HomeMy WebLinkAbout7-9-2024 Agenda PacketCITY OF ARCADIA
Arcadia Planning Commission
Regular Meeting Agenda
Tuesday, July 9, 2024, 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
Vincent Tsoi, Chair
Marilynne Wilander, Vice Chair
David Arvizu, Commissioner
Angela Hui, Commissioner
Domenico Tallerico, 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.
1
1.Resolution No. 2148– Approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 24-02 to allow an
educational center for robotics and coding at the “The Shoppes at Highlands Center” located
at 139 East Foothill Boulevard
CEQA: Exempt
Recommendation: Adopt
Applicant: Wendy and Spencer Mo
There is a ten day appeal period. Appeals are to be filed by 4:30 p.m. on Friday, July 19,
2024.
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.
1. Minutes of the June 11, 2024, Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission
Recommendation: Approve
MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL LIAISON
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, July 23, 2024, at 7:00 p.m.
2
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.
3
(Arcadia Public Library) (www.ArcadiaCA.gov)
(Planning@ArcadiaCA.gov)
(City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia,
California)
“” (5)
(5)
“”
“”
403
4
DATE: July 9, 2024
TO: Honorable Chair and Planning Commission
FROM: Lisa L. Flores, Deputy Development Services Director
By: Gary Yesayan, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 2148 APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. CUP 24-02 TO ALLOW AN EDUCATIONAL CENTER FOR
ROBOTICS AND CODING AT THE SHOPPES AT HIGHLANDS
CENTER LOCATED AT 139 EAST FOOTHILL BOULEVARD
CEQA: Exempt
Recommendation: Adopt
SUMMARY
The Applicants, Wendy and Spencer Mo, are requesting approval of Conditional Use
Permit No. CUP 24-02 for an educational center for robotics and coding for students of
elementary to high school age (dba Magikid). The educational center will have a
maximum of 12 students and three (3) instructors at any one time, and the business will
be located within one of the existing multi-tenant units at The Shoppes at the Highlands
Center at 139 E. Foothill Boulevard. It is recommended that the Planning Commission
adopt Resolution No. 2148 (Attachment No. 1), find this project Categorically Exempt
under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and approve the Conditional Use
Permit No. CUP 24-02, subject to the conditions listed in this staff report.
BACKGROUND
The 1,200 square foot commercial unit is located at The Shoppes at the Highlander
Center that is located off of Foothill Boulevard, the same center with Grocery Outlet. The
multi-tenant shopping center is zoned C-G, General Commercial. The center has a total
of 279 on-site surface parking spaces. The subject unit was previously approved for an
indoor playground for children (CUP No.17-03) and had a requirement of six parking
spaces. The former Bank of America are located on the adjacent lots
and are not a part of this shopping center; they are under separate ownership. The
parking lots of the two adjoining properties connect with the parking lot of the subject
properties for access, however no shared parking agreement exists, and therefore the
parking is considered separate for code requirement purposes. Figure-1 below shows the
5
Resolution No. 2148 - CUP 24-02
139 E. Foothill Blvd.
July 9, 2024 - Page 2 of 9
outline of the subject site and unit(See Attachment No. 2 for an aerial image, photos and
zoning information of the subject property).
Figure 1 - Subject Site and Unit
PROPOSAL
Magikid was established in 2009
and currently has multiple
locations throughout California,
including one in the City of San
Marino and La Cañada Flintridge.
Magikid provides robotics courses
in engineering, artificial
intelligence (AI) programming,
web design, training for robotics
competitions, and other similar
coding instructions. During the
regular school year, the center will
offer three (3) different classes at
6
Resolution No. 2148 - CUP 24-02
139 E. Foothill Blvd.
July 9, 2024 - Page 3 of 9
the same time with a maximum of four (4) under high school age students per class and
one instructor per class during the hours of 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday,
and 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. on weekends. As such, there will be a maximum of twelve
(12) under high school age students and three (3) instructors at any one time. After the
classes end at 6:00 p.m., Magikid will then offer Robotics competition training for up to
four (4) high school students with one (1) instructor from 6:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. Monday
through Friday, and from 3:30 p.m.to 6:00 p.m., on weekends.
During the holidays and breaks, classes for under high school age students will be
Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. and on weekends from 10:00 a.m.to
3:00 p.m. Classes for high school students will be Monday through Friday from 3:30 p.m.
to 7:30 p.m., and on weekends from 3:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. There will be no overlap with
the classes and competition to ensure there will be sufficient parking for this use and at
this center.
ANALYSIS
The educational center will have the three classes at the same time within the two
enclosed classrooms and the large open area will be for hands-on instructional sessions.
As conditioned, for safety,
The center may occasionally hold birthday celebrations for under high school
age students with attendance limited to a maximum of ten (10) students. Figure-2 below
shows the proposed floor plan and Attachment No. 3 provides the Site and Floor Plan.
Figure 2 - Proposed Floor Plan
The Arcadia Development Code allows an educational center in the General Commercial
(C-G) zone, subject to review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed
educational center will have a maximum of 12 students and three (3) instructors at any
given time. The site provides convenient and ample access for visitors, as well as the first
responders in case of emergencies. The shopping center has a variety of businesses
such as a grocery store, pet grooming, Kumon tutoring, and a Martial Arts center. The
7
Resolution No. 2148 - CUP 24-02
139 E. Foothill Blvd.
July 9, 2024 - Page 4 of 9
site provides a large, open, surface parking area for all the tenants. As such, the proposed
educational center will be an appropriate, and a fitting use in terms of the sit
characteristics, and the other businesses within the vicinity.
Parking
For tutoring and educational centers, the Development Code requires a minimum of one
(1) parking space for each employee, one (1) parking space for every five under high-
school age students, and one (1) parking space for every three students that are high-
school age or older. With the 12 under high-school aged students and three (3)
instructors, the minimum parking required per code is five (5) spaces. For the separate
session that will include a maximum of four (4) high school students and one (1) instructor,
the minimum required parking per code is two (2) parking spaces. Since classes for
students that are not of high school age have a higher parking requirement, the use was
based on five (5) parking spaces. As such, the proposed educational center will require
less parking than the previous use of six (6) parking spaces for an indoor playground. The
site has 279 parking spaces. Staff conducted several site visits throughout the day, and
vacancies,
but even at full occupancy the center would provide the minimum required parking for the
proposed educational center. Therefore, no parking deficiency has been identified.
FINDINGS
Section 9107.09.050(B) of the Development Code requires that the Planning Commission
may approve a Conditional Use Permit if all the following findings can be made:
1. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable
specific plan; and is allowed within the applicable zone, subject to the granting
of a Conditional Use Permit, and complies with all other applicable provisions
of the Development Code and the Municipal Code.
Facts to Support This Finding: The proposed educational center for robotics and
coding is consistent with the Arcadia General Plan which allows for a wide-range of
commercial uses, including neighborhood-serving uses such as educational centers.
The site is zoned C-G (General Commercial) which under Development Code Section
9102.03.020, Table 2-8, allows tutoring and educational centers such as a proposed
use, subject to review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed
educational center will occupy one of the vacant units within an existing neighborhood
shopping center known as The Shoppes at Highlands Center and the proposed
business will comply with all the applicable provisions of the Development Code and
the Municipal Code. The proposed educational center is complementary to the
surrounding commercial uses as there are other similar businesses serving the same
age group such as a Martial Arts Studio, educational or tutoring centers nearby, such
as Kumon, Code Ninjas, and My Learning Center located within close proximity from
the subject site. The proposed use is consistent with the following General Plan and
policy:
8
Resolution No. 2148 - CUP 24-02
139 E. Foothill Blvd.
July 9, 2024 - Page 5 of 9
Land Use and Community Design Element
Policy LU-6.7: Encourage a balanced distribution of commercial development
throughout the City, ensuring that neighborhoods and districts have adequate
access to local-serving commercial uses.
2. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed activity
will be compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity.
Facts to Support This Finding:
The proposed educational center will occupy a vacant 1,200 square foot unit within an
existing multi-tenant commercial building. The commercial center includes several
other similar businesses such as the Kumon tutoring center and a Tae Kwon Do
martial arts studio. for
development in the General Commercial (C-G) zones. The education center will have
a maximum of 15 people at any given time: 12 elementary to jr. high students, and
three (3) instructors. Classes with under high-school age students and high school
students will not overlap as conditioned. The educational center will require interior
tenant improvement subject to building permits. No exterior changes are proposed to
accommodate the use. As such, the proposed activity will be compatible with the
existing and future land uses in the vicinity.
3. The site is physically suitable in terms of:
a. Its design, location, shape, size, and operating characteristics of the
proposed use in order to accommodate the use, site improvements loading,
and parking.
Facts to Support This Finding: The proposed educational center for robotics and
coding will be located within an existing multi-tenant building that has other
freestanding buildings. The site can accommodate this use as there are plenty of
available parking spaces throughout the day, the proposed business hours will be
compatible with the hours of the adjacent uses, and no exterior modifications are
proposed. Therefore, the unit and site are suitable for the proposed educational
center.
b. Streets and highways adequate to accommodate public and emergency
vehicle (e.g., fire and medical) access.
Facts to Support This Finding: The site is located along E. Foothill Boulevard
with access to the shopping center parking lot from both E. Foothill Boulevard and
N. Second Avenue. These streets are adequate in width and pavement type to
carry the traffic that will be generated by the proposed educational use, including
adequate access for emergency vehicles. The proposed educational center will
not impact these rights-of-ways.
c. Public protection services (e.g., fire protection, police protection, etc.).
9
Resolution No. 2148 - CUP 24-02
139 E. Foothill Blvd.
July 9, 2024 - Page 6 of 9
Facts to Support This Finding:The Fire and Police Departments have reviewed
the application and determined that no additional improvements are needed to
provide adequate protection services to the subject site.
d. The provision of utilities (e.g., potable water, schools, solid waste collection
and disposal, storm drainage, wastewater collection, treatment, and
disposal, etc.).
Facts to Support This Finding: The subject unit is located within an existing
commercial building, in a multi-tenant shopping center which is adequately
serviced by existing utilities. The request does not include new construction that
will impact the provision of utilities, nor will it be operated in a manner that will
impact the provisions of utilities. Therefore, no impacts to the provision of utilities
are anticipated.
4. The measure of site suitability shall be required to ensure that the type, density,
and intensity of use being proposed will not adversely affect the public
convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare, constitute a nuisance,
or be materially injurious to the improvements, persons, property, or uses in the
vicinity and zone in which the property is located.
Facts to Support This Finding: The proposed educational center for robotics and
coding will provide a service in compliance with and pursuant to the Arcadia
Development Code. The proposed business will not be detrimental to the public health
or welfare, or the surrounding properties, as the site is located on a commercial
corridor with a diverse type of businesses that serve the surrounding communities.
The size and nature of the proposed educational center will be compatible with the
other uses as there are other educational or fitness facility for students of the same
age. Therefore, the site is suitable for such use.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
It has been determined that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Categorical Exemption per
the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
15301 of the CEQA Guidelines for the use of an existing facility (See Attachment No. 4).
PUBLIC COMMENTS/NOTICE
website on June 27, 2024. It was also
mailed to the property owners located within 300 feet of the subject property. At the time
of the completion of this report, no comments were received regarding this project.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2148 approving
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 24-02 for a proposed educational center at 139 E.
10
Resolution No. 2148 - CUP 24-02
139 E. Foothill Blvd.
July 9, 2024 - Page 7 of 9
Foothill Boulevard, and find that the project is Categorically Exempt under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), subject to the following conditions of approval:
1. The use approved by CUP 24-02 shall be limited to a maximum of twelve (12)
students. Of the 12 students, eight (8) of them shall not be of high school age. There
shall be a maximum of three (3) instructors at any given time.
2. A clear and unobstructed window shall be required either on the classroom doors or
walls in order to provide visibility into each classroom from outside of the rooms at all
times. This shall be approved by the Planning Division prior to issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy from the Building Division.
3. The sessions for high school students shall not be held at the same time as the classes
for the students not of high school age. The business hours or classes may be
adjusted at the discretion of the Deputy Development Services Director, or designee.
4. The Applicant shall be required to install a fire alarm system and the main exit door
shall be equipped with panic or lever type hardware. A latched or key operated locks
are not permitted. The unit must have a fire extinguisher with a minimum rating of
2A:10BC. They
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy from the Building Division.
5. A knox box shall be provided at an approved location by the Fire Department.
6. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy from the Building Division, one (1)
Automated External Defibrillator (AED) shall be installed. The location of the AED shall
be identified on the plans submitted for plan check in Building Services and is subject
to review and approval by the Deputy Development Services Director, or designee.
7. 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
8. 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
11
Resolution No. 2148 - CUP 24-02
139 E. Foothill Blvd.
July 9, 2024 - Page 8 of 9
Director, or their respective designees. The changes to the existing facility may be
subject to building permits after having fully detailed plans submitted for plan check
review and approval by the aforementioned City officials.
9. 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,
e
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
24-02
and which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of the Applicant or those
ment 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
and expenses incurred by, and/or awarded against, the City or any of the
Indemn
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, A
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.
10. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions, and conditions of approval for CUP 24-
02 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which
could result in the closing of the educational center.
12
Resolution No. 2148 - CUP 24-02
139 E. Foothill Blvd.
July 9, 2024 - Page 9 of 9
11. Approval of CUP 24-02 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
Acceptance Form 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 proposal, the Commission should
approve a motion to approve Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 24-02 stating that the
proposal satisfies the requisite findings and adopting the attached Resolution No. 2148
that incorporates the requisite environmental, Conditional Use Permit findings and the
conditions of approval as presented in this staff report, or as modified by the Commission.
Denial
If the Planning Commission intends to deny this proposal, the Commission should
approve a motion to deny Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 24-02 stating that the
finding(s) of the proposal does not satisfy with reasons based on the record, and direct
staff to prepare a resolution for adoption at the next meeting that incorporates the
If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has questions or comments
regarding this matter prior to the July 9, 2024, hearing, please contact Associate Planner,
Gary Yesayan, at (626) 574-5422, or by email at gyesayan@ArcadiaCA.gov.
Approved:
Lisa L. Flores
Deputy Development Services Director
Attachment No. 1: Resolution No. 2148
Attachment No. 2: Aerial Image, Zoning Information, and Photos of the Subject Property
Attachment No. 3: Site and Floor Plans
Attachment No. 4: Preliminary Exemption Assessment
13
Attachment No. 1
Attachment No. 1
Resolution No. 2148
14
RESOLUTION NO. 2148
APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 24-02 TO ALLOW
AN EDUCATIONAL CENTER FOR ROBOTICS AND CODING AT “THE
SHOPPES AT HIGHLANDS CENTER” THAT IS LOCATED AT 139 E.
FOOTHILL BOULEVARD
WHEREAS, on April 9, 2024, an application for Conditional Use Permit No. CUP
24-02 was filed by Wendy and Spencer Mo, for a proposed educational center (dba
Magikid) for robotics and coding classes for elementary to high-school age students with
up to twelve (12) students and three (3) instructors at any one time, located at 139 East
Foothill Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, on June 18, 2024, Planning Services completed an environmental
assessment for the proposed educational center in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and recommends that the Planning Commission
determine that the proposed educational center qualifies as a Class 1 Categorical
Exemption under CEQA pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines as the use
of an existing facility; and
WHEREAS, on July 9, 2024, a duly noticed public hearing was held before the
Planning Commission on said application, at which time all interested persons were given
full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The factual data submitted by the Community Development Division
in the staff report dated July 9, 2024, are true and correct.
15
2
SECTION 2. This Commission finds that based upon the entire record, pursuant
to Section 9107.09.050 of the Arcadia Development Code, all of the following findings for
the Conditional Use Permit can be made.
1. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific
plan; and is allowed within the applicable zone, subject to the granting of a Conditional
Use Permit, and complies with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code
and the Municipal Code.
FACT: The proposed educational center for robotics and coding is consistent with
the Arcadia General Plan which allows for a wide-range of commercial uses, including
neighborhood-serving uses such as educational centers. The site is zoned C-G (General
Commercial) which under Development Code Section 9102.03.020, Table 2-8, allows
tutoring and educational centers such as a proposed use, subject to review and approval
of a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed educational center will occupy one of the
vacant units within an existing neighborhood shopping center known as The Shoppes at
Highlands Center and the proposed business will comply with all the applicable provisions
of the Development Code and the Municipal Code. The proposed educational center is
complementary to the surrounding commercial uses as there are other similar businesses
serving the same age group such as a Martial Arts Studio, educational or tutoring centers
nearby, such as Kumon, Code Ninjas, and My Learning Center located within close
proximity from the subject site. The proposed use is consistent with the following General
Plan and policy:
16
3
Land Use and Community Design Element
Policy LU-6.7: Encourage a balanced distribution of commercial development
throughout the City, ensuring that neighborhoods and districts have adequate access to
local-serving commercial uses
2. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed activity
will be compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity.
FACT: The proposed educational center will occupy a vacant 1,200 square foot unit
within an existing multi-tenant commercial building. The commercial center includes
several other similar businesses such as the Kumon tutoring center, and a Tae Kwon Do
martial arts studio. Such uses are consistent with the City’s General Plan for development
in General Commercial (C-G) zones. The education center will have a maximum of 15
people at any given time: 12 elementary to jr. high students, and three (3) instructors.
Classes with under high-school age students and high school students will not overlap as
conditioned. The educational center will require interior tenant improvement subject to
building permits. No exterior changes are proposed to accommodate the use. As such,
the proposed activity will be compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity.
3. The site is physically suitable in terms of:
A. Its design, location, shape, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed
use in order to accommodate the use, site improvements loading, and parking.
FACT: The proposed educational center for robotics and coding will be located
within an existing multi-tenant building that has other freestanding buildings. The site can
accommodate this use as there are plenty of available parking spaces throughout the day,
the proposed business hours will be compatible with the hours of the adjacent uses, and
17
4
no exterior modifications are proposed. Therefore, the unit and site are suitable for the
proposed educational center.
B. Streets and highways adequate to accommodate public and emergency vehicle
(e.g., fire and medical) access.
FACT: The site is located along E. Foothill Boulevard with access to the shopping
center parking lot from both E. Foothill Boulevard and N. Second Avenue. These streets
are adequate in width and pavement type to carry the traffic that will be generated by the
proposed educational use, including adequate access for emergency vehicles. The
proposed educational center will not impact these rights-of-ways.
C. Public protection services (e.g., fire protection, police protection, etc.).
FACT: The Fire and Police Departments have reviewed the application and
determined that no additional improvements are needed to provide adequate protection
services to the subject site.
D. The provision of utilities (e.g., potable water, schools, solid waste collection and
disposal, storm drainage, wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal, etc.).
FACT: The subject unit is located within an existing commercial building, in a multi-
tenant shopping center which is adequately serviced by existing utilities. The request does
not include new construction that will impact the provision of utilities, nor will it be operated
in a manner that will impact the provisions of utilities. Therefore, no impacts to the provision
of utilities are anticipated.
4. The measure of site suitability shall be required to ensure that the type, density,
and intensity of use being proposed will not adversely affect the public convenience,
health, interest, safety, or general welfare, constitute a nuisance, or be materially injurious
18
5
to the improvements, persons, property, or uses in the vicinity and zone in which the
property is located.
FACT: The proposed educational center for robotics and coding will provide a
service in compliance with and pursuant to the Arcadia Development Code. The proposed
business will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare, or the surrounding
properties, as the site is located on a commercial corridor with a diverse type of businesses
that serve the surrounding communities. The size and nature of the proposed educational
center will be compatible with the other uses as there are other educational or fitness
facilities for students of the same age. Therefore, the site is suitable for such use.
5. This Project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines pertaining to the use of
an existing facility.
SECTION 3. For the foregoing reasons the Planning Commission determines that
the proposed educational center is Categorically Exempt per Class 1, Section 15301(a)
of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines and approves
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 24-02 for a new educational center within an existing
commercial unit located at 139 E. Foothill Blvd., subject to the conditions of approval
attached hereto.
SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
[SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE]
19
6
Passed, approved and adopted this 9th day of July, 2024.
______________________
Vincent Tsoi
Chair, Planning Commission
ATTEST:
______________________
Lisa L. Flores
Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
Michael J. Maurer
City Attorney
20
7
Page Internationally Left Blank
21
8
RESOLUTION NO. 2148
Conditions of Approval
1. The use approved by CUP 24-02 shall be limited to a maximum of twelve (12)
students. Of the 12 students, eight (8) of them shall not be of high school age. There
shall be a maximum of three (3) instructors at any given time.
2. The sessions for high school students shall not be held at the same time as the classes
for the students not of high school age. The business hours or classes may be
adjusted at the discretion of the Deputy Development Services Director, or designee
3. A clear and unobstructed window shall be required either on the classroom doors or
walls in order to provide visibility into each classroom from outside of the rooms at all
times. This shall be approved by the Planning Division prior to issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy from the Building Division.
4. The Applicant shall be required to install a fire alarm system and the main exit door
shall be equipped with panic or lever type hardware. A latched or key operated locks
are not permitted. The unit must have a fire extinguisher with a minimum rating of
2A
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy from the Building Division.
5. A knox box shall be provided at an approved location by the Fire Department.
6. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy from the Building Division, one (1)
Automated External Defibrillator (AED) shall be installed. The location of the AED shall
be identified on the plans submitted for plan check in Building Services and is subject
to review and approval by the Deputy Development Services Director, or designee.
7. 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
8. 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,
22
9
Deputy Development Services Director, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services
Director, or their respective designees. The changes to the existing facility may be
subject to building permits after having fully detailed plans submitted for plan check
review and approval by the aforementioned City officials.
9. 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,
e
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
-
and which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of the Applicant or those
of the App
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
and expenses incurred by, and/or awarded against, the City or any of the
Indemn
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, A
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.
10. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions, and conditions of approval for CUP 24-
02 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which
could result in the closing of the educational center.
23
10
11. Approval of CUP 24-02 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
Acceptance Form to the Development Services Department is to indicate awareness
and acceptance of the conditions of approval.
---
24
Attachment No. 2
Attachment No. 2
Aerial Image with Zoning Information &
Photos of the Subject Site
25
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.):
C-G
Number of Units:
C
Property Characteristics
1966
17,000
0
Property Owner
Site Address:121 E FOOTHILL BLVD
Parcel Number: 5771-021-029
N/A
Zoning:
General Plan:
N/A
Downtown Overlay:
Downtown Parking Overlay:
Architectural Design Overlay:Yes
N/A
N/A
N/A
Residential Flex Overlay:
N/A
Yes
N/A
Yes
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 19-Jun-2024
Page 1 of 1 26
27
28
29
Attachment No. 3
Attachment No. 3
Site Plan and Floor Plan
30
31
32
33
Attachment No. 4
Attachment No. 4
Preliminary Exemption Assessment
34
Preliminary Exemption Assessment
1.Name or description of project:Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 24-02 to allow a tutoring center
within an existing commercial center.
2.Project Location The project site is located at 139 E. Foothill Blvd. The proposed
tutoring center will be located in one of the units within an
existing multi-tenant commercial center located at the northwest
corner of N. Second Ave., and E. Foothill Blvd.
3.Entity or person undertaking
project:
A.
B.Other (Private)
(1)Name Magikid Tutoring of Robotics and Coding
(2)Address 150 N. Santa Anita Ave. # 300
4.Staff Determination:
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:
15301 Class 1 (Use of an existing facility)
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:
Date: June 18, 2024 Staff: Gary Yesayan, Associate Planner
35
ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
TUESDAY, JUNE 11, 2024
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 Tsoi called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Chair Tsoi, Arvizu, Hui, and Tallerico
ABSENT: Vice Chair Wilander
It was moved by Commissioner Arvizu and seconded by Commissioner Tallerico to excuse Vice Chair
Wilander from the meeting.
Without objection, the motion was approved.
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS
Planning Services Manager Fiona Graham informed the Commission that we received three letters
regarding Consent Item No. 1, and they were forwarded to the Commissioners via email and a hard copy
was provided on the dais.
PUBLIC COMMENTS (5 minute time limit per person)
There were none.
PUBLIC HEARING
1. Resolution No. 2147– Approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 24-03 for a new tattoo shop at
617 S. First Avenue
CEQA: Exempt
Recommendation: Adopt
Applicant: Shihao Zhao
MOTION - PUBLIC HEARING
Chair Tsoi introduced the item and Associate Planner Gary Yesayan presented the staff report.
Commissioner Tallerico asked if the Applicant was previously unaware that a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) is required to operate a tattoo shop due to the fact that the Applicant had previously
operated a tattoo shop at a different location in the City without the necessary approval.
Mr. Yesayan confirmed that the Applicant was unaware that a CUP is required to operate a tattoo
shop.
Commissioner Tallerico asked if an applicant can apply for a CUP after they have been in violation
of the Municipal Code.
36
2 6/11/2024
Mr. Yesayan said yes, they may retroactively apply for a CUP if the location is appropriate for the
use.
Commissioner Arvizu asked about the doors in the front and rear of the unit, and which doors will
be used for emergency purposes.
Mr. Yesayan stated that the double doors off First Avenue will be used as the main entrance and
the rear doors will serve as ingress and egress from the rear parking lot.
Commissioner Arvizu asked if the awning on the front exterior will cover the entire entrance of the
unit.
Mr. Yesayan said the awning will cover the entire entrance of the unit.
The public hearing was opened.
Qian Ding, also known as Jasmine, the Applicant’s spouse, introduced herself and their business.
Ms. Ding stated she has lived in Arcadia for 10 years and she and her husband are excited to
open their business in Arcadia. Mr. Zhao has been a tattoo artist for nine (9) years and previously
worked at a tattoo shop in El Monte.
Commissioner Arvizu asked Ms. Ding what their plan is for the front façade of the unit, specifically
regarding the existing window signage from the previous tenant.
Ms. Ding stated they will work with neighboring businesses to clean up the exterior and make the
building look uniform and seamless.
Commissioner Hui asked if Secret Tattoo on Foothill Boulevard was their previous business.
Ms. Ding stated that was their previous location and they are working with Google to remove their
business’ name from the Foothill Boulevard address and add it to their new location once
approved for the CUP.
Chair Tsoi asked if they will be installing a sign for their business.
Ms. Ding said yes, they will be applying for a sign permit once approved to operate.
Commissioner Arvizu asked if there will be a privacy curtain to shield customers from being
observed from First Avenue.
Ms. Ding said they would like to leave the windows uncovered and will rearrange the tattoo
stations in a way that will conceal the customers from public view, but that they also had a privacy
screen that they could move around the tattoo shop as required.
No one spoke in favor of the proposal.
No one spoke in opposition to the proposal.
Commissioner Arvizu made a motion to close the public hearing. Commissioner Tallerico
seconded the motion.
37
3 6/11/2024
Without objection, the motion was approved.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Arvizu’s concern was privacy and he wanted to ensure customers were adequately
screened from the public view from First Avenue. He had no further concerns.
Commissioner Tallerico said the proposed business meets all the requirements and therefore had
no concerns about the tattoo shop.
Commissioner Hui had no concerns.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Tallerico, seconded by Commissioner Arvizu to adopt Resolution
No. 2147 approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 24-03 for a new tattoo shop at 617 S. First
Avenue in which the findings were made and is CEQA exempt.
ROLL CALL
AYES: Chair Tsoi, Commissioners Arvizu, Hui, and Tallerico
NOES: None
ABSENT: Vice Chair Wilander
The motion was approved.
There is a ten day appeal period. Appeals are to be filed by 4:30 p.m. on Friday, June 21, 2024.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, recommending that
the City Council deny Architectural Design Review No. ADR 23-13 with a Density Bonus and
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 23-09 for the revised, three-story senior assisted living care
facility known as “The Ivy Arcadia” at 1150 W. Colorado Boulevard.
Recommendation: Approve
It was moved by Commissioner Arvizu, seconded by Commissioner Tallerico to consider Item No.
1 from the Consent Calendar for further discussion.
Without objection, the motion was approved.
The Applicant, Carrissa Savant, shared a presentation and discussed some modifications that
were made to the Project’s design to address the concerns of neighboring property owners. The
modifications included rearranging the parking spaces, lowering the finished grade, and the
provision of additional perimeter landscaping to increase privacy for adjacent properties. Ms.
Savant also reported that they conducted a community meeting with the neighbors per
recommendation of the Planning Commission at the previous public hearing.
38
4 6/11/2024
Chair Tsoi asked if the highest point of the previously approved project and the Ivy project were
relatively close in height.
Ms. Savant confirmed that it is the case.
Commissioner Arvizu asked for clarification on the difference in height between the previously
approved project and the proposed project.
Ms. Savant said that the Artis project had approximately 15-foot floor plates and was
approximately 37’-5” and 40’-1” at its highest point due to a design element at the front of the
building. The Ivy project was about 39’-6”.
Commissioner Arvizu asked Ms. Savant what the height of their floor plates are.
Ms. Savant said the floor plates of the Ivy will be 10-feet on each floor with some additional ceiling
height in the common dining room on the third floor.
Commissioner Tallerico requested clarification on the backyard simulations created by the
Applicant to show the visibility of the proposed building from neighboring properties. Mr. Tallerico
wanted to know the difference between the simulations showing current conditions and those
showing the simulated view once the building is constructed, because he did not see any major
differences.
Ms. Savant said the simulations demonstrate the current backyard views and the trees between
the properties are very tall and dense, therefore they will screen the proposed project making it
difficult to see in many cases.
Chair Tsoi asked for clarification on the original grade.
Ms. Savant explained why there was a discrepancy between the approved plans for the Artis
project and the proposed the Ivy plans.
Acting Senior Planner Edwin Arreola explained that the Artis project had used an existing grade
level six feet higher than the Ivy project, the reason being that the projects were measured from
different starting points which explained the discrepancy.
Commissioner Arvizu asked what the final height of the Ivy project versus the Artis project would
be.
Mr. Hills said the finished main level ground floor of the project will be 18 inches lower than the
Artis project, and the final overall height of the Ivy will be approximately four feet higher.
Commissioner Arvizu asked what amenities will be on the third floor.
Mr. Hills stated that the main kitchen, main dining area, and a few resident units will be on the
third floor.
Commissioner Arvizu asked what the plate heights of the third floor are.
Mr. Hills said the plate heights throughout the three floors in the development will be 10-feet with
the dining room on the third floor having a higher plate and ceiling height.
39
5 6/11/2024
Full sets of plans with the new modifications shown were distributed to the Planning
Commissioners.
Commissioner Arvizu asked what the plate heights will be on the second and first floors. He also
asked what amenities will be on those floors.
Mr. Hills said the second floor will also have a 10-foot plate. This floor will consist of residential
units, a laundry room, a staff lounge, offices, storage rooms, and a utility room.
Mr. Hills stated that the first floor will have all the memory care resident units, assisted care
resident units, and all their amenities including a dining room and laundry room. Additionally, the
first floor will consist of the reception area, a library, and a small café.
Commissioner Arvizu asked why the project will have 10’-11’ foot plate heights.
Mr. Hills explained that the plate heights will be 11- feet high, however, in the residential units the
ceilings will be about 8’-8” high due to the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning mechanisms
in the ceilings.
Commissioner Hui requested to be excused to leave the meeting at 8:05 p.m.
Chair Tsoi said the changes are an improvement, but the total footprint of the development will
still be significantly larger than the original approved project.
Mr. Hills explained the building will only be two floors from the perspective of the south and east
neighboring properties. The third floor will be visible on the north and west side and the setback
will be about 60’-70’ feet from the adjacent neighbors.
Chair Tsoi commented on the slope of the lot and asked what the average maximum height limit
is.
Mr. Arreola said the height limit is 40 feet. He explained the height limit is measured by taking the
average of the highest existing grade and the lowest existing grade.
Mr. Hills said the grade was lowered but the building height was not raised, and therefore meets
the maximum height limit of 40 feet.
Chair Tsoi pointed out that the east and south sides were raised according to the plans and asked
Mr. Hills for the average of the proposed grade levels.
Mr. Hills did not have the grade heights on hand.
The Public Hearing was opened.
No one spoke in favor of the proposal.
James Wheeler introduced himself as a resident located adjacent to the project site. Mr. Wheeler
acknowledged the Applicant’s efforts to communicate with him and his neighbors about the
modifications of their plans. Mr. Wheeler believed the project would obstruct the view of the
mountains from his home. Mr. Wheeler also remained concerned that the balconies on the east
40
6 6/11/2024
side of the building will have an impact on his privacy especially because the wall between
properties will remain the same height.
Commissioner Tallerico asked Mr. Wheeler if his main concerns were privacy and the existing
views of the mountains.
Mr. Wheeler confirmed and said those are a significant portion of his concerns.
Commissioner Tallerico asked if he would be in favor of the project if the Developer were to
address his concerns.
Mr. Wheeler said yes and clarified that he was not opposed to the Artis project, but the new
proposal is significantly larger and will impact his life.
Commissioner Arvizu asked Mr. Wheeler where his home is located adjacent to the subject site.
Mr. Wheeler said his house is located on the southeast corner adjacent to the project property.
Commissioner Arvizu asked Mr. Wheeler if one of his concerns was noise impacts from the
development.
Mr. Wheeler agreed that was one of the concerns, but the developer has since removed some of
the parking spaces that were proposed to be behind his rear wall.
Catherine Gornto introduced herself as a neighbor on the east side of the project site and said
her previous concerns remain the same, specifically privacy and noise impacts. Ms. Gornto stated
she would like to see a rendering of the Artis and the Ivy side by side to understand the difference
in height between the two projects.
Craig Tom, a neighbor adjacent to the subject property on the west side, spoke in opposition to
the project and stated he is concerned his privacy will be impacted.
Commissioner Tallerico asked if the Density Bonus allows the Developer to exceed the City’s
requirements.
Ms. Graham confirmed and explained that the California Density Bonus Law allows the project to
exceed the maximum permitted Floor Area Ratio because they are providing senior housing.
Ray Gornto spoke in opposition to the project due to its height and size. Mr. Gornto said he values
his privacy, security, and the views of the mountains and said they will all be impacted by the
proposed project.
Commissioner Arvizu made a motion to close the public hearing. Commissioner Tallerico
seconded the motion.
Without objection, the motion was approved.
41
7 6/11/2024
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Tallerico acknowledged the Developer’s efforts to appease the neighbors’
concerns but ultimately stood by his original vote to deny recommendation.
Commissioner Arvizu said he understands the need for a senior development in the community
but also acknowledged the neighbors’ concerns. Mr. Arvizu said the modifications to the plans
were not significant and the size of the building is still too large. Mr. Arvizu expressed his
opposition to the proposed project.
Chair Tsoi agreed with the Commissioners and said that he remains concerned about the height
and scale of the development. Mr. Tsoi acknowledged the letters from the housing advocates who
stated the project must be approved if no options for mitigation are agreed upon. He said that this
project has options for compromise. Mr. Tsoi suggested the third floor can be eliminated by
rearranging the amenities and residential units throughout the second and first floor.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Tallerico, seconded by Commissioner Arvizu to adopt Resolution
No. 2146 recommending denial to the City Council of Architectural Design Review No. ADR 23-
13 with a Density Bonus and Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 23-09 for the revised, three-story,
senior assisted living care facility known as “The Ivy Arcadia” at 1150 W. Colorado Boulevard.
ROLL CALL
AYES: Chair Tsoi, Commissioners Arvizu and Tallerico
NOES: None
ABSENT: Vice Chair Wilander and Commissioner Hui
The motion was approved.
2. Minutes of the June 11, 2024, Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission
Recommendation: Approve
Commissioner Arvizu motioned to approve the minutes and seconded by Commissioner Tallerico.
AYES: Chair Tsoi, Commissioners Arvizu and Tallerico
NOES: None
ABSENT: Vice Chair Wilander and Commissioner Hui
The motion was approved.
MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL LIAISON
City Council Member Kwan had nothing to report.
MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSONERS
Commissioner Arvizu thanked the neighbors for coming out and voicing their concerns.
42
8 6/11/2024
Commissioner Tallerico shared he would like to make a recommendation to the City Council about Hostile
Architecture.
City Attorney Michael Maurer informed him that this cannot be initiated by the Planning Commission, and
it can only be initiated by the City Council or by staff.
Commissioner Tallerico asked what his options are to add Hostile Architecture onto the agenda for
discussion or recommendation to the City Council.
Mr. Maurer said he may comment at the City Council meeting during public comments as a resident or
Commissioner. However, it is up to the City Council to initiate discussion for the item.
Commissioner Tallerico asked if the Planning Commission and City Council can meet to discuss various
topics.
Mr. Maurer said they can, but it must be placed on an agenda and be opened to the public.
Chair Tsoi asked for more information about the letters from the California Housing Defense Fund
(CalHDF) and Californians for Homeownership regarding the Housing Accountability Act (HAA).
Mr. Maurer explained that the HAA limits the reasons for denial of a project when housing is involved in
a project proposal.
Commissioner Arvizu asked if the letters can be considered an opinion and the organization’s
interpretation of the law.
Mr. Maurer said yes, that is the case, however, they are still important and should be considered as a
public comment.
MATTERS FROM CITY ATTORNEY
Mr. Maurer had nothing to report.
MATTERS FROM STAFF INCLUDING UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS
Ms. Graham reported that there were no items scheduled for the June 25, 2024, Planning Commission
meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Commission adjourned the meeting at 9:11 p.m., to Tuesday, June 25, 2024, at 7:00 p.m.
in the City Council Chamber.
Chair Tsoi, Planning Commission
43
9 6/11/2024
ATTEST:
Lisa L. Flores
Secretary, Planning Commission
44