Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPTEMBER 13, 2005 . . . MINUTES . An:adia City Planning COlI1JI1ission Tuesday, September U, 2l1OS 7:00 p.m. in the Arcadia City Council Chamben PLEDGE OF AI..LEGIANCE The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, September 13, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. in the Arcadia Council Chambers of the City of Arcadia, at .240 W. Huntington Dr. with Chairman Lucas presiding. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: ABSENT: Commissioners Baderian, Hsu, Olson, Wen, Lucas None OTHERS ATIENDING Community Development Administrator Donna Butler Planning Services Manager Corkran Nicholson Senior Administrative Assistant Silva Vergel MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Wen, seconded by Commissioner Baderian 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. I SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS Ms, Butler indicated that several letters were received and distributed regarding the proposed architectural design review text amendment. TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON NON-PUBLIC HEARING MATTERS (S MINUTE LIMIT PER PERSON) None 1. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEAKlNG TA 2005-04 Consideration of a text amendment adding regulations to the City's Architectural Design Review regulations (9295 et seq.) requiring design review for single-family residential uses and adopting related design guidelines. . The staff report was presented. In answer to a question by Commissioner Baderian, Ms. Butler said that the public hearing for this has been scheduled for the City Council November I" meeting, The City Council has expressed a desire to proceed with this process. It is anticipated that, if approved, this would become effective in January. ~ .' . . She explained the steps that would need to be taken to meet the above deadline. She indicated that after the public hearing, City Council would need to adopt the ordinance. If the ordinance is brought to the City Council at the same time as the hearing to be introduced, then at their following meeting they would adopt the ordinance. The ordinance becomes effective 30-days.after adoption. Don Penman, Assistant City ManagerlDevelopment Services Director, indicated that typically the ordinance is not introduced at the same time as the public hearing. It is usually brought back to the City Council at the subsequent meeting. Keeping that in mind, it is anticipated that this ordinance would become effective in January, The public hearing was opened- Chip Ahlswede, 601 S. Frrst Ave., Arcadia Assoc. of Realtors, Government Affairs Director, said that after meeting with staff on August lSfb, they would like some of the issues addressed. They are asking the Planning Commission to postpone their decision and explained that they would like to meet with their board of directors for their input. B"""'""" their annual meeting is scheduled at the end of the month, and most of their members will be out of town until September 2rJl', they would like the Planning CoII1.T.issioD to continue thc hearing. They are working on a prelimiTall.lY set of change.;. Irv Ton, n W. Las Tunas, Arcadia Board of Realtors, submitted the letters from several city residents. He commended staff and the Planning Commission for trying to do this but he dillllgl'eed on how it was being done. He wanted to get a line-by-line clarification and review of what was beiog proposed. He was surprised that there was no one present to comment on this, considering on how many homeowners this would affect. This proposal bas as much of an impact, if not more, as the proposed project at the Santa Anita lUce Track and he could not understand why the residents were not in attendance. No one else spoke in mvor of or in opposition to this item. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner- Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Olson to close the public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with no one dissenting. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Baderian, Hsu, Olson, Wen, Lucas None In reply to inquires by Chairman Lucas, Ms. Butler said that per the requirement of the Arcadia Municipal Code, the public hearing notice was published in the local paper for the July 121h meeting. In addition, there was a press release, broadcasted through Arcadia Mail, the notice and the guidelines were published on the city's website. Also, notices were sent out to the Arcadia Board ofReahors, Chamber of Commerce and the existing Homeowners Association. The Arcadia Chinese Newspaper published an article regarding this issue. The city will be notifying all residents within a 1,000' radius of the Santa Anita Race Track for the proposed development. Commissioner Wen , recognized the need to have architectural design review for the entire city so there would be consistency. So, the issue to consider is the text of the document and not whether the process Araodia City 1'ImlIiog c, . ... 2 9/1315 l\ . . is needed or not. He thought that the guidelines were very well thought out and pointed out that these are only guidelines and not code. Commissioner Baderian felt that it is important to have input from the community. The City Council wants recommendation by the Planning Commission in a timely manner. He felt that ample time has been provided for comments and. this cannot, be continued indefmitely. He believed that they should make a decision and forward it to the City Council and additional input can be taken by the City Council at their hearing. He indicated that additional comments by the Board of Realtors could be transmitted through electronic mail and then forwarded to the City Council. He pointed out that the letters that were submitted were mostly by realtors who reside in the city. Commissioner Hsu said that when this was presented to them in July, he was in favor of the guidelines. Although, at the time, he felt that they should postpone the decision to give the public time for input. He now feels that they have achieved that and was ready to forward this to the City Council. Commissioner Olson said that they have spent many hours on this and it bas already been postponed for two months. Per their direction, staff met with the realtors and it is now time to 'make a decision. He noted that there will be another public hearing scheduled before the City Council.md additional input can be taken in. He felt comfortable with this process. He was not convinced that having architectural design review would cause any problems with escrows., considering that there are many other cities thatihave these types of processes; some of which are more burdensome. The time frames of the guidelines that the, Homeowners Associations follow are ditTerentand tend to be longer than the proposal. He was in favor of coming to a consensus and forwarding this to City Council. Ms. Butler indicated that the City Council could amend the guidelines by changing the resolution. MOTION: It was moved by Chairman Lucas, seconded by Commissioner Olson to recommend approval of T A 2005-004 to the City Council. ArcIdia City i'IaDning Cnnnnmom., 3 9/13/5 h . . Commissioner Baderian suggested that staff communicate this proposal with the community and that there be an opportunity for the public to provide their input. Ms. Butler explained the various avenues of publicizing this to the residents. ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Baderian, Hsu, Olson, Wen, Lucas None CONSENT ITEMS 2. TIME EXTENSION 182 La Sierra Dr. Cal Land Engineering, Inc. Requesting a one-year time extension for TPM 2003- lIto subdivide one lot into two lots. 3. TIME EXTENSION 1132-36 Sunset Blvd. Tritech Assoc. Requesting a one-year time extension for TPM 2003-19 for a 2-unit residential condominium project. 4. TIME EXTENSION 1630 S. Santa Anita and 20 E. Camino Real EGL Associates Requesting a one-year time extension for TPM 2003-16 to subdivide two lots into three lots. Chairman Lucas wondered why these are being requested and if they could Rl'jllRlly deny the time extension. He thought that two years is ample time and could not see any extenuating circumstances. Their approvals are based upon certain set offacts that are presented at the time of the hearing and he expected the applicant to move forward and get the necessary approvals. When the applicant fails to foUow through, why should they be granted extensions? Ms. Butler stated thatin.their letters, aU of the applicants have stated that they have been unable to get the County's approvals. The County does the plan checking for the city and the process has been taking a very long time; they have been incredibly slow. She said that time extensions have never been denied in the past and was not sure what findings could be made for denying the extension. Chairman Lucas cited that deplorable conditions at 182 W. La Sierra The property is poorly maintained and if a time extension is granted, then the developer does not have any incentive to move quicker, consequently, the neighborhood suffers. He did not want to encourage approval of projects, with the Planning Commission's understanding that the project would move forward, only to have them come back with a request for time extension. He felt that it is the developer's responsibility to maintain the property, regardless ofwhatpart of the process they are in. Arc:lltia Cily I'Ianaiog c - ."'" 4 9n315 . . In answer'to a question by Commissioner Baderian, Ms. Butler said that they have to comply with the Subdivision Map Act. She explained that in the past the County was so backlogged that developers were automatically getting a two-year extension. The city relies on the County to ensure that the maps comply with all of the requirements. She said that staff would pursue the maintenance of the property. Commissioner Baderian agreed with Chairman Lucas's comments with reg/l/'d to the conditions of properties and wondered if it Should be a six-month time extension. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to approve a one-year time extension for TPM 2003-011, TPM 2003-016. and TPM 2003-019 with the. understanding that the properties must be maintained. Commissioner'Lucas thought that it was peculiar that only the above have faced this dilemma. If everyone had a delay then he could appreciate the requests. Ms. Butler pointed out that each situation is different. Commissioner Olson said that the conditions on one property could be completely different than another, For example, approvals may depend on fire hydrants, the avaiability of water or CalTrans. This can be a frustrating process. Commissioner Hsu wondered if the County could be contacted with regard to these issues to inquire if they are the ones holding up the process and Ms. Butler replied that they may not admit to that fact. ROLL, CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Baderian, Hsu, Olson, Wen, Lucas None 5, RESOLUTION NO. 1733 A resolution of the City of Arcadia, California, denying CUP 2005-,14 for the outdoor use of an existingmetaJ storage container at 657 W. Duarte Rd. There is a five working day appeal period. Appeals are to be filed by September 21st. 6. MINUTES OF 819/5 RECOMMENDATION: Approve Ms. Butler read the title of the resolution. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Olson, seconded by Commissioner Baderian to adopt Resolution No. 1733 and approve the Minutes of 8//9/5 as published. Aroadia city Planning C<lmmission S 9/IJ/S . . . . ROLL CALL: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Baderian, Hsu, Olson, Wen, Lucas None MATIERS FROM CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION Council Member Marshall announced the upcoming events. Chairman Lucas pointed out that the E-Z Lube, which was recently approved by the Planning Commission, is up for sale, at the northeast corner of Duarte Rd. and Santa Anita, MODIFICA nON COMMITIEE MEETING ACTIONS None MATIERS FROM STAFF l. CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS 2. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Penman briefed the Planning Commission on a recent study session with the City Council where several projects were discussed and priorities were set. This study session related to the Caruso project and the Westfield expansion. City Council did not want to hold a joint session with the Planning Commission but thought that they should be invited individually to attend. This will be recorded and could be replayed. There has been a lot of press from the developer. Also, there has been a lot of misinformation that has been distnlruted. Separate study sessions will be held for each project, where no decisionswiU be made. He anticipated that the EIR would be ready sometime in the fall. The problem has been that the project has been changing and each time additional review is necessary. Staff is working with a traffic consultanUo prepare the transportation master plan. In this process, they are looking at all of the traffic impacts based on growth over the next 25 years and ,all developers small or large will pay a fee. Council Member Marshall reported that she saw someone taking a traffic count at the corner of Longden and Santa Anita early Sunday morning and asked if staff knew who was doing the count? Pllli Wray, the City En.gineer; said that this was not something that the city was doing. He thought that it was possibly the Caruso Development as part of preparing for the project. ADJOURNMENT 8:15 p.rn /slDonna Butler Secretary, Arcadia Planning Commission Arcadia city PIamUng Commission 6 9113/'