Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5-25-10PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL PUBLIC HEARINGS ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Tuesday, May 25, 2010, 7:00 P.M. Arcadia City Council Chambers SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON NON PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 5 minute time limit per person. All interested persons are invited to appear at the Public Hearing and to provide evidence or testimony concerning any of the proposed items set forth below for consideration. You are hereby advised that should you desire to legally challenge any action taken by the Planning Commission with respect to the proposed item for consideration, you may be limited to raising only those issues and objections, which you or someone else raises at or prior to the time of the Public Hearing. 1. HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION APPEAL NO. HOA 10-04 AND OAK TREE PERMIT NO. TRD 10 -10 1131 Singing Wood Drive Von Jack, Inc. Gary Peters and Eric Betzler This is an appeal to reconsider the Rancho Santa Anita (Upper Rancho) Property Owners Association's Architectural Review Board denial of the proposed design for a new, two -story, single family residence. In addition, eighteen (18) diseased and /or hazardous oak trees are proposed to be removed for this development. RECOMMENDATION: Approve appeal There is a five working day appeal period after the approval/denial of the appeal. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, June 2, 2010. 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 10-04 1741 South Baldwin Avenue Michelle Wang (d.b.a. Nobel Education Institute) The applicant is requesting an amendment to CUP 09 -09 (Resolution 1811) which permitted a 115 student tutoring center with operating hours of 3:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday Friday. The amendment would permit the following four (4) changes: a. Expanded operating hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday Friday for a 9 -week period beginning in June and ending in August. b. Saturday classes with operating hours of 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. and no more than 30 students at any one time. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the Planning Services office at City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (626) 574 -5423. PC AGENDA 5 -25 -10 c. A permanent sign to be displayed at a residentially zoned property. d. A temporary banner to be displayed at a residentially zoned property. RECOM MENDATION: Conditional approval A Resolution reflecting the decision of the Planning Commission will be presented for adoption at the next Commission meeting. There will be a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 10 05 846 West Duarte Road (dba Ten Ren's Tea Time) Austin Ming Te Li of Tea Joy, Inc. The applicant is requesting an amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 00 -11 (Resolution 1612) to provide 18 additional outdoor seats at an existing 752 square -foot tea house that currently has 22 indoor seats and 12 incidental outdoor seats. RECOMMENDATION: Conditional approval A Resolution reflecting the decision of the Planning Commission will be presented for adoption at the next Commission meeting. There will be a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 10 411 East Huntington Drive, #122 Golden Dragon Restaurant Enterprises, Inc. The applicant is requesting an amendment to CUP 91 -12 (Resolution 1470) which permitted a restaurant with seating for 18 persons. The amendment would permit the following changes: a. Increase the maximum allowable seating from 18 persons to 48 persons. b. Remove the condition that prohibits the serving of alcoholic beverages. RECOMMENDATION: Conditional approval A Resolution reflecting the decision of the Planning Commission will be presented for adoption at the next Commission meeting. There will be a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. 5. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. TPM 10 01 (Parcel Map No. 71302) 1016 La Cadena Avenue 41 Califomia, LLC (property owner) The applicant is requesting a tentative parcel map for a 2 -unit residential condominium subdivision. RECOMMENDATION: Conditional approval There is a ten (10) day appeal period after the approval/denial of the subdivision. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Monday, June 7, 2010. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the Planning Services office at City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (628) 574 -5423. PC AGENDA 5 -25-10 6. MODIFICATION APPLICATION NO. MP 10 -01 AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. ADR 10 -08 728 West Huntington Drive Sanyao International, Inc. (Designer) The applicant is requesting the following modifications and architectural design review for a proposed 5 -unit residential condominium project on an R -3 multiple family zoned property: a. A 25' -0" front yard setback in lieu of the 35' -0" special setback required; b. A 5' -0" building separation in lieu of 14'-0" required; and c. A 12' -0" westerly side yard setbck in lieu of 15' -0" required for an air conditioning unit. RECOMMENDATION: Conditional approval There is a five working day appeal period after the approval/denial of the applications. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, June 2, 2010. 7. TEXT AMENDMENT NO. TA 10 11 Consideration of Text Amendment No. TA 10 -11 for a proposed ordinance amending Article IX (Division and Use of Land) of the Arcadia Municipal Code to define and address regulations for personal service business uses and the requirements for Conditional Use Permits for such uses. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval to City Council The Planning Commission's recommendation and comments will be forwarded to the City Council. CONSENT ITEMS 8. MINUTES OF MAY 11, 2010 RECOMMENDATION: Approval MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMISSION MODIFICATION COMMITTEE AGENDA MATTERS FROM STAFF UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the Planning Services office at City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (626) 574-5423. PC AGENDA 5 -25 -10 PLANNING COMMISSION 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 the City Clerk 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. Public Hearing Procedure 1. The public hearing is opened by the Chairman of the Planning Commission. 2. The Planning staff report is presented by staff. 3. Commissioners' questions relating to the Planning staff report may be asked and answered at this time. 4. The applicant is afforded the opportunity to address the Commission. 5. Others in favor of the proposal are afforded the opportunity to address the Commission. (LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES) 6. Those in opposition to the proposal are afforded the opportunity to address the Commission. (LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES) 7. The applicant may be afforded the opportunity for a brief rebuttal. (LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES) 8. The Commission closes the public hearing. 9. The Commission members may discuss the proposal at this time. 10. The Commission then makes a motion and acts on the proposal to either approve, approve with conditions or modifications, deny, or continue it to a specific date. 11. Following the Commission's action on Conditional Use Permits and Variances, a resolution reflecting the decision of the Planning Commission is prepared for adoption by the Commission. This is usually presented at the next Planning Commission meeting. There is a five (5) working day appeal period after the adoption of the resolution. 12. Following the Commission's action on Modifications and Design Reviews, there is a five (5) working day appeal period. 13. Following the Commission's review of Zone Changes, Text Amendments and General Plan Amendments, the Commission's comments and recommendations are forwarded to the City Council for the Council's consideration at a scheduled public hearing. 14. Following the Commission's action on Tentative Tract Maps and Tentative Parcel Maps (subdivisions) there is a ten (10) calendar day appeal period. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the Planning Services office at City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (626) 574 -5423. PC AGENDA 5 -25 -10 May 25, 2010 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: SUMMARY Arcadia Planning Commission Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Thomas Li, Associate Planner STAFF REPORT Development Services Department Homeowners' Association Appeal No. HOA 10 -04 and Oak Tree Removal Application No. TRD 10 -10 for a new, single family residence at 1131 Singing Wood Drive. This is an appeal by Von Jack, Inc. (Mr. Gary Peters and Mr. Eric Betzler) the property owner -in- escrow of a denial by the Rancho Santa Anita (Upper Rancho) Property Owners Association's Architectural Review Board (ARB) of the proposed design for a new, two -story, single family residence at 1131 Singing Wood Drive. The Development Services Department is recommending that the Planning Commission overturn the ARB decision and approve appeal no. HOA 10 -04, and conditionally approve the related Oak Tree Removal Application No. TRD 10 -10, subject to the conditions listed in this staff report. BACKGROUND On April 27, 2010, the Upper Rancho ARB reviewed and denied the proposed design for a new, two -story, single family residence at 1131 Singing Wood Drive. The proposed plans and photos of the subject property and vicinity are attached. A denial letter was issued on April 30, 2010 by Mr. Brad Koehler, Chairman of the Upper Rancho ARB. The letter states that the ARB denied the proposed residence because they found it to be inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood. On May 10, 2010, Mr. Gary Peters, representing Von Jack, Inc. filed an appeal of the ARB decision. Copies of the letters are attached. PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION Public hearing notices of this appeal were mailed on May 14, 2010 to the owners of those properties within 100 feet of the subject property (see the attached 100 -foot radius map) and to the Upper Rancho HOA President, Mr. Norm Doerges, and the ARB Chairman, Mr. Brad Koehler. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) a ministerial project is Categorically Exempt (Section 15300.1 of the CEQA Guidelines) and therefore, the public hearing notice was not published in the local newspaper. PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS The appellant is requesting that the Planning Commission overturn the Upper Rancho ARB decision to deny the proposed design for a new, two -story, single family residence at the subject property. The proposed residence will have a floor area of approximately 7,400 square feet, and the floor plan includes six bedrooms, a library, a home office, a retreat room, and an attached, three -car garage. Architectural features include concrete tile roofing, stone veneer, smooth -coat or light -scrub plaster, and wood shutters. Contrary to the Upper Rancho ARB's findings, it is staff's opinion that the proposed residence is consistent with the character of the neighborhood and the City's Single Family Residential Architectural Design Guidelines. In 2008, a house of essentially the same design was constructed at 1032 Singing Wood Drive; photos of this house are attached. While there are concerns that tract -type housing be avoided, the property at 1032 Singing Wood Drive and the subject property cannot be seen at the same time. The proposed plans were also approved for multiple sites in the Anoakia Estates, which is also located in the Upper Rancho HOA, but is physically separated from the subject area. And, the appellants obtained signatures of consent from all contiguous property owners, excepting the vacant property to the rear of the subject site. The Upper Rancho HOA regulations (City Council Resolution No. 5288 attached) set forth in item 19 (Standards for Board Decisions and Appeals) of Section 3 on page 6 of Resolution No. 5288 that any body hearing an appeal of an ARB decision be guided by the following principles: Control of architectural appearance and use of materials shall not be so exercised that individual initiative is stifled in creating the appearance of external features of any particular structure, building, fence, wall or roof, except to the extent necessary to establish contemporary accepted standards of harmony and compatibility acceptable to the Board or body hearing an appeal in order to avoid that which is excessive, garish, and substantially unrelated to the neighborhood. (Pertains to Exterior Building Materials Exterior Building Appearance). Good architectural character is based upon the principles of harmony and proportion in the elements of the structure as well as the relationship of such principles to adjacent structures and other structures in the neighborhood. (Pertains to Exterior Building Materials Exterior Building Appearance). HOA 10 -04 TRD 10 -10 1131 Singing Wood Drive May 25, 2010 page 2 A poorly designed external appearance of a structure, wall, fence, or roof, can be detrimental to the use and enjoyment and value of adjacent property and neighborhood. (Pertains to Exterior Building Materials Exterior Building Appearance). A good relationship between adjacent front yards increases the value of properties and makes the use of both properties more enjoyable. (Pertains to Front Yards). Oak Tree Removal Application No. TRD 10 -10 There are 24 oak trees on the subject property. The appellant retained a certified arborist, Mr. Bruce Howard of Top Notch Tree and Landscape to evaluate the oak trees. Mr. Howard's report (attached) recommends the removal of 18 oak trees due to disease and /or hazardous conditions. His observations indicate that the property has been neglected for a long time and that all the trees and foliage are in very poor condition. Two of the oak trees have died, and others are dying and severely deformed due to heavy over pruning over many years. The attached arborist report outlines each tree's condition and the arborist's recommendations. Permits to remove diseased and /or hazardous oak trees are typically handled administratively; however, when an oak tree application is related to another application, the oak tree application is to be considered in conjunction with that other application. In this case, staff thinks that the arborist's report is somewhat cursory and would like to see additional discussion about any oak trees that could possibly be saved (i.e., trees no. 9, 11, 12, 18 and 23) as well as discussion and recommendations for replacement trees. Because many of the trees are dead, diseased, and hazardous due to neglect, staff feels that replacement trees should be provided at a 2:1 ratio with the specific species, sizes and locations to be determined by a certified arborist. CODE REQUIREMENTS The proposed project is required to comply with all Code requirements and policies as determined to be necessary by the Building Official, Fire Marshal, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator, and Public Works Services Director, which are to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval. RECOMMENDATION It is staffs opinion that approval of the appeal would be consistent with the aforementioned principles stated in City Council Resolution No. 5288 and that the Oak Tree Application needs additional information. The Development Services Department recommends that the Planning Commission overturn the Upper Rancho ARB's decision to deny the proposed design and approve Homeowners' Association Appeal No. HOA 10 -04 and Oak Tree Removal Application No. TRD 10 -10, subject to the following conditions: HOA 10 -04 TRD 10 -10 1131 Singing Wood Drive May 25, 2010 page 3 1. All City requirements regarding building safety, fire prevention, fire detection, fire suppression, emergency access, parking, water supply and water facilities, sewer facilities, trash reduction and recycling requirements, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) measures, and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance (WELO) shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Fire Marshal, Public Works Services Director and Development Services Director. Compliance with these requirements is to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval. 2. Oak Tree Removal Application No. TRD 10 -10 shall be supplemented with additional information from a certified arborist regarding replacement trees and to more fully substantiate the need to remove trees no. 9, 11, 12, 18 and 23. Replacement trees shall be provided at a ratio of two (2) replacement trees per each tree removed with the specific species, sizes and locations of the replacement trees to be determined by a certified arborist. 3. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 4. Approval of HOA 10 -04 and TRD 10 -10 shall not take effect until the appellant(s) and property owner(s) have executed and filed an Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to acknowledge awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval, and that all conditions of approval shall be satisfied prior to final inspection of the project. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve the appeal and overturn the ARB denial and approve the removal of the dead, diseased and hazardous oak trees, the Commission should move to approve Appeal No. HOA 10 -04 and Oak Tree HOA 10 -04 TRD 10 -10 1131 Singing Wood Drive May 25, 2010 page 4 Application No. TRD 10 -10, based on determinations that the design of the proposed new residence satisfies the requirements of City Council Resolution No. 5288 and is consistent with the applicable design guidelines; such that the design is harmonious and compatible with the property and neighborhood, is of good architectural character, and will enhance the use, enjoyment and value of the property, the adjacent properties and the neighborhood; and subject to the stated conditions of approval or as modified by the Commission. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny the appeal and uphold the ARB denial and deny the removal of the dead, diseased and hazardous oak trees, the Commission should move to deny Appeal No. HOA 10 -04 and Oak Tree Application No. TRD 10- 10, based on determinations that the design of the proposed new residence does not satisfy the requirements of City Council Resolution No. 5288 and /or is not consistent with the applicable design guidelines; such that it is not harmonious or compatible with the property or neighborhood, is of poor architectural character, or would be detrimental to the use, enjoyment or value of the property, the adjacent properties, or the neighborhood. If any Planning Commissioner or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the May 25, 2010 public hearing, please contact Associate Planner, Thomas Li by calling (626) 574 -5447 or by email at tlic ci.arcadia.ca.us. Approved b Jim m C munity Development Administrator Attachments: Vicinity Map and Aerial Photo 100 -foot Radius Map Proposed Plans Photos of Subject Property and Neighboring Properties ARB's Letter of Denial Appeal Letter Photos of House at 1032 Singing Wood Drive City Council Resolution No. 5288 Arborist's Report HOA 10 -04 TRD 10 -10 1131 Singing Wood Drive May 25, 2010 page 5 100 w (1344) (1336) (1326) (1316) (1306) 0 100 Feet pTO Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by: R.S.Gonzalez, May 2010 R-0 R-0 (1101) (1115) (1125) (1145) (1150) (1085) (1076) a r- i m (1120) (1130) (1150) HAMPTON RD (1145) R-0 17017717.7A (1075) 1031 Singingwood Drive HOA Appeal 10-04 DR 100 NMI NM 0 S 100 1131 Singingwood Dr Arcadia Zone Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by: R.S.Gonzalez, May2010 200 Feet 1131 Singingwood Drive HOA Appeal 10-04 100 -foot radius around 1131 Singing Wood Dr. N -''i. VO 'elPea+V onpo pooh 6u1BUIS 1E11 apuappai kiols OMj MN P190 90016 VO VIPROJV woo eRmS 9 091 smiled Mee 3u1 3r uon 99P1 ona-tooLs PC Vuel.N. •VPIessoeuK1 PPM.. Seep re SINGING WOOD DRIVE t NV1d 31.1S 1 Mr90-90L-L95 9001.6 VO !Pg0JV eng10 glug9 OSI. ke0 :AMPS soup u0A S901-1116L-9Z9 lqa.1.00l13 •uspn. •Agp i2...U� czez PPM.* uomnsaumq seen NV1d 8001d ISHIA 'elpgwv .Atia poom sts6oG 1 11 aDuarqsaN XJOS omi MN 4$ S8Y 1.-86L-9Z9 1490-80Z-Z99 eM,e Nensuld lace 1ry� T wen e lUoS'3ay S V a p l� wen elueg'309t uoMnv6uv waled Nsao'.iepiinB 4 ddf i e. w a o i. e i o` LI.BP uo^ NV Id 2100 Id UNU:). s VD 'eipevy an PQ pooh BwBu!S L E L L aoUap!s J £JOSS OMj MaN 8 090-80Z-Z85 9001.6 VO 9 19e0V e.1eto elueS '3 091. 9.1e66d A D ieppng 'all >l aer uon Set 1 86L-9Z9 relz-leole n Yupne MYp Iw».u�tl ezez C y T uorm6uonq la s V e p `e Nan ..I.. SNUIIVA3 13 801831X3 V3 'eipe3N 9410 pooh 6u0u15 l 1. l aouaPlsaa /JOTS oMl MaN 3 069090Z-Z99 9001.6 V3 'e!Pe3 V area elooS'9 09l oLoled Ne9 .JPI!na •auw >faat UOA 9801. 86L-9Z9 PZlalom6..+ .uapq. .µp two. 4 LUZ lu•tudo,en seep re VJ 'e!Pe3JV 9Aua pooryl 6u0u!S L£ L L aauapisaa 4Jols oMl MaN I��II {fr m b690 90Z•Z9S 9001.6 VO VIPs.V e eI0 Blues 3 OS L sieled NeD J9Plm9 '3I goep UOA ez LZ 58oda �s MM. •WP la 1J!d U MU i uoxneSueno la see 1i iubwaoi:T uei.•o SNOLLD3S `JNIOIIfIB V0 'elpeoJV 9nu0 pooh BuI6uIS L L L aouapisaa AiolS oM± MaN 1 w co 1145 Singing Wood Drive neighbor to the south of the subject property 1131 Singing Wood Drive subject property 1125 Singing Wood Drive neighbor to the north of the subject property 1120 Singing Wood Drive neighbor to the northeast of the subject property 1150 Singing Wood Drive neighbor to the southeast of the subject property Norm Doerges President Dave Cashion Treasurer Gene Brunzell Director John Diehl Director Molly Hsu Director James Kuo Director Jan McEachern Director Premi Thomas Director Virginia Russell Director RANCHO SA 4 ANITA PROPERTY OWNERS :OCIATION, INC. Post Office Box 661268, Arcadia, California, 91066 -1268 April 30, 2010 Julie Williams Vice President Mr. Gary Peters GMP Development Pete Godfrey 150 E. Santa Clara Road Secretary Arcadia, CA 91006 RE: PROPOSED RESIDENCE —1131 SINGING WOOD DRIVE Dear Mr. Peters: The Architectural Review Board for the Rancho Santa Anita Property- Owners Association met on April 27th to review your submittal for the above referenced address. The Board's findings are that the proposed residence is inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood and your request for approval is denied. Please feel free to call me at (213)955 -6405 if you would like to discuss a revised submittal. Sincerely, Brad Koehler Chairman Architectural Review Board City of Arcadia Planning Dept. Director of Planning Jim 240 W. Huntington Drive Arcadia, Ca.91006 -6021 Von Jack Inc. Gary Peters /Eric Betzler 150 E. Santa Clara Arcadia, Ca. 91006 May 9, 2010 Dear Jim: As per our discussion on May 5, 2010, the purpose of this letter is to appeal the Rancho Santa Anita Property Home Owners Decision dated April 30,2010. (see enclosed) I have also enclosed a check for $210.00 as per your request. NY C 1010 I v RE: 1131 Singingwood, Appeal on Upper Ranch HOA. We as the applicant have met all requirements as per Section 3 -1 through 8, Including all signatures of neighboring home owners. (see enclosed) After dealing with Brad Koehler and his untruths with regards to subject site and his personel wishes I regret having to burden you and your Department with this appeal. His Letter of denial dated 4/30/10 and received on 5/3/10 is completely contrary to what is proposed. (see enclosed) The proposed home is consistent with the character of the neighborhood as evidenced on multiple other developments in the Upper Ranch HOA.. Please feel free to contact me at any time at 626 392 -6399 with any assistance or questions that I can answer for you. b q P i Residence at 1032 Singing Wood Drive RESOLUTION NO. 5288 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DETERMINING AND AMENDING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO REAL PROPERTY IN THE AREA WEST OF BALDWIN AVENUE AND NORTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD "D" ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ZONE AREA. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA DOES DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the City Council hereby repeals Resolution No. 4219, and adopts the following Resolution pursuant to Ordinance No. 1439, for the property described in Exhibit "A attached hereto. To implement the regulations applicable to the real property within the Rancho Santa Anita Property Owners Association "D" Architectural Design Zone area, the Architectural Review Board is established and is hereinafter referred to as the "Board The governing body of the Board, is the Rancho Santa Anita Property Owners Association, Inc. SECTION 2. In order to promote and maintain the quality single family residential environment of the City of Arcadia, and to protect the property values and architectural character of such residential environments, in those portions of the City in which the residents have formed a homeowners association, and to accomplish the purposes set forth in Section 4, there is hereby established the following regulations and procedures in which said association may exercise plan review authority. SECTION 3. In order that buildings, structures and landscaping on property within said area will be harmonious with each other and to promote the full and proper utilization of said property, the following conditions are hereby imposed upon all property in said area pursuant to the zoning regulations of the Arcadia Municipal Code, and all those in control of property within said area, are subject to this Resolution, and Ordinance No. 1832: 1. FLOOR AREA. No one family dwelling shall be erected or permitted which contains less than 2,500 square feet of ground floor area. The space contained within any covered porch, balcony or garage attached to a dwelling shall be computed at one- half of the actual square footage therein contained. The minimum required floor area shall be deemed to include the area measured from the outer faces of the exterior walls. 2. FRONT YARD. No building or other structure shall be erected less than forty (40) feet from the front property line. If a dwelling with a larger front yard than the minimum required by the underlying zone designation exists on a lot on either side of a lot proposed to be improved, the Board shall have the power to require an appropriate front yard on the lot to be improved, including a setback up to a size as large as an adjacent front yard. 3. REAR YARD. No building or other structure shall be erected less than forty (40) feet from the rear property line. 4. SIDE YARD. No building or other structure shall be erected less than fifteen (15) feet from the side yard property line. 5. CORNER LOTS. No building or other structure shall be erected less than twenty -five (25) feet from the side street property line. 6. FRONT OF DWELLING. Any dwelling placed or maintained on any lot shall face the front thereof. 7. GARAGES. Any separate garage not connected to the dwelling as an integral part thereof and located in the front 150 feet of the lot shall be not closer to the front property line than the main structure. 8. TREES. No living oak, sycamore, liquidambar, magnolia, or pine tree with a trunk diameter larger than six inches, measured at a point on the tree which is not more than three feet above the grade immediately adjacent to said tree, shall be cut down, killed or removed in any manner, without first securing the written permission of the Board. Such permission shall not be granted unless it is shown that the tree is a nuisance, and that there is no practical way of removing the nuisance except by cutting down, killing or removing it. 9. EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS. Materials used on the exterior of any structure, including roofing, wall or fence greater than two (2) feet above the lowest adjacent grade, shall be compatible with materials of other structures on the same lot and with other structures in the neighborhood. 10. EXTERIOR BUILDING APPEARANCE. The appearance of any structure, including roof, wall or fence shall be compatible with existing structures, roofing, walls or fences in the neighborhood. 11. APPROVAL OF BOARD REQUIRED. No structure, roof, wall or fence greater than two (2) feet above the lowest adjacent grade, shall be erected, placed or replaced unless approved by the Board. Plans for the erection, placement, or replacement of any structure, roof, wall or fence, showing the precise location on the lot of the structure, wall or fence, shall be submitted to the Board. 2 5288 No structure, roof, wall or fence shall be erected, placed or replaced except in exact conformance with the plans approved by the Board. If necessary to properly consider any application, the Board may require specific plans, working drawings, specifications, color charts and material samples. The provisions of this requirement shall not apply if the project consists only of work inside a building which does not substantially change the external appearance of the building. 12. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD. The Board shall be empowered to transact business and exercise powers herein conferred, only if the following requirements exist: a. A formally organized property owner's organization exists in said area. b. The organization has by -laws adopted that authorize the establishment of the Board. c. Said by -laws provide for appointment of property owners, only, to the Board. d. Owners have been appointed to the Board in accordance with the by -laws. e. A copy of the by -laws and any amendments thereto have been filed with the City Clerk and the Director of Planning. f. The Board shall designate a custodian of records who shall maintain said records and make them available for public review upon reasonable request. g. Permanent written records of the meetings, findings, action, and decision of the Board shall be maintained by the Board. Any decision by the Board shall be accompanied by specific findings setting forth the reasons for the Board's decision. Any decision by the Board shall be made by a majority of the entire membership of the Board, and such decision shall be rendered by the Board members who considered the application. A copy of the Board's findings and decision shall be mailed to the applicant within three (3) working days of the Board's decision. h. All meetings of the Board shall be open to the public in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act (California Open Meeting Law). 13. POWERS OF THE BOARD. The Board shall have the power to: a. Determine and approve an appropriate front yard pursuant to Condition 2 of Section 3. b. Determine whether materials and appearance are compatible in accordance with the above Conditions 9 10 of Section 3. 3 5288 c. If a grading plan is required for a building permit for a structure, the Board may require such plan to be submitted along with the building plans. d. Any of the conditions set forth in Conditions 1 through 8 of Section 3, may be made less restrictive by the Board if the Board determines that such action will foster the development of a lot and will not adversely affect the use and enjoyment of the adjacent lots and the general neighborhood and would not be inconsistent with the provisions and intent of this Resolution. e. The Board shall have the power to establish rules for the purpose of exercising its duties, subject to review and approval of the City. Copies of such rules shall be kept on file with the Secretary of the Association and the City Clerk. 14. SHORT REVIEW PROCESS PROCEDURE. a. The Short Review Process may be used by the Board for the review of applications for modifications to the requirements set forth in Conditions 1 through 8 of Section 3, provided that the application for a Short Review Process shall be accompanied by a completed application form which shall contain the signatures of all contiguous property owners indicating their awareness and approval of the application. b. The Board is not required to hold a noticed, scheduled meeting for the consideration of a Short Review Process Application. c. The Board Chairman or another Board member designated by the Board Chairman, to act in his absence, shall render his decision on a Short Review Process application within ten (10) working days from the date such request is filed with the Board; failure to take action in said time shall, at the end of the ten (10) working day period, be deemed an approval of the plans. d. The Board may determine which requirements set forth in Conditions 1 through 8 of Section 3 are not appropriate for the Short Review Process, and therefore require the Regular Review Process for the consideration of such Conditions. Any list of such Conditions which are not appropriate for the Short Review Process shall be filed in writing with the City Clerk and the Director of Planning. 15. REGULAR REVIEW PROCESS PROCEDURES. a. The Regular Review Process shall be used by the Board for the review of the Conditions 1 through 8 of Section 3, (eligible for Short Review) in those cases in which the applicant failed to obtain the signatures of approval from all of the required property owners. b. The Regular Review Process must be used for the review of applications to those Conditions 1 through 8 of Section 3, which the Board has determined are not appropriate for the Short Review Process pursuant to the above. 4 5288 c. The Board is required to hold a noticed, scheduled meeting for the consideration of a Regular Review Process Application. d. Notice of the Board's meeting shall be mailed, postage prepaid to the applicant and to all property owners within one hundred feet (100') of the subject property, not less than ten (10) calendar days before the date of such meeting. The applicant shall also provide the Board with the last known name and address, of such owners as shown upon the assessment rolls of the City or of the County. The applicant shall also provide the Board with letter size envelopes, which are addressed to the property owners who are to receive said notice. The applicant shall provide the proper postage on each of said envelopes. e. Any decision by the Board shall be made by a majority of the entire membership of the Board, and such decision shall be rendered by the Board members who considered the application. f. The Board shall render it's decision on a Regular Review Process application within thirty (30) working days from the date such request is filed with the Board; failure to take action in said time shall, at the end of the thirty (30) working day period, be deemed an approval of the plans. 16. EXPIRATION OF BOARD'S APPROVAL. If for a period of one (1) year from date of approval, any project for which plans have been approved by the Board, has been unused, abandoned or discontinued, said approval shall become null and void and of no effect. 17. LIMIT ON BOARD'S POWERS. The Board shall not have the power to waive any regulations in the Code pertaining to the basic zone of the property in said area. The Board may, however, make a recommendation to the City agency, which will be considering any such waiver request, regarding waiving such regulations. 18. APPEAL. Appeals from the Board shall be made to the Planning Commission. Said appeal shall be made in writing and delivered to the Planning Department within seven (7) working days of the Board's decision and shall be accompanied by an appeal fee in accordance with the applicable fee schedule adopted by resolution of the City Council. Upon receipt in proper form of an appeal from the Board's decision, such appeal shall be processed by the Planning Department in accordance with the same procedures applicable to appeals from the Modification Committee. 5 5288 19. STANDARDS FOR BOARD DECISIONS AND APPEALS. The Board and any body hearing an appeal from the Board's decision shall be guided by the following principles: a. Control of architectural appearance and use of materials shall not be so exercised that individual initiative is stifled in creating the appearance of external features of any particular structure, building, fence, wall or roof, except to the extent necessary to establish contemporary accepted standards of harmony and compatibility acceptable to the Board or the body hearing an appeal in order to avoid that which is excessive, garish, and substantially unrelated to the neighborhood. (Pertains to Conditions Nos. 9 10 of Section 3 of this Resolution Exterior Building Materials Exterior Building Appearance). b. Good architectural character is based upon the principles of harmony and proportion in the elements of the structure as well as the relationship of such principles to adjacent structures and other structures in the neighborhood. (Pertains to Conditions Nos. 9 10 of Section 3 of this Resolution Exterior Building Materials Exterior Building Appearance). c. A poorly designed external appearance of a structure, wall, fence, or roof, can be detrimental to the use and enjoyment and value of adjacent property and neighborhood. (Pertains to Conditions Nos. 9 10 of Section 3 of this Resolution Exterior Building Materials Exterior Building Appearance). d. A good relationship between adjacent front yards increases the value of properties and makes the use of both properties more enjoyable. (Pertains to Condition No. 2 of Section 3 of this Resolution Front yards). SECTION 4. The City Council finds and determines that the public health, safety and general welfare of the community require the adoption of this Resolution. It is determined that the various land use controls, and property regulations as set forth herein are substantially related to maintenance of Arcadia's environment, for the purpose of assuring that the appearance of structures will be compatible and harmonious with the use and enjoyment of surrounding properties. Design controls and aesthetic considerations will help maintain the beauty of the community, protect property values, and help assure protection from deterioration, blight, and unattractiveness all of which can have a negative impact on the environment of the community, effecting property values, and the quality of life which is characteristic of Arcadia. It is further determined that the purpose and function of this Resolution is consistent with the history of the City and continued efforts through various means to 6 5288 maintain the City's land use, environmental, and economic goals and to assure perpetuation of both the psychological benefits and economic interests concomitant to an attractive, well maintained community with emphasis on residential living. All findings and statements of purpose in related Resolutions which pre- existed this Resolution or prior covenants, conditions, and restrictions constitute part of the rationale for this Resolution and are incorporated by reference. SECTION 5. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held to be invalid by the final decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. The Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof be declared invalid. SECTION 6. That the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Passed, approved and adopted this 1st day of April, 1986. ATTEST: /s/ CHRISTINE VAN MAANEN City Clerk of the City of Arcadia s/ DONALD PELLEGRINO Mayor of the City of Arcadia 7 5288 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SS: CITY OF ARCADIA I, CHRISTINE VAN MAANEN, Clerk of the City of Arcadia, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 5288 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Arcadia, signed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 1st day of April, 1986, and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Councilmen Gilb, Hannah, Lojeski, Young and Pellegrino NOES: None ABSENT: None /s/ CHRISTINE VAN MAANEN City Clerk of the City of Arcadia 8 5288 EXHIBIT "A" The property bounded on the south by the centerline of Foothill Boulevard; on the west by the east line of Michillinda Avenue; on the east by the centerline of Baldwin Avenue; and on the north by the City limits. EXHIBIT "A" -9 5288 7530 Deering Ave. Canoga Park, CA_. 91.303 TREE LANDSCAPE Slate L /ceases D19 and C27 655851 Office M-993-0031 Fa.V 818- 716 -1129 C©VII TAGI OAK TREE REPORT Date: 4 -23 -2010 Prepared for: Gary Peters By: Bruce Howard, ISA Certified Arborist WE -3836A Exp. 12 -31 -2010 Job site: 1131 Singing Wood Drive. Arcadia, CA 91006 Oak tree count: 24 oaks on property and 2 on neighboring property 26 in total. 23 Quercus agrifolia, 2 Quercus engelmannii, 1 Quercus lobata Neighbor's 2 oak trees are 24 Quercus agrifolia, 25 Quercus lobata General observation: This property has been heavily neglected for quite a few years. Everything from the house to the entire yard, including the trees, is in very poor condition. Because of this neglect 2 oak trees have died, others have been destroyed by heavily over pruning and /or "lion's tail" style pruning, some trees have been butchered away from the electrical wires, some are severely deformed because of over crowding, others have extensive decay making them unsafe, etc This Oak Tree Report has been written to document and itemize each oak tree's location, health and condition. And also to make needed recommendations on each oak tree as a result of these years of neglect. This report consists of 9 pages including the cover page. It also has an accompanying survey map to identify each tree and its location on the property 441' /filC4�.1�� Bruce Howard; I:A Certified borist WE -3836A Exp. 12 -31 -2010 1 Oak tree 5 Quercus agrifolia 24 -inch trunk Satisfactory health Recommendations: none Oak tree 4 Quercus agrifolia 30 -inch trunk Satisfactory health Recommendations: none Oak tree 6 Quercus engelmannii 30 -inch trunk This tree has a heavy lean. This tree's trunk is mainly decayed wood because 80% of the bark is missing on the trunk. This tree is very unsafe. Recommendations: remove 2 Oak tree 8 Quercus agrifolia 20 -inch trunk This tree has been mutilated beyond repair. Only one limb remains. The limb has a very large rip wound that will never callus -over or heal. Recommendations: remove Oak tree 7 Quercus agrifolia 24 -inch trunk Heavy leaning over the street Poor crown formation and development. This tree is unsafe Recommendations: remove Oak tree 9 Quercus agrifolia 36 -inch trunk Tree has been severely over pruned. This "lion's tail" style pruning has destroyed this tree's natural beauty and value. It is very unlikely to ever be corrected. Recommendations: remove 3 Oak tree 10 Quercus agrifolia 18 -inch trunk This tree is dead Recommendations: remove Oak tree 11 Quercus agrifolia 26 -inch trunk Tree has a one -sided crown development with a heavy lean. This "lion's tail" style pruning has helped destroyed this tree's natural beauty and value. It is very unlikely to ever recover or be corrected. Recommendations: remove Oak tree 12 Quercus agrifolia 10 -inch trunk This "lion's tail" style pruning has helped destroyed this tree's natural beauty and Value. It is very unlikely to ever be corrected. Recommendations: remove 4 Oak tree 13 Quercus agrifolia 48 -inch trunk This tree has major decay in the main trunk due to several large wounds caused by large limb removals. Tree is leaning. This tree is unsafe. Recommendations: remove Oak tree 14 Quercus agrifolia 30 -inch trunk This tree has an unsafe lean and various weak limb attachments. Recommendations: remove Oak tree 15 Quercus agrifolia 14 -inch trunk This tree has been destroyed by excessive pruning. It is very unlikely to regain any of it's natural beauty or health. Recommendations: remove 5 Oak tree 17 Quercus agrifolia 16 -inch trunk. This tree is dead. Recommendations: remove Oak tree 16 Quercus agrifona 20 -inch trunk Satisfactory health Recommendations: remove ivy Oak tree 18 Quercus agrifolia 24 -inch trunk Heavy lean. Poor crown formation and development. Unsatisfactory health. Recommendations: remove 6 Oak tree 19 Quercus agrifolia 24 -inch trunk Decay in various limbs in crown. Poor branch attachment. Unsafe tree. Recommendations: remove Oak tree 20 Quercus agrifolia 24 -inch trunk Heavy lean. Unsatisfactory health. Recommendations: remove Oak tree 21 Quercus agrifolia 30 -inch trunk Very heavy lean. Poor crown formation and development. Unsafe tree. Recommendations: remove 7 Oak tree 22 Quercus a olia 24 -inch trunk Very heavy lean. Poor crown formation and development. Recommendations: remove Oak tree 23 Quercus agrifolia 14 -inch trunk This tree has a heavy lean. Poor crown formation and development. All the crown of the tree is on the neighbor's side. Recommendations: remove Oak tree 24 Quercus agrifolia 30 -inch trunk Neighbor's tree. Recommendations: none 8 Oak tree #25 Quercus lobata 18 -inch trunk Satisfactory health Neighbor's tree. Recommendations: none Oak tree 26 Quercus agrifolia 36 -inch 30 -inch Multi -trunk This is a very neglected tree. It is full of ivy, dead limbs and decay. It is severely deformed from because of the butchering of limbs away from the high voltage wires. The lower half of tree is heavily grown into the lower utility wires. This is a very unsafe and deformed tree. Recommendations: remove I 1 9990-90Z-999 90016 v0 VP voN web Inve3 '3 031 mwd Afee uspuna .0,1 moor LOA ts lad 4, uounsiklon u•f•••• seepp vo .vipewv eAua poom WINS 1011 BOUEIRSa8 AJO IS °MI MON SNIlNIVd 8MW -Wd8 4 _v a 1 d m V 6 Q/ a .0 c a h CO 1 5 m e a e A El 1 i co N. F 1 i L 1 p b t 1 1- 0 a s t 1 r2 a a at L JD as m y E b) m m C w C =.1116g la 0 m 21 g N m &12-"08 g N "�s" 7 C O C p C W L 0 co 2 1 co 2 ga- m 0 1.0N f Ai l C O O 0 G O 6 aaaaa a e oa e- N M 4 vi SD N DO 6 p O 3 2 Q NIlNIdd WW-WV8 LEO May 25, 2010 TO: Arcadia Planning Commission SUMMARY GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Ms. Michelle Li (db: Nobel Education Institute) LOCATION: 1741 S. Baldwin Avenue STAFF REPORT Development Services Department FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Tim Schwehr, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -04 to amend CUP 09 -19 (Resolution 1811) for a tutoring center at 1741 S. Baldwin Avenue Ms. Michelle Wang (dba: Nobel Education Institute) submitted Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -04 to amend CUP 09 -19, which permitted a 115 student tutoring center with operating hours of 3:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday Friday at 1741 S. Baldwin Avenue (Hope International Church). CUP 10 -04 requests the following changes: a. Add operating hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday Friday for a nine -week period beginning in June and ending in August. b. Add Saturday classes with operating hours of 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. with no more than 30 students at any one time. c. Allow a permanent sign for the tutoring center to be displayed at a residentially zoned property. d. Allow the display of temporary banners at a residentially -zoned property. Although there is a significant parking deficiency by Code and some concerns about increased traffic during student drop -off times, it is staff's opinion that the proposed changes to add a summer program and Saturday classes would not significantly impact the adjacent streets and neighboring properties. It is also staff's opinion that allowing a permanent sign on the existing education building and the display of temporary banners at this church property will not significantly impact the neighboring properties. Therefore, the Development Services Department is recommending approval of this application, subject to the conditions listed in this staff report. REQUEST: Approval of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -04 to amend CUP 09 -19 (Resolution 1811) which permitted a 115 student tutoring center with operating hours of 3:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday Friday at 1741 S. Baldwin Avenue. The amendment would permit the following changes: a. Add operating hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday Friday for a nine -week period beginning in June and ending in August. b. Add Saturday classes with operating hours of 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. with no more than 30 students at any one time. c. Allow a permanent sign for the tutoring center to be displayed at a residentially -zoned property. d. Allow the display of temporary banners at a residentially -zoned property. SITE AREA: 67,838 square feet (1.56 acres) FRONTAGES: 225 feet along S. Baldwin Avenue 294 feet along W. Lemon Avenue 60 feet along Sharon Road EXISTING LAND USE ZONING: The church complex is composed of three parcels: 1735 1741 S. Baldwin Avenue are zoned R -2, Medium Density Multiple Family Residential, and are developed with a sanctuary, meeting hall, church offices, a two -story education building, a single family residence, a detached two -car garage, and a 26 space parking lot. 1731 S. Baldwin Avenue is zoned R -1- 7,500, One Family Residential with a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet, and contains an open landscaped area, a playground, and a small sports court. 721 W. Lemon Avenue is zoned R -1 -7,500 and is developed with a single family residence and a 37 space parking lot. SURROUNDING LAND USES ZONING: The site is surrounded on all sides by single family residences that are zoned R -1- 7,500. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential (0 -6 dwelling units per acre) PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION Public hearing notices of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -04 were mailed on May 14, 2010 to the property owners and tenants of those properties that are within 300 feet of the subject property see the attached radius map. Because the proposed project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the public hearing notice was not published in the Arcadia Weekly newspaper. CUP 10 -04 1741 S. Baldwin Ave. May 25, 2010 page 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION The church complex is comprised of two, single family residences that are occupied by church staff, a sanctuary, social hall, church offices, and a two -story education building see the attached photographs. The church holds numerous weekend activities, such as worship services, bible study classes, choir and orchestra rehearsals, and other fellowship activities, and on weekdays hosts an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting. A schedule of the building uses at the church site is attached On January 26, 2010, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -19 to allow Nobel Education Institute to utilize the education building and social hall for tutoring services for up to 115 children with operating hours of 3:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday Friday. Approved instructional activities include homework assistance, and supplemental lessons in English and Math. An existing, fenced, outdoor playground area and sports court behind the education building were also permitted to be used by the tutoring center for supervised, 10- minute recesses. Additional operational aspects of the tutoring center are described in the attached staff report for CUP 09 -19, dated January 26, 2010. PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS This proposal will amend Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -19 to permit the following: a. Add operating hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday Friday for a nine -week period beginning in June and ending in August. The exact dates will correspond with the Arcadia School District's summer vacation schedule. The maximum number of students will not increase beyond the 115 students at any one time as approved by CUP 09 -19. b. Add Saturday classes with operating hours of 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. for no more than 30 students and four faculty at any one time. c. Allow a permanent sign for the tutoring center to be displayed on the south facing side of the educational building permanent signs are not permitted by right on residentially -zoned properties without approval of a Modification. A photo simulation of the proposed sign is attached to this report. Please note that the sign will not be illuminated. d. Allow the display of temporary banners temporary banners are not permitted on residentially -zoned properties without approval of a Modification. These temporary banners will be required to comply with all other applicable temporary banner standards, time limits, and regulations. Parking and Student Transportation Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -19 included a Parking Modification for 63 on -site parking spaces in lieu of 263 spaces required, which is a deficiency of 200 spaces see the parking requirement calculation below. Because all of the Church's buildings are not in use simultaneously, the actual parking demand is much less than the parking required by Code. The expanded operating hours for the tutoring center will not increase the parking requirement, because the maximum number of students at any one time will not increase. CUP 10 -04 1741 S. Baldwin Ave. May 25, 2010 page 3 Building Use Sanctuary Social Hall Offices Two Single Family Houses Proposed Tutoring Center CODE REQUIREMENTS CEQA Parking Requirement Calculation Parking Requirement 1 space per 28 inches of bench space 1 space per 35 sq. ft. 4 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. 2 spaces per residence 1 space per instructor 1 for every 5 students No. of Spaces Required 168 spaces 44 spaces 13 spaces 4 spaces 34 spaces Total: 263 spaces During the school year, students are picked -up directly from their schools by vans operated by Nobel Education Institute. During the proposed summer program the vans will not be used and parents will drop -off the students, and therefore there will be more vehicles entering and exiting the parking lot during student drop -off times. To accommodate the additional number of vehicles during student drop -off times, staff is recommending that the tutoring center use the same vehicle queuing configuration that is currently required for student pick -up. This configuration requires parents to use a designated loading area within the parking lot, and provides approximately 450 feet of queuing space, which can accommodate approximately 25 cars on -site. The location of the loading area and the queuing configuration are shown on the attached site plan. To ensure that the northerly parking lot is unobstructed for student drop -off and pick -up times, it is to be blocked -off by portable traffic cones during daytime hours. To facilitate and direct the drop -off and pick -up queuing, traffic cones and signs are to be set -up to delineate the direction of travel, and tutoring center staff will walk the children to and from the cars at the designated pick -up /drop -off area, and supervise and assist with the loading and unloading into and out of the parents' cars. The traffic impacts from student pick -up should not change during the summer program as the students will be picked -up at four different time periods that are staggered 15 minutes apart. All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, emergency equipment, and parking and site design are required to be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director. Proposed projects that are not approved, are by virtue of being denied, exempt from any further environmental assessment. If approved, however, and if it is determined that no physical alterations to the property are necessary, then this project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15314 of the CEQA Guidelines as a minor addition to a school operation. A Preliminary Exemption Assessment is attached to this staff report. CUP 10 -04 1741 S. Baldwin Ave. May 25, 2010 page 4 FINDINGS Section 9275.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Conditional Use Permit to be granted, it must be found that all of the following prerequisite conditions can be satisfied: 1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. 4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. 5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan. It is staff's opinion that the proposed expansion of the tutoring center satisfies each prerequisite condition. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -04, subject to the following conditions: 1. There shall not be more than one hundred fifteen (115) students and eleven (11) faculty and staff at any time at the tutoring center on weekdays, and no more than thirty (30) students and four (4) faculty and staff at any time on Saturdays. The tutoring center shall be closed on Sundays. 2. The hours of operation of the tutoring center shall be limited to 3:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. on Saturday, except for a nine week period beginning in June and ending in August when the hours of operation shall be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. on Saturday. 3. No other activities or uses, except general church administration shall take place at the church complex during this tutoring center's operating hours. 4. CUP 10 -04 includes a Modification to allow a permanent sign to be displayed on the south facing wall of the education building. The design, size, and specific location on the building wall shall be subject to approval by the Development Services Department. 5. CUP 10 -04 includes a Modification to allow the display of temporary banners at this residentially -zoned site. The temporary banners shall comply with all other applicable temporary banner regulations. CUP 10 -04 1741 S. Baldwin Ave. May 25, 2010 page 5 6. The tutoring center shall post and distribute notices to all students, parents, and staff to provide instructions for where to park, and where to drop -off and pick -up students in accordance with requirements established by the City. 7. The use approved by CUP 10 -04 is limited to the proposed tutoring center, which shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP10 -04, and shall be subject to periodic inspections and the provisions of this Conditional Use Permit may be adjusted to address any impacts to the adjacent streets and neighboring properties. 8. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 10 -04 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in the closing of the tutoring center. 9. All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, emergency equipment, and parking and site design shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director. Water supply requirements shall be provided to the satisfaction of the actual water supplier. 10. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 11. Approval of CUP 10 -04 shall not take effect until the property owner(s), applicants, and business owners and operators have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve this application, the Commission should move to approve Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP10 -04; state the supporting findings and environmental determination, and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision, specific determinations and findings, and the conditions of approval for adoption at the next meeting. CUP 10 -04 1741 S. Baldwin Ave. May 25, 2010 page 6 Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this application, the Commission should move to deny Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -04; state the finding(s) that the proposal does not satisfy with reasons based on the record, and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and specific findings for adoption at the next meeting. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the May 25 public hearing, please contact Assistant Planner, Tim Schwehr by calling (626) 574 -5422, or by email at tschwehr @ci.arcadia.ca.us. Approved by: Jim, ma C• munity Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photo Vicinity Map 300 -foot Radius Map Photos of Subject Property Photo simulation of Proposed Wall Sign Schedule of Building Uses Site Plan Floor Plans Resolution No. 1811 Staff Report for CUP 09 -19 Preliminary Exemption Assessment CUP 10 -04 1741 S. Baldwin Ave. May 25, 2010 page 7 Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by R.S.Gonzalez, January 2010 Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by RS.Gonzalez, January 2010 ,2,0E LAMBERT AVE.EL MONTE, CA91732 •FAX(626)35O4532 NORMAN MOW Pale 2 1‘' PROJECT INFORMATI 1 1741 S. BALDWIN AVE. ARCADIA, CA. 09 -001 i` y�•'~ .e■ zv S1! Rar SCALE 1" 200' 11(4 RD%" V. n x�` 0 c f c 0 ae, 0 z 60„ t— o w 2 wo zoo co w5 0.) niTIT 1— 0 OZ"15 Zt to_ Hope International Church Building use JUN 200g SUNDAY SCHEDULE Sanctuary Fellowship Hall 10 AM 11:30 English Worship 40 50 people 2 Bible Studies 10 25 people 11:30 AM -1 PM Chinese Worship 100 150 people 2 Bible Studies 10 20 people 3- 4:30 PM Indonesian Worship 4:30 7 PM Fellowship 20 30 people 5 7 PM Spanish Worship 10 20 people. Education Building 10 AM -1 PM Sunday School and Nursery 50 children 1 12 yrs old (6 classes with 6 teachers) 11:30 AM -1 PM Youth Group 10 15 people (2 leaders with junior high lcids) 4 5 PM Bible Study 10 15 people (All ages) WEEKDAY SCEDULE Fellowship Hall (choirs use sanctuary) Permanent English Pastors Office (hours) Mon 9 1 Wed 9 5 Fri 9 -5 Sat 9 2 PM Permanent Chinese Offices Sunday 9 AM 2 PM and Wednesday 6 10 PM Secretary Office hours Wed 9 12 AM Monday 7 -10 PM AA group 10 15 people (Adults) Tuesday 7 10 PM Orchestra Choir groups 30 40 people (Adults) Wednesday 6 8 PM Worship team practice 10 15 people (Adults) 8 -10 PM Prayer meeting 30 40 people (adults) Thursday 7 10 PM Choir ping pong group 30 people (Adults) Saturday 2 -5 PM ping pong group 5 15 people (adults) Education Building Tuesday 7,9 PM ESL group 10 15 people (adults) Wednesday 8• --10 PM youth group 10 -15 people (junior high kids) 9 -12 AM bible study 5 10 people (adults) Friday: Youth'group, several bible study groups 30 40 people (All ages) 2 -10 pin aturday: 5 7 PM International Students' Group 10 20 people (young adults) 7 9 PM Bible Study 10 -15 people (all ages) Proposed Office Building Use `l 1009 English Youth Leader's Office (move from Ed bldg) io p S m Chinese Youth Leader's Office (new) 50 c�A Q hi Children's Ministry Director's Office (new) mr4 wee/4. Indonesian Spanish Ministry offices. (new) 52maie5 ht /yle7 ma� y Bible Study (move from Ed building) 1 leader with 1W-15 kids I Hours Q^ 3 2 S I faits Su OA L0016 eeuoJlle3 times✓ a^d u!^+PPH'S !XI luednaappaumo 21111!4cal uoPeanp3le9oN 'PEND ryuo9eWaoul ed °H L0016 1w ^tl UPAPPEI II'LI IIeH ry laoS '1i 'bS 9££Z SU!Pl!u9 P-uoIPoUP3l3'bS L066 N ;r; Q 1 L0016 v1 4 1PrAN *AV u1MPpE •S 14L1 grubrappaumO eIlURSUI °O!I 1 9>m90Iuo140gm doll L0016 4, 1 0,0 311 3 ¶1P 3 JV *AV u!MPPS'S 14L 11'H P!omS '13S 9EEZ S' !PI!M P BPS k! LOI$ *AV o!MPIBH'S I4LI nooOPO oiropsui uopeonpg !egoist gomgo piuopsunqul odoH L0016 e!WO;!leO'eipeoiy any u!MPNEI'S Ott !IeH !eioo$ 7I bS 9EEZ Su!ppnq ®uopeonpg>3 •bS L044 1 0£01 :x4 fEL9-111E(929) 3 141. 91016 wl Wm* 'Al 0 41 to* all EE E .1.00.W41111 Meg NU° 11011 L0016 ulmPRE1 'S undn000petreto 9 1n1Pari UOTWOnPa 1 goinqD pnropeuxqui adoH L0016 ll NiluloAs0 %Men/ a i GAY ultAPPEI'S IVL1 11 MOOS la In 9EEZ 1 1 SuIP19 lituoliranPa 13 'bS LOP 5 RESOLUTION NO. 1811 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 09 -19 TO OPERATE A TUTORING CENTER WITH A MAXIMUM OF ONE HUNDRED FIFTEEN (115) STUDENTS IN AN EXISTING TWO STORY, 4,409 SQUARE -FOOT CLASSROOM BUILDING AND A ONE STORY, 2,336 SQUARE -FOOT SOCIAL HALL AT AN EXISTING CHURCH COMPLEX AT 1741 S. BALDWIN AVENUE. WHEREAS, on November 9, 2009, an application was filed by Don Crenshaw for a tutoring center with a maximum of 115 students in an existing two -story, 4,409 square -foot classroom building and a one -story, 2,336 square -foot social hall at an existing church complex; Development Services Department Case No. CUP 09 -19, at 1741 S. Baldwin Avenue; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on January 26, 2010, 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 RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the staff report dated January 26, 2010 are true and correct. SECTION 2. This Commission finds: 1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity because the proposed tutoring center will not conflict with the other uses at this site or the businesses and residences in the surrounding area. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized by Section 9275.1.35.1 of the Arcadia Municipal Code. 2. The hours of operation of the tutoring center shall be limited to 3:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. The tutoring center shall not operate on weekends. 3. All other tutoring activities at this location, including, but not limited to the Kumon Learning Center and Tokyo Education Institute shall cease operations prior to operation of Nobel Education Institute at this site. No other activities or uses, except general church administration shall take place at the church complex during this tutoring center's operating hours. 4. The tutoring center shall post and distribute notices to all students, parents, and staff to provide instructions for where to park, and where to drop -off and pick -up students in accordance with requirements established by the City. A draft of the notice shall be submitted to the City for review and approval by the Development Services Director or designee prior to beginning operation of the tutoring center. 5. The pedestrian gate at the north end of the northerly parking lot is to remain locked during the tutoring center's operating hours to ensure that students and parents are not accessing the Church property from Sharon Road. 6. The modular /mobile trailer -office structure and the two parking spaces designated as spaces no. 23 no. 24 on the site plan shall be removed to improve the ingress and egress between the parking areas. 7. The parking lots at 721 W. Lemon Avenue and 1735 S. Baldwin Avenue shall be resurfaced and restriped per City standards to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director or designee prior to beginning operation of the tutoring center. 8. The use approved by CUP 09 -19 is limited to the proposed after school, tutoring center, which shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP 09 -19, and shall be subject to periodic 3 1811 option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 13. Approval of CUP 09 -19 shall not take effect until the property owner(s), applicants, and business owners and operators have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. ATTEST: SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Passed, approved and adopted this 9th day of February, 2010. Planning Commission APPROVED AS TO FORM: Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney 5 an, anning Commission 1811 January 26, 2010 TO: Arcadia Planning Commission FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Tim Schwehr, Assistant Planner SUMMARY STAFF REPORT Development Services Department SUBJECT: A Conditional Use Permit to operate a tutoring center with up to 115 students in an existing two -story, 4,409 square -foot classroom building and a one -story, 2,336 square -foot social hall at an existing church complex at 1741 S. Baldwin Avenue. Mr. Don Crenshaw, on behalf of Nobel Education Institute, submitted Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 09 -19 to operate a tutoring center with up to 115 students in an existing two -story, 4,409 square -foot classroom building and a one -story, 2,336 square -foot social hall at an existing church complex (Hope International Church) at 1741 S. Baldwin Avenue see the attached aerial photo and vicinity map. The proposed use requires a Conditional Use Permit and a Parking Modification of 61 on -site parking spaces in lieu of 263 spaces required. Although there is a significant parking deficiency by Code and concerns about traffic congestion during student pick- up, it is staffs opinion that the proposal includes measures appropriate for the location so that this tutoring center will not significantly impact the adjacent streets and neighboring properties. Therefore, the Development Services Department is recommending approval of this application, subject to the conditions listed in this staff report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Mr. Don Crenshaw for Ms. Michelle Li (dba Nobel Education Institute) LOCATION: 1741 S. Baldwin Avenue REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit to operate a tutoring center with up to 115 students in an existing two -story, 4,409 square -foot classroom building and a one -story, 2,336 square -foot social hall at an existing church complex. The age -range of the students is to be limited to 4 -14 years of age (non- driving age) and the hours of operation are to be Monday Friday, 3:00 p.m. to 6:15 p.m. SITE AREA: 67,838 square feet (1.56 acres) FRONTAGES: 225 feet along S. Baldwin Avenue 294 feet along W. Lemon Avenue 60 feet along Sharon Road EXISTING LAND USE ZONING: The church complex is composed of three parcels: 1735 1741 S. Baldwin Avenue is zoned R -2, Medium Density Multiple Family Residential, and is developed with a sanctuary, meeting hall, church offices, a two -story education building, a single family residence, a detached two -car garage, and a 26 space parking lot. 1731 S. Baldwin Avenue is zoned R -1- 7,500, One Family Residential with a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet, and contains an open landscaped area, a playground, and a small sports court. 721 W. Lemon Avenue is zoned R -1 -7,500 and is developed with a single family residence, a 555 square -foot, modular /mobile trailer, office structure, and a 37 space parking lot. SURROUNDING LAND USES ZONING: The site is surrounded on all sides by single family residences that are zoned R -1- 7,500. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Single- Family Residential (0 -6 dwelling units per acre) PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION Public hearing notices of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 09 -19 were mailed on January 14, 2010 to the property owners, tenants and occupants of those properties that are within 300 feet of the subject property see the attached radius map. Because staff considers the proposed project exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the public hearing notice was not published in the Arcadia Weekly newspaper. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The church complex is comprised of two, single family residences that are occupied by church staff, a sanctuary, social hall, church offices, and a two -story education building see the attached photographs. Along with the numerous weekend activities, such as worship services, bible study classes, choir and orchestra rehearsals, and other fellowship activities, the church on weekdays hosts an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting, and allows a Kumon Learning Center and Tokyo Education Institute to utilize the social hall for tutoring services for up to 40 children (CUP 07 -11). A schedule of building uses at the church site is attached. CUP 09 -19 1741 S. Baldwin Ave. January 26, 2010 page 2 This church site has a number of previously approved Conditional Use Permits, including the following: CUP 09 -07 was granted in July 2009 to permit construction of a 1,273 square -foot office building to replace the modular /mobile office trailer. The church has stated that they have decided not to build the new offices, but the approval is valid for one year. CUP 07 -11 was granted in October 2007 to allow tutoring services for up to 40 children to operate in the meeting hall. CUP 80 -9 allowed the two -story education building to be used for a Christian school with a maximum enrollment of 75 students. The school moved to another location several years ago. CUP 73 -12 allowed a pre school to operate on the ground -floor of the two -story education building. CUP 65 -9 permitted construction of the two -story education building. Because all the various buildings and uses at this church are interdependent and rely on the two parking lots, there should have been a covenant recorded to hold the three parcels as one for the development of these facilities. But, there are no City records that indicate such a covenant has been filed, and therefore, one should be required for approval of this application. The proposed tutoring facility will be operated by Nobel Education Institute, which currently runs a tutoring center at 1 W. Duarte Road. This school has been in business since 1993, when they were originally approved for a maximum of 30 students (CUP 93 -04). In 2007, the Planning Commission approved CUP 07 -05 allowing Nobel Education Institute to expand into an adjacent commercial unit and increase the maximum number of students to 75 students. Because the location at 1 W. Duarte Road shares a relatively small parking lot with several other businesses, CUP 07 -05 requires that a minimum of 60 students be transported to Holly Avenue Elementary School or some other alternative location for pick up by their parents. In November 2009, Nobel Education Institute filed this application (CUP 09 -19) to relocate their existing tutoring center to 1741 S. Baldwin Avenue and increase the number of students to a maximum of 160 students. Because of parking and traffic concerns, staff suggested that the applicant reduce the number of students, and add provisions for pick -up of the children. The proposal for 115 students is based on the numbers allowed for prior and existing educational activities, and the details of this proposal are discussed in the following section. In January 2010, Code Services received a complaint from a nearby resident who stated that an unapproved school was operating at this location and creating traffic problems along Lemon Avenue. Code Services investigated the complaint and found that Nobel Education Institute was already operating in the two -story, education building, and had been operating since September 2009. A notice to cease and desist and an administrative citation were issued to Nobel Education Institute for operating a tutoring center without approval of a Conditional Use Permit and without a Business CUP 09 -19 1741 S. Baldwin Ave. January 26, 2010 page 3 License. Staff conducted follow -up inspections to verify that Nobel Education Institute is no longer operating at this location, pending approval of this Conditional Use Permit application. PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS The proposal is to operate an after school, tutoring program with 11 instructors and a maximum of 115 students at any one time. The instructional activities will include homework assistance, and supplemental lessons in English and Math. The tutoring center will occupy two existing buildings on the site: 75 students will be in the two story education building, and 40 students will be in the social hall see the attached plans for the layout. A fenced, outdoor playground area and sports court behind the education building will be used for supervised, 10- minute recesses. The proposed hours of operation are 3:00 p.m. to 6:15 p.m., Monday through Friday. Additional operational aspects of the proposal are described in the attached General Notes /Procedures for this Conditional Use Permit application. Parking and Student Transportation The property has a total of 63 on -site parking spaces. In order to allow easy ingress and egress between the southerly and northerly parking areas, the applicant is proposing to eliminate two parking spaces (nos. 23 24 on the site plan) which will reduce the number of spaces in the parking lots to 61 spaces. The proposed tutoring center by itself would require 34 on -site parking spaces based on the Code requirement of 1 space per 5 students of non driving age and 1 space per staff member. The parking requirement for the existing remaining uses (the two existing tutoring services are to be displaced by this proposal) would be 229 spaces see the table below for the parking requirement calculations. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a Parking Modification of 61 on -site spaces in lieu of 263 spaces required. This is a parking deficiency of 202 spaces. Based on the current uses of the existing buildings, the parking requirement is 229 spaces for an existing parking deficiency of 166 spaces. Building Use Sanctuary Social Hall Offices (not including trailer) Two Single- Family Houses Proposed Tutoring Center Parking Requirement Calculation Parking Requirement No. 1 space per 28 inches of bench space 1 space per 35 sq. ft. 4 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. 2 spaces per residence 1 space per instructor 1 for every 5 students of Spaces Required 168 spaces 44 spaces 13 spaces 4 spaces 34 spaces Total: 263 spaces The two -story education building was permitted by CUP 65 -9, and CUP 80 -9 allowed a 75- student Christian school. This was the last permit granted for the use of this education building, and the Christian school moved to other facilities several years ago. Because a school has not operated in this building for several years, any new use of this CUP 09 19 1741 S. Baldwin Ave. January 26, 2010 page 4 building requires a new Conditional Use Permit. Based on the floor plans, this building can currently accommodate approximately 120 people. Because all of the Church's buildings will not be in use simultaneously, and the attached schedule of activities indicates that no other activities, except regular church administration will occur during the operation of the proposed tutoring center, the actual parking demand will be Tess than the parking required by Code. To avoid parking and traffic impacts, the students are to be dropped -off at this site by four vans operated by the tutoring center see the photos included with the attached General Notes /Procedures for this application. These vans will transport the children directly from surrounding elementary and middle schools to the subject property: Kindergarten —fifth grade children will be dropped off at approximately 3:00 p.m. and sixth eighth grade children will be dropped off at approximately 3:30 p.m. At the conclusion of the tutoring sessions, the children are to be picked -up by their parents at the subject property at four different dismissal times: Kindergarten and first grade children at 5:30 p.m., second and third graders at 5:45 p.m., fourth and fifth graders at 6:00 p.m., and sixth— eighth grade children at 6:15 p.m. The tutoring center will require parents to use a designated pick -up area near the existing modular /mobile trailer- office. The proposed vehicle queuing arrangement is shown on the site plan. Parents will enter the site from Lemon Avenue and proceed north through the southerly parking lot into the northerly parking area and drive to the rear /north end of the northerly parking lot and then turn around to arrive at the pick -up area. This configuration will provide approximately 450 feet of queuing space, which will accommodate approximately 25 cars on -site to minimize congestion on Lemon Avenue. To ensure that the northerly parking lot is unobstructed during student pick- up times, it will be blocked -off by portable traffic cones. Church staff, the tutoring staff, and any daytime visitors will use the southerly parking lot. To facilitate and direct the pick -up queuing, traffic cones and signs will delineate the direction of travel and tutoring center staff will walk the children to the designated pick -up area, and supervise and assist with the loading into the parents' cars. It is staffs opinion that the proposed plan for student pick -up should sufficiently allow the safe and efficient pick -up of 115 students over a one -hour period, minimize traffic congestion on Lemon Avenue, and avoid any additional congestion on Baldwin Avenue. It is also staffs opinion that to achieve the proposed pick -up arrangement, the existing modular /mobile trailer office and two parking spaces (nos. 23 24 on the site plan) will have to be eliminated. The trailer office and these two parking spaces narrow the access between the northerly and southerly parking lots. Removal of the trailer and the two parking spaces will improve the ability to maneuver out of the northerly parking lot. Additionally, given the poor condition of the parking Tots, staff recommends that the parking Tots be resurfaced and restriped. An alternative to the proposed plan for student pick -up is to require that parents park their cars in the northerly parking lot and walk to the education building or social hall to pick up their children. The southerly parking area should be reserved for tutoring CUP 09 -19 1741 S. Baldwin Ave. January 26, 2010 page 5 center staff and church business, and any open spaces at the beginning of the pick -up time should be blocked off with traffic cones so that any incoming traffic will not have to wait for a parent backing -out of one of these spaces and thus avoid a backup onto Lemon Avenue. This arrangement still necessitates the removal of the trailer office and the two parking spaces to improve the access between the northerly and southerly parking lots. CODE REQUIREMENTS All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, emergency equipment (including a full- coverage fire alarm system) and parking and site design are required to be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director. This property is not served by the Arcadia Water Services Division. Therefore, any water supply requirements will have to be provided to the satisfaction of the actual water supplier. CEQA Proposed projects that are not approved, are by virtue of being denied, exempt from any further environmental assessment. If approved, however, and if it is determined that no physical alterations to the property are necessary, then this project is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15303 of the Guidelines, as a conversion of a small commercial structure under 10,000 square -feet in floor area. A Preliminary Exemption Assessment is attached to this staff report. FINDINGS Section 9275.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Conditional Use Permit to be granted, it must be found that all of the following prerequisite conditions can be satisfied: 1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. 4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. CUP 09 -19 1741 S. Baldwin Ave. January 26, 2010 page 6 5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan. It is staffs opinion that the proposed tutoring center can satisfy each prerequisite condition. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 09 -19, subject to the following conditions: 1. There shall not be more than one hundred fifteen (115) students and eleven (11) faculty and staff at any time at the tutoring center. 2. The hours of operation of the tutoring center shall be limited to 3:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. The tutoring center shall not operate on weekends. 3. All other tutoring activities at this location, including, but not limited to the Kumon Learning Center and Tokyo Education Institute shall cease operations prior to operation of Nobel Education Institute at this site. No other activities or uses, except general church administration shall take place at the church complex during this tutoring center's operating hours. 4. The tutoring center shall post and distribute notices to all students, parents, and staff to provide instructions for where to park, and where to drop -off and pick -up students in accordance with requirements established by the City. A draft of the notice shall be submitted to the City for review and approval by the Development Services Director or designee prior to beginning operation of the tutoring center. 5. The pedestrian gate at the north end of the northerly parking lot is to remain locked during the tutoring center's operating hours to ensure that students and parents are not accessing the Church property from Sharon Road. 6. The modular /mobile trailer -office structure and the two parking spaces designated as spaces no. 23 no. 24 on the site plan shall be removed to improve the ingress and egress between the parking areas. 7. The parking lots at 721 W. Lemon Avenue and 1735 S. Baldwin Avenue shall be resurfaced and restriped per City standards to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director or designee prior to beginning operation of the tutoring center. 8. The use approved by CUP 09 -19 is limited to the proposed after school, tutoring center, which shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP 09 -19, and shall be subject to periodic inspections and the provisions of this Conditional Use Permit may be adjusted to address any impacts to the adjacent streets and neighboring properties. 9. A covenant to develop and hold the subject Church properties as one, in a form approved by the City Attorney shall be executed by the property owner(s) and recorded with the County Recorder prior to beginning operations of this tutoring center. CUP 09 19 1741 S. Baldwin Ave. January 26, 2010 page 7 10. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 09- 19 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in the closing of the tutoring center. 11. All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, emergency equipment (including, but not limited to a full- coverage fire alarm system) and parking and site design shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director. Water supply requirements shall be provided to the satisfaction of the actual water supplier. 12. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 13. Approval of CUP 09 -19 shall not take effect until the property owner(s), applicants, and business owners and operators have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve this application, the Commission should move to approve Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 09 -19; state the supporting findings and environmental determination, and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision, specific determinations and findings, and the conditions of approval for adoption at the next meeting. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this application, the Commission should move to deny Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 09 -19; state the finding(s) that the proposal does not satisfy with reasons based on the record, and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and specific findings for adoption at the next meeting. CUP 09 -19 1741 S. Baldwin Ave. January 26, 2010 page 8 If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the January 26 public hearing, please contact Assistant Planner, Tim Schwehr by calling (626) 574 -5422, or by email at tschwehr @ci.arcadia.ca.us. Approved by: asama Community Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photo Vicinity Map 300 -foot Radius Map Photos of Subject Property Schedule of Building Uses Site Plan Floor Plans General Notes /Procedures for CUP 09 -19 Preliminary Exemption Assessment CUP 09 -19 1741 S. Baldwin Ave. January 26, 2010 page 9 PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT (Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption) 1. Name or description of project: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -04 to operate a tutoring center with up to 115 students in an existing two -story 4,409 square -foot classroom building and one -story 2,336 square -foot meeting hall at an existing church complex. 2. Project Location Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15' or 7W topographical map identified by quadrangle name): 1741 S. Baldwin Avenue (between Lemon Avenue and Sharon Road) 3. Entity or person undertaking project: A. City of Arcadia B. Other (Private) (1) Name: Michelle Wang (2) Address: 136 San Miguel Drive Arcadia. CA 91007 4. Staff Determination: (3) Phone: (626) 446 -5533 The City's Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the City's "Local Guidelines for Implementing the Califomia 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: 14 Section No.: 15314 f. The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption: Section No.: 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: May 6, 2010 Staff: Tim Schwehr, Assistant Planner May 25, 2010 TO: Arcadia Planning Commission GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: LOCATION: REQUEST: SITE AREA: FRONTAGES: 846 W. Duarte Road 240,930 square feet (5.53 acres) 637 feet along Golden West Avenue 378 feet along Duarte Road 378 feet along Naomi Avenue STAFF REPORT Development Services Department FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Thomas Li, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -05 to amend CUP 00- 011 (Resolution 1612) for a tea house at 846 W. Duarte Road SUMMARY Mr. Austin Ming Te Lee of Tea Central, Inc. (dba: Ten Ren's Tea Time) submitted Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -05 to amend CUP 00 -011, which permitted a restaurant with 22 seats at 846 W. Duarte Road. An Incidental Outdoor Dining Permit was later obtained for the addition of 12 outdoor seats. Although there is a parking deficiency by Code, it is staffs opinion that the proposal to provide additional outdoor seats would not significantly impact the adjacent streets and neighboring properties. Therefore, the Development Services Department is recommending approval of this application, subject to the conditions listed in this staff report. Mr. Austin Ming Te Lee of Tea Central, Inc. (dba: Ten Ren's Tea Time) A Conditional Use Permit to amend CUP 00 -011 for a tea house to provide 18 additional outdoor seats at an existing 752 square -foot tea house that currently has 20 indoor seats and 12 outdoor seats EXISTING LAND USE ZONING: The site is developed with a 62,135 square -foot commercial retail shopping center (President's Square) zoned C -1 D SURROUNDING LAND USES ZONING: North: Multiple Family Residential zoned R -3 South: Multiple Family Residential zoned R -3 East: Commercial Retail Center and a legal- nonconforming apartment building zoned C -2 West: Multiple Family Residential zoned R -3, and an automobile service station zoned C -2 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION Public hearing notices of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -05 were mailed on May 14, 2010 to the property owners and tenants of those properties that are within 300 feet of the subject property see the attached radius map. Because the proposed project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the public hearing notice was not published in a local newspaper. BACKGROUND INFORMATION On July 25, 2000 the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1612 granting Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 00 -011 for a 752 square -foot restaurant at the subject property. Seating was limited to a maximum of twenty -two (22) people and an Incidental Outdoor Dining Permit was issued in 2001 for twelve (12) outdoor seats for the restaurant. The subject tea house assumed occupancy of this restaurant in 2002 and operates under CUP 00 -011 and continues to provide the 12 outdoor seats. PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to amend Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 00 -011 to allow a total of 30 outdoor seats, in addition to the twenty (20) indoor seats provided. The outdoor seats will be provided along the exterior of the subject unit facing Duarte Road and Golden West Avenue. The seats will occupy a six -foot (6') wide portion of the twelve -foot (12') wide walkway along this portion of the building. The Building Official has reviewed the proposed outdoor dining area and found it to be in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the State's Title 24 handicap accessibility requirements. The City's Incidental Outdoor Dining Ordinance states that the intent and purpose of the provisions are to encourage outdoor dining areas because they can add vitality to CUP 10 -05 846 W. Duarte Road May 25, 2010 page 2 the City's business districts and enhance the quality of life of Arcadia residents. Staff finds the proposal to be consistent with this purpose. Parking The subject 752 square -foot tea house is located in a 62,135 square -foot shopping center (President's Square). The following table illustrates the number of parking spaces that are required for the existing uses at this shopping center: Parking Calculation Based on Existing Uses Use 99 Ranch Market Other Retail Full House Seafood Restaurant Food Court Other Restaurants Bank/Office Square footage 29,674 SF 11,165 SF 6,274 SF 7,321 SF 3,273 SF 4,428 SF Parking ratio 5/1,000 SF 5/1,000 SF 10/1,000 SF 10/1,000 SF 10/1,000 SF 4/1,000 SF of spaces required 148.37 spaces 55.83 spaces 62.74 spaces 73.21 spaces 32.73 spaces 17.71 spaces Total: 391 spaces A total of 391 parking spaces are required for all the current uses at the subject shopping center. With 383 on -site parking spaces, there is an existing parking deficiency of eight (8) spaces or two percent. This is a very low deficiency i in comparison to most other shopping centers in the City. The Code requires parking for a tea house at a ratio of ten (10) spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area and does not require additional parking for up to twelve (12) incidental outdoor dining seats. The proposed addition of eighteen (18) outdoor seats will occupy a 6' -0" by 26' -0" or 156 square -foot area. When the parking ratio for a tea house is applied to this area, it increases the parking requirement by two (2) spaces. This would increase the overall parking deficiency to ten (10) spaces or 2.5% for the entire shopping center. It is staff's opinion that the increase is minimal and will not have a significant impact on the shopping center or the neighboring properties. In a shared parking lot patrons are able to visit different businesses in one stop. Many patrons of the tea house may also be shop at the market or other retail shops, dine at one of the restaurants, or be an employee of one of those businesses. Also, the applicant is proposing to maintain twenty (20) indoor seats instead of the seating for twenty -two (22) people that was previously approved by CUP 00 -011. This decrease partially offsets the increased outdoor seating and parking requirement. The applicant submitted the attached parking survey showing the number of available parking spaces over the course of five days at different hours from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. The survey shows the busiest time was Saturday at noon, where only seventeen (17) parking spaces were available. CUP 10 -05 846 W. Duarte Road May 25, 2010 page 3 Staff received a letter of opposition from a neighboring business owner, Mr. Robert C. Maslow of Coin -Op- Laundry at 838 W. Duarte Road. He states that this shopping center parking lot is already filled to capacity and adding cars that will occupy the limited spaces for hours on end will be an unfair burden to existing Arcadia Businesses. A copy of the letter is attached. CODE REQUIREMENTS All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, emergency equipment, and parking and site design are required to be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director. CEQA Proposed projects that are not approved, are by virtue of being denied, exempt from any further environmental assessment. If approved, however, and if it is determined that no physical alterations to the property are necessary, then this project, as a minor addition to an existing facility is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines. A Preliminary Exemption Assessment is attached to this staff report. FINDINGS Section 9275.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Conditional Use Permit to be granted, it must be found that all of the following prerequisite conditions can be satisfied: 1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. 4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. 5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan. It is staffs opinion that the proposed additional outdoor seating at the tea house satisfies each prerequisite condition. CUP 10 -05 846 W. Duarte Road May 25, 2010 page 4 RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -05, subject to the following conditions: 1. Seating for the tea house shall be limited to twenty (20) indoor seats, and thirty (30) outdoor seats. 2. The use approved by CUP 10 -05 is limited to the proposed tea house, which shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP10 -05, and shall be subject to periodic inspections and the provisions of this Conditional Use Permit may be adjusted to address any impacts to the adjacent streets and neighboring properties. 3. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 10- 05 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in the closing of the tutoring center. 4. All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, emergency equipment, and parking and site design shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director. 5. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 6. Approval of CUP 10 -05 shall not take effect until the property owner(s), applicants, and business owners and operators have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. CUP 10 -05 846 W. Duarte Road May 25, 2010 page 5 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve this application, the Commission should move to approve Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -05; state the supporting findings and environmental determination, and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision, specific determinations and findings, and the conditions of approval for adoption at the next meeting. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this application, the Commission should move to deny Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -05; state the finding(s) that the proposal does not satisfy with reasons based on the record, and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and specific findings for adoption at the next meeting. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the May 25 public hearing, please contact Associate Planner, Thomas Li by calling (626) 574 -5447, or by email at tli @ci.arcadia.ca.us. Approved by: asama Community Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photo Vicinity Map 300 -foot Radius Map Photos of Subject Property Site Plan Floor Plans Parking Survey Letter of Opposition Resolution No. 1612 Preliminary Exemption Assessment CUP 10 -05 846 W. Duarte Road May 25, 2010 page 6 100 0 100 200 Feet 846 W Duarte Rd Arcadia Zone Subject Property i'. 846 W Duarte Road 11 11 t4 CUP 10 -05 Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by: R.S.Gonzalez, May 2010 (902) (900) (1221) (1223) (1227) Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by. RS.Gonzalez, May 2010 (1220) (838-852) C-1 (834) C-2 C-1 DUARTE RD (1240) 1238) 846 W Duarte Road CUP 10-05 (819) GC MAPPING SERVICE, INC. 3055 WEST VALLEY BOULEVARD ALHAMBRA CA 91803 (626) 441 -1080 FAX (626) 441 -8850 CITY OF ARCADIA 300' RADIUS MAP LEGEND OWNERSHIP NO. OWNERSHIP HOOK CASE NO. DATE: 02 03 2010 SCALE: 1" 100' OWNERSHIP MAP i N 01 T CCI 2 Thomas Li Associate Planner City of Arcadia 240 W. Huntington DR Arcadia Ca 91007 May 18, 2010 Re: Ten Ren,s Tea Time, 846 W Duarte Rd. Please consider the other businesses parking requirements before approving the expansion of the Ten Ren Tea Time. Parking is already in short supply in Arcadia. Drop by sometime in the in the late afternoon and you will find the existing Tea Time tables surrounded by men smoking cigarettes and gambling on card games. Come back a few hours later, and they will still be there, doing the same thing, meanwhile monopolizing parking places that Arcadia residents need for legitimate business and shopping. Arcadia already has a place for people to sit around all day and night gambling, legally. At the racetrack, of course, which has no shortage of parking places. This shopping center parking lot is already filled to capacity, and adding cars that will occupy the limited spaces for hours on end will be an unfair burden to existing Arcadia Businesses. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Robert C Maslow Coin -Op- Laundry 838 W Duarte Rd Arcadia, CA 91007 RESOLUTION NO. 1612 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 00 -011 TO OPERATE A 752 SQ.FT. RESTAURANT AT 846 W. DUARTE ROAD. WHEREAS, on June 19, 2000, a Conditional Use Permit application was filed by Pote Nongluk to operate a 752 sq.ft. restaurant, Development Services Department Case No. C.U.P. 00 -011, at property commonly known as 846 W. Duarte Road; and WHEREAS, A public hearing was held on July 25, 2000, 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 HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report is true and correct. SECTION 2. This Commission finds: 1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper use for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to .carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. 4. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan. 5. That the use applied for will not have a substantial adverse impact on the environment, and that based upon the record as a whole there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants a Conditional Use Permit to operate a 752 sq.ft. restaurant, upon the following conditions: 1. Building Code compliance and conditions of approval must be met to the complete satisfaction of the Building Section. 2. Fire safety shall be provided to the complete satisfaction of the Fire Department. 3. Seating shall be limited to a maximum of twenty -two (22) people. 4. A modification shall be granted for 383 on -site parking spaces in lieu of 394; and this approval shall not constitute an approval for the general reduction in parking for the total site. That this parking modification shall only lie for the use approved by C.U.P. 00 -011 (752 sq.R. restaurant). 5. Noncompliance with the provisions and conditions of this conditional use permit shall constitute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation. SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the forgoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on July 25, 2000, by the following vote: ATTEST: AYES: Bruckner, Huang, Kalemkiarian,•Murphy,. Sleeter NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ecretary, P1: ommission City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: r_. Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney Chairman, Planning Commission City of Arcadia 1. Name or description of project: CUP 10 -05, a Conditional Use Permit to provide 18 additional outdoor seats at an existing 752 square -foot tea house that currently has 20 indoor seats and 12 outdoor seats. 2. Project Location Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15' or 7 1/2' topographical map identified by quadrangle name): 846 W. Duarte Road 3. Entity or person undertaking project: A. B. Other (Private) (1) Name Austin Ming Te Lee of Tea Central Inc. (2) Address 721 Brea Canyon Road, Walnut, CA 91789 4. Staff Determination: The Lead Agency's Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the Lead Agency's "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)" has concluded that this project does not require further environmental assessment because: a. The proposed action does not constitute a project under CEQA. b. The project is a Ministerial Project. c. The project is an Emergency Project. d. The project constitutes a feasibility or planning study. The project is categorically exempt. e. Applicable Exemption Class: 01 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: 5 -14 -10 Preliminary Exemption Assessment\2010 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT (Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption) Staff: Thomas Li, Associate Planner FORM "A" May 25, 2010 TO: Arcadia Planning Commission FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Tim Schwehr, Assistant Planner SUMMARY STAFF REPORT Development Services Department SUBJECT: An amendment to CUP 91 -12 (Resolution 1470) which permitted a restaurant with seating for 18 persons at 411 E. Huntington Drive, #122. The amendment would permit the following changes: a. Increase the maximum allowable seating from 18 persons to 48 persons, and b. Remove the condition that prohibits the serving of alcoholic beverages. Golden Dragon Enterprises, Inc. submitted Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -06 to amend CUP 91 -12 (Resolution No. 1470) to increase the maximum allowable seating from 18 persons to 48 persons and remove the condition that prohibits the serving of alcoholic beverages at the 1,620 square -foot restaurant located at 411 E. Huntington Drive, #122 (dba: Golden Dragon Restaurant). Because the increased seating does not increase the parking requirement for this restaurant and the parking lot for this commercial center is underutilized, and because other restaurants in this area are serving alcoholic beverages, staff is recommending approval of this application subject to the conditions listed in this staff report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Golden Dragon Enterprises, Inc. LOCATION: 411 E. Huntington Drive, #122 REQUEST: An amendment to CUP 91 -12 (Resolution 1470) which permits a 1,620 square -foot restaurant with seating for 18 persons at 411 E. Huntington Drive, #122. The amendment would increase the maximum allowable seating from 18 persons to 48 persons and remove the condition that prohibits the serving of alcoholic beverages. SITE AREA: 166,000 sq. ft. (3.8 acres) FRONTAGE: Approximately 550 feet along Huntington Drive EXISTING LAND USE ZONING: The site is developed with a 3 -story, 69,700 square -foot commercial office and retail building and two freestanding restaurants totaling 11,600 square -feet constructed in 1990, and is zoned CPD -1, Commercial Planned Development. SURROUNDING LAND USES ZONING: North: Santa Anita Wash unzoned South: Commercial Office building zoned CPD -1 East: Santa Anita Wash unzoned West: Hotel and Restaurant zoned CPD -1 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Commercial /Multiple Family Residential PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION Public hearing notices of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -06 were mailed on May 14, 2010 to the property owners and tenants of those properties that are within 300 feet of the subject property see the attached radius map. Because staff considers the proposed project exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the public hearing notice was not published in a local newspaper. PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -06 would amend Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 91 -12 (Resolution 1470) for the existing 1,620 square -foot restaurant by permitting the following: a. Increase the maximum allowable seating from 18 persons to 48 persons, and b. Remove the condition that prohibits the serving of alcoholic beverages. Based on a review of the file for CUP 91 -12, it appears that the original proposal limited seating and did not include the serving of alcoholic beverages because the restaurant was to be primarily a take out/fast -food establishment. Ownership of the restaurant has changed over the years and the operation has evolved into more of a traditional dine -in establishment. Staff conducted a site visit to the restaurant and it was discovered that at some point in the past the restaurant had expanded their seating to the requested 48 persons as shown on the attached floor plan. The City's Building Services and Fire Prevention Bureau have reviewed the new floor plan and CUP 10 -06 411 E. Huntington Drive, #122 May 25, 2010 page 2 seating arrangement and have determined that it meets all Building and Fire Code requirements. Parking By Code, the subject commercial center has a current parking deficiency of 65 spaces: 428 on -site parking spaces in lieu of a requirement of 493 spaces. The following table lists the parking requirements for the various uses at this center. The additional seating and the serving of alcoholic beverages do not increase the parking requirement for this restaurant because the parking requirement is based on floor area and not the amount of seating. A parking survey of this commercial center was conducted in July of 2008 as part of a Conditional Use Permit application for a tutoring center at suite nos. 201 -203. The survey showed that a minimum of 180 parking spaces were available between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. The survey is attached to this report, and recent site visits by staff found that the parking lot is still generally underutilized. CEQA Parking Requirements Type of business Ground Floor Retail (2) Restaurants with <5,001 sq.ft. (1) Restaurant with >5,001 sq.ft. Sandwich Shop (Subway) 2 3 rd Floor Offices Tutoring/Test Prep. Centers Golden Dragon Restaurant Totals for the Subject Commercial Site Approx. Parking Sq. Ft. Ratio 24,860 5/1,000 6,060 10/1,000 6,600 15/1,000 1,090 15/1,000 37,370 4/1,000 3,700 1 /employee 1/3 students 1,620 10/1,000 81,300 Spaces Required 124 61 99 16 150 27 16 493 CODE REQUIREMENTS All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, emergency equipment, and parking and site design are required to be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director. Proposed projects that are not approved, are by virtue of being denied, exempt from any further environmental assessment. If approved, however, and if it is determined that no physical alterations to the property are necessary, then this project is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, as a minor addition to an existing facility. A Preliminary Exemption Assessment is attached to this staff report. CUP 10 -06 411 E. Huntington Drive, #122 May 25, 2010 page 3 FINDINGS Section 9275.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Conditional Use Permit to be granted, it must be found that all of the following prerequisite conditions can be satisfied: 1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. 4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. 5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan. It is staffs opinion that the proposed amendments to the existing restaurant satisfy each prerequisite condition. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -06, subject to the following conditions: 1. The seating for the restaurant shall not exceed 48 seats. 2. The restaurant shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and conditionally approved for CUP 10 -06 subject to the satisfaction of the Community Development Administrator. 3. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 10- 06 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in the closing of the restaurant. 4. All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, emergency access, and site design shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director. 5. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City CUP 10 06 411 E. Huntington Drive, #122 May 25, 2010 page 4 Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 6. Approval of CUP 10 -06 shall not take effect until the property owner(s) and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to acknowledge awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve this application, the Commission should move to approve Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -06; state the supporting findings and environmental determination, and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision, specific determinations and findings, and the conditions of approval for adoption at the next meeting. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this application, the Commission should move to deny Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -06; state the finding(s) that the proposal does not satisfy with reasons based on the record, and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and specific findings for adoption at the next meeting. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the May 25 public hearing, please contact Assistant Planner, Tim Schwehr at (626) 574 -5422 or tschwehr @ci.arcadia.ca.us. Approved by: asama asama Community Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photo Vicinity Map 300 -foot Radius Map Photos of Subject Property Parking Survey Preliminary Exemption Assessment Resolution 1470 (CUP 91 -12) Site Plan Floor Plan CUP 10 -06 411 E. Huntington Drive, #122 May 25, 2010 page 5 fto' !It Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared* RS.Gonzalez, May2010 411 E Huntington Dr #122 CUP 10-06 Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by R.S.conzalez May2010 o a 0 S CC q 2 2 k— <T, o wz L §k n e 6 5 k ill 2$ p P C' k tiz §s 7 ca k <9 �2\§ $]\2 ;k CO k CA 0 B A G o tu tu K co 0 k ce 0 Z co O 00 1-- O O 07 Z a) V D Q a) 0 0 w Q M V et in H 0 W 7 m z D a m N ez ei :PARK INK} SUVEY Parking survey was conducted every 2 hours on proposed Vision 21's business operation hours. OF SPACE AVAILABLE .Add: 411 E. Huntington Dr., Arcadia CA 91006 MON TUE W 'ID TFBJR 1�RI SAT 7/21 /22 /23 7/24 7/25 (7/26) 9:00 AM 278 11:00AM 323 1:00 PM 274 244 219 225 212 299 3:00 PM 282 261 255 249 241 321 5:00 PM 243 206 222. 210 208 289 7.00 PM 221 199 183 194 180 8.00 PM 234 203 198 236 222 I hereby certify that the parking survey-date above.and Information required for CUP are•trus and correct to the best.cf my knowledge and.bellef. Please. do not hesitate to contact Angie Kim if you have.any questions or need any additional 'Information 'Q.1.213.385.6700. Sincerely, Angie Kim Tenant Owner Vision 21 College Prep Center 4. Staff Determination: PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT (Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption) 1. Name or description of project: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -06 for a 1,620 square -foot seats. 2. Project Location Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map USGS 15' or 7 topographical map identified by quadrangle name): 411 E. Huntington Drive #122 (between Gateway Drive and Fifth Avenue) 3. Entity or person undertaking project: A. City of Arcadia B. Other (Private) (1) Name: Golden Dragon Enterprises Inc. (2) Address: 411 E. Huntington Drive #122 Arcadia, CA 91006 (3) Phone: (626) 574 -5606 restaurant with a maximum of 48 showing project site (preferably a The City's Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the City'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: 1 Section No.: 15301 f. The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption: Section No.: 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: May 6, 2010 Staff: Tim Schwehr, Assistant Planner RESOLUTION 1470 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91- 012'TO OPERATE A CHINESE FAST FOOD RESTAURANT AT 411 EAST HUNTINGTON DRIVE WHEREAS, on August 19, 1991, an application was filed by Ronnie Lam, to allow the operation of a Chinese fast restaurant with seating for 18 persons, Planning Department Case No. C.U.P. 91-012 at 411 East Huntington Drive, more particularly described in attached Exhibit A. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on September 24, 1991, 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 HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the factual data submitted by the Planning Department in the attached report is true and correct. Section 2. This Commission finds: 1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper use for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use. All yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading landscaping and other features are adequate to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. There is adequate on -site parking to accommodate the proposed use. 4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. 5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan. 6. That the use applied for will not have a substantial adverse impact on the environment. Section 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission approves a Conditional Use Permit to allow a Chinese fast food restaurant with seating for 18 persons upon the following conditions: 1. That seating shall be limited to 18 persons. -1- 1470 2. Provide the installation of a grease interceptor that shall conform with the i Uniform Plumbing Code, latest edition. 3. That fire safety shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Fire Department, including: a) Automatic hood and duct fire extinguishing system shall be installed. b) Fire sprinkler plans shall be required for tenant improvements. c) The seating plan shall be posted in plain view for the Fire Inspector at all times. 4. No alcoholic beverages shall be served in the restaurant. 5. That C.U.P. 91 -012 shall not take effect until the owner and applicant have executed a form available at the Planning Department indicating awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. 6. Noncompliance with the provisions and conditions of this Conditional Use permit shall constitute grounds for the immediate suspension or revocation of said Permit. Section 4. The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution reflect the Commission's action of September 24, 1991 and the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Amato, Daggett, Hedlund, Szany, Clark NOES: None Section 5. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 15th day of October, 1991 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Amato, Daggett, Hedlund, Szany, Clark NOES: None Chairman, Planning Commission City of Arcadia ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission City of Arcadia -2- 1470 0 CO 0 co n R s co C a 4 1 O 2 N co 0 8 2 U K d3ad 1 1 a3.Nnoo 1l31HSVo o N w 2131Nnoo load 0 0 C o v o 0 0 0 0 w z 0 z -.6Z May 25, 2010 TO: Arcadia Planning Commission FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Thomas Li, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map Application No. TPM 10 -01 (Parcel Map No. 71302) for a two -unit, residential- condominium subdivision at 1016 La Cadena Avenue SUMMARY Tentative Parcel Map Application No. TPM 10 -01 (71302) was submitted by 41 California, LLC to subdivide the property located at 1016 La Cadena Avenue for residential- condominium purposes. The proposed two -unit subdivision is consistent with the City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Code. The Development Services Department is recommending approval of application no. TPM 10 -01, subject to the conditions as listed in this staff report. GENERAL INFORMATION STAFF REPORT Development Services Department APPLICANT: 41 California, LLC (Property Owner) LOCATION: 1016 La Cadena Avenue REQUEST: A Tentative Parcel Map for a two -unit, residential condominium LOT AREA: 8,708 square feet (0.20 acre) FRONTAGE: Approximately 60 feet along La Cadena Avenue EXISTING LAND USE ZONING: The property is currently developed with two residential units with a combined area of 1,720 square feet built in 1955, and is zoned R -3, Multiple Family Residential with a maximum density of one unit per 2,000 square feet of lot area. SURROUNDING LAND USES ZONING: The surrounding properties are developed with multiple family dwellings and are zoned R -3. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Multiple Family Residential Maximum 24 dwelling units per acre PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION Public hearing notices of Tentative Parcel Map Application No. TPM 10 -01 were mailed on Friday, May 14, 2010 to the property owners and tenants of those properties that are within 300 feet of the subject property (see attached radius map). Because the proposed project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the public hearing notice was not published in a local newspaper. BACKGROUND INFORMATION On March 11, 2010, the Development Services Department conditionally approved the applicant's design concept plans under Architectural Design Review No. ADR 10 -02 for the two -unit residential project. This approval was based on staffs determination that the design complies with the City's zoning regulations and is consistent with the City's architectural design guidelines. PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting a Tentative Parcel Map for residential condominium purposes. The subject property is zoned R -3, Multiple Family Residential, and contains 8,708 square feet of land area. The R -3 zone allows for a density of one (1) unit per 2,000 square feet of lot area. Based on this density factor, a maximum of four (4) units would be allowed on the subject property. The applicant's proposal to develop two (2) condominium units on the site is half the density allowed by the Zoning Code. All development standards have been met by the project and no modifications are necessary. Therefore, staff has determined that the requested subdivision is consistent with the City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations. All City requirements shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director. The proposed plans have been reviewed by these departments and some special conditions are deemed necessary in addition to the standard conditions of approval. These conditions are listed as conditions 1 through 7 of this staff report. CEQA Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the Development Services Department has determined that the proposed project involves TPM 10 -01 1016 La Cadena Ave. May 25, 2010 page 2 a minor land division in an urbanized area, and is therefore categorically exempt from CEQA (Class 15, Section 15315). A Preliminary Exemption Assessment is attached. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of TPM 10 -01, subject to the following conditions: 1. Two (2) 24 -inch box specimen Crape Myrtle trees shall be planted in the adjacent parkway in a location to be determined by Public Works Services. 2. The developer will be required to pay the following fees prior to approval of the Parcel Map: Map Fee: $100.00 Final Approval Fee: $25.00 Total $125.00. 3. Prior to approval of the final Parcel Map, a $200 deposit shall be posted for a Mylar copy of the recorded map. 4. Prior to approval of the final Parcel Map, the developer shall submit a separate demolition and erosion control plan prepared by a registered civil engineer subject to the approval of the City Engineer. All structures shall be demolished prior to approval of the final Parcel Map. 5. Submittal of a Grading Plan prepared by a registered civil engineer subject to the approval of the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. 6. Prior to approval of the final Parcel Map, the developer shall either construct or post security for all public improvements as shown on Tentative Parcel Map No. 71302. 7. Per the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works' Low Impact Development (LID) Standards (see manual dated January 2009) the developer shall provide and incorporate all applicable LID standards on the Grading Plan. 8. All City code requirements shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Fire Department, Public Works Services Department, and Development Services Department. 9. Condominium Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC &Rs) containing provisions for property maintenance shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney, and shall be recorded concurrently with the Parcel Map. 10. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, TPM 10 -01 1016 La Cadena Ave. May 25, 2010 page 3 Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 11. Approval of TPM 10 -01 shall not take effect until the property owner and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate acceptance of the conditions of approval. PLANNING COMMISION ACTION Approval The Planning Commission should move to approve TPM 10 -01, subject to the following findings and actions: A.1. That the project and the provisions for its design and improvements are consistent with the Arcadia General Plan, and that the discharge of sewage from the project into the public sewer system will not violate any requirements prescribed by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board for this region. A.2. That this project will not have a significant effect on the environment; and that this project is categorically exempt from CEQA per Section 15315. A.3. Authorize and direct the Development Services Director or designee to approve and execute, if necessary, a subdivision agreement for this project. A.4. Approve this project subject to the conditions of approval set forth in the staff report or as modified by the Planning Commission. Denial If the Planning Commission is to take action to deny this subdivision, the Commission should make specific findings based on the evidence presented and move to deny the project. The Planning Commission may wish to consider the following findings which must be expanded upon with specific reasons for denial: D.1. That the proposed map is not consistent with the applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451 of the Subdivision Map Act. D.2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans. TPM 10 -01 1016 La Cadena Ave. May 25, 2010 page 4 D.3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. D.4. That the site is not physically suitable for the density of development. D.5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is likely to cause substantial environmental damage. D.6. That the design of the subdivision or the types of improvements is likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. D.7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems. D.8. That the requested subdivision injuriously affects the neighborhood wherein said lot is located. D.9. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the legislative body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements for access or for use, will be provided and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subdivision shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. If any Planning Commissioner or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter, prior to the May 25 public hearing, please contact Thomas Li, Associate Planner at (626) 574 -5447 or at tli(a�ci.arcadia.ca.us. Approved: J ,/'i'sama mmunity Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photograph and Vicinity Map Tentative Parcel Map No. 71302 300 -foot Radius Map Preliminary Exemption Assessment Photographs of Site and Vicinity TPM 10 -01 1016 La Cadena Ave. May 25, 2010 page 5 Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by: R.S.Gonzalez, May 2010 1016 La Cadena Avenue TPM 10 -01 (515) (514) (510) Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by: R.S.Gonzalez, May 2010 (1001) (1011) (1025) (1033) ARCADIA (1103) (1018) (1022) (1026) (47 R -3 R -3 (475) (465) FAIRVIEW AVE (461 -463) (460) R -3 (459) (456) (455) (453) 1016 La Cadena Avenue TPM 10 -01 0 z i U�= 11<�� �4l4lIjj O oirlo O< m C btwo Z 1 0 I r 1 1 0:01g gi essea o 66W '9Z -9Z9 :xv3 99S£ f9Z -9Z9 :131 90016 VO 'VIOVOaV V MI '0V021 ONO3100 61911 '3N1 `S31VIO0SSV 103 i R 8 1! j f !IJ 1 Ali d l'ill YT aiji PiI ti idt1 Alf ifigti UMW 90016 VO iav v `AtV VNalV3 Vi 9101 WfINIWNOON00 SlINfl -Z I• X9 ore SUE MORENO ewes (626) 350 -5944 OWNERSHIP OCCUPANTS UST RADIUS MAPS LAND USE PLANS MUNICIPAL COMPUANCE CONSULTING 12108 LAMBERT AVE.EL MONTE, CA 91732 -FAX(626)350 -1 PROJECT INFORMATION 1016 LA CADENA AVE. ARCADIA 10 -054 SCALE 1" 200' C) 0 41 MM 4. 3 M 3� A S/tlOf YM.ami NQ S MIA MIMEO ON SHUT 'WILDING N. MLA MSSSO ON SMUT T r _�.r MALMO NC I I1 YEA WOSLO 4 ON 211127 7 1. Name or description of project: TPM 10 -01, a tentative parcel map for a two -unit residential condominium subdivision. 2. Project Location Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15' or 7 1/2' topographical map identified by quadrangle name): 1016 La Cadena Avenue 3. Entity or person undertaking project: A. B. Other (Private) (1) Name 41 California, LLC (2) Address 11001 E. Valley Mall, Ste 301C, El Monte, CA 91731 4. Staff Determination: The Lead Agency's Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the Lead Agency's "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)" has concluded that this project does not require further environmental assessment because: a. The proposed action does not constitute a project under CEQA. b. The project is a Ministerial Project. c. The project is an Emergency Project. d. The project constitutes a feasibility or planning study. e. 0 The project is categorically exempt. Applicable Exemption Class: I 15 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: 5 -14 -10 Preliminary Exemption Assessment\2010 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT (Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption) Staff: iTkeN L k$406/ 41.e. P 1 FORM "A" Project Site: 1016 La Cadena Ave, Arcadia, CA 91007 Photo 1: Existin. Multi -Famil Residence. Viewin_ NE'l on La Cadena Ave a Illltllllllii! 'ltllVIll1 IIUII... Z�i�l�l,ll��II�I��luoar, our .,,,,aaa ^am Photo 2: Existing Multi -Famil Residence (Viewing SE'ly on La Cadena Ave Photo 3: Existing Single- Family Residence (Viewing W'ly on La Cadena Ave). Photo 4: Existi Multi -Famil Residence Viewin NW'1 on La Cadena Ave Photo 5 Existm• Sin le- Family Residence (Viewin_ SVV'ly on La Cadena Ave May 25, 2010 TO: Arcadia Planning Commission FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Thomas Li, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Modification Application No. MP 10 -01 and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 10 -08 for a five -unit, residential- condominium project at 728 W. Huntington Drive SUMMARY STAFF REPORT Development Services Department Robert Tong of Sanyao International, Inc., the designer of the proposed project filed the subject applications on behalf of the property owner, Dexter Huntington, LLC, for a new, five -unit, residential- condominium project at 728 W. Huntington Drive. It is staff's opinion that the proposal, if approved, would secure an appropriate improvement and promote uniformity of development. Therefore, the Development Services Department is recommending approval of the applicant's proposal, subject to the conditions listed in this report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Sanyao International Inc. (Designer) LOCATION: 728 W. Huntington Drive REQUESTS: To approve the following Modifications and Architectural Design Review for a proposed five -unit residential- condominium project on an R -3 multiple family zoned property: A. A 25' -0" front yard setback in lieu of the 35' -0" special setback required; B. A 5' -0" building separation in lieu of 14' -0" required; and C. A 12' -0" westerly side yard setback in lieu of 15' -0" required for an air conditioning unit. LOT AREA: 19,166 square feet (0.44 of an acre). FRONTAGE: 80 feet along West Huntington Drive and 120 feet along a 20 -foot wide alley at the rear of the property. EXISTING LAND USE ZONING: The property is improved with a single family residence constructed in 1927. A dental office was added in 1940. A swimming pool was installed in 1955. The property is zoned R -3. SURROUNDING LAND USES ZONING: North: Commercial and Medical Offices, zoned C -O D South: Multiple Family Dwellings, zoned R -3 East: Chase Bank, zoned C -2 West: Multiple Family Dwellings, zoned R -3 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi Family Residential 24 dwelling units per acre maximum. PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION Public hearing notices of MP 10 -01 and ADR 10 -08 were mailed on May 13, 2010 to the property owners and tenants of those properties that are within 100 feet of the subject property (see attached radius map). Because the proposed project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the public hearing notice was not published in the Arcadia Weekly newspaper. BACKGROUND On April 6, 2010, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2269 to approve Zone Change No. ZC 09 -01 to change the zoning of the subject property from "C -O &D" (Professional Office with a Design Overlay) to "R -3" (Multiple Family) to be consistent with the multiple family land use designation in the City's General Plan. The approval was based on the findings that the Zone Change will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity; is consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the subject property; is compatible with the zoning of the surrounding properties; and will not have a significant effect on the environment. PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to clear the site to build five (5) residential condominium units, as shown on the submitted plans. The two -story, three bedroom units will be constructed on- grade with living areas ranging from 1,805 to 2,157 square feet. An attached two -car garage is proposed for each unit. The subject Modifications are requested to secure an appropriate improvement to the lot and to promote uniformity of development. The subject property has 19,166 square feet of land area. The density in R -3 zones is 2,000 square feet per unit, which would allow a maximum of nine (9) units on the subject property. Modification Request A A 25' -0" front yard setback in lieu of the 35' -0" special setback required along this portion of West Huntington Drive (9320.40.1). MP 10 -01 ADR 10 -08 728 W. Huntington Dr. May 25, 2010 page 2 The applicant is requesting a 25' -0" front yard setback in lieu of the 35' -0" special setback required along this portion of West Huntington Drive. The intent of the special setback requirement is to allow for future street widening dedications and to promote neighborhood compatibility. The City Engineer has reviewed the proposal and has no objections to the requested setback Modification as there are no plans to widen this part of Huntington Drive. Also, the multi family complex on the adjacent lot has a front yard setback of 25' -0" that was approved in 1964 by Modification No. M -64 -106. The proposed front unit would align with the existing multi family complex to the west of the subject property. The adjacent property to the east is a bank that has an approximately 15'- 0" setback from the property line along Huntington Drive at its closest point. Therefore, it is staff's opinion that approval of this request would secure an appropriate improvement and promote uniformity of development. Modification Request B A 5' -0" building separation in lieu of 14' -0" required (9255.2.14). A 5' -0" building separation is proposed between the rear units (Units 4 and 5) in lieu of 14'- 0" required. The applicant initially proposed a storage room between these units that would connect the two rear buildings, in which case a building separation would not be required. However, a storage room at that location would block off access to the private yard of Unit 4. To provide' access for maintenance purposes, the storage room was eliminated from the proposal, which separates Units 4 and 5; leaving a 5' -0" wide walkway between these units, and requiring a minimum 14' -0" building separation per Code. The intent of the minimum building separation requirement is to allow adequate emergency access and building safety, and to provide a buffer between structures. The Fire Marshal and the Building Official have reviewed this proposal and have no concerns regarding the layout of the buildings. It is staffs opinion that approval of this request would secure an appropriate improvement to the lot. Modification Request C A 12' -0" westerly side yard setback in lieu of 15' -0" required for an air conditioning unit (9255.2.18). The primary concern regarding mechanical equipment location is the potential noise impacts upon neighboring properties. For this proposal, an air conditioning unit is proposed in the private open space area of the front unit with a 12' -0" westerly side yard setback in lieu of 15' -0" required. It is staff's opinion that a 12' -0" setback is an adequate setback for air conditioning condensers; as there have not been issues with air conditioning units installed at 10' -0" setbacks on 50' -0" wide multiple family lots. Therefore, approval of this request would secure an appropriate improvement. Architectural Design Review Concurrent with the Modification application, the Planning Commission may approve, conditionally approve, or deny the architectural design of this proposal. The designer describes this as a "Mediterranean" -style that includes architectural features such as "S" -tile roofing, arched windows, earth -tone sand stucco, and canvas awnings. Staff finds that the MP 10 -01 ADR 10 -08 728 W. Huntington Dr. May 25, 2010 page 3 applicant's proposal meets the City's Architectural Design Guidelines for multi family developments, and that the architectural style of the project will be compatible with the neighboring developments. CODE REQUIREMENTS The proposed project is required to comply with all Code requirements and policies as determined to be necessary by the Building Official, Fire Marshal, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator, and Public Works Services Director, which are to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval. CEQA The proposed project qualifies as a Class 5 Exemption (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limits) from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of Requests A, B, and C of Modification Application No. MP 10 -01 and approval of Architectural Design Review No. ADR 10 -08 subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed project shall be developed and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the plans submitted and approved by Modification No. MP 10 -01 and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 10 -08. 2. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 3. The approvals of Modification No. MP 10 -01 and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 10 -08 shall not take effect until the owner and applicant have executed the Acceptance Form available from Planning Services to indicate awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve this project, the Commission should, based on the evidence presented, state that the proposed design is consistent with the City's MP 10 -01 ADR 10 -08 728 W. Huntington Dr. May 25, 2010 page 4 Architectural Design Guidelines for multiple family developments, and specify which of the following purposes the approval of the Modifications will accomplish, and move to approve the project subject to the conditions set forth in this report, or as modified by the Commission: Denial That the request(s) will secure an appropriate improvement, or That the request(s) will prevent an unreasonable hardship, or That the request(s) will promote uniformity of development If the Planning Commission intends to deny this proposal, the Commission should, based on the evidence presented, state with specific reasons that the proposed design is not consistent with the City's Architectural Design Guidelines for multiple family developments, and that the requested Modifications will not accomplish any of the above purposes, and move to deny the project. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this project prior to the May 25 hearing, please contact Associate Planner, Thomas Li at (626) 574 -5447. Ji r m ama munity Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photo and Vicinity Map with Zoning Information 100 -foot Radius Map Proposed Plans MP 10 -01 ADR 10 -08 728 W. Huntington Dr. May 25, 2010 page 5 100 0 R- 3] Zone N 100 728 W Huntington Dr Arcadia Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by: R.S.Gonzalez, May 2010 200 Feet 728 W Huntington Drive MP 10-01 ADR 10-08 100 100 Feet iR Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared 6y: R.S.Gonzalez, May 2010 (721) HUNTINGTON DR 728 W Huntington Drive MP 10 -01 ADR 10 -08 (902) (b (831 (851 (85( ere SUE MORENO (626) 350 -5944 OWNERSHIP OCCUPANTS UST RADIUS MAPS LAND USE PLANS MUNICIPAL COMPUANOE CONSULTING 12109 LAMBERT AVE.EL MONIE, CA 91732- FAX(626 1 PROJECT INFORMATION 728 W. HUNTINGTON DR. ARCADIA, CA. 10-086 SCALE 1" 100' I Ya ea b I zE 1 1 1 6 0 41 SOUTHVI EW 1 I I 80 80 ti 1 of4 NI 4 t h 2I_ �r 1 hI 1 6O 11 1 N. ZOO d< AioyrogAm Q! dad' wilt 0 7ts 1.e 9s 42 0 ewe. ,....:=011,1:: .7.0:17 0000 000000d 1•11••P000 'ONI TINOLLYNNILNI oyANvs vo `viavoav 'M IMINIWOON00 11N11 Sl N ON 11 z Q. LlJ 1— wa NOWNLIM111 011111.4.41 111.11•••• 1 O z Iesqg O OL PP 9)1.1 Y'rn ioo YJ '•IP. .N ..0 "�C u .IJ .Pw 6'B i9t Iwrv..la nB.•l..a 'OM 1VN011VNM31NI O\AN V S V3 `YIOV321V 3AI O NO.DNIJNf1H 'M 9 L WfNIWOONOO.INf-9 H i 066C.M(0 x.4•.IBM�I(.L.) N1 'V'.YI'.08I8 V0'.!P V'000 "16 I0 •IU•S 3 BSL �VNOIlVNM31Nl OV I L14,�[+ eu100•1d 1•NUWI.•N V3 'VIQVO2IV 3AI Ia NO.LONILNfIH 'M 8ZL INIINIWOaNO311Nf1-S o�H r— L -1 r —J L_ r r-- L L- 0 wm k Ir �IUI� /5 ■Ilia II /I I 0. II r 0 Pao t of x D y�1 111 E c a 1! =C 1•. of mvi) .J 1 1 n g 0. O O LL co (0 0 LL 0 z g re of O a" LL 4 U S h YETI .;10011171:11:4Z007;;;51,70■373.4 E SSE mV BIN• OVAN¥S z 0 W W 2 0 W W W m vo OVQa¥ O NO ONLNfH a 8L mm*nOONOO Vfl 90016 Y3 P9'y 0006 "26 929I 969S 2 Bulw•Id 1.14u .3N11VN01101213.1.N1 OVAMW v 2 V3 VICIVONV JQ NOIONIIN111-1 'AA SZL IAMINII iINflS osxoanenos 01 oezeenssos 0) o ',owe* 00eo,e Ape,. ,.0,07.,1041 „0,,•■ Inc m o n o N N .0 a o n uj C E o o� N u o v Z E- o v o s o o W Rm E a U a E„ 2 Si Q 41 E w e s `P E t d p `4 W x 41 o .v c� El' i:= -5=>, M709,90799S 00_OL May 25, 2010 TO: Arcadia Planning Commission FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrat SUBJECT: SUMMARY BACKGROUND STAFF REPORT Development Services Department Consideration of Text Amendment No. TA 10 -11 for a proposed ordinance amending Article IX (Division and Use of Land) of the Arcadia Municipal Code to define and address regulations for personal service business uses and the requirements for Conditional Use Permits for such uses. The Development Services Department is proposing to amend the City's Zoning Ordinance to define, "Personal Service Business," and to establish regulations and requirements for Conditional Use Permits for those uses. These amendments are being proposed in response to the continuing instances of illegal conduct at these types of businesses, which include day spas, hair salons, nail salons, beauty parlors and health spas. Many personal service businesses have private rooms and /or enclosures, which in most cases legitimately protect their customer's privacy. But, in more and more instances, these private rooms are being used to conduct illegal activities; primarily prostitution. The Development Services Department is recommending approval of the proposed text amendments as set forth in this report and the attached draft ordinance. The City Council has had numerous discussions and study sessions on the problems being encountered at businesses that provide personal services; such as, acupuncturists and day spas. And, the City Council has had to act on the appeals of business license revocations of several such businesses because of the incidents of criminal activity at these businesses. At a Study Session at the City Council's April 6, 2010 meeting, staff was directed to institute a Conditional Use Permit requirement for Personal Service Businesses, in order to provide an additional enforcement mechanism to curtail the incidents of criminal activity at these businesses. PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS Based on the direction given by the City Council, staff has prepared the attached draft Ordinance (No. 2275) to add to the Zoning Ordinance the definition of, "Personal Service Business" and the requirement of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for those uses. The term, "Personal Service Business" is already defined in the Arcadia Municipal Code in Article VI (Businesses, Professions, Trades and Occupations) which primarily deals with business licensing. The definition is part of the Massage Therapist Regulations (Sections 6418 et seq.) and reads as follows: "Personal Service Business" shall mean a business providing non medical personal, health, beauty, or grooming services to its individual customers as a primary use including, but not limited to, day spas, hair salons, nail salons, beauty parlors and health spas. In addition to adding this definition to the Zoning Ordinance, the definition is proposed to be revised to specifically include tanning salons and tattoo parlors. This is to avoid any ambiguity about these uses being considered Personal Service Businesses. The requirement of a CUP for Personal Service Businesses may seem somewhat onerous, but the City Council has decided that the ability to impose additional regulatory measures afforded by a CUP is necessary to respond to the criminal activities that have been found to be occurring at these businesses. Personal Service Businesses are currently allowed by right, provided there is adequate parking (5 spaces per 1,000 gross square feet same as for any retail use) in the C -1, Limited Commercial; C -2, General Commercial; and C -M, Commercial Manufacturing Zones. They are also allowed in conjunction with and incidental to a hotel in the CPD -1, Commercial Planned Development -1 Zone; and with the exception of the front, one -third of the ground floor area along First Avenue, they are allowed in the CBD, Central Business District Zone. The Arcadia Redevelopment Agency, however, has deemed Personal Service Businesses as Inappropriate Uses in the Central Redevelopment Project Area (see the attached map) and at the Westfield regional shopping mall, beauty parlors, barber shops and figure salons are the only personal service businesses allowed by City Council Resolution No. 6199, which covers the mall. An alternative to requiring a CUP for all Personal Service Businesses is to require a CUP only for those businesses that facilitate the potential for illegal activities to be conducted. That is, those businesses that prevent the entirety of their interiors from being fully visible from the exterior by covering the storefront and /or having screened /partitioned areas or rooms. Staff has found that those personal service businesses that do not provide any type of privacy or private areas have not been the subject of criminal activity. However, if these types of personal service businesses are to be exempted from the requirement of a CUP, standards are needed to delineate and ensure full visibility of the interior of the business. Such standards could be that a minimum of 80 percent of the storefront be clear glazing and unobstructed by any window coverings or window signage, and that there not be any interior rooms or screened /partitioned areas, except for restrooms and small storage spaces. The other consideration in effectuating the additional regulatory measures of requiring CUPs for personal service businesses is the applicability of the requirement to existing businesses, which normally are granted legal- nonconforming status when a new regulation is adopted. Legal- nonconforming status, however, need not necessarily be allowed. In adopting a new regulation, it can be made to apply retroactively to existing businesses either immediately, or after a specified time period, or upon any change in the status of the business, such as an TA 10 -11 Personal Service Businesses May 25, 2010 Page 2 of 3 expansion or change of ownership. Additionally, existing businesses can be given the option to alter their facilities by a specified time to meet any criteria established to be exempt from the CUP requirement; for example, remodeling the storefront and removal of any interior walls or partitions to provide full visibility of the interior of the business. It is estimated that there are currently about 100 personal service business locations in the City of Arcadia. Requiring all of them to get a CUP would be a monumental task, and given that most personal service businesses provide some type of privacy, even that distinction poses a daunting task. The method of implementing new regulations, however, and its priority, the providing of the funds and personnel to effectuate the implementation are policy decisions that will be made by the City Council. The Planning Commission may make a recommendation on these aspects of this proposal. CEQA There is no possibility the environment, and Environmental Quality Preliminary Exemption RECOMMENDATION that the proposed text amendments will have a significant effect on therefore they are exempt from the requirements of the California Act (CEQA) under Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. A Assessment is attached. The Development Services Department recommends approval of Text Amendment No. TA 10 -11. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission should direct staff to convey the Commission's recommendation and comments to the City Council. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions regarding this matter prior to the May 25, 2010 public hearing, please contact Jim Kasama at (626) 574- 5423 or at ikasamaaci.arcadia.ca.us. Attachments: Draft Ordinance No. 2275 Map of the Central Redevelopment Project Area Preliminary Exemption Assessment TA 10 -11 Personal Service Businesses May 25, 2010 Page 3 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. 2275 i AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ARTICLE IX (DIVISION AND USE OF LAND) OF THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE TO DEFINE AND ADDRESS REGULATIONS FOR PERSONAL SERVICE BUSINESS USES AND THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR SUCH USES AND AMENDING ARTICLE VI (BUSINESSES, PROFESSIONS, TRADES AND OCCUPATIONS) TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF PERSONAL SERVICE BUSINESS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The following Sections of the Arcadia Municipal Code are hereby added to read as follows: 9220.15.1. BUSINESS, PERSONAL SERVICE. Personal Service Business shall mean a business providing non medical personal, health, beauty, or grooming services to its individual customers as a primary use including, but not limited to, day spas, hair salons, nail salons, beauty parlors, health spas, tanning salons and tattoo parlors. 9275.1.53.2.1. PERSONAL SERVICE BUSINESS. C -1, C -2 and C -M. SECTION 2. The following definition of "Personal Service Business" in Section 6418.1 of the Arcadia Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "Personal Service Business" shall mean a business providing non- medical personal, health, beauty, or grooming services to its individual customers as a primary use including, but not limited to, day spas, hair salons, nail salons, beauty parlors, health spas, tanning salons and tattoo parlors. SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause a copy of the same to be published in the official newspaper of said City within fifteen (15) days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty -one (31) days after its adoption. -1- 2275 ATTEST: Passed, approved and adopted this day of 2010. City Clerk of the City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney I T E Mayor of the City of Arcadia n U D LA r -2- 2275 k II J.P' .I 1 I., IMP _Aiv 1. Name or description of project: Text Amendment No. TA 10 -11 for a proposed ordinance to amend Article IX (Division and Use of Land) of the Arcadia Municipal Code to define and address regulations for, "Personal Service Business" uses and the requirements for Conditional Use Permits for such uses. 2. Project Location Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15' or 7W topographical map identified by quadrangle name): Citywide 3. Entity or person undertaking project: 1. Public Entity: Development Service Department 2. Other (Private): (1) Contact Name (2) Contact Address 4. Staff Determination: The City, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the City'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: f. The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption: The project is otherwise exempt on the following basis: There is no possibility that the proposed text amendments will have a significant effect on the environment, and therefore are exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. g. h. The project involves another public agency which constitutes the Lead Agency. Name of Lead Agency: Date: May 10, 2010 PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT (Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption) Preliminary Exemption Assessment City of Arcadia 2009 Staff: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator FORM "A" The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the City of Arcadia, at 240 W. Huntington Drive with Chairman Parille presiding. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille ABSENT: None OTHERS ATTENDING MINUTES ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, May 11, 2010, 7:00 P.M. Arcadia City Council Chambers Assistant City Manager /Development Services Director, Jason Kruckeberg Community Development Administrator, Jim Kasama Economic Development Manager, Jerry Schwartz Senior Planner, Lisa Flores Associate Planner, Tom Li Assistant Planner, Tim Schwehr Senior Administrative Assistant, Billie Tone SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Kasama noted that each Commissioner was given two handouts on Item 1, the Proposed City Street Light Assessment District. TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON NON PUBLIC HEARING MATTERS Five minute time limit per person None PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. PRESENTATION ON THE PROPOSED CITY STREET LIGHT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT Mr. Kruckeberg explained that the current method of assessment for street lighting is being eliminated. He said that the proposed methods of assessment would be based on benefit and would apply to every parcel in the city. A single family residential property would be assessed $28 per year and a commercial property assessment would be based on benefit with the City covering 60% of the costs and the property owners covering 40 He briefly reviewed the information on the handouts, particularly the contact information for questions. 2. HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION APPEAL NO. HOA 10 -03 417 Harvard Drive Warren Cross, representative from Western Roofing Systems on behalf of the property owners, Mr. and Mrs. Bill Weiss This is an appeal of the Rancho Santa Anita (Lower Rancho) Homeowners' Association's Architectural Design Review Board decision denying a Metro Shake II, Western Wood, stone coated steel roof material at the subject residence. Senior Planner, Lisa Flores, presented the staff report. Commissioner Baderian asked what the cost is to the resident to appeal the Homeowner's Association decision. Mr. Kasama said that the filing fee is $210. The Public Hearing was opened. Mr. Warren Cross of Western Roofing reminded the Commissioners that he represented other homeowners on the same type of appeal several times in the past so would skip his presentation, but said that he would be happy to answer any questions. He also said that he would be in favor of a process that would allow his clients to avoid the appeal process every time a metal roof is involved. Chairman Parrille asked if anyone else would like to speak in favor of this appeal. None Chairman Parrille asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to this appeal. None MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to close the Public Hearing. Without objection the motion was approved. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to approve Homeowners Association Appeal No. 10 -07. ROLL CALL AYES: Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None There is a five working day appeal period after the approval/denial of the appeal. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 18. PC MINUTES 5 -11 -10 Page 2 3. MODIFICATION NO. MC 10 -07 Referred from 4 -27 -10 Modification Committee Meeting 900 South First Avenue Sonal Shah The applicant is requesting a Parking Modification for the subject property to utilize the Arcadia Presbyterian Church parking lot located at 810 South First Avenue, approximately 140 feet from the subject property in lieu of the maximum permitted distance of 100 feet, to provide the required parking spaces for the conversion of a 4,453 square -foot general office space to medical uses. Associate Planner, Tom Li, presented the staff report. Commissioner Beranek asked how many employees the medical practice will have. Mr. Li explained that they expect to have only a small staff; perhaps three doctors and two staff members for each doctor. Chairman Parrille asked if there had been any opposition to the project as a result of the public notice and Mr. Li reported that there had not. Commissioner Baderian asked why the limit for off -site parking was set at 100 feet. Mr. Kasama said the restriction has been in the code for many years and he pointed out that a Modification was required for Cafe Fusion allowing off -site parking at 130 feet. The public hearing was opened. Chairman Parrille asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of this project. Dr. Scott Herman, a cardiologist at Methodist Hospital since 1980, expressed appreciation for the Commissioners' and staffs work on this project. He mentioned that he and his partner are seldom in the office at the same time and that Dr. Shah is currently the only one using the office so he doesn't expect that there will be many occasions when patients will need to use the off -site parking. Commissioner Baderian asked Dr. Herman if he read the conditions of approval and if he would comply with them. Dr. Herman said that he read the conditions and will comply. Mr. Robert Curtis, trustee at Arcadia Presbyterian church, said that the Church does not use these spaces during the week and rarely uses them even on a Sunday morning. He also said that the Church is in favor of this arrangement and does not anticipate any inconvenience as a result of this agreement. Chairman Parrille asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to this project. There were none. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to close the Public Hearing. Without objection the motion was approved. PC MINUTES 5 -11 -10 Page 3 MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to approve Modification No. MC 10 -07. ROLL CALL: AYES: Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None There is a five working day appeal period after the approval /denial of the application. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 18. 4. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. GP 10-01, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 10 -03 AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. ADR 10 -05 16 Campus Drive Ashwood Construction The applicant is requesting a General Plan Amendment, Conditional Use Permit and Architectural Design Review for a 43 -unit, affordable senior apartment complex with an on- grade parking structure on a 23,000 square -foot lot. Economic Development Manager, Jerry Schwartz, presented the staff report. Commissioner Baderian questioned the allotment of only four parking spaces to guests for the entire project. Mr. Schwartz confirmed the number and said that the developers have had success with this parking ratio at other projects in the past. Chairman Parrille asked if the school district expressed any concem that they would not be able to expand their facilities into this adjacent property. Mr. Schwartz said that school officials said they once considered buying this property but decided against it because it is located adjacent to the ball field instead of the classroom areas on the other side of their property. Chairman Parrille asked if potential tenants could be required to sign a waiver acknowledging that they are aware that there will frequently be activities at the High School generating noise, traffic and glare. Mr. Kruckeberg said that a waiver of understanding or declaration is commonly used for mixed use developments or where residential users are located in close proximity to an active use such as a school. Commissioner Baderian asked what affect this project would have on SCAG requirements. Mr. Kruckeberg explained that in relation to SCAG, every unit helps and this project adds 43 affordable units. The public hearing was opened. Chairman Parrille asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of this project. Mr. Steve Froberg, President of Ashwood Construction, the developer of the project, said that he understands the concerns expressed by the Commissioners regarding the location of the project and his experience with similar projects near major highways, railroads, schools, PC MINUTES 5 -11 -10 Page 4 etc. and confirmed the importance of revealing these facts in rental documents. Mr. Froberg also said that, based on his experience, he believes that many seniors enjoy being near an active use facility. Chairman Parrille pointed out that the high school band plays there frequently and sometimes they even have a fireworks show. Therefore, he believes some type of waiver or agreement is essential to eliminate any potential conflict over the noise and activities. Commissioner Hsu asked about the age requirement to qualify for these units and Mr. Froberg said it is 62. Commissioner Hsu pointed out that many seniors are quite active and they may experience heavy traffic on Campus Drive and Santa Anita Avenue, especially when events are held at the High School. Mr. Froberg said that regional and national studies indicate that tenants at this type of facility are usually not actively employed and tend to generate few car trips. Commissioner Baderian restated his concem over the limited number of guest parking spaces. He said that .9 parking stalls per unit seems to be insufficient particularly when holidays and special days generate family visits. Chairman PerriIle pointed out that parking on Duarte Road on weekends is extremely limited when the high school is putting on one of their frequent events, so guests of the senior apartment complex would not be able to park on the street. Mr. Froberg said that the parking lot at Heritage Park, another senior apartment complex in the city, is never at capacity, and also referred to the shared driveway easement with the office building next door. His associate is seeking a contract with the owner of the office property to formalize an easement for the shared driveway, which, based on this proposal, appears to be in the best interest of the office building. They are going to approach the owners to be allowed to use their parking lot on weekends in consideration for maintaining the shared driveway easement. Chairman PerriIle asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to this project. There were none. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to close the Public Hearing. Without objection the motion was approved. Commissioner Baderian said that he is uncomfortable with only four guest parking stalls and he asked if that number is negotiable. He explained that Campus Drive is often filled to capacity on weekends and the tenants and their guests won't be able to park there. He said altematives need to be developed. Commissioner Beranek noted that Item 10 on the Staff Report requires that the parking plan shall be satisfactory to the City Engineer. Mr. Kruckeberg said it is anticipated that there will be a lot of pick -up /drop -off traffic at the complex so the City Engineer has recommended the use of a white curb which should PC MINUTES 5 -11 -10 Page 5 alleviate some traffic issues. He also noted that Mr. Froberg's comments are correct in that four guest parking stalls is considered adequate at this type of facility. Mr. Kruckeberg recommended the addition of the following condition to insure that all potential tenants are fully aware of the increased noise and Tight generated by the close proximity of the complex to the high school: 18. All residents shall sign an affidavit affirming that they are aware their unit is adjacent to an active use (Arcadia High School) which may lead to noise, light and glare. The form of the affidavit shall be prepared by the City Attorney and a copy of all signed affidavits shall be kept on file in the Planning Division. Commissioner Baerg asked if parking spaces are assigned to individuals or are the tenants required to pay extra for parking. Mr. Schwartz said that parking spaces will not be specifically assigned but are to be used on a first -come- first -served basis. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Baderian to refer General Plan Amendment No. GP 10 -01, Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -03 and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 10 -05 to the City Council with recommendations that the proposed condition no. 18 be added, and that the City Council shall be advised of the Commission's concern about the limited number of guest parking spaces and whether the first -come- first served method is the best option for parking at the proposed facility. ROLL CALL: AYES: Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parille NOES: None The Planning Commission's comments and recommendation on the General Plan Amendment, Conditional Use Permit and Architectural Design Review will be forwarded to the City Council/Redevelopment Agency for their consideration at a Public Hearing. CONSENT ITEMS 5. RESOLUTION NO. 1815 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, Califomia, approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -02 to operate an 800 square -foot art studio with a maximum of ten (10) students within a two -story, commercial office building at 400 N. Santa Anita Avenue, Suite 102. 6. RESOLUTION NO. 1816 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, Califomia, revoking Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 09 -09 that permitted a 960 square -foot expansion to an existing 2,040 square -foot restaurant at 510 -512 E. Live Oak Avenue. PC MINUTES 5 -11 -10 Page 6 7. MINUTES OF APRIL 27, 2010 RECOMMENDATION: Approval MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Baderian seconded by Commissioner Beranek, to adopt Resolution No. 1815 and Resolution No. 1816, and approve the minutes of April 27, 2010 as presented. Without objection the motion was approved. Resolutions adopted 5 -0 Approved 5 -0 MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION Commissioner Beranek asked if the City Council had appointed a liaison to the Planning Commission and Mr. Kasama said that Councilman Chandler will continue in that office. In light of the several Homeowners Association denial appeals on metal roofs that have recently come before the Commission, Commissioner Baerg asked about the fees an applicant must pay to file an appeal. Mr. Kasama said that the fee is $210 and that any change in this process requires City Council amendment of the HOA Resolutions. Commissioner Baderian said he would like to have this issue added to a future agenda for discussion so that the Commission can forward recommendations to the City Council. Chairman Parrille agreed and said he is concemed about the costs to the homeowner of an appeal. Commissioner Beranek also expressed his agreement. MODIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING ACTIONS Chairman Parrille reported that this morning's Modification Committee meeting was cancelled. MATTERS FROM STAFF Mr. Kasama briefly reviewed the upcoming projects for consideration by the Commission at the May 25 meeting which included a Text Amendment to define personal business uses, a Modification for a condominium project and three Conditional Use Permits; two to add outdoor seating at existing restaurants, and the other amending conditions at a tutoring center. ADJOURNED 8:10 p.m. ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission Chairman, Planning Commission PC MINUTES 5 -11 -10 Page 7