Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJUNE 21,1973 CITY COUNCIL PROCEeDINGS ARE TAPE RECORDED AND ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK of W. Wistaria Avenue for permission to close a section of that for the purpose of conducting a block party on July 4. Staff ,~ubmitted a report dated June 14 concerning this request. . f' SIt).'" lip I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL STREET CLOSURE APPROVED IP; '- .J / Y . "}f/ REVISED STANDARDS FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY UNITS 1 20:8316 M I NUT E S CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA SPECIAL MEETING JUNE 21, 1973 The City Council met in a Special Session on Thursday, June 21, 1973 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the Arcadia City Hall. Mayor C. Robert Arth PRESENT: ABSENT: Councilmen Scott, Rage, Helms, Arth Councilman Butterworth who had consented in writing to the holding of this meeting. Council received a petition signed by residents of the 200 - 300 block block Council discussed the matter and was of the consensus that this type of activity should be encouraged and concurred in the recommendations of staff in the proper placement of barricades at both ends of the street. It was noted also that the residents had asked for two police officers. It was MOVED by Councilman Scott, seconded by Councilman Helms and carried unanimously that the request be granted for the street closure on July 4 - without fee for the use of the barricades; that a $25 deposit be required which would be refunded upon return of all of the barricades in good condition. Council received the Planning Director's recommendation concerning R-3 Zone Plan Review Process. This was in response to Council direction on June 5 ti,st staff undertake a study to develop criteria which would lead to a higher quality of tentative tracts for multiple family units due to the apparent lack of quality architectural design and construction in some recently developed condominiums. During this time a moratorium was placed on this type of development. The Planning Director stated that the moratorium has had a direct effect in the Planning Commission's delaying action on five tentative tracts totaling 201 individual units. He advised that the time necessarily involved in acomplete study and the subsequent zoning and building code changes would be approximately 6 months. He suggested an interim measure - imposition of certain review procedures whereby at least some aspects which contibute to quality could be reviewed and brought up to an acceptable level in those instances found to be deficient. The Plan Review Process could be adopted to replace the current R-3 review procedures which are ineffectual in application. Additional regulations to the Building Code could upgrade the quality of new multiple-family and condominium units. The following additions were submitted for Council considerations: 1. Section 8130.20 adding 1311.1 to the Uniform Building Code to read as follows "Every dwelling shall contain a comfort cooling system capable of maintaining a temperature differ- ential of 200 F between the habitable areas and the outdoor 6-21-73 - 1 - 20:8317 areas. Water evaporative cooling systems or individual window or wall mounted units may not be used to meet this requirement. 2. Section 8130.20 adding 1316.1 to the Uniform Building Code to read as follows: "Wall insulation. All walls of dwelling units shall be insulated: A minimum installed resistance to the flow of heat shall be R-ll as rated by the National Mineral Wool Insulation Association for walls with a U value of 0.05." 3. Section 8130.20 changing 1315.1 to the Uniform Building Code to read as follows "Separation Systems. Every wall, partition 1 floor and ceiling forming a separation between an apartment unit and a garage or carport, or a separation between separate dwelling units, shall be so constructed as to reduce the sound transmission to the following: Floor-ceiling system - over all average (125 - 4000 cycles per second (58 decibels; Party Walls - over all average (125 - 4000 cycles per second) 58 decibels; Party Floors - Impact sound, tapping loss - 15 decibels." Th~ increases the present 50 decibels requirement to 58 decibels reduction capability. 4. To amend the Building Code to provide that type V occupancy building shall be one hour construction. This would require 5/8 inch drywall in lieu of the present 1/2 inch and would also require solid core doors or their equivalent. Thus providing greater sound insulation, fire protection and wall strength. It was zoning manner units. also noted that the Commission is currently reviewing the R-3 regulations with the intention of revising the regulations in a which would lead to higher quality multiple family dwelling Council expressed a desire to hear from builders in the community on June 27. Council also would like to assist those builders whose developments are ready or almost ready for plan check and are being delayed due to the moratorium providing the plans meet the criteria being considered. Henry Hege, 550 W. Dillrte Road, representing Mike Vallone, builder, stated in part that Mr. Vallone has indicated he could live with the four requirements listed above however he did submit some areas in which the builders would be faced with increased costs, for instance 1 the section dealing with wall insulation and separation systems. Mr. Hege took exception to the proposed Preliminary Plan Review which makes one person responsible for plan review and approval. He felt it unacceptable and unrealistic and referred to a forthcoming meeting of the Planning Commission at which these regulations are to be considered. Mr. Hege asked the City Attorney if a builder may file check prior to the approval of a tentative tract map. Attorney replied in the affirmative. for The a plan City Mr. Medvin, Medvin & Norris, 9171 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, referred to his development proposed for 528-612 W. Huntington Drive, for which plans have been submitted. He stated in part that at this 6-21-73 - 2 - 20:8318 point any delay would be economically disastrous. He reviewed the requirements of his escrow for the purchase of the property and advised that all changes have been complied with. He asked that any further changes be applicable only to plans which have not been submitted thus far. He said he could live with the proposed four additional regulations and would proceed if they were adopted, however, he hoped the Commission would reconsider the requirements for Separation Systems as it might not be possible to comply with the proposed 58 decibel reduction capability. 1 Willard Botke, Meeker Land Development Company, stated in part that his firm is currently working on two locations for condominiums~ plans for which comply with the present requirements and are to be high quality developments. He submitted reasons why a homeowner purchases a condominium; that he looks for and demands the best. He also stated he could live with the four proposed additions with perhaps the exception of the 58 decibel factor. He would have to confer with experts in this field to decermine this. In conclusion he asked that the mora- torium be lifted so they could proceed. George Meeker, Meeker Land Development Company, was advised that his development would be included if the criteria is adopted. Louis Rodwell recalled similar circumstance some years ago and agreed with the proposal. As an architect he could understand the need for more precise drawings and plans. He felt some professional help might be needed in the decibel determination. It was MOVED by Councilman Scott, seconded by Councilman Hage and carried on roll call vote as follows that the moratorium be lifted on all multiple family projects for which plans have already been submitted for tencative tract or plan check, providing they meet items 1 through 4 of the report dated June 18, 1973 and with respect to item 4 that solid core doors be required only for exterior doors. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmen Scott, Hage, Helms, Arth None Councilman Butterworth It was then MOVED by Councilman Helms that the PLAN REVIEW PROCESS be adopted -- with the thought that Council can then ascertain whether or not the process is workable (this relates to site plan, walkways, planting, exterior materials, color scheme, etc.) Councilman Rage seconded the motion. Councilman Scott stated in part that he could not see how a builder could be told what his finished product should look like. He agreed that some of the existing developments are architecturally unattractive but they do sell so they do have some appeal. He could not support the motion at this time which carried on the following roll call vote. 1 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmen Hage, Helms, Arth Councilman Scott Councilman Butterworth (This matter will be before Council again on June 27. Official will be present at that time,) The Building MONTHLY FINANCIA L REPORT Council received the financial report for May 1973. FILED. ADJOURNMENT At 9:35 p.m., the meeting adjourned sine die. C?,/~ ~ Z?~~..~ City Clerk - - 3 - 6-21-73 !