The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12-28-10PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL 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 concerning any of the proposed items set forth below for consideration. You are hereby advised that should you desire to legally challenge any action taken by the Planning Commission with respect to the proposed item for consideration, you may be limited to raising only those issues and objections, which you or someone else raises at or prior to the time of the Public Hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS 1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 10 -15 1147 W. Huntington Drive Mai Jessica Tran ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Tuesday, December 28, 2010, 7:00 P.M. Arcadia City Council Chambers The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to operate a 600 square -foot tea house with seating for a maximum of 12 persons and operating hours of 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight, seven days a week. RECOMMENDATION: Conditional Approval A Resolution reflecting the decision of the Planning Commission will be presented for adoption at the next Commission meeting. There will be a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. CONSENT ITEM 2. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 23, 2010 RECOMMENDATION: Approve 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 Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the Community Development Division offices at City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (626) 574 -5423. PC AGENDA 12 -28-10 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 Planning Services Department 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 Hearino Procedure 1. The public hearing item is introduced by the Chairman of the Planning Commission. 2. The staff report is presented by staff. 3. Commissioners' questions relating to the staff report may be asked and answered at this time. 4. The Public Hearing is opened by the Chairman and the applicant is afforded the first 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 Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the Community Development Division offices at City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (626) 574-5423. PC AGENDA 12 -28-10 December 28, 2010 TO: Arcadia Planning Commission FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Tim Schwehr, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -15 for a 600 square -foot tea house with seating for a maximum of 12 persons and operating hours of 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight, seven days a week at 1147 W. Huntington Drive. SUMMARY Ms. Mai Jessica Tran submitted Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -15 for a 600 square -foot tea house with seating for a maximum of 12 persons and operating hours of 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight, seven days a week at 1147 W. Huntington Drive. It is staff's opinion that the tea house will not adversely impact the other nearby businesses and neighboring properties. Therefore, the Development Services Department is recommending approval of this application, subject to the conditions listed in this staff report. GENERAL INFORMATION STAFF REPORT Development Services Department APPLICANT: Ms. Mai Jessica Tran LOCATION: 1147 W. Huntington Drive REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit for a 600 square -foot tea house with seating for a maximum of 12 persons and operating hours of 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight, seven days a week in an existing shopping center. SITE AREA: 208,652 square feet (4.79 acres) FRONTAGES: 620.27 feet along W. Huntington Drive 342.84 feet along Michillinda Avenue 342.00 feet along Sunset Boulevard EXISTING LAND USE ZONING: The site is developed with two commercial buildings and a small recycling center totaling 66,649 square feet. The easterly one -story building at 1101 W. Huntington Drive is a 44,702 square -foot Ralphs Grocery Store. The westerly two -story building at 1119 1155 W. Huntington Drive contains a mix of office, financial and retail uses totaling 21,447 square -feet. The recycling center is 500 square -feet in size and located between the two buildings toward the rear of the site. The property is zoned C -2, General Commercial. SURROUNDING LAND USES ZONING: North: Three -story corporate office building with an attached two -story parking structure, and a 97 -unit retirement center (CUP 84 -19) zoned C -2 South: Multi- family residential zoned R -3 East: Two -story commercial building zoned C -O, and Multi- family residential zoned R -3 West: Two -story office building zoned C -O, and Single- family residential in an unincorporated County area GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION Public hearing notices of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -15 were mailed on December 16, 2010 to the property owners and tenants of those properties that are within 300 feet of the subject property see the attached radius map. Because the proposed project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the public hearing notice was not published in a local newspaper. BACKGROUND INFORMATION A grocery store and shopping center have been at this location since the late 1940's. Beginning in the mid- 1960's, the subject property has had a parking agreement with the adjacent northerly property at 618 Michillinda Avenue to lease 199 parking spaces. The leased parking spaces are used primarily by Ralph's customers and employees. In 2002 the Ralphs Grocery store was remodeled and expanded, and Modification No. MP 02 -24 was approved for 221 on -site parking spaces in lieu 337 required for the entire shopping center. The following Conditional Use Permits have been approved for the stated uses in the shopping center at 1101 1155 W. Huntington Drive: CUP 81 -05 allowed the grocery store that was originally built in 1948 to be replaced with a new 31,500 square -foot grocery store. CUP 92 -13 was approved for the tutoring service at 1135 W. Huntington Drive, Suite 211 for up to 30 students. It is currently operating as the College Prep Center. CUP 02 -07 was approved for the 13,000 square -foot expansion of the grocery store. CUP 10 -01 was granted in February 2010 to permit a tutoring center with up to 80 students in 4,313 square -feet of office space on the second -floor of the westerly two -story commercial building. It is operating as Elite Education. CUP 10 -15 1147 W. Huntington Drive December 28, 2010 page 2 PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to remodel a 600 square -foot, first -floor commercial unit (previously a salon) for a tea house with seating for a maximum of 12 persons. The existing commercial unit has an entrance facing south towards Huntington Drive and a second entrance facing north towards the rear parking lot. The tea house is proposing to use the north entrance as the primary entrance where patrons would enter for the seating area. The south entrance would be used for take -out service only with a counter and a small indoor waiting area. The proposed hours of operation are 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight, seven days a week. Parking and Traffic The property has a total of 221 on -site parking spaces that are shared between the grocery store and the tenants in the two -story commercial building. However, based on the current uses at this center, the parking requirement is 337 spaces. This center also leases 199 parking spaces from the adjacent property to the north for a total of 420 available parking spaces. But, these 199 spaces are considered surplus because of the approval of Modification No. MP 02- 24, which approved a 116 -space parking deficiency. Despite this substantial parking deficiency based on Code requirements, staff has not observed a parking problem at this center. The proposed tea house requires 6 on -site parking spaces based on the Code requirement of 10 spaces per 1,000 square -feet of gross floor area; an increase of 3 spaces over the previous salon use. With the proposed tea house, there will be a total parking requirement of 340 spaces and a parking deficiency of 119 spaces, as compared to the existing 116 space parking deficiency. The following table lists the amounts of parking spaces required for the various types of uses in this center: Use Retail Offices Banks Tutoring Center Tutoring Center (CUP 10 -01) Proposed Tea House Parking Requirement Calculation Parking Requirement 5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. 4 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. 5 spaces (per CUP 92 -13) 1 space per instructor 1 per 3 students 10 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. No. of Spaces Required 241 spaces 48 spaces 5 spaces 40 spaces 6 spaces Total: 340 spaces It is staff's opinion that the increased parking deficiency is insignificant and will not have an impact on the shopping center or the neighboring businesses. And, a tea house is the type of use that shares parking spaces. Patrons of this center are likely to visit the tea house along with stopping at other businesses in this center in one stop; such as, a bank, the salon, the cleaners, or one of the tutoring centers. And, the tea house will also be a service to the employees of the other businesses. CODE REQUIREMENTS All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, emergency equipment, and parking and site design are required to be complied with to the CUP 10 -15 1147 W. Huntington Drive December 28, 2010 page 3 satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director. CEQA Proposed projects that are not approved, are by virtue of being denied, exempt from any further environmental assessment. If approved, however, and if it is determined that no significant physical alterations to the site are necessary, then this project, as a minor alteration to an existing facility is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines. A Preliminary Exemption Assessment is attached to this staff report. FINDINGS Section 9275.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Conditional Use Permit to be granted, it must be found that all of the following prerequisite conditions can be satisfied: 1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity. The proposed tea house will not have any adverse impacts to the neighboring businesses or properties, and will be required to comply with all County Health Code requirements. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. An eating establishment is allowed in the C -2 zones with an approved Conditional Use Permit per Section 9275.1.45.1 of the Arcadia Municipal Code. 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 tea house will increase the parking requirement by 3 spaces; a 0.89% change, which is insignificant. 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. All of the surrounding streets; Huntington Drive, Michillinda Avenue, and Sunset Boulevard are adequate to serve the existing shopping center with the addition of the proposed tea house. 5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan. The proposed tea house is a commercial use that is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation of the site. It is staffs opinion that the proposed tea house satisfies each prerequisite condition. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -15, subject to the following conditions: 1. The tea house shall be limited to a maximum of 12 seats, and shall not be open between 12:00 midnight and 6:00 a.m. CUP 10 -15 1147 W. Huntington Drive December 28, 2010 page 4 2. No alcoholic beverages shall be sold or served at this tea house. 3. This approval of CUP 10 -15 includes a parking modification /reduction of 3 spaces for the 600 square -foot tea house. This parking modification is not an approval for a general reduction of the parking requirements for the subject commercial space, the subject building, or the subject site. 4. The use approved by CUP 10 -15 is limited to the proposed tea house, which shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP 10 -15, and shall be subject to periodic inspections, after which the provisions of this Conditional Use Permit may be adjusted after due notice to address any adverse impacts to the adjacent streets and neighboring businesses or properties observed during these inspections. 5. 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. 6. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 10 -15 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in the closing of the tea house. 7. 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. 8. Approval of CUP 10 -15 shall not take effect until the property owner(s), and applicant(s) have executed and filed an Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve this application, the Commission should move to approve Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -15; state the supporting findings and environmental determination, and direct staff to prepare a resolution for adoption at the next meeting that incorporates the Commission's decision, specific determinations and findings, and the conditions of approval. CUP 10 -15 1147 W. Huntington Drive December 28, 2010 page 5 Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this application, the Commission should move to deny Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -15; state the finding(s) that the proposal does not satisfy with reasons based on the record, and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and specific findings for adoption at the next meeting. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the December 28th public hearing, please contact Assistant Planner, Tim Schwehr by calling (626) 574 -5422, or by email at tschwehr @ci.arcadia.ca.us. Approved by: Jim munity Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photo 300 -foot Radius Map Photos of Subject Property Proposed Plans Preliminary Exemption Assessment CUP 10 -15 1147 W. Huntington Drive December 28, 2010 page 6 1147 W. Huntington Drive CUP 10 -15 Subject Property Unincorporated Los Angeles County OWNERSHIP OCCUPANTS LIST RADIUS MAPS -LAND USE. PLANS MUNICIPAL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING 21OS LAMBERT AVE.EL MONTE, CA 91132 fAX(928)350-1 PROJECT INFORMATION 1 f4TW }ft NTINGTON DR. ARCADIA, CA. 10 -245 SCALE 1" 200' RESTROOM SINK OLL1.6 'at3013SO8 VO OA18A311VA'3ZLL61 e, �,e S ii o6..d VO 110 NOJ NILNf1H LbL L :SS32laatl :S1N3110 3Sf10H tl31 VdNbil`J !i IV! Ilinif 11 {ea 111 i �l! {I ail' j 1 1 i 111 ;ill 1 1 111 1✓♦ 11 rt ill III k SS g W W y 1 0 0 r� woo •Ileugoy@BuoN�Fuol:1Iew3 8609• LZZ (9Z9) :11 6£99'68Z (UM 191 'O3 Tom NOI.L9I1a SNO91M a Z U V d Vl W Z d a Q U i bNe a s °x m gg r .1' 5 e. R ,F i o, R.Y e OF d 6 g g RR 0 AA X- 5 5ie b 7 F A g w W a I P Y ya 'a ye; a i Y A yd¢ g Y Y 1 :ii a 1 1 X i l gR; X g 1 l t 10 i .A N X y Y p i X 5 n $Y :4 1 Y x e 1 i9 1 Y e i Y� s g 3 0 gg Sg l 6 pk F4 y FY R` p 2 .1 y I F 0 8 I i iJ J L 8E ig bb: Y gR Cl i R e li gN ig Y 1 l4 p B N 5yyy 15M f l i1Y g i g 1 19X�E! !i� n 1w {6ed i 6Y o G. I I I I cp yy y5yy e 9 p X C S a C B R E F y i g s 1 A g y YY �X y 5 E y 9 4: 5' Ett ££!i i }Ri g e e 5 E e 1 y ;X kaG 1 D tah i} Y F• y i R J b Y Y E g 1 b b 1.X' bi l g g 4 1 Neil* r F Q p w y b f IS Q I I. 41 @Q o �Qg gl d 811 1lCX R9 Xk dR X i r- F 1 1 bQ' gl RI A QR .F6y b YV Y1 f F 4_ 1 5 t t!!. o S 8 a Q' ld gig r54EEY e q :r; gq r 4 ea rk�� lQ 6 rr� t Y 9{e g�kpb Y` 1 y� ba X 1 a ir n X 1_ a Yp rail' b 511 VII rAV/q#10% MITIli a� p Cda19; t .p�. a iiiiitll y @e 1:401T11121 t.;' 1' i @hf�!{ 1 5 s 9�{ ;j! t5t 7 a e I Ti l l V/ c• "'U J NU..,,ON CR. ARGON mt� R W. HUNTINGTON DR. r F Nit 1 h' 2 �X j IV G 6 �X Y g e- rg bg 1 X l a 5 4 g f fl' li; 4! fp 1/ 11 I/ Y i 2 i €i A .y F ig ill i Iii be lei 1i 4 1 p 1 ii -1 1: i 1 ,i lei F i t b F iti w ii!; i!A ppf$E y 1oo. �Ry e+� r �yf t5 65 M ie p p X tl1 18 e i F g l l 1 I� !Bag !i` 1 II y F p €q i Y� I"p- E vi: r "g ri !g b p b pg 9 9 y g yvil e� i";iGg 6 9i XX F e Y h! Xit I 2 ig 2i Y 5 9 tlR e1'� e Xeb.■ 1 V//////////////// a i I 3Av YaNIIIIH0IW (n 0 R A ga ig ei i 1[ 5 4 t 1 5 9�y 1 lid y p Y b 1 Y 6 1 p 1p p �i �li a 1 b e. 116 tF yy 1 1� 4 Er a g€ a S 9 6 a b- 11 .E! ie1 J i 1 0 w g a 8 1 WW1 Ye 77 4 4ba R X �t p9� 6 X ��X 1f Pi e 6 it e 7C a Y �a G Q e�' 6 e p X Q ,7 r a X VI i 1, k R i' R 1 9 I; 1 ra 1 11 X 0 Q 1 1M Y ba 5! 3 i 55 b 1 2 g i I:1 1J R y W 11 i as a. g, 1l 7 tl pC A 1 1 4 4 6 A R b C�X �1i W F` E Y� a qi R a F 1 R 1 Q 6 '1 1 i i I i k i Q l g MI bibY If #111 c h ig ly!i i :G ;,1,1911:1 AY K9 [Wi2W 51 is t :9 tlT a 1 2� 6Yd aXfr fl Qe H U Q F- Z O 0 gir 6 XX t b b k ie6 1 X e g X X Y X 8 X drJ 11 €I Qg 3 Q R p e b1� Ill A t i 3 [1 1 a XY Ei 1 1 P i g6 p G p q R6 W GY p p R X Y a Q �l 7Q iX� ee Y 1101 {y X [RI 1 e! 44/ '9 t ail I Phi 7 6� R 9f� 0 1 A Phi 1 111 6 1 b 4 il Y 5 61 b itl I r i r X Y' 4t 0 i X t 'Y M' 9 y@ 4r 7 115 Y CQ 6RY A Ip u b Ada X!X �ySI 1 1 1 1 Ae y 7 y ni Yg Y ��1i3 l C it 9` X S G 14 1 Rtlp9d/ r 1 Y�C V 1 e4P i i 4 ■QY Y 1 RC'r p y k X i t' 6 r1 �1� a ee A 9 Yga X F iQE ep Y ]n pe e 6 rt el e: rbpr a Ai X61 X X1S5 aY X1 X1�a rig nil B S r ntr oo.., lav 110 NOIDIJUNI1H 141.1, 3SnOH V31 VdONV89 wro..opw. ONON A 1 k SaDIVA COVER SHEET v.v_O ()ILIA V0 '0V31013S014 I wO3'Ilew 136ETIZZ (9Z9) :1190 6E9S'69Z (9Z9) lei '03 'ONE NOIL311111iNO3 (1LL16 VO'OV3W3S021 '0A19 A311VA'3 Z116I 6u..we.3 ell a. 1AVNei woo Ilewlogi]6uoxi(uol :pew3 9669'LZZ (9Z9) :I1e0 6E95'69Z (9Z9) :lel "03 'ONE N01.1.01111.1.10103 J i Ue-.d VO 'VIOV021V '210 NOIONI LNf1H L4 L L :ss321Oav :S1N3110 3Sf1O1-1 V31 VdONV210 )IIBM apls 6upsix3 0 I D 00 _411/6 °1111 I 0 0 PI 1 0 a m A A 1E1 a �l 0 01. 11 .w l 1 AL ce 0 0 J LL W 0) 0 w 1-- d Z o w MIeM apls 6uRslx3 r~� 3 CORE I� O 0 0. O 0 O 5'. I® >�e 0 0 O O Eta 1 O N 1l9ex 1 1 11ipl�o! w .i I MR �61 5 g e 1 chi I p 5 1 1 y 1 vi e OLL L6 VO ab'3w3soa 'Q/ 18 A311VA'3 81. L61 'aa NO! S mo 11 .._..4..a. 6.. :e AM raw 1 0203. A1101 E 1. WOE 'D001300100 Aral 530VA +A -0 1111 S311103H3S woo•pewLoq 6uo H6uol:8ew3 86£9'LZZ (989):IRO 6£48'688 (989) :1 '00 'ONE NO11O11111SNOO .131 sows lS1N3110 3Sf1OH 031 VdaNVao �M�o.... g qY y f i p Z 1I\ /130 DOOR SCHEDULE (n GC M ce M3X MHD 1115103 u m g 8 h pg y .g 35 00 0 3aVMOaVH 30. ONUO. soma O 059111 1MLL O O 3101104 34111 83 0 0 31014%1411 MSfd 0 x l yy 130 1 1 1I\ 808 01x04 8350D SIB 0 0 0 4015 80013 1102 0 suns O 39x4 10401 O O to 1 p MIK ,1M /130 e1000 FRAMES 0031-1 n n .f y 6 n Y i y 3800 01105 3.3"ST°'0 0 0 nw3lrn 3� DOORS 451x11 '131001 O O O 9X1100 3011 0 ,f 90128 0 0 0 31303 0405 6315011 0005 EQUIPMENT SCHEDULE >iaVW3a 01NIM17 0211100 3135, 1.03104 11 1 553110151 1x00H n t @y 3. 2 180. ..7 h >n 341 m o UMBI w1 5/1 5/1 -.z 0384. I. o FINISH SCHEDULE s >lavw3a NOTES: NOTES: 1. HE COUP OE 1181 111371. ON MAU +0110 4(063.. SERVIO /MA 1. 411 EOMYbIT 9121 113 ~KR MD 1351 R0d51151 E LMT GOOD UM Al (EAST HK (0(0 R[1SGTAMCE VALUE 2. 1113 CLtm MI5 2 1100 9121 E USG 1101P5 3230 GDP. LAY -N RMEL 910081 IMAM t rA N MOO OR 0011 HEALER E z /11 0/0 z/1 CTRI' KW MX 9 113 3111 ]118400 /M (808 1111.545 N06N3d5n5 f 01 .....a9 .2/5 43101151 0 0 3TU ON i 160045 3110x502/2 (0018 -1) 4318.5 00603/505 f 0 11 .5103. 18130 109E .3206. 161 -1 .3(129.1 OS -3 J031. 3W6 601540 11406 -10011 !0511081781. CUSTOM MADE :'EVERECr 753091 IwSTOA MADE 23.511 553113.31 '3SS -3VAM 010Z- ELLLIS !0511313.09 tlLMe 33111119-97103311 1- 01-051 .3003.' 511103 .05005. 69-1 .30W. 9C -042 I t 3006 1015(0 33) 151511 550101015 0 a0081H9n 10101 moron 010045 31901652 O l.i 3S EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION A2 GUMMI M/ MICRO SEMI VADE .ES 0.0±— —16E) MA 1EATLA (50 GAL.) REAM -0 MAD MEOW A MM E ®1.501 IDM -SUH) 1335 0313.011 3783. 55 /009 02 /2 (3.05 -201) 4D6 10361202600 1', 1011 5. S. WADER LOCKER (lf'A5) S.5 MALL MOUDISO DEE, 11.21 2330 (MS 102) MAS 11F361Wd1103 E (583 009) 23006 301 235833510 11.01 232Ve M DUOS /M MIS 0//0 111011 T2M, LOOER ,DASD REOSTER STELE GUARD (60'1 A.F.F.) :0101(RAU CASE 5111008 .e/0 3508 03109 3111 3140830 1,1 Q C 501008 .8 /f /M 3558 03000 3111 11211000 0,9 O )0F sou 0811040 ,9 %.9 0 3111 3100838 O 0 Y5 3111 AU.. L WOOa 6 Z 2310110, 0320 231015(0/ 6000.0530 1o 1 10111 Z •2!0 Nf 3S(IOk vii vaurvva0 ....1 sualoor........a. Ma mon 'op...mama 'no 1........... ...samu 7•■••onc..1..n. %mar ea.......................,.., ......................1.0 Mil ..110, /WM NI ..........94 MAI Pa Ma 9 .r.a w......cri, %MEIN MY *I la.. In./Me Aphin .2=01.....="ar .PX ....0 DNON ANO1 k 010Z '9Z E139104.01, 71 cf■ 091 Is.on. PLUMBING ELECTRICAL PLAN O•17 'OA18 A311VA '3 Z1.1.6 woo•Iieum 96E9'1ZZ (969) :1190 '03'ON2 NO113fluJaNO3 JJ1 0 z w 0 w J 7C d 0 0) z OD 2 J d W 0) 0 w Q a z w 0a o r 0 a0, 0 E 0000000 1 RESTROOM DETAIL 1. Name or description of project: 4. Staff Determination: PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT (Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption) Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -15 for a 600 square -foot tea house with seating for a maxiumum of 12 persons. 2. Project Location Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15' or 7W topographical map identified by quadrangle name): 1147 W. Huntington Drive (between Michillinda Avenue and Sunset Boulevard) 3. Entity or person undertaking project: A. City of Arcadia B. Other (Private) (1) Name: Mai Jessica Tran (2) Address: 4935 Doreen Avenue Temple City, CA 91780 (3) Phone: (213) 216- 4812 The City's Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the City's "Local Guidelines for Implementing the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)" has concluded that this project does not require further environmental assessment because: a. The proposed action does not constitute a project under CEQA. b. The project is a Ministerial Project. c. The project is an Emergency Project. d. The project constitutes a feasibility or planning study. e. The project is categorically exempt. Applicable Exemption Class: 3 Section No.: 15303(c) 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: December 7, 2010 Staff: Tim Schwehr, Assistant Planner MINUTES ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, November 23, 2010, 7:00 P.M. Arcadia City Council Chambers The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, November 23, 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 Chairman Parrille led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Chiao and Parrille ABSENT: None OTHERS ATTENDING Deputy Development Services Director /City Engineer, Phil Wray Community Development Administrator, Jim Kasama Senior Planner, Lisa Flores Associate Planner, Tom Li Senior Administrative Assistant, Billie Tone SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS A letter regarding Item 2 and a memo with corrections to the conditions of approval on Item 3 were distributed to the Planning Commissioners. 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 There were none. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION APPEAL NO. HOA 10 -07 1342 Oakwood Drive Tom Crosby (on behalf of property owners, Mr. and Mrs. Dong Chang) This is an appeal to reconsider the Highlands Homeowners' Association's Architectural Design Review Board decision to deny the architectural style of a new front porch addition. Commissioner Beranek said he had a conflict of interest on this item because the property owner, Dr. Chang, has been his personal doctor for many years. He recused himself from this item, and left the chambers. Senior Planner, Lisa Flores, presented the staff report. The Public Hearing was opened. Chairman Pamile asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of this project. Mr. Tom Crosby, the appellant, said that he feels the design of the porch is not out of proportion to the house and is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. He mentioned that there are other houses on Oak Meadow with arched entries and there are other copper roofs in the area. He pointed out that, as required by the design review process, the neighbors all signed the plans indicating their approval of the design Commissioner Baderian noted that Mr. Crosby had stated that he was a past President of the Homeowners' Association and, in light of this, he asked Mr. Crosby why he and the property owners did not meet with the Homeowners' Association representatives to try to reach an agreement before this meeting. Mr. Crosby explained that the ARB Chairman had told him that the arch and the copper roof were inappropriate, but he offered no alternatives. Therefore, Mr. Crosby felt that the ARB had already made a firm decision. Commissioner Chiao asked to see the pictures of the other properties in the area that Mr. Crosby said were similar to the proposed design for the Chang residence. Mr. Crosby provided photographs to the Commissioners. Commissioner Chiao asked if there were any samples of copper roofs in the photos. Mr. Crosby said there were not, however, he felt copper was a superior material for roofing because it requires very little maintenance. Chairman Pamile asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to this project. Mr. Ralph Bicker, Architectural Review Board Chairman for the Highlands Homeowners' Association, said that he has held this position since 1969. He provided some history on the HOA and explained their basic objectives. Mr. Bicker said the HOA tries to promote compatibility rather than conformity and that they could not find any home in the area that is in any way similar to the proposed design. He also explained that the decision to deny this application was made by a committee and that the committee members offered to meet with the applicant to explore options to make the design acceptable, but since the applicant did not want to meet, the committee felt they had no choice but to deny the application. Commissioner Chiao asked how many homes there are in the Highland HOA and Mr. Bicker said there are about 900. Commissioner Chiao noted that there appeared to be no homes with copper roofs in the HOA and Mr. Bicker confirmed this. Further, Mr. Bicker said that there is no instance where roofing materials are mixed on a single home. Chairman Parrille asked if there was any rebuttal from the applicant. There was none. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Baderian to close the Public Hearing. Without objection the motion was approved. PC MINUTES 11 -23-10 Page 2 MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Chiao, to deny Homeowners' Association Appeal No. HOA 10 -07. ROLL CALL AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Chiao and Parrille NOES: None RECUSED: Beranek There is a five (5) working day appeal period after the approval /denial of the appeal. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, December 2, 2010. Commissioner Beranek returned to meeting. 2. APPEAL OF OAK TREE PERMITS TRH 10 AND THE 10 20 276 Hacienda Drive Sharon Kwan (representative of the property owner, Roland Hwang) This is an appeal of the Modification Committee's denial of the following Oak Tree Permits: 1. Legalize the removal of an Engelmann Oak Tree that was located in the front yard area of the subject property; and, 2. Legalize the non permitted encroachment by the trenching for a block wall within the dripline of two (2) Coast Live Oak Trees that are located in the rear yard of the adjacent property at 280 Hacienda Drive. Associate Planner, Tom Li, presented the staff report. Chairman Parrille asked if the Commissioners had any questions. Commissioner Baerg asked to confirm that the Engelmann Oak was removed before the application was submitted. Yes, the tree had been removed before the application was submitted. Mr. Li explained that the applicant was not aware that a permit was required to remove an oak tree, however, the applicant did arrange for an arborist's report. Commissioner Baerg asked if the applicant disclosed that the tree had already been removed when she applied for the permit. Mr. Li explained that Code Services informed the property owners that a permit was required, and based on the arborist's report, the oak tree removal was approved. However, the approval was rescinded when it was discovered that the arborist's certification had lapsed. The Public Hearing was opened. Chairman Perri Ile asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of this project. Ms. Sharon Kwan said that she is a friend of the property owner, Ms. Jenny Wong. Ms. Kwan explained that Ms. Wong has had a series of personal problems that made it difficult for her to manage the property. Ms. Kwan said that she is trying to help her friend with the PC MINUTES 11 -23-10 Page 3 property. She said that she contacted Mr. Vance Tucker, a local arborist who was included on the city's list of certified arborists, regarding the oak tree in the front yard. Mr. Tucker determined that the tree was dead and recommended immediate removal to avoid damage to the house should the dead tree fall. Ms. Kwan then made arrangements with a local contractor for removal of the oak tree. She also pointed out that a pre -sale inspection report noted that the tree was dying due to flooding from plumbing leaks. She further explained that the landscaping is in poor condition because the water had to be turned off until plumbing repairs are made. Ms. Kwan explained that a brick wall separating the property from one of the neighbors had fallen and she asked a contractor for an estimate for repairs. Due to a misunderstanding, the contractor began digging in the yard before obtaining permission. Since then, Ms. Kwan explained that she has been unable to get in touch with the contractor to repair or complete the work they began. Ms. Kwan said that they are very sorry to have upset their new neighbors. She explained that the owner, Ms. Wong, is also very upset about the condition of the house and yard and is working diligently to have the necessary repairs made. Commissioner Baderian asked if the realtor advised the applicant of the requirement to obtain a city permit for removal of an oak tree. Ms. Kwan explained that there was a very short escrow period and Ms. Wong could not remember if she had been advised of the need for a permit. Chairman Parrille asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to this project. Mr. Simon Russin, owner of the property to the rear of the subject site, said that this property has been in trouble for 35 years. He said that the pool and trees have not been maintained. Mr. Russin said the oak tree in the front yard was dead and there were sewage and plumbing problems. Now there is a new owner, but they have not been able to get permits to make the necessary repairs. Mr. Russin pointed out that the property is an eyesore and the new owner needs help to get the property in order. Mr. Jim Krause, 280 Hacienda, said that he would like to have a good relationship with his neighbors, but he is concerned about the pattern they are establishing of ignoring regulations, and when questioned, claim simply that they didn't understand. Mr. Krause said that the trenching under the oak tree went on for several days, not just one day as stated by Ms. Kwan. He noted that 12 -inch roots were sawed off and he questioned whether the tree would survive. Mr. Krause said that about a month after this occurred, someone came to his front door and asked him to sign a document signifying his approval for the work on the block wall which had already begun. He said that there used to be a large Magnolia tree in the yard and a nice lawn, but now there are only weeds and discolored fencing. Mr. Krause said that in his opinion, legalizing a permit that was ignored in the first place is not the answer. Ms. Mary Dougherty, Santa Anita Oaks HOA President, pointed out that the staff report shows Jenny Wang as the property owner but, in fact, the title is held by her son Roland Wang. She also said that the listing agreement clearly states that the property is in a Homeowners' Association so it is unlikely that Ms. Wang was not aware of this. Ms. Dougherty distributed some pictures of the property to the Commissioners showing that the appearance of the property has substantially changed since Ms. Wang took ownership. On PC MINUTES 11 -23-10 Page 4 behalf of the Santa Anita Oaks HOA, Ms. Dougherty asked the Commissioners to uphold the decision of the Modification Committee to deny approval for removal of the oak tree and the trenching and to request replacement trees on, at least, a two for one basis. She further requests suspension of any building permits until the property is brought into compliance. Chairman Parrille asked if the applicant wanted to speak in rebuttal. Ms. Kwan said Mr. Tucker assured her that there were no protected trees on the property and she had no recollection of a Magnolia tree. She also stated that the applicant was not aware that Mr. Tucker's certification had lapsed. She said that they obtained approval signatures for the block wall from two neighbors. Commissioner Beranek asked who the legal owner of the property is. Ms. Kwan said that the property was purchased in the name of her friend's son, Roland, who is away at college. Commissioner Beranek asked if the house is currently occupied. Ms. Kwan explained that the house is not habitable due to plumbing and termite problems but they can't work on these problems until the HOA is satisfied that the tree issues are resolved. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, to close the public hearing. Without objection the motion was approved. Commissioner Baderian expressed concem about the various code violations that need to be addressed and the resulting negative impacts to the community. He said it appears that the owners are attempting to correct the problems but they don't know how to proceed. Commissioner Baderian said he would deny the appeal but he felt that follow up is needed. Chairman Parrille explained that the Modification Committee was concerned about the negligent appearance of the property and the apparent lack of concern about regulations. He noted that it is not good practice to allow unpermitted work to take place and legalize it after the fact. Commissioner Beranek said that he agrees that the trees are only a symptom of the problem. He said that the real issue is that the owner isn't working to bring the house up to code and make it habitable. He asked what would happen if the Commission denies the appeal. Mr. Kasama explained that if the appeal is denied the matter would be referred to the City Attorney. Commissioner Chiao said he understands that the HOA wants the tree issue resolved before permits can be issued for any other work. However, he said he feels it would be in the best interests of the community to allow permits to be issued for the other repairs without waiting for the tree issue to be resolved. Commissioner Baderian pointed out that there seemed to be a consensus to deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Modification Committee on the trees. However, he also suggested that staff work with the owner to find solutions to make the house habitable. PC MINUTES 11 -23 -10 Page 5 Commissioner Baderian said he felt the Commission should deny the appeal and refer the matter to the City Attorney for follow up. Chairman ParriIle agreed and pointed out that the greater issue was that work was done without permits. Commissioner Baderian said that he wanted to be sure that the necessary steps would be taken to remedy the entire situation including termites, sewer, plumbing and foundation issues. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Baerg to deny the appeal of Oak Tree Permits TRH 10 -01 and THE 10 -20. ROLL CALL AYES: Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Chiao and Parrille NOES: None There is a five (5) working day appeal period after the approval/denial of the appeal. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, December 2, 2010. 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 10 16 233 E. Huntington Drive The Derby Restaurant The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow the interim use of a tent as a temporary patio cover for an outdoor dining area. RESOLUTION NO. 1825 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -16 to allow the interim use of a tent as a temporary patio cover for an outdoor dining area at 233 E. Huntington Drive. Jim Kasama presented the staff report. Commissioner Baderian said he noticed in the staff report that the tent could be used not only for the holiday season, but for other special events as well. Mr. Kasama confirmed that the Conditional Use Permit would allow the use of the tent beyond the time limit allowed by a Special Event Permit. The tent will be removed after the current holiday season on January 3, and it will be set up again when a special event occurs. The Public Hearing was opened. Chairman Parrille asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of this project. Mr. Dustin Larson, applicant and owner of the Derby, explained that the holiday season is the Derby's busiest time of year and the extended seating offered by the covered patio is PC MINUTES 11 -23-10 Page 8 very important to their business. Without the cover, it is too cold for dining on the patio. Mr. Larson said that they are planning four special events next year; two charity events for the Boys and Giris Club and two special holidays. He mentioned that they have submitted plans for a permanent structure and he stressed that in the meantime, he is willing to comply with any and all city regulations regarding the use of the tent Commissioner Baderian asked if the additional customers would cause a parking problem for the Derby. Mr. Larson explained that the Derby provides valet parking and they have a parking lot in the rear, which they rarely use so they do not anticipate any parking issues. Commissioner Baderian asked about the Boys Giris Club events. Mr. Larson said two events are planned for the Boys Giris Club donors and boosters. Chairman Parrille asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to this project. There were none MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek to close the Public Hearing. Without objection the motion was approved. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Baerg to approve Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -16 and adopt Resolution No. 1825. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Chiao and PerriIle NOES: None There is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, December 2, 2010. CONSENT ITEMS 4. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 9, 2010 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the minutes of November 9, 2010. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Chiao, to approve the minutes of November 9, 2010 as presented. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Chiao, and Parrille NOES: None PC MINUTES 11 -23-10 Page 7 MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMISSION Commissioner Beranek said that he would recommend attendance at the League of Califomia Cities annual Planners Institute meeting which will be held in Pasadena this year. MODIFICATION COMMITTEE AGENDA Chairman Parrille reported that two items were approved. One item was for an addition to a rear unit and the other item was for a parking modification. MATTERS FROM STAFF UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Kasama said that since there will not be a quorum on December 14, the Planning Commission meeting will be cancelled. However, there will be a Modification Committee meeting that day. ADJOURNED 8:30 p.m. ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission Chairman, Planning Commission PC MINUTES 11 -23-10 Page 8