PC - Minutes - 04-17-61CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of April 17,1961
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the
Cityy of Rosemead was held in the Council Chambers,
395+ North Rosemead Boulevard. The meeting was called
to order by Chairman Wilt at 8:04 o'clock p.m.
1. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Casares.
2. Present: Commissioners: Buchanan, Casares, Kunz,.
McCaffree, Wearden, Wilt.
Absent: Commissioners: Lieberg.
Ex officio: Boyko, Flanery, Pederson; Phillips:
34 APPROVAL OF MINUTES:"
It was moved by Buchanan, second by Kunz, and unanimously
carried that the minutes of April 3, 1961, be approved as
printed.
ADMINISTRATIVE:
OLD BUSINESS
4, PLOT PLAN NO. 49 - DIGIORGIO - 5009 North Earle Street
SANTA ANITA CONSTRUCTION
Advisor Flanery stated he had discussed tkis.plot plan with
the applicant and found that the owner did not wish to
change his original plan.
Mr. A.J. Tambie, 9816 East LaRosa Drive, Temple City, stated
that he is the co -owner with Mr. DiGiorgio and that they
would be very glad to comply with any wishes of the Planning
Commission.
Commissioner Buchanan stated
requirements, but there still
zoning for this area.
that this plot plan meets all
is the question of future M -1
Robert Selway, Santa Anita Construction Co., 8717 E. Las
Tunas Drive, San Gabriel, questioned the postponement of
this plot plan and wondered if it was a question of the
future zoning or the desire for a subdivision instead of
a lot split.
Attorney Boyko explained Section 729 of the Rosemead Munici-
pal Code, and further pointed out that when an applicant
has a plot plan of four homes and a larger piece of ground
this could very well be developed as a subdivision, and
that the Commission has been skeptical of this type of de-
velopment in the past.
Mr. Selway stated that property owners should not be penal-
ized because of future zoning plans. He further asked
what the requirements are for a half street. Advisor Flanery
stated that 26' width constitutes a half street.
Mr. Tambie asked that if he spoke with Mr. Mansur, and he
is in favor of this development, would this .Commission go
along with Mr. Mansur's recommendation.
Chairman Wilt pointed out that this development as is, will
have a private street and will create a maintenance, clean-
ing and lighting problem to future property owners, but that
he would probably go along with Mr. Mansur's recommendation.
Commissioner Kunz stated that this property would be more
valuable developed as a M -1 zone and that this Commission
is trying to help the applicant see that this is the right
and'best thing for the City of Rosemead.
Mr. Tambie stated he would like to talk with Mr. Mansur
and work out a feasible plan.
(MO) It was moved by Casares to postpone action on plot plan
No. 49 until the meeting of May 1, 1961.
Motion died for lack of a second.
(MO) It was moved by Wilt, second by Casares, to deny plot plan
No. 49, under the provisions of Section 729, Article 9,
Chapter l,, of the Rosemead Municipal Code.
(RC) Roll call vote was as follows: Ayes: Wilt, Buchanan,
Casares, Kunz, McCaffree, Wearden. Noes: None. Absent:
Lieberg.
Attorney Boyko stated the applicant will be notified in
writing of this denial and has fifteen (15) days after
this notice to file an appeal to the City Council.
5. PLOT PLAN NO. 52 - WILLIE BROWN - 4214 North Bartlett Ave.
SHOREWOOD INCORPORATED
Advisor Flanery presented the factual data regarding this
plot plan.
Tom Howell, Shorewood incorporated, 8833 East Las Tunas
Drive, Temple City, applicant, stated that this lot is
perfectly level and presented pictures to show same; also
that the sewer line will be run under the driveway and
that they would be very happy to move the property line
in order to equalize the square footage of the two parcels.
Chairman Wilt stated he would like to have the individual
sewer line, width of the driveway, and slope of the ground
shown on a revised plot plan.
Commissioner Casares asked if the staff understood these
requirements of the last meeting when they asked the appli-
cant for a revised plot plan.
(MO) It was moved by Casares, second by McCaffree, and unanimously
carried that plot plan No. 52 be postponed until the meet-
ing of May I 1961.
6. PLOT PLAN NO. 53 - SHELDON KROOP - 3623. North Walnut Grove
LA COSTA BUILDERS
Secretary Pederson reviewed the discussion and action
taken on this plot plan at the last meeting.
Chairman Wilt stated he had several long discussions with
Mr. Kroop, and that Mr. Kroop wished to make no changes in
regard to this plot plan.
Mr.'Sheldon Kroop, 423 North Lincoln, Monterey Park; stated
that he was presenting his plot plan as is, with no changes,
for the Commission's approval or denial whichever may be
the case.
- 2 -
Advisor Flanery presented the factual data once again re-
garding this plot plan.
Commissioner Casares stated in view of the size and value
of this proposed house and garage he would have no objection
to this plan.
(MO) It was moved by Buchanan, second by Casares, that plot plan
No. 53 be approved subject to staff recommendations and
that the curb, gutter and sidewalk requirement be waived,
that there be a dedication of rigght -of -way sufficient for
widening Walnut Grove Avenue to 40' from the center line
at this point, and that the driveway be 16' wide.
Commissioner Wearden suggested an addition to the motion
that the driveway be located 1 to the north of the
southerly property line to provide proper drainage.
Commissioner Buchanan and second agreed to this addition.
Commissioner McCaffree suggested that the motion be changed
to require a 20' wide driveway. This suggested change to
the motion died for lack of agreement by mover.
(RC) Roll call vote was as follows: Ayes: Wilt, Buchanan,
Casares, Kunz, Wearden. Noes: McCaffree. Absent: Lieberg.
Chairman Wilt stated that the applicant will receive a
letter specifying the conditions placed on this plot plan.
NEW BUSINESS
7. PLOT PLAN NO. 54 - FORREST LUNDSTROM - 4319 N. Rio Hondo Ave.
Advisor Flanery presented the factual data regarding this
plot plan.
Chairman Wilt asked if there would be room for guest park-
ing on parcel "A ", and further stated that this is one of
the cleanest plot plans we have had in a long time.
Mr. Forrest Lundstrom, 9412 Gidley,
applicant,stated that these garages
to the south. He further stated th
posed three bedroom home.
Commissioner Casares suggested that
have 20'X 20' garages.
Temple City, owner and
could be moved a little
at parcel "B" has a pro -
parcels " A " and "B"
(MO) It was moved by Casares, second by Kunz, that plot plan
No. 54, be approved subject to the following conditions:
1. That the garages on parcels " A " and "B" be moved so
as to provide 25' parking area from the garage to the
nearest edge of the driveway.
2. That curbs and gutters be installed on Rio Hondo Avenue.
Commissioner Casares wished to make an addition to his
motion that the paved parking area as shown on parcel "B"
may be eliminated. Second agreed to this addition.
Commissioner Wearden suggested that the line running down
the driveway be explained on a revised plot plan.
Attorney Boyko
easements for
maintenance.
(RC) Roll call vote
Casares, Kunz,
Lieberg.
stated that the deed should require mutual
ise of the driveway and covenants for its
was as follows: Ayes: Wilt, Buchanan,
McCaffree, Wearden. Noes: None. Absent:
- 3 -
0
8: PLOT PLAN NO. 55 - KLOSTER & SHARPSKY - 8631 E. Norwood Place -
SHOREWOOD INCORPORATED
Advisor Flanery presented the factual data regarding this
plot plan. He further stated that curbs and gutters are
in at this location.
Commissioner Casares asked why parcel "D" was left shown
on this plot plan, and could the approval be subject to
parcel "C" only?
Attorney Boyko stated that this could be done in this manner.
Advisor Flanery explained that these other parcels are
shown simply because the same plan was used here as when
the other parcels were approved for development.
Robert Sutton, Shorewood Inc., 8833 E. Las Tunas Drive,
Temple City, stated that the property is a good 2' above
curb line and that the new subdivision in the rear would
take care of any drainage problems.
(MO) It was moved by Buchanan, second by Casares, that only
parcel "C" on plot plan No. 55 be approved subject to the
following conditions:
1. That the driveway be constructed of standard thickness.
2. That the driveway be a 10' minimum width.
(RC) Roll call vote was as follows: Ayes: Wilt, Buchanan,
Casares, Kunz, McCaffree, Wearden. Noes: None. Absent:
Lieberg.
Chairman Wilt stated if there were no objections the Commis-
sion would consider Item 16 at this time. There were no
objections and it was so ordered.
COMMUNICATIONS
9. AGENDA ITEM NO. 16 - MURRAY ZWICK - ZEC NO. 4.
Secretary Pederson read the communication from Murray Zwick
in regard to a request for an extension of time on ZEC No. 4.
(MO) It was moved by McCaffree, second by Kunz, that the Planning
Commission extend the time limit to one year on this request.
Attorney Boyko stated that under Section 540 of the Rosemead
Zoning Ordinance the Planning Commission may act without a
public hearing provided it grants no longer time than two
years after the granting of the zone exception.
Commissioner Casares asked if the extension should be applied
for before the expiration date or at the time of expiration.
Attorney Boyko stated that the request should be made in
writing before the expiration date.
Commissioner McCaffree wished to withdraw his previous motion
with the agreement of second. Second agreed to this withdrawal.
(MO) It was moved by McCaffree, second by Kunz,that an extension
be granted without a public hearing to a date which is the
second anniversary (April 6, 1962) of the granting of this
Zone Exception Case No. 4.
Commissioner Buchanan asked what this extension pertains to
in ZEC No. 4. Attorney Boyko answered that the zone excep-
tion was to operate a warehouse in a "P" zone.
- 4 -
( RC)
Roll call vote was as follows: Ayes: Wilt, Buchanan, Casares,
Kynz, McCaffree, Wearden. Noes! None. Absent: Lieberg.
MURRAY ZWICK - LIBRARY SITE COMMUNICATION
Secretary Pederson read this communication from Murray Zwick
in full expressing his dissatisfaction with the location of
the proposed regional.library.
Commissioner Casares stated that the Planning Commission
recommended several sites for the regional library and the
County decided on the one located between Ivar Avenue and
Muscatel Avenue on the south side of Valley Blvd.; also
that the Planning Commission had no control over this deci-
sion and should not antagonize the County by recommending
a change.
Mr. Murray Zwick read a letter he had written, dated April
17, 1961, stating his personal opinion in more detail re-
garding this site. He felt that this area is potential key
business property and that the library would be more valu-
able located one block west, or at Muscatel Avenue and
Valley Blvd. as the closest to the business district.
Secretary Pederson stated that the City had received peti-
tions with 128 signatures favoring the present proposed
library site.
(MO) It was moved by Casares, second by Kunz, that the Planning
Commission receive and file this communication from Murray
Zwick.
(RC) Roll call vote was as follows: Ayes: Wilt, Buchanan,, Casares,
Kunz, McCaffree, Wearden. Noes: None. Absent: Lieberg.
Chairman Wilt stated if there was no objection the Planning
Commission would consider Item No. 13 at this time.
There were no objections and it was so ordered.
LEGISLATIVE: NEW BUSINESS
10. AGENDA ITEM NO. 13 - REQUEST FOR VACATION OF STREET -
BARRETTE AVENUE
Secretary Pederson read a memo from the Road Department in
full giving their recommendations as follows:
1. This dedicated future street was intended for use
as a north -south street when the adjacent area would be de-
veloped. However, the existing street pattern in this area
shows that this would no longer be feasible. Therefore,
there is no apparent use for this future street as part of
a north -south street.
2. Our recommendation is to vacate this future street
but retain enough area adjacent to the terminus of Barrette
Avenue to extend said street westerly. A westerly extension
of Barrette Avenue would seem feasible if the area is.de-
veloped further.
3. If the City feels that there
extension of Barrette Avenue our recoi
that the property owners benefited by
complete a cul de sac for turn around
minus of Barrette Avenue and the City
lent area for said cul de sac.
would be no westerly
nmendation would be
this vacation should
purposes at the ter -
should retain suffic-
-5-
7
0
4. Since Barrette Avenue drains easterly we feel no
drainage problem exists now or would be created if the City
acts in accordance with these recommendations.
CA Farrell explained that this is a request from the pro-
perty owners of lots 1 and 141 which are adjacent to this
future street. He further stated that the north and south
direction of this future street has no possibilities of
joining to another street as there is development on the
north. There is the possibility of going west and joining
with Fendyke Avenue in the future.
(MO) Commissioner Casares moved to recommend to the City Council
in line with the recommendations of the Road Department.
Motion died for lack of a second.
Secretary Pederson stated that the Commission could re-
quest the Road Department to prepare a map showing the
exact location of a half cul de sac.
(MO) It was moved by Casares, second by Kunz, to postpone this
item until we receive a map from the Road Department re-
garding the possibility of a half or more cul de sac and
proper turn around area.
(RC) Roll call vote was as follows: Ayes: Wilt, Buchanan, Casares.,
Kunz, McCaffree, Wearden. Noes: None. Absent: Lieberg..
Chairman Wilt declared a recess at 11:15 o'clock p.m.
Meeting reconvened at 11:25 o'clock p.m.
LEGISLATIVE: OLD BUSINESS
11. AGENDA ITEM NO. 9 - REPORT RE: RECOMMENDATION FOR MINIMUM
PAVEMENT THICKNESS - DARRELL FLANERY
Secretary Pederson stated the Commissioners had received
copies of a supplement to the original pavement thickness
report. This supplement describes the approximate cost
of the different thicknesses and types of pavement..
(MO) It was moved by McCaffree, second by Wilt, and unanimously
carried that Item 9 on this agenda be postponed until the
meeting of May 1, 1961.
12. AGENDA ITEM NO. 10 - BUDGET 1961 -62 - WORK SHEETS
Secretary Pederson stated that the Planning Commission
should suggest plans, programs, and activities for itself
and the City for the 1961 -62 budget, and that it will
probably not be feasible to pay all Commissioners expenses
to all meetings. He further stated that so far there has
been no appropriation for meetings for the Planning Commis-
sion.
Chairman Wilt stated that consideration should be made in
regard to the League of California Cities meeting in San
Francisco and the Southern California Planning Congress in
Palm Springs this next fiscal year.
Commissioner Casares stated that meeting expenses in the
budget are unnecessary and that requests for such meetings
should be made to the City Council as needed. He also
felt that expenses for Staff, Council, and Commissions
should be kept to the barest minimum.
- 6 -
0 •
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Chairman Wilt suggested this item be studied further and
be placed on the agenda of our next meeting on May 1, 1961.
LEGISLATIVE: NEW BUSINESS
AGENDA ITEM NO. 11 : ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS RE: ANNEXATIONS
14 AND 15 (Preliminary Discussion)
Secretary Pederson stated that the hearing for these annex-
ations will be May 9, 1961, and that this memo and zoning
maps are to familarize the Commission with this area and
the zoning that exists and the recommended changes by Mr.
Mansur and Staff.
Commissioner Buchanan asked who will be at the Public Hear-
ing on May 9th, to answer any questions regarding this
zoning. Chairman Wilt answered he is very sure the Secre-
tary and Mr. Flanery would do a very good job.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 12 - RECOMMENDATIONS RE: BUFFER BETWEEN
INDUSTRIAL AND RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
Advisor Flanery stated that some quidance is needed con-
cerning the use of these Buffer zones, and perhaps the
Attorney could draw up some type of ordinance in regard
to this matter.
Attorney Boyko stated that Secretary Pederson could obtain
some sample ordinances from other cities to work with.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14 - TENTATIVE POLICIES RE: ORDINANCES
NO. 62 and No. 63.
Chairman Wilt stated if there were no objections this item
would be postponed until the meeting of May 1, 1961. There
were no objections and it was so ordered.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15 - DISCUSSION - HOUSE MOVE INS -
CHAIRMAN WILT.
Chairman Wilt stated if there were no objections this Item
would be postponed until the meeting of May 1, 1961. THDare
were no objections and it was so ordered.
MATTERS FROM COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF
None.
It was moved by Wilt, second by Kunz, and unanimously
carried that the meeting adjourn. Meeting adjourned at
12:01 o'clock a.m. Next regular meeting May 1, 1961.
CHAIRMAN SECRETARY
- 7 -