Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Planning commission approves 3‑lot subdivision at 444 North Lima Street
Loading...
Summary
The Sierra Madre Planning Commission on April 16 approved a tentative parcel map to split 444 North Lima Street into three single‑family lots, finding the division consistent with the general plan and exempt from CEQA; commissioners said future homes will return for design review as required.
The Sierra Madre Planning Commission voted unanimously April 16 to approve Tentative Parcel Map TPM 25‑01, allowing a 30,872‑square‑foot property at 444 North Lima Street to be divided into three R‑1 lots.
Staff presented the proposal, saying the existing 1948 single‑family residence would be demolished, that seven protected trees stand on the property and two of those trees are proposed for removal for reasons the applicant’s arborist described as poor health and severe damage, and that the subdivision meets minimum lot area requirements. Staff recommended adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 26‑5 to forward a recommendation of conditional approval to City Council and stated the project is categorically exempt from CEQA under the small‑lot division exemption.
Adrian Dahl, project manager for Dahl Architects and the applicant’s representative, said the existing house has been vacant “at least 10 or 15 years” and presented renderings for three two‑story homes with detached two‑car garages. He said the shared driveway will wrap around and preserve a large oak tree and that the owner, Steve Reebley, intends the three homes for family members.
Nearby residents spoke at the public hearing. Joe Catalano of 480 North Lima said he is “very much in support” of the plan and urged removal of a concrete block wall at the front of the site. Cynthia Lesch of 435 Adams Street said the proposal, as designed, “will permanently eliminate that privacy for my family,” and urged conditions to reduce scale, protect sight lines and require an independent arborist review to preserve mature oaks. Guy Bailey asked the commission to require independent verification before approving tree removals. Jennifer Makeda, a young homeowner in Sierra Madre, said she supports additional housing options but questioned whether the proposed homes will provide yards and privacy similar to older single‑family lots.
Commissioners asked staff to clarify technical points including net versus gross lot area for floor‑area calculations, driveway width (staff said 15 to 24 feet), design‑review triggers for two‑story homes, and coordination with Los Angeles County Public Works regarding a flood control easement on Parcel 3. Several commissioners said the hearing must be limited to the lot split rather than to future home designs; design review permits will return to the commission or staff as required by the zoning code.
Following deliberations, a commissioner moved to approve the tentative parcel map and the motion passed unanimously. The commission’s action forwards a recommendation to the City Council; if the council approves the map the applicant will return with separate design review applications for any homes that trigger that process.
Next steps: the Planning Commission’s approval is a recommendation to City Council; future design‑review permits for two‑story homes, and any building permits that involve grading or excavation greater than three feet, could trigger additional reviews.
