Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOCTOBER 9, 1956
.
.
Counc11 Chamber, Cit.y Hall,
Arcadia, California,
October 9, 1956, 8:00 P. M.
TO: ALL CITY COUNCIIMEN AND PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
SUll.J]X:T:: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
The City Planning Commission met in regular meeting. In the absence of the
Chairman and Vice Chairman, Mr. Pra.tt was elected temporary Chairman.
PRESENT: Cormn1ssioners Acker, Balser, Daly, Pratt, Sorenson and Vachon.
ABSENT: Cormn1ssioner Robertson.
OTHERS PRESENT: Carozza, 11ansur, Phillips, McGlasson and Talley.
The minutes of the meeting of September 25, 1956, were approved as written
and mailed.
At this tilne Mr. Vachon, Vice Chairman, appeared andas.sumed the chair.
The request of Walter C. Muller for modification of rear yard requ1relnents
at 181 Colorado Place, referred by Modification Cotnmittee without recommendation,
was considered. Mr. Sorenson stated that there was no buffer between the
proposed bu1lding and a residential area. He stated that the building would be
3 teet from the line and separated from tlJe residential area only by a 4 foot
wall. The Secretary pointed out that all except two owners on the east had .
sitned in favor of the modification, and thet they had, been notified. He also
stated that there would be one parking space for each hotel unit 1?;J.us 51 spaces
foJ:' the restaurant, and that four of the'se spaces would be lost i:f the building
weJ:'e constructed at the required distance from the property line. Mr. Muller,
owner of the Westerner Hotel, stated that the variance would protect adjacent
residerits in that the buildings could be serviced from the front, F>>tI&y tram the
rellidential side. He also stated that the proposed site would look better fram
the street.. He pointed .oUt that moving the buildings forward would cause
traffic congestion and eliminate needed parld.ng area. Mr. Pratt stated that it'
Was unfortunate that the buildings were adjacent to an R-i area without a .
protective buffer strip. The Secretary pointed out that there were no prl'test.,
ants at. the meeting of the MOdification Cormn1ttee. The City Engineer stated
that the 20 foot rear yard requirement was possibly to allow for a future alley.
Mr. Balser stated that he coldd see no harm in adding another building inasmuch
as two existing buildings are in a similar location. He stated that having all
buildings at the same set-back would look better. Motion by Mr. Balser, seconded
by 11r. Daly and carried that, the request of UaJ.ter C. Muller for modification of
rear yard requirements at 161 Colorado Place be approved.
The request of Attorney Fred M. Howser that the public hearing on the
requested zone variance for a mortuary a.t 1820 South Santa Anita Avenue be
continued from October 23, 1956, to November 13, 1956, was considered. The
Secretary stated that the COIIlIIIission could continue a hearing, pro:rlded that the
hearing was opened on the advertised date and then continued by motion.
Hr. H. R. StOke, i826 South First Avenue, Chairman of a home owners' group in
the south part of Arcadia pretested the change or date and requested a :run
hearing on October 23, 1956. Mr. Preston Harris, 18n Louise Avenue. stated
that a large number of resident and non-resident property owners had been
notified. He strongly opposed continuance of the 'hearing. Mr. Acker stated that
due to the large group of persons notified and the controversiaJ. nature of the
hearing, he feels that the hearing should be held on October 23. 1956.
Mr. Balser concurred with Mr. Acker. Motion by Mr. Pratt, seconded by Mr. Acker
and carried that the request of Fred M. Howser that the public, hearing on the
requested zone variance for a mortuary at 1820 South Santa Anita Avenue be
continued from October 23, 1956, to November 13, 1956, be denied.
Lot split No. 114, being t,he request of John L. Barnes to divide property
at 1560 South Tenth Avenue, referred to Mr. 'rachon and Mr. Acker for reinvesti-
gation, was considered. A letter from Mr. Barnes was read. .Mr. Acker stated
10-9-56
.
.
that he had talked to Mr. !Jarnes and lel!I'lled that he. was not ready to sell, and
that he had agreed to demolish the barn ,in a year. Mr. Barnes had also agreed
to increase the width of parcel 1 frOm S7 feet to 58.5 feet. Motion by
Mr. Acker, seconded by Mr. Vachon and carrled that the request of John L. Barnes
to divide the northerly 58.5 feet of the northerly 132.9 feet of lot 37,
F. A. Geier Tract, excluding that portion within Tract ~lo. 19653, be recanunended
for approval With condition I, as established on .June 12, 1956, emended to read
as follows:
1. LOt width to be increased to 58.5 feet and the existing barn to
be removed.
Lot split No. 128, bling therequest of l1arjorie W. Whittaker to divide
property at 1020 West Huntington Boulevard, was considered. The report of the
City Engineer was read. r1r. Sorenson pointed out that the Comprehensive Street
Plan provides .for a future street at the rear of this lot, and that said street
might be blocked by building at this time. He stated that this split shouJ.d
not be considered at this time. Motion by Mr. Sorenson, seconded by Mr., Acker
and carried that the request to divide t.'J.e southerly 210 feet of the westerly
78.75 feet of lot 7, Tract No. 2731, be recommended for denial without
prejudice. If the request should be granted, a final map and recreation fee
will be required.
Lot split No. 129, being the request of Ra;ymond M. Kennett to divide
property at 200 South Second Avenue, was considered. The report of the City
Engineer was read. Mr. Daly stated that this appeared to be a natural split.
MOtion by Mr. Daly, seconded by Mr. Sorenson and carried that the mquest to
divide the easterly 72 feet of the westerly 207.5 feet of the northerly
183.4 feet of the southerly 507.25 feet of lot 58, Santa Anita Tract, be
recanunended for approval subject to the following conditions:
1. That a final map be fUed with the City "Engineer;
2. That a sewer lateral be proVided on Second Avenue for Parcel 2
through a 3 foot easement O1i"er parcell;
3. That 12 feet be dedicated for widening Second Avenue;
4. That a recreation fee of ~>25.oo be paid;
5. That the City be re:iJnbursed:j284.79 tor pro rata share of the cost
of opening Bonita Street, which provided street frontage far
parcel 2.
Lot split No. 130, being the request of Donald H. \valters to divide
property at 702-712 East Camino Real, was considered. The report of the City
Engineer was read. Mr. Balser stated that this was a. good lot split and that
the rear of the property would conform to the future street plan. He stated
that parcel 2 should remain in one ownership until the rear is subdivided, and
that all non-conforming buildings should be removed. Hr. Pratt stated that the
west half of the property was ~ by Mr. and Nrs. vlalters, but that he was not
sur.e who owned the remainder. Motion by Mr. Balser, seconded by Mr. Pratt and
carried that the request to divide the westerly 78 feet and the easterly 75 feet
of the northerly 130 feet of the westerly 228 teet of the easterly 455.92 feet
of the northerly 477.5 feet of lot 122, Arcadia Acreage Tract, be recammended
for approval sub.iect to the follo-wing Conditions:
1. That a final map be filed with the Ciiqr Engineer;
2. That a sewer lateral be provided for parcel 2;
3. That a recreation fee of $50.00 be paid;
4. That four nan-canforming buildings be removed from parcel 2;
5. That the garage on parcell be relocated to clear the new lot lines;
6. That a covenant be recorded restricting parcel 2 to one ownership
until such time as a subdivision of the rear portion is approved.
-2 -
10-9-56
. '
.
.
.Lot, split No. 1.31. being the request of Herbert H. Goddard to dirlde
prope:M.y at 2129 South Santa Anita Avenue, was considered. The report of the
City Engineer was read. Motion by 1-11'. Sorenson, sec.onded by Mr. Daly and
carrled that the request to dirlde the westerly 90.38 feet of lot 1. Tract
No. 11070, be recammended for approval sub.1ect to the following conditions:
1. That a final map be fUed idth the City Engineer;
2. That a sewer lateral be prorlded far parcel 2;
3. Th,at a recreation fee of $25.00 be paid}
4. That the brick incinerator and the aviary be removed}
5. That thenon~onfonning drivewa;v be reconstructed to confOIm to
Engineering Department specifications.
Lot split no. 132, being the request of France.s Keller to ,dirlde property
at 615 South Baldwin,\venue, was r.eferred to Mr. Vachon and Mr. Balser.
Lot spli:t, No. 133. being the request of Carlton S. Smith to divide property
at 422 Eldorado street, was referred to Mr. Acker and Mr. Sorenson.
The tentative map of Tract No. 18618, located l-:est of Second Avenue and
north of Camino Real. was considered. The report of the City Engineer was read.
Mr. Buser stated that this was a good subdivision with lot sizes and areas
meeting the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. but with a street only
50 felilt idde, due to the shallow lots. Mr. Pratt inquired about the drainage
from Greenfield Avenue. The City Engineer stated that because of the City
reservoir below, this drainage would not be damaging to private property.
Mr. Vachon pointed out that the parcels to the west should be developed. Motion
by Mr. Balser,. seconded by Mr. Pratt and carried that the tentative map of
Tract No. 18618, located west of Second Avenue and north of Camino Real. be
recODlIllended for approval subject to the follOwing conditions:
1. That 12 feet be dedic al;ed for the widening of Second Avenue}
2. That 30 feet (half street) be dedicated and :improved for extension
of Greenfield Avenue. including barricades along the adjoining
property. 'and one foot lots along the street to control street
extension;
3. That if the 50 foot street is approved. a 5.foot planting and. sidewalk
easement on each side of Pamela Road be required;
4. That streets be improved as required by Ordinance and the
Engineering ~partment;
5. That the following fees and deposits be required:
26 ,Street trees at $5.00
2 Street name signs @ $25.00
fA30.00
50.00
Steal street light standards as per Edison,
plan
Recreation fee for 10 lots @ ~\25.oo
250.00
6. That the developer prorlde rear lina easem.ants for all utility pOles.
The City Engineer wanted :it fully understood that any development of
Greenfield Avenue ~orth of this tract will require the dedication and improve-
ment of the westerly one-half of the street opposite this tract.
The tentative map of Tracts No. 23343, 23144 and 23345. located on the
north extension of Highland Oaks Drive and Canyon Road. was considered. The
Secretary read a letter from Edward D. Neuhoff', Attorney for Camden~ilshire
ComplllV. and the report of the City F..ng1neer. The City Engineer pointed out the
. ' .
- 3 -
10-9-56
.
.
mlll\Y :iJllporlant :iJllprovements in comparison to the previous~ submitted tentative
subdivision map, including street circulation and better land use by revision of
the original plan and addition of new areas. Mr. Pratt inquired about the
propoeed setbacks and was informed that .30 foot. front setbacks and 10 foot side
setbacks were contemplated by deed restriction. The qity Engineer stated that
he had discussed water supp~ abd storage with the Water Department SUperintend,.
ent. Mr. Neuhoff indicated the willingness of t.he CllI1I(I.en-Wilshire CompaIV to
dedicate a certain area for enlargement of the water storage area. He stated
,that there would be 40 pounds water pressure at the highest lot. Mr. Neuhoff
stated his views about roadway widths in hil.ly areas. He stated that, in his
opinion. narrower paving with parld.ng prohibited was better than .36 foot paving
with parld.ng allowed. Mr. Harold M~ Tega;rt, Engineer for Camden-Wilshire CompaIV
cited certain advantages of narrOW roadw~ in hilly areas. Mr. Phill.ips
inquired about the number of lots above the present reservoirs, and was advised
by Mr. Tegart that there are about 40 or 50 lots too high to be served by present
water lines. He stated that as a result of his discussion with the Water Superin-
tendent,it was decided that the 'subdivider would dedicate the reservoir site and
install pipe lines in the street, and that. the City would furnish the reservoir
and pumps. Mr. Tegart requested approval of the first of the three developments,
Tract No. 2.314.3. sa that it could be recorded and allow work to proceed.
Mr. Neunoff stated that it lvas hoped that grading could be done before the start
of the raiDiY season. There was considerable discussion regarding stre,et widths,
parkway widths, and planting easements along narrow 'streets. Notion by Mr. Pratt,
seconded by Hr. Balser and carried that the tentative map of Tract No. 2314.3,
located an the north extension of Highland Oaks Drive and ClIl\Yon Road, be
,recommended for approval sub,iect to the following conditions:
1. That all :iJllprov'ements required by the Subdivision Ordiilance shall
be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer;
2. That a surety bond shall be posted with the. City to guarantee the
construction of the ClIl\Yon Road access to connect with Highland
Oaks .Drive within one year;
.3. ~hat a .36 foot roadway section be constructed in the 60 foot and
50 foot rights of way and a .30 footroad~ section be constructed
in the 40 foot rights of way;
4. That a 5 foot planting and sidewalk easem~t be prOVided on each
side of the 40 foot rights of way;
5. That deed restrictions prohibit the changing of IIl\Y drainage ~ter
the original construction.
Tentative map of Tracts No. 23144 and 2.3145 is to be given further study
and discussed at the next meeting.
A petition forsnnexation of i;he area bounded by Live Oak Avenue, Peck Road,
Jeffries Avenue and the Arcadia City BOundary was discussed. The petition
signed by 10 property owners was read. The City Engineer stated that this was a
large area which should be viewed and studied. He suggested ~ppointing a
corrunittee to study the area and discuss itsproblams with the staff. A report
from the Planning Consultant was requested. A committee consisting of Commission-
ers Sorenson, Acker and Daly was appointed. A representative of the Alta-Dena
Dairy asked if a protest could be. registered. He was advised that opportunity
would be provided at IIl\Y future public bearing on the subJeot.
The Commission reconsidered the proposed floor area requirement and number
of dwellings an a lot in Zone R-l. The conditions as set forth by tha Planriing
Consultant in his report of July 2.3, 1955, with ohanges asrecOlIlIlIended by the
City Attorney, was read. The Planning Consultant presented a new report. He
stated that there should be floor area restrictions in Zone R-o if' there are suoh
restrictions in Zone R-l, although they have less importance in Zone R-o since
a~ one dwelling is permitted per lot. He pointed out that the restriotion ma1n],y
affects second and third dwellings in Zone R-l. Motion by Mr. Acker, seoanded by
Mr. Daly and carried that the City Attorney be instructed to draw the necessary
resolution to institute proceedings to hold a publio hearing on the regulation of
the number of houses permitted substantially as set forth in the Planning
- '4 -
10-9-56
. .. . .
.
.
Consultant's report of JuJ:y 23, 1955. It was deoided that this should be held
in abeyance for consideration with other proposed amendments regarding floor
area of dwellings. The Secretary was requested to procure data on floor area
requirements established b,ydeed restrictions.
Mr. Acker inquired about the possibility of obtaining a map showing the
available C-2 and C-3 Zoned lots in the City. Mr. Phillips suggested that
perhaps Mr. Ed. Beatty of the Chamber of Commerce might have the ini'onnation.
The City Engineer stated that these lots could be outlined on Engineering
Department maps. Mr. Vachon requested the City Engineer to explore the various
avenues for upplying this ini'ol1ll8.tion.
Mr. Phillips asked if" rear houses in Zone R-l could be restricted to single
story. It was stated that a height limitation could be put in as an amendment
along with the floor area amendment.
There being no further business, the Chairman: declared the meeting
adjourned.
'~.l H, 0~1hy
L. M. TALLEY
- 5 -
10-9-56