No preview available
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