Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

And I'm going to call the meeting to order. This  is the meeting of the Monroia Planning Commission   on October 15, 2025. And could I um have everyone  stand and join me in the pledge of allegiance? I pledge algiance to the flag of the United  States of America and to the republic   for which it stands. One nation under God,  indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Can I have a roll call, please? Yes.  Chair Brown is excused and Vice Chair Rose will   be serving as acting chair. Uh, Commissioner  Austin here. Janisk here. Sheffller here.   Stira here. Vashani here. Acting chair Rose  here. Okay. And we're going to move on to   um approval of the minutes. We have two  sets of minutes. One from August 13th,   the other from September 10th. And I  ask now is are there any corrections   um to the minutes or could I call for a motion to  want a motion for each? Yes. Yes, please. Okay.   Then I move that we approve the meeting minutes  for August 13, 2025. Second. All in favor say I.   I. I. Any opposed? Motion passes. How about um M  minutes from September 10th, 2025? I can do that,   too. I move to approve September 10th, 2025 minute  meetings as proposed. Second. All in favor? I I   Any opposed? Thank you. Okay, we'll move on  to public hearing items. Public hearing one,   I think John is going to take care of that for  us. Yes, chair and good evening, commissioners.  

Uh item one that we received a request to withdraw  this application. So, uh staff is pulling this   item from the agenda and there's no further  action from the planning commission tonight. Okay. and we don't have to take any  any action at all. So, we'll move on   to public hearing number two. And chair,  before we move on to public hearing two,   we should see if anyone has any public  comment for items not on the agenda. Oh,   I'm sorry. You're right. Yes. Does anyone  have any um public um items that are not on   the agenda? Can hear those now before we move  on? Doing a great job. Thank you. Okay. Seeing   none hearing none, we'll move on. We'll move  on to public hearing number two. This is for   an ordinance number 2025-11, resol planning  commission resolution number PCR 2025-00003. And the request is an amendment to the Monrovia  Municipal Code to act section 17.12.070 070 and   amend section 17.52.0 0 1 0 to create incentives  for the development of bungalow courts allowing   minor modifications to certain development  standards for the placement of nonhabitable   architecturally compatible accessory structures  and determine that the project is categorically   exempt pursuant to California code of  regulations section 15305 class 5 minor   alterations in land use limitations from the  California Environmental Quality Act sequence And could I get the staff report? Yes. Thank you  very much, chair, members of the commission. I   appreciate you um introducing that item. Uh the  purpose of this ordinance is to create a small  

but important incentive for bungalow court  development, specifically allowing certain   small openair non-habitable structures such as  arbors and trelluses within the setback areas   through a minor exception process. So, just for  some background, the uh bungalow courts are a   defining part of Monrovia's architectural  history. They first appeared in Southern   California in the early 1900s as a way to  provide modest, affordable, multifamily homes   uh that still felt like single family cottages.  Each home faced a shared landscaped courtyard,   creating a friendly and walkable sense of  community. They were um also an early version   of what we would now call missing middle housing.  Our historic context statement describes bungalow   courts as providing the privacy of a small  dwelling in a shared semi-private landscape.   In the previous slide, we saw an example Harding  Court that was built in 1920 with 15 cottages.   This is an image of Myrtle Court which features  duplexes surrounding a central craftsman home.   These developments helped shape the scale and  charm of our older neighborhoods. In uh 2022,   the development review committee approved a new  bungalow court at 732 Mountain uh View Avenue.   It was modeled after Pasadena's Gart's Court.  This is a 1920s landmark shown on the left.   The Mountain View project pictured right was very  wellreceived by the city council and the city's   pre preservation advocates including the Monrovia  Old House preservation group who highlighted this   um uh as the as the right balance between housing  supply and neighborhood character. In fact,   you can see some of these images on display at  the Monroia Historical Museum uh paying homage   to this to this development type. So during  construction of that Mountain View project,  

um there was a decorative arbor installed to mark  the courtyard entryway. Although it beautifully   uh uh meshed with the bungalow courts design, uh  staff discovered that the arbor didn't actually   meet the front yard setback standard. Under  the current co under the current code, arbors   and trelluses are treated the same as uh any other  accessory structure. So there's no path to approve   these within setback areas even for these purely  decorative open air features. This situation   revealed that there's a gap in the zoning code  that makes it difficult to fully realize the   design intent of these bungalow courts. So the  purpose of this ordinance is to fill that gap. It   adds section 17.12.070 070 incentives for bungalow  court development and amends section 17.52.110 related to minor exceptions. It formally defines  bungalow court as a distinctive housing type   recognizing it in the zoning code for the first  time. And it authorizes the development review   committee to grant minor exceptions for small  open air non-habitable decorative features like   arbors and trelluses and pergolas when  they enhance a shared courtyard space. So here's what the ordinance does in practice.  It it encourages bungalow court development while   protecting neighborhood character. It allows  limited flexibility for smallcale courtyard   structures. It sets clear size limits so features  remain modest and pedestrian scaled. For example,   the maximum height of 10 feet is is imposed  in the front yards and 8t tall within the   sideyards. Maximum width is set at 20 feet.  maximum depth 8 ft in front yards and in   side yards four feet in width and 3 feet in  depth. Each proposal would still need to go  

through a minor exception process where  the DRC reviews its design and placement   and safety. This ensures the flexibility  needed without sacrificing any oversight.   The ordinance is also fully consistent with  the general plan land use policies 9.3 and 9.4   4 uh which call for monitoring um residential  standards to maintain compatibility and refining   design guidelines for new multif family housing.  It also supports context sensitive infill and   keeps Monrovia's small town scale intact. Also  under SQA, this action is categorically exempt   under section 15305 class 5 because it's just  a minor alteration in land use limitations.   um it simply allows decorative non-habitable  structures with limited dimensional adjustments.   So in summary, ordinance number 2025-11 is a  very narrowly focused contextsensitive update   to our zoning code. It gives us a practical  way to accommodate small design elements that   define the character of bungalow courts while  maintaining clear limits and review safeguards.   Staff's recommending that the planning  commission adopt resolution number 2025-00003 recommending city council approval  of this ordinance. This concludes   my presentation. I'm happy to answer any  questions of the commission. Thank you,   Mr. Mayor. Do the commissioners have any  questions regarding the staff report? I do. Okay. Thank you for the great report. Um,  I agree. You know, bungalow courts seem like a   charming way to increase the housing stock in  a neighborhood compatible way. What impact do   we think this will have like actually  putting this in our zoning ordinance?   Well, if anything, it it would encourage hopefully  people to um embrace these features and hopefully  

um there are some that um that are existing  and they could be fixed if if this just by   removing this small impediment. Um and also um as  I mentioned earlier, there is some oversight with   the development review committee making sure that  it's not going to be um an issue for health and   safety reasons. And uh where can bungalow courts  be built within our current zoning? They can be   built in certain plan development areas and also  multif family residential zoning districts above   a certain amount like above a certain density  or as long as they conform to the density long   to the density. Now, the the case at the uh on  the Mountain View project, um they were um four   um four individual units and then two ADUs in the  back which formed that U-shaped design. Okay. And   uh just one more. Um can you tell us are there  any um bungalow court construction projects in   progress right now or any permit applications out  there? Not at the moment, but there is a landmark   uh that was recently approved last year. And  um the interesting feature of this landmark   is that it was a duplex, a courtyard duplex.  And it's important feature was the courtyard,   although it was a sidefacing courtyard. It wasn't  a front-facing. So the side, which what property   was that? It's on Foothill and I I think it's 423  uh East Foothill if I'm not mistaken. Okay. Uh but   it's a very interesting case um of of u how it  um represents early multif family development   with a duplex in a in a courtyard shape. Uh the  challenge though is that um the owner um needs   to make that visible that uh that courtyard  visible to the public because that's why it's  

important. Um and in order to do that um she has  to give up a little bit of privacy. Right now she   has a very solid gate. Um, so she had recently  submitted a request to do a sideyard arbor uh   as a way to enhance that entryway and to into her  prop into the view viewpoint through there. Uh,   so that's the only one other one I know of at  this point. Fascinating. Thank you very much.   Any other questions? Okay. Then at this time, I  would like to open the public hearing and hear any   um testimony of persons in favor. I'm not  going to ask for the applicant because we   are the applicant. So, if there's anyone in the  audience that isn't would like to speak in favor seeing none, anybody in the audience have um  have concerns that they would like to express? Seeing none, um then I will  close this public hearing and   uh move on to the commissioners  for discussion and um a motion. I'll move to adopt planning commission regul   regulation number PCR. Excuse me. Does  somebody else have something to say? Um, resolution number PCR 2025- Z003 and recommend  approval to the city council. Second. Roll call,   please. Yes. Commissioner Austin, yes. Janisk,  yes. Sheffller, yes. Stira, yes. Vashani,   yes. Acting chair rose. Yes. Thank you. Okay, that  concludes our public hearings and administrative  

reports. I see that we have none, but I think  we have some development updates. Uh, yes, good   evening, vice chair. Uh, just wanted to give you  uh two updates. The first one is this afternoon   the development review committee conducted an  advisory review on the 701 South Myrtle Avenue   uh project. Um, so that project is making its way  through the public hearing process. Um, next week   we will be sending out our 20-day public hearing  notice. So the commission will be seeing it um,   November 12th. Um, so that one is is moving  along. Um, and the final EI for that property   that project has been prepared and it's on the  city's website. Um and then last but uh the other   item I wanted to touch on is SB79. Uh following  our planning commission meeting last month. Um   the city um council prior to that meeting the  city council had issued their uh a letter of   opinion on that matter and we shared that with the  commission. Um as you know that um item did pass   signed by the governor uh I think last Friday. Um,  and our team I I'm very um I I know our team will   be picking up our pace quickly to take a look at  that that bill and um see how it affects the city   of Monrovia yesterday afternoon. The city council  had a special meeting with Assembly Member John   Arbidian and a good part of that conversation  dealt with SB79 and there according to Mr.   uh Harbidian, there are certain provisions that  would allow the city to adopt a local alternative   plan that's uh consistent with SP9. Um so that's  something that the staff will be obviously working   and looking at. So I just wanted to give you that  update. Um there is a lot to sift through though  

with that. So it might be some time before we  can, you know, bring something to the commission   on that. So, that concludes my report. Thank you  very much. Thank you. I think this might be the   all-time shortest meeting ever. Do any of the  commissioners have any updates or announcements   that they would like to make? Oh my goodness, I  feel guilty. All right. Well, with that, I guess   uh I will adjourn this meeting. And I get to use  the cavl there. It's officially closed at 7:48.