HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-23-23 Agenda PacketCITY OF ARCADIA
Arcadia Planning Commission
Regular Meeting Agenda
Tuesday, May 23, 2023, 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.
(626) 574-5423 48
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.
626-574-5455
72
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
Brad Thompson, Chair
Vincent Tsoi, Vice Chair
Angela Hui, Commissioner
Domenico Tallerico, Commissioner
Marilynne Wilander, Commissioner
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS
PUBLIC COMMENTS (5 minute time limit per person)
Each speaker is limited to five (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 at 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.
11
1. Resolution No. 2127 – Approving Multiple Family Architectural Design Review No. MFADR
22-01, Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 23-01 (84114), and Planning Commission
Administrative Modification No. PC AM 23-01 for a four-unit, Contemporary-style, multi-family
residential condominium development with a front yard setback modification of 23’-1” in lieu
of the required 25’-0” at 1025 La Cadena Avenue
CEQA: Exempt
Recommendation: Adopt
Applicant: Philip Chan
There is a ten day appeal period. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Monday, June 5,
2023.
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.
2. Minutes of the April 25, 2023, 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 13, 2023, at 7:00 p.m.
22
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.
33
(Arcadia Public Library) (www.ArcadiaCA.gov)
(Planning@ArcadiaCA.gov)
(City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia,
California)
“” (5)
(5)
“”
“”
403
44
DATE:May 23, 2023
TO: Honorable Chairman and Planning Commission
FROM: Fiona Graham, Planning Services Manager
Prepared By: Edwin Arreola, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 2127 - APPROVING A FOUR-UNIT, CONTEMPORARY-
STYLE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT,
A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBDIVISION, WITH A FRONT YARD
SETBACK MODIFICATION AT 1025 LA CADENA AVENUE
CEQA: Exempt
Recommendation: Adopt
SUMMARY
The Applicant, Philip Chan of PDS Studio Inc., on behalf of the property owner, Sindy Siu, is
requesting approval of Multiple Family Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 22-01,
Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 23-01 (84114), and Planning Commission Administrative
Modification No. PC AM 23-01 for a four-unit, three-story, Contemporary-style multi-family
residential condominium development with a front yard setback modification of 23’-1” in lieu
of the required 25’-0” at 1025 La Cadena Avenue (“Project”). The proposed development and
subdivision are consistent with the City’s General Plan, Development Code, and Subdivision
Map Act. As an infill development Project with minor change to the land use limitations, the
proposed development qualifies for a Categorical Exemption under the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt
Resolution No. 2127 (refer to Attachment No. 1), approving MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01
(84114), and PC AM 23-01 subject to the conditions listed in this staff report.
BACKGROUND
The subject property is a 7,490 square foot interior lot, located on the west side of La
Cadena Avenue, between Arcadia Avenue and Fairview Avenue. The property is zoned
R-3, High Density Multiple Family Residential with a General Plan Land Use Designation
of High Density Residential. The property is surrounded by other R-3 zoned properties to
the north, south, east, and west. The Project site is currently improved with a single-story,
residential duplex structure. The first unit was built in 1951 and the second unit was added
55
Resolution No. 2127 - MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114) and PC AM 23-01
1025 La Cadena Avenue
May 23, 2023 – Page 2 of 16
in 1957 – refer to Attachment No. 2 for an Aerial photo with Zoning Information and Photos
of the Subject Property and Figure 1.
A Certificate of Demolition (COD) for the subject property was approved on May 5, 2022.
Based on the evaluation by an Architectural Historian, the property does not meet any of
the minimum requirements for designation as a historical resource under federal, state and
local criteria. The residence is not a good example of any particular architectural style and
is not representative of or associated with any important historical events or people. The
structures have not yet been demolished due to the City’s replacement policy for residential
projects, which requires approval of a new project prior to demolition of the structures on
site.
PROPOSAL
The applicant is requesting approval to demolish the existing structures on the property to
construct a new, four-unit, three-story, multi-family residential condominium development
with at-grade garage parking – refer to Attachment No. 3 for the Tentative Parcel Map and
Attachment No. 4 for the proposed Architectural Plans. The Project requires an
Administrative Modification to allow a 23’-1” front yard setback in lieu of the 25’-0” required.
Any modification to the front yard setback for a new multi-family development is subject to
Planning Commission review.
The Project is designed in a Contemporary architectural style that incorporates design
materials such as neutral toned stucco, dark accent trims, exposed fascia boards, wood
siding, stone veneer, and gable vents. The design utilizes these materials to provide
Figure 1 – Existing Residence
66
Resolution No. 2127 - MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114) and PC AM 23-01
1025 La Cadena Avenue
May 23, 2023 – Page 3 of 16
variations in the massing of each of the buildings which help visually break them up
horizontally and vertically (see Figure 2).
Each unit will contain three (3) bedrooms, although they will have slightly different sizes,
comprising 1,210 to 1,284 square feet in floor area. Each unit will have a 20’ x 20’ two-car
garage that will be accessed from the shared driveway on the north side of the property.
The lot dimensions and applicable development standards limit the configuration options
of the proposed development. Therefore, the Applicant is asking for a reduction in the front
yard setback to 23’-1” in lieu of the required 25’-0” in order to provide each garage with the
25’-0” backout space required for access. The site will also comply with guest parking
space requirements, providing two (2) parking spaces, and a bike rack for 2 spaces will be
located on the north side of the property.
The proposed development will have an overall building height of 33’-0”, which is the
maximum height limit for a building with a pitched roof. Aside from the front yard setback,
the development complies with all of the other minimum setback requirements.
Additionally, the Project will provide the minimum required open space through shared
common open space area at the rear of the property. Most of the existing landscaping on
site will be removed and new landscaping will be installed in compliance with the Water
Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO) and Multi-Family Design Guidelines. None of the
existing trees on site are protected under the City’s Protected Tree Ordinance. However,
Figure 2 – 1025 La Cadena Ave. Rendering
77
Resolution No. 2127 - MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114) and PC AM 23-01
1025 La Cadena Avenue
May 23, 2023 – Page 4 of 16
the Applicant will preserve some of the existing trees and incorporate them into the new
landscape design.
ANALYSIS
The R-3 Zone requires a minimum density of one dwelling unit per 2,200 square feet of lot
area, and a maximum density of one unit per 1,450 square feet of lot area. This calculates
to a minimum density of three (3) units and a maximum of five (5) units for the subject site;
therefore, the proposed four-unit development complies with the minimum density
requirements of the underlying R-3 Zone. Aside from the front yard setback, the Project
complies with the development standards of the R-3 Zone, including, but not limited to
setbacks, height, and open space. Also, the Project complies with the minimum parking
requirements for each of the units, guest parking, and bicycles spaces. Therefore, the
proposed development complies with the parking requirements of the R-3 Zone.
The request for a reduced front yard setback is required because of the 100’-0” depth of
the property. In the configuration provided, from the front of the lot to the back of the lot,
the multi-family development requires a 25’-0” front yard setback, a 20’-0” interior garage
space for the building at the front (plus additional space for the garage walls), a 25’-0” back
out space, a 20’-0” interior garage space for the building at the rear (plus additional space
for the garage walls), and a 10’-0” rear yard setback. Taking into account these minimum
required dimensions, there is an overall shortage of 1’-11” across the depth of the property
Figure 3 – Site Plan
N
88
Resolution No. 2127 - MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114) and PC AM 23-01
1025 La Cadena Avenue
May 23, 2023 – Page 5 of 16
to accommodate the structures in the configuration proposed. The Applicant explored
arranging the units in various other configurations, as shown in Figure 4 below, however
each of these layouts was infeasible in terms of meeting the required setbacks, providing
the minimum back out space, or avoiding front facing garages.
Figure 4 – Layout Study showing alternative site layouts considered by the Applicant
Providing the minimum required three units instead of four would allow the development to
be in compliance with all development standards. However, compliant site layouts would
result in a poorer design outcome. One possible compliant layout would require the units
to be configured in a row-style along the depth of the lot, making the building appear narrow
from the street front and exposing the driveway and backup space area. Another possible
three-unit configuration would require at least one street facing garage and a shared
driveway, a design that is inconsistent with the neighborhood. Allowing the Project to
encroach 1'-11" into the front yard setback accommodates a better site layout and creates
a more desirable curb appeal, as no garages would be visible to the street and the front
building would have a larger presence along the street frontage.
In order to keep the minimum required garage size and back out space to prevent any
access issues, and to keep the minimum required open space area located in the rear yard,
the Applicant is requesting for a reduction in the front yard setback of 1’-11”. Additionally,
there are two multi-family developments located two properties to the north that are within
15’-0” of La Cadena Avenue. According to the setback diagram for the properties on La
Cadena Avenue between Fairview Avenue and Arcadia Avenue (see Figure 5), the street-
side yard setback for the corner property at 1001 La Cadena Avenue is 14’-6” and the
99
Resolution No. 2127 - MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114) and PC AM 23-01
1025 La Cadena Avenue
May 23, 2023 – Page 6 of 16
street-side yard setback for the corner property at 1000 La Cadena Avenue is 10’-0”.
Despite being the street-side setbacks of these properties, the length of these buildings
along La Cadena Avenue make it so that a 23’-1” front yard setback for the subject property
would not be a drastic or noticeable modification along this block. The property to the north
of the subject property has a front yard setback of 26’-6” and the property to the south has
a front yard setback of 25’-0”. This block of La Cadena only contains four (4) properties on
the west side, including the subject property, and the average setback of the three (3) other
properties is approximately 20’-2”. The proposed front yard setback would be reasonable
and compatible with the streetscape.
Concurrent with the subdivision application, the Planning Commission must approve,
conditionally approve, or deny the architectural design of the Project. The Project is
designed in a Contemporary architectural style – refer to Attachment No. 4 and Figure 6.
Although there is a collection of Traditional-style buildings within the vicinity, there is not a
dominant architectural style that stands out within this neighborhood. The proposed
contemporary design would be compatible with the existing traditional multi-family
developments in the neighborhood, as it incorporates elements that fit in with the older,
Figure 5 – Setback Diagram
FAIRVIEW AVE.
1010
Resolution No. 2127 - MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114) and PC AM 23-01
1025 La Cadena Avenue
May 23, 2023 – Page 7 of 16
traditional style buildings on this street, such as the use of neutral toned stucco, exposed
fascia boards, wood siding, and traditional looking gable vents. The exterior walls of the
building are proposed to be finished with an off-white, sand stucco, stone veneer, and lap
siding which will provide a variety of neutral-tone colors. The roof will consist of composite
slate, off-gray colored roofing tiles and white fascia boards along the eaves. Additional
architectural features include black window trim, wrought iron balcony railings, gable vents,
and metal awnings. The Applicant has also designed two other developments within
proximity to this site. One is under construction and located across the street at 1022 La
Cadena Avenue and the other development is located on the block south of this Project at
1111-1117 La Cadena Avenue and is similar in design to the Project. The Project will also
provide adequate landscaping throughout the property to enhance the design.
The massing and scale of this Project would be compatible with the other multi-family
developments found in the surrounding multi-family neighborhood. The height of the new
development will not be out of character with the existing developments on La Cadena
Avenue and other multi-family developments with similar lot sizes in the vicinity. There are
other existing three-story developments and two-story developments with semi-
subterranean parking within close proximity to the subject site. Landscaping will be
provided along the property lines where feasible and window placement on the
development has been considered for privacy of the neighboring properties. Therefore, the
proposed development and subdivision of condominiums would be consistent with the
City’s General Plan, Multiple-Family Residential Design Guidelines, the Development
Figure 6 - Elevations
1111
Resolution No. 2127 - MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114) and PC AM 23-01
1025 La Cadena Avenue
May 23, 2023 – Page 8 of 16
Code, the State Subdivision Map Act, and would not violate any requirements of the
California Regional Water Quality Control Board.
FINDINGS
Tentative Parcel Map
The proposal to subdivide the airspace for four (4) residential condominium units requires
a subdivision through the Tentative Parcel Map process – see Attachment No. 3 for
Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 23-01 (84114). The proposed subdivision complies with the
subdivision regulations of the Arcadia Municipal Code and the Subdivision Map Act and
would not violate any requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board.
The following findings are required for approval of a Tentative Parcel Map:
A. The proposed map, subdivision design, and improvements are consistent
with the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, and the Subdivisions
Division of the Development Code.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The proposed tentative parcel map for a four-unit
multi-family residential condominium development and subdivision of the airspace
has been reviewed for compliance with the City’s General Plan, Development Code,
and the State’s Subdivision Map Act. It has been determined that the proposed
subdivision is consistent with the General Plan High Density Residential Land Use
designation and the R-3, High Density Multiple Family Residential zoning
designation. These designations are intended to accommodate high density,
attached or detached residential units such as condominiums, within the appropriate
neighborhoods. The proposed tentative parcel map complies with the Subdivision
Map Act regulations and there is no specific plan applicable to this Project. The site
is physically suitable for this type of development, and the approval of the
architectural design for the building is compatible with the scale and character of the
existing neighborhood. The Project would not adversely affect the comprehensive
General Plan and is consistent with the following General Plan goals and policies:
Land Use and Community Design Element
Policy LU-1.1: Promote new infill and redevelopment projects that are
consistent with the City’s land use and compatible with surrounding existing
uses.
Policy LU-4.1: Require that new multi-family residential development be
visually and functionally integrated and consistent in scale, mass, and
character with structures in the surrounding neighborhood.
Policy LU-4.2: Encourage residential development that enhances the visual
character, quality, and uniqueness of the City’s neighborhoods and districts.
B. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of
development.
1212
Resolution No. 2127 - MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114) and PC AM 23-01
1025 La Cadena Avenue
May 23, 2023 – Page 9 of 16
Facts in Support of the Finding: The R-3 Zone requires a minimum density of one
dwelling unit per 2,200 square feet of lot area, and a maximum density of one unit
per 1,450 square feet of lot area. Based on the lot area of 7,490 square feet, a
minimum of three (3) units and a maximum of five (5) units can be developed at this
site. Therefore, the proposed four-unit development complies with the density
requirements of the underlying zone. The Project also complies with all other
applicable zoning requirements including but not limited to parking, height, open
space, and setbacks, with the exception of the front yard setback which is the
subject of an Administrative Modification. The proposed front yard setback is 23’-1”,
whereas 25’-0” is required, which is consistent with two other multi-family
developments in the vicinity and allows for an appropriate improvement of the lot.
The site is physically suitable for the proposed four-unit multi-family residential
development.
C. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely
to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The proposed tentative parcel map for four (4)
multi-family residential units is a subdivision of an infill site within an urbanized area
and does not serve as a habitat for endangered or rare species. The Project would
not cause substantial environmental damage or impact wildlife.
D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause
serious public health or safety problems.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The proposed subdivision is to subdivide the
airspace of four (4) units for condominium purposes. The construction would be in
compliance with all applicable Building and Fire Codes to ensure public health and
safety. The proposed density would be below the maximum allowed by the R-3 Zone
and the City’s existing infrastructure would adequately serve the new development.
Therefore, the Project would not cause any public health or safety problems.
E. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of,
property within the proposed subdivision (This finding shall apply only to
easements of record or to easements established by judgement of a court of
competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body
to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access
through or use of property within the proposed subdivision).
Facts in Support of the Finding: The proposed design of the subdivision does not
conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of,
property within the proposed subdivision. There are no known easements on the
subject property.
1313
Resolution No. 2127 - MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114) and PC AM 23-01
1025 La Cadena Avenue
May 23, 2023 – Page 10 of 16
F. The discharge of sewage from the proposed subdivision into the community
sewer system would not result in violation of existing requirements specified
by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The Arcadia Public Works Services Department
determined that the City’s existing infrastructure would adequately serve the new
development, and the requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control
Board would be satisfied.
G. The proposed design and site improvements of the subdivision conform to
the regulations of the City’s Development Code and the regulations of any
public agency having jurisdiction by law.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The proposed design of the multi-family
development is in conformance with the City’s Development Code, as all
development standards are being met, and all of the improvements required for the
site and each unit would comply with the regulations in the City’s Development
Code.
Planning Commission Administrative Modification
According to Arcadia Development Code Section 9107.05.050, it states that an
Administrative Modification may be approved if at least one of the following findings can be
made:
1. Secure an appropriate improvement of a lot;
2. Prevent an unreasonable hardship; or
3. Promote uniformity of development
The proposed modification will promote uniformity of development by allowing the multi-
family development to have a front yard setback of 23’-1” in lieu of the required front yard
setback of 25’-0”. The proposed front yard setback would not be less than the street side
setbacks for two other existing properties located two properties to north from the subject
property along La Cadena Avenue which are within 10’-0” and 14’-6” of the streetside
property line. The proposed modification will also secure an appropriate improvement of
the lot. The 100’-0” depth of the lot limits the configuration of the development. The lot
requires a 25’-0” front yard setback, a 20’-0” interior garage space for the building at the
front (plus additional space for the garage walls), a 25’-0” back out space, a 20’-0” interior
garage space for the building at the rear (plus additional space for the garage walls), and
a 10’-0” rear yard setback. The combined length of these setbacks, walls and garages
exceeds the depth of the lot by 1’-11”. In order to keep the minimum required garage size
and back out space to prevent any access issues and to keep the minimum required open
space area located at the rear yard, a reduction in the front yard setback is appropriate.
The proposed front yard setback encroachment of 1’-11”, would not result in any negative
impacts to the neighboring properties and would be compatible with the current streetscape
on La Cadena Avenue.
1414
Resolution No. 2127 - MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114) and PC AM 23-01
1025 La Cadena Avenue
May 23, 2023 – Page 11 of 16
Architectural Design Review
The proposed development is located within the High Density Residential (R-3) Zone,
which is intended to provide a variety of medium to high density residential development.
The proposed design of the four-unit condominium Project is compatible with existing multi-
family developments in the surrounding neighborhood in terms of design, massing, and
scale. The proposed Contemporary-style architectural design would be compatible with
other existing multi-family developments along La Cadena Avenue and within the
neighborhood as it incorporates traditional-looking elements to its design that are
compatible with many of the older, traditional looking buildings. The architectural elements
incorporated in this design, such as neutral toned stucco, lap siding, and stone veneer, are
consistent with developments in the vicinity that have similar features. Additionally, the
massing and scale of the new development will not be out of character with developments
in the vicinity as many of the existing multi-family developments consist of three-story
developments and two-story developments with semi-subterranean parking. The proposed
buildings have articulation on all facades, providing visual interest and reducing massing.
The proposed design is therefore consistent with the City’s Multifamily Residential Design
Guidelines.
All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building
safety, health code compliance, emergency equipment, environmental regulation
compliance, and parking and site design shall be complied with by the property
owner/applicant to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Deputy
Development Services Director, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director, or their
respective designees.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
It has been determined that the Project site is less than five (5) acres; the Project site has
no value as a habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; the Project would not
have any significant effects upon the environment, and the site can be adequately served
by all the required utilities and public services. Therefore, the Project is exempt under Class
32 (In-Fill Development Projects) pursuant to Section 15332 of the State California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Additionally, the Project is also exempt
under Class 5 as a minor alteration to the land use limitations of CEQA under Section
15305 of the CEQA Guidelines. Refer to Attachment No. 5 for the Preliminary Exemption
Assessment.
PUBLIC NOTICE/COMMENTS
A public hearing notice for this item was published in the Arcadia Weekly and mailed to the
property owners located within 300 feet of the subject property on May 11, 2023. Staff
received one public comment from a neighbor in opposition to the Project, as they do not
agree with the requested change to provide a front yard setback of 23’-1” (refer to
Attachment No. 6).
1515
Resolution No. 2127 - MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114) and PC AM 23-01
1025 La Cadena Avenue
May 23, 2023 – Page 12 of 16
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Multiple Family Architectural
Design Review No. MFADR 22-01, Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 23-01 (84114), and
Planning Commission Administrative Modification No. PC AM 23-01, subject to the
following conditions, find that the Project is Categorically Exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and adopt Resolution No. 2127, subject to the following
conditions of approval:
1. The project shall be developed and maintained by the Applicant/Property Owner in a
manner that is consistent with the plans submitted and conditionally approved for
MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114), and PC AM 23-01, subject to the approval of
the Deputy Development Services Director, or designee.
2. Any required mechanical equipment, such as backflow devices, visible from the
public right-of-way shall be screened from public view. Screening may include
landscaping, solid walls or other methods deemed appropriate for the development.
The placement and height of said screening shall be subject to review and approval
by the Deputy Development Services Director, or designee.
3. All windows shall be recessed a minimum of two (2) inches from the building wall. A
construction detail indicating the 2-inch recess shall be included on the plans
submitted to the Building Division for plan check.
4. The project shall comply with the latest adopted edition of the following codes as
applicable:
a. California Building Code
b. California Electrical Code
c. California Mechanical Code
d. California Plumbing Code
e. California Energy Code
f. California Fire Code
g. California Green Building Standards Code
h. California Existing Building Code
i. Arcadia Municipal Code
5. The project shall comply with Chapter 35A Multiple Family Construction Standards
as amended in the Arcadia Municipal Code Section 8130.20.
6. All utility conductors, cables, conduits and wiring supplying electrical, cable and
telephone service to a multiple family building shall be installed underground except
risers which are adjacent to and attached to a building.
7. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the
City prior to issuance of a building permit. The grading plans shall indicate all on-
and off-site improvements and shall indicate complete drainage paths of all drainage
water run-off.
1616
Resolution No. 2127 - MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114) and PC AM 23-01
1025 La Cadena Avenue
May 23, 2023 – Page 13 of 16
8. A demolition permit shall be obtained from Building Services prior to the removal
and/or demolition of the structures on site.
9. No utilities or fixtures shall be located on the exterior walls of the building that face
the main driveway.
10. Prior to approval of the Final Parcel Map, the Applicant/Property Owner shall:
a) Remove and replace the existing curb, gutter, and sidewalk from property line
to property line.
b) Construct a sidewalk from property line to property line. The sidewalk must
be fully ADA around all obstacles.
c) Construct a new drive approach per the City Standard plan with the top of the
wing at a minimum of one foot away from the property line.
11. Prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy, the Applicant/Property Owner shall
repair any damages caused by the development to the asphalt street frontages from
property line to property line including but not limited to trench cuts and construction
traffic, per the direction of the City Engineer.
12. The proposed development requires a Low Impact Development (LID) plan which
shall comply with the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works 2014 LID
standard Manual and show the selected measures on the grading plan. These
selected measures include but are not limited to using infiltration trenches, bio-
retention planter boxes, roof drains connected to a landscaped area, pervious
concrete/paver, etc.
13. All structures shall be provided with an automatic fire sprinkler system per the City of
Arcadia Fire Department’s Multi-Family Dwelling Sprinkler Standard.
14. There is an eight inch (8”) cast iron water main with 67 psi static pressure that the
development shall connect to on La Cadena Avenue for domestic water and/or fire
services. The Applicant/Property Owner shall provide calculations to the Public
Works Services Department to determine the total combined maximum domestic
and fire demand and verify the water service size required prior to issuance of a
Building Permit.
15. The Applicant/Property Owner shall install a common master water meter for the
residential multi-family development. The water meter for each unit can be used to
supply both domestic water services and fire services. The Applicant/Property
Owner shall separate the fire service from domestic water service with an approved
back flow device.
16. All condominiums shall require a separate water service and meter for common
area landscape irrigation.
1717
Resolution No. 2127 - MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114) and PC AM 23-01
1025 La Cadena Avenue
May 23, 2023 – Page 14 of 16
17. A Water Meter Permit Application shall be submitted to the Public Works Services
Department prior to issuance of a building permit for the new development.
18. New water service installations shall be by the Applicant/Property Owner.
Installation shall be according to the specifications of the Public Works Services
Department, Engineering Section. Abandonment of existing water services, if
necessary, shall be carried out by the Applicant/Property, according to Public Works
Services Department.
19. An 8” Vitrified Clay Pipe (VCP) sewer main is available on La Cadena Avenue which
is owned by the City of Arcadia to provide sanitary sewer service for the project. The
Applicant/Property Owner shall utilize the existing sewer lateral, if possible.
20. If any drainage fixture elevation is lower than the elevation of the next upstream
manhole cover (463.82’), an approved type of backwater valve is required to be
installed on the lateral within the City’s right-of-way.
21. 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.
22. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Applicant must defend, indemnify, and
hold the 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 MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01
(84114), PC AM 23-01 (“Project”) 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 notify the Applicant of the claim, action, or proceedings and will
1818
Resolution No. 2127 - MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114) and PC AM 23-01
1025 La Cadena Avenue
May 23, 2023 – Page 15 of 16
cooperate in the defense of the matter. 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, the
Applicant shall provide to the 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. The 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. The City shall only refund to the 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. The parties hereby agree to cooperate in defending such action.
The City will not voluntarily assist in any 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, at the request of the Applicant or not.
23. Approval of MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114), and PC AM 23-01 shall not be in
effect unless the Property Owner and Applicant have executed and filed the
Acceptance Form with the City on or before 30 calendar days after the Planning
Commission has adopted the Resolution. The executed Acceptance Form submitted
to the Development Services Department is to indicate awareness and acceptance
of the conditions of approval.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Approval
If the Planning Commission intends to approve this Project, the Commission should move
to approve Multiple Family Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 22-01, Tentative
Parcel Map No. TPM 23-01 (84114), and Planning Commission Administrative Modification
No. PC AM 23-01, state that the proposal satisfies the requisite findings, and adopt the
attached Resolution No. 2127 that incorporates the requisite environmental and
subdivision findings, and the conditions of approval as presented in this staff report, or as
modified by the Commission.
Denial
If the Planning Commission is to deny this Project, the Commission should state the
specific findings that the proposal does not satisfy based on the evidence presented with
specific reasons for denial, and move to deny Multiple Family Architectural Design Review
No. MFADR 22-01, Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 23-01 (84114), and Planning
Commission Administrative Modification No. PC AM 23-01 and direct staff to prepare a
resolution for adoption at the next meeting that incorporates the Commission’s decision
and specific findings.
1919
Resolution No. 2127 - MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114) and PC AM 23-01
1025 La Cadena Avenue
May 23, 2023 – Page 16 of 16
If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments
regarding this matter prior to the May 23, 2023, Planning Commission Meeting, please
contact Associate Planner, Edwin Arreola at (626) 821-4334, or earreola@ArcadiaCA.gov.
Approved:
Lisa L. Flores
Deputy Development Services Director
Attachment No. 1: Resolution No. 2127
Attachment No. 2: Aerial Photo with Zoning Information and Photos of the Subject
Property and Vicinity
Attachment No. 3: Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 23-01 (84114)
Attachment No. 4: Architectural Plans
Attachment No. 5: Preliminary Exemption Assessment
Attachment No. 6: Public Comment
2020
Attachment No. 1
Attachment No. 1
Resolution No. 2
2121
24347.00004\41320453.1
RESOLUTION NO. 2127
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MULTIPLE FAMILY
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. MFADR 22-01, TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP NO. TPM 23-01 (84114), AND PLANNING COMMISSION
ADMINISTRATIVE MODIFICATION NO. PC AM 23-01, WITH A
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) FOR A FOUR-UNIT,
CONTEMPORARY-STYLE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT, A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
SUBDIVISION, WITH A FRONT YARD SETBACK MODIFICATION AT
1025 LA CADENA AVENUE
WHEREAS, on January 19, 2022, February 23, 2023, and April 10, 2023,
applications for Multiple Family Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 22-01, Tentative
Parcel Map No. TPM 23-01 (84114), and Planning Commission Administrative
Modification No. PC AM 23-01 were filed by Philip Chan of PDS Studio Inc. on behalf of
the property owner, Sindy Siu, for a four-unit, three-story, Contemporary-style multi-family
residential condominium development with a front yard setback modification of 23’-1” in
lieu of the required 25’-0” at 1025 La Cadena Avenue (collectively, “Project”); and
WHEREAS, on May 10, 2023, Planning Services completed an environmental
assessment for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(“CEQA”), and recommends that the Planning Commission determine the Project is
exempt under CEQA per Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines because the Project is
considered an in-fill development project and per Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines
as a minor alteration to the land use limitations; and
WHEREAS, on May 23, 2023, a duly-noticed public hearing was held before the
Planning Commission on said Project, at which time all interested persons were given full
opportunity to be heard and to present evidence.
2222
24347.00004\41320453.1
2
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The factual data submitted by the Community Development Division
in the staff report dated May 23, 2023, are true and correct.
SECTION 2. This Commission finds, based upon the entire record:
A. The proposed map, subdivision design, and improvements are consistent with
the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, and the Subdivisions Division of the
Development Code:
FACT: The proposed tentative parcel map for a four-unit multi-family residential
condominium development and subdivision of the airspace has been reviewed for
compliance with the City’s General Plan, Development Code, and the State’s Subdivision
Map Act. It has been determined that the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
General Plan High Density Residential Land Use designation and the R-3, High Density
Multiple Family Residential zoning designation. These designations are intended to
accommodate high density, attached or detached residential units such as
condominiums, within the appropriate neighborhoods. The proposed tentative parcel map
complies with the Subdivision Map Act regulations and there is no specific plan applicable
to this Project. The site is physically suitable for this type of development, and the
approval of the architectural design for the building is compatible with the scale and
character of the existing neighborhood. The Project would not adversely affect the
comprehensive General Plan and is consistent with the following General Plan goals and
policies:
Land Use and Community Design Element
2323
24347.00004\41320453.1
3
Policy LU-1.1: Promote new infill and redevelopment projects that are
consistent with the City’s land use and compatible with surrounding existing
uses.
Policy LU-4.1: Require that new multi-family residential development be
visually and functionally integrated and consistent in scale, mass, and
character with structures in the surrounding neighborhood.
Policy LU-4.2: Encourage residential development that enhances the visual
character, quality, and uniqueness of the City’s neighborhoods and districts.
B. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development:
FACT: The R-3 Zone requires a minimum density of one dwelling unit per 2,200
square feet of lot area, and a maximum density of one unit per 1,450 square feet of lot
area. Based on the lot area of 7,490 square feet, a minimum of three (3) units and a
maximum of five (5) units can be developed at this site. Therefore, the proposed four-unit
development complies with the density requirements of the underlying zone. The Project
also complies with all other applicable zoning requirements including but not limited to
parking, height, open space, and setbacks, with the exception of the front yard setback
which is the subject of an Administrative Modification. The proposed front yard setback is
23’-1”, whereas 25’-0” is required, which is consistent with two other multi-family
developments in the vicinity and allows for an appropriate improvement of the lot. The
site is physically suitable for the proposed four-unit multi-family residential development.
C. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat:
2424
24347.00004\41320453.1
4
FACT: The proposed tentative parcel map for four (4) multi-family residential
units is a subdivision of an infill site within an urbanized area and does not serve as a
habitat for endangered or rare species. The Project would not cause substantial
environmental damage or impact wildlife.
D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause
serious public health or safety problems:
FACT: The proposed subdivision is to subdivide the airspace of four (4) units for
condominium purposes. The construction would be in compliance with all applicable
Building and Fire Codes to ensure public health and safety. The proposed density would
be below the maximum allowed by the R-3 Zone and the City’s existing infrastructure
would adequately serve the new development. Therefore, the Project would not cause
any public health or safety problems.
E. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of, property within
the proposed subdivision (This finding shall apply only to easements of record or to
easements established by judgement of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority
is hereby granted to the review authority to determine that the public at large has acquired
easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision):
FACT: The proposed design of the subdivision does not conflict with easements
acquired by the public at large for access through or use of, property within the proposed
subdivision. There are no known easements on the subject property.
2525
24347.00004\41320453.1
5
F. The discharge of sewage from the proposed subdivision into the community
sewer system will not result in violation of existing requirements specified by the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board:
FACT: The Arcadia Public Works Services Department determined that the City’s
existing infrastructure would adequately serve the new development, and the
requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board would be satisfied.
G. The proposed design and site improvements of the subdivision conform to the
regulations of the City’s Development Code and the regulations of any public agency
having jurisdiction by law:
FACT: The proposed design of the multi-family development is in conformance
with the City’s Development Code, as all development standards are being met, and all
of the improvements required for the site and each unit would comply with the regulations
in the City’s Development Code.
H. Administrative Modification
The Project meets at least one of the following:
Secure an appropriate improvement of a lot;
Prevent an unreasonable hardship; or
Promote uniformity of development
FACT: The proposed modification will promote uniformity of development by
allowing the multi-family development to have a front yard setback of 23’-1” in lieu of the
required front yard setback of 25’-0”. The proposed front yard setback would not be less
than the street side setbacks for two other existing properties located two properties to
north from the subject property along La Cadena Avenue which are within 10’-0” and 14’-
2626
24347.00004\41320453.1
6
6” of the streetside property line. The proposed modification will also secure an
appropriate improvement of the lot. The 100’-0” depth of the lot limits the configuration of
the development. The lot requires a 25’-0” front yard setback, a 20’-0” interior garage
space for the building at the front (plus additional space for the garage walls), a 25’-0”
back out space, a 20’-0” interior garage space for the building at the rear (plus additional
space for the garage walls), and a 10’-0” rear yard setback. The combined length of these
setbacks, walls and garages exceeds the depth of the lot by 1’-11”. In order to keep the
minimum required garage size and back out space to prevent any access issues and to
keep the minimum required open space area located at the rear yard, a reduction in the
front yard setback is appropriate. The proposed front yard setback encroachment of 1’-
11”, would not result in any negative impacts to the neighboring properties and would be
compatible with the current streetscape on La Cadena Avenue.
I. The proposal is consistent with the City’s Multifamily Residential Design
Guidelines:
FACT: The proposed development is located within the High Density Residential
(R-3) Zone, which is intended to provide a variety of medium to high density residential
development. The proposed design of the four-unit condominium project is compatible
with existing multi-family developments in the surrounding neighborhood in terms of
design, massing, and scale. The proposed Contemporary-style architectural design
would be compatible with other existing multi-family developments along La Cadena
Avenue and within the neighborhood as it incorporates traditional-looking elements to its
design that are compatible with many of the older, traditional looking buildings. The
architectural elements incorporated in this design, such as neutral toned stucco, lap
2727
24347.00004\41320453.1
7
siding, and stone veneer, are consistent with developments in the vicinity that have similar
features. Additionally, the massing and scale of the new development will not be out of
character with developments in the vicinity as many of the existing multi-family
developments consist of three-story developments and two-story developments with
semi-subterranean parking. The proposed buildings have articulation on all facades,
providing visual interest and reducing massing. The proposed design is therefore
consistent with the City’s Multifamily Residential Design Guidelines.
SECTION 3. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (“CEQA”), this Project is subject to a Class 32 Categorical Exemption as an infill-
development project per Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines, and Class 5 Categorical
Exemption as a minor alteration to the land use limitations per Section 15305 of the CEQA
Guidelines.
SECTION 4. For the foregoing reasons the Planning Commission determines
that the Project is Categorically Exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act
(“CEQA”), Sections 15305 and 15332, and approves Multiple Family Architectural Design
Review No. MFADR 22-01, Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 23-01 (84114), and Planning
Commission Administrative Modification No. PC AM 23-01 for a four-unit multi-family
residential condominium development at 1025 La Cadena Avenue, subject to the
conditions of approval attached hereto.
SECTION 5. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
2828
24347.00004\41320453.1
8
Passed, approved and adopted this 23rd day of May, 2023.
Brad Thompson
Chair, Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Lisa L. Flores
Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Michael J. Maurer
City Attorney
2929
24347.00004\41320453.1
9
Page Intentionally Left Blank
3030
24347.00004\41320453.1
10
RESOLUTION NO. 2127
Conditions of Approval
1. The project shall be developed and maintained by the Applicant/Property Owner in
a manner that is consistent with the plans submitted and conditionally approved for
MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114), and PC AM 23-01, subject to the approval of
the Deputy Development Services Director, or designee.
2. Any required mechanical equipment, such as backflow devices, visible from the
public right-of-way shall be screened from public view. Screening may include
landscaping, solid walls or other methods deemed appropriate for the development.
The placement and height of said screening shall be subject to review and approval
by the Deputy Development Services Director, or designee.
3. All windows shall be recessed a minimum of two (2) inches from the building wall. A
construction detail indicating the 2-inch recess shall be included on the plans
submitted to the Building Division for plan check.
4. The project shall comply with the latest adopted edition of the following codes as
applicable:
a. California Building Code
b. California Electrical Code
c. California Mechanical Code
d. California Plumbing Code
e. California Energy Code
f. California Fire Code
g. California Green Building Standards Code
h. California Existing Building Code
i. Arcadia Municipal Code
5. The project shall comply with Chapter 35A Multiple Family Construction Standards
as amended in the Arcadia Municipal Code Section 8130.20.
6. All utility conductors, cables, conduits and wiring supplying electrical, cable and
telephone service to a multiple family building shall be installed underground except
risers which are adjacent to and attached to a building.
7. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the
City prior to issuance of a building permit. The grading plans shall indicate all on-
and off-site improvements and shall indicate complete drainage paths of all drainage
water run-off.
8. A demolition permit shall be obtained from Building Services prior to the removal
and/or demolition of the structures on site.
3131
24347.00004\41320453.1
11
9. No utilities or fixtures shall be located on the exterior walls of the building that face
the main driveway.
10. Prior to approval of the Final Parcel Map, the Applicant/Property Owner shall:
Remove and replace the existing curb, gutter, and sidewalk from property line
to property line.
Construct a sidewalk from property line to property line. The sidewalk must
be fully ADA around all obstacles.
Construct a new drive approach per the City Standard plan with the top of the
wing at a minimum of one foot away from the property line.
11. Prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy, the Applicant/Property Owner shall
repair any damages caused by the development to the asphalt street frontages from
property line to property line including but not limited to trench cuts and construction
traffic, per the direction of the City Engineer.
12. The proposed development requires a Low Impact Development (LID) plan which
shall comply with the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works 2014 LID
standard Manual and show the selected measures on the grading plan. These
selected measures include but are not limited to using infiltration trenches, bio-
retention planter boxes, roof drains connected to a landscaped area, pervious
concrete/paver, etc.
13. All structures shall be provided with an automatic fire sprinkler system per the City
of Arcadia Fire Department’s Multi-Family Dwelling Sprinkler Standard.
14. There is an eight inch (8”) cast iron water main with 67 psi static pressure that the
development shall connect to on La Cadena Avenue for domestic water and/or fire
services. The Applicant/Property Owner shall provide calculations to the Public
Works Services Department to determine the total combined maximum domestic
and fire demand and verify the water service size required prior to issuance of a
Building Permit.
15. The Applicant/Property Owner shall install a common master water meter for the
residential multi-family development. The water meter for each unit can be used to
supply both domestic water services and fire services. The Applicant/Property
Owner shall separate the fire service from domestic water service with an approved
back flow device.
16. All condominiums shall require a separate water service and meter for common area
landscape irrigation.
17. A Water Meter Permit Application shall be submitted to the Public Works Services
Department prior to issuance of a building permit for the new development.
3232
24347.00004\41320453.1
12
18. New water service installations shall be by the Applicant/Property Owner. Installation
shall be according to the specifications of the Public Works Services Department,
Engineering Section. Abandonment of existing water services, if necessary, shall be
carried out by the Applicant/Property, according to Public Works Services
Department.
19. An 8” Vitrified Clay Pipe (VCP) sewer main is available on La Cadena Avenue which
is owned by the City of Arcadia to provide sanitary sewer service for the project. The
Applicant/Property Owner shall utilize the existing sewer lateral, if possible.
20. If any drainage fixture elevation is lower than the elevation of the next upstream
manhole cover (463.82’), an approved type of backwater valve is required to be
installed on the lateral within the City’s right-of-way.
21. 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.
22. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Applicant must defend, indemnify, and
hold the 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 MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114), PC AM
23-01 (“Project”) 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 notify the Applicant of the claim, action, or proceedings and will
cooperate in the defense of the matter. The Applicant must indemnify, defend and
hold harmless the Indemnitees, and each of them, with respect to all liability, costs
3333
24347.00004\41320453.1
13
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, the Applicant shall provide to the 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. The 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. The City shall only refund to the
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. The parties hereby agree to cooperate in defending
such action. The City will not voluntarily assist in any 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, at the request of the
Applicant or not.
23. Approval of MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114), and PC AM 23-01 shall not be in
effect unless the Property Owner and Applicant have executed and filed the
Acceptance Form with the City on or before 30 calendar days after the Planning
Commission has adopted the Resolution. The executed Acceptance Form submitted
to the Development Services Department is to indicate awareness and acceptance
of the conditions of approval.
----
3434
Attachment No. 2
Attachment No. 2
Aerial Photo Zoning Information
Photos of the Subject Property
3535
Overlays
Selected parcel highlighted
Parcel location within City of Arcadia
N/A
Property Owner(s):
Lot Area (sq ft):
Year Built:
Main Structure / Unit (sq. ft.):
R-3
Number of Units:
HDR
Property Characteristics
1951
939
2
Property Owner
Site Address:1025 LA CADENA AVE
Parcel Number: 5778-005-008
N/A
Zoning:
General Plan:
N/A
Downtown Overlay:
Downtown Parking Overlay:
Architectural Design Overlay:N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Residential Flex Overlay:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Special Height Overlay:
N/A
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 17-May-2023
Page 1 of 1 3636
3737
3838
3939
Attachment No.
Attachment No.
4040
414141
Attachment No.
Attachment No.
Architectural Plans
4242
4343
4444
4545
4646
4747
4848
4949
505050
515151
5252
Attachment No.
Attachment No.
5353
Preliminary Exemption Assessment FORM “A”
PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT
1.Name or description of project:MFADR 22-01, TPM 23-01 (84114), and PC AM 23-01 – A
tentative parcel map for a four-unit residential condominium
development and a modification for a front yard setback of 23’-
11” in lieu of the required 25’-0” front yard setback with a
Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental
Quality Act (“CEQA”)
2.Project Location – Identify street
address and cross streets or
attach a map showing project site
(preferably a USGS 15’ or 7 1/2’
topographical map identified by
quadrangle name):
1025 La Cadena Avenue (between Arcadia Avenue and
Fairview Avenue)
3.Entity or person undertaking
project:
A.
B.Other (Private)
(1)Name Philip Chan of PDS Studio Inc., on
behalf of Sindy Siu
(2)Address 711 S. 1
st Avenue
Arcadia, CA 91006
4.Staff Determination:
The Lead Agency’s Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in
accordance with the Lead Agency's "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA)" has concluded that this project does not require further environmental
assessment because:
a.The proposed action does not constitute a project under CEQA.
b.The project is a Ministerial Project.
c.The project is an Emergency Project.
d.The project constitutes a feasibility or planning study.
e.The project is categorically exempt.
Applicable Exemption Class: 15305 – Class 5 (Minor Alteration in Land Use
Limitations)
15332 – Class 32 (Infill Development)
f.The project is statutorily exempt.
Applicable Exemption:
g.The project is otherwise
exempt on the following basis:
h.The project involves another public agency which constitutes the Lead Agency.
Name of Lead Agency:
5454
Preliminary Exemption Assessment FORM “A”
Date: May 10, 2023 Staff: Edwin Arreola, Associate Planner
5555
Attachment No.
Attachment No.
5656
From:John Flores
To:Edwin Arreola
Subject:Comment on proposal for APN 5778-005-008
Date:Monday, May 15, 2023 10:14:31 AM
IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from
this sender johnf @ truenorthusc.com
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hello,
I wanted to comment on the proposed use for the project at 1025 La Cadena.
As a neighbor living at 530 Fairview Ave I appreciate the tree canopy and wide set
streets. Our setbacks are planned to assure future generations of more sunlight, a
larger tree canopy. It one of the reasons that Arcadia looks and feels different from
other mis managed cities. Reducing the setback reduces the quality of life for the
neighborhood.
I do not agree with a request to change the setback from 25’ to 23’ 1”. Please do not
approve. I cannot make it to the hearing so I submit my comment here.
Regards,
John Flores
626-429-3300
5757
ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
TUESDAY, April 25, 2023
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made
available for public inspection in the City’s Planning Services Office located at 240 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California,
during normal business hours.
CALL TO ORDER Chair Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Chair Thompson, Vice Chair Tsoi, Hui, Tallerico, and Wilander
ABSENT: None
It was moved by Commissioner Tallerico and seconded by Commissioner Wilander to excuse
Commissioner Hui from the meeting.
Without objection, the motion was approved.
Commissioner Hui arrived at 7:10 p.m., therefore the minutes will reflect that she was present and it is
not necessary to excuse her.
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS
Deputy Development Services Director, Lisa Flores, informed the Commissioners that we did receive
one late correspondence and it pertains to Agenda Item No. 1, and a copy of it was sent to all the
Commissioners by email and a hard copy was provided on their dais tonight.
PUBLIC COMMENTS (5 minute time limit per person)
There were none.
PUBLIC HEARING
1.Resolution No. 2126 – Approving Multiple Family Architectural Review No. MFADR 22-08, Tentative
Tract Map No. TTM 23-01 (84023), and Diseased Tree Removal No. TRD 23-08 for an eight-unit,
Contemporary style, multi-family residential condominium development and the removal of a
diseased protected Camphor Tree at 826-830 Sunset Boulevard
CEQA: Exempt
Recommendation: Adopt
Applicant: Eric Tsang
MOTION - PUBLIC HEARING
Chair Thompson introduced the item and Assistant Planner Alison MacCarley presented the staff
report.
Commissioner Tallerico asked if it is the property owner’s responsibility to take care of their
protected tree and if there is a penalty if it is harmed.
Ms. MacCarley confirmed that was correct and that the property owner should consult a Certified
Arborist to oversee the trimming.
58
2 4/25/23
Ms. Flores also added that if a major limb or a protected tree was removed without a permit, then
there is restitution and penalty fees that the City can impose on a property owner for violating the
Code.
Commissioner Wilander asked who enforces this issue if it was in violation. Ms. Flores stated that
the City would involve Code Enforcement Division.
Commissioner Tallerico asked if the property owner responded to the public comment submitted
by the tenant. Ms. MacCarley said the comment was forwarded to the property owner, but due to
the late submittal she had not heard back from them.
Vice Chair Tsoi asked about the landscape plans and why there was only one tree planted in front
of the rear units versus two trees in front of the first two units.
Ms. MacCarley explained the space in the rear is actually common open space for all residents
to use and potted plants were chosen over planted trees in order to maximize the space.
Vice Chair Tsoi also asked about the eviction process and if the tenants were notified of their
rights.
Ms. MacCarley was unsure and felt it should be best answered by the Applicant.
Commissioner Wilander asked about the code violations mentioned by the tenant’s public
comment.
Ms. Flores said the trash issue was brought to the property owner’s attention and it was corrected
prior to the City having to issue a Notice of Violation.
City Attorney Michael Maurer noted that the other code violations will be enforced through the
code enforcement process and the City will respond to any code violations.
Commissioner Tallerico asked if all the violations have been corrected. Ms. Flores could only
confirm that the trash bin issues were resolved.
Chair Thompson brought up his concern regarding the 18’ driveway width adjacent to, and backup
space between two guest parking spaces at the rear of the development. Ms. MacCarley
confirmed the back-out clearance is actually 26’-0”. The on-site circulation and queuing were
reviewed by the City Engineer and those guest parking spaces were in compliance with the
Development Code.
Eric Tsang, the Applicant and Architect of the project spoke on behalf of the Property Owner. Mr.
Tsang addressed the guest parking space concerns and answered the Commissioners’
questions.
Chair Thompson asked if the parking stalls do not require a 25-foot back up space.
The Applicant said there is a 25 foot back up space and it is confusing because he did not show
the entire dimension and broke down the measurements. The backup space is actually 26 feet
and exceeds the minimum requirement.
59
3 4/25/23
The Commissioners had no further questions for the Applicant.
Chair Thompson asked if there were any other speakers in favor of the proposal.
Chair Thompson asked if there were any other speakers in opposition of the proposal.
Janice Nelson, a current tenant of the subject property, confirmed which violations have been
resolved and which violations have not been resolved.
There were no additional speakers for this item.
It was moved by Commissioner Wilander, seconded by Commissioner Tallerico, to close the
public hearing.
Without objection, the motion was approved.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Tallerico expressed his concerns about the email and how late it was submitted to
the City, and he would have liked to know the Property Owner’s response. Mr. Tallerico
commented on the parking spaces but ultimately was in favor of the project.
Commissioner Wilander said the project looked to be consistent with the General Plan, consistent
with the neighborhood style, and was in favor of the project.
Vice Chair Tsoi commented on the visitor parking spaces and how narrow they look but had no
concerns because the parking spaces comply with the Development Code.
Commissioner Hui had no concerns and was in favor of the project.
Chair Thompson had concerns about the guest parking stalls but was in favor of the project. Mr.
Thompson addressed the code violations but ultimately believed the violations were about the
existing use and not the proposed use.
Vice Chair Tsoi asked about the projected start of construction for the project and if the tenants
have some time to be properly notified before construction begins.
Ms. MacCarley stated that the Tract Map will need to be recorded prior to issuance of building
permits, so construction timing will be dependent on that.
Ms. Flores said since the Applicant is here on behalf of the property owner it would be his
obligation to share the Commission’s concern to the property owner, but the City will also ensure
that the overgrown weeds and other code violations are addressed.
Commissioner Tallerico asked if the vote for the project should be postponed given the
circumstances with the tenants, the code violations, and the parking stall concerns. Chair
Thompson said the code violations will be addressed and there is enough evidence the parking
stalls are in compliance; therefore, the Commission will move forward with a vote.
60
4 4/25/23
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Wilander, seconded by Commissioner Tallerico to approve
Multiple Family Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 22-08, Tentative Tract Map No.
TTM 23-01 (84023), and Protected Diseased Tree Removal Permit No. TRD 23-08 which satisfies
the requisite findings and move to adopt Resolution No. 2126 incorporating requisite
environmental and subdivision findings and the conditions of approval as presented in the Staff
Report.
ROLL CALL
AYES: Chair Thompson, Vice Chair Tsoi, Hui, Tallerico, and Wilander
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
There is a 10 day appeal period. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Monday, May 8, 2023.
2.Resolution No. 2123 – Approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 23-01 for the sale of beer, wine,
and liquor within the existing specialty market store (DBA: Hey Den Market) located at 1304 S.
Baldwin Avenue
CEQA: Exempt
Recommendation: Adopt
Applicant: Calvin Chan
MOTION - PUBLIC HEARING
Chair Thompson introduced the item and Assistant Planner Alison MacCarley presented the staff
report.
Commissioner Wilander asked for clarification about the term “off-site sales.”
Ms. MacCarley explained that “on-site sale” is for restaurants where alcohol will be consumed on-
site, whereas “off-site” sales is when alcohol that is consumed off-site and not on the premises.
Commissioner Hui asked about the type of alcohol that will be sold.
Ms. MacCarley said she was unsure of the brands that would be sold. The question was deferred
to the Applicant.
The Commissioners had no further questions for staff.
Chair Thompson opened the Public Hearing.
Stanley Szeto was present on behalf of the Applicant. Mr. Szeto said they had no objections to
the conditions; however, they would like to request to extend the closing hour from 6:00 p.m. to
8:00 p.m.
Vice Chair Tsoi asked what the store’s current closing hours are. Mr. Szeto said their current
closing hour is 6:00 p.m.
61
5 4/25/23
Ms. Flores explained there is no condition of approval that restricts their closing hours of operation
to 6:00 p.m. and they can close at 8:00 p.m.
Commissioner Wilander asked if the permit will restrict the cost of the liquor being sold, and it was
confirmed that the permit will not affect the cost of the liquor.
Commissioner Hui asked about the safety of the building and the safety of the expensive alcohol
bottles.
Mr. Szeto explained the very expensive liquor will be located behind the counter. Additionally, the
building is secured with cameras.
The Commissioners had no more questions for the Applicant.
Chair Thompson asked if there were any speakers in favor of the proposal.
Chair Thompson asked if there were any speakers in opposition of the proposal.
No one spoke in favor of or in opposition to the proposal.
It was moved by Commissioner Tallerico, seconded by Vice Chair Tsoi, to close the public
hearing.
Without objection, the motion was approved.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Tallerico said he was comfortable with the business selling expensive alcohol, it is
in their best interest to ensure their inventory is well secured and he was in favor of this proposal.
Commissioner Hui was in favor of the proposal.
Vice Chair Tsoi had no problems with the application and was in favor of the proposal.
Chair Thompson agreed with the Commissioners. Mr. Thompson said allowing this use will not
present any adverse impacts to the neighborhood and it is compatible with existing and future
land uses.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Tallerico, seconded by Vice Chair Tsoi to approve Resolution No.
2123 approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 23-01 for the sale of beer, wine, and liquor within
the existing specialty market store (DBA: Hey Den Market) located at 1304 S. Baldwin Avenue,
and that it meets all the findings and is exempt from CEQA.
ROLL CALL
AYES: Chair Thompson, Vice Chair Tsoi, Hui, Tallerico, and Wilander
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
62
6 4/25/23
There is a 10 day appeal period. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Monday, May 8, 2023.
3. Resolution No. 2125 – Approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 23-02 to allow a tutoring center
with up to 45 students at 22 E. Duarte Road
CEQA: Exempt
Recommendation: Adopt
Applicant: Eileen Wang
MOTION- PUBLIC HEARING
Chair Thompson introduced the item and Planning Services Manager Fiona Graham presented
the staff report.
Commissioner Wilander expressed some concerns about the Applicant operating the tutoring
center prior to obtaining permits to operate.
Ms. Graham explained the Applicant has been working with Planning Services to obtain the
proper permits to legalize the use.
Commissioner Hui asked how many high school students will be allowed on site. Ms. Graham
confirmed one of the conditions states up to 10 of the 45 students are permitted to be high school
students.
Chair Thompson asked if the business has been operating with a business license. Ms. Graham
responded they have not because it is contingent upon a CUP.
Chair Thompson asked if the windows inside the unit must be uncovered. Ms. Graham said that
condition no. 3 states the classroom must maintain a clear window or other opening that allows
for observation from outside the room.
Commissioner Tallerico asked about the legalities of moving a business to a new location. City
Attorney Michael Maurer clarified that it is still subject to a CUP and that the Commission must
make all the required findings that are site specific, and the merits of the application are what
need to be considered.
Commissioner Wilander asked if this case is different because the Applicant is a Council Member.
City Attorney Maurer said it is not because under Fair Political Practices Commission rules, a
Council Member is allowed to appear as a member of the public if the item is a matter of personal
interest.
Vice Chair Tsoi asked if a Conditional Use Permit can be assumed by a new business owner if
the Conditional Use Permit has not expired. Ms. Flores confirmed it can and the process would
be a change of ownership, but this is not the case here.
Vice Chair Tsoi asked for clarification of the orientation of the floorplan. Ms. Graham explained
that there is a reference on top of the floor plan indicating that the top is north towards Duarte
Road. She explained that there are two entrances, and most students are expected to enter from
the south entrance off the parking lot.
63
7 4/25/23
Commissioner Hui asked how the residents will know if a business has obtained the required
permits prior to opening.
Ms. Graham explained that all the records are public records, and the information can be
requested through a public records request.
City Attorney Maurer added that all neighbors within a certain radius of a property are notified
through a public hearing notice.
Vice Chair Tsoi asked about the classrooms and their accessibility. Ms. Graham said one of the
rooms on the north side of the unit will not be used as a classroom because of the lack of
accessibility and the other classrooms can accommodate the students.
There were no further questions for staff.
Chair Thompson opened the Public Hearing.
Eileen Wang introduced herself and her business. Ms. Wang clarified that her business has not
been open in the last year due to the pandemic, except for some students they have serviced
online. Since moving to this location in December 2022, she informed the Commission that all
she has been doing was remodeling the place. In January they opened to the public and have
been operating since then and they have been working with the school district for many years.
Commissioner Wilander asked about the exit and entrance points of the unit. Ms. Wang said there
is one door in the south end and one in the north end of the unit. Ms. Wang clarified the back door
remains open and the front door facing Duarte Road will remain closed from the outside, but it
will still serve as an exit from inside of the building.
Commissioner Hui asked for clarification about the language used in the staff report referring to
“occupying a vacant unit.” Ms. Graham explained the unit was previously occupied by a different
tutoring center but was vacant at the time she occupied it. Ms. Wang further explained why she
took over this unit for her business.
The Commissioners had no further questions for the Applicant.
Michelle Wu introduced herself as an Arcadia resident and spoke in favor of the proposal.
Jennifer Yu introduced herself as a business owner and realtor and she spoke in favor of the
proposal.
No one spoke in opposition to the proposal.
It was moved by Commissioner Wilander, seconded by Commissioner Tallerico, to close the
public hearing.
Without objection, the motion was approved.
64
8 4/25/23
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Hui expressed some concerns that the strip center might be redeveloped over time
and that she might have to move for a fifth time. Despite her concerns she was in favor of the
project.
Commissioner Tallerico thought the proposal was fine and was in favor of it.
Commissioner Wilander thought the proposal was consistant with the requisite findings and was
in favor of approving the Conditional Use Permit.
Vice Chair Tsoi said the space is adequate for the proposed use and has no problem with the
proposal.
Chair Thompson expressed some concern about the front door being locked during business
hours, but was satisfied knowing staff will ensure it will comply per Code. Mr. Thompson further
stated that the proposal was consistent with the General Plan and that the space is physically
adequate for the proposed use.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Hui, seconded by Commissioner Wilander to adopt Resolution
No. 2125 approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 23-02 to allow a tutoring center with up to
45 students at 22 E. Duarte Road. It is CEQA exempt and meets all the findings.
ROLL CALL
AYES: Chair Thompson, Vice Chair Tsoi, Hui, Tallerico, and Wilander
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
There is a 10 day appeal period. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Monday, May 8, 2023.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Minutes of the March 14, 2023, Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission
Recommendation: Approve
Commissioner Tallerico motioned to approve the minutes as amended and seconded by Chair
Thompson. Vice Chair Tsoi abstained since he was absent from that meeting.
ROLL CALL
AYES: Chair Thompson, Hui, Tallerico, and Wilander
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The Motion was approved.
65
9 4/25/23
MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL LIAISON
Dr. Cao reported on the Fire Department’s Pancake Breakfast on May 6 at Fire Station 107.
MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSONERS
Vice Chair Tsoi asked about SB 330 and whether the City is required to comply and if so, how will it be
enforced.
City Attorney Maurer said the City is required to comply with SB 330 but because Arcadia is a Charter
City and has some level of Home Rule Authority and there may be some ability to challenge some
requirements.
MATTERS FROM CITY ATTORNEY
City Attorney Maurer had nothing to report.
MATTERS FROM STAFF INCLUDING UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS
Ms. Flores presented the Commissioners with an invitation to the Volunteer Appreciation Dinner on May
11.
The meeting on May 9 was cancelled and there are a few items queued for the May 23 Planning
Commission Meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Commission adjourned the meeting at 8:44 p.m., to Tuesday, May 9, 2023, at 7:00 p.m. in
the City Council Chamber.
Brad Thompson
Chair, Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Lisa Flores
Secretary, Planning Commission
66