Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMAY 28, 1963 , ~ -.. C.., ORIGINAl: ~ ~..,,:..-=--- . --,......,...~ ...~ . . ! r~ ~'" r;'j ~l r", : I {-', '1 i f' ~,' ~~., :~ :. :.": .: I ( " , J b;" '. '"' ~~ ,: MINUTES . ',' L": ., .. ," . ,.-........ r....!. C -'. ":.. \ ',' PLANNING COMMISSION, ARCAt~,; ~~~R~I,~l'J REGULAR MEETING May 26, 1963 The Planning Commission of the, City of Arcadio, met in regulor session on May 28, 1963, at 8:00 P,M. in the Council Chombers of the City Hall, with Choirman Forman presiding. Commissioner Kuyper led in .the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL Commissioners Ferguson, Golisch, Hanson, Kuyper, Norton, Parker and Forman. OTHERS PRESENT: City Attorney James A. Nicklin Assistant City Engineer Frank Forbes Planning Director Will iam Phelps ~enior Planner Ernest Mayer, Jr. Councilman Conrad Reibold The Commission welcomed Councilman Reibold on being appointed as liaison representative ,of;the City Council. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING V-63-16 (Ed ingheuser) This item was continued from the meeting of May 14, pending the completion of a study by the Zoning Committee of the proper location of tall buildings in Arcadia. The Chairman of the Zoning Committee, Mr. Ferguson, stated that since the last meeting the Committee has met and has started the necessary studies. However, the studies are not completed. Therefore, the Committee wishes to have this item con- tinued. The Chairman announced that this was a continued public hearing. COMMUNICA TIONS Communications were received from property owners relative to this zone variance as well as V-63-18 (Mr. Vallone). PROPONENTS Robert F. Smith, 329 South Fourth Avenue, Alhambra, Calif. (5 West Duarte Rood) E. A. Park Real Estate, 9040 E. Huntington Drive, San Gabriel, Calif. OPPONENTS Joseph C. Leslie and Alice M. Leslie - 120 W. Camino Real West Arcadia Homeowners Association, Robert J. Considine, President, Mr. and Mrs. Grigsby B. Jackson, 481 Fairview Avenue, Mr. and Mrs. R.G.Ross, 829 La Cadena Ave. Mr. and Mrs. McDonald H. Curtis, 831-833 La Cadena Ave. May 28, 1963 poge One '\"'''' , , c APPLICANT Dr. Ralph Erlingheuser desired to be heard in behalf of his application. He requested the Commission to consider his statements as an earnest effort on his port to develop the property in the best possible manner, taking into consideration the size, area and neighborhood, and not for personal gain. MOTION Moved by Commissioner Golisch, seconded by Commissioner Ferguson and unanimously carried that the Zone Variance of Dr. Ralph Erlingheuser, V-63-17, be continyed until the report from the,Zoning Committee has been completed. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING V-63-18 (Vallone) This pubi'ic hearing was continued from the meeting of May 14, 1963. APPLICANT Mr. Mike Vallone presented a petition favoring his application for on eight-story cipartmentdwelling on Huntington Drive, signed by 52 property owners in the area. Mr. Robert Stevens, Attorney at law, representing the appl icant stated he did not have new information, except for use of the Zoning Committee, which was a statement of land use prepared by Dr. James M. Gillies who is nationally known for his analysis of construction and business conditions, being the Assistant Dean., School of Business Administration at U.c. L.A., and Economic Advisor to the Building Contractors Association. He gave the high points of the report. There is a gread demand for the use of land in this area; that steps should be taken to be certain that misused land is redeveloped into its appropriate use; that land planning must be done with care to be certain that voluable land is not wasted; that land can be used more effectively by using it more intensively; by developing it with high density populations. If people in the region wish to I ive in such accommodations as demonstrated by a careful analysis, and, if there is on entrepreneur willing to invest on such a project, then zoned land should be maqe available for such developments. A community which provides such land would, I) increase its tax base very substantidll: and this is important in the face of rising operating costs; 2) perhaps even more signi- ficantly permit residents to have the type of living quarters they desire; and, 3) make a contribution to the total development of the southern California economy by demon~; strating how efficiently land cqn pe util ized. There is no doubt that high rise construction is coming to southern California. There is still some doubt, however, os to its specific location as to the exact communities which will capitalize on the development to the mutual benefit of the municipality, the citizens and the southern California economy". MOTION Moved by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner parker, and unanimously carried that Zone Variance V-63-18 continued from May 14, be a'gain continued until the flext regular meeting, pending the report of the Zoning Committee. TRACT NO. 27195 Tentative map of Tract No. 27195, located north of Oak haven Rood, east of S<.Inta Anita Wash, consisting of 20 lots, was considered by the Planning Commission. May 28, 1963 Page Two c STAFF REPORT: The subject tract is located on the proposed extension of Oakhaven Road, north of Foothills Junior High School and east of the private street knawnas Oakhaven Lane. Th e .tract proposes 20 lots on a 50 ft. wide street in Zone R-I. The total lot areas appear to equal or exceed the 7500 sq. ft. R-I requirement, but, it .:jnust be pointed out that the pad areas are considerably smaller and range from a low of 2700 sq. ft. to a high of 6300 sq. ft. Ninet'een of the twenty lots have a frontage of 75 ft. or better. The Planning Department recommends that the tract be approved, subject to the following conditions: I. Install all standard street improvements required by the subdivision ordinance, Improvements, grades and drainage shall be to the satisfaction of the Director of Publ ic Works. Grades shall not exceed 15% and a grading plan submitted that shall be acceptable to the Director of Public Works. 2. Provide all easements required for utilities. All utilities shall be installed underground. 3. Remove all trees an.d structures from the street right of way. 4. Remove all 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. 5. A drainage and grading plan shall be prepared and submitted, meeting the approval of the Depadtment of Public Works. 6. Slope banks shall not exceed ~,L:.I/.2 to I for cuts or fills; the exact I imit of the slope shall be established in consultation with a soils engineer and a geologist acceptable to the City Engineer. 7. Lot lines shall be placed at the top of slopes wherever possible and be within tract boundaries. 8. All slopes shall be benched and the benches graded and drained at a grade sufficient to prevent silting. There should be bench access (acceptable to the City Engineer) 'for maintenance purposes. Soil erosion protection shall be installed and main- tained by the developer until the property is sold to a single property owner, unless approved alternatives are provided for maintaining the slopes. 9. The top of all cuts against virgin slope which shall remain after construction should be protected from erosion by a drainage interceptor. 10. The minimum pad area for each lot should be 7500 square feet, and shall be substantially level and drain to street. 11. The soils recommendations, engineering and testing shall be made by a capable soils engineer or firm agreeable to both the City and the developer; a geologist will also be required. Continuous inspection will be required during'all grading operations. May 28, 1963 Page Three '-_/ c 12. The City of Ar'cadio would reserve the right to review the deSign of all grading and street improvements and drains which are tributary to the property within the City of Arcadia. 13. All 50 foot streets shall be provided with 5 foot sidewalk and planting easements. Minimum curb to curb width of 36 feet, and all standard improvements including sewers, water, storm drains, curb and gutter and pavement. A four foot concrete sidewolk shall be required to control porkway erosion. 14. Driveways to eoch pad should be provided ond paved with asphalt or concrete from the street curb I ine to the pad for erosion control. , 15. The basis of design for 011 storm droins should be on appropriate Los Angeles Caunty Flood Control hydrology methods. 16. The subdivider sholl comply with all requirements of the subdivision ordinances and excovation ordinance. 17. This area will have to have an additional street access to Arcadia or Monrovia when the portion shown' as future is developed. 18. Lots in fee at ends of all streets to control access. 19. Approval of this tract sets no precedent or approval for future tract as shown. 20. Lots I through 6 shall have walls constructed to screen the properties to the west and that such walls shall be of a design, material and height acceptable to the Department of Publ ic Works and Planning Department. 21. Fees and deposits required: Street I ight installation (Underground as part of improvement of Tract) Street sign installation $ 140.00 Street tree installation 459.00 Rec:J;&!tion fee 500.00 TOTAL $ 1,099.00 22. Prior to the submittal of 0 final mop a revised tentative map incorporating the above condi.tions of approval shall be submitted for approval by the Planning Commission. 23. Lot plot plans indicating the size and orientation of cill proposed structures on each lot shall be submitted to and be approved by the Planning Commission prior to recordation of final map. A petition signed by four of the five property owners on Oakhaven Lane was subm itted. The request of the property owners included, 1) that the property direct,ly contiguous to Oakhaven Lane be rezoned R-O; 2) that the developer, Angraco, Industries, Inc. be required to plan construction of new homes on that portion of the development contiguous to Oakhaven Lone, to face to that street only; and, 3) that the construc- tion or placement of new homes or any moved be accompl ished without the sacrifice of full-size oaks and deodars. May 28, 1963 Page Four c-~ c A number of the property ownerS were in the oudience ond desired to speok: Mrs. Doris Hubbard, 1261. .oakhaven Lane Mr. Allan Hubbord, 1261 Oak haven Lane Louis Deris, 124() Ot]khaven Lane Ralph Alferie, 1235 Oqkhaven Lane Niles U. Hess, 1250 Qakhaven Lqne Mr. William T. Beckwith, the developer, answered various questions raised. The Chairman stated that he fel t the subdivisions ishould be referred to the Subdivision Committee and that the remarks made at this meeting would be of value to them in making a determination of the tracts. MOTION Moved by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Golisch, and unanimously carried, that Tentative Tract No. 27195 be referred to the Subdivision Committee for study and recommendation. TRACT NO. 27803 Tentative map of Tract No. 27803, which isa proposed 17 lot subdivision north of Oakglen Avenue, east of Sant!' Anita Wash, was considered. STAFF REPORT: The subject tract is located on the proposed extension of Oakglen Avenue, east of the Santa Anita Wash and north and west of the private street known as Oakhaven Lane. The tract proposes 17 lots. on a YJ ft. wide street in Zone R-I. The total lot area appears to equal or exceed the 7500 sq. ft. requirements but it must be pointed out that the proposed pad areas in some cases are considerably smaller and range from a low of 3100 sq. ft. to a high of 8800 sq. ft. All the lots except one equal or exceed the 75 ft. R-I frontage requirement. The Planning Department recommends thai the tract be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Install all standard street improvements required by the subdivision ordinance. Improvements, grades and drainage shall be to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. A grading plan submitted that shall be acceptable to the Pirector of Public Works. 2. ~rovide all easements required for utilities. All utilities shall be installed . underground. 3. Remove all trees and structures from the street right of way. 4. Remove all 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. 5. A drainage and grading plan shall be prepared and submitted, meeting the approval of the Department of Public Works. May 28, 1963 Page Five 6. Slope bcinks shall not exceed 1-1/2 to 1 for cuts or fills; the exact limit of the jslope shall be established in'consultation with a soils engineer and a geologist acceptable to the City Engineer. 7. Lot lines shall be placed at the top of slopes wherever possible. 8. All slopes shall be benched and the benches graded and drained at, a grade sufficient to prevent silting. There shall be bench access (acceptcible; to the City Engineer) for maintenance purposes. Soil erosion protection shall be installed and maintained by the developer until the praperty is sold to a single property owner, unless approved alternatives are provided for maintaining the slopes. 9. The top of all cuts against virgin slope which shall remain after canstruction should be protected from erosion by a paved drainage interceptor. 10. The minimum pad area for each lot should be;7500 square feet, shall be sub- stantially level and drain to street. II. Soils recommendations, engineering and testing shall be made by a capable soils r.engineer or firm agreeable to both the City and the developer; a geologist will also be required. Continuaus inspection will be required during all grading operatians. 12. Minimum curb to curb width of 36 feet, and all standard improvements, inc'lud- ing sewers, water, storm drains, curb and gutter and plIVement. A four foot concrete sidewalk shall be required to control parkway erosion. 13. Driveways to each pad shall be provided and paved with asphalt or concrete from the street Eurb I ine to the pad for erosion control. 14. The basis of design for all storm drains shall be on appropriate Los Angeles County Flood Control hydrology methods. 15. The subdivider shall comply with all requirements of the subdivision ordinance and excavation ordinance. 16. Special attention must be given to grading between proprosed street and lots 12 through 17. Street is '10 to 18 feet above, existing grade. 17. The County Parks and Recreation Department should be contacted to ascertain their requirements regarding the equestrian and hiking trail' in this area. 18. Drainage facili.ties and easements may be required and shall be to the,satis- faction of the Director of Publ ic Works. 19. Triangular property easterly of street and southerly of lot 17 shall be made a part of lot 17. 20. Provide a 1 foot in fee at end of street. 21. Existing house on lot 14 shall be made to conform to the Municip.aLCade and .alJ.:sewer and water serv i ce shall be prov ided from the new street. May 28, /963 Page Six MOTION LOT SPLIT NO. L-63-18 MOTION LOT SPLIT NO. L-63-19 C~ 22. The swimming pool on Lot 13 shall be fenced in accordance with Code require- ments or removed and backfilled to the sotisfoction of the Deportment of Public Works. 23. Lots 12 through 17 shal I have walls to screen the praperties to the south and east and that such walls shall be of a design, material and height acceptable to the Department of Public Works, and Planning Department. 24. Fees and deposits required: Street light installation (Underground as part of improvement of Tract) Street sign installation $ - - Street tree instollation 286. O~ Recreation fee 425.00 $711. 00 25. Prior to the submitting of a final map 0 revised tentotive map incorporating the above conditions of approval shall be submitted for approval by Planning Commission. 26. House plot plans indicating the size and orientation of all proposed structures on eoch lot shall be submitted to and be approved by the Planning Commission prior to recordotion of a final map. Inasmuch as this tract and Tract No. 27195 are being developed together by the same subdivider and are in the same general area. the' remarks in general pertaining to the one would apply to the other. Moved by Commissioner Ferguson, seconded by Commissioner Kuyper ond unonimously carried thot Troct No. 27803 be referred to the Sub-division Committee for further study and recommendation. Application of Margoret M. Godfrey, 239 W. Lemon to divide lot, at rear of this property was considered. The purpose of this split is to shift the rear property line 4.16 ft , adding this additional footage to Lot 5, of Tract No. 24140. The Planning Department recommends the lot split subject to the following conditions: 1. Fi Ie a final map 2. Provide water services to comply with the Uniform Plumbing Code. Moved by Commissioner Ferguson, seconded by Commissioner Kuyper, and unanimously carried that Lot Split No. L-63-18 be tentatively approved, subject to the conditions os outl ined in the stoff report. Application of Marie L. Myler, 1004 South 10th Ave. for a division of property at this address was considered. This lot split hlJd been approved but had expired because of the conditions of approval were not fulfilled. The Planning Department recommends approval, subject to the following condition: I. File a finol mop 2. Provide 0 sewer luteral 3. Pay a $50.00 recreation fee 4. Water services to comply with the Uniform Plumbing Code. 5. Construct concrete curb and gutter along EI Norte Avenue May 28, 1963 Page Seven MOTION LOT SPLIT REG'UIREMENT NO. L-63-9 MOTION VARIANCE APPLlCA TI ON NO. V-63-17 6. Remove guest house from Parcel 2 7. Remove 5 ft. choJin link fence and shrubbery from Tenth Avenue, or reduce them to legal height. Moved by Commissioner Golisch, seconded by Commissioner Ferguson, and unan- imously carried that Lot Split No. L-63-19 be tentatively approved, subject to the conditions as outl ined in the staff report. The Commission had approved a lot split located at the corner of Naomi and Holly Avenues - 363 Naomi Ave. One of the conditions of approval was that the existing garage be removed and 0 new one constructed. The applicants have found thot becouse of the lorge size of the existing garage they can by removing 5 ft. of the building comply with the requirements of the Code and still have a garage of approximately 21 ft. in width. Approval is requested to remove this portion of the goroge ond have the remaining portion remain intoct. Moved by Commissioner Ferguson, seconded by Commissioner Norton, and unanimous'l) carried that the request as outlined be approved, and that the existing garage with the removal of 5 feet from the width be permitted to remain. Public h:earing was held on Ap\:!lir;:otion af William Knight for the construction of o third story pent house above a proposed apartment building on property known as 1102 Fairview Avenue was held. STAFF REPORT: William J. Knight, owner of property located at the southwest corner of Sunset and Fairview Avenue and known as 1102 Fairview Avenue requests permission to construct a third story penthouse above a proposed two story apartment building, the total height of which shall not exceed 35 ft. ANALYSIS: The subject property is in Zone R-3 which allows 0 maximum height limit of two stories or 35 feet. A recent Commission action regarding this property granted a modification appeal to allow construction of the proposed apartment building within ten feet of the side property line on Sunset Boulevard. The Commission at its last meeting considered two other variance applications, which among other requests, sought permission to exceed the two story or 35 feet height limit. Both applications were referred to the Zoning Committee for further study and analysis with the object in mind that no decision be reached until a height district map could be prepared. The Planning Department recommends that this request to allow construction of a third story penthouse, a variation from present R-3 allowances, be cotogorized with the other two similar requests ond that it too be referred to the Zoning Committee for further study. COMMUNICA TlONS: Lucille Pedroni, 1024 Sunset Blvd, protested the height of the building. May 28, 1963 Page Eight MOTION VARIANCE APPLICATION No. V-63-15 (Curci) PROPONENTS: Freeman Campbell, 840 Arcadia Avenue, the designer of the building felt that with the construction of this building the entire area would be enhanced. It is considered a prlblem lot. The cosl of the subterranean garage and elevator becomes a problem for o.small number of units this size. The owners desire to occupy the penthouse. The plan calls for large units but from an economic standpoint the additional unit is needed. OPPONENTS: Ed. Roetters, 1015 Sunset Blvcj. awner of the lot to the south was neither for nor against. He felt with the increased height between the proposed building and the building he is constructing would not be good planning. His building would be but 20 ft. high. Inasmuch as this application exceeds the height limit provided under the R-3 regulations, it was moved by Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Kuyper, and unanimously carried that this matter be continued until the next regular meeting, pending the report of the Zaning Committee on height limitations. The hearing on the. application of Helen Curci for a zone variance to allow the construction of six dwelling units to the rear of home known as 250 Oakhurst Lane was held. STAFF REPORT: The applicant proposes to develop six 2 bedroom, one story apartment un its to the reor of an existing house containing two dwelling units. The plan shows 12 carpart parking spaces of 10 ft. x 20 ft. size and a turning area of 25 ft. BACKGROUND: In 1940 the City Council per Ordinance No. 636 did opprove Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9 of Tract 13487 for construction, maintenance and operation of residential bungalows of one or two un i ts each not to eXfceed a tota I of 8 un i ts on anyone lot. In addition Lot 10 of Tract 13487 was approved for construction, operation and maintenance of a restaurant, cocktoillnumge on Lot 10 and permitted only bungalow units as heretofore described. The Arcadia Municipal Code adopted October 23, 1960 (part of Lot 6) 250 (Lot 7 subject property) 260 (Lot 8), 270 (part of Lot 9) are presently improved with a house type duplex each. The property known as 278-288 (part of Lot 10) is improved with eight bungalow type dwelling units. The remainder of the property on Oakhurst Lane is either improved with single family dwellings or is unimproved. The subject properties: rear lot line abuts the rear lot lines of three Zone R-I properties fronting on Santo Maria Road and improved with substantial homes of qual ity. May 28, 1963 Page Nine '-1 ( . '"-, ANALYSIS A basic consideration in determining justification for a zone variance such as the one being considered is the determinatian of whether or not granting of such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment af a property right possessed by others in the same zone and vicinity. There appears to be no question as to justification for approval on thi.s basis with the existence of eight units developed close by under the same ordinance that applied to th is property as well. ' Another consideration concerning a variance applic.ation has to do with the determin- ing of whether or not the granting of such variance will be materially detrimental to the public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity. There is in existence a 12 ft. high 4 ft. wide carolina cherry hedge screening the rear of property fronting on Santa Maria Road. This Department does not consider the hedge adequate for buffering sound nor protecting privacy and recommends that additional screening be provided to separate the proposed developments from adjacent properties. CONCLUSIONS The Planning Department recommends that the application be approved, subject to the following conditions: A. The proposed units be developed to comply with all requirements of the R-3 ordinance with the exception of driveway requirements. B. The proposed units not to exceed 11 ft. 6 in. in height to the ridge line. C. The proposed units be developed not nearer than 15 ft. to the rear praperty . line and th...t a plan be prepared showing this area suitably landscaped to provide additional buffering to properties east of subjec t property, such plan to be approved by the Planning Department. D. The building shall contain no more than 8 units each and no more six additional be constructed. E. The grading, drainage utility line placement, retaining walls, paving plans be submitted to the Department of Publ ic Works and approval given. F. Complete working drawings shall be submitted to and be approved by the Deportment of Building and Safety prior to issuance of a building permit. COMMUN ICA TIONS OPP.,lZlNENTS: A. Donald and Cornel is F. Galbraith, 621 Santo Moria Road. George E. lewis, 240 Oakhurst lane.~ ro,'c, A petition signed by most of the property owners on Santa Maria Road was presented. ( approximatel y 25 properti es) APPLICANTS: Mr. William T. Beckwith, Realtor, 107 W. Huntington Drive stated that since 1940 special use has been allowed on the property. It has been since the co'dificotion that this special use was eliminated (:or in 1960). The Curci's purchased the property May 28, 1963 Page Ten MOTION HEARING CLOSED in 1953. Between 1953 and 1960 they couid h.Jve developed the property. The Codifi- cation el im inated the further development of all property on the south side of the street. They felt that with one property enjoying this right it was not logical to take away the same right from onother. Some of the residences on Sonta Maria Drive back up to 0 50 unit opartment building. He commented on severol items in the report of the Plann- ing Department. OPPONENTS: George Bliss, 240 Oak Hurst Lane Dr. Donisthorpe, 24& Oak Haven Lane William R. Atwood, 5i1 S",nta Maria Road Mrs. Margaret Thiel, 260 Oakhurst Lane Mr. Charles Giles, 605 Santa Maria Road Unk Hlnter, 625 Santa Maria Road Mr. Garrett, 274 Oakhurst Lane Mrs. Clare Arth, 1017 Cotolpa Rood Mr. Glen Richardson, 527 Santa Maria Road Tom Byer, 60.1 Santa Maria Rood. The general concenses of those who spoke against the appl ication was that the street is but 30 ft. wide; is a private road; that troffic is already a problem; many peopie cannot now get in and out of the driveways when one person entertains; fire protection would be hampered; properties were purchased with understanding of their being R-l; the lots in the area are developed with one single-family home; the R-3 area an Color- ado is developed with apartments; the zoning under question wos prior to the developmen of Santa Maria Rood; the petition filed did not seek owners on any other property thon Santa Maria Road. Renoak Way was not canvassed, but several property owners were also opposed to an apartment project in this area; the depreciation of property vaiues of surrounding parcels would result if the request were granted. The City Attorney stated that with the adoption of the Municipal Code, Ordinance 636 is specifically repealed. This ordinance granted a varr.:ition from Ordinance 439 which was the zoning ordinance then in effect. Ordinance 439 was repealed spa;ifically 'by Ordinance 760 in May of 1949; when the new zoning ordinance was adopted. Ordinance 760 specifically repealed Ordinance 439 and all ordinances amendatory thereof. Ordinonce 636 being a variance from the provisions of Ordinance 439 was an ordinance amendatory so it wos repealed by Ordinance 650. FurHier, since Ordinance 636 wos 0 variance from Ordinance 439 which repealed the basic ordinance there is no longer any variance. It is probably true that many people did not understond that and a few building permits were issued after 1949 in error. Mr. Curie presented a letter derogatory to the appl icant wh ich wos not read. He later requested the original to be with drawn. On motion of Commissioner Norton, seconded by Commissioner Ferguson, the original letter was withdrawn and a photostot copy filed in its place. Mr. Dutson, 1127 W. Duarte Road was the purchaser of the property urder consideration. It was the opinion when he purchased that the land could be developed with other units as above stated. Moved by Commissioner Gol isch, seconded by Commissioner Norton and unanimously carried that the public heoring be closed. May 28, 1963 Page Eleven Ample time and opportunity had been given the area to develop the property under the varionce and inasmuch as this is an R-l orea, it was fel t that it should remain as such. MOTION Moved by Commissioner Golisch, seconded by Commissioner Kuyper that Variance application V-63-15 be recommended for denial inasmuch as this area is developed os an R-l orea and should remain as such. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Ferguson, Gol isch, Hanson, Kuyper, Norton, Parker and Forman NOES: None ABSENT: None RECESS The Chairman called 0 recess for two minutes. The meeting reconvened at 11 :07 P. M. VARIANCE Public hearing held on the application of Robert Williams for a zone variance to APPLlCA TlON allow 0 curb cut on Live Oak Ave. ot 325 Live Ook Avenue on property on which NO. V-63-19 a restaurant is being developed under 01'1 architectural overloy. (Williams) There were no communications. STAFF REPORT: Robert F. Williams, owner of property known as 325 East Live Oak Avenue requests a variance to allow construction of a 25 ft. wide curb cut on Live Oak Avenue to allow vehicular access to a proposed parking area intended to serve a proposed restaurant. ANALYSIS.: The application is necessary because of City Council Resolution No. 3073, a con- dition of which states that vehicular access ta the subject property shall be by means of a dedicated alley as opposed to curb cuts on Live Oak Avenue and Fourth Avenue. This condition was inserted at the time, to prevent the promiscuous creation of curb cuts along major orterial streets which if not controller could create traffic hazards. However, an analysis of the developments that have occurred aoong Live Oak Avenue, the proposed subject development, and the developments that are I ikely to occur indicates that the subject request presents no problems and could reduce some of the traffic that might use Fourth Avenue, a residential street, if the site were developed per the opproved development plan as it now exists. The Department of Public Works concur in th is analysis. The Planning Department recommends that this appl ication be approved, subject tO~the condition that the proposed curb cut be constructed in a manner approved by the Department of Publ ic Works. May 28, 1963 Page Twelve " '"-, PROPONENTS: Mr. Robert F. Will ioms, 2233 South Fifth Avenue stated the originol provision wos that access should be mode from an olley to the reor. Properties had not been developed at the time of the D. overlay, and it could not be determined how many curb cuts would be requested on the inajor street. It was not determined that the cut would not affect traffic and would make a better plan for the traffic using the parking lot, being able to enter from one street and exit on another. MOTION (Hearing Closed) Moved by Commissioner Ferguson, seconded by Commissioner Kuyper, and unanimous I carried that the publ ic hearing be closed. MOTION Moved by Commissioner Golisch, seconded by Commissioner Ferguson that Zone Variance No. V-63-19 be recommended for approvol. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Ferguson, Golisch, Honson, Kuyper, Norton, Porker and Forman NOES: None ABSENT: None VARIANCE Publ ic hearing on the appl ication of Rolph Stogsdill, for permission to construct APPLICATION a home for the aged deof on property located at 529 West Las Tunas Drive. V-63-20 STAFF-REPORT: Mr. Ralph Stagsdill, 529 W. Las Tunas Drive, (Size of property) 100 ft. x 191 ft. Area 19,000 sq. ft. Proposed Use: Home for the Aged Deaf. The existing house on the subject property is proposed to be removed and 0 new structure constructed continaing 6500 sq. ft. The new building will be two stories and contain 19 bedrooms. Ample londscaping is proposed on 011 sides of the proposed building. On the north and east side a minimum landscaped area of ten feet is praposed. In addition a masonry wall 6 ft. in height will enclose the site. The activity area for this building is located on the west side of the lot and is next to the property in Zone C-2 and D. The average bedroom size is approximately 15 ft by 17 ft. A common or community kitchen, dining room and living room is proposed. Space within the building is allocated for 0 matron's quarters, infirmory and laundry. The refuse orea is well screened from the street and adjacent property. 14 offstreet parking spaces are shown on the plan. Two of these will be under cover. EXISTING ZONING The westerly 25 ft. of the subject property is in Zone C 2 and D. The remaining easterly 50 ft. is in Zone PR I and D. (P permits parking use of the property os well as R-I uses. The D is an architectural overlay). A copy of the architecturol "D" overlay restrictions governing this land is attached (NOTE: The portion of the subje,ct property in Zone C 2 is in Fire Zone No. I. The portion in PR-l and D is in Fire Zone No.3. In Fire Zone No. I buildings must be constructed of incombustible materials. Frame and stucco construction is permitted in Fire Zone No.3. The proposed building is frame and stucco. Only the City Council can grant rei ief from the Fire Zone Regulations). May 28, 1963 Page Th i rteen . . CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AREA The fou'r corners of Baldwin and Las Tunas Drive, are in commercial zones and developed with commercial land uses. At the time the northeost corner was piaced in commercial zoning the Commission emphasized that this orea should be restricted to neighborhood commercial uses. Commercial zoning on either side of Las Tunas, . east of the present zaning was nat considered necessary nor desirable. On the south side of Las Tunas Drive the commercial zoning changes to Zone R-l after the Play- time Nursery which is somewhat of a buffer between the R-] and commercial uses. RECOMMENDA TlON: The Planning Department recommends that the variance be approved because: I. This type of use will provide a transition from the commercial uses to the sing'le family residential uses. 2. Adequate buffering by landscaping walls, etc.. is provided to effectively screen this use from the adjoining R-l properties. 3. The generol location of the site is ideal due to its proximity to stores and bus transportation for the praposed use. However, the Department also recommends that approval be granted, subject to the condition that complete working drawings of the proposed building, walls, and landscaping, including irrigation systems, be in substantial compliance with the submitted approved plot plans, and that these drawings be opproved by the Planning Commission. In addition to this condition the Commission should consider requiring sidewalks and increasing the height of the block wall on the front of the property to four feet. APPLICANT: Mr. Ralph D. Stogsdill, 54,7 Workman Ave. stated the property had been zoned C-2 and had had difficulty having people develop. He had an offer fram a large drug company far property on Baldwin Ave. had it been rezoned C-2. The attempt had been made to have a development that would be compatible to everyone in the neighborhood. Small individual buildings had been refused and th is was the best use that could be obtained. The area is permissible to two stories, and from appearance the proposed building resembles an apartment house. The front of the building has been set back 79 feet from the curb, which is 15 ft. back of the adjoining residences. This wos done to cooperote with the neighborhood and to have the parking in front. The residents will be deaf and mute and in most cases former professional people, such as teachers, etc. so they will not be driving. He produced a communication from the California Homes for the Agee Deaf to the fact that this is I icensed by the State Welfare Department and operates under the jurisdiction of this Department. Checks are made by a state representative on the operation of the home. No ill people will be at this home. This is a compatible use of the property arid would be 0 buffer between the C-2 and the R-l properties. The design and plans coli for 30 rsidents, with a matron or caretaker. They will own the property themselves, as an organization. The neighborhood had beer;!,' mailed notices of the public hearing and had been urged by Mr. Stogsdill to appear at the meeting. Some.question arose as to the fire zone with reference to the type of occupallcy. May 28, 1963 Page Fourteen . . MOTION MOTION PUBLIC PARTICI- PA TI ON ADJOURN- MENT ~ ~ The Planning Director had contacted the Department of Social Welfare, Mrs. Jean lIi'eecy. She is the investigator of the facility which these prople own in West Los Angeles. Regardless of the action taken by the City of Arcadia IiIS to the plot plans and building plans, the plans would have to receive approval from their Department, and would have to comply with various state regulations. There are state standards for size of the dining rooms, the size of the living room and the size of the bedrooms and baths. If the Commissioner were to decide to approve the application, it should be subject to the approval of the finol working drawings from the State Department of Social Welfare that these were the plans they had approved. OPPONENTS: Mr,.Paul Frandsen, YJ2 W. Woodruff Ave. stated he had recently purchosed this property and that it was R-I. He felt that any change in use in the area to detract from the R-l was not good planning. Moved by Commissioner Kuyper, seconded by Commissioner Ferguson, and unanimous" Iy carried that the public hearing be closed. 7:,,_, '0 There was concern as to whether or not the frame and stucco building was appropriate for this use. Safety factors, height of building, parking were 011 considered. Some of these questions, no doubt, would be up to the agency under whose jurisdiction this'would come for approval. Inasmuch as there were many questions raised it was the concensus of opinion that the matter should be referred to the Subdivision Committee for further study. Moved by Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Norton, and unanimously carried that the public hearing be continued and that the matter be referred to the Subdivision Committee for further study. No one in the audience desired to be heord. The meeting adjourned at 12:05 A. M. k"d k~)l1 r#-y~ WILLIAM PHELPS Planning Director ,