HomeMy WebLinkAbout0762
.
.
.
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 762
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA GRANTING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A RESIDENTIAL
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AT 310 WEST FOOTHILL
BOULEVARD.
WHEREAS, on September 24, 1971, John K. Asder filed an
application for a conditional use permit, Planning Department
Case No,. C.U.P. 7l-2l, for a residential planned development on
property known as 310 West Foothill Boulevard, more particularly
described as follows:
That portion of Lot 7, Tract No. 948, in the
City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, State
of California, as shown on map recorded in
Book 17, page 21, of Maps, in the Office of
the County Recorder of said County, situated
between the east line of Tract No. 15430,
Map Book 470, page 38 and the west line of
Tract No. 20642, Map Book 59~, page 78; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on said matter on
October 26, 1971, at which time all intereste'd persons were given
full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; thereafter
the application was modified and plans were submitted for approval
of a 10-unit development, and public hearings were held on said
modified plans and application on November 23 and December l4, 1971,
at which times all interested persons were given full opportunity
to be heard and to present evidence.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA HEREBY DETERMINES AND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION l. The subject site is zoned R-l single family
and developed with a single-family residence, two accessory
buildings and two greenhouses. The property is bounded on the
north by Foothill Boulevard, on the south by the Foothill Freeway,
-l-
762
v!
.
.
.
and on the east and west by singl~-family residences in Zone R-l.
The applicant proposes to develop a ten lot planned residential
development on a site of approximately l02,000 square feet
(2.34 acres). The proposed density is within that allowable by
co.de; however, the site is less than the three acre minimum
requirement. A total of 52 parking spaces (26 covered and 26 open)
are proposed, meeting code requirements. A perimeter masonry wall
five feet in height has been indicated for all but the Foothill
Boulevard property line. The applicant's plot plan indicates that
none of the new buildings will be located within 25 feet of the
site's perimeter, or exceed two stories or 35 feet in height.
~ The existing 3,800 square foot residence is proposed to remain and
encroaches two feet into the 25 foot perimeter setback.
SECTION 2. This Commission finds that a development,
constructed in substantial compliance with the prelimina~y plans
which have been approved by this Commission and in compliance
with the conditions of this permit, will be well-related to
and will harmonize with existing and future uses of adjacent prop-
ertiesand circulation patterns thereon; will not constitute a
disruptive element in the neighborhood; and will provide a better
environmental design than would be possible under standard sub-
division procedures.
The Commission further finds that:
l. The location of the site between Foothill Boulevard
. and the Foothill Freeway and between the rear property lines of
residential properties on the east and west makes it difficult
to develop this property in a conventional manner. For this
reason, a waiver of the site area requirement of a three, acre,
-2-
762
.
.
.
.
.
minimum is justified and said requirement is hereby waived.
2. The granting of a conditional use permit as herein-
after provided will not be detrimental to the public health or
welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone
or vicinity.
3. The site for the proposed use is adequate in size
and shape to accommodate said use, and all yards, parking, load-
ing, landscaping, and other. features required to adjust said us,e
with the land and uses in the neighborhood.
4. The use applied for at, the 10,cation indicated is
properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized.
5. The site abuts streets and highways adequate in
width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated
by the proposed use.
6. The granting of such conditional use permit will
not adversely affect the general plan.
SECTION 3. For the foregoing reasons, subject to
approval of the City Council, this Commission grants a conditional
use permit for use of said property for a residential planned
development subject to compliance with all applicable regulations
of the Arcadia Municipal Code, except as specifically waived
herein, and upon the following conditions:
l. The final plans shall comply with the preliminary
plans and shall be approved by the Planning Commission. The final
plans shall include elevation plans for all structures and
complete landscaping plans, both of which plans shall have been
submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission prior to the
time that the applicant submits the final plans for approval.
-3-
762
, .
. .
.
.
.
2. The regulations set forth in Sections 8l30.20 and
8130.2l of the Arcadia Municipal Code shall apply to all construc-
tion, and the effect of saia regulations shall be incorporated
in the final plans.
3. The residential planned developments regulations
shall be met with the exception of those specific sections that
may be modified by the Planning Commission and approved by the City
Council.
4. The existing accessory buildings shall be removed
before construction begins.
5. Final plans shall include grading and drainage
. plans which have been submitted to and approved by the Depart-
ment of Public Works.
o
6. A five-foot sidewalk and trees shall be installed
in the parkway in accordance with standards of the Department of
Public Works.
7. All utilities shall be installed underground.
8. The northerly ten feet of the property shall be
dedicated for street purposes for the future widening of Foothill
Boulevard.
SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption
of this resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the
City Council.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was
.
adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City
of Arcadia held on the 25th day of January , 1972, by the
following vote:
AYES:
Commissioners Huddy, Livingston, Perlis, Reiter
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Commissioner
Commissioner
COJIUllissioner
Erickson
Kuyper
LaUber9L-~ 7~
Chairman
ATTEST:
tt J(/i!/&4J7 )/-1 JOr1/3}'// .J
ecretary
-4-
762
,
, . t
.
.
.
.. ,
.
.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE TH E
ARCAD'IA CITY_P.LANNING COMMISSION
C.U.P.71-21
The Planning Cammission of the City of Arcodia, Colifornia, will hold a
public hearing on Tuesday, October 26, 1971, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council
Chambers of the City Hall, located at 240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California.
The purpose of the Public ,Hearing will be ta afford the public an opportunity
to be heard concerning the proposed use of property commonly known as 310 West
Foothill Boulevard, as a Planned Unit Development for thirteen (13) units. The lot
description of the subject site is as follows:
".. ~at portion of Lot], Tract No:, 94,a, in the City of Arcadia,
County of Los Angeles, State of California, as shown on M~p recorded
in Bo~k 17, page ~I, ?f fAap;, in the Of~ice of the County Record~r /
of sal ount~" S,:r....'i!.yV M~(?~ ~.. c....::r//:-.,..e- cJ
~c; ,-:,/? / S<(' ~c:> / q ~ <I '7() - }.61 <2.- d' JL'/b
he proposed plan may be seen in the office of the Planning Department,
240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California, Monday through Friday, between
.the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
DATED: October 15, 1971
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA
().j~J W~
WILLIAM WOOLARD
ACTING SECRETARY OF THE
ARCADIA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
mk w~-t"/ ~"'-~tP 0/ 7;-($e-r"/ 2a{,';" 2 :- ~1' ~ Sf? -f 7 ~
,j
L~
+ ~ Q{>
.. "
.
.
.
THIS NOTICE IS BEING SENT AS A MATTER OF COURTESY TO INFORM YOU
OF THE CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING.
\ ..'~CL: V, '
NOTICE OF PUB~iC;HEARING
BEFORE THE
ARCADIA CITY PLANN1NG eOMM1SSiSN
,~ - .,
..' I.)
l~ l"_! I
Cll"{ OF fJi'-'(...f'lI.~ ,-.
errY ~~"'OP';-l ..,
C.U.P. 71-21
TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN A-300-FOOT RADIUS'
.
The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California
will continue the public hearing on'C~U.P. 71-21 on Tuesday,
December 14. 1971. at 7:30 p.m., in the' Council Chambers of the
City Hall, located at 240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia,
Ca 1 iforni a.
The purpose of the public hearing will be to afford the
public an opportunity to be he~rd concerning the proposed use
of property commonly known ~s 310 West F60thill Boulevard, as a
Planned Unit Development for ten (10) units. The lot description
of the subject site is as follows:
"...that portion of Lot 7, Tract No. 948, in the
City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, State of
California, as shown on Map recorded in Book 17,
Page 21, of Mapsi in the Office of the County
Recorder of said County."
The proposed plan may be seen in the office of the Planning
Department, 240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadi~. Californi~,
Monday through Friday, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
DATED: December 3, 1971
PLANNING~COMMISSION OF THE
'CITY OF'ARCADIA~ CALIFORNIA
(jJ~~
WILLIAM WOOLARD
SECRETARY TO THE ARCADIA
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
.
db
.
.
.
November 23, 1971
TO:
FROM:
PLANN1NG COMMISSION
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: REVISEO PLANS fOR
C.U.P. 71.-21
310 WEST FOOTHILL BOULEVARD
.
The attached new plot plan submitted by Mr. John
Asder indicates a total of ten units rather than the
thirteen units as originally submitted,.
According to the 'revised plans the ten units
will provide a density factor cf,one dwelling unit
per 10,000 square feet on a parcel of land that con-
tains 102,000 square feet (2.34 acres).
Please note that due to the reduction in units,
there is also a reduction in parking.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
t?n- ~~
RON CONTRERAS
ASSOCIATE'PLANNER
RC:db
Attachment
.
\
.
.
I * I
-'
I -- I
-.
- n
~
!-..oU
~ i I
.-w
l__M_J
.
1_..._t.....w_1_ ...~ ,__.~_... I _w_ .L_____L
.,.~l
-....
-
UOAl DUICRIPflOlI
-.--,...,--
.an__ __
~CIf"1,I .-,__
,--
.-............""'"
-,-- ...!..I!!l!Il
~_ .1......
.......eu """'._ _ _'
-- -
---. ...-
.
~
-
:
:li
!j
.:!
1!1;~
Zfl
I
.
0
"
4
>
.
8 ~I
;; -I
~ z
0
~i
ci
:E
,I
~
'"
u
'"
Cl
0 .
~
u
>
u
o~
~
"I
=>
01
u,
~.'!
~.
as
-"
.
.
.1
October 26, 1971
~O: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
NO. C.U.P. 71-21, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
310 WEST FOOTHILL BOULEVARD
ZONE R-l
APPLICATION
This application, filed on September 24, 1971, in the
name of John K. ASdel', proposes to develope a Planned Unit
Development of thirteen (13) lots.
PRESENT LAND USE AND ZONING
~
IThe subject site is zoned R-l single family an~ developed
with a single-family residence, two accessory buildings and
two greenhouses. The property is bounded on the north by
Foothill Boulevard, on the south by the Foothill Freeway, and
on the east and west by single. family residences in zone R-1.
(R,:r.e- .at'taCfl9d T ~nd Use ann' ~eRil~6 lIa.p).
.
PROPOSAL AND AN~J::S. ~ ~
The~:if~nt proposes to develop a tlliI l~cu nSi lot
Planned . Development on a site of approximately 102,000
square feet (2.34 acres). The proposed density is within th~
allow~le by~de~ however, the site is less than the three
(3) acre minimum requirement.
A total of 52 parking spaces (26 covered and 26 open) are
proposed, meeting code requirements. A perimeter masonry wall
five feet in height has been indicated for all but the Foothill
Boulevard property line.
The applicant's plot plan indicates that none of the
new buildings will be located within 25 feet of the site's
. perimeter, or exceed two stories or 35 feet in height.
The existing 3,800 square foot residence is proposed to
remain and encroaches two (2) feet into the 25 feet perimeter
setback.
...
1.,~'cY
Y~1\P'}
.
.
.
C,U,P',71-2l
2
There is a 90 foot, setback from center line requirement
along Foothill Boulevard. The applicant's proposal indicates
a 75 foot setback. The setback from center line along Foothill
Boulevard for the houses adjacent to the subject site on the
east, fronting on Burnell Oaks Lane is 70 feet, and 'on the
west, fronting on,,san Carlos Road is 75 feet.
A tentative tract was filed and approved in, 1966 for a
six (6) lot subdivision on the subject property (the appli-
cant's original request was for seven,(7) lots); At that
time concern, was expressed regarding protection of the adjoining
developed residential areas. The ,proposed planned Unit Develop-
ment, setbacks' and common lands'caping maintenance would provide
for adeq~ate protection of adjoining areas.
REC0MMENBATION
.
The Planning Department believes that a Planned Unit
Development would be an appropriate method of developing this
property which would provide a,better and more compatible
development'thanpossible through a conventional subdivision.
Because of the location and dimensional characteristics
of the ,site, and the character and quality of the adjoining
residential developments which preclude the possibility of
acquiring additional lot area, the Planning Deparxment would
recommend that the three (3) acre minimum site requirement
be waived.
The Planning Department also believes .that the front set-
back could be modified to 75 feet from center line (35 feet
from property line) in light, ,of existing developments and .set-
backs in the same area.
On the othe~ hand, the Planning Department does not view
the proposed plot plan as a "Planned Unit :Development." The
somewhat equal dispersion of units throughout the site fragments
the lot area creating numerous small common open areas rather
than creating a significant open, space which can be participated
in either passively or actively by the majority of the,property
owners.
.
This dispersion ,of units and fragmentation of open space
presents a plan which has t~e appearance,of'R-2 zoned and
develOPed property fronting on, what: would be a.sub-standard
street.
It is the recommendation ,of this Depart~ent that the
Planning Commission grant a continuance'of thits item until two
meeting's hence in order to allOW for the subndttal..and_review.,
of revisedplan~ which would comply more with the spirit ,and
iritent of the Planned Unit Development ordinance.
.
.
.
.
.
C.U.P. 7l~21
3
However, should the Commission wish to approve this-appli-
cation at this time, the following conditions should be made
conditions of said approval:
l. Conditions as outlined in the attached report from
the Department of Public Works shall be complied
with to the satisfaction of, the Director of Public
Works.
2. That all of the requirements of Ordinance No., 1420,
Sections 9277 et. seq. of the Arcadia Municipal
Code (Residential Planned Developments) shall be
met'with the exception of those specific sections
that may. be modified by the Planning Commission and
approved'by the City Council.
3. That the two accessory 'buildings and two greenhouses
shall be removed.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
tfB.-L ~
RON CONTRERAS"
ASSOCIATE PLANNER
RC:db
Attachments
.
.
.
October 19, 1971
TO: Planning Department
FROM: Department of Public Works
SUBJECT: CUP 71-21 - Unit Development at 310 W. Foothill Blvd.
The plans for the proposed development have been reviewed and the following
should be made conditions of approval:
1.
Submit detail plans for on-site improvements showing existing and
finished surface elevations and indicating method of drainage.
0W~
Install 5' property line sidewalk on Foothill Blvd. and plant trees
in parkway per requirements of the Department of Public Works.
3.
Existing driveway, if not used, shall, be closed to conform with City
standards.
4.
Install all utilities underground.
.
5, Dedicate 10 feet for future widening of Foothill Boulevard.
"~4
CHESTER N. HOWARD
Director of Public Works
CNH/JD/fn
.
. ."
(1.-0 16.000
*~
~-c '!:O,ClOCl
.
.
~OOlH I I-L- e>oU\...e:::."~
~.~.
. . . .
D .
4-
. <) . ?IJ~~~
\i. \ll
f\ ~ . ~ .
. "i
~
.
t4 III
\J a ~ . (J
. '1 ~ ~ ~
~ . .
.(l.-I · ,
. . . JZ--I . rz-I
. .
'tD"t. ">6'
-
t- W~ ~l>>J\? LN-lE- ~Iu... ~/>.'1
, I-t I I I . I 1>-11::;,F F-'f I I I I I I I I
I I I I
LAND U?E 1l0NI~6 MAP
{: U P -11- II 1;,
~"-le:o ut-Jrr ~F'ME5NT
!:>IO WE:3!!5r, ~lu... eot.Jl.eVAPo
.,.
<:
~
II
III
pJ
~
f'
IJ1
X
~
.
.
<<f
...
~.
...
~:
~
...
..
..
"...
...
:
,
:-
i
~!~
.
,-
i~
.
.
.
>'
'.'
g
:'
,
.
4:) ~ ~
0 rJ
> 0 .
IL
-'
JJ
...""'"
"""'"
lWilJ J
J
-
:>
", b
~;.
,<
,0 I 0
L--- ~ wt WALl. II-
..'I .
=~~
LDTAi::.e..^
~t4.",lDS -tor.a:JC
tt"~@"".."'*"
~...ee.lt.,;~.
. -,
---+-
~
~a
~~&'i'
......
~-
~-
~AL Ce.scr:IPTIO~
pecnOJ,l OF LOT 1 ."TtACT ..ca.
III CrT'" OF' JrC:C.IrDI.\.CAUP".
9C....L~ I'dO'
- ..
. ..
.. t."".
_"IkIClOO
.
.
.
.' .
"
.
f 1""
~
.
e&r.:::!
jj1";jT
-....c.&...:lI__
M, ea::>
13'.14'
=
~ USVel-
., "
OIHE
9f;jjI
;} :
'~.
tS~.w
FLOC>R
Q;I-l
rr
:
L1VINC:
~'ll:_1.I'
04-- _~Uc.~ ~ Jg. L~. '__--'>
FLAN
I!!:: "Z~
.
i ~""'" LE'-.IEL
~'~ 1'-0'
~
"E!:
.' ,
. .1.'
Id
'.
.'
,
.
"
.
.
.
--_._~=--::::::."-~.:
~-~
Q
~
(
~ ~ 0~
'l~
~
)
.
fI
elf