Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJULY 26, 1960 ROLL CALL MINUTES zoNE VARIANCE So. Calif; Edison Co. , , MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION .OF THE CITY OF ARCAD.IA REGULAR MEETING JULY 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 o'clock P.M., July 26, 1960, ~ith Chairman Acker. pres.iding. PRESENT: Commissioners Acker, Forman, Golisch, Norton and Michler ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: City Attor~ey James A. Nicklin Director of Public .Works C E. Lortz Planning Secretary' L. M. Talley The minutes of the meeting of July 12., 1960 were approved as written and mailed. .' Pursuant .to notice given, a public hearing was held on the application of the Southern California Edison Company for a zone variance to allow the enlargement of an electric distribution substation at 309 N. Second Avenue. 'The Secretary read the application. The ataff report indicated this is. ~he applicl!tion of the Southern California Edison Company for a zone variance to con- struct, operate and maintain an elec~~ic distribution substation at 309 N. Second ~~.D\.\e. A substation is now located on a portion of the property by reaaon of a 'variance granted May 15, 1956 by Resolution No. 2772. 'The present substation is located on lots 17 and 18. Due ,to present and anti- cipated growth of the area and the increased demand for service, the applicant proposes to expand the operation to include eight additional lots. This will involve the closing of a portion of the alley. The applicant pro- poses at its own expenae, to relocate the alley and the facil ities now ins.talled. The area to the east acrosa Second Avenue is zoned and used for M-l purposea. The area to 'the.south, west and north is zoned R-3 and developed for reaidential purposes. The plans submitted show that the'entire. site will be enclosed with an 8 foot chain link fence and have a buffer strip of shruba and trees. The buffer strip is 10 feet to 15 feet wide. The. application states that initial operation is planned for 1961 with periodic additions as required. The chairman opened the hearing and Mr. California Edison Company addressed the Paul Langlie, representing the Southern commission in support of the application. Page One July 26, 1960 ZONE CHANGE 211 E. Foothill /--" , ~', . , In reference to the plot plan and drawings on display the commission had two primary questions: (1) How would the proposed enlargement of the substation effect the east-west slley located between St. Joseph Street ~nd r~ Porte Street? (2) v/ould there be any landscaping around the development? The Director of Public Works clarified the first que$tion stating thst the Southern California Edison Company would realign the east-west alley by turn- ing it south at the west line of their property and bring it out to St. Joseph Street; furthermore, Southern California Edison Company would dedicate and improve the new alley alignment. Nr. Langlie ,clarified the second question stating that they would landscape a 10-15' strip of land between the property line and the fence line around the substation property. Mr. R. H. Ridgeworth, 150 St. Joseph Street, opposed this variance in a zone R-3 area for three reasons: 1. The enlargement of the substation would be detrimental to surrounding property values. 2. The transformers might cause radio and television reception interference. 3. The gravel used for ground cover would be unsightly. Commissioner Norton felt that the interference and beautification aspecta of the protest might have some merit; whereby Mr. Langlie assured the commission that the Edison staff was equipped and would handle any interference problems' created by their transformers. Motion by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Michler and carried to close the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Norton', seconded by Commissioner Nichler and carried unanimoualy to instruct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary resolution to recommend approval of the zone variance subject to the conditions as outlined in the staff report and application. Pursuant to notice given, a public hearing was held on the application of Ralph's Grocery for a change of zone from R-l to C-2 & D at tho rear of the property located at 211 E. Foothill Boulevard. The Planning Secretary read the application. The staff report explained that this is the application of Ralphs Grocery Company fo.r a zone change from Zone R-l to Zone C-2 and Zone D on a parcel of land 45.5 feet by 98 feet; being the rear portion of the property at 228 E. Sycamore Avenue. This application is made in accordsnce with the conditions of Resolution No. 3215 which states that the subject property may be used for the requested purposes, subject to its acquisition, rezoning and the filing of a covenant agreeing that it shall be held in common o,mership with the balance of their proprty. If this zone change is approved the conditions to be made applicable under Zone D should be the same as set out in Resolution No. 3215 covering the balance of the property, Page Two July 26, 1960 ZONE VARIANCE 9943 Longden -::-.,oo-~ ) The chairman then opened cation to come forward. the hearing and asked for those in favor of the appli- No one appeared before the commission. Mr. D. H. Crane,. 234 E. Sycamore Avenue approached the corranission for informa- tion rather than to register a protest in regards to the application. Mr. Crane asked if the 30 feet remaining behind the proposed market could be classified as and used for a'ccess to the rear of his property. The Planning Secretary said that the 30 feet was not to be a dedicated 'alley. The City Attorney informed Mr. Crane further that an alley cannot be deemed adequate access to property situated as in Mr. Crane's. After aiscussion, it was moved by Commissioner Forman, seconded by Commiasioner Golisch and carried to close the public hearing. Motion by Commissio~Michler, seconded by Commissioner Forman and unanimously carried to instruct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary resolution to recollllllend approval of the zone change, subject to' the conditions of the staff report. Pursuant to notice given, a public hearing was held on. the application of Robinson Brothers for a zone variance to'~llow Zone R-3R uses on Zone R-l pro- perty located at 9943 Longden Avenue. The Planning Secretary read the application and staff report. The report as outlined stated 'that the .Robinson Brothers proposed to erect 3 apartment houaes, each containing 5 apartments, with 3 additional apartments in separate buildings, making a total of 18 apartments. The plan showa. 17.5 feet dedication for widening Baldwin Avenue with an addition- ai 2.5 feet planting and sidewalk easement. The staff suggests that these figures be changed to 17 feet and 3 feet. For .the purpose of this report, the parcels shown on the plan have been lettered A, Ii and C, starting at the corner. All of the apartments, .including the driveways and parking, meet the require- ments of Zone R-3R. The areas of parcels A and 'B, including the 3 foot ease- ment, provide 3038 square feet of land area per .dwelling unit. Parcel C, includ- ing the easement, provides 2965 square feet per unit. The total site, including the easement, provides 3005 square feet per unit. The yards meet all Zone R-3R requirements if the property is split as shown. If held as one development; the distance between the buildings on parcels A & B should be increased from 20 feet to 25 feet. If approved, the improvement o~ Longden Avenue should be considered. CommunicaciCons protesting the va,riance were received from the following property o.wners: 'Mr. & Mrs. B. H. Parker - 9945 Estrella Mr. & Mrs. E.. V. Ross i - 9939 Estrella Mr. & Mrs. Wayne Baker - 9925 Estrella In summation the protests covered the following points: (1) The granting of one zone variance would lead to the granting of another. (2) The Planning Commission and City Council establ:l:shed R-lzoning for the area under the proceedings of Annexation 17-A a little over six months ago and the zoning ahould remain as is. Page Three July 26, 1960 \ (3) The construction of apartments in the arel! "lOuld add to the already heavy Baldwin Avenue traffic. (4) Frequent applications in the area for zone change and variance. A petition involving 18 properties was also filed in protest to the granting of a variance for apartments at 9943 Longden Avenue. The chairman asked the Chy Attorney to outline the property owners' rights in filing application for zone change or zone variance at frequent intervals. The City Attorney explained that a property o'~er has the right to petition the Council with zoning applications and as to variances there is no time 1 imi t wha tever. The proper,ty owners in the area of an appl ication are pro- tected by ~ans of the public hearing. The chairman opened the public hearing and asked for those in favor of the application to state their views. Mr.. Harry Robinson, 1114 Lyndon Way, applicant, assured the commission that he would do a good job with the proposed project. Commissioner Norton asked if it would be economically feasible to construct the project one story high. Mr. Robinson indicated that it would eliminate 7 apartments. Mr. Robinson was then asked if he were granted R-3 .uses instead of R-3R uses could he then be limited to one story. The answ>r Has yes. Chairman Acker asked for all those who opposed the variance to relate their opinions. The folloHing property owners protested the granting of the vari- ance on the grounds that it would devaluate their property, increased traffic would add to the confusion of the corner at Longden Avenue and Baldwin Av~nue that there is no need for apartments in the area. Lillian Mahoney, 645 W. Longden Avenue Mr. & .Mrs. B.H. Parker, 9945 E. Estrella Avenue Howard Russell, 9951 E. Estrella Avenue jOhn Pavilik, 9909 E. Estrella Avenue Rudy Capranica, 639 W. Longden Avenue Bernard Neumeyer, 638 W. Longden Avenue Katherine Van Buren, 645 W. Longden Avenue Harold Fetter, 644 Estre+la ( Owner of property but not resident) Mrs. Howard Russell, 9951 E. Estrella Mrs. B. H. Parker wanted an explanation as to how R-l zone property owner could prote.ct their zoning. The City Attorney discussed the zone change and variance procedure and reiterated that the best protection is the public hearing process. Commissioner Norton felt that the area in question warranted further study and added that no decision should be made until all the facts have been examined. After discussion, motion by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Michler to continue the public hearing for a study and report by the staff and zoning committee. At this time a citizen's committee was formed, composed of B. H. Parker, chair- man and Bernard Neumeyer. The committee was to contact the neighbors in order to determine whether or not they wanted ,to organize a meeting with members of Page Four July 26, 1960 ZONING ORDINANCE Amendment LOT SPLITS \ .. -'\, of the Planning C\Jnunission. the Planning Secretary read a report from and compiled by the Downtown Arcadia Business Association, dated July 12, 1960. The report indicated that it is the consensus of opinion of 4 property owners and 4 tenants that certain modifications to the non-conforming buildings should be per- mitted. The permissible modificatiqns, as proposed, would allow a mini- mum extenaion of 10 feet to a maximum extension of 35 feet from the alley line,. The committee of 8 also indicated that marquee.. should be constructed at the rear of rhe buildings. The matter of s,dewalks at the rear of the remodeled buildings did not receive a majority vote one way or the other, according to tloe committee report. After cons iderable discussion L<: "'as decided to continue the matter until after the Council and Commission hav" heard panding talks by experts on the matter of b master plan for the city. MotIon by Commissioner Michler, seconded by Commissioner Norton and carried to continue the matteT until the meeting of Septembe~ 27, 1960. !>lo. 298 - G. Rayson Brown, 250 Ii. Duarte Road. the Planning Secretary read the engineeT's report and the conditions that .should apply, if approved, as follows 1. File a final map "lith the City Lr...in.~e'r. 2. ~rovide a sewer lateral for parcel 2. This will require t"O installations; one temporary connection to the sewer in the easement, and another to the dry sewer now in Magna Vista Avenue, which will be the permanent connec- tion when Magna Vis.ta Avenue is e. 'ended. 3. .Dedicate 30 feet for Magna Vista Avenue. The easterly one foot to be deeded in fee to the city. Construct con- crete curb and gutter ahd pave the street. Make arrange- ment for street drainage satisfactory to the City Engineer. 4.. Pay the following fees and deposits: $25.00 17.00 45.00 760.00 Recrea t ion fee 2 street trees for 1/3 cost of a street light for proportionate share of opening Magna Vista Avenue into LeRoy Avenue. 5. Provide necessary rear line utility easement. The rear line of the proposed new lot should be the prolongation of the north line of Tract No. 20952. 6. File a covenant to insure that the temporary sewer conne~tion will be abandoned when the sewer in front of the lot is avail- able for uae. 7. Remove all buildings from parcel 2 and all trees from the street area. Page Five July 2.6, 1960 . - '~"""". '..,1, ," ... ~, I ';.1 , . . . " A general discussion followed. Commissioner Forman stated the devel- opment of the street at the rear of this property would create a poor pattern inasmuch as the street at the rear of adjoining property to the west 'is only half dedicated and improved. Commissioner Golischfelt that a pattern ofa 60 foot street narro~ ing toa 30 foot street and then widening to a 60 foot street would. be a poor and hazardous development also. Motion by Commiasioner Forman, aeconded by Commissioner Golisch' and carried to recommend the denial of Lot Split application No., 298. ROLL CALL AYES: Commissioners Forman, Golisch, Michler snd Norton NOES: Commiasioner Acker ABSENT: None No. 299 - William W. Green, 1608 S. Sixth Avenue The engineer's ~eport was read. Commissioner Golisch indicated that the proposed parcel Widths of 70' and 71.5' are less ~han minimum; however, they do conform with the prevailing lots in the neighborhood. Commissioner Forman added that the areaa of each parcel would be well over the minimum. Motion by Commissioner Golisch, seconded by Commissioner Forman and carried unanimously to recommend approval of lot split No. 299, sub- ject to the' following conditions: 1. File a final map with the City Engineer. 2. Pay $25.09 recreation fee. 3. Relocate the existing dwelling and garage to clear the division line. No. 300 - O. M. Knutsen, 718 Camino Grove Avenue The Planning Secretary read the engineer's report. Commissioner Acker asked if the guest house on the rear of the Sixth Avenue parcel was being occupied. The applicant informed the chairman that the guest house was being occupied by the parents of the property owner. It was generally agreed that the split would conform to the pattern of lots as establiShed by the approved subdivision being improved m Camino Crove and Encino Avenue in the immediate area. Therefore; motion by Commissioner Forman, seconded by Commissioner Golisch and carried to recommend approval of lot aplit No. 300 sub- ject to the following conditions: 1. File a final map with the City Engineer. 2. Install a sewer lateral for Parcel 2. Page Six July 26, 1960 CONVALESCENT HOME (1601 S. Baldwin) & REZONE J.NNEXATION No. 14 . 3. Pay $25.00 recreation fee. 4. Remove the shed and debris from the lot. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Forman, Golisch, Michler and Acker NOES: Commissioner Norton ABSENT: None The Planning Secretary read the report of the Zoning Committee involv- ing both the proposed convalescent home at 1601 S. Baldwin Avenue and ,the rezoning of Annexation No. 14 located on the west side .of Bald- win Avenue between Camino Real and Callita Street as follows: In 1956, by Ordinance No. 954, the entire frontage along Baldwin Ave- nue was tentatively given C-l zoning, subject to specified conditions. None of the conditions have been fulfilled and the entire area has remained undeveloped. In the opinion of the committee it would not be desirable for commer- cial uses to extenrl further south along Baldwin Avenue and the sub- ject area should be restricted to prevent this. Definite plans have now been submitted by the property owners for the propose~ development of the area. These plans conform to a pattern of' tapering intensity which follows the idea of limiting the commer- cial usea. At the southwest corner of Baldwin Avenue and Camino Real, on a par- cel being approximately 214 feet by 300 feet, the owners propose two one-story connnercial buildings and a services.tation. At 1601-1609 S. Baldwin Avenue, being a parcel 204 feet by 630 feet, the owner requests a special use permit to allow a 66 bed, one-story convalescent home. It is proposed that the westerly 150 feet of the parcel be reserved for R-I use.. At the northwest corner of Baldwin Avenue and Callita Street on a parcel about 103 feet by 170 feet, the owners propose a one-story commercial office building. On the southwest corner of the same streets, on a parcel about 134 feet by 170 feet, the same owners pro- pose a two-story professional office building. In the opinion of the conunittee, these uses seem reasonable and of 'a nature that will not be detrimental to surrounding property. We do feel that the professional office building should be limited to one story. In order to control the development and to insure that it will be as proposed on the plans that have been submitted, the connnittee re- commends that the basic zoning of the area within annexation No. 14 be left as R-l and that a zone variance be granted to ,allow the uses requested by the various. owners, .subject to the following conditions: 1. All of the individual parcels shall be developed in sub- atantial compliance with the plans and plot plans sub- mitted. Page Seven July 26, 1960 2. All of the buildings shall be limited to one story in height. \ 3. The development at the southwest corner of Camino Real and Baldwin Avenue, on the parcel oloned by Mr. Bernard and others, to be in compliance with the requirements of Fire Zone No.1. 4. The development of all the other parcela, except the R-l area at the rear or 1601-1609 Baldwin Avenue, to be in compliance with the requirements of Fire Zone No.2. 5. 20 feet shall be dedicated for widening of Baldwin Ave- nue except where such dedication has now been made. 6. Land shall be dedicated to make Callita Street 60 feet wide. 7. Land shall be dedicated and improved to provide access satisfactory to the City Engineer to the west portion of the property at 1601-1609 S. Baldwin Avenue. 8. The development of each parcel to be on an individual basis, and not to be dependent on other parcels. 9. The final plans for the development of each parcel shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Com- mission prior to the issuance of a building permit. At the request of the chairman, the City Attorney, reviewed the his- tory of Annexation No. 14 and all the ramificatio~of its zoning to date. . Leong Commissioner Acker then recogn1zed Ros~, representative of the inveRt- ment firm interested in the proper.ty at the southwest corner of Camil)o Real and Baldwin Avenue. Mrs. Leong wished to know what the long range zoning was for Baldwin Avenue, specifically the area of Annexa- tion No. 14. She was informed that the city has no master plan and no assurance could be given as to what the zoning might be in 5, 10 or 15 years from now. Mr. Robert Routery, 716 Call ita Street, urged approval of the zoning as contemplated by the zoning committee report. Mr. Bernard Neumeyer., 638 W. Longden Avenue was opposed to any change in the present status of Baldwin Avenue zoning. Motion by Commissioner Forman, seconded by Commissioner Michler and carried to close the public hearing. Commissioner Acker then asked if each commissioner would state his. views on the matter before them. Commissioner Michler felt that the commission had studied this area completely over a period of several !llonths and that the plan before them was a good one. The deep lot located at 1601 S. Baldwin Avenue is a problem lot in that it is not conducive to single family develop- ment. In fact, a great deal of Baldwin Avenue frontage has this pro- blem. Page Eight July 26, 1960 ZONE VARIANCE Vlarehouse r Conunissioner Norton advised the commission to take a long look at Baldwin Avenue. This street should not develop as a commercial strip zone; further it is not necessarily true that the R-l zoning will have to give way along Baldwin Avenue. I Commissioner Forman related that the city has studied this area in question for over five years, and Baldwin Avenue will undoubtedly change character with the advent of the foothill freeway. The cor- ner of Camino Real and Baldwin Avenue would be a good location for a service station as proposed by the owners and investors. The con- valescent home, proposed on the 1601 S. Baldwin Avenue site, is also a sound plan, as resubmitted. Professional offices near the Callita Street and Baldwin Avenue intnrsection is also good; and further, this plan in general 'has had little negative reaction. Commissfoner Golisch declared that the convalescent home was turned down last time because the planners felt that it was located in the wrong area. Since that time the circumstances have not changed appreciably. I , I Commissioner Acker reviewed the history of Annexation 14 and stated that an R-3 zone ,;QuId create problems of increased school loads, police and fire protection, etc., and summed up his thinking by sup- porting the Zoning Committee's recommendations. Motion by Commissioner Michler, seconded by Commissioner Forman to recommend approval of thn Zoning Committee report, subject to the conditions included therein. ROLL CALL AYES: Commissioners Forman, ~lichler and Acker. NOES: Commissioners Golisch and Norton ABSENT: None The City Attorney then advised that the motion having failed to carry due to the lack of affirmative vote of four members the matter would be. sent to the City Council in 35 days without recommendation unless in that time a change of vote either to appr,ove or to deny the pro- posal was obtained. Mr. J. W. Bernard, owner of property at the sawthwest corner of Bald- win Avenue and Camino Real, wondered if it would be advisable to have , the owners of the 3 properties at Baldwin Avenue and Camino Real file a zone variance application with the commission during the 35 day per- iod. The City Attorney stated that this would only confuse this issue further in that the area is already under study. Mr. Bernard asked it it would be possible to meet with those commission- ers who recorded a dissenting vote in order to discuss some of the problems involved. It was agree': to meet with him., The Planning Secretary read the Zoning Committee report as follows: This is the 'application of the Industrial Brush Company, 114 St. Joseph Street, to construct and use a building at 214 N. First Ave- nue for warehou~and office purposes. Page Nine July 26, 1960 ZONE CHANGE 2515 S. 6th The applicant is operating under authority of a zone variance granted May 16, 1950, by Resolution No. 2028 and extensions granted August 5, 1952, by Resolution No. 2277, and May 4, 1954, by Resolution No. 2495, Which requires that the subject property be maintained as a parking lot. The present application proposes that parking will be established on lot 1, Block 79 at the northeast corner of First Avenue and Santa Clara Street and on lot 2, Block 81, on First Avenue north of St. Joseph Street. The plan submitted shows the building to be one-story masonry construc- tion of approximately 5200 square feet area. The front portion of ap- proximately 1400 square feet is devoted to office space and the rear of approximately 3800 square feet to warehouse use. The rear 40 feet of the lot is reserved for open loading area. Property on First Avenue in this area is zoned C~2. Property on Santa Clara Street ,at the rear of the subject property is zoned M-l. .This property lies between the Santa Fe Railway and the proposed free- way in the area Which the Planning Commission proposes to restudy as to its future use. Motion by Commissioner Michler, seconded by Commissioner Norton and carried unanimously to instruct the City Attorney to prepare the nece- ssary resolution recommending approval of the var,iance for a warehouse at 214 N. First Avenue, subject to the conditions of the Zoning CODDDit- tee repor t. The Planning Secretary read the staff and committee' report Which stated this is the application of Earl Wragg for a change of zone from Zone R-2 to Zone R-3 on property at 2515 S. Sixth Avenue. The north 44 feet of the property will be used for street purposes for access into proposed Tract No. 25782. This will leave a 56 foot wide corner lot on which it is proposed to erect a 12 unit apartment. The east. 247 feet of the property is Zoned R-2 and contains 13832 square feet, which would allow 2 dwelling units under present zoning. The west 99 feet of the property is Zoned R-3 and contains about 7400 square feet which would allow 4 dwelling units" making a total of 6 units as zoned. The total property contains about 21232 aquare feet, Whieh, if Zoned R-3, would allow 14 units. It is proposed to erect 12 uM ts,. Because the property to the east and the north is zoned and developed as R-1, and this subject R-2 lot has acted as a buffer to the R-3, pro- perty to the south, the request for a zone charge is recommended for denial. However, to allow a reasonable amount of relief to this property, it is ,recommended that a zone variance be granted to allow R-3 uses, subjec.t to all .the regulations of Zone R-3, except that the maximum number of dwelling units be limited to eight. Mr. Alfred Allen, 1045 W. Huntington Drive, addressed the cODDDission requesting denial of the zone change rather than an approval of a zone variance as outlined in the committee report. Discussion followed, after whieh there was a motion by Commissioner Forman, seconded by Commissioner Norton and carried to close the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Michler, seconded by CODDDissioner Norton and carried unanimously to instruct the City Attorney to prepare the neces- sary resolution recommending denial of the zone change and approving the' zone variance and its conditions as spelled out in the committee Page Ten ZONE CHANGE 208 E. Duar.te TENTATIVE TRACT No. 26077 \. report. Mr. Lem Ward, realtor, then asked if the commission realized that the proposed subdivision in that area was contingent upon the granting of the zone change as applied for. The chairman assured Mr. Ward that the commission was aware of con- ditions of the aforementioned subdivision. The Zoning Committee report was read and stated that this is the appli- cation of D.A.R. Industr.ial Leasing for a change of zone from Zone R-2 to Zone C-l on the east half 'of the property at 208 E. Duarte Road. The four corners of Duarte Road and Second Avenue are now Zone C-l. From the commercial zone to the city boundary at Fifth Averue the pro- perty is in Zone R-l and R-2. East of Fifth Avenue, property in ~fun- rovia is commercially zoned. The Zoning Committee is reluctant to recommend any further extension of commercial zoning until all of the area has been studied. The appl-icant has stated that he plans to construct business offices, but has submitted no plans and has not stated how extensive a building program he has in mind. The present C-l zoning on the west half of the lot will allow such con- struction, and the R-2 zone on the east half will allow parking as a transitional use. This might serve the needs of the applicant until the future of the balance of East Duarte Road is establiahed. Therefore, we recommend that the application be denied. If it is approved the alignment of the dedicated alley should receive serious consideration. A motion by Commissioner Norton to close the hearing followed, seconded by Commissioner Forman and carried. Mo.tion by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Forman and carried unanimously .to construct the City Attorney to prepare a resol- ution recommending denial of the zone change as recommended by the zon- ing committee in its report dated July 21, 1960. The Planning Secretary read the report of the staff and subdivision com- mittee ,,,hich stated this is the tentative map of Tract No. 26077 located on Greenfield Avenue between La Sierra Drive and' Pamela Road, containing 17 lots.. Three additional parcels of property are participating in the street opening but are not a part of the tract. Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 are each ah-"t. 7.3 feet wide but each of them, along with all the other lots, are well over the required minimum area. This tract will eliminate the dead end of Greenfield Avenue nor,th of Pamela Road and provide good circulation to'the entire area. The tract is recommended for approval, subjec~ to the following condi- t ions: 1. Remove all buildings within the tract and all trees within the street area. Page Eleven July 26, 1960 SIGN APPROVAL Ralph I S Marke t ''-~-' 2. Provide all necesaary rear line utility easements. 3. Install all street improvements required by the sub- division ordinance in accordance with plans and to grades to be approved by the City Engineer. 4. Pay the following fees and deposit~: 6 42 3 17 @ @ @ @ $810.00 357 . 00. 105.00 425.00 $1,697.00 $135.00 8.50 35.00 25.00 Steel street light poles Street trees Street name signs Lots recreation fee 5. The city shall dedicate for street purposes lot 26, Tract No. 19712, and lot 15, Tract No. 21618. The Director oLPublic Works then explained thai: there were a few slight revisions to the tentative map initially submit.ted. These changes were outlined on a revised tentative map that was submitted after the report was made by the Subdivision Commit~ee. The change involved a minor variation in the alignment of Greenfield Avenue. Lots 8 and 9 are each about 73' wide but each, along with all other Iota are well over the required minimum area. Motion by Commissioner Forman, seconded by Commissioner Norton and carried unanimously to recommend the approval of revised tentative map No. 26077 as follows: 1. Remove all buildings within the tract and all trees within the street area. 2. Provide all necessary rear line utility easements. 3. Install all street improvements required by the sub- division Ordinance in accordance with plans and to grades to be approved by the City Engineer. 4. Pay the following fees and deposits: 6 42 3 17 @ @ @ @ $135.00 8.50 35.00 25.00 $810.00 357.00 105.00 425.00 $1,697.00 Steel street light poles Street trees Street name signs Lots recreation fee 5. The city shall dedicate for street purposes Lot 26, Tract No. 19712, and Lot 15, Tract No. 21618. The Planning Secretary displayed a plot plan of a proposed pole sign to be erected for the ploposed Ralphs Market a.t 211 E. Foothill Boulevard. 'He explained that the sign met ail the conditions of the code; but the Zone D overlay as it applies to the commercial zone at the northeaa.t corner of Foothill Blvd. and Second Avenue requires Planning Commission approval of all new construction. It was the consensus of the commission that the sign w.uld not adversely affect the proposed plan for the corner market. Motion. by Commissioner Forman, seconded by Commissioner Michler and Page Twelve July 26, 1960 - . RESOLUTION SIGN APPROVAL Sec\lrity Bank '''--- carried unanimously to approve the sign and its location as submit- ted on the plot plan and drawings. No. 378 - The City Attorney presented Resolution No. 378, entitled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE GRANT- ING OF A ZONE VARIANCE TO ALLOW A DWELLING TO BE MOVED ON TO THE REAR OF PROPERTY AT 330 WEST HUNT- INGTON PLACE AND CONVERTING IT INTO A SCHOOL LIBRARY AND REMEDIAL READING ROOM." Motion by Commisaioner Forman, seconded by Commissioner Norton and carried unanimously to waive the reading of the full body of the resolution. Motion by Commissioner Nichler, seconded by Commissioner Goliach and carried to adopt Resolution No. 378. ROLL CALL AYES: Commissioners Forman, Golisch, Michler, Norton and Acker NOES: None ABSENT: None ThePlann'ing Secretary informed the commission that once again the busines& of a roof sign for the Security First National Bank was pend- ing. The initial application by the bank was presented before the modi- fication committee on June 28, 1960. at which time the sign, some 19 feet above roof, was denied because it greatly exceeded the present code limi- tation aa to height above curb line. The matter had been' appealed to the Planning Commission on July 12, 1960 wherein the Modification Com- mittee was upheld. The appeal then went to the City Council on July 19, 1960. Because the applicant had submitted a substantially different roof sign proposal' to the City Council, that body had referred the matter back to the Modification Committee for consideration of a deciaion on July 26, 1960. Because the Nodification Committee did not want to establish a precedent in regard to height limit, the revised plan was referred to the Planning Commission at this time. The Planning Secretary then displayed the, new roof aign plan showing the sign to be a total of 11' - 10" above the roof; and 18' - 6" long by 7' - 10" high. Mr. Herbert Best, representative of the Security First National Bank then explained that there was no other location on the building where a sign could be located due to the glass and brick design of the structure. It was also added by Mr. Best that the lease of the building contained a provision that the bank was the only tenant allowed to have a sign. After discussion it was moved by Commissioner Forman, seconded by Com- missioner Michler to grant the modification to allow the roof .sign to be erected, subject to the following conditions: 1. The roof sign to be not greater than 18' - 6" long Page Thirteen July 26, 1960 ~ " . AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION ADJOURN nor higher than 7'- 10", and further, not to exceed a total height of 11' - 10" from the roof line. 2. Sign to read "Security First National Bank". 3. The building is to be lim; ted to one sign. ROLL CALL AYES: Connniaaioners Forman, Golisch, Michler and Acker. NOES: Commissioner Norton ABSENT: None Mr. Alfred Allen, developer of Tract No. 25253, addressed the commiss~on in regard to the aforementioned subdivision. Mr. Allen asked if there was any possible way that a city official might help expedite the sign- ing of the final map by the representatives of the Roman Catholic Church. Commissioner Acker stated that the commission matter .if at all possible. would help expedite the There being no further business before the ccnnnisaion the meeting adjourned at 12:00 o'clock, Midnight. 'f~. L. M. TALLEY Planning Secretary Page Fourteen J"ly 26, 1960 ~