Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJUNE 8, 2004 rJ 8) . MINUTES . Arcadia City Planning Commission Tnesday, June 8, 2004 7:00 p.m. in tbe An:adia City Council Cbambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Planning Commission ot'the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, June 8, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in the Arcadia Council Chambers of the City of Arcadia, at 240 W. Huntington Dr. with Chairman Baderian presiding. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: ABSENT: Commissioners Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen, Baderian None OTHERS ATTENDING Council Member Roger Chandler Community Development Administrator Donna Butler Associate Planner Joe Lambert Assistant Planner Tom Li Senior Administrative Assistant Silva Vergel MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Wen, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to read aU resolutions by title only and waive reading the full body of the resolution. The motion passed by voice vote with no one dissenting. ROLLCALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen, Baderian None SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS Ms. Butler indicated that three letters in favor of CUP 4-5 were distributed to the Planning Commission. 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 r,i . . . 1. PUBLIC HEARING CUP 2004-005 136 Las Tunas Dr. Celeste's Kitchen (Oscar Sierra) Consideration of conditional use permitfor an existing take-out restaurant to accommodate 68 patrons including incidental outdoor dining. The staff report was presented. Commissioner Hsu stated that he drove by the lot and noticed that inoperable cars are being parked behind C & L Auto Body. If they are going to share the parking lot, the existing situation must be improved prior to making any arrangements: He thought it was being uSed as a storage area. Mr. Lambert said that parking along Live Oak is for employees or patrons of the site and not'for cars waiting to be serviced, The public hearing was opened. Oscar Sierra, 14000 Niko St., Baldwin Park, said that originally they opened this restaurant for take out only. When he approached the City, he was informed he could open as take out only and see how things progress before applying for seating, Soon his customers asked if he could provide seating for them while they. are waiting for their food. He then added a couple of more tables for his customers and now he is here to obtain the necessary permits for his seating. He read a letter from C & L Auto Body Shop in favor of his use and indicated that the owner ofPetJungJe has informed him that his customers could utilize it during the weekends and that would be for 50 cars. When he approached the City, he was told that he would need a CUP to have sit down and it was suggested to him by staff, to first open the restaurant as take oUt and submitp1ans later to have seating. In answer to a question by Chairman Baderian, Mr. Sierra said that he knew he needed a CUP to have seating and that is why he is here today. He indicated that after he opened, he was asked by his patrons to provide seating and that is why he brought in tables and chairs. He knew that he needed a CUP for seating. In reply to a question by Commissioner Wen, Mr. Sierra said that agreement to utilize the parking lot during the weekends is verbal. Jennifer Cole, 8418 E. Santa Ynez, San Gabriel, said that she is a patron ahd truly enjoys going to tlfts restaurant. The oWners have worked very hard.to get this business off the ground. They serve wonderful food and the ambiance of the restaurant is great. Most patrons'park along Las Tunas or next to C & L Auto Body. She thought that something else is going on and had a feeling that it was the other restaurantthat did not want competition and is creating trouble. Mr. Sierra's customers are very loyal and will walk several blocks just to come to this restauraiit. They deserve to have their success and make a living. Beth Costanza, Dk of the. Chamber of Commerce, 204 S. Park Rose, Monrovia, said they are working very hard to keep business in the City and she would hate to see them go. She preferred working with them to make it a success. She suggested talking with the neighbor and to legalize the parking. Sandhya.Ray, 141 W. Las Tunas Dr., said that she is the director of Wonder Years Montessori School, and although she was not here to create a problem for her neighbor, she was concerned about the traffic Arcadia City Planning Commission 2 618/4 . . and Safety issues. Tl1ey have seen an increase in the use of parking on their side of the (north side) street . and to either side of their school. When the children are dropped off and picked up, this needs to be done in a safe manner. But, when cars are continuously parked on their side of the street, this makes visibility'more difficult for the parents and could be potentially disastrous because they cannot see the traffic on the street. She asked that red curbs be provided on either side of the school to remedy this problem. Larry DiPeppe, 140 W. Las Tunas Dr., said that he is the owner and operator of their business, which has been in the community since 1977. Parking has always been a problem in this area. He doubted that Pet Jungle would allow them the use of their parking lots, especially since it is chained at the end of the day. Approximately, one month ago ABC cited the restaurant for serving alcohol without having the proper licenses. They ignored that and continued to serve alCohol so he did call ABC back regarding the violation. Originally, Mr. Sierra approached him to see if he minded ifhe put a couple of tables for his patrons while they were waiting for their food but he soon added a couple of more. tables and began serving meals. Many of his customers are older and C3Jl!lot walk and Mr. Sierra's customers are taking up the parking so his customers have to walk further to get to his restaurant. He is not against the competition,.just protecting his interests. Terry Keanan, 226 N. Colorado Blvd., said that Ms. Costanza, the Director of the Chamber, said that they need more businesses like this in the City. He wondered why they would need a business that continuously violates, disobeys and disrespeCts the laws? Arcadia needs law abiding citizens and businesses. He indicated that they are loyal customers of Mr. DiPeppe's restaurant. Unlike the subject restaurant, DiPeppe's restaurant has been a sit down establishment since it opened. He could not see how they could utilize the Pet Jungle parking lot, especially since it is chained up in the evening. The Planning Commission needs to . look at past performance of Mr. Sierra and see him as someone who freely violates the code. Connie Keanan, 226 W. Colorado Blvd., said that there is definitely a competition between the two restaurants. Katherine Martin, 915JLas Tunas Dr., said that she is now 17 and has been going to DiPeppe's since she.was 6 years old. They are.also loyal customers of this restaurant. The subject restaurant is breaking the law and not complying with code. She felt that all businesses must abide by the laws that are set. In rebuttal, Mr. Sierra said he did not set out to disobey the rules. At his customer's request, he put tables and chairs out. His customers then wanted to bring their own wine so he allowed them to do that. He noted thai a few months ago, one ofms patrons was having a party and iliey had brought wine and'he noticed that waiters from DiPeppe's were taking pictures of this incident. Subsequently, ABC cited him for serving liquor without having the appropriate licenses and he has since applied for the proper licenses through ABC. This is not about competition. They just want to work and make a living by serving good, tasty and fancy food. No one else spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hsu, seconded by Commissioner Wen to close the public hearing, The motion passed by voice vote with no one dissenting. Arcadia City Planning Commission 3 61814 . . ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen, Baderian None Ms. Butler indicated that the restaurant whereDi Peppe's is located has been at this location since the 50s and at that time CUPs were not required, thus, Di Peppe's is a legal non-conforming use. If they were to close and re-open at a later date they would need to comply with current parking regulations. Commissioner Wen said that he is sympathetic with the owner and encourages law-abiding businesses. It is the Planning Commission's responsibility to interpret the regulations. He strongly suggested that Mr. Sierra obtain a signed agreement for the use of the parking. Ms. Butlet replied. that such an agreement would have to ensure that the:parking is excess parking and that during the specified times it is actually available. Commissioner Hsu agreed and said that this is a clear violation and he thought that a pllrkiilg agreement should be , made. CommissioneI: Olson recaIIed a similar situation with a successful real estate office that did not have adequate parking. They were told that they were too successful for their location and should seek a better location to serve their need and he felt that also applies in this situation. He had a difficult time supporting this request. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Olson, seconded by Commissioner Wen to deny CUP 200~005. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen, Baderian None Chairman Baderian noted that there is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the resolution. The resolution will be adopted on June 22. Appeals are to be filed by June 30. 2. PUBLIC HEARING TPM: 2004-005 90 I Holly Ave. Jack Wang Consideration of a tentative parcel map for a 2-unitresidential condominium project. The staff report was presented and the public hearing was opened. Tom Cao, TritechAssoc., 135 N. San Gabriel Blvd., San Gabriel, said they are in agreement with all of the conditions in the staff report. Arcadia City PIaoning Commission 4 61814 . . ; No one else spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hsu, seconded by Commissioner Wen to close the public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with no one dissenting. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen, Baderian None MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Olson, seconded by Commissioner Wen to approve TPM 2004- 005 subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. ROLLCALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Hsu, Lucas, OlsOn, Wen, Baderian None Chairman Baderian noted thatthere isa ten day appeal period. Appeals are to be filed by June 18. 3. PUBLIC BEARING CUP 2004-006 .100 E. Live Oak Ave. Badjuan Xu Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a day care facility with a maximum number of 45 children. RESOLUTION NO. 1708 A resolution _ of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, approving Conditional Use Permit 2004-006 for a day care facility with a maximum of 45 children at 100 E. Live Oak Ave. The staff report was presented. In answer to a question by Commissioner Hsu, Mr. Lambert said that the drive way is one-way. Commissioner Hsu wondered if they could require a spike strip-to discourage going the wrong way and Ms. Butler advised against that. She felt that if they go the wrong way once. they would probably not repeat it. In the past, they have required that theOWlier monitor this and it has been successful. The public hearing was opened. Arcadia City Planning CommissiQn s 61814 . . Ryari Lee, 767 N. Hill St., Los Angeles, said the owner currently has a day care at home. She will . comply with all the requirements and this will be a business that will benefit the City. The facility is suitable for this type of a use, Kathy Perez, 10208 E. Nadine St., Temple City, said that she is employed at the California Water Company, which is two doors to the east. There is not enough parking in the area and she would hate to come in one morning only to find that there is no parking for her. She did not think that this would be an ideal area for children to play. There is no play area. She could foresee a parking problem. This is not a good area for this use, considering the various uses in the neighborhood. In rebuttal, Mr. Lee said that this facility was previously utilized as a tutoring center and he could not see why this should be denied. He did not think there would be a parking problem. In answer to a question by Chairman Baderian, Mr. Lee said that they are in agreement with the number of children at 45, whose ages will range from 2.5 to 6 years old. No one else spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Wen, seconded by Commissioner Lucas to close the public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with no one dissenting. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: CommissionersHsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen, Baderian None Commissioner Olson felt this was a gOOd use that did.not require any modifications. He thought if there were any problems with parking the water company could post signs. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Olson, seconded by CommisSioner Wen to approve CUP 2004- 006 subj ect to the conditions listed in the staff report and adopt Resolution,No. 1708. ROLLCALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen, Baderian None Chairman Baderian noted that there is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the resolution. Appeals are to be filed by June 16. 4. PUBLIC HEARING VESTING TM 53890 1432-1516 S. Eighth Ave. Hank. long Consideration of an amendment to a previously approved Vesting Tentative Map fora 1O-lot Arcadia City Planning Commission 6 6/814 . . singl~family residential subdivision. The staff report. was presented and the public hearing was opened. Cindy Wu, 11823 Slauson, Santa Fe Spring, representing the applicant indicated that they will comply with all regulations. No one else spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Lucas, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to close the public hearing, The motion passed by voice vote with no one dissenting. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Coinmissioners Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen, Baderian None In answer to a question by Commissioner Olson, Ms. Butler said that a vesting.plan does not include the landscaping plan. A vesting map ensures the developer that the lots can be developed under the regulations in existence at the time of approval of the vesting map. She said the City does not have authority to require,the landscaping for single-family homes. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner 0I5.0n, seconded by Commissioner Lucas to approve Vesting TM 53890 subject to the conditions in the staff report. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Hsu,Lucas, Olson, Wen, Baderian None Chairman Baderian noted thatthere is a ten-day appeal period. Appeals are to be filed by June 18, 5. PUBLIC HEARING CUP 2004-007 650 W. Duarte Rd., #100A Xiaoyan Chen Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for a tutoring center with 24 students in an existing 2,300 sq. ft. office unit. The staff report was presented. and the public hearing was opened. Xiao Yan Chen, 650 W. Duarte Rd., #100, said that she has been at this .location for a year and has observed that the parking behind this area is hardly used. Of the45 existing spaces, only about II3 is Arcadia city Planning Commission 7 61814 . . ever 'used meaning there are 30 available spaces. This building stands alone and has its own private . entrance. She did not think there would be a parking problem. Gene Roybal, 21 W. Camino Real Ave., said that he is the leasing agent. Ms. Chen has been leasing at this location. for a year and would like to use the facilities as a tutoring center. She would only be adding 500 sq. ft. to the square footage. The parking area that she is referring to is vacant most of the time adjacent to Naomi Ave. There is a rear entrance where students would be dropped off and picked up. . Grace Hsao, 660 W. Duarte, said that she works at bank. next door. This area has gotten extremely busy with the traffic generated by Arcadia Supermarket. She did not think there is enough parking for this facility already. This would not be a suitable area for children. There is already another school there. In rebuttal, Ms. Chen, saia that the bank is on a separate piece of property and away from the parking area that she is referring to. She did not think that this use would create a parking problem. Again" they will have a different entrance, which would be safer. Their on-line business has been there for one year. No one else spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Lucas, seconded by Commissioner Wen to close the public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with no one dissenting. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen, Baderian None With regard to a question by Commissioner Olson, Ms. Butler indicated that they will be required to provide two restrooms in the unit. In answer to a question by Commissioner Wen, Mr. Li indicated that that there are 2 travel agencies, dentist! s office and general office at this location. He indicated. that a parking study was not done but said that the parking area is far from the building and inconvenient and that is why it is not being used. He did not think that the rear area would be safe to drop off and pick up children. He indicated that modifications were granted for the'dentaloffices. The deficiency in'theparkihg is'basel! upon the entire center and not one particular use. The parking lot adjacent to. Naomi is underutilized because it is far aod inconvenient. Commissioner Olson said that there have been several modifications over the years granted for this site but those uses did not have. or generate heavy traffic. The parking in the rear is far away. This business could be very successful and again, like the other use this evening, it should probably be located at another site. Commissioner Lucas said that parking seems to have been the issue tonight to deem uses appropriate. He noted that the entire site is deficient in parking and he thought in this case to use parking as an ~ City'Planning Commiision 8 61814 . . excUse to deny the project is inappropriate. He thought parking should leave the discussion because . then nothing would be permitted at the site. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Lucas, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to approve CUP 20()4.. 007 subject to. the conditions in the staff report. ROLLCALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Hsu, Lucas Commissioner Olson, Wen, Baderian MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Olson, seConded by Commissioner Wen to deny CUP 2004-007 subject to the. conditions in the staff report. Commissioner Wen remark~d that parkingis definitely an issue at this site. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Olson, Wen, Baderian Commissioners Hsu, Lucas Chairman Baderian noted that there is a five working day appeal period after-the adoption of the resolution. The resolution will be adopted on June 22. Appeals are to be filed by June 30. 6. PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL 1104 Rancho Rd. Lisa Carlson Consideration of an appeal of the Santa Anita Oaks Homeowners Association's denial of roofing material. The staff report was presented. In response to a question by Commissioner Wen, Mr. Lambert stated that the Planning Commission should consider the compatibility issue and the roofing material that is being used. The roofing that is being currently installed is not the same material listed on the building peimit. The public hearing was opened. Lisa Carlson, 1104 Rancho Rd., said that originally when they purchased the home, it had cedar roofing and she knew that it wOlild have to be changed soon. She hired a contractor who pulled the building permit but when they began installing it, it. was determined that the roof would need to be reinforced to be able to accommodate the new roof'. She inquired about her options and was told by the contractor about the roofing material that she began installing. She remarked that she did not intend to deceive anyone but she encountered a problem where her roof would be unable to accommodate the roofing Arcadia City Pbuming Commission 9 61814 . . mateilaJ without reinforcement. She could not use any other material other than the composition shingle. She felt that the Homeowners Association's image ofa composition roof was from the 70s, black and plain. But, the material that she chose is a 3-dimensional quality product. She is not trying to cut costs or detract from the neighborhood. She approached her neighbors within a 100' radius and all were pleased with what she was proposing and did not object to it. She submitted several letters in favor of her proposal, the invoice for the roof as proof that it is expensive, photos of her home with the root: a photo of another home in the area with composition roofing, various photos showing her overhang and' a letter from her physician attesting to the fact that both her and her mother are allergic to cedar roofing. She went on to say that the roofing that she chose is nice and compatible with the homes in the area. The home is setback far from the street so someone driVing on the street would be unable to tell what roofing material is being used. She also said that the Showcase House in Pasadena used the same material. This material is suitable and blends: in with the area. In answer to a question by Chairman Baderian, she said that she knew when they purchased the home that they would need to re-roof, although, she did .not find out about the limitations on the roofing material until later. The building permit was pulled for material that was on the Homeowners Association's approved roofing material list but because her roofing structure would not be able to support the weight of the material, the contractor recoinmended the proposed material. She relied.on her contractor's expertise. After she was .issued the "Stop Work Order" and was told to obtain the Homeowners Association's approval, she was denied the roofing material by Gary Dom. She said tbat she also got tbe opinion of two other contractors who concurred with the weight of the materiaL Maggie Breeden, U04 Rancho Rd., confirmed that both her daughter and granddaughter suffer from allergies to cedar. The roofwas 85% completed when they were issued the "Stop Work Order". They called Pamela, Blackwood,the President of the Homeowners AssoCiation, who felt it was a nice roof and could not understand why the board denied it. She thought that they should update their list of roofing material. The installed roofing material is thicker than most composition shingle and attractive. The neighbors like what has been installed and have not objected to it. They were disturbed when they received an anonymous letter regarding the roofing material. Of course now it does not look good because it is unfinished. There are many roofs on Foothill Blvd, that have this type of roofing and it has not affected property values, Jack Lynch, 224 Hacienda, said that it was obVious to him that this was composition roofing when he first saw it. He has lived in this area and served on the Architecturai Review Board for many years. They have a list of approved materials, which.makes it easier for City Staff and the homeowners when theytty to re-roof. WIlen he saw the nome l5eing re-roofed he asked the contractor for a copy of the building permit which he could not produce. There are plenty of lightweight roofing materials that could be utilized. It is achievable. Their list clearly indicates that no composition shoulil be used. He did not think that the neighbors would tell the owner that they were not happy with the material. It is clear that they did not follow procedure. He Stated that there have been a couple of aluminum roofs installed which were reviewed by the Homeowners Association, The Architectural ReView Board will occasionally permit various. roofing materials on request basis. Regarding the roof on the house on Woodland Lo. he said that happened without their knowledge. He said their list was changed approximately two years ago. Occasionally they get requests for different materials and they make a determination. The Homeowners.Association's decision is made on appearance and architectural value. They are concerned that this will set a precedent. Even though the material that Ms. Carlson may use is Arcadia City PlanniDg Commissiau 10 6/814 . . of high quality, the subsequent homeowner may come and say that they cannot afford the same material . and would like to go with a less expensive roofing and he thought this would set a negative precedent. Gary Dorn, 1410 Rancho Rd., Chairman Architectural Review Board for Santa Anita Oaks Homeowners Association, said that they have never allowed composition roofing in their Homeowners Association. He felt this would compromise the character of the area. Carlton Seaver, 1115 Rancho Rd., said that the home owner did not approach him regarding this roof. This is an acceptatile roof but it is not as interesting as the previous material. He thought that it was inappropriate to appeal this decision to the Planning Commission, when they did not approach the .Architectural Review Board for their approval. Steve Mathison, 900 Paolma, member of the Architectural Review Board for the Lower Rancho Homeowners Association said they hope that the Planning Commission will deny this request because it will set a negative precedent and massage. They have roof issues all the time. He read a letter from Tony Henrich the Chairman of their Architectural Review Board which in part stated that the homeowner changed roofing material midstream without obtaining the necessary approvals, which he thought was deceitful. . In rebuttal, Ms. Carlson stated that the HomeoWners Association's list had another light weight material but she was advised that was still too heavy. She remarked that she did not set out to deceive the Architectural Review Board, but this was the only material that could be used. As far as support.beams, she could install that but that would take away from the look and character of the house. She reiterated that from the street this does not look like composition roofing. She felt that the list needs to be revised and updated. No one else spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hsu, seconded by Commissioner Lucas to close the public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with no one dissenting. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen, Baderian None In answer to a question, by Commissioner Olson, staff indicated that they were unaware of the roof on the house on Woodland Lane. This was just brought to their attention tonight. Ms. Butler explained that the Planning Commission should consider the roofing material and consider the homeowner's appeal <lfthe Homeowners Association's action. Chairman Baderian remarked that there was a similar situation that came before the Planning. Commission not too long ago where the applicant had done something without first obtaining the appropriate approvals. In that case, they considered the project as if nothing had been done. Hefelt that the Planning Commission should view this in the same manner, i.e., they should not consider whether Arcadia City PlamUng Commission 11 618/4 . . the roof is 85% complete with roofing material that is not approved by the Homeowners Association, but they should review it as the roof is not there and the owner wants to instaU a roof not approved by the Homeowners Association. Ms. Butler added that the resolution is specific about obtaining the proper approvals and compatibility. Whether the roof is almost completed or not is irrelevant. She did discuss the weight of the roof with the Building Official who said that the weight of the permitted roof is 5.9 Ibs and the structure could technicaUy hold up to 6 Ibs., Indicating that this is pretty close to the limits on the structure. But, they should have obtained the approvaIsprior to installing the new material. It is difficult to say whether this will set a precedent or not but the Homeowners Association's list is two years old. Chairman Baderian noted that some of the approved materials on the list are not even being made and are unavailable. He asked Ms. Butler if they should keep in mind that the roof is 85% complete? Commissioner Lucas felt they should review this as the roof does not exist. They should consider this as the Architectural Review Board denied the roofing material and now it has ~n appealed to the City. He did not think they should rewrite the authority of the Homeowners AssoCiation because that should be done at the City Courtcillevel. Commissioner OIsonJelt they should look at this as if it is not there. There was no hearing before the Architectural Review Board. He had mixed feelings about this and was troubled by the fact that the applicant did not go before the Architectural Review Board and no formal hearings were held with the neighbors. He had a problem with the Architectural Review Board in this matter. He had concerns that the ArchitecturaI Review Board did not look at it ahead of time and denying the roof Having said the above, he still felt that they should look at the proposed material as if it is not installed. MOTIoN: It was moved by Commissioner Lucas, seconded by Commissioner Baderian to deny the appeal. Commissioner Olson thought this could have been handled better. He asked that the Architectural Review Board be more flexible in looking at their standards and how they implement and approve things. It is sometimes difficult to take an old house and retrofit it vs. a brand new home. Commissioner Wen agreed. He feltthere was a iack of communication. He was sympathetic with the homeowner. Commissioner Hsu agreed. Commissioner Lucas said manufacturers are always coming up with new materials and technology. He thought they should.be able to find material that is light weight and compatible. He encouraged the association to.look at new materials that are compatible. ROLLCALL: AYES: NOES: COmmissioners Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen, Baderian None Arcadia City Planning Commission 12 61814 . . Chaiiman Baderian noted that there is a. five working day appeal period. Appeals are to be filed by . June 16. 7. PUBLIC HEARING TA 2004-002 Consideration of a text amendment relating to advertising signboards. The staff report was presented. In answer to a question by Commissioner Wen, Ms. Butler stated that these are for off-premise advertising signs like ones on the freeway. Code allows these with an approved CUP. The public heating was opened. No one, spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Lucas, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to close the public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with no one dissenting. ROLLCALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen,.Baderian None MOTION: It was. moved by Commissioner Lucas, seconded by Commissioner Wen to recommend approval of T A 2004-002 to the City Council. ROLLCALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen, Baderian None CONSENTlTEM 8. PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINATION Finding that the proposed C.I.P. for 2004-2005 is consistent with the General Plan. 9. RESOLUTION NO. 1706 A resolution of the Planning Commission of the City' of Arcadia, California granting CUP 2004- 004 for a vocational school with 80 students in two existing industrial buildings with a combined floor area of 14,109 sq. ft. at 5417 Peck Rd. Arcadia City Phu:m~g Commission 13 61814 . . lO.MlNuTES OF 5/1lI4 RECOMMENDATION: Approve MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Olson, seconded by Commissioner Wen to approve the consent items. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen, Baderian None Cha~an Baderian noted that there is a five working day appeal period. Appeals are to be filed by June 16. MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL Council Member Chandler asked what the Commission's thoughts were on the role of the liaisons at their meetings. He asked them if they thought that a liaison was needed at their meetings? In response, Commissioner Lucas said that the City Council is the appellant body for the Planning Commission. He thought it was almost inappropriate to have a member of the City Council sit at the Planning Commission meetings and if an itemisappeaJed, their previous attendance. may influence their decision. Commissioner Olson said the City Council receives copies of the Planning Commission minutes. He also thought that this becomes important when an appeal is filed. He did not see a need for a representative from the City Council. Chairman Baderian stated that the Planning Commission is an advisory body"to the City Council. He also did not see the need for City Council representation. He thought it was a waste of their time.. Commissioner Wen remarked that the City Council cannot vote on any items. He thought that Commissions that do not meet regularly"may need a liaison but not this one. Commissioner Hsu was under the impression that this was justa tradition. MATTERS FROM PLANNING COMMISSION Topics of discussion at joint study session with City Council. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to bring back all the items for discussion and prioritize them atthe next meeting prior to meeting with City Council. The top 5 items would be then put on the agenda to discuss at.the study session. Ms. Butler also suggested discussing mixed uses. Arcadia City Pl81'D1ing Commission 14 61814 . . ~0nIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING ACTIONS Commissioner Olson summarized the Modification Committee actions. MATTERS FROM STAFF 1. CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS 2. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEMS None ADJOURNMENT 10:00 p.m. /slDonna Butler Secretary, Areadia Plai1i1ing Commission ..vcadia City Planning Commlssion IS 6f8l4