HomeMy WebLinkAbout6-8-10PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Tuesday, June 8, 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.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
All interested persons are invited to appear at the Public Hearing and to provide evidence or testimony conceming
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. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. TPM 10 -02 (71312)
1202 1206 Mayflower Avenue
Dexter Corp.
The applicant is requesting approval for a Tentative Parcel Map for a four -lot subdivision.
RECOMMENDATION: Conditionally approve
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 21, 2010.
DISCUSSION ITEM
2. REVIEW OF HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATIONS' ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD
PROCEDURES
CONSENT ITEMS
3. PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINATION
Finding that the proposed Capital Improvement Program for 2010 -2011 is consistent
with the General Plan.
4. RESOLUTION NO. 1817
A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, approving Conditional
Use Permit No. CUP 10-04 to amend CUP 09 -19 (Resolution 1811) to expand the operating schedule
and permit limited exterior signage for the tutoring center at 1741 S. Baldwin Avenue.
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
6 -8 -10
5. RESOLUTION NO. 1818
A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, Califomia, approving Conditional
Use Permit No. CUP 10 -06 to amend CUP 91 -12 (Resolution 1470) to increase the maximum
allowable seating to 48 persons and allow the serving of alcoholic beverages for on -site consumption
at the 1,640 square -foot restaurant located at 411 E. Huntington Dr., Suite 122.
6. RESOLUTION NO. 1819
A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, Califomia, approving Conditional Use
Permit No. CUP 10-05 to amend CUP 00 -011 for the Tea House at 846 West Duarte Road.
7. MINUTES OF MAY 25, 2010
RECOMMENDATIONS: Find the proposed Capital Improvement Program consistent with the
General Plan, adopt Resolutions 1817, 1818 and 1819, and approve the minutes.
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
6 -8 -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
6 -8 -10
June 8, 2010
TO: Arcadia Planning Commission
FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator
By: Tim Schwehr, Assistant Planner
STAFF REPORT
Development Services Department
SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map Application No. TPM 10 -02 (71312) for a
proposed four (4) lot, single family residential subdivision at 1202
1206 Mayflower Avenue.
SUMMARY
Tentative Parcel Map Application No. TPM 10 -02 (Parcel Map No. 71312) was
submitted by the property owner, Dexter Corp., for a four (4) lot, single family
residential subdivision at 1202 1206 Mayflower Avenue. The new subdivision
would complete an existing one -sided cul -de -sac, and all four lots would be
consistent with the City's subdivision requirements and General Plan. Therefore, the
Development Services Department is recommending approval of the tentative parcel
map application, subject to the conditions listed in this staff report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
REQUEST:
SITE AREA:
FRONTAGES:
Dexter Corp. (Property Owner)
1202 1206 Mayflower Avenue
A proposed tentative parcel map for a four (4) lot, single family
residential subdivision
40,201 square feet (0.92 of an acre)
Approximately 118 feet along S. Mayflower Avenue
Approximately 371 feet along Magnolia Court
EXISTING LAND USES ZONING:
1202 Mayflower Avenue is developed with two, legal- nonconforming
single family residences totaling 2,240 square -feet constructed in
1938. 1206 Mayflower Avenue is developed with a 1,485 square
foot, single family residence constructed in 1940. Both lots are zoned
R -1 -7500; single family residential with a minimum lot size of 7,500
square feet.
SURROUNDING LAND USES ZONING:
The properties to the north and west are developed with single family
dwellings and are zoned R -1- 7,500. The adjacent property to the
south is developed with two, legal- nonconforming, single family
residences and is zoned R -1- 7,500. The properties to the east are
located in unincorporated Los Angeles County and are developed
with single family dwellings.
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
Single- Family Residential at a density of 0 -6 dwelling units per acre.
Public Hearing Notification
Public hearing notices of Tentative Parcel Map Application No. TPM 10 -02 were
mailed on May 27, 2010 to the property owners and occupants of those properties that
are within 300 feet of the subject properties (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
In January of 2004, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Map Application
No. TM 60096 to subdivide two lots (1120 1126 Mayflower Avenue) into a five -lot
single family residential subdivision on a one -sided cul -de -sac street (Magnolia
Court). In December of 2004, the City Council approved the Final Map for Tract No.
60096.
PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS
The applicant is proposing to subdivide the two lots at the southeast corner of
Mayflower Avenue and Magnolia Court into four lots, and to remove the existing
improvements for the subsequent construction of a new single family residence on
each lot. The new lots will have the following characteristics:
Lot 1 will be an 11,813 square -foot, reverse corner lot with a 100' wide
street frontage on Magnolia Court and a depth of 118' with a street side
along Mayflower Avenue;
TPM 10 -02 (71312)
1202 1206 S. Mayflower Avenue
June 8, 2010— Page 2
CEQA
Lot 2 will be an 8,847 square -foot interior lot with approximate dimensions
of 75' wide by 118' deep;
Lot 3 will be an 8,845 square -foot interior lot with approximate dimensions
of 75' wide by 118' deep; and
Lot 4 will be a 10,534 square -foot, irregular shaped interior lot with a 118'
wide street frontage on Magnolia Court and an approximate depth of 118'.
The proposed subdivision .meets all applicable subdivision regulations and would
complete an existing one -sided cul -de -sac. The proposed map shows reduced
interior side yard setbacks for Lots 1 4 (7' -6" for the first -floor and 15' -0" for the
second floor) to match the required side yard setback of Lots 2 3. Approval of
Tentative Parcel Map Application No. TPM 10 -02 would not include approval of these
Zoning Modifications. Separate Modification Applications for these dwellings will be
necessary with complete architectural plans. Modifications for new homes are
subject to approval by the Planning Commission.
The subject properties have approximately 40,201 square feet or 0.92 acre of land
area. The density factor in the City's General Plan for this area is zero to six (0 -6)
dwelling units per acre, and the subdivision and zoning regulations require a
minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. The proposed tentative parcel map satisfies
these criteria. Based on its consistency with the General Plan and surrounding
properties, staff recommends approval of this tentative parcel map application,
subject to the conditions in this staff report.
Other Requirements
The applicant shall be required to comply with all code requirements as determined
necessary by the Building Official, City Engineer, Development Services Director,
Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director.
This project is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by Section 15315 of
the CEQA Guidelines as a minor land division (i.e., 4 or fewer lots) in an urbanized
area zoned for residential use. A Preliminary Exemption Assessment is attached to
this staff report.
RECOMMENDATION
The Development Services Department recommends that the Planning Commission
approve Tentative Parcel Map Application No. TPM 10 -02 (71312) subject to the
following conditions:
TPM 10 -02 (71312)
1202 1206 S. Mayflower Avenue
June 8, 2010— Page 3
1. The landscaping of each new lot shall be subject to the City of Arcadia Water
Efficient Landscaping Requirements as specified in City Ordinance No. 2267.
2. A tree preservation plan identifying by size and type all trees with a diameter in
excess of four inches (4 shall be presented to the Development Services
Department for its review and approval prior to the issuance of a demolition
and /or grading permit. Approval of a tree preservation plan may require the
altering of the design of the proposed subdivision and the potential building
footprints.
3. An Oak Tree Permit shall be obtained prior to removal of any oak tree and /or
construction under the dripline of any oak tree. Such permit shall include
mitigation measures, subject to the approval of the Development Services
Director or designee that compensate for the removal of any oak tree, and
minimize any impacts on an oak tree.
4. A diseased 20 -inch Elm tree located in the City Parkway of Mayflower Avenue
shall be removed and replaced with a 24 -inch box Camphor tree per the Public
Works Services Director.
5. A separate domestic water service and water meter shall be required for each
residence, and a separate water meter shall be required for any common area
irrigation.
6. A 5 -foot wide public utilities easement is required along the north property line as
shown on Tentative Parcel Map 71312 and shall be granted on the Parcel Map.
7. A non vehicular access easement shall be dedicated to the City of Arcadia along
the west property line of Lot 1 prior to approval of the Parcel Map.
8. A 5 -foot wide easement to the City of Arcadia for drainage purposes shall be
required at the rear yards of Lots 1 thru 3, as shown on Tentative Parcel Map
71312. All runoff from Tots 1 thru 4 shall be discharged to Mayflower Avenue.
9. Driveway approaches for all Tots shall be located on Magnolia Court.
10. The developer shall pay a $100 Map Fee and $100 Final Approval Fee, and
shall post a $200 deposit for a Mylar copy of the recorded map prior to approval
of the Parcel Map.
11. In addition to following the City of Arcadia standard trench detail, the developer
shall pay a slurry seal fee prior to obtaining building permits or shall repair all
street cuts with slurry seal prior to final occupancy to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and Public Works Services Director.
12. Prior to approval of the Parcel Map, the developer shall either construct or post
security for all public improvements as shown on Tentative Parcel Map 71312.
TPM 10 -02 (71312)
1202 1206 S. Mayflower Avenue
June 8, 2010— Page 4
13. A separate demolition and erosion control plan prepared by a registered civil
engineer shall be submitted and approved by the City Engineer prior to approval
of the Parcel Map. All existing structures shall be demolished prior to approval of
the Parcel Map.
14. A grading plan prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. Per the Los
Angeles County Department of Public Works, the project shall provide and
incorporate all proposed Low Impact Development (LID) methods on the grading
plans.
15. After the issuance of any building and /or grading permits for this project, a
Rough Grading Verification Form shall be submitted to and approved by the
Development Services Director or designee prior to the placing of any concrete
on the site; and a Final Grading Verification Form shall be submitted to and
approved by the Development Services Director or designee prior to any final
building inspections and issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy. Said
Grading Verification Forms will stipulate that all grading operations have been
completed in substantial compliance with the final grading plan approved by the
City's Engineering Services.
16. All City code requirements shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the
Building Official, City Engineer, Development Services Director, Fire Marshal,
and Public Works Services Director.
17. 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.
18. Approval of Tentative Parcel Map Application No. TPM 10 -02 (71312) shall not
take effect until the property owner(s), applicant(s), and civil engineer have
executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development
Services Department to acknowledge acceptance of these conditions of
approval.
TPM 10 -02 (71312)
1202 1206 S. Mayflower Avenue
June 8, 2010— Page 5
PLANNING COMMISION ACTION
Approval
The Planning Commission should move to approve Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM
10 -02 (71312) subject to the following findings and actions:
A.1. Find 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. The Public Works Services Department did not have any comments
indicating that the existing sewer system is inadequate to accommodate the
proposed subdivision.
A.2. Find that the determination of a CEQA exemption as set forth in the attached
Preliminary Exemption Assessment is appropriate.
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 intends to deny this application, the Commission must
make at least one of the following findings based on the evidence presented, expand
upon the finding(s) with specific reasons, and move to deny the project:
D.1. Find 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. Find that the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not
consistent with applicable general and specific plans.
D.3. Find that the site is not physically suitable for the type of development.
D.4. Find that the site is not physically suitable for the density of development.
D.S. Find that the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely
to cause substantial environmental damage.
D.6. Find that the design of the subdivision or the types of improvements are likely
to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
TPM 10 -02 (71312)
1202 1206 S. Mayflower Avenue
June 8, 2010— Page 6
D.7. Find that the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are likely to
cause serious public health problems.
D.8. Find that the requested subdivision injuriously affects the neighborhood
wherein said lot is located.
D.9. Find 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 June 8 public hearing, please contact
Assistant Planner, Tim Schwehr at (626) 574 -5422.
Approved by:
'7'asama
o mmunity Development Administrator
Attachments: Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 10 -02 (71312)
Aerial Photo Vicinity Map
300 -Foot Radius Map
Photos of Subject Properties
Photos of Surrounding Properties
Environmental Document
TPM 10 -02 (71312)
1202 1206 S. Mayflower Avenue
June 8, 2010— Page 7
w
-J
U
In
U
1—
O (.1) m
Z Z NJI a
0 0 CD L
n cc N nn
J 00 ~Z°
0 <d
W <U u. en W
O0
O ol� 0
c.--- N W ct O a. Z y Cr
Q 00 I VI Fr- Q om Z
a_ U
W p ,,ZO
0 <0
W 2 1
s
P o a
(1
Q <I-
OU g
I— ZW
Z w
CO a. gE
1 m
'0N1 `S31VIOOSSV 193
ee
0071 17f. 7f.7 •A _1 0071 'Z7(. 7 131
900L6 VO 'VIOVaV
V 1!Nn 'aVOd ONI6O1OO 61811
8.16T 1_13"
/00•5535:
1^,I f;
I3
U
co
co
u 7
0
N
0
1 I
IMSONVI
ela—
e
04 at
cn
7
o..#1
'8 6f
4'\ f 3nN3V213M0I3
1 9 loot iih g 1 1
1 )1 1.
1 1' 1
I 1 I i 1 1 S
I
1 u sm. ®�b1N;a 2
Lt o
yvviu vluvJav
`and ?:13MO1dAVw 90zi 9 zozl
NOISIM 8f1S
OL,LS.00N
ci
0
9
8
1)
8
s§
8
5
R
2
8
,0 8'
g
1
d
a
.4
0
n
cs
t1
1
w
g
a
1
1
In..,eA g
VICINITY MAP N0 1
HAS
IW 9 In
011
w
-J
U
In
U
1—
O (.1) m
Z Z NJI a
0 0 CD L
n cc N nn
J 00 ~Z°
0 <d
W <U u. en W
O0
O ol� 0
c.--- N W ct O a. Z y Cr
Q 00 I VI Fr- Q om Z
a_ U
W p ,,ZO
0 <0
W 2 1
s
P o a
(1
Q <I-
OU g
I— ZW
Z w
CO a. gE
1 m
'0N1 `S31VIOOSSV 193
ee
0071 17f. 7f.7 •A _1 0071 'Z7(. 7 131
900L6 VO 'VIOVaV
V 1!Nn 'aVOd ONI6O1OO 61811
8.16T 1_13"
/00•5535:
1^,I f;
I3
U
co
co
u 7
0
N
0
1 I
IMSONVI
ela—
e
04 at
cn
7
o..#1
'8 6f
4'\ f 3nN3V213M0I3
1 9 loot iih g 1 1
1 )1 1.
1 1' 1
I 1 I i 1 1 S
I
1 u sm. ®�b1N;a 2
Lt o
yvviu vluvJav
`and ?:13MO1dAVw 90zi 9 zozl
NOISIM 8f1S
OL,LS.00N
ci
0
9
8
1)
8
s§
8
5
R
2
8
,0 8'
g
1
d
a
.4
0
n
cs
t1
1
w
g
a
1
1
1202 -06 Mayflower Ave
Arcadia
Zone
Atos
Development Services Department
Engineering Division
Prepared by R.S.Gonzalez, April 2010
1202 1206 Mayflower Avenue
TPM 10-02
100
100 Feet
(1115)
(1119)
(1121)
5
IAGNOLIA LN
(1120)
(1117)
(1201)
(1213)
(1125)
(1129)
(1217)
EL SUR AVE
(1126)
(1130)
(1301)
Development Services Department
Engineering Division
Prepared by: R.S.Gonzalez, ApnI 2010
CC
5
0
(1106)
(1110)
(1114)
(1209)
(1229)
R -1
(1237)
MAGNOLIA CT
4
(1218)
(1220)
(1224)
(1250)
1202 1206 Mayflower Avenue
TPM 10 -02
(1239)
(1259)
1
ore SUE MORENO
beef (626) 350 -5944
OWNERSHIP OCCUPANTS UST
RADIUS MAPS LAND USE PLANS
MUNICIPAL CCMPUUWCE CONSULTING
2106 LAMBERT AVE.EL MONTE, CA 91732 •FAX(626)360 -1
PROJECT INFORMATION
1202 1206 MAYFLOWER AVE
ARCADIA, CA.
10 -065
SCALE 1" 200'
Project Site: 1202 1206 Mayflower Ave, Arcadia, CA 91006
(Viewing SW'ly on Magnolia Court)
Project Site: 1202 1206 Mayflower Ave, Arcadia, CA 91006
(Viewing SE'ly on Magnolia Court)
Photo 6: Existing Single Family Residence.
(Viewin NW'ly on Magnolia Ave)
Photo 7: Existing Single Family Residences.
(Viewing NE'ly on Magnolia Ave)
1. Name or description of project:
PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT
(Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption)
Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 10 -02 for a 4 -lot subdivision
2. Project Location Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a
USGS 15' or 7%2' topographical map identified by quadrangle name):
1202 1206 Mayflower Avenue (between Magnolia Court and Standish Street)
3. Entity or person undertaking project: A. City of Arcadia
B. Other (Private)
(1) Name: Dexter Corp..
4. Staff Determination:
(2) Address: 11819 Goldrinq Road #C
(3)
g. The project is otherwise exempt on the following basis:
Arcadia, CA 91006
Phone: (626) 574-5606
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: 15
Section No.: 15315
f. The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption:
Section No.:
h. The project involves another public agency which constitutes the Lead Agency.
Name of Lead Agency:
Date: Mav 17, 2010 Staff: Tim Schwehr, Assistant Planner
Photo 6: Existing Single Family Residence.
(Viewin NW'ly on Magnolia Ave
Photo 7: Existing Single Family Residences.
(Viewing NE'ly on Magnolia Ave)
1. Name or description of project:
PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT
(Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption)
Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 10 -02 for a 4 -lot subdivision
2. Project Location Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a
USGS 15' or 7'/2' topographical map identified by quadrangle name):
1202 1206 Mayflower Avenue (between Magnolia Court and Standish Street)
3. Entity or person undertaking project: A. City of Arcadia
B. Other (Private)
(1) Name: Dexter Corp..
(2) Address: 11819 Goldrinq Road #C
Arcadia, CA 91006
(3)
Phone: (626) 574 -5606
4. Staff Determination:
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: 15
Section No.: 15315
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: Mav 17, 2010 Staff: Tim Schwehr, Assistant Planner
June 8, 2010
TO: Arcadia Planning Commission
FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator
By: Lisa L. Flores, Senior Planner
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
Development Services Department
SUBJECT: Review of the Homeowners' Association's Architectural Review Board
Procedures
This discussion item was requested by the Planning Commission in response to a
number of appeals of denials by the Rancho Santa Anita (Lower Rancho)
Homeowners' Association's (HOA) Architectural Review Board (ARB) for the use of
metal roofing. The Planning Commission expressed a concern about the
homeowners having to go through an appeal on a roofing material that is neither
new nor unique to the Lower Rancho area and that has been found to be acceptable
in the past. At the May 11, 2010 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission
requested that this issue be placed on an agenda for discussion.
The Lower Rancho HOA regulations are established in City Council Resolution No.
5287 (attached) for the purpose of assuring that the appearance of structures will be
compatible and harmonious with the use and enjoyment of the surrounding
properties. The design controls and aesthetic considerations help maintain the
beauty of the community, protect property values, and help assure protection from
deterioration, blight, and unattractiveness. To ensure that the buildings, structures
and landscaping on properties located within the Lower Rancho area will be
harmonious with each other, the project must be reviewed through a Short Review
or Long Review procedure as outlined in Sections 10 and 11 of City Council
Resolution No. 5287.
Architectural Review
The City's five designated HOAs require a homeowner to submit a written
application with plans and samples of the materials that detail a proposed
improvement. The ARBs review these applications for compliance with their
regulations as stipulated in their respective City Council Resolutions. The ARBs'
regulations are in addition to the regulations in the City's codes and the City's
architectural guidelines. Accordingly, homeowners in the HOAs need to obtain
approval from both their ARB and the City before proceeding with their project.
Restriction on Metal Roofing
On May 7, 2009, the Lower Rancho ARB held a meeting to discuss roofing materials
and apparently came to a consensus to not permit metal roofing in the Lower
Rancho Area. A summary of this meeting is attached.
Procedures
When the first of the metal roofing appeals was submitted in 2009, staff reviewed the
ARBs paperwork and City Council Resolution No. 5287 and determined that even
though the item, "Roofing" is listed on the Short Review Procedure form (attached)
Resolution No. 5287 does not include, "Roofing" in the items eligible to be reviewed
through the Short Review Procedure. According to Section 3.11 of Resolution No.
5287, the Regular Review Procedure (a noticed, scheduled meeting) should be used
for roofing projects. Technically, the Short Review Process is only for those issues
specifically listed under Section 3.10 of Resolution No. 5287. However, after
discussions with Lower Rancho representatives and the City Attorney, it was
decided that because the use of the Short Review Procedure for, "Roofing" has been
the practice for many years by all five of the City- designated HOAs, staff would
process a homeowner's appeal of a denial of a Short Review for roofing.
DISCUSSION
Since last year, the Planning Commission has considered and sustained four
appeals of metal roofing denials by the Lower Rancho ARB. The Commission has
expressed its concern regarding homeowners having to go through an appeal to be
able to use metal roofing, particularly because after the first appeal hearing, the
Lower Rancho ARB has not attended any of the subsequent hearings.
The issue is that the Lower Rancho ARB's decision to not allow the use of metal
roofing appears flawed; yet the ARB continues to deny requests for the use of metal
roofing, and this seems to unnecessarily subject their homeowners to the appeal
process, which delays their projects, incurs the $210 appeal fee, and expends City
staff time and resources.
While these metal roofing appeals have only been from the Lower Rancho area,
they have brought to Tight the need to update and revise the architectural review
Review of HOA Procedures
June 8, 2010
Page 2
regulations and processes of the City's HOAs. On March 30, 2010, the
Development Services Department held a meeting with representatives of all five of
the City- designated HOAs and ARBs. At that meeting, the five City Council
Resolutions were reviewed, and the City Attorney discussed the legal restrictions
and ramifications that apply to the HOAs and ARBs. It was acknowledged that the
regulations and processes need to be updated, but this will require meetings
between City staff and the respective HOAs and ARBs to determine what particular
updates and revisions should be made, and subsequently, any amendments would
have to be presented to and considered by the City Council at a public hearing.
RECOMMENDATION
Depending upon the outcome of this discussion, the Planning Commission can
direct staff to convey a recommendation and comments to the City Council for
consideration, or simply receive and file this report in light of staffs plans to
eventually meet with each of the HOAs to update their respective City Council
Resolutions and procedures.
If any Planning Commissioner or other interested party has any questions or
comments regarding this matter prior to the June 8, 2010 public hearing, please
contact Senior Planner, Lisa Flores at (626) 574 -5445 or at Iflores@ci.arcadia.ca.us.
Approved by:
asama
Community Development Administrator
Attachments: City Council Resolution No. 5287
Summary of May 7, 2009 Lower Rancho ARB meeting
Short Review Procedure Application Form
Review of HOA Procedures
June 8, 2010
Page 3
RESOLUTION NO. 5287
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA,
CALIFORNIA, DETERMINING AND AMENDING REGULATIONS
APPLICABLE TO REAL PROPERTY IN THE RANCHO SANTA ANNTA
AREA AND IN THE AREA BETWEEN THE TURF CLUB AND
COLORADO STREET "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. 4020, and
adopts the following Resolution pursuant to Ordinance No. /1389, for the property
described in Exhibit "A attached hereto.
To implement the regulations applicable to the real property within the
Rancho Santa Anita Residents' 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 Residents'
Association.
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 1,400 square feet of ground floor area if one story in height,
and not less than 1,000 square feet of ground floor area if one and one -half or two
stories in height. The space contained within an open porch, open entry, balcony,
garage, whether or not it is an integral part of the dwelling, patio, basement, or cellar
shall not be considered in computing the square footage contained in any such
building. The minimum required floor area shall be deemed to include the area
measured from the outer faces of the exterior walls.
2. FRONT YARD. 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. SIDE YARD. A lot with a building or any part thereof, occupying the front
one hundr "ed (100) feet, or any part thereof, of such lot shall have a side yard of not
less than ten (10) feet.
4. ANIMALS. Wild animals, sheep, hogs, goats, bees, cows, horses, mules,
poultry, or rabbits shall not be permitted or kept.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
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.
8. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD. The Board shall be empowered to
transact business and exercise powers herein conferred, only if the following
requirements exist:
2 5287
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).
9. 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 5 6 of Section 3.
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 4 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.
3
5287
10. 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
4 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 4 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.
11. REGULAR REVIEW PROCESS PROCEDURES.
a. The Regular Review Process shall be used by the Board for the review of
the Conditions 1 through 4 of Section 3, (eligible for Short Review) in those cases in
which the applicant fails 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 4 of Section 3, which the Board has determined are not
appropriate for the Short Review Process pursuant to the above.
c. The Board is required to hold a noticed, scheduled meeting for the
consideration of a Regular Review Process Application.
d. Notice of 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.
4
5287
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.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. 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 Coundl.
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.
15. 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 prindples:
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.
5 3287
(Pertains to Conditions Nos. 5 6 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. 5 6 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. 5 6 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 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 derision
of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of
6 5287
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
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. 5287 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
7
Ls/ DONALD PELLEGRINO
Mayor of the City of Arcadia
/s/ CHRISTINE VAN MAANEN
City Clerk of the City of Arcadia
5287
EXHIBIT "A"
Area #1 Beginning at a point on easterly line of Michillinda Avenue, said point
being the southwesterly corner of Lot 36, Tract No. 15928; thence easterly along the
southerly boundary of said Tract No. 15928 and Tract No. 14428 to a point which is
the northwesterly corner of Lot 12, Tract No. 15960; thence southerly along the
westerly line of said Lot 12 and its prolongation thereof to its intersection with the
centerline of De Anza Place; thence southerly and easterly along said centerline to its
intersection with the centerline of Altura Road; thence southerly along said
centerline to its intersection with the centerline of Hugo Reid Drive; thence easterly
along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of Golden West Avenue;
thence northwesterly along said centerline to its intersection with the centerline of
Tallac Drive; thence easterly along said centerline to its intersection with the easterly
line of Tract No. 13312; thence northerly and easterly along the easterly and
southerly boundary of said tract to the southeasterly corner of Lot No. 1 to its
intersection with the easterly line of Golden West Avenue; thence northerly along
said easterly line to its intersection with the southerly line of Vaquero Road; thence
easterly along said southerly line to its intersection with the easterly terminus line
of said Vaquero Road; thence northerly along said easterly line to its intersection
with the southerly line of Lot 17 of Tract No. 11215; thence easterly along said
southerly line to its intersection with the easterly line of aforementioned Tract No.
11215; thence northerly along said easterly line and its prolongation thereof to its
intersection with the centerline of Colorado Street; thence westerly along said
centerline to its intersection with the centerline of Altura Road; thence southerly
along said centerline to its intersection with the easterly prolongation of the
northerly line of Tract No. 17430; thence westerly along said northerly line to its
intersection with the easterly line of Michillinda Avenue; thence southerly along
said easterly line to the point of beginning, said point being the southwesterly corner
of Lot 36 of Tract No. 15928:
EXHIBIT "A" cont'd
EXHIBIT "A"
Area #2 Beginning at the northwesterly corner of Lot No. 62 of Tract No. 12786;
thence southerly along the westerly line of said Lot and its prolongation thereof to
its intersection with the centerline of Hugo' Reid Drive; thence easterly along said
center line to its intersection with the southerly prolongation of the easterly line of
Tract No. 14460; thence northerly along said easterly line to its intersection with the
northerly line of said tract; thence westerly along said northerly line to its
intersection 'with the westerly line of said Tract No. 14460; thence southwesterly
along said westerly line, and its southwesterly prolongation thereof, to its
intersection with the northeasterly corner of Lot No. 61 of Tract No. 12786; thence
westerly along the northerly line of said tract to the point of beginning, said point
being the northwesterly corner of Lot 62 of Tract No. 12786;
Area #3 All properties with that area bounded on the west by Baldwin Avenue,
on the north and east by Colorado Street and on the south by the southerly tract
boundaries of Tract Nos. 14940 and 15318.
EXHIBIT "A"
9 5287
Rancho Santa Anita Residents Association
Date: May 7, 2009
Serving the Lower Rancho College St. Areas
Re: Review of ARB approved rooting materials metal roof materials
Mtg Date: Thursday May 7, 2009
Mtg Time: 8:30 pm to 9:30 pm (open to the public)
The meeting was opened and the following board members were present:
Steve Mathison
Dale Brown
Rick Frickie
Bob Eriksson
Lou Pappas (absent)
The purpose of the meeting was to establish a consensus for the preapproved roofing
materials for the area in addition to a detailed discussion on the Boards position on the
installation of Metal Roofing Products that have been proposed in the area and have also
been conditionally approved on a small number of homes over the past few years on a
individual basis.
It was discussed that a number of products currently on the list are no longer
manufactured for a variety of reasons (failed manufacturers or product failures) and that
the list can use some updating.
The metal roof products were then discussed as this issue seems to come up on a regular
basis and the board members felt that the position needed to be discussed in detail. After
much discussion the general consensus of the board members was to NOT allow metal
roofing products in the area for the following reasons:
1) Ridge, valley, eave, and edge details of the products require a great deal of special
attention for the roof system elements to fit properly together and look correct.
Even when they are assembled correctly they still have a manufactured look, and
the details noted obviously do not resemble the details for a wood or composite
shingle, which the metal roof is designed to emulate.
2) The finish of the product uses an similar asphaltic granular material similar to that
of an asphalt shingle. With the exception of the variations in the surface to mimic
the shape of a real wood shake, the product looks like a "Thick Butt Asphalt
Shingle" which is not allowed in the Rancho Santa Anita area
3) Although the material can provide a Class A fire rating, other materials already
approved by the Board also achieve this fire rating.
4) The Board has received input regarding the difficulty fire fighters have in an
emergency venting a space through a roof with this material. As such there is the
opinion greater damage can occur to a structure.
The different roof types within the association were discussed and the overall appearance
of the neighborhood is that of a wood shake or shingle in addition to manufactured tile
that has the appearance of shake as well as concrete tile. It is the opinion of the board
that the metal roofing products submitted to date are not "Harmonious" with the look and
feel of the community it represents.
A, PROJECT ADDRESS
B. PROPERTY OWNER
ADDRESS (IF DIFFERENT)
TELEPHONE NUMBER
C. APPLICANT (IF OTHER THAN OWNER)
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE NUMBER
APPLICATION FOR HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW
(SHORT REVIEW PROCEDURE)
D. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT (check applicable)
[3 ENCLOSED ADDITION TO MAIN DWELLING
SQUARE FOOTAGE TO BE ADDED
[3 UNENCLOSED ADDITION
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ADDITON
[3 ROOFING
SPECIFY MATERIALS
EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS (describe below)
EXTERIOR WALLS OR FENCES (describe below)
OTHER (describe below)
FILE NO.
DATE FILED
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED (SIGNATURES) OWNERS OF ADJACENT PROPERTY, CERTIFY
THAT WE HAVE READ THE FOREGOING APPLICATION, AND HAVE SEEN THE PROPOSED
PLANS, AND HEREBY GRANT OUR CONSENT TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
ON MAP SIGNATURE OF OWNER ADDRESS
1.
2.
3.
5.
6.
7.
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE ALL PROPERTIES WHOSE
BOUNDARIES ARE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, CO- TERMINUS WITH THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY:
EXAMPLE:
2
1
3
SUBJECT
PROPERTY
4
5
STREET
AN APPLICATION FOR THE SHORT REVIEW PROCEDURE SHALL ALSO BE ACCOMPANIED BY THE
FOLLOWING:
1, Completed Application Form
2. sets of scaled plans which should include the following:
a. Plot plan showing the entire site and the existing and proposed
use.
b. Elevations, floor plans, sections, etc. as necessary to fully
illustrate the project.
3, Depending upon the specific size, scale, location of the proposed
project, the Board (Committee) may require additional information
including but not limited to color and /or materials samples.
4, Letter size envelope(s) with proper postage, addressed to the owner and
applicant (if different), and to the City of Arcadia Planning
Department, 240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia, CA. 91006. These
envelopes are for the mailing of the Architectural Review Board's
(Committee's) decision.
June 8, 2010
TO: Arcadia Planning Commission
FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrato
SUBJECT: Capital Improvement Program for 2010 -2011
SUMMARY
CIP INFORMATION
STAFF REPORT
Development Services Department
Per Section 65403(c) of the Government Code, the Planning Commission is required to make
a finding that each fiscal year's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is consistent with the
City's General Plan. The Development Services Department is recommending that the
Planning Commission find that the CIP for the 2010 -2011 fiscal year is consistent with the
City's General Plan.
Attached for review is the list of the capital improvement projects for the 2010 -2011 fiscal
year. The projects are City buildings and facilities maintenance and improvements, streets
and public rights -of -way maintenance and improvements, sewer and water facilities
maintenance and improvements, landscaping and irrigation maintenance and improvements,
and parking and transit enhancements.
The 2010 -2011 CIP projects are consistent with the following goals, objectives,
implementation measures, and strategies set forth in the Municipal Facilities and Services
Element of the City's 1996 General Plan:
Maintain a transportation system that maximizes freedom and safety of movement;
maintains a balance between mobility and cost efficiency of maintenance; and preserves a
sense of comfort and well -being throughout the community by reducing the intrusiveness of
commercial, industrial, and regional traffic on neighborhood streets.
Provide adequate City administrative, community, and social service facilities to carry out
the mission of the City of Arcadia.
Maintain a reliable system of water, sewer and storm drain lines to meet the needs of the
community.
Reducing the number of automobile trips and providing alternatives to automobile use.
Promoting Transportation System Management and Transportation Demand Management
techniques.
Encouraging the use of alternative modes of transportation.
Promote the design of roadways to optimize safe traffic flow within established roadway
configurations by minimizing turning movements, uncontrolled access, on- street parking,
and frequent stops to the extent consistent with the character and needs of adjacent land
uses.
Reduce the need for vehicular travel by: Supporting the responsible expansion of public
transit services within Arcadia, including the establishment of rail transit and connections
between major destinations within the community and the metropolitan area; and promoting
the use of public transit and ride sharing through development of convenient and attractive
facilities.
Pursue the establishment of rail service to Arcadia, including a transit stop within the
downtown redevelopment area.
Ensure that functional utilities such as water, wastewater and solid waste collection and
disposal meet the service standards presented in Table 6 -B of the General Plan.
Provide local park facilities and recreation areas that are appropriate for the individual
neighborhoods in which they are located, reflect the needs and interests of the population
they serve, and meet the performance standards identified in the General Plan.
Coordinate closely with the Arcadia Unified School District on an ongoing basis to resolve
issues such as expanding the joint use of facilities and the use of vacant or underutilized
school sites.
Pursue implementation of the City's Public Buildings Master Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
It is staffs opinion that the projects set forth in the 2010 -2011 Capital Improvement Program
are consistent with the City's General Plan. Therefore, based on the information set forth
above, the Planning Commission should find that the 2010 -2011 Capital Improvement
Program is consistent with the General Plan.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
The Planning Commission should approve a motion finding that the 2010 -2011 Capital
Improvement Program is consistent with the City's General Plan.
If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or
comments regarding this matter, or any particular capital improvement project, please
contact Jim Kasama at (626) 574 -5423 or ikasama0cLarcadia.ca.us prior to June 8,
2010 so that specific details can be made available either prior to, or at the Planning
Commission meeting. If necessary, the appropriate staff personnel from other
departments may be available to answer questions regarding specific projects.
Attachment: 2010 -2011 Capital Improvement Program List
Capital Improvement Program
June 8, 2010
Page 2
VI
ti
m n
t
N
.2
N
0
e
a
2
U'
V
U
Q
a
Z
a
1LL
1
1
1
1
1 1
8
Ul
1,
ID
m
M
N
0
0
1 0
o
N
705
REDEVELOPMEN1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1 1
1 O
1
1
0
0
C
C
IC
00
1
1
p
N
N
1
1 1
1
1.
0
0
O
0
m
0
0
0
a
0
t+
0
N
0
r
o
0
a
o
N
g
M
0,
O
Ill
O
8
O
0
0
O
a
0
0
0
Q
1,
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
N- a
0 O
a'
a
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1 1
i
1
1
0
50,000 1
000'
II
400,000
CO 0
6
11
11111111.
1
1 1
1
1,
1
1
1
1
1
1 1 1,
1
o c
0 Ir
n v
1,
1
1
1
XVl SVO
Z61
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
0 00'Z B
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
M
1
1
1
1
1
1
302
CAPITAL
000'6
000'99
000'L
1
70,000
10,000
25,000
Ws
M
25,000 1
REQUESTING
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
Public Works
Public Works
Public Works
s)yoM o!Ignd
Public Works
Public Works
Public Works
Public Works
Public Works
Public Works
I Public Works
Public Works
Public Works
Public Works
Public Works
Public Works
Public Works
Development 1
Development I
Development I
Development 1
Development
Development
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Annual Meter Replacement Program
SCADA System Upgrades and Computerized Utilities System Mapping
Waive Replacement Program
LL
+apc armenance ane irrigation upgraaes ror water
Conservation
(Replacement of Calsense Irrigation Controller Components
Metals Total Maximum Daily Load (Metals TMDL) Special Studiies
Trash Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Catch Basin Devices
Annual Replacement of HVAC Rooftop Units
City Hag Maintenance Improvements
Public Works Facility Improvements
(Community Center Facigty Improvements
"Fire Station 106 HVAC Relocation
Library Facility Improvements
Police Department Facility Maintenance Improvements
Crown Restoration of City Trees
(Colorado Transmission Main Chapman Baldwin
(Pressure Reducing Station from Zone 2 to Zone 2A
Bridge Repairs
Torrey Pines Reservoir Recoatinq
Annual Sewer Inspections and CCTV Data Review
Baldwin Avenue Sewer Pipeline Project Construction
Water Main Replacement
Update Urban Water Management Plan
Rehab Streets with Stone Pine Trees
Arcadia High School Track Resurfacing
St. Joseph VOC/Nitrate Treatment Study Design
Historical Museum Facility Improvements
Police Repeater Station Emergency Generator Replacement
11EPA/CEQA Studies for STAG Grant
Eisenhower Park Bridge Improvement
3ity Hag Soccer Feld Replacement with Synthetic Turf Project
kcadia High School Musco Sport Field Lighting Project
iuntington Drive W/B Rehabilitation
;old Line Transit Plaza
tikeway Master Plan
TS Arterial Development
sidewalk Accessibility Handicap Ramp Project
tiscellaneous Traffic Signal Improvements
iuntington Drive Capacity Improvements
I
Nernow Parking Lot on Live Oak Avenue
al MI N
h
01
MI .I eI AI N
N
N
NI NI M
el
e)
Ln
cl
e.
e)
a
el
O
V
O
N el
N
N
N
0
L
L h-
)I 691
31
I e1
3 1 32 1
a l 6L
OTHER
Inrim
S33d
1dtS
E 31OtLdV VOL
FEDERAL GRANT
FEDERAL GRANT
1 000'001
000059
1 000'06
40,000
30,000
705
REDEVELOPMENT
118
SOLID WASTE
o
520 f
WATER
i13M3S
LZS
157
PROP C
120,000
107
PARKS
1 5 805,700
)Cd1 SVO
Z4L
302
CAPITAL
1 004'6
0
000'09
000'SL
00S'4L
REQUESTING
DEPARTMENT
tuawdoianea
Development
Development
I Iuawdolana0
I uogearaall
344
arlj
Aamgn
PROJECT DESCRIPTION f
Transportation Impact Fee Study Update
Duarte Road Rehabilitation Project
Sidewalk Gap Closure
Counter Expansion, ADA Compliance
Low Energy Swing Doors
Vehicle Exhaust Extraction System
Fire Station Maintenance Program
I Migrate Integrated Library System to Open Source Software
U
C m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
0
a ad
It 2 CI
RESOLUTION NO. 1817
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP
10 -04 TO AMEND CUP 09 -19 (RESOLUTION 1811) TO EXPAND THE
OPERATING SCHEDULE AND PERMIT LIMITED EXTERIOR SIGNAGE FOR
THE TUTORING CENTER AT 1741 S. BALDWIN AVENUE.
WHEREAS, on March 25, 2010, an application was filed by Ms. Michelle Wang to
amend the previously approved Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -19 (Resolution 1811) for
the tutoring center at 1741 S. Baldwin Avenue; Development Services Department Case No.
CUP 10 -04; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on May 25, 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 May 25, 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 tutoring center does 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.
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. The subject property is accessible from
W. Lemon Avenue, which is adequate in width and pavement type for the traffic demands of the
residences and businesses in the area, including the tutoring center that was approved by
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -19.
5. That the granting of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -04 will not adversely affect
the comprehensive General Plan because a tutoring center is consistent with the General Plan
Land Use Designation for the subject area.
6. This minor addition /expansion to an educational operation qualifies as a Class 14
Categorical Exemption of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15314
of the CEQA Guidelines. Furthermore, the use applied for will not have a substantial adverse
impact on the environment, and 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 wildlife depends.
SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants Conditional Use
Permit No. CUP 10 -04 to amend CUP 09 -19 (Resolution 1811) to expand the operating
schedule and allow limited exterior signage for the tutoring center at 1741 S. Baldwin Avenue,
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 4:00 p.m. on Saturday, except for a nine
week period beginning in June and ending in August when the hours of operation shall be
2 1817
limited to 8:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 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 for the tutoring
center to be displayed on an east facing building wall at this residentially -zoned site. The
design, size, and specific location on the building wall shall be subject to design review
approval by the Development Services Department.
5. CUP 10 -04 includes a Modification to allow the display of temporary banners on
an east facing building wall at this residentially -zoned site. The temporary banners shall
comply with all other applicable temporary banner regulations.
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 CUP 10 -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.
3 1817
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.
4 1817
ATTEST:
SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Passed, approved and adopted this
Secretary, Planning Commission
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney
day of 2010.
Chairman, Planning Commission
5 1817
RESOLUTION NO. 1818
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
CUP 10 -06 TO AMEND CUP 91 -12 (RESOLUTION 1470) TO INCREASE
THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SEATING TO 48 PERSONS AND ALLOW
THE SERVING OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR ON -SITE
CONSUMPTION AT THE 1,640 SQUARE -FOOT RESTAURANT LOCATED
AT 411 E. HUNTINGTON DR., SUITE 122.
WHEREAS, on April 8, 2010, an application was filed by Golden Dragon Restaurant
Enterprises, Inc. to amend CUP 91 -12 (Resolution 1470) to increase the maximum allowable
seating to 48 persons and allow the serving of alcoholic beverages for on -site consumption
at the 1,640 square -foot restaurant; Development Services Department Case No. CUP 10-
06, at 411 E. Huntington Dr., Suite 122; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on May 25, 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 May 25, 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 expanded seating and serving of alcoholic beverages is consistent with other
restaurants located at this commercial center.
2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper one for which a
Conditional Use Permit is authorized. Section 9275.1.53.5 of the Arcadia Municipal Code
allows for a restaurant at this location with an approved Conditional Use Permit.
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 and 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. The subject property is accessible
from E. Huntington Drive, which is adequate in width and pavement type for the traffic
demand of the businesses in the area, including the restaurant that is approved by
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -06.
5. That the granting of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -06 will not adversely
affect the comprehensive General Plan because a restaurant is consistent with the General
Plan Land Use Designation for the subject area.
6. That increasing the maximum seating and permitting alcoholic beverages to be
served for on -site consumption at the existing restaurant qualifies as a Class 1 Categorical
Exemption of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as an existing facility per
Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines. Furthermore, the use applied for will not have a
substantial adverse impact on the environment, and 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 wildlife depends.
SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants Conditional
Use Permit No. CUP 10 -06 to amend CUP 91 -12 (Resolution 1470) to increase the
maximum allowable seating to 48 persons and allow the serving of alcoholic beverages for
on -site consumption at the existing 1,640 square -foot restaurant, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The seating for the restaurant shall not exceed 48 seats.
2 1818
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 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
3 1818
ATTEST:
Services Department to acknowledge awareness and acceptance of these conditions of
approval.
SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Passed, approved and adopted this day of 2010.
Secretary, Planning Commission
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney
Chairman, Planning Commission
4 1818
RESOLUTION NO. 1819
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
CUP 10 -05 TO AMEND CUP 00 -011 FOR THE TEA HOUSE AT 846
WEST DUARTE ROAD.
WHEREAS, on March 29, 2010, an application was filed by Mr. Austin Ming Te
Lee of Tea Central, Inc. (dba: Ten Ren's Tea Time) to amend the previously approved
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 00 -011 for the existing tea house at 846 West Duarte
Road, Development Services Department Case No. CUP 10 -05; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on May 25,
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 May 25, 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 additional outdoor seating 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. Section 9275.1.53.5 of the Arcadia Municipal
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. The proposed additional outdoor seating will not interfere with
pedestrian or vehicular access, and the additional parking requirement for such outdoor
seating is minimal.
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. The subject property is
accessible from Duarte Road, Golden West Avenue, and Naomi Avenue, all of which
are adequate in width and pavement type for the traffic demand of the subject
restaurant and the proposed additional outdoor seating.
5. That the granting of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -05 will not
adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan because a restaurant is consistent
with the General Plan Land Use Designation for the subject area, and outdoor seating
is an encouraged feature to add vitality to the City's business areas and enhance the
quality of life of Arcadia residents.
6. That the proposal to add outdoor seating to an existing restaurant qualifies
as a Class 1 Categorical Exemption from the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a minor alteration and /or negligible expansion of
an existing facility per Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines. Furthermore, the
additional outdoor seating at an existing restaurant will not have a substantial adverse
impact on the environment, and based upon the record as a whole there is no evidence
-2- 1819
that the additional outdoor seating will have any potential for an adverse effect on
wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends.
SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -05 for 18 additional outdoor seats at the existing
restaurant at 846 West Duarte Road, 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 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 tea house.
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
-3- 1819
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),
applicant(s), and business owner(s) and operator(s) have executed and filed the
Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate
awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval.
SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Passed, approved and adopted this day of 2010.
ATTEST:
Secretary, Planning Commission
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney
Chairman, Planning Commission
MINUTES
ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, May 25, 2010, 7:00 P.M.
Arcadia City Council Chambers
The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, May 25,
2010 at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the City of Arcadia, at 240 W. Huntington Drive
with Chairman Parrille presiding.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille
ABSENT: None
OTHERS ATTENDING
Deputy Development Services Director /City Engineer, Phil Wray
Community Development Administrator, Jim Kasama
Assistant Planner, Tim Schwehr
Senior Administrative Assistant, Billie Tone
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS
Mr. Kasama noted that each Commissioner was given four items; a letter of withdrawal from
the applicants on Item 1, an email on item 2 requesting extension of business hours to 4:00
p.m. instead of 1:00 p.m., information on item 3 from the Arcadia Police Department, and a
letter in opposition to item 6.
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. 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.
This item was withdrawn by the appellant.
2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 10 -04
1741 South Baldwin Avenue
Michelle Wang (d.b.a. Nobel Education Institute)
Since he lives within 300 feet of the site, Chairman Parrille recused himself and Vice
Chairman Hsu assumed the chair.
The applicant is requesting an amendment to 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. 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 4:00 p.m. and no more than 30
students at any one time.
c. A permanent sign to be displayed at a residentially zoned property.
d. A temporary banner to be displayed at a residentially zoned property
Assistant Planner Tim Schwehr, presented the staff report.
Commissioner Baerg asked if the applicant's request for extended hours on Saturday would
conflict with activities at the church. Mr. Schwehr explained that this request had been
reviewed by church representatives and they determined there would be no conflict with
their activities.
The Public Hearing was opened.
Vice Chairman Hsu asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of this project.
Ms. Michelle Wang, representing Nobel Institute, said that she would be happy to answer
questions.
Commissioner Baderian asked Ms. Wang how the school is advertised. Ms. Wang said that
most of their students are referred by word -of -mouth and current students are given flyers
about the programs to share with friends and neighbors.
Commissioner Baderian asked if there are any signs for the school on the property now.
Ms. Wang said there are not. Commissioner Baderian asked why they want to add a
permanent sign and two temporary banners.
Ms. Wang said that the church complex has several buildings and visitors to Nobel, such as
job applicants, suppliers and parents, often have trouble locating their office. She said that
signs would solve this problem. As to the temporary banners, Ms. Wang explained that they
would be used to announce special events like the beginning of the summer and fall
programs, etc.
PC MINUTES
5 -25-10
Page 2
Commissioner Baderian asked about the proposed size of the permanent sign. Mr.
Schwehr explained that the size and design of the sign would be subject to Design Review
by staff so the sign would have to conform to city regulations.
Vice Chairman Hsu asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to this project.
There were none.
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Baerg, to close the
Public Hearing. Without objection the motion was approved.
Commissioner Baerg expressed reservations about a permanent sign and temporary
banners in a residential area. He pointed out that without the sign, the center blends in with
the residential community but adding signs would change the appearance of the center to a
more commercial type area.
Commissioner Baderian pointed out that if this application is approved, there may be more
requests for these types of signs in residential areas.
Commissioner Beranek noted that the tutoring center /church is actually on Baldwin Avenue
which is very close to a commercial area and that it appears to be a functional sign rather
than a marketing type sign. He added that it is common in schools to post signs announcing
registration for the upcoming term.
Mr. Kasama pointed out that the photo of the proposed sign is a simulation and that the
actual sign could be smaller. He briefly reviewed the regulations for temporary banners
including the number of times per year that banners can be used and the length of time that
they can be displayed.
Commissioner Baderian said that he could support the project if the conditions of approval
were amended to restrict the placement of a permanent sign and temporary banners to the
Baldwin Avenue side of the property.
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Beranek to approve
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -04 subject to the conditions in the staff report, and as
amended by the Commission.
ROLL CALL
AYES: Baderian, Baerg, Beranek and Hsu
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Chairman Pamile
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.
PC MINUTES
5 -25-10
Page 3
Chairman Parrille resumed the chair.
3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 10 -05
846 West Duarte Road (dba: Ten Ren's Tea Time)
Austin Ming Te Lee 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.
Community Development Administrator, Jim Kasama, presented the staff report.
The public hearing was opened.
Chairman Parrille asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of this project.
Ms. Chang, project coordinator for the applicant, said that the applicant had reviewed the
staff report and agrees to comply with all conditions. Ms. Chang offered to answer the
Commissioners' questions.
Chairman Parrille 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 noted the memo from the Police Department concerning the
possibility of gambling at this location, but said that since there had not been any official
reports he would support the application.
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to approve
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -05 subject to the conditions in the staff report.
ROLL CALL:
AYES: Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille
NOES: None
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 10-06
411 East Huntington Drive, #122
Golden Dragon Restaurant Enterprises, Inc.
PC MINUTES
5-25-10
Page 4
MOTION:
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.
Assistant Planner, Tim Schwehr, presented the staff report.
Commissioner Baderian asked to verify that alcohol consumption would be on -site only and
he asked when staff last visited the site. Mr. Schwehr said the consumption of alcohol
would be restricted to on -site only and that he had visited the site about three weeks ago.
Chairman Parrille noted that there are two other restaurants in operation in the center and
he asked Mr. Schwehr if parking congestion was anticipated with the addition of a third
restaurant. Mr. Schwehr said there were no parking problems anticipated.
The public hearing was opened.
Chairman Parrille asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of this project.
Mr. Stan Szeto, representing the applicant, Golden Dragon, said that the original restaurant
devoted a lot of space to buffet service but the new restaurant wanted a more traditional
seating plan. Mr. Szeto also explained that alcoholic beverages would be limited to wine
and beer only.
Commissioner Baderian noted that when staff visited the restaurant the seating had already
been changed without applying for a Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Kasama explained that
the seating arrangement had been changed before the current owner bought the restaurant.
Chairman Parrille asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to this project.
There were none.
It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to close the
Public Hearing. Without objection the motion was approved.
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to approve
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -06 subject to the conditions in the staff report.
ROLL CALL:
AYES: Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille
NOES: None
PC MINUTES
5 -25-10
Page 5
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 California, LLC (property owner)
The applicant is requesting a tentative parcel map for a 2 -unit residential condominium
subdivision.
Assistant Planner Tim Schwehr, presented the staff report.
The public hearing was opened.
Chairman Parrille asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of this project.
Mr. Hank Jong, Civil Engineer for the project, represented the owner. He said the owners
had reviewed all conditions and would comply with them. He offered to answer the
Commissioners' questions.
Commissioner Beranek asked Mr. Jong why the applicant chose to build only two units
when the lot would have supported four units. Mr. Jong explained that the size of the project
is determined by the owner.
Chairman Parrille asked if visitor parking is provided for the units and Mr. Jong said that
there are two visitor spaces on site.
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.
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Hsu, seconded by Commissioner Baderian to approve
Tentative Parcel Map No. TPM 10 -01 (Parcel Map No. 71302) subject to the conditions in
the staff report.
ROLL CALL:
AYES: Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille
NOES: None
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.
PC MINUTES
5 -25-10
Page 6
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 setback in lieu of 15' -0u required for an air conditioning unit.
Assistant Planner Tim Schwehr, presented the staff report.
Commissioner Hsu asked if there is a decibel level limit requirement for air conditioning units
and Mr. Schwehr said that there is and it is verified by an on -site inspector.
The public hearing was opened.
Chairman Parrille asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of this project.
Mr. Robert Tong, project designer, offered to answer the Commissioners' questions.
Commissioner Beranek asked why, if the site could support nine units, the applicant chose
to build only five. Mr. Tong explained that although the proposed project meets standards,
the lot is narrow and allows for only a single driveway, which was a factor in determining the
number of units.
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.
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Hsu, seconded by Commissioner Baderian to approve
Modification Application No. MP 10 -01 and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 10-08.
subject to conditions in staff report.
ROLL CALL:
AYES: Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and PerriIle
NOES: None
PC MINUTES
5 -25-10
Page 7
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
Community Development Administrator, Jim Kasama, presented the staff report.
The public hearing was opened.
Chairman Parrille asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of this project.
There were none.
Chairman Parrille 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 in favor of tighter controls on this type of business.
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Baerg to recommend
approval of Text Amendment No. TA 10 -11 to the City Council.
Commissioner Beranek asked what the cost will be for a Conditional Use Permit. Mr.
Kasama said it will be $1200. He explained that as proposed, the fee would apply to new
businesses only. However, the City Council may choose to apply the new requirements to
existing businesses, or when there is a change in ownership.
ROLL CALL:
AYES: Baderian, Baerg, Hsu and Parrille
NOES: Beranek
The Planning Commission's recommendation and comments will be forwarded to the City
Council.
PC MINUTES
5 -25-10
Page 8
CONSENT ITEMS
8. MINUTES OF MAY 11, 2010
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Baderian seconded by Commissioner Beranek, to approve
the minutes of May 11, 2010 as presented. Without objection the motion was approved.
MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION
Commissioner Beranek pointed out that two of the projects reviewed at the meeting
underutilized the number of units allowed for the lot. Chairman Parrille made the same
observation and asked if this was in accordance with the General Plan.
Commissioner Baderian asked when workshops were planned to provide information on the
General Plan and Mr. Kasama said there is a workshop scheduled for June 3 and another
later in June. He said the Commission can expect hearings on the General Plan in late
summer or the fall.
Commissioner Baderian asked if there was any news on the Caruso project and Oak Tree at
the Santa Anita Race Track. Mr. Kasama said the cancellations /renegotiations of Santa
Anita's agreements were probably a result of the bankruptcy proceedings and the outcomes
are unknown.
MODIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING ACTIONS
Chairman Parrille reported there were three items approved by the Modification Committee
this morning. They were MC09 -15 for a Parking Modification, MC 10 -05 for fence height,
and MC 10 -12 for front yard and side yard setbacks.
MATTERS FROM STAFF
Mr. Kasama briefly reviewed the upcoming items for the next Planning Commission meeting
including the annual determination that the Capital Improvement Program is consistent with
General Plan, and a tentative parcel map to subdivide two lots into for four new fats that will
finish a one -sided cul -de -sac.
Commissioner Baderian asked when the Planning Commission reorganization was
scheduled. Mr. Kasama said that reorganization will be likely be scheduled for the first
meeting in July.
Mr. Kasama said that Commissioner Hsu's term will end on June 30 and the City Council will
appoint a new Commissioner in July.
PC MINUTES
5 -25-10
Page 9
ADJOURNED 8:05 p.m.
ATTEST:
Secretary, Planning Commission
Chairman, Planning Commission
PC MINUTES
5 -25-10
Page 10