Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJUNE 12, 1956 . . Council ChaJnber, City Hall, Arcadia, California, ;rWle 1?,1956, 8100 P. M. TO: ALL CITY COUNCWIEN AND PLANNING C01ij/USSIONERS SUBJECT: PLANNING COlolMISSION MINUTES The City Planning COIIIIIlission met in regular meeting with Chaiman Pratt presiding. PRESENT 1 Commissioners Acker,Balser, Daly, Pratt, Robertson and Vachon. ABSENT: Commissioner Sorenson. OTHERS PRESENT: Carozza, Mansur, Nicklin, Phillips,Rice, McGlasson and Talley. The minutes of the meeting of May 22, 1956, were approved as written and mailed. Pursuant to. notice given, a public hearing was held on the application of the Camden-INilshire Company for a zone variance to allow the property at 1666 North Santa Anita Avenue to be used as a real eetate office in connection with the sale of properties in the Santa Anita Highlands, and to allow the continuance of the present, or similar, signs for the period of the variance. Photographe of subject property were shown. COIiDuunications from Roger Johnson, 1725 North Santa Anita Avenue, and F. R. Norton, 1758 North Santa Anita Avenue, protesting the variance were read. Two petitions were presented. one containing 38 signatures representing 36 parcell! within 300 feet of the subject property and 6 signatures of property owners more than 300 feet from subject propertyj and the other contRining 24 signatures representing 22 parcels over 300 feet from the subject property. l'ir. J. N. Hildie, manager of the .George Elkins Company office at 1666 North Santa Anita Avenue. representatives f'or Camden"Wilshire Company stated that an office was needed to sell property to the north and that this location. being the natural point of entry to the tract. was ideally situated. Jl'Jr. Edward D. NeuhOff, Attorney for .Camden"Wilshire Company, addressed the Commission, requesting that the variance be granted. He pointed out that 28 lots remained to be s old and that approximately 150 lots were to be serviced from this office, and that this was the most convenient location for servicing the existing area and for developing the upper area. He estimated that this development would take apprOximately two years to complete. No one else spoke in favor of the variance. IIJr. Stanley L. Schuster, 1660 North Santa Anita Avenue, represent- ing property owners of the Santa Anita Highlands, addressed the Commission in protest against the variance. He pointed out the number of petitioners against the variance and stated that these residents, having been informed in 1948, that the tract office was to be temporary, wanted the lot to change from commercial to residential use. He stated. that due to the temporary foundation construction, the building could be easily moved. There were approximately 15 persons in the audience represented by Mr. Schuster. There being no other person desiring to be heard, the Chairman declared the hearing closed. The matt~r was taken under advisement until the next meeting, and a report frOlll the staIf ~as requested. Pursuant to notice given, a public hearing was held on the application of the First Baptist Church of Arcadia for a change of zone from Zone R-1 to Zone R-2 of the property located on the south side of' Forest Avenue west of First Avenue, including the rear portions of the lots locatadat 53 and 57 East Haven Avenue. The Secretary pointed out that the lots at 53 and 57 East Haven Avenue were on the agenda as Lot Split No. 108. Mr. Dexter D. Jones, Attornery for the First Baptist Church of Arcadia, addressed the COmmission, requesting that the zone change be granted. He presented a plot plan showing the proposed develop- ments. He pointed out the need for larger church facilities and additional parld.ng area. He sud he considered it. good zoning to have an R-2 buffer zone between and R,,3 and an R-1 zone. Mr. Howard Anderson, 715 North First Avenue, addressed the Commis~ion to protest the change of zone. He stated that since the rear of his lot abuts the property in question, the proposed development would affect his priVacy. No one else desired to be heard and thl:l Chairman declared the hearing closed. The matter lias taken under advisement until. the next meeting, and a report from the staff was requested. 6-12-56 . . The Commission considered a revised plot plan for the California Thoroughbred Breeders Association office at San Juan Dl'ive and Colorado Plaoe. The new plan provides for an enlarged patio, new drivewa;y and parking area arrangement, and a. wood rail fence bett-reen the park:\.ng lot and the residential lots to the north. Mr. George Thomas, member of the building oommittee of the California Thoroughbred Breeders Association, stated that the Association lashed to provide a quieter library and improve the exterior by making these changes, but still conform as much as possible to the previously approved plan. I-Ir. Balser stated that he thought this plan was an improvement over the original plan. Mr. Robertson stated that :the fence would have to oqnform to Ordinance No. 760. Motion by ~lr. Daly, seconded by Mr. Acker and carried that the reviSed plot plan, being substantially in confol'lDity with the original. plot plan, be approved, but the wall between the parking lot and the residential property to. the north shall conform to ordinance requirements . Lot split No. 108, being the request of Austin Shively and Annie Hanawalt to divide property at 53 and 57 East HaVen Avenue was held over until next meeting pending action on the zone change requested by the First Baptist Church of - Arcadia. Lot split No. lll, being the request of James Kosturos to divide property at 220 \-iestFoothill BouleVard, was considered. Mr. Robertson stated that the same lot split request had come up before and had been denied. He pointed out that that this was a one family area of large lots. Motion by Mr. Vachon. seconded by Mr. Robertson and carried that the request +" divide lot 1, Tract 'No. 12374, into two 10ts facing Foothill Boulevard be recommended for denial, as not conforming to other lots in the vicinity. Lot split No. ll2.l:eing the request of Lillian J. Haskin to divide property at 1017 South Sixth Avenue, was considered. Report frOll1 the City Engineer pointed out that the rear line will conform -to that of lot 5, Tract iio. 18616. Mr. Acker stated that although all lots in the area are greater that 60 feet in width. only this one l:'eI1Iains unimproved, and there is little else that can be done with it. Mr. Bal.se:t' pointed out that it would be better to have a 60 foot improved 10t than a vacant lot. Motion by Mr. Balser, seconded by Mr. Acker and carried that the request to divide the east 130 feet of the west 160 feet of the south 60 feet of the north 231.25 feet of lot 53, Tract No. 808, be recollllllended for approval subject to the followi.11g conditions: 1. That a final map be riled with the City Engineer; 2. l'hat a recreation f.ee of i;25.00 be paid. Lot split No. ll3, being the mquest of Albert O. Knutsen to divide property at 321Leda Lane, was considered. Mr. Daly expressed the opinion that removal of the old garage would improve the street. f1r. Vachon pointed out that a lot split involving similar land locked rear area had been denied recently. Mr. Acker expressed doubt that it was good planning to split irregular lots even if the area meets the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. Mr. Knutsen addressed the Collllllission stating that his reason for splitting the lot was to fre.e the land looked area, and with the proceeds of the lot sale to develop the rear area. The City Engineer asked about the possibility of moving the house to another location on the lot. Mr. Knutsen stated that the cost would be approximately $10,000. Hr. Robertson stated that the Commission did not want to establish a precedent of splitting irregular pieces out of the corners of lots. He also stated that he believed that the rear of the property could be better developed. Hotion by Mr. Vachon, that the request to divide a."I irregular portion of lot. 4. Tract. No. l5558. be recollllllended for denial. Said motion was seconded by Mr. Acker and carried b1 the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Acker, Balser, Pra.tt,Robertson and Vachon. NC'ES: Conunissioner Daly. ABSENT: Commissioner Sorenson. Lot split No. lJ.4, being the request of John L. Barnes to divide property a.t 1560 Tenth Avenue, ~ras considered. Mr. Balser stated tha~ a .57 foot lot was too far below the min:imwn r~uirement of 75 feet. Motion by lIr. Balser, seconded by Mr. Daly and carried t~t the request to divide the north 57 feet of the south 132.90 feet of lot 36, F. A~ Geier Tract. be recommended for approval subject to - 2 - 6-12-56 r . . the following conditions: 1. Lot tddth to be increased to 60 feet and existing barn removed. - 2. That a final map be filed tdth the City Engineer; 3. That a sewer lateral be installed for the north parcel; 4. That a recreation fee of $25.00 be paid. Lot split No. 115, being the request of Retha M. Mitchell to divide property at 1602 Tenth Avenue, was considered. Report from the City Engineer set forth the condition that c.urb and gutter and sewer be constructed. along Camino Real east from Tenth Avenue. The City Engineer pointed out that although the paving is already in, the applicant wOuld re:lmburse the City for a portion of the expense. Motion by Mr. Daly', seconded by z.Jr. Balser and carried that the request to divide the north 126.56 feet of lot 38, F. A. Geier Tract, and the strip of City owned property adjoining to the north, be recOl1lll1ended for approval. subject to the following conditions: r , ,,)ee. revlS!o>< I~I <r I ~(" 1. That the strip of land adjoining lot 38, F. A. Geier Tract, on the north be purchased from the City; 2. That a sewer main, sewer laterals to each lot, and curb and gutter along Camino Real east of Tenth Avenue be constructed; 3. That a final map be fUed with the City Engineer; 4. That a ~75.oo recreation fee for the three new lots be paid; 5. That all other mounts stipulated in the applicant's offer of May 16, 1956, be paid. Lot split No. 116, being the request of Wendell H. Mack:l.e to divide property at l111-1l17 Sunset Boulevard, was assigned to Mr. Vachon and Mr. Balser to investigate. Tentative map of Tract No. 19391, located at Second Avenue and Norman Avenue, was considered. Report from the City Engineer stated that approval of this subdivision would complete the extenSion of Third Avenue north from Norman Avenue and provide access to the west from Third Avenue. Report from the Planning Consultant pointed out that this tentative map conforms s1ibstantialJy with Street Plan Map No. 21 and practically concludes the development of this Street Plan which was approved by the Planning Commission on September 30, 1952. Mr. Marshall Pond, engineer for the SUbdivision, stated that a "knuckle-type" turn would have been provided tibere Third AveIlue joins Winnie ~(~, but the developer had been unable to acquire the additional land. lfl1'. Herbert Hawkins, developer of the subdivision, said that the property north of lots 7 and 8 was owned by Mr. Newa who would not sell because he wished to inaintain a 15,000 square foot minimum. Mr. Pond explained that due to this fact, Mr. Newa would not grant an easement for utility poles at the rear of lot 8. Mr. Pond stated, however, that the rear line of lot 8 could be revised satisfactorily to obtain the desired result. He also pointed out that since the existing house on Second Avenue south of Norman Avenue is within three feet of the side property line, it w.as proposed that Norman Averme be moved seven feet north and the garage on lot 3 be moved away. Mr. Robertson stated that the tentative map meets the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance, and that the revision of the rear line of lot 8 should be left to the subdivider. Motion by Mr. Robertson, seconded by Mr. Vachon and carried that the tentative map of Tract No. 19391 be recommended for aPProval subject to the following conditions I 1. That all buildings within the tract, except the dwelling on lot 1 shall be removed, and all bniltlings located on land from which this subdivision is created shall be removed to such extent that no new non-conforming bni 1 dings are created, 2. That rear lot line easements shall be provided for power and telephone line installations; - 3 - 6-12-56 . . .3. That all improvEl!llElnts, deposits and fee,s required by ordinances and regulations of the City shall. be complied with; 4. That 12 feet be dedicated for the widening of Second Avenue. The Secretary read a notice of pUblic hearing on a zone exception clU!e from the Regional Planning COIIlIIIission, County of Los Angeles. The notice set forth a request for and exception to the A-I (Light Agriculture) and C-,3 (Unlimited COllU1lercial) Zones in order to expand an existing cash and carry dairy by estab- lishing,operating and maintaining an addition to 1;he milk refrigeration unit and an addition to the milk plant on an irregular shaped parcel 01' approx:imateJ.y one acre located on the south side of West Jeffries Avenue approx:imately $00 feet westerly of South Peck Road at 148 West Jeffries Avenue in South Arcadia District, Los Angeles County. It was stated that this property is near the City-owned water land. Motion by- Mr. Balser, seconded by Hr. Vachon and carried that the Phnning COlIIIIIission register protest to the Regional Planning COIIlIIIission, County of Los Angeles. The proposed sign ordinance previOUSly submitted by the Planning Consultant, was held over to allow the staff an opportunity for further study. The matter of zoning 01' Live Oak Avenue tl'iangle ~~as'.j:Jrbught 'up by the Oity Engineer who stated that the City Council concurred with the Planning Commission and suggested that a meeting be arranged with the property owners. Mr. Robertson suggested that, since Mr. Talley would be away on vacatioll' Mr. Carozza. should sit in on the meeting. lfJI'. Carozza a~ed to arrange a meeting and notify the property owners. The Secretary brought uP. for discussion the Bella Vista area where continued lot splits are creating a condition of a long dead-end street and double frontage lots. The Commission reconnnended that the Planning Consultant submit a report on the entire area. The Planning Consultant proposed that the Commission reviel; the Zoning Ordinance in regard to allowing second and third dwellings on an Ii-I lot. He stated that it would be possible to revise the Ordinance so as to give the City control rather that the property owner. The Planning Consultant was requested to submit a report on the matter. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned. . /j 7f\ i J:,~ -V\0 V~ JYJJ~1>' L. N. TALLEY Secretary - 4 - 6-12-$6