Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, so the time is now 7.30 on Wednesday, June the 10th, and this meeting is now called to order. Please stand and follow Commissioner Schaeffler for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Can we please have roll call? Yes. Commissioner Austin? Here. Janicek? Here. Rose? Here. Scheffler? Here. Stahira?

Here.

Vashani?

Here.

Chair Brown? Here.

So the next item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes. So we actually have two minutes. So we have the May 13 special meeting as well as the regular meeting on May the 13th. If there are no corrections, I'll entertain a motion to approve and we should probably do them separately. So can I get a motion for the unadopted minutes for May 13, 2026 for the special meeting?

I'll move to approve the minutes of the May 13th special meeting. I'll second.

Okay. We'll now take a voice vote. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Abstention.

OK, so we have one abstention by Commissioner Stehera. And so with that, I believe the motion is still approved. OK, so let's move on to the unadopted minutes of May 13, 2026 for the regular meeting. If there are no corrections, I'll entertain a motion to approve.

I'll make a motion to approve the minutes as presented. I'll second.

Okay, so now let's do a voice vote. So all in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Any abstentions?

I abstain.

Commissioner Stewart is abstaining. And so with that, the motion is approved. At this time, citizens who wish to discuss any items not on the agenda may speak to the commission. As a reminder, the commission may not discuss or vote on items not on the agenda, but we can take this information and use it to inform our future deliberations. Does anyone wish to speak? And if you do, please approach the podium one at a time and state your name for the record. This is for items not on the agenda. OK, so it's looking like we don't have anyone. So the public input portion of the meeting is now closed. We'll now be moving on to our public hearings. We have two public hearings on the agenda today. So first up is public hearing number one, which is a tentative parcel map number 085171. TPM 2026-001, relating to 394 North Magnolia Avenue, EGL Associates. Sheila Harahanto is the applicant. Let's see. So can we please have the staff report? Thank you.

Thank you, Chair, and good evening, Commissioners. Yes, as mentioned, this is a tentative parcel map to merge two parcels. The applicant, EGL Associates, is applying for this for the property owner. So the parcel map or process, the lot merger process is reviewed by the Planning Commission and per the Monrovia Municipal Code, the Planning Commission must find that the map complies both with the Subdivision Map Act and the Monrovia General Plan. The proposal before you today is to combine two residential lots adjacent to each other. This is in order to help facilitate the conversion of a guest house into an ADU. That we'll show you later on. So the subject property, as mentioned, it's 394 North Magnolia Avenue. It's currently made up of two lots, one facing the street and then one to the rear, shown in orange and blue. The larger lot, which is about 6,750 square feet, is developed with a single-family home and a detached two-car garage. The rear lot, which is 2,000 square feet, is developed with the guest house. Combined, there would be about just over 8,700 square feet in size. As you can see, the subject site, it's within a single-family neighborhood within the RL zone. The neighborhood is developed with older single-family homes from the mid-20th century. So this neighborhood was originally subdivided in 1924. As you can see in the map to the left, Later on, this area that is outlined along Patterson Drive was then, the lots, eight lots along Patterson Drive were rearranged, changing the lot lines, creating a shift in the lot line arrangement. This property, the rear property was then sold to the owners along Magnolia Avenue in the current arrangement that you see today. So the proposal includes a parcel map to combine the front and rear lots into one. As you can see, the front lot was built with the main dwelling and the garage in 1937, and the rear lot was developed with the guest house back in 1946. The conditions that would be applied to the parcel map are the standard conditions. So these include submittal of a final map to the public works to a city engineer. The approval doesn't approve any development. It's just for the map itself. And then the applicant would have to include a title report and show all easements with that final map submittal. and it would have to be prepared by a licensed surveyor or a licensed civil engineer. some of the key findings that are applied for this project are that it consists with the general plan currently the lots are substandard in size and depth especially the rear lot so combining the two would bring the two parcels closer into conformance with the minimum lot size for that area as well as the lot depth And it's not likely to cause any environmental damage or impacts to public health as it's already developed with the single-family home and the guest house. There's already sewer access between the front lot to the rear lot. So staff believes the findings for approval can be made for the POSR map. This project was noticed there was a 10 day mailing notice sent out as well as the newspaper publish, we received no public comments. At this time. It was also presented to the DRC for an advisory review on May 20. They recommended approval with the standard conditions in place. So with that said, staff is recommending approval of the parcel map. This concludes my presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Do we have any questions from the commissioners regarding the staff report, please?

Yes, thank you. Just one general question. The difference between a guest house and an ADU and that change, not that that makes a difference, but if you could refresh myself and the commissioners.

Yes. So the main difference is really the rental. A guest house is meant for family members or friends to stay over for a short period of time. An ADU is meant to be a rental unit for somebody to live in long term. Got it. Thank you.

um can you just maybe talk a little bit about um how it was that part of that parcel was sold to the other owner in the first place yeah so at the time that this is considered a legal non-conforming lot so this slide kind of shows how

It was subdivided from the 379 Patterson Drive and then sold to the property owner of 378, who then sold it to 394 North Magnolia. So it has kind of changed hands quite a bit.

Yeah. Could that happen? today to similar lots in that area? No. No.

This was way back decades before. Now it would have to go through this either a parcel or tentative map process. Cool. Thank you.

Any more questions before we move to the public comment? No? OK, so now we're moving to the public testimony portion. This is the time and place for public input regarding public hearing item number one. We will accept testimony in the following order. The applicant, persons in favor, persons with concerns, and then the applicant will have a chance to respond if there are any questions. Reminders, please come to the podium one at a time and state your name for the record. All comments and questions should be directed to the chair. And not to members of the audience. No dialogue with the audience is permitted. Any questions by commissioners for persons testifying should be asked before the hearing is closed. Comments and discussion by commissioners should be reserved until all testimony is taken. So do we have, would the applicant like to come up and speak?

Oh, hi. Hi. Good evening. My name is Bon Lee from EGL Associates, the civil engineers for the project. And we are located at 11819 Golden Road, Unit A, Arcadia. And we have complied with all applicable CD codes in the standards and agree to the conditions of approval. And it will be available to answer any questions you may have. Thank you.

Thank you.

I don't think there are any questions. Oh, please. So next we're going to have, oh, if. I know, but we need to do it. We need to come to the, yeah, no. So I'm going to, I'm going to, if you're done. You're done? Thank you. So now we'll be hearing from persons in favor. Okay, if there are none. Persons with concerns? Okay, so please, please come up, state your name for the record so you can sit down, sir. Thank you so much.

Hello, my name is Jocelyn Jindro. We reside on 248 West Scenic Drive. It's actually three houses north of theirs. And we actually have the same situation. When we bought the house, there is a parcel in back of us. And that's the reason why we're here, to just look at the process and see how things work. So we are in favor. It's their property. do what they choose so anyway so yeah so our purpose here is to see how the process works we are new to Monrovia and we love it here and so that's why we want to see what options we have in connecting that parcel we have actually it's in the map it's right there on the corner third house our address is on scenic but it's on the corner of scenic and magnolia so that little square in back belongs to us so we pay two property taxes on those two parcels. So we want to know how we can incorporate it. Thank you.

Thank you so much and welcome to Monrovia. Anest, do we have any persons with concerns who would like to come up and speak? No? Okay. So I think it's safe to say the public testimony portion of the hearing is now closed. Now is the time for the commission to discuss, possibly debate, this item. So if there's no further discussion from the commission, is that safe for me to say? OK. Do we have a motion and a second?

Sure, I move to approve tentative track parcel map number, I can't even see, 085171 TPM 2026-001 with conditions presented in the staff report. Second.

Roll call, please. Yes, Commissioner Austin? Yes. Janicek?

Yes.

Rose? Yes. Scheffler? Yes. Stahira? Yes.

Yes.

Mashani? Yes. Chair Brown? Yes. Motion is approved.

All right. Thank you very much. I'll go ahead and I'll read the appeal language. And that is that all decisions of the planning commission may be appealed to the city council if filed in writing to the city clerk within 10 days of tonight's decision. And an appeal fee does apply. And chair, if you would like, we can let this resident know that she's more than welcome to speak to one of our planners in the back in the lobby. We can get her contact information and the planners can get in touch with her.

Okay, wonderful. Will that be after the meeting? We can do that right now, actually, when they're done. Okay, okay, wonderful. So did you, I don't know if you heard what she said, that one of the planners can speak with you shortly. Wonderful, okay. Okay, so now we're moving on to public hearing item number two, which is tentative track map number 85208, TTM 2026-0002, relating to 1219 South Magnolia Avenue, Feng Xiao Architect, Inc. Feng Xiao is the applicant. Can we please have the staff report for that, for public hearing item two? Thank you.

Yes, thank you chair and good evening commissioners tonight before you we have another map for you. This is a tentative tract map 85208. This is to subdivide one lot into six airspace condominium units in conjunction with a six unit two-story residential condominium project and fangs out architects fang is with us here tonight in the audience. And as the Commission may recall, there is no design review requirement for the construction of a multifamily development. This application does include a six-unit condominium project. The application before you tonight is to review that proposed map, which would subdivide airspace rights into six individual units to be able to sell those condos separately. And so the review is limited to that tentative tract map. And this would be an advisory review before you to the City Council. So the subject site is located at 1219 South Magnolia Avenue. It is in the RH residential high density zone. The site is just over 18,000 square feet in size. It's currently developed with one residential unit and a detached garage. Those existing improvements are proposed to be demolished, and it is surrounded by multifamily residential development of similar bulk and mass, both across the street and directly north and behind. And there is a First Lutheran Church across the flag lot to the south. So, again, the requested approval, this is a tentative map for the subdivision for six condominium units. Currently, like I said, that's a single family. This is an infill development project, so it is going to infill that project into those six units, as you can see, the existing on the left and the proposed rendering for that six-unit development project on the right. It should be noted that this was reviewed for objective design standards, which it does meet all of those standards, and that includes measurable design-related requirements such as exterior building and finishes, architectural elements, building entries, and grading. In addition to that, it also complies with all of the residential high density zoning compliance standards. So the density is 54 units to the acre. That would equate to about 22 units that would be allowed. They are only proposing six. They're under the FAR requirement of 75%. In total, it would be just over 12,000 square feet for the entire development. And it meets all the required setbacks. Here we have the proposed tentative tract map. Again, this is the subdivision for the six airspace rights. Each unit, it's three buildings in total, but it's attached to two units each. The unit sizes range from just over 2,000 to 2,250. Each will be providing a three bed and three bath, a private yard, and a two-car garage. The tentative track map does have specific findings, specifically that it is consistent with the general plan and zoning requirements. As we saw, it does meet all of the objective design standards as well as the RH zoning standards. The site is physically suitable. Again, it is well more than equipped to accommodate the six units that are proposed. It could accommodate more if the applicant had chosen to do so. And it also complies with the Subdivision Map Act and the Municipal Code, and this has been reviewed by our city engineer. We do have some standard conditions of approval for the development, specifically decorative block wall on all the side and rear property lines. All private recreation areas have to require a 5-foot to 6-foot high decorative fence or wall, which is provided in the design. They will have to provide a second landscape and irrigation plan subject to MWILLO, and a draft copy of the CC&Rs do have to be provided to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to occupancy of the buildings. This was reviewed by the Development Review Committee on May 6th. It did include a courtesy notice at a 300-foot mailing radius. There was no public comments received, and the DRC unanimously recommended approval to the Planning Commission with the draft conditions as presented in the staff reports This hearing was also duly noticed at a 300-foot mailing radius and a newspaper notice, and we have not received any public comments, at least up until this point. And with that, staff is recommending approval to City Council of the Turnitin Track Map as presented in the staff report. That concludes my presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have, as well as the applicant. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Any questions, commissioners, relating to the staff report?

Just a clarification on the decorative block wall that is required on the property lines. Is there already something there on the property lines? Are we going to have a situation where there's like a block wall next to another block wall or anything like that?

Yes, so I believe the north side does have a partial block wall already. That is proposed to remain. I believe they're going to stucco over it to make it more in line with the proposed development. The others have chain link fencing which would be replaced with a new decorative block wall.

Thanks.

Any other questions before we move to the public testimony piece? OK. So this is the time and place for public input regarding public hearing item number one. We'll accept testimony in the following order. First the applicant, then persons in favor, persons with concerns, and then the applicant will have a chance to respond. Same reminders as the last one. So please come up to the podium one at a time and state your name for the record. So would the applicant like to come up and speak?

Good evening. It is my pleasure to be here. My name is Feng Xiao. I'm the principal of architectural firm at XA, located 2540 Huntington Drive, suite number 207, San Marino. We have been working with staff you know, when we started the project, since we started the project. So we went through actually, you know, all different departments. We really appreciate all the support from staff and planning and Austin. So anyway, I don't have much to add. I think, you know, he did a very thorough review. I mean, I just want to say we are here. We try to design something compatible to neighborhood from large scale to the small scale to architectural detail. So we hope to build something really nice and pretty high quality living to contribute to the neighborhood. I mean, that's what we're here for. So I'm here to answer any question you might have. Thank you.

Um, I have a question about the planned landscaping. I noticed there are is at least one mature tree, maybe more on the property as it exists. How many trees are going to get removed? And how many trees are you going to replace that with in the final project?

If you look at the landscape plan, we're actually going to keep the mature tree at the front yard. We don't have intent to remove it. They are not a protected tree, but we're going to keep it.

Great to hear. Any additional trees that you're going to add to the property overall? I know it's taking up a lot of the new structures or taking up a lot of the building or a lot of the property area, but just curious.

I'm going to check the landscape plan. I believe in the common open space there, we still have some other trees. You know, I just not at this moment. I mean, if you'll behave, I can look up. Cool.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions? OK. And so should we wait for her to look for that? Well, let me do persons. Let me do the, oh, perfect.

I have my computer here. I just need to look at it. Put a page from the document as the conceptual narrative. Yeah, the two mature trees at the front, we're going to keep it. We add one more at a corner at the front yard. We also have two more on the backyard at the common open space. And we also have three smaller trees on the north side of the property. I mean, I have it here if...

I actually, my co-commissioner pointed out the conceptual landscape plan that I didn't, I totally missed before. So thank you all.

All right. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you so much. If we don't have any additional questions for the applicant, do we have any persons in favor who would like to speak? Any persons with concerns? No? Okay. So the public testimony portion of the hearing is now closed. Now is the time for the commission, so we're moving on to our discussion portion. Now is the time for the commission to discuss and debate this item. I love it. All right. So if there's no further discussion from the commission, can I get a motion and a second?

Move to recommend approval of the City Council of tentative track map number 85208 and TTM 2026-002 as presented in the staff report.

Second.

Roll call, please. Commissioner Austin? Yes. Janicek? Yes. Rose? Yes. Scheffler? Yes. Stahira? Yes. Vashani? Yes. Chair Brown? Yes. The motion is approved.

All right. And this item does require City Council approval, and it's set to go to the City Council tentatively on July 7th.

So we're moving on to administrative reports, of which we have none. And now we're going to move to the Community Development Director's Report.

All right. Good evening. It's great to see everyone here this evening. I have just one brief report, and that is to let you know that our Monrovia Area Partnership Program is hosting our Neighborhood Block Party. This takes place every year at Julian Fisher Park. It's set for this Saturday, June 13th, from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. This is a family event. friendly event. There's going to be things for all ages to participate in, games, food, music, and much more. We'll also have a lot of vendors who will be out with community resources, similar to our neighborhood conference. So please do take advantage of this great opportunity. It's free. And that concludes my report. Thank you.

Thank you. Now moving along to reports and announcements from commissioners. Is there anything anybody wants to report on? Please.

Yeah, I just wanted to, I'm sure city staff is aware, but SCAG did release their SB 79 maps last week. It went to our CEHD and RC. If there are any errors in the maps that you have found, SCAG would like documentation by emailing sp79 at scag.ca.gov, and that will be due this Friday. So, thanks.

Anything else? No? Okay, with that, our next, we're going to move to adjourn. Our next regularly scheduled meeting will be July 15th. This meeting is now adjourned at 7.58. Yeah, so good night, everybody.

I'm going to send out another notice, another newspaper notice.

You've already paid everything, so you're good there. How far are you guys on the construction set? We haven't started.

I want to wait until this is approval. I guess we can start it then. Yeah, yeah, yeah. After this.

I was going to say, if you're already finished, you could submit a risk if you want. Oh, no, no, no.

I normally...