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
~