The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About4825 RESOLUTION NO. 4B25 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA APPROVING M-79-3 AND DENYING THE APPEAL OF ELIZABETH R. TESINS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND MODIFICATION COMMITTEE AND MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT. WHEREAS, on January 9, 1979, the Modification Committee held a duly noticed public hearing and after making findings of fact unanimously approved M-79-3 fi+ed by John H. Wilkes for his property at 740-742 West Lemon Avenue, Arcadia, legally described as Lot 1 of Block H of the Santa Anita Land Company Tract as recorded in Map Book 6, Page f37, hereinafter referred to as "Subject Property", at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity 'to be heard and to pre~ent evidence, including Mrs. Elizabeth R. Tesins, a neighbor reSiding at lBlO South Rowland Avenue, Arcadia, shown on the Los Angeles ~ounty Assessor's Roll to be owned by Elizabeth R. Tesinsky and Rose Tesinsky, hereinafter referred to as "Tesins Property" 1 and WHEREAS, aforesaid decision of the Modification Committee was appealed to the Planning Commission by Elizabeth R. Tesins, and a duly noticed hearing was held by the Planning Commission on February 13, 1979, duly continued to February 27, 1979, at the request of Elizabeth R. Tesins, and duly continued to March 13, 1979 for addi- tional evidence at which times all intere~ted persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence, incl,uding Elizabeth R. Tesins, who testified on February 13, 1979 and on February 27, 1979 and who did not appear on March 13, 1979. WHEREAS, on March 27, 1979 the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1097 by a 6 to 0 vote with 1 absent, making findings of fact upholding approval of M-79-3 and denying the appeal of Elizabeth R. Tesins. -1- 4B25 WHEREAS, said Elizabeth R. Tesins appealed the aforesaid decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council of the City of Arcadia and the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on May 1, 1979, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence and at which time said Elizabeth R. Tesins did not appear to be heard, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AND DETERMINE AS,_FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That we hereby make the following findings of fact: 1. Applicant John H. Wilkes, the owner of subject property, pursuant to Division 2, Part 9, Chapter 2 of Article IX of the Arcadia Munic~pal Code, filed application M-79-3 for a modification from the requirements of Arcadia Municipal Code Section 92B3.B.7 to allow a , i recently constructed approximately ,6 ft. high wood fence, hereinafter re~erred to as .Said Fence", on subject property approximately 5 feet from the street side (westerly) property line of his corner lot in , lieu of 10 feet required from the side property line required by Arcadia Municipal Code Section 9283.8.8 and in lieu of the 4' open . work fence allowed within said 10 feet by Arcadia Municipal Code S 92B3.B.7. A plot plan of said fence location is set forth in Exhibit "A" which is attached hereto and by this reference, ~ncor- porated herein. 2. Subject property is zoned R-l developed with two single family dwellings, a,s shown as the cross-hatched area in Exhibit "B" which is attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 3. As shown in said plan, the westerly portion of said fence is set back approximately 5 feet from Rowland Avenue which is an existing substandard private street exiting onto Lemon Avenue which is a public street. 4. Said fence is necessary to applicant t::J close off unin- vited access to his back yard, and to preserve the privacy of -2- 4B25 residents of subject property. A 4' high fence or a 5' high fence would not preserve the privacy of residents on subject property and adequately block uninvited access. 5. That construction of the westerly portion of said fence 10' from said westerly property line would ,require placement of approximately one-half of the length of said westerly fence portion near the middle of applicant's existing paved driveway. 6. That the southerly portion of said fence parallels the northerly property line of the Tesins property and is set back approximately 4' from said property line, leaving approximately 400 square feet or more of applicant's property inaccessable to applicant and access able from the Tesins property. 7. That Elizabeth R. Tesins has asphalted said 400 square feet plus of applicant's property, 'effectually widening the drive- way of Tesins property by approximately 4'. B. That we hereby find that said fence does not interfere with the visibility of vehicular ingress and egress to subject property or adjoining property as per standards on file with the Planning Department, due to the following findings of fact that we hereby make: A. That said fence is located along Rowland Avenue, a private street, which has no curb, gutter, sidewalk or parkway along the same and only eight properties use Rowland Avenue for personal and incidental ingress and egress. B. That Planning Staff conducted a study of the visibility of ingress and egress to the Tesins property using a Ford LTD, and that due to the approximate 5' setback of said fence from Rowland Avenue and, the approximfte 4' from the Teeins property, Staff found there to 'be adequate visibility looking torward said fence to the north when the back of the car was at the Tesins westerly property line prior to entering Rowland Avenue. -3- 4B25 C. That the appellant Mrs. Elizabeth R. Tesins, is willing to accept the existing setbacks of said fence with a height of 5' in lieu of 6'. 9. Said fence is not located within 25' of an intersection. 10. That these findings of fact are equally applicable to Arcadia Municipal Code S 92B3.8.7 as amended by Ordinance No. 1666. 11. Based on the aforedescribed specific findings of fact, we hereby also find that: A; M-79-3 il; necessary: (1) to secure an appropriate improvement; or (2) prevent an unreasonable hardship to applicant; or (3) promote uniformity of development. B: Said fence would not be detrirgental to the public health and welfare, nor in:jurious to the property or improvements in its zone or vicinity. SECTION 2. We hereby deny the appeal of Elizabeth R. Tesins and approve M-79- 3. SECTION 3. That we hereby find this project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Title 14 of the California Administrative Code Section l5l03(e~ and Section 2, III, A., 4, a and b of Arcadia City Council Resolution No. 4727 adopting regulations for environmental documents pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act. -4- 4B25 SECTION 5. That the Clerk of the Council shall certify to the adoption of this resolution. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Arcadia held on the l5th day of May, 1979 , by the affirmative vote of at least thrE!e Councilmen, to wit: AYES: Councilmen Parry, Pellegrino, Saelid,and Margett NOES: None ABSENT: Councilman Gilb SIGNED AND l}PPROVED this 15th day of May, 1979. -5- 4B25 ~ '1(/ 'J~, '~()N . M t + 'f!' 6. ,:'ifJHN 1IJj~ . _'!;l HOMe ?JI.ONE : '1,<<(::8B~ GlJ!t. PHoNS : ""I q,s'j,I"C A:U1F - - -- . - . , . . . . . . .~ . . -- , ': O~V& .' , " " 11IM I OIl.I/JE 3:)" '/ w,.f , '.. I , - " , " , .' " , ~ l ,1J'~ , , , < . ',. I ( , . , . ' ,- '. , ", '- : . . - . " . , . . . '1"1 ').. , '1"1b . . .. ,'I'''' . ..', t . , ~ . I , , . c ,\ . . . . . . . " I I ..~ , . . . . . I 4 " H I &11 I . ~.. ~~ I - . ~ - ~ ~ - . 7f>'1' " . . ~~ . < CO,. I . (. , ; . "' I . . . I . . :.!: . " I . - . . . - . . . " oJ au ..-..-... nL .--. - . " ' , .. , ..,.:.. .' , - 'pltlllg"WttV . . .. " 1- c:.~.t I, ~ , . .' . - , , - , - . . '/, . . , . . ,,~t>t .I.' . .' - - . - '. ..-_ t - ~ - IBID R.O I.I.J t. ;IN 0 .~ ,lj EXHiBiT "A" 740-742 ,., Ler.lon Ave. ~"79'3 .., 00' :';:; /^,-l~-~ I I I I I o ~O: o I o .1 I f I I I I I u L o~~o ~i: "1 l:) O~ ~Q/ '(7"" c.C Ii;;O:"'O;.;j I . J'O I I -' ',- 5C: I ~-~-~ ~----'i I" ~: ~ I O I ~: ~ I '"I..O.--:.....O~ '01: ;';. "'10 01 ca:.,u 10 I ..,'ft " I O i....s..9_~ ~__~L-jR-\ I I J 'i ,I O :~- O.~t.QS~ I "~ I ,~p I 1',/ ~J"./ f ao'tI I 1'.17/ t74d I I'UT.I c.c. I ~O , to C Z 71 I' ~. . "~I '~)..~-:"~''''' I . r-=-'..:...~.f"':;':;~~' I . :.....';;. '..u'. i r :. ~p'.ioo:::.:,y I . t-~,,:"''T'';'''' ). I . I . .~ ' I (,011 . I I 81 L._ " ,. I~ ': I :0: I I 1'111.1 1 ,"0, o I~LEMON AVENUE. j; -.rr; (7.;~>>J411 o ~ ~~~// ~ 0 : r, '//~ I O )> :..:V..u I ~ I 0;:: ~ ~~l i.. ~ t I l:) Ig ~I ~ ~_._--- __J 0 : ~ . I'" ~ Ig 0 ~Ig 1 .1 ''In'l "'i ~---_._--_. "'.:;- O~ ~~_,52____~ 0 OO':gO ~: C"\ ~J .:; .... ~c "'I: '" CJ o ... . o " (T"7/' o J.; :.i ~, . ..J,.... VAL ~! . f7JZ) &0,00 7C (724.1 (7/4'; o 'C; 0\ Co 80.00 (72")"~U'" O .... . 0.... g ~ ,., c: C '" - "'1 -: .... o . - 9..'.r.C' --- - o ~ ,=.,.. + -- -- , \l. :. Q '" .. . ;'\ 'l:l '" .,; - - d"~ .. ... ~'" Par-t, I ,-ot ,+ I .' 119.'4 ~!- .~ ~~ - '" .. ",; - - '" ... .;;' ~ c;;, ~;5 '" ~ .. I;v/I ~. 0 '" o .. (~.Ir.l' '. 0 ..H.; (~~/.1 .. . '- '" 1'19 .;.:. VI 3 Q~ (7/1) '" Q,I .:.. ,;.; S,RE;E'T L".. "B'T ~. , _. I 1.../\; '11 ! , ;{~;h D, r.. ~OO' .6 SCALE NORTH '-;"1 f<J LAND USE ~ .ZONING