HomeMy WebLinkAbout1-22-91Planning Commission proceedings are taped recorded and on file in the office of the Planning Dept.
MINUTES
ARCADIA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday, January 22, 1991
The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, January 22, 1991
at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Arcadia City Hall, 240 West Huntington Drive, with
Chairman Larry Papay presiding.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Commissioners Amato, Clark, Hedlund, Szany, Papay
ABSENT: None
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Hedlund to read all
resolutions by title only and waive reading the full body of the resolution. The motion passed
by voice vote with none dissenting.
MINUTES
Commissioner Clark said that on pages 4 and 5 of the Minutes, it should say "Chairman Pro Tem Clark"
and not "Chairman Papay".
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Amato to approve the
Minutes of January 8, 1991 as amended. The motion passed by voice vote with none
dissenting.
OTHERS ATTENDING:
Councilman Joseph Ciraulo
City Attorney Mike Miller
Planning Director William Woolard
Assistant Planning Director Donna Butler
Secretary Silva Vergel
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
TPM 90 -014
Lots 947 - 1007;1189 -1237;
1240 -1249, all inclusive in the
Chicago Park Tract
Livingston- Graham, Inc.
The staff report was presented.
Consideration of a tentative parcel map to consolidate
lots along Clark Street into thirteen (13) Tots.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
1/22/91
Page 1
Commissioner Hedlund expressed his concern in regard to lot 2 and said that if some time in the future
it is not used, they can stop paying taxes and it could end up belonging to the City or County and
eventually become a burden.
The public hearing was opened.
Edward C. Hartman, 425 W. Bonita, San Dimas, the engineer of the project representing the applicant
was present. He said that at the last meeting there seemed to be concerns over soil suitability in the
pit area, although this is not part of the pit. He noted that LeRoy Crandle Assoc. conducted a study of
the area and determined that under normal, reasonable construction methods the area can be developed.
He remarked that Livingston- Graham has 460 acres of mining area which can mine approximately 70
million tons of aggregates. They have a permit to mine until the year 2005 which is reviewed every 4
years. He assured the Commission that they would not abandon lot 2 and submitted a letter dated
October 14, 1963 from the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD), which requires them
to maintain a berm of 150' minimum width and a top elevation of 345' along the southerly line of the
Chicago Park land and it is required that the berm is maintained so that no vehicle could go over the
side. Livingston- Graham takes monthly checks to make sure that this is done. It is very important to
maintain the top of berm to allow for continued mining operations and to provide an area safe for
operation and from erosions and damage to other properties.
He further stated that he met with El Monte staff members (Planning and Engineering Departments),
on December 19th. On January 10th the met with the residents from the area at Cherry lee School.
The residents questioned the ownership of Clark Street. The original Chicago Park Tract Map was filed
March 15, 1888. The street widths are not shown; however, the title block states that the lots are to
be have a uniform depth of 133.4 with 25' dedicated street in front of each of the lots making it a 50'
wide street. Tract Map 10790 shows Cogswell St. to be 50' wide. Tract Map 13286 created 11 lots
along Clark St. and showed some changes from TM 10790 and it increased Cogswell St. from 25' to 30'.
In his opinion, Clark St. is a public thoroughfare and a public street. The slope of the street is .5%
and City standards are .4% and it drains to the west. If sidewalks are put in, the driveway approaches
would have to be reworked and using minimum standards it would not adversely impact the existing
driveways. Depending on design a 400' long concrete retaining wall would have be built, ranging in
height from 2' to 3 1/2'. The easterly four lots would not be impacted. Livingston- Graham will
construct the driveway approaches and the retaining walls, at their expense if they are required to do
so, and would obtain the necessary permits from the City of El Monte.
He remarked that this is a 1945 subdivision in a 1991 world and recommended that the sidewalks and
the street improvements should be made to accommodate both pedestrian and vehicular traffic. In
regard to the letter from the City of El Monte, Mr. Hartman stated that since 1973 the subject
properties have been hooked up to sewer laterals and have been paying assessment fees. He also said
that in checking with LACFCD, they were informed that they are in the sanitation district and have
been paying taxes in the sanitation district. He felt they have complied with all reasonable criteria as
set forth by the City of Arcadia and in the development plans they will try to work to mitigate the
affects of the people to the south.
Anton Dyck, V.P. and General Manager of Livingston- Graham, 16080 Arrow Highway, Irwindale,
agreed with Mr. Hartman and said that they would like to proceed with this project. There is a lot of
trash thrown away there and by improving the street and developing the property that would stop.
Mark Persico, City Planner of City of El Monte, 11333 Valley Blvd., El Monte, objected to the
environmental review process and said that the initial study was done without a clear definition of the
project as far as what will be the cumulative impacts of the project. He said that they are concerned
with the future uses of the properties and thought that they should be addressed before granting this
request. He said that they are concerned with the increased use of the sewers and wondered how a
residential system is going to handle it. The increased truck and vehicular traffic would also pose a
Arcadia City Planning Commission
1/22/91
Page 2
problem and remarked that the Arcadia General Plan (GP) designates that street there as a major
arterial and noted that it does not meet what would be a typical major arterial and that it would need to
be a minimum of 100' right -of -way. He stated that the project is not compatible with the residential
properties. He was also concerned with the impact of this development on the Fish and Game within the
pit itself. He thought that the Commission cannot approve the project because finding A.1. "define that
the project together with the provisions for its design and improvement is consistent with the Arcadia
GP" does not apply. The Arcadia GP makes several references in its Land Use Element to maintenance
and improvement of commercial and industrial areas of the City that would encourage their
compatibility with the adjacent areas and did not think that this would apply in this case. In the
Circulation Element of the GP the goal is to discourage parking of non - residential vehicles on
residential streets and remarked that this is a residential neighborhood. He referred to a letter from
Mr. Johanson which asks for continuance of the hearing to further examine the project.
Hector Garcia, 12038 Clark, El Monte, said that if this is approved it will depreciate property values
in the residential areas. He remarked that Clark St. is a heavily used street and this project will
increase traffic and pose an additional danger to the children and the grandchildren in the area.
Merrill Ficker, 12060 Clark, El Monte, agreed with Mr. Persico and said that if this was approved, it
would be a deteriment to their properties. The additional traffic will have a negative impact in the
area and suggested that the Commission go down and see Mr. Dootson's business and see what the traffic
is like.
Elias Gonzales, 12022 Clark, El Monte, said that this will change the way of living in the area and said
that his neighbor to the west will step out of his front door into a street. He did not want a 400' long
concrete wall and said that there are plenty of walls which are extremely unattractive. He remarked
that Arcadia is a community of homes and this area should remain as such. He thought that the project
will disrupt the whole area.
Marvin Cichy, City Attorney's Office, City of El Monte, 11333 Valley Blvd., said that he was there on
behalf of the Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District, which represents 80% of the San
Gabriel Valley, and said that they have recently formed a new board and said that their General
Manager phoned the Planning Department and requested a continuance project. He said that they are
concerned with the environmental and future use of the property. He agreed with Mr. Hartman in that
this is the 1990s and not 1945 and remarked that in the 1990s gravel pits would not be allowed. He
thought that highest and best use for these properties would be to store water and to use the area for
recreation purposes. He commented that they are also concerned with what will happen to the horse
trails which have been in existence for a very long time. He thought that sewers would be a problem
and wondered what type of a load would be discharge from the future uses.
In rebuttal, Mr. Hartman said that they are not planning any type of a development there and have not
submitted any plans other than showing a grading plan that would take all the storm water away from
the edge of the pit. He remarked that the area is zoned M -1 & D, which requires Planning
Commission's review of any project proposed. He said that the State Geology Board found that
aggregates are a valuable resource to the people and they should be protected and remarked that
Uvingston- Graham has one of the best pits in the state which has very fine aggregates.
There were no other persons desiring to speak in favor of or in opposition to this item.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Szany, seconded by Commissioner Clark to close the public
hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
1/22/91
Page 3
In response to Commissioner Clark's questions, staff said that this property could be developed today
with 118 lots vs. 13 lots which have been proposed. They can even consolidate Tots and in some cases
covenants havebeen recorded to hold properties as one. It was noted that Clark St. is not a major
arterial but a secondary.
Mr. Woolard said that streets are usually 36' wide with a 12' parkway width on either side or an
overall right -of -way of 60'. The actual paved area would be the same in this area except there would
not be the 5' of parkway on the south side. All that is being considered tonight is the consolidation and
not the future use of the property and the applicant stated that they did not have specific plans for the
site.
Staff remarked that Public Works is requiring a 5' dedication on the south side of the property and
that 8" P.C.C. and 18" gutters be constructed. They are not required to provide sidewalks; just the
construction of curbs and gutters on the south side. As a condition of approval, Public Works has also
required that all off -site improvements which are located in the City of El Monte should be to the
satisfaction of the City of El Monte. It was noted that the City boundary is at the property line of the
properties on the south side of the street and the entire 55' wide street is in the City of Arcadia.
Commissioner Clark said that he appreciates all the concerns from El Monte and the comments that
have been made in regard to the potential impact of future developments, but the Commission should
consider the consolidation and not the future uses or their impacts.
In response to a question by Commissioner Szany, staff said that at the last meeting Mr. Brown, a
representative of the San Gabriel Valley Water District, was present and was in favor of the
continuance. Staff had received a call from the General Manager of the San Gabriel Valley Water
District requesting another continuance so that they can review the project and because they were not
given notice of the original meeting which they were not required to receive.
Commissioner Szany tried to make a motion for a 30 day continuance and Mr. Miller recommended that
the motion not be made, unless the applicant consents to it because of time requirements set forth in
the subdivision regulations. He also said that this is the second public hearing and the Commission's
action could be appealed to the City Council. If the applicant consents to the continuance then it is the
Commission's prerogative to continue the hearing.
Commissioner Amato was surprised that El Monte has allowed those properties to remain as single -
family when they are surrounded by manufacturing.
Mr. Miller said that the Commission can add the following as a condition of approval:
8. If any lawsuit is filed that arises out of the City's action concerning TPM 90 -014, and the
applicant or any party related to the applicant is deemed by the Arcadia City Attorney to be a
real party in interest to said case, applicant shall be responsible to defend and pay for the
defense of any such lawsuit. Nothing herein shall preclude the City of Arcadia from
participation and representation with regard to 'subject litigation.
Chairman Papay reiterated that this is a request for consolidation and not for the future use of the
property. The proposal does not change the zoning in the area. This property is zoned M -1 & D and
the improvements to the streets are as a result of this.
Commissioner Hedlund expressed concern with the ability to perform some of the things that were
outlined by Mr. Hartman and hoped that they would not return at a future date requesting a
modification.
Arcadia City Planning Commission
1/22/91
Page 4
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Hedlund to approve
TPM 90 -014 subject to the conditions in the staff report with the addition of the above
mentioned condition.
ROLL CALL
AYES: Commissioners Amato, Clark, Hedlund, Szany, Papay
NOES: None
Chairman Papay noted that there is a ten day appeal period.
PUBLIC HEARING CUP 90 -001
122 Wheeler Ave.
Gary Thayer II
Consideration of a conditional use permit to operate a
restaurant bar with a dance floor for evening use, and
a parking modification to permit 18 on -site parking
spaces in lieu of 68 spaces required for the proposed
business.
This application was withdrawn by the applicant.
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION None
TIME EXTENSION
TM 47199
114 -120 California
The staff report was presented.
MOTION
Consideration of a request for a one year time extension
for an 8 -unit condominium project.
It was moved by Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Amato to grant a one year
time extension to February 14, 1992.
ROLL CALL
AYES: Commissioners Amato, Clark, Hedlund, Szany, Papay
NOES: None
Arcadia City Planning Commission
1/2 2/91
Page 5
RESOLUTION 1457
A resolution granting CUP 90 -019 for a new 24 -hour
supermarket with liquor sales for off -site consumption at
16 E. Live Oak.
Mr. Woolard read the titles of the resolution.
It was noted that condition 5 should be changed to read:
5. That pick -up of discarded/donated items, and any other recycling activities be conducted at a
minimum distance of 50 feet from any residentially zoned property.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Amato, seconded by Commissioner Szany to adopt Resolution
1457 and to formally affirm the decision of January 8, 1991 and the votes thereon.
ROLL CALL
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Amato, Clark, Hedlund, Szany, Papay
None
Chairman Papay noted there is a five working day appeal period.
MATTERS FROM COUNCIL None
MATTERS FROM COMMISSION None
MATTERS FROM STAFF None
ADJOURNMENT
Plum fl.. 7..i t l.i"` • i�t.�l��
Secretary, Arcadia Planning Commission
Arcadia City Planning Commission
1/2 2/9 1
Page 6