Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFEBRUARY 26, 1963 .. - I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROlL CALL MINUTES CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING .' c: ~-'-'- MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION, ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA REGULAR MEETING February 26, 1963 The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, met in regular session on Tuesday, February 26, 1963, at 8:00 P.M., in the Council Chamber, City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Dr. Arcadi.a, California The Chairman led in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. PRESENT: Commissioners Ferguson, Golisch, Kuyper, Norton, Parker and Forman ABSENT: Commissioner .Michler OTHERS PRESENT: City Councilman Jess Balser City Attorney James A. Nicklin Asst. City Engineer Frank Forbes Planning Director William Phelps Planning Technician Ernest Mayer, Jr, The approval of the minutes of February 13, 1963 will be considered at the next meeting. A continued public hearing on the proposed amendments to the Arcadia Municipal Code governing apartment house developments was held. The staff report submitted at the previous meeting had been revised with many of the changes discussed incorporated. This was presented by the Planning Director. The Chairman requested any in the audience with further questions or further informa- tion to submit them at th is time. The following persons were heard: John De Young, 854 West Huntington Dr; Don Betsinger, 12 Yorkshire Drive Mike Vallone, 1028 Park Ave. lionalLeon, 1515 N.. Hayward, Los Angeles, Ed. Roetters, 1015 Sunset Boulevard Eoch expressed concern for the development of particular parcels of land and speci- f ically as to the side yard requirements proposed and the requirements for subterranean gorages. The Planning Director pointed out that each plan coming in would have to be considered On an individual basis and be checked by the Planning Department. It may be that a lot would 'have to have some rei ief, but if the City wants top quality development some further restrictions must be placed at this time to insure future development. The approval by the Planning Department would be for the substantial compliance with the regulations. This would not give power to the Planning Department, it would be a motter of .:whether the plans conform or do not conform. There would still be the right of appeal to the Planning Commission and to the Council. February 26, 1963 Page One .' . '\...~ One developer stated that he had been with his architect and designers trying to plan an apartment that would meet all of the requirements as proposed and he had been unable to do it. The Chairman stated that work had .been done by some other developers and a rendering was submitted complying with approximately 95% of the proposed changes. There was a small interpretation as to the use of the side yard that would be the only item that would prevent it from approval as submitted. The aim of the Commission is to set up a set of rules that the developers could work from. If there are conditions permitting any construction beyond two stories in height specific regulations would be written For that type of building. The side yard on any buildings over the two stories would be considered on a special basis. The present wording of the requirements as proposed had not been considered with the City Attorney and before any final action is taken a d;raft should be prepared incorporating the pro- posed changes. This would be again co'nsidered at the meeting of the Commission on March 12, 1963. The public hearing, therefore, was continued until March 12, 1963, with instructions to draft a resolution embodying the proposed changes to the R-3 regulations. TRACT NO. 27992 This tract is located on the west side of Tenth Avenue, north of Camino Real. The consideration af the tract was held February 13 and was continued to this date. The Subdivider has requested an extension of time for further consideration; therefore, the matter is continued until March 12, 1963. TRACT NO. 27619 This tract is located west of Santa Anita Avenue - north of Palm Drive, which will be the extension of Birchcroft Avenue. STAFF REPORT: The tract proposed to develop fourteen single-family lots ranging from 8300 to 14,359 square feet. The Planning Department recommends that the subject tract be approved with the conditions of approval as set forth in this report. 1. Install standard street improvements required by the subdivision ordinance. Improvements, grades and drainage shall be to the satisfaction of the Director of Publ ic Works. No driveway shall encroach in curb returns. 2. Provide all easements required for rear line utilities'. 3. Remove all trees and structures from the street right-of-way. 4. Remove ai" structures and buildings within or across the tract boundary. These removals or relocations shall comply to all City Ordinances, Codes and regulations, and be done to the satisfaction of the Department of Publ ic Works, including garage at 39 W. Palm Drive. 5. Dedication of street 60 feet wide, or provide planting and sidewalk easements for any portion of .,right of way less than 60 feet wide. February 26, 1963 Page Two " (~ 6. Birchcroft Street cul-de-sac shall be shifted to allow complete construction of curb, gutter and pavement. 7. Fees a nd deposits required: Street I ight installation Street sign installation Street tree installation Recreation fee - II lots at $25.00 $ 920.00 140.00 408.00 275.00 TOTAL $ 1,743.00 8. Dedicate a one foot strip to the City of Arcadia in fee at the westerly end of B irchcroft Street. 9. Dedicate a one foot strip in fee to the City of Arcadia .along the street right of way line adjacent to 29 West Palm Drive, or ploce in an approved trust. 10. A covenant in the form approved by the City Attorney shall be recorded agreeing that for the purposes of Article IX of the Arcadia Municipal Code the exterior boundary of said tract shall constitute the rear lot I ines of Lots 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 and 12. The Subdivision Committee had reviewed this proposed tentative map and found it to be much improved over previous plans. Some consideration should be given for a one foot in fee to control the extension of the street to the west, and also a one foot in fee for the property located to the east of the tract to control future development. Some consideration was given the width of the street coming from Palm Drive. The entrance is 50 feet which terminates in a 60 foot street. It was felt that this street should be 60 feet in its entire length. MOTION Moved by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Golisch that Tract No. 27619, located east of Santa Anita Ave., between Longden Avenue and Palm Drive, be recommended for approval, subject to the conditions as outlined in the Staff Report, and further that the street width at Palm Drive should be 60 feet; that a one foot in fee be dedicated to the City on the praperty extending to the east of this tract, or that an approved trust be set up against the property. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Ferguson, Golisch, Kuyper, Norton, Parker and Forman NOESi: None ABSENT: Commissioner Michler LOT SPLIT NO. L-63-1 This lot split is located at 1255 - 1301 N. Santa Anita Avenue - 55 Woodland Lane ond was considered at the Planning Commission meeting of February 13, 1963, and did not receive a majority vote. It was continued to this date so that the Commissioners would have an opportunity of viewing the property and further study the conditions. February 26, 1963 Page Three .... ~j MOTION Moved by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Golisch that Lot Split No. L-63-1 be opproved, subject to the conditions outl ined in the Staff report and to the further condition that the side I ine on the property located at 55 Woodland Lane be,jncreased five feet so that there would be but one break in the line. \ ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Ferguson, Golisch, Kuyper, Norton,ond Parker. NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Michler ABSTAINED: Commissioner Forman. LOT SPLIT NO. L-63-4 The Planning Commission considered Lot Spl it No. L-63-4, for property located at 415 West Walnut Avenue. If approved, the following conditions should be imposed: I. File a final map 2. Provide sewer lateral to the newly created lot. 3. Pay a recreation fee of $25.00 4. Provide water services to comply with the Uniform Plumbing Code. 5. Remove the existing frame rumpus room and frame shed to rear of garage. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial - split would create two 59 ft. wide lots (substandard) - none that narrow on block. MOTION Moved by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Ferguson, and unanimously carried that Lot Split No. L-63-4 - Alia Reynolds, be tentatively approved, subject to the above conditions. LOT SPLIT NO. L-63-5 The Planning Commission considered Lot Split No. L-63-5, for property located at 231 Sharon Road. If approved the following conditions should be imposed. I. File a final map 2. Provide water services to comply with the Uniform Plumbing Code. , STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ,Approval - This will allow for proper separation between existing house and proposed new garage location. MOTION Moved by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Golisch, and unanimously carried that Lot Spl it No. L-63-5 for property located at 231 Sharon Road be tentatively approved, subject to the conditions as outlined in the Staff report. LOT SPLIT NO. L-63-6 The Planning Commission considered Lot ~ lit No. L-:63-6, for property located on the southeast corner of Orange Grove and Michillinda Avenue - William Hovantz, 1140 W. Orange., Grove Avenue. ( February 26, 1963 Page Four ~ c If approved the following conditions should be imposed: I. File a final map 2. Provide water services to comply with the Uniform Plumbing Code. MOTION Moved by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Golisch, and unanimously carried that Lot Spl it No. L-63-6 be tentatively approved, subject to the conditions as outlined in the Staff report. CENTRAL AREA PLAN Mr. Don Gutoff and Mr. Pat Gaffney, representing the Consultant firm of Wilsey, Ham and Blair made a formal presentation to the Commission of their prel iminary plan for the revitalization of the C::entrol Business District. Each Commissioner was furnished a copy of the plan. Mr. Gutoff stated that it would be in order for the Commission to set a meeting with the Consultants and go over the plan and make its recommendation to the City Council. Time element is essential inasmuch as the City is preparing its budget far the coming fiscal year and it may be necessary to appropriate or set aside funds for a portion of the work to be accompl ished by the City. The consultants would like to see an early decision and would like to see the plan as presented ar as modified by the Commission as to the pol icy be sanctioned and thereafter adopted as the Planning Commission development policy for this area. This then would put the plan in momentum so that any future con- struction or development would be compatible with the approved pol icy. If this plan is adopted they. then, would go ahead on the final repart,supplementing more or less the technical data with the diagrams, etc. and the finished product. This will make the document more attractive, more favorable and will assist potential investors to have a clear idea for the area. The report will be supplemented with a recommended action program whereby certain general cross-ranging as to the public improvements to be provided and the certain zoning changes that are recommen.. ded in the report that the same may be better formulated and with certain time tables worked out so the adopted policy can be converted into an action program. It would seem appropriate after the adoption of the pol icy that an interim emergency zoning ordinance go into effect, whereby the status qua wou Id be maintained in this area. It is premature to place a moratorium on the permits at this time, but it is possible that delay in acting on the plan could pose some problems that would make it more difficult to develop. The matter will be discussed at the next Planning Commission meeting. Mr. John LaBuff, 1306 Auburn Drive, West Covina, asked two questions: 1. If copies of the interim report were avai lable for the property owners. He was informed that copies could be made available on a loan basis. 2. He was concerned with an emergency ordinance prohibiting development pending the adoption of the plan. He was concerned as to whether or not out of town property owners would be notified of this. February 26, 1963 Page Five . RESOLUTION NO. 472 MOTION MOTION REPORTS PUBLIC PARTICIPATION BENSEN VARIANCE CENTRAL AREA STUDY c He was informed that as a property owner he would get notice if the zoning is to be changed, but as to any emergency ordinance it is likely that notice would not be given, as that would defeat the purpose of adopting it. There would be some time before the Council could adopt the plan. It is still in the preliminary stage and meetings have to be held to get to the final stqjes. The City Attorney presented Resolution No. 472, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE DENIAL OF THE ZONE VARIANCE TO ALLOW TO REMAIN A CARPORT ILLEGALLY CONS TRUCTED ON PROPERTY ON 1122 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE IN SAID CITY." Moved by Commissioner Ferguson, seconded by Commissioner Norton, and unanimously carried that the reading of the full body of Resolution No. 472 be waived. Moved' by Commissioner Ferguson, seconded by Commissioner Norton that Resolution No. 472 be adopted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Ferguson, Goli~f:h,,, Kuyper, Norton, Parker and Forman NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Michler No reports were given by the Planning Director No one in the audience desired to be heard. The Planning Director stated that the Planning Department was to consider under what requirements a second house could be developed on a lot as a result of the variance of Mr. and Mrs. Elmer Bensen on Le Roy Avenue which had been denied. This study had not been completed due to the other matters having precedence. However, such consideration will be given in the near future as soon as the apart- ment is completed. The Commission directed a letter be forwarded to the City Council indicating the desire of the Planning Commission to have the Central Area held as close to the present use as possible so that there would be no upsetting factors interjected either in possible use which would be adverse to the new plan. It was felt that a moratorium or emergency element should be considered in order to hold the line in the development for the next sixty to ninety days. February 26, 1963 Page Six '. . MOTION ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Kuyper and unanimously carried that the Planning Director drraft a communication to the City Council outl ining the firm stand of the Commission relative to the approval of any use or new building permit within the area under study by the Consul tants until such time as the plans are adopted by the City Council for the Central Business Area. The meeting adjourned at!lO: 40 p, M. tt/~~~ WILLIAM PHELPS Planning Secretary February 26, 1963 Page Seven