Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5-24-22 PC_ Agenda PacketCITY OF ARCADIA Arcadia Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda Tuesday, May 24, 2022, 7:00 p.m. Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons with a disability who require a disability related modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, may request such modification or accommodation from Planning Services at (626) 574-5423. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to the meeting. 根据《美国残障人法案》的规定，需要提供残障相关调整或便利设施才能参加会议的残障人士（包括辅助器材或服务），可向规划服务部 请求获得此类调整或便利设施，电话号码 (626) 574-5423。请在会前 48 小时通知规划服务部，以便作出合理安排，确保顺利参加会议。 Pursuant to the City of Arcadia’s Language Access Services Policy, limited-English proficient speakers who require translation services in order to participate in a meeting may request the use of a volunteer or professional translator by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (626) 574-5455 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting. 根据阿凯迪亚市的语言便利服务政策，英语能力有限并需要翻译服务才能参加会议的人可与市书记官办公室联系（电话：626-574-5455 ），请求提供志愿或专业翻译服务，请至少在会前 72 小时提出请求。 CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL Zi Lin, Chair Kenneth Chan, Vice Chair Brad Thompson, Commissioner Vincent Tsoi, Commissioner Marilynne Wilander, Commissioner SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS PUBLIC COMMENTS (5 minute time limit per person) Each speaker is limited to three (5) minutes per person, unless waived by the Planning Commission. Under the Brown Act, the Commission or Board Members are prohibited from discussing or taking action on any item not listed on the posted agenda. PUBLIC HEARING All interested persons are invited to appear at a public hearing and to provide evidence or testimony concerning any of the proposed items set forth below for consideration. Separate and apart from the applicant (who may speak longer in the discretion of the Commission) speakers shall be limited to five (5) minutes per person. The applicant may additionally submit rebuttal comments, at the discretion of the Commission. You are hereby advised that should you desire to legally challenge in court or in an administrative proceeding any action taken by the City Council regarding any public hearing item, you may be limited to raising only those issues and objections you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. 1. Resolution No. 2097 – Denying the Appeal of Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 21-13 for a proposed two-story residence with a Categorical Exemption Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) at 26 E Santa Anita Terrace Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2097 Appellants: Yang Liu and Jun Dai, Maxine McClellan, Bingbing Zhang, Wei Cong, Marianne Martin, Li Chen and Chi Liang, and Lesley Ma There is a ten day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. If adopted, appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Monday, June 6, 2022. 2. Resolution No. 2096 – Recommending that the City Council approve Text Amendment No. TA 22-01 (Ordinance No. 2388) amending Divisions 2 and 5 of Chapter 1, Article IX, of the Arcadia Development Code related to urban lot splits and two-unit projects and with a Statutory Exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2096 Applicant: City of Arcadia CONSENT CALENDAR All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and can be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the Commission, staff, or the public request that specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion and action. 3. Minutes of the May 10, 2022, Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL LIASION MATTERS FROM PLANNING COMMISSIONERS MATTERS FROM ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY MATTERS FROM STAFF INCLUDING UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission will adjourn this meeting to Tuesday, June 7, 2022, at 7:00 p.m. Welcome to the Arcadia Planning Commission Meeting! The Planning Commission encourages public participation, and invites you to share your views on City business. MEETINGS: Regular Meetings of the Planning Commission are held on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. A full Planning Commission agenda packet with all backup information is available at City Hall, the Arcadia Public Library, and on the City’s website at www.ArcadiaCA.gov. Copies of individual Agenda Reports are available via email upon request (Planning@ArcadiaCA.gov). Documents distributed to a majority of the Planning Commission after the posting of this agenda will be available for review at the Planning Services Office in City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION: Your participation is welcomed and invited at all Planning Commission meetings. Time is reserved at each regular meeting for those in the audience who wish to address the Planning Commission. The City requests that persons addressing the Planning Commission refrain from making personal, slanderous, profane, or disruptive remarks. When the Chair asks for those who wish to speak please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record. Please provide a copy of any written materials used in your address to the Planning Commission as well as a copy of any printed materials you wish to be distributed to the Planning Commission. MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA should be presented during the time designated as “PUBLIC COMMENTS.” In general, each speaker will be given (5) minutes to address the Planning Commission; however, the Chair, at his/her discretion, may shorten the speaking time limit to allow all speakers time to address the Planning Commission. By State law, the Planning Commission may not discuss or vote on items not on the agenda. The matter will automatically be referred to staff for appropriate action or response, or will be placed on the agenda of a future meeting. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND APPEALS are items scheduled for which public input is either required or desired. Separate and apart from an applicant or appellant (who may speak longer at the discretion of the Planning Commission), speakers shall be limited to (5) minutes per person. The Chair, at his/her discretion, may shorten the speaking time limit to allow all speakers to address the Planning Commission. The applicant or appellant may also be afforded an additional opportunity for rebuttal comments. AGENDA ITEMS: The Agenda contains the regular order of business of the Planning Commission. Items on the Agenda have generally been reviewed and investigated by the City Staff in advance of the meeting so that the Planning Commission can be fully informed about a matter before making its decision. CONSENT CALENDAR: Items listed on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine by the Planning Commission and may be acted upon by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a member of the Planning Commission, Staff, or the public so requests. In this event, the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered and acted on separately. DECORUM: While members of the public are free to level criticism of City policies and the action(s) or proposed action(s) of the Planning Commission or its members, members of the public may not engage in behavior that is disruptive to the orderly conduct of the proceedings, including, but not limited to, conduct that prevents other members of the audience from being heard when it is their opportunity to speak, or which prevents members of the audience from hearing or seeing the proceedings. Members of the public may not threaten any person with physical harm or act in a manner that may reasonably be interpreted as an imminent threat of physical harm. All persons attending the meeting are expected to adhere to the City’s policy barring harassment based upon a person’s race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical handicap, medical condition, marital status, gender, sexual orientation, or age. The Chief of Police, or such member or members of the Police Department, may serve as the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Planning Commission meeting. The Sergeant-at-Arms shall carry out all orders and instructions given by the presiding official for the purpose of maintaining order and decorum at the meeting. Any person who violates the order and decorum of the meeting may be placed under arrest and such person may be prosecuted under the provisions of Penal Code Section 403 or applicable Arcadia Municipal Code section. DATE: May 24, 2022 TO: Honorable Chair and Planning Commission FROM: Lisa L. Flores, Planning & Community Development Administrator By: Edwin Arreola, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 2097 – DENYING THE APPEAL OF SINGLE FAMILY ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. SFADR 21-13 FOR A PROPOSED TWO-STORY RESIDENCE WITH A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AT 26 E SANTA ANITA TERRACE Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2097 SUMMARY The Appellants, Yang Liu and Jun Dai, Maxine McClellan, Bingbing Zhang, Wei Cong, Marianne Martin, Li Chen and Chi Liang, and Lesley Ma, are appealing the Development Services Department’s approval of Single-Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 21-13 for a new 3,169 square foot, two-story residence with an attached 443 square foot two-car garage, a 268 square foot attached covered patio and a 633 square foot basement located at 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace. The appeal was filed on March 10, 2022. It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2097, thereby denying the appeal and upholding the Development Services Department’s decision. BACKGROUND The subject property is an 8,283 square foot, unimproved vacant lot at the end of a cul- de-sac at E. Santa Anita Terrace (see Figure 1) which was once part of a larger lot that was subdivided in 2018. The structures that were previously on this property were demolished in 2018 as part of the Final Parcel Map approval. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential – refer to Attachment No. 2 for an Aerial Photo with Zoning Information and Photos of the Subject Property and Surrounding Properties. The surrounding properties are all zoned R-1 and consist of one-story homes on E. Santa Anita Terrace and two-story homes to the north and south, on different streets but abutting the subject site. Appeal 22-02 of SFADR 21-13 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace May 24, 2022 – Page 2 of 15 The subject property was part of a larger property that was 31,040 square feet at 1512 S. Santa Anita Avenue. In 2009, a Tentative Parcel Map for a two-lot subdivision was approved. The subdivision resulted in a 20,918 square foot lot area for Lot No. 1 with access from Santa Anita Avenue (1512 S. Santa Anita Avenue) and Lot No. 2 was 8,283 square feet with direct access from Santa Anita Terrace (26 E. Santa Anita Terrace, the subject site) – refer to Figure 1 below. The tentative parcel map was valid for two years. Because of the recession in 2009, multiple Assembly Bills were passed by the State to automatically extend all the parcel and tract maps. As a result, the tentative parcel map for this site expired on July 14, 2018, which included a one-time, one-year extension that was granted by the City. The Final Parcel Map was approved by the City Council on June 19, 2018, that included a right-of- way dedication for the future construction of a half cul-de-sac (refer to Figure 1 above and Attachment No. 8 – Parcel Map No. 70963). Ultimately, it would become a full cul-de-sac should the property owner at 1504 S. Santa Anita Avenue dedicate the other half of the cul-de-sac. The dedication does require that the driveway apron be altered at 28 E. Santa Anita Terrace in order for the subject site to have access from the street. Since the approval of the parcel map, a new 6,693 square foot two-story house was approved at 1512 S. Santa Anita Avenue last December. The subject property currently has no dividing wall on its westerly property line but once the site is developed it will have a wall between both properties. The lot is bounded by walls/fencing on the north, east, and south. Figure 1 – Parcel Map Appeal 22-02 of SFADR 21-13 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace May 24, 2022 – Page 3 of 15 Project Description On April 26, 2021, the Applicant filed a Single-Family Architectural Design Review application to develop the last lot of this subdivision with a new house. Now that the lot is being developed, it would require the driveway apron to be modified and adjusted at 28 E. Santa Anita Terrace in order for this site to have access from the street (see Figure 2). All the improvements will occur within the public right-of-way and it will not affect the owner’s legal lot. Also, a portion of the existing 6-foot high block wall at the end of E. Santa Anita Terrace and along the easterly property line of the subject property would need to be removed to allow access. Back in September 2021, City Staff met with the affected owner next door, Mr. Jun Dai (one of the Appellants), to make him aware of the proposed development and alteration to his driveway apron since he would be most directly impacted by this project. He was unaware of the access since he was not the property owner at the time the tentative map Figure 2 – New Driveway Approach Street Area to be Paved New Driveway Apron (28. E Santa Anita Ter.) Subject Site Appeal 22-02 of SFADR 21-13 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace May 24, 2022 – Page 4 of 15 was approved. Since then, the Applicant and City kept him apprised of all the changes that were made throughout the process. In terms of the design, the Applicant originally proposed a 3,386 square foot, two-story, Traditional style home with an attached 443 square foot, two-car garage and 268 square foot covered patio. The half cul-de-sac area in front of the property was also to be constructed and dedicated with the project. The project was first noticed on October 11, 2021, at which time the City received a total of 5 letters of concerns from the neighbors. The neighbors were mainly concerned with the potential safety hazards, appearance, and functionality of the proposed half cul-de- sac, the first two-story house being proposed on this street, and potential construction impacts. Additionally, the neighbors to the east had concerns regarding the modification of their driveway access within the public right-of-way for the potential installation of a cul- de-sac – refer to Attachment No. 7 for those comments. After taking the neighbors’ comments into consideration, the project was revised with the following changes: x The proposal to construct the half cul-de-sac was removed and a hammerhead driveway was proposed instead with private access to the property since the neighbors did not like the appearance, design or functionality of the half cul-de- sac. Regardless, the revised driveway would still require a portion of the neighbor’s driveway access in the public right-of-way to be altered to allow access to the subject site. The end result would be a new narrow drive approach at the end of the street next to the neighbor’s altered drive approach. x Reduced the overall square footage of the two-story house from 3,386 square feet to 3,169 square feet. x Reduced the floor area of the second floor from 1,365 square feet to 1,111 square feet, including high ceiling area. x Increased the second story setback on the easterly side from 15’-0” to 20’-6” and kept the second story footprint towards the west and south of the building. x Limited the easterly facing windows on the second floor to one obscured glass window. x Added a 633 square foot basement. As a result of the changes, the revised project is a 3,169 square foot, Traditional style, two-story residence. The proposed home will consist of 4 bedrooms, 4.5 bathrooms, an attached 443 square foot, two-car garage, a 268 square foot attached covered patio, and a 633 square foot basement – refer to Attachment No. 5 for Architectural Plans. The total floor area ratio (FAR) of the residence will be 3,232 square feet, whereas 3,727 square Appeal 22-02 of SFADR 21-13 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace May 24, 2022 – Page 5 of 15 feet is allowed. The site will have a total lot coverage of 34% (2,832 square feet), whereas 35% (2,899 square feet) is allowed. On February 2, 2022, a second notice was sent to all the property owners within the 300- foot radius that included all the changes that were made to the project, as stated above. During the notification period, the City received five letters from the neighbors– refer to Attachment No. 6. On February 28, 2022, the project was approved on the basis that the proposed design for the two-story house was found to be consistent with the City’s Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines, as the overall mass and scale along with its style helped transition this new home from a two-story home that is to the west of this site into the single-story homes on Santa Anita Terrace. Also, due to the orientation of this lot, the house will not have a street presence like the other homes on Santa Anita Terrace. In Figure 3 – Site Plan Appeal 22-02 of SFADR 21-13 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace May 24, 2022 – Page 6 of 15 fact, only the driveway is visible from the street. The house will be screened by large mature Cypress trees and foliage on the adjacent property, and the subject site will also have tall hedges and trees within the side and rear yard areas to provide further screening and help soften the appearance of the two-story house. The Traditional architectural style is coherent, consistent with the neighborhood, and adequately executes the style. Furthermore, the proposed home will comply with all of the required development standards. On March 10, 2022, the Appellants filed an appeal within the prescribed 10-day appeal period (refer to Attachment No. 3 – Appeal Letter). On April 14, 2022, City staff met with the Appellants to discuss their concerns and explain that the map and the half cul-de-sac was not a part of this project since the map was approved back in 2009 and recorded in 2018. Furthermore, Staff went over the history of the subject property as it relates to the subdivision, answered any questions about the proposed project, and addressed the Appellants' concerns and assured them that the half cul-de-sac would not be constructed for this project. ANALYSIS The Appellants had concerns with the new house depriving the other residents of on- street parking since it is a short street, the proposed driveway conflicting with the feng shui of the neighborhood, the two-story house creating a privacy issue to the surrounding neighbors, safety pertaining to visibility when accessing the new driveway, potential construction impacts, and other concerns that pertain to the subdivision which is not a part of this approval – refer to Attachment No. 3. Below is an analysis to the Appellants concerns shown in italics. Figure 4 – North (Front) Elevation Appeal 22-02 of SFADR 21-13 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace May 24, 2022 – Page 7 of 15 1. Adding another house deprives other residents of parking spaces for their own uses and for visitors. This address already has seven houses on a small, short street. The City does not restrict the use of on-street parking to the property owners. As a result, a new residence on a lot that was legally subdivided is allowed the same privilege as the other property owners and/or visitors on this street. 2. This new project breaks the Feng Shui of the neighborhood, generating a leakage of chi by cutting a hole into an otherwise whole cul-de-sac. The City does not take feng shui into account as part of the design review process and the only access into this property is from Santa Anita Terrace. The property owner is allowed to develop this property and have access, as any other legal lot. 3. Building a two-story house deprives the privacy of all surrounding neighbors that are in the direct view of the new property. In fact, other than a traditional farm-style house, all nearby affected properties are one-story. The new house can easily see into all houses in the area outlined by E. Santa Anita Terrace, Louise Avenue, and E. Camino Real Avenue. Regarding the privacy concern, the Applicant revised the design to provide a greater setback on the second floor on the easterly side of the house to ensure that there is no privacy concern to the property next door at 28 E. Santa Anita Terrace. The second story setback was increased from 15’-0” to 20’-6” (an additional 5’-6”), and that side of the house will only one window with an obscured glass, as shown in Figure 5 below. There will be no privacy issue to the adjacent properties due to the orientation of the house on this site in relations to the adjacent homes. Furthermore, there are tall mature Cypress trees and landscaping on the adjacent properties that provide additional screening to the neighboring sites and the subject property owner will provide tall hedges and trees on the site – refer to the photos under Attachment No. 2. Figure 5 – East Elevation Appeal 22-02 of SFADR 21-13 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace May 24, 2022 – Page 8 of 15 4. The proposed street frontage and the private driveway create a safety risk for the adjacent neighbor. The plan does not demonstrate that vehicles coming out of the new property are clearly visible to those of the adjacent neighbor. The hammerhead driveway would create a large, paved turn around area making it possible for vehicles to make a 3-point turn and head nose first out of the driveway and onto the street allowing for greater visibility, as shown below. Therefore, the approved layout should not create a safety risk. 5. The proposed street frontage [of the subject lot will be shortened] to less than 44’, which does not meet the city regulation of 44’ required at the end of the cul-de-sac. This was clearly stated and rejected in the 2009 analysis of the parcel map modification, TPM 09-10. The site contains a half cul-de-sac area that is to be dedicated to the City should the property to the north dedicate the area to construct a standard cul-de-sac. The lot has an 89’-9” frontage along this dedication. Although a dedication was proposed for this half of the cul-de-sac, a driveway is being proposed instead to alleviate the neighbors’ concerns. The end result would be a new narrow drive approach at the end of the street next to the neighbor’s altered drive approach. Figure 6 – Proposed Hammerhead Driveway Appeal 22-02 of SFADR 21-13 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace May 24, 2022 – Page 9 of 15 6. The parcel map change, which created the “26 E Santa Anita Terrace” address, was not [recorded] in the city’s public record until 2019. The 2009 notice was unclear. Residents who resided on E. Santa Anita Terrace we’re not clearly notified that Lot 2 would have an “E. Santa Anita Terrace” address. And none of the residents that moved-in after 2009 were aware of this change because of negligence in updating the public record. As stated earlier in this staff report, the property owners within the 300 foot radius were notified of the tentative parcel map to subdivide the subject lot into two lots. The final parcel map was recorded within the allowed time frame, which included multiple automatic extensions from the State. The final parcel map process does not require notification to the neighbors, just approval by the City Council. The parcel map that was recorded by the Los Angeles County’s Recorder’s Office in 2018 had been noted as “For Condominium Purposes” so it was corrected in 2019 since this property is not zoned for condominiums. Lot No. 2 of the subdivision always had access off of E. Santa Anita Terrace since any access from Santa Anita Avenue would require a driveway easement over Lot No. 1, thereby creating a flag lot and the City has not allowed flag lots since the early 1970’s. 7. The proposed project poses a public safety risk to all residents on this street, including significantly reduced parking space for other residents during the construction period, and causing an easy access for criminals to the otherwise self-contained neighborhood at E. Santa Anita Terrace. Figure 7 – Current Terminus of E. Santa Anita Ter. Appeal 22-02 of SFADR 21-13 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace May 24, 2022 – Page 10 of 15 The City will work with the Applicant to ensure that they comply with all best management practices for construction and if possible, have their contractors park on the subject site during construction. Staff acknowledges that any construction might an inconvenience to the neighbors, but the duration is temporary. Also, a condition of approval has been placed on this project that the Applicant must inform all of the property owners on this street and any properties that abut the property line at least 2 weeks prior to any grading/construction on this site and provide the Superintendent’s contact information should any of the neighbors have any concerns – refer to condition no. 4. In terms of easy access from Santa Anita Avenue to E. Santa Anita Terrace, a new 6 foot high wall is approved for the new house at 1512 S. Santa Anita Avenue between the two properties and it would provide a barrier for any potential trespassers off of Santa Anita Avenue. If this site is developed prior the adjacent property, the Applicant shall be required to build the new wall first – refer to condition no. 5. FINDINGS Section 9107.19.050 of the Development Code requires that the Review Authority may approve a Site Plan and Design Review application, only if it first makes all the following findings: 1. The proposed development will be in compliance with all applicable development standards and regulations in the Development Code. Facts to Support This Finding: The subject site is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential Zone, which allows for the development of a single-family residence. Aside from the design review criteria addressed hereafter, the proposed project will not change the use or density allowed in this zone and meets all of the development standards and regulations required, including but not limited to setbacks, height, and floor area. 2. The proposed development will be consistent with the objectives and standards of the applicable Design Guidelines. Facts to Support This Finding: The proposed project will be consistent with the City’s Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines as the overall mass and scale of the home transitions well between the adjacent two-story homes to the west of this site and the single-story homes on Santa Anita Terrace. The proposed residence will not have any street presence like the other homes on Santa Anita Terrace because the orientation of this lot hardly has any street frontage other than a driveway, the proposed home is tucked away, and there are large Cypress trees on the adjacent property to further screen the second floor. The Traditional Appeal 22-02 of SFADR 21-13 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace May 24, 2022 – Page 11 of 15 architectural style is coherent, consistent with the neighborhood, and adequately executes the style. 3. The proposed development will be compatible in terms of scale and aesthetic design with surrounding properties and developments. Facts to Support This Finding: The proposed Traditional style home would be compatible with the character of the neighborhood in terms of the architectural design since the subject site is in a residential neighborhood that is comprised of Ranch or Traditional style homes. The traditional style house is consistent with the City’s design guidelines in terms of form, roof, articulations, design features and details, and color. The architectural design, overall articulation, greater second story setbacks, and placing of the proposed residence towards the rear of the lot helps minimize the scale and soften the appearance of the home. 4. The proposed development will have an adequate and efficient site layout in terms of access, vehicular circulation, parking and landscaping. Facts to Support This Finding: Due to the limitations of the lot, the only access to the property is off of a street frontage at the end of E. Santa Anita Terrace. A driveway, along with improvements in the public right-of-way, will be constructed in order to provide adequate access to the site. Additionally, to improve vehicular circulation, a hammerhead driveway is proposed on the property to allow vehicles to drive on to E. Santa Anita Terrace safely facing forward. Required parking is being provided with a two-car garage and adequate landscaping will be provided throughout the property which would also enhance the privacy for the surrounding neighbors. 5. The proposed development will be in compliance with all of the applicable criteria identified in Subparagraph 9107.19.040.C.5 for a Site Plan and Design Review application. Facts to Support This Finding: The proposed project would be in compliance with all the applicable criteria set forth in Subparagraph 9107.19.040.C.5, including all other applicable sections of the Development Code. The project is in compliance with the City’s Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines as the proposed home will have an appropriate mass, scale, and design that fits in with the homes it is bounded by. The site layout and design is harmonious with the neighborhood as its smaller two-story design will provide a transition between the larger two-story home to the west and single story home to the east. The project is situated in a location that presents minimal privacy issues and is well landscaped throughout the site. The driveway for the site is designed to provide efficient and safe access to the residents and neighbors. No major impacts on or off-site are Appeal 22-02 of SFADR 21-13 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace May 24, 2022 – Page 12 of 15 expected from this project. Therefore, the proposed home will be consistent with the City’s Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines and General Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The proposed project qualifies as a Class 3 Categorical Exemption per the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303(a) of the CEQA Guidelines for the construction of a new single-family home. Refer to Attachment No. 9 for the Preliminary Exemption Assessment. PUBLIC COMMENTS Public hearing notices for this appeal were mailed to the owners of the properties that are located within 300 feet of the subject property and published in Arcadia Weekly on May 12, 2022. As of May 19, 2022, staff has not received any comments from the public. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2097 to deny the Appeal and uphold the Development Services Department’s approval of SFADR 21-13 with a categorical exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. The project shall be developed and maintained by the Owner/Applicant in a manner that is consistent with the plans submitted and conditionally approved for Single- Family Design Review No. SFADR 21-13, subject to the satisfaction of the Planning & Community Development Administrator or designee. 2. The project shall comply with the City’s Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance (WELO). The application shall be submitted with the plans for plan check in Building Services. 3. The Owner/Applicant shall construct the following improvements: a. Remove the block wall for the entire width of the public right-of-way extension of Santa Anita Terrace along the property frontage of 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace. b. Remove the curved curb and gutter, and the driveway extension in front of 28 E. Santa Anita Terrace and construct a new curb, gutter and drive approach to follow the normal street extension to the westerly Santa Anita Terrace terminus c. Construct a standard drive approach for the property at 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace at the terminus of the current street. 4. The Owner/Applicant shall inform all the property owners on E. Santa Anita Terrace and those that abuts the subject site at least two weeks prior to commencing any Appeal 22-02 of SFADR 21-13 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace May 24, 2022 – Page 13 of 15 work on the subject site (i.e. grading/construction) and the notice should include the Superintendent’s contact information. 5. Prior to the start of work on the subject site (i.e. grading/construction), if the site is developed prior to the adjacent property to the west at 1512 S. Santa Anita Avenue, the Applicant/Owner shall be required to construct a new 6’-0” high wall along the westerly property line. This shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning & Community Development Administrator, or designee. 6. Landscaping shall be planted in the right-of-way dedication area as indicated on the plans. All landscape and hardscape areas within the dedication area shall be maintained by the Property Owner. 7. The hedges/shrubs along the side and rear yard areas shall be planted at a height of 6’-0” or taller prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy from Building Services. The landscaping must comply with the approved landscape plans and maintained. 8. The Owner/Applicant shall comply with all City requirements regarding building safety, fire prevention, detection, suppression, emergency access, public right-of- way improvements, parking, water supply and water facilities, sewer facilities, trash reduction and recycling requirements, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) measures to the satisfaction of the Building Official, Fire Marshal, Public Works Services Director, and Planning & Community Development Administrator, or their respective designees. Compliance with these requirements is to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval by the foregoing City officials and employees. 9. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Applicant must defend, indemnify, and hold City, any departments, agencies, divisions, boards, and/or commissions of the City, and its elected officials, officers, contractors serving as City officials, agents, employees, and attorneys of the City (“Indemnitees”) harmless from liability for damages and/or claims, actions, or proceedings for damages for personal injuries, including death, and claims for property damage, and with respect to all other actions and liabilities for damages caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of the Applicant’s activities in connection with Single-Family Design Review No. SFADR 21-13 on the Project site, and which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of the Applicant or those of the Applicant’s contractors, agents, tenants, employees or any other persons acting on Applicant’s behalf, which relate to the development and/or construction of the Project. This indemnity provision applies to all damages and claims, actions, or proceedings for damages, as described above, regardless of whether the City prepared, supplied, or approved the plans, specifications, or other documents for the Project. In the event of any legal action challenging the validity, applicability, or interpretation of any provision of this approval, or any other supporting document relating to the Appeal 22-02 of SFADR 21-13 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace May 24, 2022 – Page 14 of 15 Project, the City will promptly notify the Applicant of the claim, action, or proceedings and will fully cooperate in the defense of the matter. Once notified, the Applicant must indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Indemnitees, and each of them, with respect to all liability, costs and expenses incurred by, and/or awarded against, the City or any of the Indemnitees in relation to such action. Within 15 days’ notice from the City of any such action, Applicant shall provide to City a cash deposit to cover legal fees, costs, and expenses incurred by City in connection with defense of any legal action in an initial amount to be reasonably determined by the City Attorney. City may draw funds from the deposit for such fees, costs, and expenses. Within 5 business days of each and every notice from City that the deposit has fallen below the initial amount, Applicant shall replenish the deposit each and every time in order for City’s legal team to continue working on the matter. City shall only refund to Developer any unexpended funds from the deposit within 30 days of: (i) a final, non- appealable decision by a court of competent jurisdiction resolving the legal action; or (ii) full and complete settlement of legal action. The City shall have the right to select legal counsel of its choice that the Applicant reasonably approves. The parties hereby agree to cooperate in defending such action. The City will not voluntarily assist in any such third-party challenge(s) or take any position adverse to the Applicant in connection with such third-party challenge(s). In consideration for approval of the Project, this condition shall remain in effect if the entitlement(s) related to this Project is rescinded or revoked, whether or not at the request of the Applicant. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval of Appeal If the Planning Commission intends to approve the appeal and overturn the Development Services Department’s decision of the project, the Commission should pass a motion to approve the Appeal, stating that the proposed project is inconsistent with the City’s Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines and the findings cannot be made for Single Family Architectural Design Review, and that the project is exempt per Section 15303(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, and direct staff to prepare a resolution for adoption at the next meeting that incorporates the Commission’s decision and specific findings. Denial of Appeal If the Planning Commission intends to deny the appeal and uphold the Development Services Department’s approval of the project, the Commission should pass a motion to deny the Appeal, stating that the proposed project is consistent with the City’s Single- Family Residential Design Guidelines and the findings can be made for Single Family Architectural Design Review, as stated in this staff report. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the May 24, 2022, Planning Commission Meeting, please Appeal 22-02 of SFADR 21-13 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace May 24, 2022 – Page 15 of 15 contact Edwin Arreola, Assistant Planner by calling (626) 821-4334, or by email to earreola@ArcadiaCA.gov. Approved: Lisa L. Flores Planning & Community Development Administrator Attachment No. 1: Resolution No. 2097 Attachment No. 2: Aerial Photo with Zoning Information & Photos of Subject Property and Vicinity Attachment No. 3: Appeal Letter Attachment No. 4: Decision Letter for SFADR 21-13 Attachment No. 5: Architectural Plans Attachment No. 6: Public Comments from February 2, 2022, Notice Attachment No. 7: Public Comments from the October 11, 2021, Notice Attachment No. 8: Parcel Map No. 70963 Attachment No. 9: Preliminary Exemption Assessment Attachment No. 1 Attachment No. 1 Resolution No. 20 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2097 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL OF SINGLE FAMILY ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. SFADR 21-13 FOR A PROPOSED TWO-STORY RESIDENCE WITH A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AT 26 E SANTA ANITA TERRACE WHEREAS, on April 26, 2021, an application for Single Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 21-13 was filed by Eric Tsang on behalf of the property owner, Johnny Ngo, for a new 3,386 square foot, two-story, Traditional style residence with an attached 443 square foot two-car garage and a 268 square foot attached covered patio at 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace; and WHEREAS, on February 2, 2022 a notice was sent to all of the property owners within a 300 foot radius from the subject site informing them of a revised project. The revised project was for a smaller two-story, Traditional style residence consisting of 3,169 square feet in floor area with an attached 443 square foot two-car garage, a 268 square foot covered patio, and a 633 square foot basement. During the notification period, the City received a total of five comment letters; and WHEREAS, on February 28, 2022, after reviewing the neighbors’ concerns carefully the Development Services Department approved SFADR 21-13 on the basis that the proposed project is consistent with the City’s Single Family Residential Design Guidelines, the revised proposal was an improvement since it provided greater setbacks on the second floor, and adequate access to the house was provided to the subject site from the street; and 2 WHEREAS, on March 10, 2022, within the 10-day appeal period, the project was appealed by Yang Liu and Jun Dai, Maxine McClellan, Bingbing Zhang, Wei Cong, Marianne Martin, Li Chen and Chi Liang, and Lesley Ma (“Appellant”) appealing the Development Services Department Planning Division’s approval of SFADR 21-13; and WHEREAS, on May 5, 2022, Planning Services completed an environmental assessment for the proposed project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and recommends that the Planning Commission determine that the proposed project qualifies as a Class 3 Categorical Exemption under CEQA pursuant to Section 15303(a) of the CEQA Guidelines for the construction of a single-family home; and WHEREAS, on May 24, 2022, a duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on said application, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The factual data submitted by the Community Development Division in the staff report dated May 24, 2022 are true and correct. SECTION 2. This Commission finds that based upon the entire record, pursuant to Section 9107.19.050 of the Arcadia Development Code, all of the following findings can be made. 1. The proposed development will be in compliance with all applicable development standards and regulations in the Development Code. 3 FACT: The subject site is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential Zone, which allows for the development of a single-family residence. Aside from the design review criteria addressed hereafter, the proposed project will not change the use or density allowed in this zone and meets all of the development standards and regulations required, including but not limited to setbacks, height, and floor area. 2. The proposed development will be consistent with the objectives and standards of the applicable Design Guidelines. FACT: The proposed project will be consistent with the City’s Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines as the overall mass and scale of the home transitions well between the adjacent two-story homes to the west of this site and the single-story homes on Santa Anita Terrace. The proposed residence will not have any street presence like the other homes on Santa Anita Terrace because the orientation of this lot hardly has any street frontage other than a driveway, the proposed home is tucked away, and there are large Cypress trees on the adjacent property to further screen the second floor. The Traditional architectural style is coherent, consistent with the neighborhood, and adequately executes the style. 3. The proposed development will be compatible in terms of scale and aesthetic design with surrounding properties and developments. FACT: The proposed Traditional style home would be compatible with the character of the neighborhood in terms of the architectural design since the subject site is in a residential neighborhood that is comprised of Ranch or Traditional style homes. The traditional style house is consistent with the City’s design guidelines in terms of form, roof, articulations, design features and details, and color. The architectural design, overall 4 articulation, greater second story setbacks, and placing of the proposed residence towards the rear of the lot helps minimize the scale and soften the appearance of the home. 4. The proposed development will have an adequate and efficient site layout in terms of access, vehicular circulation, parking and landscaping. FACT: Due to the limitations of the lot, the only access to the property is off of a street frontage at the end of E. Santa Anita Terrace. A driveway, along with improvements in the public right-of-way, will be constructed in order to provide adequate access to the site. Additionally, to improve vehicular circulation, a hammerhead driveway is proposed on the property to allow vehicles to drive on to E. Santa Anita Terrace safely facing forward. Required parking is being provided with a two-car garage and adequate landscaping will be provided throughout the property which would also enhance the privacy for the surrounding neighbors. 5. The proposed development will be in compliance with all of the applicable criteria identified in Subparagraph 9107.19.040.C.5 for a Site Plan and Design Review application. FACT: The proposed project would be in compliance with all the applicable criteria set forth in Subparagraph 9107.19.040.C.5, including all other applicable sections of the Development Code. The project is in compliance with the City’s Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines as the proposed home will have an appropriate mass, scale, and design that fits in with the homes it is bounded by. The site layout and design is harmonious with the neighborhood as its smaller two-story design will provide a transition between the larger two-story home to the west and single story home to the east. The 5 project is situated in a location that presents minimal privacy issues and is well landscaped throughout the site. The driveway for the site is designed to provide efficient and safe access to the residents and neighbors. No major impacts on or off-site are expected from this project. Therefore, the proposed home will be consistent with the City’s Single-Family Residential Design Guidelines and General Plan. SECTION 3. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), this Project is a Class 3 Categorical Exemption for the construction of a new single-family home per Section 15303(a) of the CEQA Guidelines. SECTION 4: For the foregoing reasons, the Planning Commission determines that the proposed project is Categorically Exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Section 15303(a), Class 3, and denies the appeal and upholds the Development Services Department’s decision to approve Single Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 21-13 for a new 3,169 square foot, two-story residence with an attached 443 square foot two-car garage, a 268 square foot attached covered patio, and a 633 square foot basement at 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace, subject to the conditions of approval attached hereto. SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. 7 Page Intentionally Left Blank 8 RESOLUTION NO. 2097 Conditions of Approval 1. The project shall be developed and maintained by the Owner/Applicant in a manner that is consistent with the plans submitted and conditionally approved for Single-Family Design Review No. SFADR 21-13, subject to the satisfaction of the Planning & Community Development Administrator or designee. 2. The project shall comply with the City’s Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance (WELO). The application shall be submitted with the plans for plan check in Building Services. 3. The Owner/Applicant shall construct the following improvements: a. Remove the block wall for the entire width of the public right-of-way extension of Santa Anita Terrace along the property frontage of 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace. b. Remove the curved curb and gutter, and the driveway extension in front of 28 E. Santa Anita Terrace and construct a new curb, gutter and drive approach to follow the normal street extension to the westerly Santa Anita Terrace terminus c. Construct a standard drive approach for the property at 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace at the terminus of the current street. 4. The Owner/Applicant shall inform all the property owners on E. Santa Anita Terrace and those that abuts the subject site at least two weeks prior to commencing any work on the subject site (i.e. grading/construction) and the notice should include the Superintendent’s contact information. 5. Prior to the start of work on the subject site (i.e. grading/construction), if the site is developed prior to the adjacent property to the west at 1512 S. Santa Anita Avenue, the Applicant/Owner shall be required to construct a new 6’-0” high wall along the westerly property line. This shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning & Community Development Administrator, or designee. 6. Landscaping shall be planted in the right-of-way dedication area as indicated on the plans. All landscape and hardscape areas within the dedication area shall be maintained by the Property Owner. 7. The hedges/shrubs along the side and rear yard areas shall be planted at a height of 6’-0” or taller prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy from Building Services. The landscaping must comply with the approved landscape plans and maintained. 9 8. The Owner/Applicant shall comply with all City requirements regarding building safety, fire prevention, detection, suppression, emergency access, public right- of-way improvements, parking, water supply and water facilities, sewer facilities, trash reduction and recycling requirements, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) measures to the satisfaction of the Building Official, Fire Marshal, Public Works Services Director, and Planning & Community Development Administrator, or their respective designees. Compliance with these requirements is to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval by the foregoing City officials and employees. 9. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Applicant must defend, indemnify, and hold City, any departments, agencies, divisions, boards, and/or commissions of the City, and its elected officials, officers, contractors serving as City officials, agents, employees, and attorneys of the City (“Indemnitees”) harmless from liability for damages and/or claims, actions, or proceedings for damages for personal injuries, including death, and claims for property damage, and with respect to all other actions and liabilities for damages caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of the Applicant’s activities in connection with Single- Family Design Review No. SFADR 21-13 on the Project site, and which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of the Applicant or those of the Applicant’s contractors, agents, tenants, employees or any other persons acting on Applicant’s behalf, which relate to the development and/or construction of the Project. This indemnity provision applies to all damages and claims, actions, or proceedings for damages, as described above, regardless of whether the City prepared, supplied, or approved the plans, specifications, or other documents for the Project. In the event of any legal action challenging the validity, applicability, or interpretation of any provision of this approval, or any other supporting document relating to the Project, the City will promptly notify the Applicant of the claim, action, or proceedings and will fully cooperate in the defense of the matter. Once notified, the Applicant must indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Indemnitees, and each of them, with respect to all liability, costs and expenses incurred by, and/or awarded against, the City or any of the Indemnitees in relation to such action. Within 15 days’ notice from the City of any such action, Applicant shall provide to City a cash deposit to cover legal fees, costs, and expenses incurred by City in connection with defense of any legal action in an initial amount to be reasonably determined by the City Attorney. City may draw funds from the deposit for such fees, costs, and expenses. Within 5 business days of each and every notice from City that the deposit has fallen below the initial amount, Applicant shall replenish the deposit each and every time in order for City’s legal team to continue working on the matter. City shall only refund to Developer any unexpended funds from the deposit within 30 days of: (i) a final, non- appealable decision by a court of competent jurisdiction resolving the legal action; 10 or (ii) full and complete settlement of legal action. The City shall have the right to select legal counsel of its choice that the Applicant reasonably approves. The parties hereby agree to cooperate in defending such action. The City will not voluntarily assist in any such third-party challenge(s) or take any position adverse to the Applicant in connection with such third-party challenge(s). In consideration for approval of the Project, this condition shall remain in effect if the entitlement(s) related to this Project is rescinded or revoked, whether or not at the request of the Applicant. ---- Attachment No. 2 Attachment No. 2 Aerial Photo ZLWK Zoning Information Photos of Subject PropertyDQG9LFLQLW\ Overlays Selected parcel highlighted Parcel location within City of Arcadia Property Owner(s): Lot Area (sq ft): Year Built: Main Structure / Unit (sq. ft.): Number of Units: Property Characteristics 0 Property Owner Site Address: Parcel Number: 5781-001-035 Zoning: General Plan: Downtown Overlay: Downtown Parking Overlay: Architectural Design Overlay: Residential Flex Overlay: Special Height Overlay: Parking Overlay: Racetrack Event Overlay: This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. Report generated 18-May-2022 Page 1 of 1 68%-(&76,7()$&,1*($6772:$5'6(6$17$$1,7$7(5 68%-(&76,7()$&,1*6287+72:$5'6(&$0,125($/$9( 68%-(&76,7()$&,1*1257+72:$5'666$17$$1,7$$9( Attachment No.  Attachment No.  $SSHDO/HWWHU Attachment No.  Attachment No.  'HFLVLRQ/HWWHUIRU6)$'5 City of Arcadia Development Services Department Jason Kruckeberg Assistant City Manager/ Development Services Director 240 West Huntington Drive Post Office Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91066-6021 (626) 574-5415 (626) 447-3309 Fax www.ArcadiaCA.gov February 28, 2022 Eric Tsang 440 E. Huntington Drive, Suite 356 Arcadia, CA 91006 SUBJECT: Single-Family Design Review No. SFADR 21-13 PROJECT ADDRESS: 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace Dear Mr. Tsang, The proposed project was first noticed on October 11, 2021. The public comment period for that Notice of Pending Decision ended on October 25, 2021. Staff received five comments in opposition of the proposed project. The neighbors had concerns with the proposed half cul-de-sac that would be constructed within the public right-of-way and the new two-story home. After consultation with City staff, a half cul-de-sac was no longer required. As a result, a driveway was proposed. The Applicant also significantly reduced the area of the second floor to better blend with the other one story homes in this neighborhood and, due to the orientation of the lot, the placement of the house, and the existing foliage that exists along the side property lines, most of the house will not be visible from the street. The project was re-noticed on February 2, 2022. Staff received five comments in opposition of the revised project with concerns from the neighbors regarding the new driveway access from the street and that the house is a still a two-story house. After careful review, staff determined that the design of the house is consistent with the Single-Family Design Guidelines and access to the house is being adequately provided through the public right- of-way. Therefore, the Development Services Department has conditionally approved the single-family design review project for a new 3,169 square foot, two-story, Traditional-style residence with an attached two-car garage, an attached 268 square foot covered patio, and a 633 square foot basement. This project is subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. The project shall be developed and maintained by the Owner/Applicant in a manner that is consistent with the plans submitted and conditionally approved for Single-Family Design Review No. SFADR 21-13, subject to the satisfaction of the Planning & Community Development Administrator or designee. 2. The project shall comply with the City’s Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance (WELO). The application shall be submitted with the plans for plan check in Building Services. 3. The driveway leading to the subject property shall be a private driveway and be constructed in accordance with any requirements from the Engineering Division. A private driveway sign shall be placed at the end of E. Santa Anita Terrace. 4. Landscaping shall be planted in the public right-of-way as indicated on the plans. All landscape and hardscape areas within the public right-of-way shall be maintained by the Property Owner. 5. The hedges/shrubs along the property lines shall be planted at a height of 6’-0” or taller prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy from Building Services. 6. The Property Owner/Applicant shall comply with all City requirements regarding building safety, fire prevention, detection, suppression, emergency access, public right-of-way improvements, parking, water supply and water facilities, sewer facilities, trash reduction and recycling requirements, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) measures to the satisfaction of the Building Official, Fire Marshal, Public Works Services Director, and Planning & Community Development Administrator, or their respective designees. Compliance with these requirements is to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval by the foregoing City officials and employees. 7. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Applicant must defend, indemnify, and hold City, any departments, agencies, divisions, boards, and/or commissions of the City, and its elected officials, officers, contractors serving as City officials, agents, employees, and attorneys of the City (“Indemnitees”) harmless from liability for damages and/or claims, actions, or proceedings for damages for personal injuries, including death, and claims for property damage, and with respect to all other actions and liabilities for damages caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of the Applicant’s activities in connection with Single- Family Design Review No. SFADR 21-13 on the Project site, and which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of the Applicant or those of the Applicant’s contractors, agents, tenants, employees or any other persons acting on Applicant’s behalf, which relate to the development and/or construction of the Project. This indemnity provision applies to all damages and claims, actions, or proceedings for damages, as described above, regardless of whether the City prepared, supplied, or approved the plans, specifications, or other documents for the Project. In the event of any legal action challenging the validity, applicability, or interpretation of any provision of this approval, or any other supporting document relating to the Project, the City will promptly notify the Applicant of the claim, action, or proceedings and will fully cooperate in the defense of the matter. Once notified, the Applicant must indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Indemnitees, and each of them, with respect to all liability, costs and expenses incurred by, and/or awarded against, the City or any of the Indemnitees in relation to such action. Within 15 days’ notice from the City of any such action, Applicant shall provide to City a cash deposit to cover legal fees, costs, and expenses incurred by City in connection with defense of any legal action in an initial amount to be reasonably determined by the City Attorney. City may draw funds from the deposit for such fees, costs, and expenses. Within 5 business days of each and every notice from City that the deposit has fallen below the initial amount, Applicant shall replenish the deposit each and every time in order for City’s legal team to continue working on the matter. City shall only refund to Developer any unexpended funds from the deposit within 30 days of: (i) a final, non-appealable decision by a court of competent jurisdiction resolving the legal action; or (ii) full and complete settlement of legal action. The City shall have the right to select legal counsel of its choice that the Applicant reasonably approves. The parties hereby agree to cooperate in defending such action. The City will not voluntarily assist in any such third-party challenge(s) or take any position adverse to the Applicant in connection with such third-party challenge(s). In consideration for approval of the Project, this condition shall remain in effect if the entitlement(s) related to this Project is rescinded or revoked, whether or not at the request of the Applicant. There is a ten (10) day appeal period for this application. To file an appeal, a completed Appeal Application form must be submitted to the Development Services Department along with a $630.00 appeal fee by 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, March 10, 2022. Approval of SFARD 21-13 shall not be of effect unless the property owner and applicant have executed and filed the enclosed Acceptance Form to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. The Acceptance Form is due now and if it is not received by March 30, 2022 or if the project is appealed, this approval will become null and void. This design approval shall expire in one year (March 11, 2023) from the effective date unless plans are submitted to Building Services for plan-check, a building permit is issued and the construction is diligently pursued, a certificate of occupancy has been issued, or the approval is renewed. The final plans must be consistent with the approved design concept plans and any conditions of approval. Any inconsistency from the approved design concept plans may preclude the issuance of a building permit. An extension may be granted by the Development Services Director or designee, or the Review Authority that approved the project for a maximum period of one (1) year from the initial expiration date. An extension can only be granted if the required findings can be made. Please note that acceptance of an extension request does not indicate approval of an extension. A building permit must be obtained prior to any construction activity. Please contact Building Services at (626) 574-5416 to determine the type of documentation, plans, and fees for the appropriate permit. This approval letter must be presented to Building Services to initiate the permitting process. You may visit the City’s website at www.ArcadiaCA.gov/noticesanddecisions to view this letter. If you have any questions regarding the above approval, please contact me at (626) 821-4334 or by email at earreola@ArcadiaCA.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Community Development Division / Planning Services Edwin Arreola Assistant Planner Enclosed c: Johnny Ngo, Property Owner Bingbing Zhang, Neighboring Resident Wei Cong, Neighboring Resident Lesley Ma, Neighboring Resident Li Chen and Chi Liang, Neighboring Residents Yang Liu and Jun Dai, Neighboring Residents Marianne Martin, Neighboring Resident Attachment No.  Attachment No.  Architectural Plans 83 ': 83 7: + 5( )  5( )  6 $17 $$1,7 $7 (5 0(;,&$1)$13$/072%(5(029(' 3,1(725(0$,1  +7%/2&.:$//725(0$,1  +7+2*:,5(725(0$,1  +7)(1&(725(0$,1  6ƒ (  6ƒ (   1ƒ (  1ƒ (        5(4 ')52176(7%$&.   5(4 '67)/56(7%$&.   5(4 '1')/56(7%$&.    5(4 '67)/56(7%$&.   5(4 '1')/56(7%$&.    5(4 '1')/56(7%$&.       5( 4 '   6 7  ) / 5 6 ( 7 % $ & .       $6+725(0$,1   6725< 6,1*/()$0,/< 5(6,'(1&( ),5(3,7 ), 5 (  3 / $ & ( 1  +7'(&25$7,9(%/2&.:$// 1  +7'(&25$7,9(%/2&.:$// 1  +7'(&25$7,9(*$5'(1:$// *5 $ 6 6 & 5 ( 7 (  ' 5 , 9 ( : $ < &21&5(7(3$7,2                   (  +7%/2&.:$//72%(5(029(' (  +7%/2&.:$// 725(0$,1                      35,9$7('5,9(:$<6,*1 3$9(5'5,9(:$<,152: /$1'6&$3,1*,152: /$1'6&$3,1* /$:1$5($ /$:1$5($/$:1$5($ /$ 1 ' 6 & $ 3 , 1 * /$ 1 ' 6 & $ 3 , 1 *   6,7(3/$1 ].dCIʒ ɺɺɶʒ.hCd0C*dICYʒʍʑɹɻɼʍ Y0ʍɿɷɶɶɼ ɿɶɿʒɻɼɿʒɹɽɹɽ B0=˫Y0ʣ]0*CʒIB Y0.0wC*d]C*ʍ0 ɷɸ ʘ ɷ ɽ ʘ ɸ ɶ ɸ ɷ  ɺ ʌ ɶ ɶ ʌ ɺ ɶ  V B ʣɷʒɶ C* I  Y  ] 0   C   ʞt    C d ʟ  ]  C d    C 0 d   d  Y  ʞ  V C ʌ  ɻ ɽ ɾ ɷ ʣ ɶ ɶ ɷ ʣ ɶ ɹ ɻ ʟ Y    0  ʍ       ɿ ɷ ɶ ɶ ɼ ]0dV=C $33/,&$172:1(5 2:1(5'$9,'1*2 $''5(66 9$&$17 (6$17$$1,7$7(55$&( $5&$',$&$ $31 7(/ (0$,/0$,/#(5,&'(6,*1&20 $33/,&$17(5,&&76$1* $''5(66(+817,1*721'568,7( $5&$',$&$ 7(/ (0$,/0$,/#(5,&'(6,*1&20 352-(&7'(6&5,37,21 352-(&71$0(1*25(6,'(1&( 352-(&7$''5(66 9$&$17 (6$17$$1,7$7(55$&( $5&$',$&$ $31 $31 -2%'(6&5,37,211(:6725<75$16,7,21$/67</(6)5 =21,1*5 180%(52)6725< 2&&83$1&<*528358 &216758&7,217<3(9% '(02/,7,21$//(;,67,1*81,76 352-(&7'$7$ /276,=(6) 67)/225/,9,1*$5($6) 1')/225/,9,1*$5($6) %$6(0(17$5($6) 727$//,9,1*$5($ :,7+%$6(0(17 6) 727$//,9,1*$5($ 67 1')/225 6) +,*+&(,/,1*$5($6) *$5$*($5($6) &29(5('3$7,26) /27&29(5$*(6)6)  727$//,9,1*$5($6) )/225$5($5$7,26)6) 6)  $//2:$%/()$5  6)0$; ‡6,'(:$/.&85%$1'*877(56+$//%(5(3/$&('3(5&,7<67$1'$5'6 ': 7: + 5( )  5( )  ',1,1*5220 " *5($75220.,7&+(1 &$5*$5$*( %('5220                                 :2.                            %('5220                                                                                                                                                                                ; *$5$*(   ; 6&   ; 6&   ; 6&   [ &6 6,//+7    [ &6 6,//+7    ; 6&   [ &66,//+7    ; */$667*   [ '%/&66,//+7    ; 6&   ; 6&   ; 6&   ; 6/   ; 6/                      ; 6&   [ $: 6,//+7  7*     ; )2/',1* 7*   ;  7*     [ ); 6,//+7    [ ); 6,//+7    [ ); 6,//+7    [ );6,//+7    [ &6 6,//+7  7*   [ $:6,//+7  7*                           ; 6&         [ &6 6,//+7    [ &6 6,//+7    [ &6 6,//+7        %('5220 0$67(5 %('5220                                                                          ; 6&   ; 6&   ; 6&   ; 6&   [ &66,//+7  7*   ; 6&   [ );6,//+7    [ &66,//+7    [ &66,//+7    [ &6 6,//+7            ; 6&             [ ); 6,//+7    [ ); 6,//+7    [ $: 6,//+7    [ $: 6,//+7                                            [ ); 6,//+7                 [ &66,//+7  7*                               [ $: 6,//+7 7*2%6&85('                                       *$0(5220 2)),&(              [ &66,//+7   ; 6&   ; '%/)' 67 2 5 $ * ( ].dCIʒ ɺɺɶʒ.hCd0C*dICYʒʍʑɹɻɼʍ Y0ʍɿɷɶɶɼ ɿɶɿʒɻɼɿʒɹɽɹɽ B0=˫Y0ʣ]0*CʒIB Y0.0wC*d]C*ʍ0 ɷɸ ʘ ɷ ɽ ʘ ɸ ɶ ɸ ɷ  ɺ ʌ ɶ ɶ ʌ ɺ ɸ  V B ʣɸʒɶ C* I  Y  ] 0   C   ʞt    C d ʟ  ]  C d    C 0 d   d  Y  ʞ  V C ʌ  ɻ ɽ ɾ ɷ ʣ ɶ ɶ ɷ ʣ ɶ ɹ ɻ ʟ Y    0  ʍ       ɿ ɷ ɶ ɶ ɼ (=IIYV=C   67)/225   1')/225 :,1'2:6&+('8/(  :,1'2:7<3( :' +7 6,//+7 127(6  &$6(0(17       7*  '%/&$6(0(17        &$6(0(17        &$6(0(17        $:1,1*       7*  $:1,1*       7*  ),;('        ),;('        ),;('        ),;('        &$6(0(17        &$6(0(17        $:1,1*        $:1,1*        ),;('        ),;('        ),;('        $:1,1*       7* 2%6&85('  &$6(0(17        ),;('        &$6(0(17        &$6(0(17       7*  &$6(0(17       7*  &$6(0(17       '2256&+('8/(  '2257<3( :' +7 127(6  3$1(/*$5$*(      6,1*/()/86+      6,1*/()/86+      6,1*/()/86+      */$66     7*  6,1*/()/86+      6,1*/()/86+      6,1*/()/86+      6/,',1*3$1(/      6,1*/()/86+      6,1*/()/86+      6/,',1*3$1(/      )2/',1*     7*  6,1*/()/86+      6/,',1*3$1(/     7*  6,1*/()/86+      6,1*/()/86+      6,1*/()/86+      6,1*/()/86+      6,1*/()/86+      6,1*/()/86+      '%/)/86+      6,1*/()/86+      32&.(7'225      32&.(7'225      '28%/()5(1&+     $%%5(9,$7,216)25:,1'2:6 '2256 $: $:1,1* &/67 &/26(7 &6 &$6(0(17 '$ '28%/($&7,1*'225 '%/ '28%/( )' )5(1&+'225 +)5' +$/)5281' 2%6& 2%6&85(' 6& 62/,'&25( 6+ 6,1*/(+81* 6/ 6/,'(5 7* 7(03(5('*/$66 753/ 75,3/(   %$6(0(17)/225 67))  6753  $9(5$*((;,67,1**5$'(  1'))  1'53  55  3/3/                                               67))  6753  $9(5$*((;,67,1**5$'(  1'))  1'53  55                                   ' ( *5 ( ( (1 &5 2 $&+0 (1 7 3 /$1 ( 3/ ].dCIʒ ɺɺɶʒ.hCd0C*dICYʒʍʑɹɻɼʍ Y0ʍɿɷɶɶɼ ɿɶɿʒɻɼɿʒɹɽɹɽ B0=˫Y0ʣ]0*CʒIB Y0.0wC*d]C*ʍ0 ɷɸ ʘ ɷ ɽ ʘ ɸ ɶ ɸ ɷ  ɺ ʌ ɶ ɶ ʌ ɺ ɹ  V B ʣɹʒɶ C* I  Y  ] 0   C   ʞt    C d ʟ  ]  C d    C 0 d   d  Y  ʞ  V C ʌ  ɻ ɽ ɾ ɷ ʣ ɶ ɶ ɷ ʣ ɶ ɹ ɻ ʟ Y    0  ʍ       ɿ ɷ ɶ ɶ ɼ =td0IC]   1257+(/(9$7,21 )5217   :(67(/(9$7,21 6,'( 0$7(5,$//(*(1' &21&5(7(522)7,/( %25$/522),1* 6$;21<6/$7( (%21< 9(57,&$/6,',1* -$0(6+$5',( 9(57,&$/),%(5&(0(176,',1* )$50+286(:+,7( )$6&,$ ;3$,17(' '811(':$5'6-(7'( *$5$*('225 &+,*$5$*('225 29(5/$<&$55,$*( &('$5 '2256 :,1'2:6 -(/':(1256,0,/$5 :22'&/$'6'/ %/$&. %5,&.9(1((5 0(5,',$1%5,&. .(/2:1$ *5(<*5287 (;7(5,25:$///,*+7 6$92<+286((//,-$< /,*+77$// 287'225:$//6&21&( :22'3$1(/ 5(&(663$1(/6 '811(':$5'66:,66&2))((         67))  6753  $9(5$*((;,67,1**5$'(  1'))  1'53  55  3/3/ 67))  6753  $9(5$*((;,67,1**5$'(  1'))  1'53  55                                 '(*5(( (1&52$&+0(173/$1( 3/ ].dCIʒ ɺɺɶʒ.hCd0C*dICYʒʍʑɹɻɼʍ Y0ʍɿɷɶɶɼ ɿɶɿʒɻɼɿʒɹɽɹɽ B0=˫Y0ʣ]0*CʒIB Y0.0wC*d]C*ʍ0 ɷɸ ʘ ɷ ɽ ʘ ɸ ɶ ɸ ɷ  ɺ ʌ ɶ ɶ ʌ ɺ ɻ  V B ʣɹʒɷ C* I  Y  ] 0   C   ʞt    C d ʟ  ]  C d    C 0 d   d  Y  ʞ  V C ʌ  ɻ ɽ ɾ ɷ ʣ ɶ ɶ ɷ ʣ ɶ ɹ ɻ ʟ Y    0  ʍ       ɿ ɷ ɶ ɶ ɼ =td0IC]   6287+(/(9$7,21 5($5   ($67(/(9$7,21 6,'( 0$7(5,$//(*(1' &21&5(7(522)7,/( %25$/522),1* 6$;21<6/$7( (%21< 9(57,&$/6,',1* -$0(6+$5',( 9(57,&$/),%(5&(0(176,',1* )$50+286(:+,7( )$6&,$ ;3$,17(' '811(':$5'6-(7'( *$5$*('225 &+,*$5$*('225 29(5/$<&$55,$*( &('$5 '2256 :,1'2:6 -(/':(1256,0,/$5 :22'&/$'6'/ %/$&. %5,&.9(1((5 0(5,',$1%5,&. .(/2:1$ *5(<*5287 (;7(5,25:$///,*+7 6$92<+286((//,-$< /,*+77$// 287'225:$//6&21&( :22'3$1(/ 5(&(663$1(/6 '811(':$5'66:,66&2))((         7: +                                                                (;7(5,25),16,+3(5(/(9$7,216  /$<(56*5$'( ' 3$3(5  :,'( 02,6723 )/$6+,1*3$3(5  )5$0,1*3(56753/$1  ;)855,1*  ,168/$7,213(57  ,17(5,25),1,6+  :,1'2:3(5:,1'2:6&+('8/(         5(&(66 C     (;7(5,25),16,+3(5(/(9$7,216  /$<(56*5$'( ' 3$3(5  :,'( 02,6723 )/$6+,1*3$3(5  )5$0,1*3(56753/$1   ;)855,1*  ,168/$7,213(57  ,17(5,25),1,6+  :,1'2:3(5:,1'2:6&+('8/(    5 ( & ( 6 6 C  (;7(5,25),16,+ 3(5(/(9$7,216  /$<(56*5$'( '  3$3(5  :,'( 02,6723  )/$6+,1*3$3(5  )5$0,1*3(5675 3/$1  ;)855,1*  ,168/$7,213(57  ,17(5,25),1,6+  :,1'2:3(5 :,1'2:6&+('8/( 6/23(         5(&(66 ].dCIʒ ɺɺɶʒ.hCd0C*dICYʒʍʑɹɻɼʍ Y0ʍɿɷɶɶɼ ɿɶɿʒɻɼɿʒɹɽɹɽ B0=˫Y0ʣ]0*CʒIB Y0.0wC*d]C*ʍ0 ɷɸ ʘ ɷ ɽ ʘ ɸ ɶ ɸ ɷ  ɺ ʌ ɶ ɶ ʌ ɺ ɻ  V B ʣɺʒɶ C* I  Y  ] 0   C   ʞt    C d ʟ  ]  C d    C 0 d   d  Y  ʞ  V C ʌ  ɻ ɽ ɾ ɷ ʣ ɶ ɶ ɷ ʣ ɶ ɹ ɻ ʟ Y    0  ʍ       ɿ ɷ ɶ ɶ ɼ YII(V=CʘdyVʒ d0=   522)3/$1 176:,1'2:+($' 176:,1'2:-$0% 176:,1'2:6,//$75(&(66:,1'2:6 SANTA AN I T A T E R 2-STORY RESIDENCE LOT COVERAGE SUMMARY: TOTAL LANDSCAPED AREA: 4,075 SF. 898 SF. OF WST USE ON LAWN (22%) 337 SF. OF MEDIUM WATER USE PLANTS (8.3%) 2,681 SF. OF LOW WATER USE PLANTS (65.8%) 159 SF. OF NONE WATER USE IN GRAVEL (3.9%) HARDSCAPE IN FRONT SETBACK: 617 SF. (28.1%) < 40% (TOTAL FRONT SETBACK AREA: 2,198.5 SF.) RE F . UP DATE REVISIONS SCALE DATE PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY SHEET NO. OF 1 SHEETS TW O T R E E S DE S I G N , I N C .            ( P D L O   SI N G L E F A M I L Y R E S I D E N C E 26 E S A N T A A N I T A T E R R A C E AR C A D I A , C A . 9 1 0 0 6 12-05-2021 CP LA N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T U R A L D E S I G N S E R V I C E S CA L I F O R N I A R L A # 5 8 4 0 18 3 2 S A N D I E G O S T . W E S T C O V I N A , C A . 9 1 7 9 0 AS SHOWN P2113 CHIAC H E N G P E RNG NO. 5 8 4 0 ÁÁ ÁÁ LA N D S C A P E PL A N T I N G P L A N L-1 Attachment No.  Attachment No.  3XEOLF&RPPHQWVIURP )HEUXDU\1RWLFH Yang Liu and Jun Dai 28 E Santa Anita Ter Arcadia, CA 91006 2/16/2022 Edwin Arreola City of Arcadia Planning Services 240 W Huntington Drive P.O Box 60021 Re: SFADR No. 21-13 rev 1 Dear Mr. Arreola, We are providing written comments regarding the revised building project of a two-story single family in 26 E Santa Anita Terrace (SFADR No. 21-13 sent for commenting between 02/08-02/16). As the residents neighboring this new project, we are writing to express our strong objections to this pending project, specifically the associated modification of the street. Here are specific objections: 1. The proposed street frontage is not acceptable. The proposed modification will cut the existing cul-de-sac in half. This is incompliant with city regulation. In fact, your 2009 review explicitly concluded that a similar proposal does not meet the requirement and rejected. The current proposal still violates the minimum 44 ft required for cul-de-sac at the end of the Santa Anita Terrace. As such, the proposed modification poses great safety risks, as there is insufficient turnaround space for cars, coming into the cul-de-sac, in and out of this new lot or from our driveway. Moreover, the proposed modification will significantly narrow our parking space, causing additional safety issues with city and public service vehicles. Therefore, we are strongly against this modification of the cul-de-sac. 2. The proposed modification to the street will destroy the landscape of the cul-de-sac, generating an oddly shaped terminus. Alteration of the cul-de-sac landscape has the potential to devalue the properties on this street. In particular, the proposed drive way encroaches upon our parking space and driveway by cutting away max 20 ft in front of our garage. The crowded appearance will deface the landscape of our house, impacting the re- sale value of our property. 3. The proposed modification also violates city regulation of a minimum 32 feet setback of our house front from the curb. Our house’s setback is currently closer to the curb than this rule but is legally grandfathered. Removing the driveway by several feet will narrow current setback further, and thus prevent any future house improvement that we would like to take to increase our house value. This again implies devaluation of our house. 4. As commented in the last period, the creation of this new lot, with the ‘26 E Santa Anita Ter’ address, was not corrected in public record until 2019, nearly one year after we bought our house. This lack of public disclosure affected the purchase price of our house. We request compensation, but more importantly, we object this change in the concern of re- sale of our house. 5. As commented in October 2021, we are still concerned about the risk to public safety. During the construction, the project will open our neighborhood to traffic from Santa Anita Avenue because the east lot is empty. This will provide easy access to criminals and increase the risk for burglary and property theft. We require the project to demonstrate a plan that will remove such risk, and we also require written agreement from the project to pay for any loss or damage to residents’ properties owing to burglary or property theft caused by the construction. 6. As commented last time, the revised description did not address our concerns about our access to main roads nor noise mitigation. One of us needs to go to work place and the other of us is working from home. The new project poses two threats to our employment. First, the construction trucks for the new project will likely block our access to the streets. This impedes our access to Camino Real and Santa Anita Avenue, meaning it will affect us getting to work on time. Second, the severe noise from the construction will affect our ability to concentrate on work or tele-conferencing with co-workers. We require that the project present a detailed plan to manage the traffic caused by construction as well as how the project plans on mitigating the noise. We require written agreement that the project will offer compensation for any work hours lost due to noise or traffic within the neighborhood. In summary, the proposed change to Santa Anita Terrace is not acceptable to us. We require the city gives this careful evaluation and looks for an alternative solution. Sincerely yours, Yang Liu and Jun Dai Concerned residents From:Li Chen To:Edwin Arreola Subject:SFADR No. 21-13 rev 1 Date:Wednesday, February 16, 2022 3:17:43 PM <https://s3.amazonaws.com/staticmediafiles/media/sights/iron-icon-color.png> IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from this sender lic91776 @ gmail.com CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Dear Mr. Arreola, We are providing written comments regarding the revised building project of a two-story single family in 26 E Santa Anita Terrace (SFADR No. 21-13). As the residents in the cul-de-sac of this new project, we are writing to express our strong objections to this pending project, specifically the associated modification of the street. 1. The proposed modification will destroy the landscape of the cul-de-sac, generating an odd shaped terminus. Alteration of the cul-de-sac landscape has the potential to devalue the properties on this street. 2. The proposed project of a two-story house also affects the privacy of our house. Plus, there is no two-story house around the proposed project. Building a two-story house is not accepted. In summary, we are very concerned about this pending project and the proposed access to Santa Anita Terrace is not acceptable. We require the city to give this careful evaluation and look for an alternative solution. Sincerely yours, Li Chen and Chi Liang 1523 Louise Ave Arcadia, 91006 From:Lesley Ma To:Edwin Arreola; young yang Cc:bbzhang.ucd@gmail.com; Jun; anniexure@gmail.com Subject:Re: Questions about your revised SFADR No. 21-13 Date:Wednesday, February 16, 2022 3:55:17 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Dear Planning Service, After reviewing the plan, I think opening a road at the end of the cul-de-sac is awkward and it destroys the harmonic and the master plan of the whole neighborhood. The original lot was facing Santa Anita Ave. The entrance of this property is not supposed to be on this end, it should be from the Santa Anita Ave where original of the lot faces. The approval of splitting the lot into two lots and one of the entrances is on the cul-de-sac was a mistake. It destroys this nice and peace community. The parking of the property (28 E Santa Anita Ter) will be too small and it will cause safety issue. The decision is in favor of the seller, it doesn’t consider the loss of the current affected property (28 E Santa Anita Ter) and the whole neighborhood. If the opening is still facing Santa Anita Ave and design the lot as an easement, I would have no opposition to it. In addition, the construction will cause safety issues if the wall is open. All our neighbors have big concern on it. In conclusion, we strongly against this project! Lesley Ma Residence of 37 E Santa Anita Ter From:Wei Cong To:Edwin Arreola; congwei Subject:Re: Comments on proposed construction project on 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace (SFADR No. 21-13) Date:Wednesday, February 16, 2022 4:41:30 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Dear Planning Services staff, I am a property owner on E. Santa Anita Terrace. After reviewing the revised proposal of building a 3169 square feet, two-story residence on 26 E Santa Anita Terrace, under SFADR No. 21-13, I am listing my comments below: First of all, I still strongly object to the proposed plan of building a two-story residence. Not only is there no existence of a two-story residence on the entire street, but also the proposed two-story residence will violate the harmony of our community. I expressed such concern in my email sent in October 2021, but the revised plan makes no mention of it. Secondly and most importantly, I completely object to the plan of adding this 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace residence on our street. The design of the driveway and the proposed opening on the existing street is unsightly. The house’s driveway, placed near another, poses potential driving hazards. The proposed plan is not only a violation of the current homeowners’ rights, but also will destroy the original beautiful plan of the neighborhood. We, as homeowners, did not purchase our homes with the knowledge of such a potential major change on our street. Last but not least, due to the unique location of the residence, safety concerns will arise if construction starts. Passing such a lot plan in 2009 was not a careful decision by the Arcadia City, and there might be violations of regulations. I request the City to release more information on this lot change decision, including the hearing and panel discussion details, to the public. In conclusion, we strongly object to the proposed plan. Thank you for your consideration. Wei Cong 27 E Santa Anita Terrace, Arcadia From:Bingbing Zhang To:Edwin Arreola; bbzhang.ucd Subject:Re: Comments on project on 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace (SFADR No. 21-13) Date:Wednesday, February 16, 2022 4:42:50 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Dear Mr. Arreola, I am a property owner on E. Santa Anita Terrace in Arcadia. After reviewing the revised building project of building a 3169 square feet, two-story residence in 26 E Santa Anita Terrace (SFADR No. 21-13, referred herein as “This Revised Plan”), I would like to express my strong objections to the proposed plan. I feel my previous concern has not been fully addressed with the revised plan. In my comment from October 25, 2021, I strongly objected to the proposed plan of building a two-story residence. There is no presence of a two-story house on the street, so building one will destroy the harmony of the community. However, This Revised Plan is still proposing to build a two-story house. In the same comment, I had stated: l “I completely object to the plan of adding this 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace residence on our street. The design of the driveway and the proposed opening on the existing street is unsightly, and prone to potential accidents with the two houses’ driveways next to each other.” This Revised Plan stated that there will be a private driveway leading to the proposed property. I feel this modification is a similar approach to the previous proposal and does not address my safety concern at all. I also recently learned from a document, (dated July 14, 2009 and provided by the City Planning Office), that the Revised Plan is actually incompliant with the city requirement of a 44 ft minimum at the end of Santa Anita Terrace. l The proposed plan of adding a house at the end of the cul-de-sac will also break the current balance of the street and is a violation of the current homeowners’ right. We, as homeowners, did not purchase our homes knowing that a major change on the street would take place which may negatively affect our home values. This concern is being shared strongly in our neighborhood. To emphasize my concern, This Revised Plan will destroy the landscape of the cul-de-sac, generating an odd and absurd shaped terminus. I question whether there is any cul-de-sac in Arcadia being built this way. As a result, the proposed alteration of the cul-de-sac landscape has the potential to devalue the properties on this street. Last but not least, in my October 25, 2021 comment, I stated that we, as residents on the street, have safety concerns if the construction starts due to the unique location of this residence. The Revised Plan did not address this concern. Again, to summarize, we strongly object to the proposed plan! Thank you for your consideration. Bingbing Zhang 33 E Santa Anita Terrace, Arcadia Attachment No.  Attachment No.  3XEOLF&RPPHQWVIURPWKH 2FWREHU1RWLFH Yang Liu and Jun Dai 28 E Santa Anita Ter Arcadia, CA 91006 Edwin Arreola City of Arcadia Planning Services 240 W Huntington Drive P.O Box 60021 Dear Mr. Arreola, We are providing written comments regarding the new building project of a two-story single family in 26 E Santa Anita Terrace. As the residents neighboring this new project, we are writing to express our strong objections to this pending project and the associated modification of the street and cul-de-sac of E Santa Anita Terrace. We have listed 7 objections below: 1. The creation of ’26 E Santa Anita Ter’ was not disclosed until after we purchased our property at 28 E Santa Anita Terrace when we closed the escrow around October 5th of 2018. This lack of disclosure affected the purchase price of our house. And if the project is approved, it may affect the future sales price of our property. 2. Construction of a two-story house at 26 E Santa Anita Ter allows its residents to easily view our home and backyard, essentially robbing us of our right to privacy. Therefore, we object to any plans of construction of a two-story house at 26 E Santa Anita Ter unless the project provides a detailed plan regarding how our privacy will be respected. 3. E Santa Anita Terrace is a quaint and pretty street. The new project will extend the cul-de- sac into an odd shape. It destroys the image of the street and may decrease the property values in the long run. We request the city and the project to provide a better modification plan of the street. 4. To accommodate the new location at ’26 E Santa Anita Ter’, the street will cut away up to 5 feet of our current driveway. This will significantly diminish our currently available parking space, risking accidents with cars from the new location (26 E Santa Anita Ter) and the city service vehicles (garbage trucks, utility vehicles, etc). If the project was approved, we need written agreement from the project and the city that any damage to our vehicles incurred during and after construction will be paid in full by the project and the city, respectively. 5. The city restricts any construction within a certain distance from the curb. Since the city will shorten the distance between our house and the street, if this project is approved, we need written proof from the city that the city will lift the construction restriction on our house. 6. The new project will be a public safety risk to our neighborhood. For the past three years we’ve resided at 28 E. Santa Anita, the cul-de-sac protected our neighborhood from burglary and property theft by isolating it from any main streets. During the construction, the project will open our neighborhood to traffic from Santa Anita Ave because the other lot is empty. This will provide easy access to criminals and increase the risk for burglary and property theft. We require the project to demonstrate a plan that will remove such risk, and we also require written agreement from the project to pay for any loss or damage to residents’ properties owing to burglary or property theft caused by the construction. 7. Due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, we have hybrid models of employment that require us to alternate between being at work in person and working from home. The new project poses two threats to our employment. First, the construction trucks for the new project may block our access to the streets. This impedes our access to Camino Real and Santa Anita, meaning it will affect us getting to work on time. Second, construction results in severe noise that will affect our ability to concentrate on work on days we work remotely. We require that the project present a detailed plan to manage the traffic caused by construction as well as how the project plans on mitigating the noise. We require written agreement that the project will offer compensation for any work hours lost due to noise or traffic within the neighborhood. As residents of Arcadia for 8 years and hopefully many more years to come, we wish our concerns are heard and addressed before the city council considers the approval of the project. However, if these concerns are not all addressed, we will be pursuing further legal action. Sincerely yours, Yang Liu and Jun Dai From:Lesley Ma To:Edwin Arreola Subject:Comments on project location 26 E Santa Anita Terrace Date:Thursday, October 21, 2021 10:12:07 AM <https://s3.amazonaws.com/staticmediafiles/media/sights/iron-icon-color.png> IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from this sender hongma99@hotmail.com CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Dear Planning Service, After reviewing the plan, I don’t feel this lot is suitable for a 3,386 two-story residence. The shape of the proposed cul-de-sac is awkward and it destroys the harmonic and the master plan of the whole neighborhood. A normal cul- de-sac is round sharp ending but this one is half 90-degree-corner (with a tall wall) and half round shape which looks extremely abnormal. Putting a two-story house in such a rare shape boundary at the end of the street makes the street looked like some kind of un-planned community. I believe in Fengshui. Destroying the half round shape of the cul-de-sac will cause bad luck to this nice and peace community. The entrance of this property is not supposed to be on this end, it should be from the Santa Anita Ave where original of the lot faces. In addition, the construction will cause safety issues if the wall is open. All our neighbors have big concern on it. In conclusion, we strongly against this project! Lesley Ma Residence of 37 E Santa Anita Ter From:W Cong To:Edwin Arreola Cc:Wei Cong Subject:Re: Comments on proposed construction project on 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace (APN: 5781-001-035) Date:Sunday, October 24, 2021 8:51:21 PM <https://s3.amazonaws.com/staticmediafiles/media/sights/iron-icon-color.png> IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from this sender congwei@gmail.com CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Dear Planning Services staff, I am a property owner on E. Santa Anita Terrace. After reviewing the proposed plan of building a 3386 square feet, two-story residence on a 8283 square feet lot, I am listing my comments below: 1. First of all, I strongly object to the proposed plan of building a two-story residence. Not only is there no existence of a two-story residence on the entire street, but also the proposed two-story residence will violate the harmony of our community. 2. Secondly and most importantly, I completely object to the plan of adding this 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace residence on our street. The design of the driveway and the proposed opening on the existing street is unsightly, and it poses potential driving hazards with the two houses’ drive ways next to each other. The proposed plan will also destroy the original beautiful plan of the neighborhood and is a violation of the current homeowners’ right. We, as homeowners, did not purchase our homes knowing that a major change on the street would take place. 3. Last but not least, there will be safety concerns if the construction starts due to the unique location of this residence. In a summary, we strongly object to the proposed plan! Thank you for your consideration. Wei Cong 27 E Santa Anita Terrace, Arcadia From:Bingbing Zhang To:Edwin Arreola Subject:Re: Comments on proposed construction project on 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace Date:Monday, October 25, 2021 2:33:03 PM <https://s3.amazonaws.com/staticmediafiles/media/sights/iron-icon-color.png> IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from this sender bbzhang.ucd@gmail.com CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Dear Planning Services Office, I am a property owner on E. Santa Anita Terrace. After reviewing the proposed plan of building a 3386 square feet, two-story residence on a 8283 square feet lot, I am obligated to express my strong objections on the proposed plan. First of all, I strongly object to the proposed plan of building a two-story residence. There is not a single two-story residence on the entire street, so building one will destroy the harmony of the community. Secondly, I completely object to the plan of adding this 26 E. Santa Anita Terrace residence on our street. The design of the driveway and the proposed opening on the existing street is unsightly, and prone to potential accidents with the two houses’ driveways next to each other. The proposed plan of adding a house at the end of the cul de sac will also break the current balance of the street and is a violation of the current homeowners’ right. We, as homeowners, did not purchase our homes knowing that a major change on the street would take place which may negatively affect our home values. Last but not least, we, as residents on the street, have safety concerns if the construction starts due to the unique location of this residence. Again, to summarize, we strongly object to the proposed plan! Thank you for your consideration. Bingbing Zhang 33 E Santa Anita Terrace, Arcadia From:Marianne Martin To:Edwin Arreola Subject:Re: 26 E Santa Anita Ter Date:Monday, October 25, 2021 3:18:17 PM <https://s3.amazonaws.com/staticmediafiles/media/sights/iron-icon.png> IRONSCALES finds this email suspicious! We know MARIANNE MARTIN by name, but the email was sent from an unfamiliar address mmartin@ausd.net | Know this sender? <https://members.ironscales.com/sights/info/MTk1NTQ2MTQ2:1mf8IN:o5qmQnKjJ6i23rscKXao5GuTmmU/> CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Dear Edwin Arreola, As residents whose property borders the project at 26 E Santa Anita Terrace, we have serious concerns about this proposal. Having half a cul-de-sac dead end into our fence is awkward, unattractive, and unnecessary. We will not give or sell our land, so the cul-de-sac, as designed, will never be completed. There is absolutely no need for a partial cul-de- sac there; it has no function. There are other options for access to that lot. Creating this half cul-de-sac is unfair to the homeowners at 28 E Santa Anita Terrace.. For many years, they and the previous owners have been allowed to use some of the land in question as part of their driveway access. Under the concept of adverse possession, they in fact have a claim to some of this land because of many years of allowed use. The current residents of 28 E Santa Anita Terrace have notified you of the loss of five feet of access to their own driveway, which could create a dangerous and unmanageable situation for them. In talking with other residents on E Santa Anita Terrace, it is clear that they are also unhappy about this project because adding this unsightly and incomplete cul-de-sac ruins the aesthetic of the neighborhood and lowers their property values. It is important to consider the wishes of all residents when making this decision. Multiple residents are unhappy with this plan. You will have to decide if you want to accommodate the wishes of one builder or listen to the wishes of many residents in this neighborhood. We are proud long-time residents of Arcadia -- 42 years at this house and 47 years in total. We have always valued and respected Arcadia's desire to create and maintain attractive neighborhoods and feel this half cul-de-sac is a big mistake. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration on this matter. Sincerely, Marianne and William Martin 1504 S Santa Anita Ave Arcadia, CA 91006 (626)446-9070 Attachment No.  Attachment No.  3DUFHO0DS1R