The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutOCTOBER 8, 1957 ROLL CALL MINUTES HEARING CONT'n Vetednary Clinic HEARrWG CONT' I) (Sen! or) . MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 8, 1951 - 8:.00 P.M. The City Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session in the Council Chamber of the City Hall with Chairman Vachon presiding. PRESENT: CODDDissioners Acker, Davieon, Forman, Michler, Pratt, and Vachon. ABSENT: CODDDissioner Robertson. . OTHERS PRESBNT: Councilman Phillips, Cook, Carozza, Gardner and Mrs. Andrews. The minutes of September 10, 1951 were approved as written and maUed with one correction: Motion by lIr. Pratt, 'Second. by Mr. Davison, ~ carried that an automobUe radiator repair shop should be classified as a use permissible in zone C-2. The words "and carried" and "shop" I,olCre omitted from the minutes. Pursuant to the continuance of September 10, 1951 the public hear- ing was resumed on the application of the Arcadia Parking, Inc.. for a zone variance to allow a veterinary clinic at 121 W. Duarte Road in zone C-2. A Staff and Zoning CoDDDission report was sub- mitted by'Mr. Gardner, stating that the close proximity of an &-3 area to the existing C-2 zone would be detrimental. end recom- mending that the application for a zone variance be denied. Moved .' by Mr. Forman, seconded by Nr. Michler, and carried, that the variance to allow a veterinary clinic at 127 W. Duarte Road be denied. A report from the Staff as to the zoning for similar businesses in numerous other cities was read by the Technician. Investigation had been carried out. and the findings of this report is a basis of the denial. Staff had taken this report into consideration. Pursuant to the continuance of September 10. 1957 tbe public hearing was resumed on the application of &. V. Senior for a variance to allow a pet hospital at 108 W. Las Tunas Drive, in zone C-2. Two additional protests had been filed. Mr. and Mrs. Lloyd Porter, of 229 W. Las Tunas Drive . protested this type business being allowed in this area and opposed any further variance in the so- called "triangle"; stated that if a pet hospital belongs in C-2, then zoning restrictions should be changed to allow clog and cat hospitals in C-2. They support tbe City Council's decision to go no farther than C-2 with architectural overlay. A. B. Chandler. of 216 Woodruff Ave. was assured that this was to be a C-2 zone wen he bought his property; he added his request to those of his neighbors that variances remain as now and that no more be granted in this "triangle." The Zoning Co1lllDittce and Staff report was read by the Technician. showing that there would be no outside runs; that the building will be completely sound-proofed; the accoustical engineer employed assures that all noises that might be heard outside will be re- duced to a "whisper." The type buUding proposed to be built will cost approximately $10,000.00 and will be of definite aesthetic value to the "triangle" and the cOllllllWlity as a whole. Commensu- rate with the type business prevailing in this "triangle", the variance should be granted with the following stipuletions: Tbat the building complies with the D overlay; that the existing set-bacltstandard be met; and that the entire operation of a veterinary clinic be under roof. '. d Mr. Acker stated that he would go along with the recommendationu u~ the Zoning Committee and the Staff, Many changes take place over the years satisfying conditions that were objectionable in the past. In thia case, where a building ia completely sound-proofed, air con- ditioned, etc., it is different from the kind that haa been and, therefore, ,oould not be detrimental to the propertyoWttera adjoin- ing this property. Mr. Vachon stated that it should be understood that this is a com- mercial zone, surrounded by commercial property, same that have variances in a similar way; also, that no residential property abuts this particular property, the closest homes being at least 200 feet away, except the one of the appl'icant, which will ne removed at such time as this would be granted. This is, the main consideration that the Zoning Committee gave in giving a favorable report on this application. Motion by M~, Michler, seconded by Mr. Pratt, and carried, that the zone variance to allow a pet hospital at 108 W. Las Tunas Drive be granted in accordance with the provisions stated herein, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff and Zoning Committee, PUBLIC IlBARING Church Pursuant to notice given, public hearing '~s held on the application of Santa Anita Church of Religious Science for zoning variance to allow a church to be located approximately 300 feet north of Syca- more Ave. at the northerly prolongation ,of Second Avenue and lying easterly from Oakhaven Lane. They desire to purchase from the Oberly estate approximately 5.14 acres to be used for church pur- poses, which include buildings and facilities far services and religious education for youth and adults. Conditions non-conforming to present zoning exist. This variance is requested because the present location of their church at Rosemead and Loxley Drive is not adequate snd has no room for expansion; also, membership desires that the church be located within boundaries of the City of Arcadia. There is a natural site among the trees on the Oberly estate where the church would he built; and their definite' aim is to prevent the ,trees' being disturbed. The church ~~uld be located so as not to interfere with the natural beauty of the landscape and would cost between $150,000 and $200,000. It would be barely visible from the present residential development. All parking '~ould be on the pro- perty, itself. The largest percentage (75% of 300) of the congre- gation are from the City of Arcadia. The Chairman stated that this was the time and place set for the hearing of this application, and requested those in favor of this zone variance to present any material necessary. Harry Keighly, 712 Pershing Square Bldg, , Los Angeles, representing the Oberly estate, brought out that it had been the wish of the Oberly family to preserve the trees and scenic beauty; that the sale of this property would leave approxima~ely 47 acres in the estate; that this would not detract from the estate, would be ad- vantageous for the community, and would preserve one of the most scenic spots in the foothU ls, and uould "preserve for all time these magnificent trees." Jack I~ells, a member of the Board of Trustees of the Church and a member of their building committee (former resident of Arcadia, n~ living in Glendora), brought out that they had looked a long time and this was the most adequate site they had found; requested they be allowed this zone variance for reasons enumerated in their petition. ethel Barnhart, minister of the Church and resident of Arcadia, expressed the desire of the membership to have the Church inside Arcadia; stated they have in mind only to add to the community, not to do anything that would detract from it. Walter J. Thompson, one of the executors of the estate and son-in- law of the deceased Mrs. Oberly, stated that had there been any thought that selling this portion of the land for church purposes would in any way depreciate the remaining portion of the estate, they would not consider the sale of this part to the Santa Anita Church. He requested favorable consideration of their request. Page 2 - 10/8/57 "'.. b'/:;. Commissioner Acke,: req",ested elaboration of the youth activities of tb~ Church. Nr. 1I',lJo stated that there were no athletic activitie~; they consist of Sunday meetings at 6:30 PM and two weeks' summer Bible schcol, du~ing which the classes are within the church e~cept for l5-~lnu~~ breaks when stud~nts might go 'out- side. Commissioner Davison suggested, in view of possible residential development of t!l>.l IlX'S'1l Ollst of this site, that some plan of plant- ing or walls be in"')11':>~&ted in the overall plan to bl.:>ck the parking ar.:>s from ~iBht. Spok~sman for th& Church stated that they looulc be ~~<<~l~ to ouggestion along this 1 in", as they want to make the idea entirely acceptable to residente in the area. The CllaiT.m~~ re~~rted ~h3t those opposed to this vcriance present their vilOwo. A. H. Rude, 143 E. Sycacore, stated he had contacted every owner of property adjacent this site and all but one--Paul Graham, who is a member of the cong~egation--strenuously object to this vari- snce. It wss stated that the homes in this area sell for $35,000 to over $40,000; that s"bdivisian of this site wo~.ld bring the Oberly estate many times more than the $200,000 offered by the Church, also bringing the City greater tax return. He entered a petition in opposition to the vuriance; it was stated none of the petitioners had allY obj~ction to the practice of religion, but they didn't want it to affect t~e values of: their property; also, it was pointed out that trees ere of ~re importance to a lot owner than to a church, and that high-class subdivision of the property wollld save just as many of the trees. The petition, signed by 41 opposing property owners, was read into the !'l1nutec; the llhairma", waivec! rSE.cling the names of the signers. It wes brought aut specif~cally that P~ul Graham, who had not signad the opposing petition, c~d signed the applicant's petition for zone variance. Lou Deris, 1240 Oak.~aven Lane, directly went of r.he proposed church site, pointed out that because o~ t~e rugged terrain, any future residential develop~nt would ce atop the barranca and above the church. The main concern of the neighborhood is that if this variance is granted, there will be a group of the residents on an island between a commercial zone and a zone which has accepted a variance; then there is a flat piece of land on which they feel the owners will request that it also be given a variance for some other type commercial venture. Nick Pokrajac, 157 Elkins Place, owner of the lot directly west of the proposed site, stated they had entertained the idea of building a home on this vacant lot and living there, but now felt that the prospect of having a church at that lo~ation didn't help the value of their property, and they definitely are opposed to having a church next to their lot. Dr. Kent Nebeker, 150 E. Sycamore, pointed out that there is only one street through this whole area--Second Avenue--and with their growing population in the area, cars already are plentiful; and that if 600 more cars were to travel that street, it would be difficult to get out. Norman Frost, 202 E. Sycamore, directly below the site on the east side of the street, stated he was primarily concerned because this particular variance would cut him off completely from the R-l, putting him between a church and a commercial area. Allen Hubbard, 1261 Oakhaven Lane, pointed out that there are four requirements for a zone variance and that the applicant's case does not meet them; also, that the Church has gone on record that they do not wish to do anything harmful to residents in this area, yet they are pushing their plans in the face of opposition from all the residents but one; that the constant expansion of this congregation and their activities eventually would completely destroy the scenic beeuty, specifically the trees; and that authority in the real estate field feels that allowing a church to be built in a resi- dential area will adversely affect the values of the adjoining property. Page 3 - 10/8/57 '~-_/ George E. Joyce, 250 E. Sycamore, stated that although he has noth::..r;3 aga~,!'i3t ell....,:, \, "f !l'l}' kine'!, he def~,nitcl7 is opposed to havinS one i!1 t:h(, ,'i.,j,,,i;t:y .:.i hir. r(\b.l1ence. ~m-)nd ~~<t 31,~:f:C'~ I 1~1J iL ~":Ct"l!""~~ ~Eik,~d to cla~cr"1",e on the state- mer.'>: d' l1t', ,l,b~ke:c: he ';>;jin~ed ~ut t:lat the street ::0 t.his site is mceadam ~~thout curb. 3~CCpt at one amall area; thet there ia no exit fr:om ll; I;:,er elld 0(; Syra.nore, so that 611 CS1:S going to this area rr:.llit. t:"'~e ~ac.\ "'-1'': tc.€ 3am'3 st!"cet, congeati.'g traffic to a detr1iJ211t f)~ all r~r:!~';tr..r..'i:.i. H. E. ;h~r,-::t..:'C, 1 :iL~ !~. SYC4zu,'t';;.." :.l'St west 111: tha Jlt'(1~oced site, expr.:)fjo,:cl 1';1.'e!"t r:on-.:~rn as t.o t,'i~l~~t eventua~,l:, wOl',ld de\'~Lop in the rema:i.n1:.lf ;J, :.!creA .)f the fJt..:>rl] estate should tl.is va::iance be alla":F-I, Mr. P.s~t stated that the Pla~ing Commission always gives careful consideration to the request of any church because they feel it is a CO'111'1lJr.it)' project and helpful to e."eryone. He ~uggested to the aI-pl:rsr.t theIl., ,,-t.etber or not tbe vcr.iance is granted, !leveral techr,icrll ohjecti~ns would have to be overcome: he stated that he dOl\bted e lot split ever h:s been granted where there was not dedicated street ~rontage, wh~ch this toould not have; that before an intelligent de~i9ion could be made, a tentative map should be filed showing a d~dicated street to the site, as well as a tenta- tive map of development of the complete area. Mr. Carozza displayed Item 7, a ten~3tive tract map of the probable land use of the area which encompasses the 5.14 acres under dis- cussion and areas owned by the Oberly estates to the east, and vacant property north of Sycamore to the base of the hills and a little aboVe. When the application was made for lot split H175, there was the immediate thought that the Commiasion could not possibly consider a lot split as irrecular as the one proposed by thq a;plicant without some .,h:e r:oOlcideration for the remainder C'f toe lsnd. Because this lot split purports, then, to follow ,,+Oar would ~e f~ture streets, certainly the lot split would be Fre.<licated on the use of the land wi::i.out :lue ccoAideration to the ulti'llat'l ua.) and full stuey of t.u' land. Fc.r that reaflon, there has b~~n submitted a te~t~tive ~ap, Txact #19836, for the use of the entire 17-1/2 acreE in w~ich Iie3 this 5-1/2 acres in the area to the east. This map wan submitted relatively late and Committee members were unable to get together late; and because there was not a Staff report on this map, no action was taken. It has been held over and discussed with the Engineers, who made some minor revisions; and there is no recommendation from either Sub-division Committee or Staff on that particular Tract. Chairman declared public hearing be held O'ler until the next meeting, October 22, for the purpose of Staff reports, requesting that the Stsff include in its report the tentative sub-division map, showing this proposed church site dS a lot in the sub- division, Ihld showing dedicated streqlS to it, as well as any recommendations, based on the statem~nt that the Oberly estate is planning to develop the whole area as a sub-division of homes, with the exception of' the 5-acre plot which was to go to the church and that there would be no variance for commercial property in the balance of the area. LOT SPLIT No. 175 Thomson Moved by Pratt, second by Davison, and carried, that this be held over until decision is reached on Tract 19836. 7. TRACT NO. 19836 Motion by Pratt, second by Davison, and carried, that action be withheld until such time as a report is submitted on this sub- division. 4. PUBLIC HEADING (Seimer) This application for yard variance was approved by the Modifica- tion Committee on September 11; however, some residents protested, and it has been returned to Council. A letter was read, protesting not only the placement of the secondary houses with attached garages, but also mis-use of the term R-buiIding-lot; that im- mediately adjoining is a poultry and egg business, approached by a public road and containing a permanent cement house for dis- pensing the products; that this is a permanent structure for Page 4 - 10/8/57 . . . r---", ~- ,J housing and food for young broo.der stock; that this business is less than th~ stj~ul~ted distance from the existing dwelling, and that "0 b~i:ding permit should be issued until all existing non- confor":tn~ ouUdings are removed. t~ contended that this part in US" :Zr't' ."~intel\ai1ce of the buai",,-"B canllot be included in toy calculatio!l of building lot frontage,and that the .Modificatit'n Boar.d has no authority to 'pass upon placem<mt of the proposed auxU:'!lry buHdings Until legality of the ..'bole undertaking has been established. A letter fro:n Mr. and Mrs. se:lmer was read, stating that a drive- way used for business or pleasure cannot be called a public ro!li. The Chairm&l called for those in 'favor of granting the application. No: one spoke. Those who spoke in opposition were: R. 'W. Meldrcm, 1212 S~ Sixth, who stated that putting two $4,000- houses in front of the present c~eap house wouldn't help their property or other property .nearby. Mrs. 'Dexter, who lives across the !ltreet, stated that $4500-houses in that area would be a detriment to surrounding p~operty. This was continued to the, next meeting to give Commissioners a chance to look at the property. MODIFI- CATION Requesteli by Mr. and Mrs. Sheahan" 1200 .5'. !lanta An,ita Avenue. Application was ,received before the new~-~ ruling ~ecameeffeetive; and at' tha.t dme; the lO-ft. minimum was required. Dimensions had been found faulty and Mr. Sheahan had provided a new map showinz intentions of the applicant; the future street being 140 ft. to the rear of the dwelling, less 10 ft. 'ma!i:~s this proposed lot: l3C ft; however, 1istan~a from rear of dwelling to proposed rear yard 1~n9 is 10 :oi:. ~'1'l::e i~ of the 25 ft. we ask. Motion \,;> ,;", ,:,~OI1, second by Pratt, amI ca<:,.~..d, t;,"':trodification of addi':',:io",,>. ",'welling be dimied with-Jut pk.:>C:judice 'JIltil street is wor~:'.::{, n',;:.!:.. LOT SPLIT fl176 Joseph MURcolino, 400 Highland Oaks v~ive, Mo.tion by Pratt, second by Vachon, l'.:!..; ,:a;:~ied, that this be recom- mended to Council for denial. LOT SPLIT #177 Kathry"", h. Lord Motion by Michler, second by Acker, undcarried, that, lot split at 1220 S. Santa Anita be denied without predjudice until such time as extension of Louise Avenue goes through. LOT: SPLIT #178 Alfred H. Allen, 1015 '5. Mayflower. Motion by Acker, second by Michler, and carried, that thia be recommended to Council for approval. 8. , TRACT NO. 24122 Communication from Subdivider of TraCt; alternate lot scheme submitted by Treadwell Engineering Co. Motion by Davison; seco"~ by Pratt, and carried, that revised tentative map of tract be recommended to Council for approval. 9. TRACT NO. 24031 Moti:on by Davison, second by Pratt,. and carried, that Final map of Tract 'fJ2403l, west of Santa Anita Avenue and north or Camino Real, be recommended for approval subject to deed in fee for Lot 13 to control ,extension of street, improvement of street to sub-division standards, and paying of following fees and deposits: 33 street trees @ $ 5 4 steel light poles @ $150 1 street name sign @ $25 '12 lots'recreation @ $25 10. TRACT NO. 19707 Motion by Pratt, second by Davison, and carried, that this Tract be recommended to City Council .for approval, subject to deed in fee and improvement of streets to sub-division standards, and payment of fees and deposits. Page 5 - 10/8/57 , . . - ~' ,- .. ARCADIA UNIFIED SCHOOl. Letter was received fr~m ArcaJia Uni!ied School District regarding available property for school sites. Motion by Davison, second by Pratt, ~n~ carried, that the le~ter be filed. RESOLUTION #265 This i<" a r",que"t of Mr. TuttI-e, ".~ South BaldWin Avenue, for clas~ific~r.ion ~f. an auto repal~ sa~p. ~,tion by Acker, seccnd by FC'r'man, and carried, that reading of the Resolution be waived. Motion by Forman, second by Michler, and carried, that Resolution #265 be ap~roved. TRIANGLE PARKING CommunicatJ.on from Frank L. Dolan was read, requesting recon- sideration of putting this .M-l in C-2 zoning. Mrs. Dolan inquiIed about and "Jas assured there had been a public hearing. Noactton was necessary. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. ; " ;1 j- /"( ./ ~ /7-((,'-'(;t/1_,(;..~ Technician for L. M. Talley, Secretary Page 6 - 10/8/57