HomeMy WebLinkAbout1447
.
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 1447
A RESOLUTION OF TIlE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TIlE OTY
OF ARCADIA RECOMMENDING TO TIlE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF TIlE DRAFI' GENERAL PLAN FOR TIlE CITY OF
ARCADIA,
WHEREAS, public hearings were held before the Planning Commission on
August 14, August 28 and October 23 to consider the revised General Plan which
contains the following elements: Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Open Space and
Conservation, Parks and Recreation, Safety and Noise; and includes a section on the
City's Spheres of Influence,
WHEREAS, all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard
and to present evidence at said public hearings;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING
COMMISSION MAKES TIlE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDS
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the Planning Commission finds that the revised General Plan
provides a single comprehensive document which updates the contents of the
previously adopted elements and presents each element in a common format that
communicates to the community through written statements and illustrations, the
City's policies on future development within Arcadia.
Section 2. That the Planning Commission recommends approval of the
revised General Plan with the recommendations set forth in this Resolution.
Section 3, That the following should be added to the Land Use Element of
the General Plan:
Goals: (page IV-7 of the General Plan)
10. Maintain and preserve single-family large lot neighborhoods.
11. Preservation of mature trees within the community.
12. Review the possibility of rezoning some undeveloped or under
utilized commercial areas to residential.
Objectives: (page IV-7 of the General Plan)
10. To preserve, where feasible, mature native trees on both
commercial and residential properties,
11, Discourage the subdividing of predominantly large lot
neighborhoods into smaller lots incompatible with the surrounding area.
-1-
1447
.
.
.
12. To insure that new single-family subdivisions do not result in leap
frog development which leaves existing lots which are out of conformity
with the general development of the area and which are not capable of being
subdivided in the future.
13, To determine if there are undeveloped or underutilized
commercial properties which might be more appropriately developed with
residential uses,
Policies: (page IV-8 of the General Plan)
11. Encourage the preservation of large lot neighborhoods where
residents in the area wish to maintain the character and integrity of the
neighborhood.
12, Require that new streets be a minimum distance from existing
parallel streets.
13. Discourage developments which leave existing lots which cannot
be subdivided in the future.
Action Pro~rams: (pave IV-9 of the General Plan)
13. The Planning Commission and/or City Council should identify the
single-family neighborhoods which are developed predominantly with large
lots and look into the adoption of measures to preserve these areas,
14, Adoption of minimum standards between streets,
15, Continue to encourage the preservation of mature native trees as
part of the subdivision and development of both residential and commercial
properties.
16, The Planning Commission andll?r City Council should identify
commercial properties which are undeveloped or under developed which
they feel might be more appropriately zoned residential and, if appropriate,
adopt measures to change these areas.
Section 4. That the following changes be made to the Land Use Element of
the General Plan (page IV-8):
Action Programs:
1. Review existing subdivision regulations to determine if criteria can
be developed to mitigate the -Jisaal impaets ef prejeetG l'.iUeI\ prepe5e siftgle
siEieli e~d lie sae stf'eets prohibit single-sided cul-de-sacs except under specific
circumstances.
-2-
1447
.
.
.
4. Review the existing "H" high rise zoned commercial and residential
areas to determine the appropriateness of the zoning and whether to retain or
remove the high rise overlay.
Section 5. That the following "Action Program" be added to the Noise
Element of the General Plan (page X-6):
5, That the Noise Study completed in 1975 be updated to reflect the
current conditions within the City.
Section 6, That the General Plan shall be reviewed on an annual basis,
Section 7, The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution
reflect the Commission's action of October 23, 1990 and the following vote:
A YES: Commissioners Amato, Hedlund, Szany, Papay
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Clark
Section 8. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and
shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the Oty of Arcadia.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13 day of November, 1990 by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Amato, Clark, Hedlund, Szany, Papay
None
None
---
/ <?
ChaIrman, Planning C . sion
City of Arcadia
ATTEST:
/)xIkvmJJ;1r!J/dAL _
Secretary, Planning Commission
City of Arcadia
-3-
1447
.
.
.
October 23, 1990
TO: ARCADIA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DONNA L. BunER, ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: DRAFI' REVISED GENERAL PLAN
SUMMARY
On August 28,1990 the Planning Commission continued the public hearing on the
Draft General Plan to tonight's meeting to allow more time for both public and the
Planning Commission to review and comment on the Draft General Plan.
-,
The Planning Commission should:
1. Open the hearing and receive public input
2, Present their (Commission's) comments on the General Plan.
The Planning Commission's findings and comments will be forwarded to the City
Council in the form of a resolution. The public's comments will be summarized
and forwarded to the City Council for consideration.
INFORMA nON
The Draft General Plan contains the following elements: Land Use; Circulation;
Housing; Open Space and Conservation; Parks and Recreation; Safety and Noise. It
also includes a discussion on the City's Spheres of Influence,
In 1972 the City adopted the General Plan which contained a Land Use Element,
Circulation Element, Public Facilities Element, Public Utilities Element, Community
Design Element, Parks and Open Space and Housing Element. The Scenic Highway
Element was also adopted in 1972. The Open Space and Conservation Element was
adopted in 1973. In 1975 the Noise, Public Safety and Recreation Elements were
adopted.
There have been several amendments to the General Plan during the past 18 years;
however, there have been no major revisions to any of the elements with the
exception of the Housing Element which was amended in 1981.
Revised General Plan
October 23, 1990
Page 1
.
.
.
The General Plan is not a static document. As conditions in the community change
it is necessary to review the General Plan to determine if "objectives", "policies" and
"action programs" are still valid or whether the City may have to modify or revise
the General Plan. Revisions or changes to the General Plan may only be done
through the public hearing process.
PURPOSE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GENERAL PLAN
The essential characteristics of the general plan are that it is comprehensive. general
and long-range. "Comprehensive" means that the plan encompasses all
geographical parts of the community and all functional elements which bear on
physical development. "General" means that the plan summarizes policies and
proposals and does not set forth specific locations or detailed regulations. "Long
range" means that the plan sets forth policies and goals which clarify the City's idea
of the kind of community they want 20 to 30 years in the future.
The General Plan provides the basis for rational decision making regarding the city's
long-term physical development It is a policy document to guide future growth
and development in the City.
The Plan is the foundation upon which all land use decisions are to be based. Each
element of the general plan sets forth "objectives", "policies" and "action
programs", The "action programs" are not detailed r~ations and are not "law",
"Action programs" are implemented as a result of changes to the zoning
regulations, subdivision regulations, etc.
Relationship of the General_~lan to the Zoning Ordinance
There is often confusion between the zoning and subdivision regulations, and the
sections of the general plan which deal with the private use of land. The General
Plan, zoning and subdivision regulations all deal with the private uses of land. The
General Plan, however, sets forth only broad categories for ~eral areas of the City.
The City's Zoning ordinance, the official zoning map and the subdivision
regulations are s.pecific and detailed legislation which are intended to carry out the
ieneral provisions set forth in the General Plan.
REVISED GENERAL PLAN
The revised General Plan is a consolidation of the Land Use; CirculatiOn; Housing;
Open Space and Conservation; Parks and Recreation; Safety and Noise elements
into an internally consistent, single comprehensive document, The Plan includes
the State mandated elements as well as the optional Parks and Recreation element,
Revised General Plan
October 23, 1990
Page 2
.
.
.
N; noted in the General Plan Summary, the revision achieves the following:
1. It reduces the number of separate elements by incorporating common issues
into one document.
2. Incorporates issues addressed. by the previous elements of ''Public Facilities"
and "Community Design" into the "Land Use Element".
3, Maintains the "Parks and Recreation Element" as an optional element.
4, Provides a single document which is easier to understand by the community,
5. Incorporates the data and statistics pertaining to the elements into a separate
Technical Appendix.
6, Presents each element in a common format.
7. Updates the contents of the previously adopted elements and of the Housing
Element amended in 1981.
8, Focuses on the most important aspects of each element.
9. Achieves a general plan that in written statements and illustrations
communicates to the community the City Council policies on future
development within Arcadia.
DESCRIPTION OF ELEMENTS
The following is a description of each of the elements as set forth in the General
Plan Summary:
Land Use Element
The Land Use Element designates the general distribution and intensity of uses for
housing, business, industry, open space, education, public facilities, waste disposal
facilities, and other categories of public and private uses. The element explains
these land use categories and their location in text and map form, Among other
things, the element recommends:
. Review of the existing "H' zoned residential areas to determine the
appropriateness of the zoning designation.
. Review of the subdivision regulations as they pertain to single-sided cul-de-
sacs.
Revised. General Plan
October 23, 1990
Page 3
.
.
.
· Insuring that any future uses of the two gravel quarries located within the
City provide for the protection of water quality and minimize to the extent
possib~e the impact on adjacent land uses.
· Evaluation of the adequacy of the library facilities within the city to meet
future needs of the community.
· Continuation of the use of architectural design review for multipl~family,
commercial and industrial developments.
Circulation Element
The Circulation Element is correlated with the land Use Element and identifies the
general location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, trans-
portation routes, and terminals,
An issue which has been included in the revised circulation element is to cooperate
with the regional planning agency in studies of additional mass transit systems and
evaluate the best possible locations for terminals that would serve Arcadia residents.
,
Housini Element
The Housing Element is a comprehensive assessment of current and projected
housing needs for all segments of the community and all economic groups. In addi-
tion, it embodies policy for providing adequate housing and includes action
programs for this purpose. The Housing Element reflects the Southern California
Assodation of Governments (SCAG) 1988 revised regional housing needs
assessment and the special housing needs of the City.
On July 11, 1990, a copy of the Housing Element was forwarded to the Department of
Housing and Community Development for review and comment. The City has
received the State's comments and is currently preparing responses to the
comments,
Open Space and Conservation Element
The Open Space and Conservation Element addresses the conservation, develop-
ment and use of natural resources including water, soils, and mineral deposits,
measures for preserving open space for natural resources, outdoor recreation, and
public health and safety. The element addresses the existing gravel quarry on Lower
Azusa Road and the possibility of a proposed landfill. It eliminates from the Open
Space designation, the gravel quarry located north of Clark Street (previously this
was listed as Open Space).
Revised General Plan
October 23, 1990
Page 4
.
.
.
Noise Element
The Noise Element identifies and appraises noise problems within the community
and forms the basis for land use. The element provides information on current and
future noise levels and identifies the most suitable locations for various land uses,
especially those that are particularly sensitive to noise impacts. The adopted Noise
Element also facilitates the enforcement of standards and codes thereby protecting
the health and well-being of persons living and working in Arcadia. Two action
programs recommend: (1) the adoption and enforcement of a community noise
ordinance and (2) continuation of the City's efforts to obtain noise barriers along the
Foothill Freeway.
The Noise survey was completed in 1975. Although, with a few exceptions, staff
does not believe there have been significant changes to noise levels in the City, the
Commission may wish to include as an "Action Program" that the noise survey be
updated to provide the City with more accurate information to evaluate and prepare
a noise ordinance.
~ety Element
The Safety Element establishes policies and programs to protect the community
from risks associated with seismic, geologic, flood, urban fires, and wildfire hazards.
The Element provides information and establishes guidelines which are intended to
inform and assist in protecting the Arcadia community from any unreasonable risk
associated with the effects of seismic induced hazards; other geologic hazards;
flooding; wildland and urban fires; and hazardous wastes, The Element also
addresses items related to fire hazards such as evacuation routes, peak load water
supply requirements and minimum road widths and clearances around structures.
On July 13, 1990 a copy of the revised Safety Element was forwarded to the State
Division of Mines and Geology. We have not received any comments from the
State.
Included in the revised Element is a discussion of the cities emergency response,
preparedness and recovery plan.
Parks and Recreation Element
The Parks and Reaeation Element provides a comprehensive analysis, policy
recommendations and implementation plan to guide the development,
maintenance and operations of the City's park and reaeation resources. The
revised element includes a list of all city parks and programs.
Revised General Plan
October 23, 1990
Page 5
Spheres of Influence
. Spheres of Influence are unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County adjacent to the
City which are within a logical extension of Arcadia's services and which could
possibly be annexed to the City at some time in the future.
These areas are included in the City's General Plan because prior to annexation by a
city the Local Agency Formation Commission requires that an area be general
planned and zoned by the City, These areas are included within the City's General
Plan so that the County may consider the City's long range planning policies and
designations in the County's review of any zone change or use permit within the
area.
FINDINGS
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the
Planning Department has prepared an initial study for the revised General Plan.
Said initial study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial adverse
change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project
including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of
historical or aesthetic significance. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been
prepared.
.
The Planning Commission should open the public hearing and receive public
testimony on the revised General Plan.
The Planning Commission's findings and comments will be forwarded to the City
Council in the form of a resolution, The public's comments will also be
summarized and forwarded to the City Council for consideration.
ACTION
Attached for the Planning Commission's review are:
1, Exhibit A which sets forth comments from the October 16 joint meeting of the
Planning Commission and the City Council; and
2 Minutes of the August 14 and August 28 Planning Commission meeting.
The Planning Commission should direct staff to prepare a resolution setting forth
the Commission's findings and recommendations to the City Council for adoption
at the Commission's next meeting of November 13, 1990.
.
Revised General Plan
October 23, 1990
Page 6
.
.
.
EXHIBIT A
COMMENTS ON 1HE GENERAL PLAN DISCUSSED AT 1HE
OCTOBER 16 JOINT MEETING OF 1HE PLANNING COMMISSION
AND CITY COUNCIL
Preservation of large lot neighborhoods:
The following may be added to the Land Use Element of the General Plan:
Goal:
Maintain and preserve single-family large lot neighborhoods,
Objective:
Discourage the subdividing of predominantly large lot neighborhoods
into smaller lots incompatible with the surrounding area.
"
To insure that new single-family subdivisions do not result in leap frog
development which leaves existing lots which are out of conformity
with the general development of the area and which are not capable of
being subdivided in the future.
Policy:
Encourage the preservation of large lot neighborhoods where residents
in the area wish to maintain the character and integrity of the
neighborhood.
Require that new streets be a minimum distance from existing parallel
streets,
Discourage developments which leave existing lots which cannot be
subdivided in the future.
Action Program:
The Planning Commission and/or City Council should identify the
single-family neighborhoods which are developed predominantly with
large lots and look into the adoption of measures to preserve these
areas.
Adoption of minimum standards between streets.
.
.
.
PUBLIC HEARING
GENERAL PLAN
Consideration and review of the Revised General Plan, which
contains the Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Open Space and
Conservatio", P(arks and Recreation, Safety and Noise Elements
and Spheres of Influence.
The staff report was presented,
Staff suggested continuing this to the Commission's next meeting, It was noted that there have been no major
changes and remarked that the State has made some comments which the City will have to respond to, This item
has been tentatively scheduled for review by the City Coundl on 9/18.
Mr, Woolard explained that annexations are up to the City and the City can detennine whether it would be
appropriate or not.
Staff said that some time ago the City received a request to annex the area in the southwest part of the Oty and
the City was concerned with the water and commented that many issues are' taken into consideration when
annexing an area,
The public hearil'lg was opened,
No one spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item,
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Oark, seconded by Commissioner Amato to c:onllnue the hearing to the
Commission's August 28th meeting,
ROLL CALL:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Amato, Oark, Hedlund, Suny. Papay
None
...........-............-.......-.--
Arcadia City Planning Commission
8/14/90
Page 10
.
.
.
CONTINUED PUBUC HEARING
GENERAl PLAN
Consideration and review of the Revlsecl General Plan,
which contains the land Use, Circulation, Housing, Open
Space and Conservation. P8I1Is and Recreation. Safely and
Noise Elements and Spheres of Influence.
The staff report was presented and the public hearing was opened.
Harold Ellis. 1504 S. Eighth. said that the plan as proposecl is very general, vague and not very
specific and needs to give definite direction that the City should take. He felt that the plan is very
evasive and that it should be utilized as a guide lor the City. Some of the studies that are used are from
1987 and even 1975 which are old and obsolete. He said that Orange Grove Avenue should be made as a
scenic route through the City belore all the beautlfultraes are 10m and the straetls widened. He said
th'lt if the City Is displeased with single-sided cul-de-sacs. then they should not be approved unless
there is a physical barrier preventing the development, He thought that the plan should be sent back
to staff lor updated deta. He said that thera are enough people in Arcadia and the City should take into
consideration that additional people translate into more traffic:. pollution, water. trash. noise
problems, He thought thai the only way 10 keeping the density down is 10 take posillve steps to limil
more people from coming InIO the area. He stated that In some parts of town a developer can build an
'a.story residential building and he thought Ihat Ihat is absolutely rldJculous. He fell Ihat at the
presenl rale. Ihera is no need 10 make any new developments. just replac/ng the existing developmenl
will have a very substantial impact on the quality of life In the City. He noted that If a developer
doesn't have ample room on a lot. then the project should be denied and the City should not approve
substandard 101S.
Craig Pearson, 2424 Albert Way, said that he was in agreement wllh Mr. Ellis's testimony, He asked
whal is a Density Bonus Ordinance which is diSCUssed in Part 8. Page 14. under Obj8Cllves?
Staff explained that a Density Bonus Ordinance is required by the Slate, 10 grant a developer additional
units on a project provided Ihey are lor row and moderate income housing.
Mr, Pearson remarttedlhat by allowing this type of a development It would be further density. traffic,
pollution and added stress on lite City. He thought that lite plan should address issues sucn as traffic.
monster houses and overd8YeIopment.
Staff Slated that every city is committed 10 offer tha Density Bonus OrdInance and the City does not
have an option, ThIs is a requiremenl by the State 10 offer low and moderate Income houSing, If a
Arcadia City Planning COmmission
8/28/90
Page 5
.
.
.
developer does not want to provide low and moderate housing, they are not going to get a density bonus
but it is tile State's way of trying to provide a range of a1temative housing which a lot of cities are
unable to do,
Mr, Woolard said that the City does not have an option and has to provide this type of a program. He
noted that the City would like to hear about issues such as monster homes. traffic anc:l pollution which
can be addressed In the General Plan,
Mr, Pearson said that in Section t ,4, Objectives, what Is the definition of mixed use projects which is
being proposed along Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road?
Staff said that a mixed use project is a mixture of commercial and residential type of developments
which would be providing aiternatives to housing and poasibly lower Income housing.
Mr, Woolard sald that a mixed use project does have benefits and explained that sometimes when a
residential use is close to commercial areas, which are generally along major transportation lines,
where they may be able to uae the a1tematlve transportation, rather than drive their car, it would
actually reduce some of the problems that occur with growth in ~uthem Callfomia.
Mr, Pearson asked what is .planned unit development" and sald readlng the definition in the General
Plan. he interpreta It to mean the breaking up of large lots to smaller lots.
Staff said that for single-family developments, Code requires a minimum of 3 acrea before a planned
, unit development can be considered. Recently, Council approved a planned unit development on North
First Avenue on R-1 and R-2 lots. which could have allowed 60+ units but with the planned unit
development they will be building 40 units, The planned unit development allows for flexibility and is
used where a conventional subdivision can't be done.
Mr. Pearson said that the plan needs to be more specific and he felt strongly about restricting the
cuning of mature trees or encouraging proper landscaping of projects.
Mr. Ems said that the General Plan should be something that is utilized and not just be put on the shelf
after ita adoption. He asked for a 60 day continuance to allow him to get public input to allow him lime
to get the word out to the public regarding these hearings.
There were no other persons desiring to speak in favor of or In opposition to this item.
MOTiCJ'4
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Amato to close the public
hearing, The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting.
Chairman papay asked If a public hearing had been scheduled before the City Council on this item?
Staff rematked no public hearing /tad been scheduled before Council. A tentatlYe schedule wu to have a
hearing before the Council on September 16th. however that has changed and there Is no specific date
at this time, After the Planning Commission has made their comments, there will be incorporated into
a resolution whlclt Is forwarded to the City Council.
Chalnnan Papay commented that w/tat has been done Is to consolidate all the doaIments into one single
document.
Staff Indicated that was correct and this was an update whlclt separates the text from the technical
appendix. So that the major document contains the meats and guts of lite plan,
) ArcadIa City Planning Commission
8/28/90
Page 6
.
.
.
CommissiOner Szany was concerned thai somebody purchasing several lots In the Baldwin Slocker area
would be able 10 put a cul-de-sac in and reduce the sizes of the lots 10 12,000 sq. ft. and still comply
with Code and noted thai presenlly there are lots thai are 30.000-40.000 sq. ft. in size. He felt that
the General Plan should address that. He slaled thai the 101 splillhal was heard by the Commission is
an axample of what he Is referring to and commented that this could set a precedent. He also thought
that the trllles should be Included. He thought the General Plan should Include a policy which would
encourage the preservation of large lots.
Commissioner Amato said that he would like this item to be continued so It can be reevaluated and
thought thai he would like to have the hearing postponed until after the joint meeting with Council.
In response to Chairman Papay's comments Councilman Ciraulo stated thai he likes the idea of
postponing the Commission hearing until the Council and the Commission have met.
In response to questions from Chairman Papay. Mr. Woolard staled that there are no time constraints,
Commissioner Hedlund said thai he did not like to chop up large lots and create smaller lots and would
like to address the density bonus and would like to discuss that with City Council, He was also
concerned wilh one-sided cul-de-sacs and the increase in traffle generated by them.
In answer to Chairman Papay's question, Mr. Miller said thai the Supreme Court decisions on several
cases in the last five years have indicated that If you go too far in your regulato'Y action. and that is a
Judgment call, the government has to pay the compansetlon for It. In certaln cases the Supreme Court
has said thai in certain situations this could be deemed to be taklng of property and the government
would be liable for financial damage.
Staff thought that there are several Items on the agenda for the jolnl meeting with Council and did not
think that there would be ample time to discuss the General Plan especially since it is a major project.
Commissioner Amato commended staff for doing an excallent job In preparing the Revised General Plan
bul felt that it should be continued to allow for more public Input.
Chairman Papay saiclthat he would like to get Counclrs reaction to the Commission's ideas and said that
If the Council Is opposed 10 some of the ideas then It would be useless to pursue It. He remarked that he
would like to see Counclrs general response to some of the issues.
Councilman Ciraulo agreed with Chairman Papay and felt that It would be a good idea to get an overall
feeling of how mosl of the Council feels and did nolthlnk that they would get Into specifics In the joint
meeting.
Mr. Woolard said that staff will try to address everybody's concerns and will then forward all
comments to Council. Staff Is not looking for a consensus at this point from the Commission, but for
Individual input, '
The consertsus of the Commission was to discuss the matter briefly with Council and get direction from
them, II was noted lhet the joint meeting with Council Is on Oc:tober 18th andlhe next Planning
Commission meeting following lhe meeting would be on OCtober 23rd. whlclt would also allow for more
public Inpul.
~
It was moved by Commissioner Hedlund, seconded by Commissioner Szany 10 re-open the publiC
hearing, The motion passed by voice with none dissenting,
Arcadia City Planning Commission
8/28/90
Page 7
.
'.
MOT1CJ.j
It was moved by Commissioner Hedlund. seconded by Commissioner Szany to continue the
public hearing to October 23. 1990.
ROll. CAll.:
AVES:
/ICES:
ASSENT:
Commissioners Amato. Hedlund. Szany, Papay
None
Commissioner Clark
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION
Harold Ellis. 1504 S, Eight Ave., was pleased with the Commission's action of the General Plan. He
said that he would like to get more public input, Recently San Francisco denied a development due to
incompatibility with the neighborhood and said that he would wrtte to them and get the appropriate
ordinance and he would then submit it to the City. He thought that this type of an ordinance, if adopted.
would give the authority to deal with developments such as single-sided cul-de-sacs which tear up the
neighborhoods.
Alvin Albe. 458 W. Palm, said that the public is not aware of what the Commission is trying to
achieve. The public is not aware that Issues such as traffic. noise and pollution can be addressed in the
General Plan and by contlnuing the hearing. the Commission is making the right deeision. He stated
that he would try 10 inform his neighbors of the hearing, He thought that this should be more
publicized and it should be noted that the issues that are being considered can be addressed by the
public and can have an impact on the Commission's thOught process.
Staff said that a copy of the General Plan is available 10 check out from the Planning Dept. and also at
the library.
Chairman Papay said that everything that is being discussed Is in general terms and are generalized
criteria of necessity and the specilIcs come wi1tI speclfIc propertles.
Mr. Woolard said that this clocument Is a policy guldlngclocument for future growth and development in
the City. He said that comments made should be pradudlve crltIdsm of the plan and the comments
should be constructive. The public should state their concerns and what they think the City can do to
address them. The General Plan Is not going to solve traflIc and manslonlzatlon and it will only point
out problems. Subsequent zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations Of' other Code changes will bring
about the changes that are deemed necessary anclldentllled In the plan.
Mr. Miller said thai when the General Plan Is adopted and In place, it Is only a guideUne and it does not
have the ultimate force of law, The subsequent ImplementatIOn Items wiD be the ones that will be
enforced. Zone changes ancl18xt amendments requlnt public hearing process, Introcluctlon and adoption
of ordinances which wUl go through and during this process. depending on the outcome of the public
hearings, some of thoSe Items may not necessartly be implemented.
. ...............................
.
Atc8dIa City Planning Commission
8/28/90
.
.
.
CONTINUED PUBUC HEARING
GENERAL PLAN
Consideration and review of the Revised General Plan,
which contains the Land Use. Circulation, Housing, Open
Space and Conservation, Parks and Rea-eatlon, Safety
and Noise Elements and Spheres of Influence,
The staff report was presented,
Staff said that the essential characteristics of the General Plan (GP) are that it is comprehensive,
general and long-range. .Comprehenslve. means that the plan encompasses all geographical parts of
the community and all functional elements which bear on physical development. .General. means that
the plan summarizes policies and proposals and does not set forth specific locations or detailed
regulations - that is not the purpose of the GP. .Long range. means that the plan sets forth policies
and goais which clarify the City's idea of the kind of community we would like to see 20 to 30 years in
the future, The GP provides the basis for rational decision making regarding the City's long-term
physical development. It is a policy document to guide future development of the City, Each element
sets forth objectives. policies and action programs. The action programs. however, are not detailed
regulations and are not law. They are implemented as a result of changes to the zoning regulations and
subdivision regulations. The general plan, zoning and subdivision regulations deal with private uses of
land, however, the general plan sets forth broad categories for general areas of the City, The City's
zoning ordinance is the means by which the city sets forth more specific and detailed legislation which
is intended to carry out the provisions that are set forth In the General Plan. Staff recommends that
the Commission may want to include. as an action program. that the noise survey which was completed
in 1975, be updated to evaluate and prepare a noise ordinance. Tonlghfs findings and comments will
be forwarded to the City Council in the form of a resolution as well as the public testimony received
tonight and the previouS hearings,
In answer to Commission's question, staff said that population growth has not been addressed in the GP,
Exhibit .A. sets forth comments on the general plan which were discussed at the joint meeting with the
City Council.
The public hearing was opened.
Chris Vance. 417 S. second. said that tha previous GP which was adopted in the early 70's seemed to be
much more detailed but this new proposal breaks down developments into light, medlum and heavy
density and asked how they relate to the residential uses. He was concerned about how this revised GP
wouid affect his area, He noted that the maps Included In the packet are not legible and felt that the
General Plan has a strOng influence on what Is permitted in a specific area.
Staff remarked that larger maps will be made available after this document has been adopted. The
original GP was amended In the late 70's as currently shown. Based upon the previous designation, it
would not be possible to back zone. The GP would have to be changed first before you could rezone to a
lower density. The old GP was very detailed and in the late 70s it was made more general. This GP
creates one multiple-family designation.
Mr. Woolard explained the reason these were clone for the single-family and the multiple-family
designations was so that zone changes could be easier to become more restrictive.. If the GP had not
been amended as it Is now and the City wanted to make a larger lot requirement or change the allowable
density, staff would have to amet1d the GP before changing the zoning.
Alvin Albe. 458 W. Palm. said that in readlng the GP he felt that some valid points were made. He
stated that there Is enough population in the City already and it should not be the CIty's policy to draw
more people Into the community. There is enough traffic and pollution problems in the City and an
Arcadia City Planning Commission
10/23/90
Page 3
.
.
e
increase in the population would only add to the problem. He directed all his comments to the Land Use
Section of the GP.
In Section IV-S,1 and 3, he thought a statement should be inserted discouraging population growth, An
effective way to limit growth would be to limit cul-de-sacs and subdivisions. Section 5-3, Issues and
Opportunity, discusses the widening of Second Avenue from 40'to 60' and remarked that there are
many cul-de-sacs on Second which add 10 the tralflc. He felt that the population growth is in direct
correlation with the traffic problems. Section IV-4, F1ndlng 19,regarding street trees; he thought the
City should have a policy of protecting mature trees on a lot. Section IV-6, Goals and Objectives,
states "to promote and preserve the character of single-family residential environments permitting
individual expression which does not unnecessarily infringe on the rights of the property owner or
adjacent owners". He felt that this concept should be expanded and that new construction In the City
should be harmonious or compatible In size and design with other existing houses in the neighborhood,
He said that in the homeowner's associations (HOA) in the City, the words compatible and harmonious
are applied to new homes and he felt that since most of Arcadia does not have HOAs then by inserting the
above words in the GP, they would also be protected from monster homes. Section VI-14, Objective
1,1, delivers the wrong message, "one of the Objectives of the City Is to continue to facilitate the
construction 01161 dwelling units per year..... He did not think that the City should allow 161 new
developments a year.
Cathy Tyson, 310 W, Norman, agreed with Mr. Albe and said In regard to the Land Use that future
buildings should not Infringe on the property owners of adjacent properties. Many of the
developments in the south part of the City have infringed on adjacent properties. She felt that the "H"
overlay should be changed and thought that an S-story building is unnecessary.
In regard to Circulation, she noted that the large homes that are built bring in more people and more
cars which In turn create more traffle and an increase In noisa. She thought that school districts
should be addressed In the GP,
In regard to Housing, she remarked that August 29th Issue of the L.A. Times published the 1990
census and reported that Arcadia has had a 4% Increase since the 1980 census. She felt that there
were enough people In the City already and the City should not encourage increased population. She
was against cul-de-sacs (especially single-sided cul-de-sacs), and felt that they create more
population and traffic, She was ,also against lot splits and said that at the comer of Santa Anita and
Palm there was a beautiful single-story home and now there are two large homes creating more people
and traffic.
In regard to Conservation, she felt that Anoakla should be saved for historical importance and should be
returned to the City as a park. She thought that the City should try to save mature trees and maintain
the program of street planting and care. She thought large buildings have destroyed many 01 the
mature trees. She asked If a fee or a fine could be imposed on developers encouraging them to save
mature trees? She felt that the City should give considerations to the parks within the City,
In regard to Open Space, she said that since the armory Is being returned to the City, why not build an
auditorium for the high school.
In regard to Noise and Safety, she thought that the Neighborhood Watch program should be promoted to
aid the police to aeate a safe neighborhood,
She thought that size of homes should be limited which would help eliminate problems such as density,
traffic, the saving 01 large and mature trees, noise and papulation.
Anthony Parrille, 654 Sharon, agreed with the previous speakers, He was concerned with
mansionizatlon, traffic and loss of trees In the community. He said that while driving on Lemon he saw
Arcadia City Planning Commission
10/23/90
Page 4
.
.
.
that a house was demolished and the only thing left on the property was a tree and remarked that after
a new home is bul" and landscaping put In " will take yealS to replace those valuable trees. He
suggested discouraging any more mini-mails In the City and referred to the Presidenfs Square on
Duarte and Golden West which has remained unused since It was remodeled. He didn't think that an
area that Is zoned for a commercial use should be used for mini malls which increase traffic, In
regard to the Recreation Plan he noted that In addition to Ullle League and soccer, the City has a Junior
all American Football program. This program contributes to the City's program.
Harold E/Ils, 1504 S. Eighth, said that he would like to see a zero population growth in the City since
there are enough people, cars, traffic in the community, He said that If the City is going to have a GP
that guides the City It has to have some basic philosophy. Zero population growth Is good philosophy,
He was also concerned with manslonizatlon. He said that the community feels that the City needs to
give better direction as to the way development should go and remarked that on Eighth Avenue there is
a single lot which is sandwiched between two cul-de-sacs and said that is poor planning, He talked
about single-sided cul-de-sacs which the City should avoid. He said that he realizes that the GP should
be general to a certain degree but lIS purpose Is to provide a specific direction that the people want the
community to take and Is a document that should guide development. He was concerned with the
number of cul-de-sacs on a specific street, preserving the Iew large lots, traffic, population and that
the plan should address the above in much more detail. He said that a lot of the data in the GP Is
obsolete and It should be updated. There should be a better guideline from which the City can approve
or deny a project.
There were no other persons desiring to speak in favor of or in opposition to this item.
: M011ClN
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Amato to close the public
hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting.
Chairman Papay said that based upon the joint meeting with the City Council, exhibit A addresses all
concerns brought up at the meeting in regard to preservation of large lots and cul-de-sacs. Exhibit A
speaks to maintaining ancl preserving single-family large lot neighborhoods. It speaks about
identifying single-family neighborhoods which are developed predominantly with large lots and to look
into the measures to preserve these areas and the adoption of minimum standards between streets
which translates to distance between cul-de-sacs. It discourages developments which leave existing
lots which cannot be subdivided in the future.
Commissioner Szany said that there Is nothing in the GP that says there should be no cul-de-sacs. He
thought what the City Is trying to do Is requiring better designs of ones that are built in the future and
also saying maybe there are some areas that should not be subdivided with cul-de-sacs because these
areas are predominantly large lots neighborhoods and to chop these areas up with cul-de-sacs would
not be appropriate. By leaving the GP In general terms the zoning can be changed (downzoned), if
appropriate, without having to go through the GP amendment. Even though it wiD be a lot tougher to
build in cul-de-sacs there are still some areas where cul-de-sacs are appropriate. He felt that
Exhibit A leaves It broad enough so such problems can be addressed at a later date.
Chairman Papay remarked that the GP does not changed the zoning but talks about the preservation of
single-family neighborhoods that are predominantly developed with large lots. A recent zone change in
the north part of the City which changed the zoning from R-O 15.000 to R-O 22.000. Although the
GP does not state no cul-de-sacs it will make it more difflcu" to develop a cul-de-sac just because a
person acquires several parcels of land.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
10/23/90
Page 5
.
.
.
Commissioner Hedlund said that he didn't think that cul-de-sacs were bad but we want to where
possible preserve large lots. Exhibit A discusses what the City would like to see done so not to infringe
on what people have and yet not deny other people their property rights.
Commissioner 'Amato said that the City is trying to preserve the aesthetics of large lots and said that he
was opposed to one-sided cul-de-sacs,
Staff said that Section IV, page 8, under action programs, Item 1 states that "review existing
subdivision to determine If the criteria can be developed to mitigate the visual Impacts of projects
which propose single-sided cul-de.sacs streets" and suggested alternative wording "review existing
subdivision regulations to determine If criteria can be developed to prohibit single-sided cul-de-sacs
except under "given" circumstances".
Chairman Papay thought that the alternatives with respect to single-sided cul-de-sacs Is a good Idea
and would be for Isolated deep lots. The recommendation will include the incorporation of what Is In
Exhibit A as part of what is recommended for approval to the City Councll. He thought they may wish
to put some wording in the GP regarding preservation of trees on private property,
In answer to the Commissioners questions, Mr. Woolard said that when a development comes in, every
effort Is made to work around the trees, or In some cases flip the design to save the tree but there are
occasions where that is not feasible and the tree will have to be removed and replaced with a 15 gallon
tree, In some cases it is possible to build wells around the trees to try to save them but that cannot
always be done. The tree preservation plan Is a fairly standard requirement In all subdivisions and
multiple-family projects. Under existing circumstances, if the developer thinks that the tree is going
to be a problem, there is nothing that prohibits the existing owner to remove some or all the trees
before the transfer takes place. looking at old historical pictures of Arcadia, there are more trees
now than ever and said that a good example would be the condominium units on Naomi west of Baldwin
which have over 100 trees.
Commissioner Szany said that he has faced a situation similar to what Mr. Woolard explalned and they
were able to flip the driveway to save the tree.
Staff said that developers are encouraged to save as many trees as possible and wording can be added to
GP to reflect that. It was noted that more people are attempting to save trees but the City is also
getting some real nice replacement trees. The landscaping on some of these new developments are
much nicer than what was previously there and even though the trees may not be mature, a lot of them
within 10 years are going to be as nice if not nicer than what is presently existing.
Chairman Papay suggested "preservation" or "replacement" and said that he realizes that trees cannot
always be saved put can be replaced.
Commissioner Szany asked if a no growth or slow growth policy could be adopted? He referred to a
section In the GP which discusses the construction of 161 dwelling units and wondered if that would be
net or gross, He said that'ln some instances 2 homes are takeo down and replaced with 3 units which
result in the net gain of one additional unit.
Staff said that that would be net units. The Southern California Assoclation of Governments (SCAG)sets
forth a certain amount of housing that the City is suppose to be built a year. Arcadia Is a unique
situation since it Is built out and Mr. Woolard has discussed this with them and was able to reduce that
number to 161 dwelling units a year, This is the housing need Identified by SCAG as far as
employment and other factors. The City might like to cIo a lot of different things but is mandated by
State law to provide a certain number if housing units per year,
Arcadia City Planning Commission
10/23/90
Page 6
.
.
.
Mr. Woolard further explained that both State and SCAG have made it clear that no community can stop
growth and If they try they will be taken to court and will lose. SCAG states that within the LA Basin a
certain amount of growth Is going to occur and most of the growth Is a result of birth rate and not
because of people coming In from other states or countries. They feel It is a regional problem and that
all the cities must bear the burden of absorbing the Increased population. No city Is going to be
allowed to establish a no growth policy or growth limitation policies that have the same affect. The
Housing Element tries to address this Issue which they refer to our fair share of the anticipated
growth in the region and that is what the numbers in element reflect.
Mr, Miller said that sometimes findings can be made by stating that the infrastructure can't really
Sllpport the growth but there isn't enough here to justify these kind of findings in terms of
legitimizing a "no growth" type of a policy.
Commissioner Amato indicated that the state will be fairly active in enforcing the requirement of
providing housing.
Mr, Woolard said that the City is trying to address the housing needs of low and moderate income
persons and would not meet its fair share by providing homes that are $500,000. Part of the fair
share will be met when Redevelopment Agency funds are eventually allocated for low and moderate
income housing, An arrangement has been made to contribute a larger amount, beginning 1996, and at
that time 25% of the tax increment will be going towards providing low and moderate Income housing.
it would be nice It a percentage of the 161 units were low and moderate housing. The City will make
efforts to make that possible by waiving fees. higher density and possibly providing modifications for
parking. Because of the land values In the City there haven't been any Inquiries to provide homes for
, low and moderate income persons but that is being addressed In the Housing Element.
"
Staff commented that the State has reviewed the Housing Element and has said that there are several
things that should be more specific. it is very difficult to answer some of them In specifics since
Arcadia is unique in respect that the property values are higher and It Is difficult to address the needs
of the overall population. There will be more changes before this is adopted because the Planning
Department Is In the process of gathering Information to respond to the State's comments to address
the issues of such things as handicapped persons. the elderly, homeless. special needs groups within
the City.
Mr. Woolard noted that Councilman Harblcht has requested a report on the City's high rise zoning
which is being prepared for both commercial and residential properties. There is a substantial
portion of high rise residence In the area between Huntington and Duarte, between Santa Anita and
First and a portion east of First to Second, which has population density potential of about 4 times of a
large condominium. There is also the town center area which is zoned for high rise. the triangle
between the rail road, Santa Anita and south side of Huntington Drive. A large portion of west Arcadia.
extending as far north as Falrview and down to Naomi Is also zoned for high rise residential. As a
result of the report, It could be derived that high rise Is not appropriate In these areas and the high
rise zoning should be removed. If at a later date someone wants a high rise then It could be reviewed,
at. He thought these areas should be reviewed and It appropriate remove the "H" overlay. This should
also be one way of roiling back the potential commercial density and residential danslty In area,
Before the 1972 GP. it was attempted to take the high rise zoning off of those properties and at the
hearing many people showed up who were against It and they felt that they purchased their properties
as an investment and wanted the high rise zoning.
Commissioner Hedlund said that there are many commercial properties In the City which he would
prefer to see as residential. '
Mr, Woolard said that in the 1972 GP. the whole area on the south side of Huntington Drive between
Holly and Baldwin was zoned for commercial and was changed to multiple-family residential. The
Arcadia City Planning Commission
10/23/90
Page 7
.
.
'e
Commission should Identify areas which they think could be changed and pass the recommendation to
the Clly Council, He remarked that one potential site might be the President's Square. In response to
some questions, Mr, Woolard said that the Anoakla site was In escrow with lewis Homes but he was
unaware of any further developments there.
Commissioner Szany fell that his concerns were being addressed In the GP with regard to cul-de-sacs,
mature trees and high rise for both commercial and residential uses.
Chairman Papay wondered If the GP could be reviewed periodically and Mr. Woolard suggested that It
could be reviewed annually.
The Commission tell that they would be In favor of recommending approval of the GP to the Clly
Council with the following additional recommendations:
t.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Exhibit A
Trees
High rise
Annual review of GP
Noise study
Review of under utilized commercial properties
MOTION
II was moved by Commissioner Suny, seconded by Commissioner Amato to recommend
approval of the Revised General Plan to the Clly Council with the recommendations made above.
ROLL CALL:
AYES:
NCeS:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Amato, Hedlund, Suny, Papay
Ncne
CommlsslQner Clark
Mr. Woolard said that the resolution will be presented to the Commission at Its next meeting for
adoption. He said that all of the comments of both the Commission and the public will be forwarded to
the CIly Council, He encouraged the speakers to also come to the Council meeting to express their
views.
fC'J
(0/1.,3 lie