Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOCTOBER 27, 1959 . ROLLCALL MINUTES ZONE VARIANCE Clarizio MINUTES PLANNING CONMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 27, 1959 The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session in the Council Chamber of the City Hall at 8:00 o'clock P.M., Octobec 27, 1959 with Chairman Acker presiding. PRESENT: Commissioners Acker, Davison, Michler, Norton, Stout and Wallin ABSENT: Commissioner Forman OTHERS PRESENT: Nicklin, Forbes, Talley and Mrs. Maroshek The minutes of the meeting held October 13, 1959 we,e approved as written and mailed. The commission held a public hearing on the application of Sophia P. Johnson and Orlando Clarizio for a zone variance and/or special use per- mit to allow the erection and operation of a convalescent home contain- ing approximately 57 beds, at 1601 S. Baldwin Avenue. The application requests permission to build and operate this structure for elderly, ambulatory and slightly ambul...tory people; it will be restricted, allowing no narcotic, alcoholic or mental cases. The Secretary read the report which stated the property involved is 1.38.28 feet wide by 630 feet deep, and is located between Camino Real and Ca1- lita Street on the west side of Baldwin Avenue. This lot along with other properties in the area were annexed to the City of Arcadia in December, 1955. On April 3, 1956 the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 954, which placed the subject lot in Zone C-1 under the following conditions: 1. That 20 feet be dedicated for the widening of Baldwin Avenue. 2. That an alley be dedicated south from Camino Real through the property. 3. That sufficient property be dedicated to widen Call ita Street to.a 60 foot right of way. 4. That property be dedicated to provide street access from Call ita Street into the rear of the deep lots that front on Baldwin Avenue. 5. That the 3 parcels of land facing Camino Real be com- bined and developed as parcels facing Baldwin Avenue. The ordinance also specifies that unless with the area shall remain in Zone R-l. not been satisfied. all the conditions are complied To this date the conditions have Because this area has not developed as contemplated by Ordinance No. 954, the commission may wish to consider these parcels along with the other parcels that will be reclassified in the overall rezoning of the territory in Annexation No. 17-A. The plans submitted with the application show two separate off street parking areas on the convalescent home property. One parking arrange- ment is situated in the front setback area and has access from Bald- win Avenue. The other layout is located at the rear of the lot, and has access via a 25 foot wide dead end residential street. The com- bined off street parking facilities will accomodate approximately 36 cars. The commission should consider the fact that tlie applicant proposes a future wing addition to the convalescent home as indicated on the plot plan. Sandwiched between the proposed convalescent home at 1601 S. Baldwin Avenue and the several residential lots that front along Callita Street is a very long, narrow parcel of land located at 1611 S. Bald- win Avenue. We would like to point out that the granting of the var- iance would have a very definite effect on the future use of this 66.35' x 630 I strip of land. At present there is an old single fam- ily dwelling on the lot. The Secretary read a communication from Mrs. J. M. Moriarty, 1616 S. Baldwin Avenue, Which stated briefly that she is opposed to this request, and felt permitting the construction of this home would hinder her attempts to sell her home, Which she plans to do in the near future. Another communication was read, signed by John W. &. Carolyn Bernard, Harry Robinson, La Mar Robinson, Herbert and Fannie Wroten, which out- lined the history of this parcel of land, and in essence presented no objection to the rezoning if the health and well being of adjoining property owners is not endangered; but if such variance breaches in any way Ordinance No. 954 the signers would object to such reclassi- fication on the' grounds that it would be discriminatory toward the adjoining property owners and would cause them to suffer considerable loss on the value of their property. Two other communications received at the start of the meeting were also read by the Secretary, one signed by Mrs. Charles Herndon, 725 W. Camino Rea'l, and another signed by Nrs. Margaret C. '~lcl<ee, 721 W. Camino Real, Arcadia. Both communications registered opposition to this zone variance. The Chairman announced the time and place for public hearing, and requested those present in favor to come forward and 011: line their position. Mr. Dexter Jones, Attorney for the applicants, stated the rooms in the proposed structure would consist of one or two bedroom vacUities; the front setback from the property line would be 128 feet; the building is specifically designed as a nursing and convalescent home, and the preliminary plans have been approved by the California State Depart- mentof Health.. He proposed a minor change to the plans as presented, which would involve construction of a driveway ~own the north side of the pro- perty connecting with the proposed alley providing access from Camino Real to Baldwin Avenue. Page 1'\-10 October 27, 1959 '-_/ The convalescent home can be described as a long term care facility. The California State Department of Public Health states that deter- mination of need 'shall be estimated upon the basis of 3 beds per 1000 population to serve long term illness. The applicant displayed an architectural rendering of the proposed building, giving an idea of the general design and materials to be used. Mr. Michler wanted to know if this would include elderly people, as well as convalescent patients. Mr.. Jones and Mr. Clarizio said this would include such people. Mr, Norton asked if the contemplated operators of this home have had experience with this type of faCility. ~. Jones answered that there would be a number of doctors interested in the proposed project, and if appr'oval is granted for the special use, then they would seek a top administrator.. The Chairman asked about the location of an incinerator on the property, which is required by state law. Mr. Jones pointed out the proposed location on the plan at rear of the buildings and explained that it would be one of the new electric type, non-smoke producing and would be very costly. The ChairmaI! requested that those opposed come forward and state their views. Mr. Walter Routery., 706 W. Callita Street, stated that all of the homes on his street were worth about $25,000.00. Four of the homes on the north side of the street are improved with swimming pools, close to the. proposed site, and none of the homes are of the older type the application refers to. He objected to the prospect of having ambulances using Callita Street as access to the rear of the proposed home. He wished to know if the petitioner, who is a builder, is building to operate or to resell. He felt that this would be a good place to stop commercial from dev- eloping down Baldwin . Mr. Frank.T. Kelly, 725 W. Callita Street, was concerned with the effect granting this change would have on the 66 foot strip to the south. He was also interested in who is going to be the operator of the'convales- cent home. He was opposed to the granting of this request. Ella Hilfert, 721 W. Call ita stated she was opposed very strongly to such a structure so close to her home., because of the heavy traffic it might cause and the devaluation to her property. Mrs. Herbert Vogel, 1626 S. Baldwin Avenue, is located right across the street from the prl,lposed home. She is strongly opposed to granting this change. She believed it would be a definite detriment to her pro- perty; her tenants have already told her they will move if the struc- ture is allowed. ~~. Harry Roach, 1609 S. Baldwin, is the owner of the long strip to the south of the property in question. He believed that allowing a Page Three October 27, 1959 convalescent home on this property would be the end of development on Baldwin Avenue as it has progressed at the present time, regard- less of multiple dwelling or commercial. Mr. Carl Pennino, 1510 Cambury, stated he lives to the rear of this property, and would be subject to the incinerator proposed to be at the rear of the convalescent home. He was opposed to the granting of the request. Mr. Tom McLaughlin, 505 S. First Avenue, Real Estate Broker, stated he had sold many of the homes in the area, and knew some of the people personally, he wondered if this proposed home would not be a serious detriment to the value of the surrounding area. The resident at. 724 Call ita Street registered her protest to the grant- ing of this request. Mr. Mark Rivers, 1445 S. Baldwin Avenue, operator of a store for over 10 years, wished to go on record as being opposed to the granting of this zone variance. He did not believe it is in the interest of good planning or the neighborhood surrounding. Mr. Paul Porter, 702 W. Camino Real, opposed the request because the alley would go right by his bedroom window. There are several rentals, and this alley would cause annoyance to the tenants. Mr. Herbert Wroten, 714 W. Camino Real, opposed the request for zone variance, because. the proposed alley would come off of his property. Mrs. Moriarty, 1616 S. Baldwin, stated she plans to sell her home in the near future, and felt granting of this request would hinder her chances of selling it. Bill Williams, Realtor, 906 S. Baldwin, stated if they relisted the properties abutting this proposed home, they would have to list for $3,000.00 to $10,000.00 less should this zone variance be allowed, and from that standpoint would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Mr. Michler declared he would like to go out and review the site and study the situation a little more before making a decision. There was a question in his mind whether this is the location for such a project; he expressed particular concern about the fate of the 66 foot strip to the south of the parcel in question, and he wondered if the owner of this strip would be willing to sell to Mr. Clarizio for any planned expansion. Mr. Stout stated he had viewed this area with this particular project in mind, and although he did not question the need for rest homes, nor the adequacy of the plan presented at the commission tonight, he felt this is not the proper location for these reasons. It provides the commission with a great deal of rezoning problems, as well as access problems. He added that the rezoning of the property in Annexation l7-A near this section will be under consideration soon, and this whole area could be reconsidered at that time. Also, he felt that the commission should keep in mind the widening of Baldwin Avenue to a 100 foot street in relation to the development of the future freeway, and for the additional use of the race track traffic, along with the contemplated commercial use, all of which were not compatible to the location of a rest home. Page Four October 27, 1959 lle admitted that the strip of property to the south presents a pro- blem. He didn't compare this area with the site on Huntington Drive on which a convalescent home was permitted, because the sur- rounding area is R-3, and does not have business around it. He also thought the location was poor for the patrons who might occupy the home, on account of the business and traffic foreseen for that area. He also took into account the amount of protests of people living on adj~cent properties. }~. Norton concurred with Mr. Stout's statements, and added in view of the contemplated rezoning of that portion of Annexation 17-A immediately adjacent to this area, as well as the rezoning currently being con- sidered in the West Arcadia area, to allow this change would be pre- mature. Mr. Acker stated that sufficient evidence through protest was pre- sented tonight that this is not the right location for this home; he did not question the need for such homes in a community, but the pro- perty owners have a right to expect the Planning Commission to carry out their wishes. Moved by Mr. Davison, seconded by Mr. Wallin to recommend the denial of this request for zone variance and/or special use permit. }~. Michler wished to go on record, before casting a no vote, that his vote should not be misconstrued to be an affirmative vote for this variance request, but only that he would have like to discuss the question further with the staff after further investigation; consequently the no vote. ROLL CALL AYES: Acker, Davison, Norton, Stout and Wallin NOES: Michler ABSENT: Commissioner Forman ZONING Annexation No. 17-A The commission considered a decision on the proposal to establish zoning on that portion of the property contained in Annexation 17-A, lying south of the south line of' Lemon Avenue as contemplated by Resolution No. 345. The Secretary read a petition, containing signatures of 44 residents of E. Estrella Street, Val Street and the northern side of Longden Avenue, and in essence requested that all properties on the repres- ented properties remain R-l. The Secretary read the Zoning Committee report which stated the com- mittee has reviewed the maps of' the subject area, showing the actual use o~ each lot and the previous County zoning which applied and its relation to property on the east side of Baldwin Avenue, and has con- sidered the requests of the property owners. It is suggested that the commission recommend the following zoning be adop ted: 1. From Live Oak Avenue to the south li.ne of Schaub I s Market the property was Zoned R-3. There are 15 lots of which 7, or approximately 50%, are developed with multiple family houses. This should be placed in Zone R-3. Page Five October 27, 1959 . . ~ONE CHANGE Seidner 2. The southwes t corner of Las Tunas Dt'ive and Bald- win Avenue is occupied by Schaub's Market and a service station. n1e property was zoned C-3 and C-2 with Zone P on the southerly portion. The south 100 feet of the west 190 feet of the site is adjacent to County R-l 5000 zoning, and should be Zoned PR-3. The balance of the site should be zoned C-3. 3. The northwest corner of Las Tunas Drive and Baldwin Avenue is occupied by a swim school and a service station. It was zoned C-2 with Zone P on the northerly 60 feet. The north 60 feet of the site should be Zoned PR-3, and the balance C-2. 4. From the commercial corner at Las Tunas Drive to Garibaldi Avenue there are 15 residential lots, including one each on Woodruff Avenue and Gari- baldi Avenue. Of these 15, 8 are now used for more than one family. The previous zoning was R-3 and the new zoning should be a-3. There is a church at the southwest corner of Wood- ruff Avenue and Baldwin Avenue. It is our under- standing that this property is being de-annexed. If this does not occur this property should also be zoned a-3 to conform with the area. 5. The balance of the annexed area from Garibaldi Avenue to Lemon Avenue, including the various east and west streets, was all in Zone a-I 5000. It is all used for a single family dwellings with the exception of two non-conforming uses; a small market on Baldwin Avenue and a hay storage barn on the south side of Estrella Avenue. }~ny of the larger lots have more than one single dwelling, but they are not, to any great extent, different from some of the older a-I zoning under the City Ordinance. All of this area 'should be zoned a-I. Mr. Michler stated he concurred in the recommendations contained in the Zoning Committee report. Moved by Mr. Michler, seconded by Mr. Stout to recommend the zoning for that portion of Annexation No. 17-A as outlined in the Zoning Committee report. aOLL CALL AYES: Acker, Davison, Michler, Norton, Stout and Wallin NOES: None ABSENT: Mr. Fo.rman The commission considered a decision on the request of Saul G. Seidner for a change of zone from Zone a-I to Zones C-2 and D on property at the northeast corner of Baldwin Avenue and Workman Avenue. The.Secretary read the report of the Zoning Committee which stated in view of the zone change recently granted by the City Council on the property adjacent to tlie north of this property, the connnittee suggests that the commission reconnnend the granting of the request Page Six October 27, 1959 . . . for Zones C-2 and D. The following items should be covered in the Zone D regulations: 1. Every exterior sign shall pertain only to a use conducted within the building. 2. All flood Ughting shall be directed away from adjoining properties. 3. The exterior walls of all buildings ,other than natural field materials ,shall be of pastel coiors. All exterior walls shall be of masonry or concrete construction and all cons.truction shall comply with the requirements for buildings and occupancies in Fire Zone 1. 4. No signs on the property hereinbefore described shall exceed 50 feet in height above the ground nor contain any bUnking lights or moving parts. 5. Towers, chimneys, spires, gables, roof structures, flag poles, radio or television masts shall not exceed a height of twenty feet above the roof" of the main portion of the building. 6. All parking areas shall be improved and walled as required by Section 15 of the Zoning Ordinance. 7. The westerly 25 feet, measured at right angles to the westerly lot line of Lot 43, Tract No. 6641, as shown on map recorded in Book 126, page 67 of Maps, records of Los Angeles County, shall be dedicated to the City of Arcadta for street purposes for the widening of Baldwin Avenue, and concurrent with the construction of curbs, gutters and pavement therein by the city, side- walks at least five feet in width shall be constructed at owner's expense within the Baldwin Avenue parkway the full length of subject property. 8. The Planning Commission or City Council may modify any of the. foregoing conditions if such modification will not adversely effect property or improvements in the vicinity and if such modification will equally accom- plish substantially the same results as will the adher- ence to the foregoing conditions. Mr. Norton stated, here again, C-2 .is.' being further extended on Bald- win Avenue, which is possibly an area that should have some kind of a buffer zone. He added that some place the Une will have to be drawn. Mr. Davison concurred, and said that the commission is very concerned with the need of a buffer zone in these situations. However, he did not believe that this is the point to draw the line. In view of the results of the previous request for changes at this location, he thinks it would be unfair to the applicant to disallow it. Mr. Michler stated he believed not to go along with this request would constitute discrimination. Moved by Mr. Michler, seconded by Mr. Wallin to recommend approval of Page Seven October 27, 1959 . . this request for zone change. ROLLCALL AYES: Acker, Davison, Michler, Stout and Wallin NOES: Mr. Norton ABSENT: Mr. Forman PARKING REQUIREMENTS The commission considered a decision on the proposal to amend the zoning ordinance as it pertains to underground automobile parking as contemplated by Resolution No. 342. The Secretary read a letter addressed to the City Council, signed by Mr. Jack Rennick, 907 W. Huntington Drive, in which he stated brief- ly he greatly objected to the "up-grading" of R-3 property. The letter contained suggestions such as adding two new zones or R-3A and R-3B, which would not discourage outside capital. It continued that street parking can be controlled by a two hour parking limit. The Secretary then read the Zoning Commit'tee's report which stated the following: At the public hearing there was considerable support for allowing underground parking, provided it was entirely underground, so that additional lot area could be devoted to larger apartment units and more and larger patio areas. The committee has no objection to this kind of use. It is suggested that underground parking not be considered a story provided it is at sufficient depth so that the floor level of the first floor of the building is not more than two feet above the top of the curb in the street adjacent to the building. ConSideration should be given to limiting the number of apartment units allowed on a lot, so that the area gained by providing under- ground parking will not be used only to provide more units. The Secretary explained that underground parking is now permissible if one-half or more is underground, and that the Zoning Committee were suggesting that underground parking be permissible if the floor level of the first floor of the apartment is not more than two feet above the curb level of the street. This would make the overall height of the building conform with other two-story buildings without under- ground parking. Discussion followed. The Secretary stated that at the hearing dif- ferent builders and developers felt we should have a revision of the ordinance which states that in Zone R-3 on every 750 square feet of lot area an apartment unit may be built; the builders are not getting that many 'apartments after required yards and parking is placed on the surface of the property. It was suggested at the hearing that a figure of 1500 s~uare feet per dwelling unit become effective to assure the extra footage, after eliminating surface parking, going to improvement of the units, such as patios, etc., instead of allowing additional units. Mr. Davison stated he thought the figure of .1500 square feet was a little low; he thought it more practical to talk in figures of 1750 to 1800 square feet of land area per dwelling unit. Page Eight October 27, 1959 . . , . The Secretary stated that at the previous hearing on R-3 amend- !llents, there was considerable discussIon on increasing the parking ~pace from 8 feet to 10 feet, also to increasing the parking from 1-1/4 per unit to 1-1/2 per unit; on some of the smaller R-3 lots only 50 feet wide, the suggestion had been made to allow tandem park- ing, one car behind the other, ,,men there is entrance from an alley. The Secretary read a rough draft report at this point, which may be directed to the City Council, recommending that the commission's previous recommendation on amending requirements for Zone R-3 be supplemented to incorporate regulations on lot area per family and parking regulations. Mr. Nicklin stated he would like to go into the technical aspects of this subject. He referred to underground parking which the Planning Commission has under consideration, which is related in subject matter to the commission's prior recommendations concerning Zone R-3. ~len the commission has closed a hearing, adopted a resolution and forwarded it to the City Council, technically, the commission has no power to alter the recommendation as such, unless the Council >;ereto refer it back to the Planning Commission. He believed it would be perfectly proper to embody in the resolution on underground parking further statements that if these recommenda- tions were to be adopted by the council, then the commission's prior recommendation should be modified in order to integrate with the new recommendation ,ohich was subsequent to the former one. ltwas the concensus of opinion that the figure to be considered for square footage of land area would be 1800 square feet. Mr. t-licklin stated it was proper to make a motion instructing the City Attorney, in collaboration with the Planning Secretary, to prepare a resolution embodying the concensus of opinion as expressed On the subject matter. Moved by Mr. Stout, seconded by Mr. Wallin and carried to instruct the City Attorney, in collaboration with the Planning Secretary, to prepare a resolution embodying the concensus of opinion as expressed on the subject matter. TRACT NO. 23832 Monrovia The Secretary introduced a subdivision forwarded by the City of Monrovia, lying on the east side of Fifth Avenue, at the extension of California Street. The Street fs 50 I wide, the lots are 73.7 x 81.5. It is a cuI de ~ac street, and the only access will be from Fifth Avenue, which is entirely within the City of Monrovia. The Secretary was instructed to forward a letter to the City of Monrovia, thanking them for keeping us informed, and stating that this subdivision does not meet our requirements. LOT SIZES Mr. Stout stated that his committee has given the Secretary sufficient information to allow him to draw up a suggested amendment concerning lot sizes, which should be available at the next regular meeting. The Secretary stated that Mr. Forbes and he had discussed the question of lot sizes, and wondered if it wouldn I t be well to consider estab- lishing a minimum depth. Page Nine October 27, 1959 . -. ZONE R-3 Restri~ted ZONE R-3 Amendments ZONE C-3 West Arcadia ADJOURN They suggested some definite figures as follows: 1. In zone R-O north of Huntington Drive a minimum width of 100 feet; minimum depth of 150 feet, and a minimum area of 20,000 square feet. 2. In Zone R-O south of Huntington Drive a minimum width of 100 feet, minimum depth of 125 feet, and a minimum area of 15,000 square feet. 3. In Zone R-l a minimum width of 75 feet; a minimum depth of 100 feet, and a minimum area of 9000 square feet. It was agreed that this idea had possibilities, and should be incorporated in the recommendation. The City Attorney was requested to prepare the necessary recommendation. }~. Michler stated in regard to the R-3 restricted recommendations that the main bone of contention in the report was Item No. 13, which related t() adherence to architectural standards, particularly the word "contemporar.y". The Secretary referred to the Pasadena Ordinance, Section 13, Special Conditions, "The Planning Commission "may" require such walls, fences, paved areas, planting areas, setbacks and other conditions as it may deem necessary for the protection of adjacent property, or in the interest of the public welfare." It was the concensus of opinion to change the word "may" to "shall". The City Attorney was requested to prepare a resolution to set the matter for hearing. Mr. Marks, Arcadia Monrovia Realty, came forward to find out if it would be possible to speak when some of these proposed changes effect- ing R-3 c()me up again before the Planning Commission. The City Attor- ney suggested it would certainly be proper for the chair to hear from the audience prior to the formal adoption of the resolution. Discussion ensued regarding the possible tax increase the effect of rezoning West Arcadia would have on the residents. The City Attorney explained that the real tax increase begins to come after there is development in the area. As soon as actual value is realized from the development of surrounding property, sooner or later the County Assessor is going to pick that up. There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission the meeting adjourned at 11:00 P.M. f? 'Nv. L. M. TALLEY Planning Secretary Page Ten October 27, 1959