner's Association's Architectural
Review Board's condition of approval requiring that the garage remain in the rear yard for a
proposed addition and remodel.
The staffreport was presented and the public hearing was opened.
Prior to,receiving the appellant's, testimony, Chairman Olson asked Mr, Lynch, Chairman of the ARB, if
public hearing notices were mailed to all residents within the 100' radius of the subject property oased
on Reso. 5290? Also, the ARB findings indicate that the actions were taken by 4 commillee members;
i.e., Beck. Lynch, Seaver and Potter but according to the HONs Minutes of the May 19th meeting, Mr.
Poller is not a member of the ARB.
Jack Lynch, 224 Hacienda Dr" said that public hearing notices were sent out. He said that Mr. Poller is
and has been on the board. At their annual meetings, Mr. Potter noticed that his name was not on the list
of board members at which time he spoke up and was informed by Ms. Blackwood that the issue would
be investigated, Mr. Potter has been a member of the ARB for many years and is present at all the
meetings. He did not know how all of a sudden his name was dropped. He was never asked to step
down. He is an asset to the ARB. If there was an election, they were never made aware ont. He
referred back to the noticing issue and said that the ARB did notrequire the appellant to notify everyone
in writing with regard to this issue because the applicant had used the short form review. The
applicant's architect was contacted and informed that this remodel was extensive and required the other
foim.
In reply to a question by Commissioner Lucas, Mr. Lynch said that it is the owner's responsibility to
notify the neighbors within 100' but they did not do that because they completed the short form review,
In answer to a question by Commissioner Wen, Mr. Lynch said that the ARB does not routinely inform
the HOAmembers of their actions but the ARB's actions are filed with the City.
Ms. Butler said that their resolution was adopted by the City Council and they must comply with the
resolution just like all other City resolutions.
Mark Johnson, 618 Gloria Rd., said that the resolution clearly states that they could use the short form.
He said tbat it is very clear that Mr. Potter is not part of the ARB. This house was built in 1951 and they
are trying to improve the home. He felt that the remodel would be compatible with the other homes in
the area and remarked that none of his neighbors are opposed to it.
Thomas Beck, 236 Hacienda, said that he has served on the ARB for at least 10 years. This home
should not have gone through the short review process. The short form is for minor projects and this is
clearly not a minor project. Ms, Blackwood is the president of the HOA and not a part of the ARB. She
moved into the area in 1998. However, Mr. Potter, a long time resident, is a part of the ARB and has
been to each and every meeting. They are unclear why his name was not on the ARB list. Based on his
experience and his recollection, they have never allowed a garage to be located in the front yard. The
Arcad~ Cily Planning Commission
3
10112102
.
.
ARB felt strongly that the master bedroom should be located in the front of the house and the garage
moved to the back. If they a1iowed this it would set a precedent and others would request it. Neighbors
do not want to look at garages which are often left open, They are concerned with the ripple affect of
this if it is permitted. Even though there have been 4 homes that have been cited with having garages in
the front, in his opinion, there are only 3 homes out of 30 homes on this street with their garages in the
front yard. He remarked that the ARB is comprised of volunteers who donate their time. In fact, Mr.
Lynch has been devoting 1.5 hours a day on ARB issues. They are looking at what is best for the
neighborhood. He felt strongly that they are working within the guidelines provided to them Their area
isa "high end" neighborhood and they do not want garages facing the street. They are trying to protect
the integrity of the neighborhood.
In response to a question by Commissioner Baderian, Mr. Beck could not cite any specific request that
was denied with having the garage in the front yard but he knew that they have repeatedly denied these
types of requests. The ARB felt that other alternatives are available for this lot to rearrange the plans so
the garage is not in the front of the house.
Jack Lynch, 224 Hacienda, said that it is their responsibility to look at the plans and see what is best for
the integrity of the area. There are 35 homes on Gloria and only 3 of them have garages facing the
street. They would like to maintain the ambiance of the Oaks. They have denied similar requests in
the past. Asa board, they do not want to see this type of a design. He felt they need .10 have the support
of the community and the,Planning Commission withtheir.decision.
In rebuttal, Mr. Johnson said that Mr. Potter is clearly not a, member of the ARB. He felt that two
members of the ARB are trying to push their agend{! and their style which he thought was wrong. The
resolution, indicates that a home should not be garish or excessive and in his opinion the proposed home
is neither. 'He remarked that Mr. Beck's garage faces the street. They are limited with their design 'and
have limitations due to their lot width.
No one else spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item
Chairman Olson closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Lucas said that he has served on the ARB in his area and this project would certainly not
qualifY under the short tenn review process. He drove in the area and found two homes on the street
with garages in the front yard but notiCed that these were angled, so the garage doors did not face the
street. The proposal is substantially different from what is in the neighborhood. He felt there are other
alternatives some of which were suggested by the ARB. Although, he did .not want to redesign the
house, he believed that the present design could be improved. It was clear to Commissioner Lucas that
the Planning Commission has nothing to consider here because the applicant failed to use the correct
form. He felt ,the parties need to go back and repeat the process.
ChainnanOlson wondered if the ARB had a quorum when,they voted on this issue and if they had the
voting right to deny the application.
Commissioner Baderian said based upon the Minutes of the HOA it appears that Mr. Potter is not a
member of the ARB. Therefore, he questioned whether the action that was taken by the ARB was a
legal action.
Arcadia Cily Planning Commission
4
10122102
.
.
Chairman Olson said that based upon Mr. Lynch's testimony, Mr. Lynch felt that he followed the
correct procedutes by allowing Mr. Potter to vote. However, it does not appear that Mr. Potter was a
part of the ARB. Therefore, would this process tonight be a moot paint because the ARB did not act
within the time that they should have rendered a decision based upon Reso. 5290? He felt that the
appeal is a moot point because they never held a proper meeting.
Ms, Butler replied that as mentioned by Chairman Olson, the city is concerned based upon the evidence
provided by the HOA that Mr. Potter does not appear to be an ARB member. This is based upon the
documents that were submitted to the city. Reso. 5290 clearly states that the majority of the ARB
membership must review and approve the request and not the majority of the present ARB members.
Even though they acted in good faith, it does not appear that the correct procedure was foIlowed, Based
upon the documentation submitted by the president of the HOAand its accuracy, and there is no reason
to think that it is not accurate, this process is a moot issue because Mr. Potter is not ail ARB member.
Thus, there does not_appear to be a quorum of membership. She said that even though the applicant
should provide the ARB with the envelopes and stamps for the public hearing notices, it is the
responsibility of the ARB to mail the notices. The ARB should have advised the applicant that they
followed the wrong procedure and should have informed them to use the long torm. It is possible that
the property owner was not aware that he was to get the names to the ARR
Ms. Butler went on to agree with Chairman Olson regarding this process being a moot issue due to the
ARB's fililure to act according to Reso, 5290. However, the Planning Commission needs to make that
determination; i.e., whether the process was handled correctly. Clearly, this size of an addition would
require the long form review process. The HOAs .are given latitude and each of them handle these
differently,
Chairman Olson commented that he felt the ARB hasdonea,goodjob, however, in this particular case it
is unfortunate that the proper procedure was not folIo wed, therefore, it does not leave much of a choice
for the Planning ConuniSsiqn in so far as the action that they must take.
MOTION
It was moved by Chairman Olson, seconded by Commissioner Baderian making the
determination that. the appeal on the architectural design is moot and the application is deemed
approved due to ARB's failure to act on the application within the,settime limit.
Commissioner Lucas disagreed and did not think that the application and the issue were moot. He felt
that they would just be concurring with the basis for the appeal. The Planning Commission is resolving
to approve the motion based on the procedural issue, which is issue no. 2,
Chairman Olson amended his motion and Commissioner Baderian accepted the change.
Commissioner Hsu inquired about the front yard setback and Mr. J(ll""ma replied that an addition could
be added regarding the front yard setback.
Commissioner Lucas did not think they could do that because if the motion is approved, it would defeat
the action of the ARB so all of their actions would be moot.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
s
10122102
.
.
Mr. Kasama. noted that a resolution would be forthcoming at the Planning Commission's next m~ing.
ROLL CALL:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Baderian, Hsu, Wen, Olson
Commissioner Lucas
Chairman Olson noted that there'is a five working day appeal period after. the adoption of the resolution.
The resolution will be adopted on November 12th. Appeals are to be filed by November 20th.
6. PUBLIC HEARING 2002-004
Consideration of proposed changes to the R-O and R-I zones.
The staffreport was presented and the public hearing was opened.
Jeff Lee, 255 E, Santa Clara, said that he resides in the City in the Upper Rancho area and he is an ARB
member. Although, he was insupporl of this he thought that a better description of building entry was
needed. Would the building entry also take into account the access way, the porch, foyer and any sitting
room? Would it be inside or outside area? He was concerned and.did not want homes to be cut right
down the middle with large second story portions on either side of the front entry. He thought that it
would cut the house in half. In his area, they have, circular driveways and do not want to prohibit them.
Ms. Butler responded that the building entry consists of exterior areas and ,not what is behind the front
door. She commented that staff is concerned about areas that are constructed over the entry and they are
trying to better define it. With regard to the circular driveway, Ms. Butler indicated that modifications
could be sought for circular driveways,
Mr. Lee had concerns with regard to reverse corner lots, He thought that it is a good idea to address the
mass but it is difficuh to achieve a 5' setback that would create an awkward skirt around the house. As
an ARB member, they do not want to see that type of a design. They would prefer to see different
layers. He would prefer an angle rule be applied. He thought this would be extremely difficult for
narrow lots and it would virtually make it impossible to have a two-story home on reverse comer lots.
Ms. Butler said that there is currently a 300 angle, She noted that,there is not that many reverse comer
lots in the City. These lots generally have a 15' setback, unless there is a.special setback and that would
'not be changing;
Mr. Lee thought that further study was needed on,this issue,
Ralph Bicker, 101 White Oak, Chairman of ARB for HigWand HOA, was in support ofthe amendments.
He thought that the length between building modulations should be increased from the 25' to 40'.
Ms. Butler replied that intent was to address two-story homes.
Walt Williams; 967 Hampton Rd., President of the Upper Rancho HOA, said that his comments also
reflect Mr. Schiavonne's feelings. He discussed these issues with him. Their ARB is in support of
addressing front entry and reducing the mass. However, they do.not want to prohibit circular driveways
due to safety issues because sometimes it is just too difficuh to back out.
Arcadia City Planning Commission 6 10!12/O2
.
.
Chung Ming L~ 401 Danimete, objected to the proposed changes because it would severely limit her
ability to expand her home. She would like to enlarge her home and have a 5-bedroom home with a 3-
car garage but her architect informed her that the maximum she could get would be a 4-bedroom house
with a 2-car garage because of her lot size, Ifthis is approved, no one will buy comer lots anymore and
it would severely affect property values. She does not want a mansion, just a house that her family
would be comfortable to live in.
Robert Tong, 255 E, Santa Clara, said that he was the architect of some of the homes that were depicted
in the presentation. Some of those homes were built under the old code, prior to the 1999 changes,
No one else spoke in favor of orin opposition to this item.
Chairman Olson closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Baderian was in support of the recommendations. He liked increasing the green space
areas. He thought that further revisions were needed for the 400 angle and .that these changes should be,
made prior to getting this issue to the' City Council.
,Ms. Butler said that a building permit would be required for the approach portion of the driveway. Staff
is looking at prohibiting circu]ardriveways on lots that are less than 75' in width and is in the process of
surveying other cities. Circular driveways are safer, especially on busier streets. If circular driveways
are prohibited, a homeowner could always opt for the modification process. There is a concern that
circular driveways take away parking from the street because there are two approaches but staff does not
feel there is a great impact.
Commissioner Baderian was in support of the proposed amendments.
Commissioner Wen said that he was in agreement with most of the suggested changes. He was
concerned with prohibiting circular driveways. He felt that the size Of the iot would determine ifa
circular driveway could actually be constructed, There does not appear to be a great impact in the loss
of street parking as a result of circular driveways. It is a safety issue, especially, in his area which is
hillside. He preferred more green space. He asked if they could hold a joint session with City Col!Ilcil
and discuss the issues. He also recommended that they impose a FAR.
Commissioner Lucas felt'that the ,modification process could deal with items that are not permitted by
code. The text should not be amended for the unique and uncommon situation. Rather, 'it should deal
with what is more common. He thought they should address garages facing the street and preferred to
see a text amendment dealing with having garage doors not directly facing the street or be ata 90" angle.
Commissioner Hsuagreed and asked if these changes could be retroactive?
Ms. Butler replied that it could not be retroactive. Another change proposed by this text amendment
addresses the temporary tents and canopies. By prohibiting them in the code, it will allow staff means to
enforce their removal.
Chairman Olson was in support of what has been presented and,Jelt that the modification process could
indeed address the unique situation as well as give the city an opportunity to review and comment on the
Arcadia City Planning Commission
7
10/22/02
.
.
design. The tents are an eye sore and are popping up all over the city. He thought they should .look at
garages and study it further. The 1999 code eliminated 3-car garages facing the street but sometimes
there is a space constraint. But, when the garages are located in the back, what happens is that the cars
are all parked on the driveway and creating a clutter in the front yard.
Commissioner Baderian suggested having a:summary of tonight's comments prepared for the Planning
Commission. He felt they should discuss it further'and review all options that were presented tonight.
He wanted to make sure that whatever is presented to the City Council has been reviewed by all the
HOAs and Arcadia Board of Realtors.
Chainnan Olson suggested ajoint study session with City Council.
Ms. Butler replied that it would be difficult to schedule a study session and although that is possible, it
will take some time to arrange it.
Conunissioner Lucas wondered ifRVs could be addressed?
Ms. Butler provided abri~f history of the City's attempts to address RVs. She indicated that it is
difficult to approve it because ofthestrong opposition.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Olson, seconded by Commissioner Baderian to continue the
hearing to December 10th.
NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
7. RESOLUTION NO. 1681
A resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, granting CUP 2002.
018 to operate a drive-thru pharmacy and the sale of alCoholic beverages for off site consumptiOl
at 9952-9956 Las Tunas Dr,
Ms. Butler read the titles of the resolution.
-MOTION
It was moved by Conunissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Lucas to adopt
ResolutionNo. 1681 and formally affirm the decisions of October 8th and the vote thereon.
ROLL CALL:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Baderian, Hsu, Lucas, Wen, Olson
None
Chainnan Olson noted that there is a five working day appeal period, Appeals are to be filed by October
29th.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
8
10122/02
.
.
MAlTERSFROM CITY COUNCIL
Council Member Wuo thanked the Planning Commission, staff and the public for their input on the text
amendment. He announced that Sunday is Lucky Baldwin Picnic and invited all to attend. Also,
November3'd is the Fandango at Arcadia Historical Museum and they will have antique cars on display.
He also announced that Rusnak will be moving its Mercedes Benz dealership to the City.
MAITERS FROM PLANNING COMMISSION
Commissioner Lucas indicated that he would,not be present at the next meeting.
MODIFICATION COMMIITEE MEETING ACTIONS
Chainnan Olson summarized the Modification Committee actions.
MATTERS FROM STAFF
1. CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS
2. UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS
Ms, Butler discussed the upcoming agenda items. She also reminded the Planning Commission about
the Commissioners dinner hosted by City Council on November 6th.
ADJOURNMENT
9:30 p.m
Is/Donna Butler
Secretary, Arcadia Rlanning Commission
Arcadia City Planning Commission
9
10122/02