Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes - 2005/06/14 - RegularPLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 14, 2005 • INITIATION: 1. CALL TO ORDER Pursuant to the Agenda posted June 9, 2005, Chairman Griffiths called the meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, June 14, 2005. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners: Le Berthon, Blum, Yu, Griffiths Absent: Commissioner Seibert Also Present: City Attorney Martin, Community Development Director Dawson, and Senior Planner Lambert Vice- Chairman Blum - Made a motion to excuse Commissioner Seibert for cause, seconded by Commissioner Le Berthon and unanimously carried. • 4. TIME FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK Vern Nelson, 9843 Olive St., Temple City — Stated that he had a concern about the accidents on Olive and Baldwin. Stated that there was a fatality at that intersection last month and that since then there have been other accidents. Chairman Griffiths — Asked what time of day the accident occurred. Vern Nelson — Stated that it was about 3:30 p.m. Commissioner! e Berthon — Asked what he felt might be the cause of the accidents. Vern Nelson — Stated that he was not sure and that perhaps it was because cars were speeding. 5. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 24, 2005 RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS SUBMITTED • Chairman Griffiths — Stated that he wanted to delete the words "and unanimously carried" on page 6 of the draft minutes. Planning Commission June 14, 2005 Page 2 Vice- Chairman Blum — Made a motion to approve the minutes of May 24, 2005, as, • amended, seconded by Commissioner Yu, and unanimously carried. 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None 7. NEW BUSINESS: A. PUBLIC HEARING: SEVERAL ZONE VARIANCES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 3,303 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO AN EXISTING 1,263 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND A 739 SQUARE FOOT SECOND UNIT AS FOLLOWS: (1). TO ALLOW A 5' -0" SIDE YARD SETBACK IN LIEU OF 5' -6" REQUIRED FOR THE PROPOSED SINGLE STORY ADDITION; (2). TO ALLOW A 10' -6" WIDE DRIVEWAY IN LIEU OF 15' -0" REQUIRED; (3). TO ALLOW 4' -0" SIDE YARD SETBACKS FOR THE PROPOSED GARAGE /SECOND UNIT; (4). TO ALLOW A 5 -CAR GARAGE (WHICH IS REQUIRED BY CODE) WITH 2 SPACES THAT ARE IN TANDEM AND NOT INDEPENDENTLY ACCESSIBLE; (5). TO ALLOW AN 18' -4" HEIGHT FOR THE PROPOSED DETACHED GARAGE /SECOND UNIT IN LIEU OF THE 15' -0" • MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMIT; AND (6). TO ALLOW A 739 SQUARE FOOT SECOND UNIT (INSTEAD OF THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED 640 SQUARE FEET). THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 9837 OLIVE STREET AND IS SITUATED IN THE SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R -1) ZONE. SITE: 9837 OLIVE STREET CASE NO.: ZONE VARIANCE 05 -1617 PROPERTY OWNER/ APPLICANT: FRANK & MARIA MACCHIA 9108 BROADWAY TEMPLE CITY, CALIFORNIA 91780 RECOMMENDATION: 1) HEAR STAFF REPORT 2) HEAR THOSE FOR AND AGAINST 3) CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT [15301] 4) ADOPT RESOLUTION Director Dawson — Read the Staff Report dated June 14, 2005. N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES June 14 2005.doc • " " Planning Commission June 14, 2005 Page 3 Senior Planner I ambert  Gave a PowerPoint presentation. City Attorney Martin  Stated that it looks as if someone sold off the back portion to the lot to the east. Director Dawson  Stated that it appears that there is a lot split that has a flag component to it and it appears that there are three houses on a single lot, two lots down from the subject site. Commissioner Yu  Stated that there are many flag lot developments on Olive. Chairman Griffiths  Asked if there were any questions of Staff and opened the Public Hearing. Frank Macchia, 9108 Broadway, Temple City  Stated that he never asked for a variance for the height. Stated that the laundry portion of the second unit could be eliminated to meet the necessary requirements. Stated that he wanted an explanation of the findings in the draft resolution. Stated that he did not feel it was right to label his "study room" as a bedroom because this increases his parking requirement. Stated that he wanted clarification about why the Staff Report was recommending denial. Director Dawson  Asked who would live in the second unit. Frank Macchia, 9108 Broadway, Temple City  Stated that it would be his son. Chairman Griffiths  Stated that a second unit is allowed but with strict guidelines. Director Dawson  Stated that many lots in this area have multiple units, which are Legal non - conforming, and there are many flag Tots in the area as well. Stated that the property is zoned R -1 and that those standards should be followed. Stated that in reviewing the plan, there are many places where the project does not meet the Code and it is difficult to make the required findings. Frank Macchia, 9108 Broadway, Temple City  Stated that it would be difficult to add on if he had to follow the requirements. Stated that he would have to remove five feet from a room and that is a drastic reduction. Stated that he could not see the point in adding on with these types of restrictions. Commissioner Ytt  Asked if he had spoken to his architect in order to come up with a design that meets the code. Frank Macchia, 9108 Broadway, Temple City  Stated that his architect was aware of the restrictions, but not all of them because some of them are new. Asked what the big " deal was about the additional six inches of setback. N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES June 14 2005.doc Planning Commission June 14, 2005 Page 4 Chairman Griffiths — Stated that zoning regulations and rules are developed over a long period of time and the zoning ordinances reflect what the majority of the residents of the City would like to see in the community. Stated that you need to find out the rules before you plan a project. 11 • 1: : •.1 I . -u1- — Stated that he felt the rules did not make common sense. Stated that there should be rules and exceptions to the rules. Chairman Griffiths — Stated that the Planning Commission is here to possibly grant some exceptions. Li-Chairman Blurn — Asked the applicant if the designer has met with Staff to try to come up with some possible solutions. Director Dawson — Asked the Planners if they recall having interaction with the applicant's designer. nior Plann .r amb . — Stated that he did interact with the Applicant, but not his designer. Stated that he did give the applicant some options but the applicant elected to apply for a Zone Variance. Frank Macchia, 9108 Broadway, Temple City — Stated that the recommendations went against common sense. Chairman Griffiths — Asked if anyone else wanted to speak in favor of the application. • ' - — Stated that he is a neighbor and was in favor of the requested variances. Stated that he felt there were very small lots with big homes on them and that this is a large lot and should be granted the variances. ►- •o •:4 -u1 — Chairman Griffiths — Asked if anyone else wanted to speak in favor of the application. Asked the applicant if he wanted to speak in rebuttal. Vice- Chairman Blum — Made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Yu. Chairman Griffiths — Hearing no objection, closed the public hearing and began discussion. Commissioner I e Berthon — Stated that the Planning Commission is constrained to follow the Zoning Code and in this case he does not see a substantial reason to grantvariances. Stated that there are too many variances and not any particular reason to grant them. Stated that he would have to vote against granting the variances. N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES June 14 2005.doc • • • " Planning Commission June 14, 2005 Page 5 Commissioner Yu  Stated that he would like to go through the variances one by one. Stated this is a one -story house and the applicant has chosen not to build a two -story house. The front elevation looks like a "Temple City House" and has character. Stated that the purpose of the Code and Code Amendments are that the housing and building stock will improve. Stated that there is no reason why the new house could not meet the required side yard setback. As far as the driveway variance, if the designer had spent more time on the design he would have been able to design the proper sized driveway and a project with conforming side yard setbacks. Stated that the driveway is very long and it would be difficult to maneuver in and out of it. Stated that regarding the third variance request for the four -foot side yard for the garage, that there is no reason this cannot be complied with. As far as the fourth variance, he does not have a problem with that one. Stated that the last two were a miss -print and the applicant said that he does not need those two variances. Stated that in summary, he felt the project could be re- designed to meet the code. Stated that he could not support the project as proposed. Vice - Chairman Blum  Stated he felt the same way and that he felt it would be a nice house if it were redesigned. Stated that he could not make the findings to grant the requested variances. Chairman Griffiths  Stated that he concurred. Stated that Commissioner Yu made a good analysis of the variances and that five of them could be eliminated with a properly designed project. Stated that findings could not be made to support the granting of such variances. Commissioner I e Berthon  Made a motion to deny Zone Variance 05 -1617 for the reasons set forth and to adopt the draft resolution, seconded by Vice - Chairman Blum and unanimously carried. Chairman Griffiths  Stated that the motion to deny carried and was subject to a 15 -day appeal /review period. N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES June 14 2005.doc Planning Commission June 14, 2005 Page 6 B. PUBLIC HEARING: A ZONE VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE REPLACEMENT OF AN EXISTING GARAGE WITH A NEW GARAGE, WHICH WOULD HAVE A WIDTH OF 19 FEET (INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 20 FEET). THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT GARAGE IS PROPOSED TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH A REMODEL OF AN EXISTING DWELLING, WHERE THE NEW GARAGE WOULD BE RESITUATED BETWEEN THE EXISTING DWELLING AND THE STREET, BEHIND THE FRONT YARD SETBACK. ALSO, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A 5 -FOOT EASTERLY SIDE YARD SETBACK AND A 5 -FOOT WESTERLY SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR A PORTION OF THE ADDITION (INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 6 FEET). THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ZONED R -1: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. THIS VARIANCE REQUEST WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON OCTOBER 14, 2003 AS ZV 03 -1535. THAT APPROVAL EXPIRED ON OCTOBER 14, 2004, THEREFORE, THE OWNER HAS RE- APPLIED FOR THE SAME REQUEST SITE: 9614 OLIVE STREET CASE NO.: ZONE VARIANCE 05 -1619 PROPERTY OWNER/ APPLICANT: ANDY NGUYEN 9614 OLIVE STREET TEMPLE CITY, CALIFORNIA 91780 RECOMMENDATION: 1) HEAR STAFF REPORT 2) HEAR THOSE FOR AND AGAINST 3) CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT [15301] 4) ADOPT RESOLUTION Director Dawson - Read the Staff Report dated June 14, 2005. Senior Planner 1 amhert — Gave a PowerPoint presentation. f:hairman Griffiths — Asked if there were any questions of Staff and opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Nguyen — Stated that he is the designer of the project. Stated that relocating the garage would make it safer for the owner to exit onto the street. N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES. June 14 2005.doc • Planning Commission June 14, 2005 Page 7 • Chairman Griffiths — Asked if anyone else wanted to speak in favor of or against the application. Vice - Chairman Blum — Made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Le Berthon and carried without objection. Chairman Griffiths — Closed the Public Hearing and began discussion. Vice - Chairman Blum — Stated that the side yard setback is a minor variance and he did not have a problem with it. Commissioner I e Berthon — Stated that he concurred. Commissioner Yu — Stated that he also concurred. Stated that for the most part, the set- back is 12 -feet except for the new addition. Stated that he is in support of granting the variance. Chairman Griffiths — Stated that he could make the findings for the garage width, but not for the setback variances. Stated that he could not make the necessary findings to support the setback variances. Vice - Chairman Blum — Stated that it is a new application and that he could concur with • Chairman Griffiths that there are no special circumstances in this case. Stated that he would be in favor of granting the garage variance but not the setback variance. Commissioner Yu — Stated that losing a foot on the east side might be difficult to overcome and the bathrooms would have to be reconfigured. Commissioner I e Berthon — Stated that indeed this is a new application and it deserves to be looked at further. It appears as though the new setback requirement might have been overlooked and perhaps a new design could be submitted. Stated that he felt the applicant could redesign the project. Vice - Chairman Blum — Made a motion to approve the variance for the garage and deny the variance for the setbacks and adopt the draft resolution as amended, seconded by Commissioner Le Berthon. • Chairman Griffiths — Stated that the motion was to deny the application for the setbacks but approve the variance for the garage width. Roll call vote Commissioner Yu — Yes Commissioner I e Berthon — Yes Vice - Chairman Blum — Yes N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES June 14 2005.doc Planning Commission June 14, 2005 Page 8 Chairman Griffiths - Yes Chairman Griffiths — Stated that the decision was to deny the application for the setbacks but approve the variance for the garage width. Stated that there is a 15 -day appeal /review period. C. PUBLIC HEARING: A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF EIGHT (8) APARTMENT UNITS. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED IN THE HIGH DENSITY (R -3) RESIDENTIAL ZONE SITE: 5008 -5014 ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 05 -1618 PROPERTY OWNER/ APPLICANT: PEI -WEN CHANG AND XIAO -CHUN ZOU 2216 S. SECOND AVENUE ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 RECOMMENDATION: 1) HEAR STAFF REPORT 2) HEAR THOSE FOR AND AGAINST 3) NEGATIVE DECLARATION 4) ADOPT RESOLUTION Director Dawson — Read the Staff Report dated June 14, 2005. Senior Planner I amhert — Gave a PowerPoint presentation Chairman Griffiths — Asked if there were any questions of Staff and opened the Public Hearing. - .1. 1. — Stated that the project complies with all of the recently amended development standards, except for the guest parking requirements. Stated that even though his plan had already been conceptually approved, he altered certain areas in order to comply with some of the new requirements. Stated that he would like to build high - quality rentals. Stated that he would rather spend a little bit more money and have better housing. Stated that the reason that he does not want to combine the lots is because it is harder to get a loan on a commercial piece of property rather than on two four -unit apartment complex Commissioner Yu — Asked the applicant why there were no windows on the first floor facing the driveway. Asked why the "entry court" has no windows either. N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES June 14 2005.doc • " " Planning Commission June 14, 2005 Page 9 Pei -Wen Chang, 2216 S. Second Ave., Arcadia  Stated that there is a window on both sides along the driveway. Asked to approach the board and showed the Planning Commission where the windows are. Stated that there should be a 4 x 4 window on each side of the entry court. Stated that the changes can be easily done. Director Dawson  Asked the applicant if he objected to a condition that the Tots not be sold separately. Pei -Wen Chang, 2216 S. Second Ave., Arcadia  Stated that he did not object to that language Chairman Griffiths  Asked if anyone else wanted to speak Vice - Chairman Blum  Made a motion to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Commissioner Yu. Chairman Griffiths  There being no objection, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Yu  Stated that he did not object to the project. Stated that he wanted to have the language inserted about the windows. Commissioner 1 e Berthon  Stated that he concurred but wanted to clarify that the applicant has agreed to change the windows. Chairman Griffiths  Asked if the condition was to move the window or add a window. Commissioner Le Berthon  Stated that if it were to add a window, then he would agree. Asked if a deed restriction would be placed on the properties and if so, then he could approve the project. Vice - Chairman Blum  Stated that he was in favor of the project. Chairman Griffiths  Stated that the applicant could meet with Planning Staff and discuss some additional architectural features. Commissioner Yu  Made a motion to approve Conditional Use Permit 05- 1618 with the amendments as discussed and adopt the draft Resolution and the Negative Declaration, seconded by Commissioner Le Berthon and unanimously carried. Chairman Griffiths  Stated that the approval has been granted and is subject to a 15 -day appeal /review period. N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES June 14 2005.doc " " " Planning Commission June 14, 2005 Page 10 8. COMMUNICATIONS: None 9. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS: 10. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Griffiths adjourned the meeting at 8:55. ATTEST: r Secretary N:\Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2005 \PC MINUTES June 14 2005.doc