HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPRIL 26, 1960
ROLL CALI..
ZONE VARlANCE
Pelt proc:ess
(~
/-',
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 26, 1960
The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session
in the Council Chamber of the City Hall at 8: 00 0 'clock P.M.., April
26, 1960. In the' absence of the regular Chairman, Mr. Acker, the
Vice-chairman, Mr. George Forman presided.
PRESENT: Commissioners Forman, Golisch, Michler and Nor,ton
ABSENT:
Commissioners Acker', Davison and Stout
OTHERS
PRESENT:
City Councilman Jess Balser: Assistant City Engineer Frank
F. Forbes: Planning Secretary L.M. Talley
The commission held a public hearing on the application of Rico Land
and Investment for a zone variance to allow pelt processing at 126-
128 Wheeler Avenue.
The applicant requests permission to store and dress nutria skins on
the premises; the building has been used for clothing manufacture
for the past 12 years. The building will be remo.delled with no struc-
tural changes. Pelts would be .shipped from varioUs parts of the
country, and they would be stored and processed at the Wheeler Ave-
nue address. ~
There wilbe no manufacturing done on' the premises. Because of lack
of foot traffic and display centers this property although zoned
C-2, does:rot lend itself to retail use.+
The Planning Secretary read the staff report which stated this is
the application of Rico Land and Investment, Incorporated for a
zone variance to allow the property to be used for the dress'ing
and storage of Nutria skins.
The lot is 50 feet by 160 feet, containing 8000 square feet area,
and abuts an alley at the rear. It is presently' ~roved with a
masonry building, which'is two stories in front and one story in
the rear. The building was erected in 1945 and'added to in 1950
before parking for commercial buildings was required. It has
loading space at the rear but practically no parking space.
The property is in Zone C-2, although for the past few years it has
been used for clothing manufacture.
Next door east of this property is a public garage, and a public
parking lot east of the garage. To the west is the post office
bui1dipg, the post office parking lot, and a public parking lot.
Across the street on the north side of Wheeler Street there is a
wood working shop. Across the alley to the south are the commer-
cial businesses facing Huntington Drive.
Page One
April 26, 1960
._~/.
The Planning Secretary then read the following communications:
Mr. Henry Bertolotti, 512 ~gelita Drive, Corona Del Mar, California,
The letter protested strongly the granting of this variance on the
grounds that. the storing and dressing of nutria skins, which actually
are big rats, would create an undesirable odor. Mr. Bertolotti is a
joint owner of the Post Office Building located at 122-124 Wheeler
Avenue, Arcadia.
C. M. Millwork Company, 115 Wheeler Avenue, submitted a letter pro-
testing the granting of the vatiance, considering it a potential
nuisance to the area, mainly from offensive odors, which might be
obnoxious to patrons and employees of the lumber company. .
A cOlIllllUnication from Hilliam and Jane So ckman , 153 Alta Stree't, pro-
tested permitting the variance because such a business would not .tend
to be beneficial to the progress of the downtown shopping area, which
desperately needs new retail businesses.
The Arcadia Garden Center, 145 E. Huntington ~rive, protested that
the establishment of this of business at this location would be detri-
mental to the business district. the signer, Mr. Pike felt that it
belonged in a manufacturing zone.
There belng no further communications, the Chairman announced the
time and place for public hearing and asked for those who wished to
speak in favor of this variance to come forward and give their names.
Mr. R. B. Rice, the applicant, s,tated there will be no odor inside or
outside of the building, and there will be no noise inside or out-
side of the building. He added that this operation wili create no
noise or odor where the 'lumber company across the street causes odor
from sawed wood and would produce noise as well.
Mr. Rice stated that this particular building is not located in a
retail section, because the foot traffic past the building does not
exceed more than 5 pe'ople a day. The skins are cured before they
receive them by mail; he went on to explain in more detail the
actual processing which would be in operation at the site.
Mr. Rice continued stating there would be 12 girls in the office.
They might expect some wholesale trade,' but most of their wholesale
trade is handled at their downtown Los Angeles location; all in all
he might expect. about 15 people each day. ~e rear of this building
would not be closer than 85 feet to the building Un e of the next
building to the rear.
Mr. Bob Toussant, stated he is the owner of a hardware store near
the location of this building, and he could not see how the opera-
tion of such a business could damage his business in any way. There
is.no foot traffic on that street now.
Mrs. Rice, wife of the applicant, stated that most of the 12 girls
employed in the office would patronize the stores and businesses in
the immediate area. She also displayed and passed for commission
perusal a nutria fur muff, the finished product, stating that this
is the "rat" referred to in one of the letters of protest. She
reemphasized that there is no offenave odor of any kind in the stor-
age of these pelts.
Mr. 'tom' Sullivan, the owner of property at 26, 28 and 30 N. First
Avenue, wished to say that 'one of the letters of protest was from
Page Two
April 26, 1960
ZONE VARIANCE
Bowling Alley
Mr. Sockman, who has opposed 'many things that others have felt
were good for the downtown area. He would strongly urge that the
commission grant this variance and help the downtown area progress.
Mr. Hobson, owner of property' near the area in question, wished to
second Tom Sullivan's remarks, and go on record,as favoring this
zone variance.
The Chairman stated that 'in view of the fact the meeting is short
three commissioners, 'he wouid prefer to delay this decisicn for the
next regular meeting.
Mr. Norton questioned the parking facilities which would be pro-
vided for the employees.
The Planning Secretary explained that this building was completed
before there was any parking'requir~d. Any new building in that
area today still must provide its own parking, one space for each
500 square feet of building area, even though it has paid 'its share
of the assessment in the parking district.
Mr. Tom Sullivan stated that these parking requirements do not
affect this building, because it is non-conforming. He did not'be-
lieve this was the matter before the Planning Commission at this
time because this is not new construction.
The Chair.man announced that this public hearing would be continued
until May 10, 1960, for a report from the Zoning Committee.
The commission held a public hearing on the application of John W.
Huhter and G. M. Shumaker for a zone variance to allow a bowling
alley at 1020-1030 S. Baldwin Avenue.
The Planning Secretary displayed and explained to the commission
the location and plot plan of the proposed bowling alley which pro-
vided for 32 lanes. Part of the proposed structure projects over
into the rear portion of the property which is Zone PR-3; this is
the reason for the request for a variance, to allow the building in
the PR-3 portion.
The Planning Secretary read from the application which stated the
applicant purchased the property in December, 1959..
The Planning Secretary read the staff report which stated this is
the application of John W. Hunter and G. M. Shumaker for a zone
variance to permit the erection of a 32 lane bowling alley encroach-
ing into Zone PR-3.
When this .portion of Baldwin Avenue was commercially zoned a depth
of 150 feet was established. In recent years15 feet was dedicated
for widening Baldwin Avenue, leaving 135 feet in Zone C-2 and the
rear of the lot in Zone PR-3.
The average depth of this site is 325.43 feet. It has. a width of
212.40 feet and an area of 69,122 square feet.
Plans are being prepared for the opening of Arcadia Avenue and
Ordinance No. 1049 prohibits any building on the south 30 feet of
the subject property. The proposed plot plan shows this area to
be left free of buildings.
The plot plan submitted shows a one-story building with an area of
Page Three
April 26, 1960
/--,
approximately 34,000 square feet. About one third of the building
is in the PR-3 Zone,
The area of this building will require a minimum of 68 parking spaces.
The plot plan shows 85 spaces, of which 22 are within the area pro-
posed for future Arcadia Avenue.
The Planning Secretary read communications in opposition to the zone
variance as follows:
Mr! L. F. Oxender, 720 Fairview Avenue, protested because rather than
a bowling aHey he fel.t the improvement of C-2 property with retail
stores would be more advantageous .to the' area. The lettercoritinued
that although bowling alleys have their place in the community
t~ey should be located further away from residential property be-
cause of their late hour noise.
Edward A. Heiss, 2164 Canyon Road, owner of property at 652 Fairview
Avenue, protested bec3use of the noise and added traffic which would
tend to dr.ive out present tenants and keep others from coming in; all
this could result in devaluation of adjacent property.
A petition signed by 20 people representing 12 properties was pre-
sented in protest to the granting of the variance for the reasons
that this development would not be in the best interests of the over-
all development of the R-3 zone, particularly in view of the recently
enacted R-3requirements to upgrade the apartment development; because
of the excessive noise resulting from the increased traffic, and
because it would be contrary to the concept of the City of Arcadia
being a city of fine homes.
Rancho Santa Anita Incorporated submitted a letter to the commis-
sion which stated that it is their intention to construct a bowling
alley'on 4-1/2 acres lying just north of their present El Rancho
Shopping Center. It concluded by requesting that the commission
defer a decision until they have had an opportunity to study the
plans of the proposed Baldwin Avenue project, particularly in regard
to the parking facilities in this area.
Mr. Granville Shumaker, the applicant and owner of property at 650
W. Duarte Road, stated that he has entered in~o a contract. with
A.M.F., manufacturers of bowling equipment, and have entered into
a partnership agreement with a man by the name of Duke Snider, well
known member of the Los Angeles Dodgers' team. Mr. Snider's name
will help advertise Arcadia, a community of which we are all proud.
Mr. Shumaker added that they are faced with the necessity of speedy
action on this matter, because they have already booked for winter
leagues, and they are anxious to complete the building in time for
this activity. With the granting of the variance the architect
would have the needed latitude to give the best possible design.
He presented to the Planning Secretary the bowling news which des-
cribed the plans to build a bowling alley with Duke Snider as one
of the partners. A.M.F. has picked this location as the best possible
for such development; the operators would welcome all the apartment
houses possible, since they are the greatest source of bowling
enthusiasts.
Mr. Jacobson, one of the architects engaged to design the proposed
bowling alley, stated that there is not a restriction in zoning which
would prevent this type of improvement from being realized. He
stated that the land is diagonally adjacent to the commercial develop-
ment on Duarte Road, owned by the applicant, and therefore there is
no difficulty in providing parking facilities for such an improve-
ment. In his experience he has never found that such a business is
Page Four
April 26, 1960
J
noisy or detrimental to a residential area; the large majority of
bowlers come from apartment developments.
The Architect, Mr. Jacobson, then displayed a preliminary' floor plan
and plot plan of the proposed improvement to the commission. The
building would contain 32 lanes with a coffee shop and lounge and
a nursery room ~orchildren who would be supervised While their
parents are bowling.
The Chairman asked for those opposed to the granting of the variance
to come forward.
Mr. Lawrence Bourquin, 645 Fairview Avenue, stated that he recently
purchased this property from the City of Arcadia with the intention
of building a very modern apartment house which would meet all the
stringent requirements recently adopted 'in the R-3 zone. He won-
dered if a bowling alley should be allowed so close to, his R-3 pro-
perty; whether it would be advisable for him to proceed with plans
to build an apartment house. He added that he'is one of the signers
of the petition read by the Planning Secretary, and all of the signers
are people who live within the 300 foot radius of the proposed bowl-
ing alley.
Mr. Bourquin felt that the general plan of R-3 development in the
area was a comprehensive plan, and the bowling alley Would be an
upsetting factor in this consideration. The type of C-2 which should
go in should not be one that is incompatible with the surrounding
R-3 area.
A bowling alley in order to be successful should have certain factors
present to operate (1) A well known name such as Duke Snider (2) A
restaurant (3) a cocktail lounge and bar and (4) to remain in operation
for 24 hours a day. He strong~y urged the commission to recommend
the denial of this zone variance request.
Mr. Heiss, owner of property at 652 Fairview Avenue, stated that. the
occupants of the R-3 development Wiluld not be given to strenuous
exercise; the bowling alley would have to depend largely on patron-
age from people beyond the immediate vicinity. The resulting noise
at night, would not be conducive to a good R-3 development.
Mr. D. H. Johnson, 250 W. Camino Real, stated that this same appli-
cant opened a parking lot in violation of the zoning ordinance, and
as punishment the City Council re~arded him by granting him a variance.
He felt that the land is. inadequate for the proposed bowling alley;
he proposes to use parking area originally designated for the Gateway
Shopping Center
Mr. Johnson added that unless this bowling alley is different than the
average it will also house a pool room and a cocktail bar; this type
of activity is offensive to many people in Arcadia, because it is con-
sidered a poor environment to the young citizens of Arcadia. The
granting of this variance would indicate that the planning of this
city lies in the hands of one developer, not in the hands of the
Planning Commission and the City Council. The only way this variance
should 'be granted would be if a restriction were to be signed by
the owner wherein hard liquor or the operation of pool tables or
billiards should not be installed.
Mr. Dick Callaway, 804 Fallen Leaf Road, stated he was neither for
nor against the granting of this variance; he asked about the dimen-
sions of the C-2 area. The Planning Secretary answered that there
is a 135 foot depth from Baldwin Avenue which is zoned C-2.
Mr. Callaway stated that the actual building area of 135 feet would
Page Five
April 26, 1960
result in a rather narrow cockta'il lounge and a long skinny rest-
aurant; he did not believe there is room for a bowling alley with
all its accompanying facilities.
Mr. Granville Shumaker addressed the commission again stating he
would like to answer some of the statements which had been made.
There is no particular reason why he cannot build a four story
building with a cocktail lounge and a restaurant over the alleys.
Commissioner Norton asked Mr. Shumaker about his earlier statement
regarding the A.M.F. survey showing that this is the most desirable
location for such a development.
Mr. Shumaker answered that he didn't seek the business venture, that
the A.M.F. came to him because he owned the property; they asked if
he would be interested in building a bowling alley on this site.
Commissioner Michler stated that he was reminded of one other bowl-
ing alley matter in the city to which there was considerable opposi-
tion. To his knowledge there has not been any derogatory reaction
since its completion; as a matter of fact, he felt that the area
had been improved fro.m the addition of this particular improvement.
The Planning Commission has. nothing . whatsoever to do with the cock-
tail lounge aspect of this proposed structure; this is a matter for
the State Board of Equalization, as he understood it. He had been
under the impression that a number of 'church groups use this alley.,
~ere are a great many fine people in the City of Arcadia who
enjoy the'sport of bowling a great deal; in fact, the familiee take
their children to participate'. He felt the matter should go back
for further study to the Zoning Committee and staff.
Commissioner Golisch asked about how the extension of Arcadia Avenue
would affect the proposed parking situation. This would result in
taking. away 22 perking spaces as shown, which would not provide
adequate parking. for the facility.
Commissioner Forman stated that on this matter also the commission
is somewhat handicapped by the absence of three commissioners, and
he felt this matter should be reviewed in a little more detail, and
a report made by the Zoning Committee and Planning Staff. He
declared the matter held until the next regular commission meeting
of May 10, 1960.
ZOO ING
ORD !NANCE
AMENDMENT
The commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendment of
Sections 15 and 16 of the Zoning Ordinance concerning structural
alterations of non-conforming buildings.
The Planning Secretary explained to the commission and others pre-
sent that there are in the downtown area buildings which were con-
struc~ed before the zoning ordinance required any parking what-
ever. Some of those buildings have some parking and others have
none; a few do conform with the present ordinance. The Zoning
Ordinance also states any building that does not conform to all the
requirements of the zone in which it is located shall be consid-
ered non-conforming, and may not be structurally altered, added to,
etco, etc.
The matter has been discussed with the City Manager and the City
Council. The City Council appointed a committee to study the matter
composed of Councilman Balser, Planning Commissioner Michler and
Planning Commissioner Norton and Mr. Mel Pratt from the Vehicle
Parking District, along with members of the staff. This committee
went into this matter quite thoroughly, and have .come up with some
recommendations as a starting point.
Page Six
April 26, 1960
ZONE VARIANCE
Car Storage
The Planning Secretary read from a report to the City Council from
the committee which investigated this problem.
The Chairman announced the time and place for public hearing.
Mr. Mel Pratt, 21 E. Huntington Drive, stated tha~ at one time
the property behind Huntington Drive was a large weed' patch until
the first Vehicle Parking District in Arcadia was established.
He felt that it is rather foolish to hold back a building program
which could benefit both the landlonls and business peoplep as well
as the city. He atated that if a business doesn't have a back'door
it is handicapped, because people don't want to walk any further
than they must.
It is the desire of some of the tenants to move the building out far
enough so that as much benefit as possible could be realized from
making the improveiDent.
Commissioner Norton explained and described a drawing which depict-
ed the possible proposed improvement of the rear of the commercial-
buildings on Huntington Drive; rather than individual-store develop-
ment, it is possible to realize continuity of deSign-of the struc-
tures. He felt this is one of the most progressive programs that
has ever come before the commission to help this area.
Mr. Pratt stated that the only statement in the report read by the
Planni~g Secretary to which he might take exception is the recommend-
ed 7-1/2 foot limit the building could be extended; he understood
that it was not much more expensive to bring the building. out 25
feet which would be more advantageous to the property owner to add
building area for display, etc. A. landlord would be much more
likely to invest additional capital in the improvement of his
property if he felt that the maximum could be realized from his
investment.
Mr. Pratt went on to say in answer to queries that in discussing. the
situation with other landlords',in the area there seemed to be en-
thusiasm for the possibility of making these improvements, and he
felt that the continuity of design Commissioner Norton referred to
could be worked out satisfactorily.
Mr. Tom Sullivan, 28 N. First Avenue, agreed with Mr. Pratt that
limiting the moving of buildings out 7-1/2 feet to the rear when
for the same amount of investment an owner could realize 25 feet
was impractical. In today's business world a merchant either gets
bigger or he cannot survive; insofar as the parking problem is con-
cerned the merchants will find the parking to take care of its cus-
tomers if business should cause them to be overflowing.
After considerable discussion the Chairman declared that this
matter WOuld be continued until the Planning Commission meeting of
May 24, 1960 to allow time for further study.
The commission considered a decision on the application of William
A. Behrens for a zone variance for; mew car storage at 151 Alta
Street.
The Planning Secretary read from the Zoning Committee report which
stated this is the application of William A. Behrens for a zone var-
iance to permit the property at 151 Alta Street, in Zone PR-3, to
Page Seven
April 26, 1960
be used for storage of new automobiles and a variance from the
wall requirements,
In the opinion of the committee this type of proposed land uSe is
not incompatible with the parking uses permissible in Zone PR-3.
In Zone PR-3 ~ entire lot may be used for parking purposes under
specified cond1J: ions; however, we feel that a definite front set-
back and a higher wall should be' established for automobile stor-
age as it applies to this application. Therefore, it' isrecom-
mended that a 5 foot high orn~ental concrete block wall be con-
structed across the width of the lot at the 30 foot front setback
line, and the set back area be landscaped and maintained.
The application is recommended for approval, .subject to the follow-
ing conditions:
1. Remove the existing buildings ~rom the lot.
2. Construct a 5 foot high ornamental concrete block
wall across the lot at the front set back line.
3. Landscape and maintain the 30 foot front setback area
and the parkway on Alta Street.
4. Construct new curb on Alta Street at the present
driveway.
5. Construct a 6 foot chain link fence along the east
and west lines of the lot from the rear property
line to the front set back line.
6. Pave the lot and conduct the drainage to the alley
or street.
7. Direct all floodlighting away from residential pro~
perty.
The Planning Secreta~y then read two petitions both of which ex-
pressed approval of ~he granting of t~is variance. One had 14 sig~
natures and the other had 8 signatures from various businessmen
in the Huntington Drive area.
Mr. Behrens, the applicant, stated that he would not be willing
to accept the recommended 30 foot setback condition, because he
wollld lose too much property and defeat the purpose for obtaining
a variance.
Mr. Tom Sullivan, stated when you take 1/5th of the area of a lot
and put it to no practical use whatsoever, you must figure that
it cost the purchaser roughly $3,000.00 Nobody would gain any-
thing from this 30 foot setback; the cost of the maintenance of
the landscaping which would serve no one would be wasted. He
felt that there must be some other solution to the problem besides
, the condition of the 30 foot setback.
Commissioner Michler stated that since the addition to the record
of the petitions, in favor of the granting of this variance, and
since the entire commission is not present tonight, he would
recommend that this matter be held for further consideration.
,
Page Eight
April 26, 1960
Commissioner Golisch stated that he thought the principal idea
seemed to be whether the entire street should be rezoned; 'if there
is one granted a var~ance, then this will lend itself to rezone the
entire street.
The Planning Secretary stated that the proper zone for storage of
cars in conjunction with an automobile agency would probably be
C-2.
Moved by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Golisch and
carried to close the public hearing .on the application of William
A. Behrens for a zone variance for new car storage at 151 Alta
Street.
Commissioner Norton concurred with Commissioner Michler in that
he felt this matter requires further review.
The Chairman announced that he believed the full commission should
have the opportunity to pass on this decision, 'and' he therefore
declared the matter be held until the meeting of May 10., 1960. for
a decision, and requested that the Zoning Committee reconsider the
matter.
TRACT NO..
2580.3
The commission reconsidered the tentative map of Tract No. 2580.3
located on Santa Anita Terrace containing 16 lots.
The Planning Secretary explained that this is a revised map, sub-
mitted after a meeting with the SUbdivision Committee and the sub-
divider. On the first map presented two weeks ago the easterly
portion of the tract was not included; namely lots 12, 13, 14, IS,
16 and 17 which were not in the previously submitted map. The
street dead ended about the center of lots 11 and 18; the developer
has shown what can be the eventual development in the hope that he
will be able to obtain that land.
Commissioner Golisch stated that the only problems which the Sub-
division Committee was concerned about were on lot 24, which seem
to be corrected on this revised map, along with other items which
have been improved. All in all it would seem to be a good use of
the land.
Mr. Arthur Bauman, the subdivider, stated that he had done every-
thing possible to attempt to obtain this additional land, but there
is such a wide difference in the asking price and the offered price;
these property owners are asking for $34,0.0.0..0.0. more than the price
he had offered them,and he felt that he had made a generous offer.
Mr. Bauman was prepared to proceed with the tract, and believed
that eventually the remainder of the development will be realized,
but he would not estimate' when.
Commissioner Norton questioned the length of the cuI de sac which
was proposed to be 80.0. feet long; he was in complete sympathy with
the subdivider's problems in this matter, but the commission
turned down a similar tract because of a long cuI de sac, and in
all fairness he could not approve this map.
The Assistant City Engineer brought to the attention of the com-
mission the existence of a drainage channel developed almost to
its full width. It will not be an inexpensive thing to cross;
it will take a good size sJ;ructure.
Page Nine
April 26, 1960.
There are large quantities of water Which flow in the drain,
which would require a type of. bridge. Such a structure would
be necessary to realize a continuation of Santa Anita Terrace.
Commissioner Norton stated that tliis cuI de sac is' quite in ex-
cess of the limit set by the Subdivision ordinance, and if the
cOlIDDission permits one 'it is predisposed to approve another.
The subdivider, Mr. Bauman, stated' that wlien they ask for 2 and
one-hBlf times what you offer them, you do not have the oppor-
tunity to explain the costs to them. He felt that the expense'
of the bridge would not be large'enough to make any difference.
There is 20 feet to cross, and if it costs $100.00 per foot it
wOuld only'be $2,000.00 He felt that if the cClImnission turned
down his proposal, this. could cause the three people to hold out
for even more money; because they would know the commission was
holding it up on account of them.
COlIDDissioner Forman asked Commissioner Norton if he would dis-
approve a tract with a cuI de sac of 500 feet, if approved, to
lot 6; then the subdivider wo~ld have the right to come ahead in
the future and finish the tract.
Commissioner Norton reemphasized that he is not t~ying to stop
tliis tract from being accomplished, but the fact is that the 800
foot cuI de sac is non-conforming, which has been denied in the
past.
Mr. Bauman stated that to a builder the 500 foot cuI de sac is
not practical. There is no. hazard in a longer cuI de aac by
any stretch of the imagination; this cuI de sac would permit
them to throw a 500 foot beam for ,the Police Department or
Fire Department.
Mr. Bauman stated further that there have been other tracts which
have been approved with longer than a 500 foot cuI. de sac. There
was a tract which was approved at the last City Council meeting
which had a cuI de sac street of 675 feet; it was also recommended
for approval by the Planning Commission.
The Planning Secretary identified this tract as Tract No. 25439,
Winnie Way and EighlhAvenue; this was a revised tentative map,
and was recommended:for approval 'by the Planning CODllDission on
April 12, 1960. He explained that this will be a permanent dead
end street; it will never go through to Sixth Avenue.
CODllDissioner Norton wished it understood that he believed this is
a flexible cODllDission, and that in eSSence they are trying to work
with this subdivider as the cODllDlssion hss,..always tried to work
with other developers.
Moved by CODllDissioner Golisch, seconded by Commissioner Norton tD
recommend the denial of Tract No. 25803.
ROLL CALL
AYES: Commissioners GOlisch, Michler and Norton
NOES: Commissioner Forman
ABSENT: Commissioners Acker, Davison and Stout
The' Planning Secretary .informed the cODllDission that the "three"
vote is not sufficient to carry.
Page Ten
April 26, 1960
Mr. Bauman explained .to the commission that they were acting
upon the revised tentative map before them, which showed the
street as coming through; they must ei~her approve it or disap~ .
prove it as submitted.
Moved by Commissioner GOlisch, seconded by Commissioner' Norton
to approve the revised tentative map of Tract No. 25803, subject
to the following conditions:
1. Dedicate a lOftlot wide drainage easement instead
of the proposed 6 foot easement.
2. Remove all buildings within the tract and any trees
within the street right of way.
3. Provide all necessary rear line utility easements.
4. Install all street improvements, including drainage
facilities, required by the Subaivision Orainance in
accordance 'with plans and to grades to be approved by
the City Engineer.
5. Pay all fees and deposits required by the Subdivisim
Ordinance.
ROLL CALL
AYES: Commissioners Forman, Golisch, Michler and Norton
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Acker, Davison and Stout,
TRACT NO.
25782
The commission reconsidered tentative map of Tract No..25782,
located on Sandra Avenue west of Sixth Avenue containing 11 lots.
The Planning Secretary read the staff report which stated at the
Planning Commission meeting of April 12, 1960 the meobers of the
Subdivision Committee agreed to meet on the site of Tract No.
25782 in order to review the problems connected with the pro-
posed development,
On April 19, 1960 the committee met with the developer as re-
quested.
It is noted that there are 3 major factors to be considered in this
matter: (1) the sub-standard widths of lots I, 2, 3, 4 and lots
7, 8, 9, 10 (2) the 800 foot long cuI de sac (3) the proposed
43 foot right of way for Sandra Avenue. .
It is our understanding that the property immediately north of
lots 10 and 11 is now available for subdivision. This would appear
to solve the problem of the 800 foot cuI de sac.
The tract is recommended for approval, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Secure additional land to make each lot a minimum
of 75 feet wide at the building line.
2. Dedicate all of the streets a minimum of, 50 foot
right of way with an additional 5 foot planting
and sidewalk easement on each side.
3. Provide all necessary rear line utility easements.
4. Install all street improvements required by the Sub-
division Ordinance in accordance with plans and
Page Eleven
April 26, 1960
grades to be approved by the City Engineer.
5. Pay all fees and deposits required by the Sub-
division Ordinance.
6. Extend Lenta Lane north to Rodell Place and the
present dead end of Lerita Lane and include the
property north of lots 10 and 11 in the subdiv-
is ion.
After considerable discussion it was moved by Commissioner
Golisch, seconded by Commissioner Norton to recommend the approval
of Tract No. 25782, subject to the following conditions:
1. Secure additional land to 'make each lot a minimum
of 75 feet wide at the building line.
2.. Dedicate all of the s'treetsa minimum of 50 foot
right of way with an additional Sfoot planting
and sidewalk easement on each side.
3. Provide all necessary rear line utility easements.
4. Install all street improvements required by the Sub-
division Ordinance in accordance with plans and
grades to be approved by the City Engineer.
5. Pay all fees and deposits required by the Subdivision____
Ordinance.
6. Extend Lenta Lane north to Rodell Place and the pre-
sent dead end of Lenta Lane and include the property
north of lots 10 and 11 in the subdivision.
ROLL CALL
AYES: Commissioners Forman, Golisch, Michler and Norton
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Acker, Davison and Stout
~~;~O.
L-l
The Planning Secretary informed the commissio~ that.he had received
a request from the subdivider that Tract No.. 21701 be removed from
the agenda to a later date.
LOT SPLITS
No. 291 - William Cracknell-1212..Highland Oaks Drive, referred to
Commissioners Davison and Forman.
The Planning Secretary read from the Engineer's report.
Commissioner Forman stated he hsd viewed this property. He felt
that parcel No. 2 had possibilities of being another building site,
but he could not see that parcel No. j could be an adequate building
site.
He felt that parcel 2 and 3 could be combined to become one lot
instead of two, with the possibility that parcel 1 could be expanded.
This could be accomplished by moving the lot line north.
Page Twelve
April 26, 1960
RESOLUTION
No.. 373
TRACT NO.
21618 -
Tillle Extension
COUNCILMAN
Jess Bslser
-'
After considersble discussion it was moved by Commission~ Norton,
seconded by Commissioner Golisch and carried for the approval of
Lot Split No.. 291, subject to the fOllowipg conditions.:
1. Parcell, with the existing dWelling to be 109
foot frontage.
2, Parcel 2 to include the balance of'the property.,
having a frontage of 275 fee.t.
3. File afiilal map with the City Engineer.
~ 4. Install a sewer lateral to parcel 2.
5. Pay $25.00 recreation fee.
,/6. Secure release of the easement to the Flood Control
District to a line approximately 16 feet from the
channel wall.
"
No. 373 - In the absence of the City Attorney, the Planning Secretary
read the full body of Resolution No. 373, entitled:
"A RESOLUTION OF TIlE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF TIlE
,CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TIlE GRANT-
ING OF A REQUESTED ZONE RECLASSIFICATION FROM ZONE
R-l TO ZONE R-3 OF CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1602-
1616 SOUTH BALDWIN AVENUE IN SAID CITY."
Moved by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Michler to
adopt Resolution No. 373.
ROLL CALL
AYES: Commissioners Forman, Golisch, Michler and Norton
NOES: None
ABSENT: Cl)mmiss:loners Acker, Davison snd Stout
The Planning Secretary stated that two years ago a tract was approved
which had changed hands several times, it is now right near a final
map being filed, and the developer is asking for an extension of
one year because it will be pressing them to record a final map
before June 4, 1960.
Moved by Commissioner Michler, seconded by Commissioner Norton and
carried to allow an extension of time of 6 months for Tract No.
21618. .
Before the meeting adjourned, City Councilman Jess Balser informed
the commission that this would be his last meeting as Council Repre-
sentative on the commission. He expressed his regret at leaving,
and commended the commission for its fine accomplishments.
The Chairman stated the commission would certainly miasMr. Balser,
that his suggestions' and comments have always been helpful.
Page Thirteen
April 26, 1960
, ~ ..
-
,--j
Commissioner Norton wished to second the comments made by the
Chairman stating that, it had been a real pleasure having Mr.
Jess Balser as the Council representative on the commission;
ADJOURN
There being no further'business to come before the commission
the meeting was adjourned at 11:00 P.M.
'f 110. Cf\~'
L. M. TALLEy'---l
Planning Secretary
Page Fourteen
April .26. 1960