HomeMy WebLinkAboutDECEMBER 13, 1960
I'
ROLL CALL
MINUTES
COMMUNICAtION
H. T. Michler
ZOO ING
60 W. Live Oak
-~
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 13, 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., December
13, 1960.
PRESENT: Commissioners Acker, Ferguson, Forman, Golisch, Norton and
Rutherford
ABSENT:
Commissioner Michler
OTHERS
PRESENT:
City Attorney James A. Nicklin
Assistant City Engineer Frank F. Forbes'
Planning Secretary L. M. Talley
The minutes of the regular meeting of November 22, 1960 were approved
as written and mailed.
The Planning Secretary presented a communication from Mr. H. T. Michler,
Planqing Commissioner, requesting a leave of absence from the Plannin,g
Commission meeting tonight because of a business conference. The Plan-
Secretary explained that this would be his third absence, and required
the request for a leave of ebsence.
Moved by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Forman and
carried unanimously to grant the requested leave of absence' from the
meeting to Mr. H. T. Michler.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing to determine the zoning
to be placed on property in Annexation No. 22, being two lots on
Welland Avenue.
The Planning Secretary read a communication from the Superior Concrete
Block & Building Supply Company requesting the annexation of lots 4
and 5 at 60 W. Live Oak Avenue to the City of Arcadia.
The Planning Secretary explained from the board the location of the
property. There are two lots belonging to Superior Concrete Block
which Were not included in Annexation No. 19. Mr. Shirley, President
of Superior Concrete Block, has requested they be annexed to the
City of Arcadia. They are presently located in the City of Temple
City, but Temple City has given its consent to release the property
for annexation to the City of Arcadia.
The Planning Secretary then read the staff report which stated Mr.
Homer C. Shirley, President of Superior Concrete Block and Building
Supply Company, has requested that a portion of their property lo-
cated on Welland Avenue be annexed to, the City of Arcadia and placed
in Zone M~l.
Page One
December 13, 1960
"
..
."
They are the owners of lots 1, 2 and 3, Tract No. 10260, located at
60.W. Live Oak Avenue, which were annexed to the city by Annexation
No. 19 in 1959. They also own lots 4 and 5 on WeIland Avenue, which
are presently in the City of Temple City.
They desire that all the property be in Arcadia. Temple City has given
consent .to the annexation.
Outside of a small residence located at the .southeast corner of lot
5, the entire property is now heing used as apart of their building
material business.
Along the west side of WeIland Avenue a concrete block wall exists
along lots 4 and 5. The south side of lot 5 and the. west side of
lots 4 and 5 are completely closed in by the walls of a concrete block
building.
Across the street on the east side of WeIland Avenue is the site of
a proposed hospital in Temple City. The surrounding lots to the south
anll west are used for residential uses, many of them with more than
one dwelling.
The Chairman declared the public hearing opened, and asked for those
in favor to please come forward and give their names. Mr. Shirley,
President of Superior Concrete Block Company, expressed his desire'for
this property to be annexed to the City of Arcadia, and to be zoned
M-l, the same as his property which is already in the city. He ex-
plained that due to a mistake when the property was being considered
for Annexation No. 19, these two lots were inadvertently left out;
hence his application for annexation to the City of Arcadia.
The Chairman requested those. opposed to the annexation and zoning of
M-l please come forward.
No one responded.
Motion by Commissioner Rutherford, seconded by Commissioner Ferguson
and carried unanimously to close the public hearing on this matter.
Discussion ensued.
Commissioner Norton questioned as to the possibility of placing a D
overlay on the M-l zone as requested.
The Chairman stated he felt it should be taken in based upon the same
zoning as now exists on the property already in the City of. Arcadia.
The property in question was not purchased since the annexation; it
was simply overlooked in the annexation procedure.
Commissioner Forman stated that there is a buffer wall existing on
the property now, which would perhaps suhstitute for the need of a
D overlay.
Motion by Commissioner Ferguson, seconded by Commissioner Rutherford
to recommend the approval of .Annexation .No. 22 to be zoned M-l, and
to instruct the City Attorney to draw up a resolution to that affect.
The motion was unanimously carried.
ZONING
Peck Road
The Planning Commission held a public hearing to determine the zon-
ing to be placed on city owned property on the west side of Peck Road
south of the Rio Hondo Channel.
The Planning Secretary displayed the location .of the property on the
Page Two
December 13, 1960
"'"
\,-----'
map, and then read the staff report which stated the City of Arcadia
is the owner of appro~imately 14 acres of land cn the west side of
Peck Road, south of the Rio Hondo Channel.
Negotiations are now under way to sell this property. One of the con-
ditions of the sales agreement is that the land will be zoned M-l and
D.
This industrial zoning would conform with other uses in the area and
the zoning just adopted to be made applicable to annexation No. 20
along the east side of Peck Road.
The requirements of tbe D zone should be as follows:
a. All buildings shall be constructed of. tilt-up concrete,
concrete block or equivalent masonry construction in com-
pliance with the ~uilding Code of the City of Arcadia
for construction in No. 3 Fire Zone; except that frame
and stucco construction shall be permitted in the front
portion of the buildings for office use and decorative
purposes.
b. All buildings shall be set back a minimum of 10 feet
from the Peck Road property line after street dedi-
cation.
c. The front setback area shall be suitably landscaped
and maintained.
d. Doors and windows on the street side of a building,
except tbose used exclusively for light and venti-
lation and opening directly into rooms used exclu-
sively for business offices, shall not comprise more
than 10 percent (10%) of the area of such street side
of the building.
e. No rooms on the street side of any building shall be
used for storage, display or manufacturing purposes if
more than ten percent (10%) of the building consists
of do.ors and windoWS.
f. No door for transporting materials or equipment in or
out of the b~ilding may face Peck Road unless set back
from the front property l.ine forty (40) feet or more.
g. All parking areas for commercial and industrial vehicles
and equipment sball be paved and shall be located to
the rear or side of buildings.
h. All materials and equipment stored outside a building
shall be stored at tbe rear or side of the main build-
ing and shall be enclosed by at least a six-foot high
masonry wall, and no materials stored outside shall pro-
ject above the enclosed masonry wall.
i. Parking of employee and customer vehicles will be per-
mitted in front of said building.
j. Any work areas outside the building shall be located in
the rear of said building or at the side, and shall be
enclosed with at least a six-foot masonry wall.
Page Three
December 13, 1960
......
--,~
The Chairman declared the public hearing opened and asked for those
who wished to speak in favor of the zoning to please come forward.
No one responded.
The Chairman then asked for those who are opposed to the zoning to
pl:ease come forward.
Mr. Carl Webb, 5349 N. Peck Road, stated he wondered if the property
under discussion would take in his property too.
The Assistant City Engineer stated that Mr. Webb's property is in
the county area and not in the city-owned area. He explained that
the existing road beside Mr. Webb's lot will become one of the lots
in the proposed development when the pit operation is complete. He
could not say how soon it. would be abandoned, however.
Motion by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Forman and
unanimously carried to close the public hearing on this matter.
Commissioner Ferguson questioned Section a. of the staff report, which
restricted the construction to tilt-up concrete, concrete block or
equivalent masonry construction in compliance with the Building Code
of the city for construction in No.. 3 Fire Zone; except that frame and
stucco construction shall be permitted in the front portion of the
buildings for office use and decorating purposes.
The Planning Secretary explained that it meant the exterior walls on
the front of the building used only for office purposes, not manufac-
.turing purposes. The purchaser of the property brought in some plans
that had a rectangular manufacturing area with a wing out to the
front for office purposes, and he asked that he be allowed to use the
frame and stucco there with the idea of obtaining a more attractive
architectural treatmeht.
Commissioner Norton stated that everything that is mandatory for an
orderly development of this particular M-l with a D overlay seems to
be present, so that it certainly complies with everything that could
be desired for such an industrial area.
Motion by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Golisch and
carried unanimously to recommend the approval of the zoning of the
city-owned. property lying on the west side of Peck Road as outlined
in the staff report, and to instruct the City Attorney to draw up a'
resolution to this effect.
La! SPLITS
No. 318 - Arcadia Presbyterian church, 1234 S. Second Avenue referred
1;0 Commissioner Michler and Commissioner Rutherford.
The Planning Secretary explained that this is the property which
formerly belonged to Mr. Giles Meade. Apparently he donated it to the
church and they are requesting a lot split.
The Planning Secretary read the engineer's report stating the require-
ments for approval of the lot split and that the lots will be less than
the minimum required width, but conform to many other lots in the
block. The applicant intends to move the present dwelling to the
rear and construct three new dwellings. The requested split will re-
sult in two lots 69 feet wide. On the east side of Second Avenue from
Duarte Road to Camino Real there are 9 lots less than 75 feet wide;
on the west side there are 12 that range from 60 feet up to 75 feet.
Page Four
December 13, 1960
.......
COUN~, TRACT
Commissioner Rutherford stated that this lot split would be a de-
.sirable one. The one house currently sitting in the middle of the
property would be moved to the back and it would be enhanced by
three other homes in this area.
Motion byCo~issioner Rutherford, seconded by Commissioner Formsn to
recommend the approval of lot split No. 318, subject to the following
conditions:
1. File a final map with the City Engineer.
2. Install a sewer lateral for parcell.
3. Dedicate 12 feet for widening Second Avenue'.
4. Pay $25.00 recreation fee.
5. Move the existing house .to clear the new lot line.
.ROLL CALL
AYES: Counnissioners Acker, Ferguson, Forman, Golisch and Rutherford.
NOES: Counnissioner Norton
ABSENT: Counnissioner Michler
No. 305 - Paul Schmidt, 220 W. Foothill Boulevard - reconsider condi-
tions.
The Planning Secretary explained that this lot split was approved in
September. One of the conditions was to add 10 feet to parcel 1 on
the front facing Rancho Road. On closer examination of the lot he
found what did not show on the tentative map; at. the east side of the
present house On parcel 2 there is a concrete patio (unroofed, q~ite
a nice concrete patio under an oak tree) which in his opinion should
go with the old house. They are requesting that the 10 feet additional
depth be removed as a condition, and then the lot split does comply
with the original request; and it win be 135 feet deep along the
north property line, and the. new lot would still contain better than
13,000 square feet.
Commissioner Forman stated that with the patio being a definite part
of this old house, he could not see any objection to granting this.
However., he would desire .to point out that the Planning Commission
does not like to be put in the position of granting a request with
conditions set forth and accepted by the applicant; and after the
matter has been forwarded to the City Council and approved with these
conditions,. .to have someone come back and state they are sorry but
they cannot do it the way they agreed; now will you the Planning Co~
mission please change your mind? Nevertheless, he would certainly
make a motion to recommend the approval of this lot split as original-
lyrequested. The motion was seconded by,Commissioner Ferguson and
unanimously carried.
The Planning Commission considered the tentative map of Tract No.
26280, located on Foss Avenue south of Longden Avenue in county ter-
ritory.
The .Planning Secretary advised that this map was submitted to the com-
mission on November 23, 1960. He found out today that the map was
Page Flve
December 13, 1960
,r--"
approved by the Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commission yeste~'
day. Tl:ie tract meets county requirements but no,t city requirements.
the county tentative map was ordered filed.
PLANNING
PROGRAM
the Planning Commission reviewed the action of the City Council on the
~lanning program.
the Chairman stated he felt the commission should hear the communica-
tion, which had been read ,at the regular meeting of November 22,
1960 in order, to. comment on the different items as they were read.
the Planning Secretary read the communication, dated November 21, 1960.
Commissioner Forman commented that under item 1, page 2, the "redevelop-
ment of the area affected by the Foothill Freeway"; that would be one
of the important areas for which a Planning Consultant would be h1.red,
after the groundwork had been done by the planner and the members of
the staff.
Commissioner Rutherford stated he felt it was just about time for the
city to look at the land available for parks and recreation, because
the city is in 'need of thi,s type of development there are not enough
~laces for recreation in the city, he felt that the City Council is
right in adopting this policy.
Commissioner Norton asked about the possible expenditure involved in
item "b", "Prepare and maintain an existing land use IIUlp of the city."
the Planning Secretary explained that a large part of the field work
has been done; it wss completed about a year ago; it should be brought
up to date, but the area (generally speaking) south of Huntington Drive
and south of Duarte Road, the older portion of the city; the field work
has been done, but not brought up to date. Any additional land use
studies would probably come out of regular payroll expenditure, he
assumed.
Commissioner Norton asked if a similar type of operation had been in
existence in the Planning Department.
the Planning Secretary answered that in 1949 a land use survey of
the city was made; it wesnot keIt: up to date; at that time the city
hired boys from Cal-tech on a part time basis; he had no idea what
the actual cost was, but it was not an exorbitant cost.
Commissioner Ferguson stated that he thought the plan was a fine idea,
especially to study the probl~m areas of the city,
the Chairman ,asl<ed about the statement "the planner will devote all of
his time to the physical job of planning with the day to day supervi-
sion by the Planning Secretary with the City Manager to participate
to a greater personal degree in the total planning f,unction': He won-
dered how the projects would be initiated, only through the City Mana-
ger and the Planning Secretary? How would the Planning Commission fit
1n to the plan1
the Planning Secretary explained that the initiation of action could be
by anyone of the staff involved or by all of them; if there is an area
in need of study--(interrupted)
Page Six
December 13, 1960
...
,~'"
Commissioner Rutherford asked if to date all the planning functions
have been channeled through the Planning Secretary's office? The
answer was yes.
Commissioner Norton expressed confusion relative to the same paragraph
questioned by the Chairman; is the city planner, as proposed, going
to be in the position of making these recommendations over and above
those of the Planning Secretary? or conversely, the fact thathe is
there to physically work this, would the channels Which have been
heretofore utilized by the planning office be altered?
The Planning Secretary stated that in regard to the statement "to-
gether with the Planning Secretary he will make verbal and written
recommendations to the Planning Commission~ it was his impression that
the city planner and the Planning Secretary would work together the
s~ as the Planning Technician and the Planning Secretary worked
in the past.
Commissioner Norton stated that his concern was relative to the fact
that it would be a unit action, in other words, rather than an individual
action. Rather than go through the office of the Planning Secretary as
it now does it would then come through this City Planner, plus the
City )!anager.
The Planning Secretary stated he did not believe it would go through
th~ City )!anager's office; it is simply that the City Manager intends
to take a more active part in the total planning function as stated in
the report. He didn't believe there is any intent at all to sidetrack
the Planning Commission or anything of that sort. Under the Department
of Public Works we have a Planning Division, Which has consisted of
the Planning Technician and the Planning Secretary and the office
secretary, which would simply be changed to the City Planner, himself
and the office secretary. It is simply a change of personnel in the
diVision, but the reports would come through the same channels as
before.
Commissioner Norton asked if this would hold true in the future?
The Planning Secretary answered that there has been no suggestion of "
changing the set up as it now exists at all, to his knowledge.
Commissioner Golisch stated at the City Council meeting the )!ayor in-
dicated there was no thought in the council's mind that there was any
decrease or cutting of the responsibility of the Planning Commission,
but merely that they were looking toward the future to provide the
best in the way of personnel and replacements of present personnel;
they were looking towards that direction rather than any thought of re-
ducing the activity - or the scope of the commission's activity.
Commissioner Norton stated that he did not wish his point to be miscon-
strued: It is not a'matter of decreasing or increasing ~he responsibil-
~t1 of the commission; this is trrelevant. His concern was predicated
on. the verbage relative to the number of personnel involved to the
ulttmBte bringing of the plans before the commission.
Commissioner Golisch stated that the present City Manager is a profes-
sional planner; and hia concern was that if the City )!antPrshipshould
change, as it has in the past, might a new one not be a planner, and
would everything continue to go through a new manager if this should
happen?
The Planning Secretary commented that under the Zoning Ordinance and
Page Seven
December 13, 1960
,-
\,---
the Subdivision Ordinance, all these matters must come through
the Planning Commission, regardless of who does the actual processing
of them before they get to the commission.
The Planning Secretary continued reading from the report, Item No.2,
Page 3.
Commissioner Ferguson commented on Item "b" under Section 2 "the num-
ber of hours of work by the consultant will be controlled by the City
Manager". Did this mean that the Planning Consul~an t will be con-
trolled by the City Manager. Did this mean that the Planning Consul-
tant could be brought into the picture any time the City Manager felt
that it was necessary?
,The Planning Secretary explained that his interpretation of this would
be that the City Planner and himself would not have authority to call
in a consultant 2 hours today, maybe 4 hours tomorrow, etc., without
some authority from the City Manager.
Commissioner Golisch commented on Item "a", under No.2 "the consultant
would be employed to review and comment on the work of the planner on
an hourly basis". If the planner is a qualified professional, he would
think that if a consultant were brought in he would merely assist in
a larger scope of work that the planner himself couldn't handle; and it
seemed strange to him that they would be bringing in a consultant to
review the work of a professional man.
Commissioner Norton stated that it would seem to him there are two
situations here: No. 1 - We have in essence a proposal for a qualified,
professional planner; in addition, it is further stated that the City
Manager himself is also a qualified planner, and it would seem to him
between the two, it would seem questionable to indulge in the expense
of a third planner to inspect the work of a qualified man. If a man
is qualified, he is qualified; if he is unqualified, then we don't want
him.
Commissioner Golischstated that if the city has a large scale program
of problems coming before the commission, then he felt that a consultant
could be called in to assist the planner, not to review it.
Commissioner Norton stated that it does not indicate this in the report;
it states that the consultant would review and comment on the work of
the planner on an hourly basis; it could be conceivable that a man could
be called in on a weekly, bi-monthly, monthly or semi-annual basis to
check the work of the planner; and he would certainly take exception
to par..graph "a"; because if we are looking for a qualified man, then
it would be in theiinterest of the city to pr,ocure the services of such.
In answe,r to a question the Planning Secretary stated that it would pro-
bably take some revision of the current budget when the city planner is
hired, because he will be hired at a higher rate of pay than the Plan-
ning Technician; if it is a couple of months that we have no one on
the payroll, it may be that there is money enough in the budget to pay
the higher salary for the balance of the year. So far as the Planning
Consultant is concerned, there is a sum set up in the budget this year
for such purposes.
Commissioner Norton asked what ,the average fee that a professional con-
sultant would charge the city on an hourly basis1
The Planning Secretary answered that he was not qualified to give that
information at all; he explained tliat in the past the city hired Everett
Page Eight
December 13, 1960
Mansur as a consultant; he worked 3 days a month for a ~ericd cf 5
or 6 years; the rate he was paid at the time was $120.00 a month for
three days. He would assume that other consultants might have been
higher, and what the rate would be in this present era, he. could
not say, except that it would probably be higher.
CODDllissioner Golisch asked if a City Planner or Planning Direct.or' s
relationship would be the same with the City Manager as anot.her de-
part.ment head?
The Planning Secretary stat.ed that at the present t.ime the Pl~nning
Division is a part of the Department of Public Works under Mr. Lortz's
direction; the normal channels .'ould be to take up lflanning lJ1.atters
with Mr. Lortz, and then with the City Manager; now, whether that is
to be continued he did not know. Commissioner Ferguson stat.ed that
his concern was on the same basis; that if you have a professional
planner working on the staff, and having a Planning Consultanr to
review his work; it. isn't unusual that professionals do nor always
agree; what happens if they disagree?
Commissioner Golisch added: and then we have the City Manager who
is also a professional planner; we would be fortunate to ger things
done.
The Planning Secretary stated that any recommendations on the study
areas come first to the Planning Commission; the Planning Commi.ssion
may not agree With the City Planner, either; then the Planning Com-
mission makes a recommendation to the City Council and maybe the
City Council won't agree with the Planning Commission; he thought
there is the same condition right today.
Commissioner Norton stated that basically it revolves around related
costs in terms of; if a man is qualifi'ed as a planner, and he is em-
ployed in the service of the City of Arcadia as a professional plan-
ner with a formal education, then l1e should be compet.ent and capable,
and his work should not be a matter of checking to be done perhaps
as a t.eacher looking at the work of a student.
Commissioner Golisch added: It should be that he would be hired as
an assistant on a major project if they were to call in a consultant.
Commissioner Forman stated that this is the reason he brought up the
freeway.project; this is a major project which involves a great
deal of land. and he did not believe a new man, part.icularly, would
be able to absorb all the facts in a short period of time, and he
believed he would need some help there; this l.s the immediate thing
we should get on right away.
CODDllissioner Forman alao quesrioned the wordl.ng of "guide lines"; it
seemed to him that in planning for the future the guide lines are the
main object; however, it looks like that on a major project it would
be more up to a coordination of ideas between the planner end the
consultant, if necessary, to set on the guide lines; we need our help
on the outside for the guide lines rather than on the inside.
The Planning Secretary explained that as he understood the paragraph,
these are guide lines for the employment of a planning Consult.ant.
Commissioner Forman added that he still felt that the staff and the
commission should get started on establishing some guide l.ines, be-
cause he felt that they have been remiss in not getting started soon
enough on some of t.hese problem areas.
Page Nine
December 13, 1960
. . , .
Commissioner Rutherford stated that if the City Manager is a
qualified planner; hires a City Planner and then we have a planning
consultant; he would like to point out that we have also had Mr.
Leslie Talley in the city for a good many years, and he added that
without that experience he didn't know how the city could have gotten
along; he felt Mr. Talley was great at it, and he wished to point
chis out at this time to the commission just for what~it's worth.
The Planning Secretary continued reading the report with Item No.
3.
'Commissioner Norton stated that he would 'have one thought to make in
connection with Item No.3, and he thought that as a member of the
commission he would be remiss if it were not brought into focus, and
that is: it is stated here "that upon the retirement of Mr. Talley,
the position of Planning Secretary will be abolished, and the title
of City Planner changed to Planning Director". It would seem to him
that out of respect to a man who has devoted as many years as he has
to this city, in making it as fine a city as we enjoy today, he
would certainly be inclined to at least bring to the group for con-
sideration and possible discussion the value of presenting to Mr.
Talley (if it met with the City Council's approval) the title of
Planning Director prior to the abolishment of this office. He felt
that this would be in good taste; he thought that it would be cer-
tainly a move of prestige value, and one that he would like this com-
mission, at least, to think about and discuss i:fthey are so
inclined.
COmmissioner Rutherford stated that these were a few of the things
he was trying to point out a few minutes before; most of these
things have been processed through Mr. Talley's office through the
years, and he just wanted to point out that there is no substitute
for experience. And though sometmes we do not concur, this is one
time that he wholeheartedly agreed with Mr. Norton.
Commissioner Forman stated the thought that has been expressed by
Mr. Norton and seconded was ably done and he thought very good ideas.
Many people in public service get nothing but the short end of the
stick, so to speak, during their term of office, and maybe a gold
watch when they retire, which mayor may not be compensation for
some of the grief which has been dealt out over the counter day after
day. . And he felt that if there is a way to recognize the faithfulness
of Les Talley to the city and to the Planning Commission that this
is a way of obtaining it priOr to his retirement; he concurred also.
The Chairman stated that since there will be some changes in the
Planning Department he felt that the commission should recommend
to the City Council that consideration be given, at the time of this
reorganization, of the abolishment of the title of Planning Secretary
and adopting the title of Planning Director headed by Les Talley
prior to his retirement, then there would not be any need for further
change in the future; the organization would be set up.
Moved by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Ferguson and
carried unanimously to make the above expressed recommendation to
the City Council.
The Planning Secretary continued reading the report to its conclusion.
The commissioners expressed full accord with the balance of the recom-
mendation and the Chairman stated that overall, they were in accord
Page Ten
December 13, 1960
'. . '.
RESOLUTIONS
MATTERS FROM
THE AUDIENCE
l
-,
with the report in general, with the minor modifications based on
the discussions tonight.
The City Attorney before presenting his resolutions stated that he
hBd been requested by Councilman Butterworth to explain his absence
from the meeting tonight. The Councilman was attending other meet-
ings on city matters.
No. 396 - The City Attorney presented Resolution No. 396, entitled:
"A, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS
FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSIDERING AND MAKING RECOMMENDA-
TIONS CONCERNING THE RECLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN REAL PRO-
PERTY ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES OF DUARTE ROAD IN
SAID CITY FROM ZONE R-l TO 'ZONE R-3 OR SOME MORE RE-
STRICTIVE ZONE, AND FIXING THE DATE, HOUR AND PLACE or
A PUBLIC HEARING FOR SUCH PURPOSE."
Motion by Commissioner Forman, secon~ed by Commissioner Norton and
csrried unanimously to waive the reading of the full body of Resolu-
eton No. 396.
Motion by Commissio,ner Forman, seconded by Commiss1.onerNorton and
carried unanimously to adopt Resolution No. 396.
No. 397 - The City Attorney presented Resolution No. 397, entitled:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS FOR THE
PURPOSE OF CONSIDERING AND MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS CON-
CERNING THE RECLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY
ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF SYCAMORE AVENUE EAST OF SECOND
AVENUE IN SAID CITY FROM ZONE R-l TO ZONE R-3 OR SOME
MORE RESTRICTIVE ZONE, AND FIXING THE DATE, HOUR AND
PLACE OF A PUBLIC HEARING FOR SUCH PURPOSE."
Motion by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Ferguson and
carried to waive the reading of the full body of resolution No. 397.
Motion by Commissioner Norton, seconded'by Commissioner Ferguson and
carried unanimously for the adoption of Resolution No. 397.
Fremont Koch, M.D., asked the members of the commission if they could
give him any information on the disposition of the plans for the medi-
cal building at 623 W. Duarte Road which had been considered at the
Planning Commission meeting of November 22, 1960. He had understood
that the matter would be on the agenda tonight, after having been re-
ferred back to staff for the comments and opinion of the Fire Chief.
The Planning Secretary explained that the Fire Chief had been contacted
and they had talked with the architect on the building. The plans had
not been submitted to the staff as yet with whatever modifications
were necessary for acceptance by the Planning Commission.
Some discussion ensued about the possibility of Arcadia Avenue going
through, and it was decided that since this matter will be brought up
to the City Council at their regular meeting of December 20, 1960, he
would prefer to defer decision on the acceptance of the plans pending
the decision on the opening of Arcadia Avenue, since this
Page Eleven
December 13, 1960
!
'. ..
~,
would effect the plans to a gIeat extent.
The Planning Secretary informed the commission that he had been in-
formed there was a meeting with the City Manager on the question of
Arcadia Avenue opening, and there may he some action at the council
meeting next Tuesday.
The City Attorney explained that the meeting was held, and the purpose
was to work out problems on properties abutting Baldwin Avenue, which
in turn have a direct bearing on this property.
'The applicant"s proposal is that if access is provided from Baldwin
Avenue back to this property, then they would provide the necessary
access to the rear portion of this property on what would become
Arcadia Avenue, and then the dimensions involved on the driveway
become less important. He did not know what the outcome of this meet-
ing was, however.
ORDINANCE
No. 912
The Planning Secretary stated that in 1955 by Ordinance 912, there
was certain rezoning made on Duarte Road, between First Avenue and
Second Avenue, including the corners east of Second Avenue.
The rezoning was contingent on dedicating 12 feet for widening of
Duarte Road and dedicating opening of an alley at the rear of the
property. The zoning was C-l; to make it available and useful for
commercial purposes the commission thought that an alley through there
was necessary. At that t1mesonie of the property, more than half,
made their dedication and obtained the outright change of zone.
Other property owners had not made the dedication, and the ordinance
was set up to provide that if within two years they did make the
dedication, then the zone would be changed to Zone C-l without any
further hearings. That two years, of course, expired long ago. The
City Manager asked the Planning Secretary to bring to the attention
of the commission" the advisib1.lity of the commission on their own
motion to reinstitute proceedings to set up again that the proper-
ties concerned can be rezoned to Zone C-l by the dedication of the
necessary right of way., This would be !'lore desirable than having
individual applications from individual owners concerned.
. .
On the north side of Duarte Road there are just two lots, and those
are owned by one person. On the south side there are five lots.
The Planning Secretary continued that he had cheCked with the City
Attorney, and there is no way to extend that time limit; it has
expired, and in the adoption of the City Code the ordinance that set
it up actually was repealed in its entirety, and the City Attorney
advised that it would have to be intit:Lated with new proceedings.
Motion by Commissioner Forman, seconded by Commissioner Rutherford
and carried unanimously to instruct the City Attorney to draw up a
resolution instituting proceedings for de purpose of rezoning the
property on Duarte Road between First and Second Avenues from its pre-
sent zoning to C-l upon dedication of l2 feet of frcntage for wid-
ening purposes and the required alley dedication.
ADJOURN
There being no further business presented to tpe Planning Commission
the meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M.
L. M. TALLEY
Planning Secretary
Page Twelve
December 13, 1960