The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About0466 . . . . ~ RESOLUTION NO. 466 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE DENIAL OF A ZONE VARIANCE AND/OR SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO DRILL TWO WATER WELLS, CONSTRUCT BUILDINGS AND WATER TANK AND INSTALL APPURTENANT EQUIPMENT ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CLARK STREET 400 FEET EAST OF PECK ROAD IN SAID CITY. WHEREAS, there was filed with this Commission on the 15th day of November, 1962, the application of the San Gabriel Valley Water Company, as owner, by John E. Skelton, Vice-President, for a variance and/or special use permit to drill two water wells; to erect a ground-level, welded steel water storage tank 88 feet in . diameter by 40 feet in height; to erect one concrete booster pump building approximately 16 feet by 36 feet and two corrugated metal turbine pump buildings 10 feet by 10 feet; and to install pumps and appurtenant equipment therein; and thereafter to maintain and operate said wells, tank, buiidings, pumpS and equipment on property in the County of Los Angeles, State of California, described as follows: Lots 1357 through 1361 of Chicago Park Tract as shown on map recorded in Book 30, page 100, of Miscellaneous Records in the office of the County Recorder of said County; and, WHEREAS, after due notice as required by the Zoning Ordi- nance of said City, a publiC hearing was dUly held on the matter by and before this Crnnmission on the 11th day of December, 1962, at t which time all interested persons were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION HEREBY DETER- MINES AND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: -1- 466 v . . . . . . . SECTION 1. That subject property consists of five lots, each 25 feet by 133 feet, containing a total area of 16,625 square feet, and is zoned M-l and D, as are all the lots in that area. That subject property is vacant as is much of the property in the area but several new modern industrial buildings have been construct- ed in the adjacent area thus zoned and another is in the process of construction. That water mains and fire hydrants have been in- stalled on Clark Street by the Arcadia Water Department, and the City of Arcadia has ample water and water facilities to completely and adequately serve the area. SECTION 2. That it was not shown that there are excep- tional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to subject property or to the intended use thereof that do not apply generally to the property or class of. use in the same zone or vicinity, nor was it shown that a variance is necessary for the preservation of any property right of the applicant possessed by other property in the same zone or vicinity in that industrial development under its present zoning with the present architectural restrictions would be a desirable and profitable use of subject property. That the development of subject property with sheds and a tall water storage tank would not comply with the applicable architectural overlay and would be detrimental to the present and prospective industrial development and would materially deter the further and proper im- provement of the area in which the property is located. That the location of two wells within 1000 feet of the city-owned Peck No. 1 Well might have an adverse effect on the present city-owned instal- lations in the area and applicant's proposed facilities are totally unnecessary to serve the City or the area. That there are other water production properties properly zoned for such purposes and much closer to applicant's area of demand. That the restrictive -2- 466 . . . provisions of the City's zoning ordinance recognizes such a factor. That a variance from the high type of industrial development planned for the area in which subject property is located would constitute poor planning practice and would adversely affect the comprehensive general plan. SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons, this Commis- sion recommends to the City Council that the requested variance and/or special use permit to drill two water wells, construct build- ings and a water tank, and to install appurtenant equipment on the above-described property be denied. SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption . of this resolution and shall cause a copy of the same to be for- warded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Planning Commission held on the 8th day of January ,1963, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Ferguson, Gollsch, Kuyper, Norton, Parker and Forman NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Michler ~~'- ATTEST: WILLIAM PHELPS Secretary . -3- 466 ~ .,..-... . . . . . December 6, 1962 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT:M,ODIFICATION APPLICATION - M-62-65 APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF THE MODIFICATION COMMITTEE APPLICATION The appl ication seeks a modification of the R-I lot regulations for the property known as 1128 South Sixth Avenue to permit the construction of a second house containing approximately 1100 sq. ft. and in addition to permit the construction of 0 guest house containing approximately 800 sq. ft. The application was considered by the Modification Committee of the Planning Commission on November 13, 1962, and was denied by unanimous action. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY I. It is an R-I ,lot 2. It contains 26,169.30 sq. ft. 3. It is improved with an existing 860 sq. ft. house located on the front portion of the lot 4. The rear portion of the lot has been subdivided since June 2, 1949. CHARACTERIS TICS OF THE AREA I. Nine of the twenty-one lots fronting on the east side of ,South Sixth Avenue of which the subject property is one, are improved with two or more houses. 2. The recently subdivided properties which were taken from the rear of the properties fronting on Sixth Avenue now front on Encino Avenue and are improved with high quality homes in the $35,000 class. 3. Similar subdivisions of equally fine homes hove been developed west of Sixth Avenue along Fifth Avenue and generally throughout the immediate neighborhood. MODIFICATION COMMITTEE ACTION The Modification Committee considering th is request to allow the material modificotion of the R~I environmental qualities and characteristics of this property not in the best interests of the surrounding neighborhood and Arcadia in general and denied the application. ~ ~'~5r' .~ . -" - . . . . . . Page 2 . RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department recommends that the decision of the Modification Committee be upheld. Other courses of action that the Commission may take in this matter are: I. Postpone action by continuing the public hearing regarding this application until the Planning Staff hos hod a'full opportunity to study and evaluate the requirements governing R-I districts in Arcadia. 2. Approve the application. PLANNING DEPARTMENT WILLIAM PHELPS, Director By g..,-IrI11~ O. ERNEST MAYER, JR~~o Planning Technician WP:EB:ma . . . . . December 6, 1962 TO: PLANNING, COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL DATA REPORT REGARDING JUSTIFICATION FOR DENIAL OR POSTPONEMENT OF MODIFICATION APPLICATION M-62-65 (A second house and Guest House on Lot)! From a legal viewpoint it may be difficult to deny the modification applicotion request to allow the construction of a second house and in addition a guest house on an R-I lot since it fulfills the three legal requirements. However, from 0 planning viewpoint, before any decision is reached regarding the subject property or similar properties, considerotion should be given not only to its relationsh ip to abutting properties but also to its location in context with the entire surrounding neighborhood and in fact Arcadia os 0 whole. The Planning Department is aware of the existence in this case of other nearby lots improved with two houses. However, it believes that the mere existence of such uses should not give license to additional such development. Arcadia some time ago set high development standards for single-family residential zones. The fine properties olong Enc;no Avenue and many other neighboring streets bear witness to that fact. Arcadia has been constantly striving to maintain these standords and in so doing should consider these applications not on 0 lot by lot basis but rather in terms of the effect of permitting such developments on the' entire areo. The subject application in this case seeking permission to construct not only 0 second house on on R~I lot but in addition a guest house which might in splteOf 'covenants to the contrary become a rental unit, represents a development of R-I property to on R-2 use. To allow such development besides creating a greater population density perpetuates the R-2 uses in this area and further postpones land development which might moke a more compatible use of this and adjacent properties. The Planning Deportment believes that permitting this type of development represents poor planning practice and adversely affects the comprehensive single-family plan of this area. PLANNING DEPARTMENT WILLIAM PHELPS, Director By !2:f;~' ~ Planning Technician WP:EM:ma