Loading...
PC - Minutes - 07-25-61CITY OF ROSEMEAD ROSEMEAD CALIFORNIA PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of July 25, 1961 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead was held in the Council Chambers, 3954 North Rosemead Boulevard. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Wilt at 7:35 o'clock p.m. I. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Lieberg. 2. Present: Buchanan,, Casares, Kunz, Lieberg, Wearden, Wilt. Absent :. McCaffree Ex officio: Boyko, Flanery, Pederson, Phillips. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 10, 1961. Commissioner McCaffree arrived at this time. (MO) It was moved by Buchanan, second byy Casares and unanimously carried that the minutes of July 10, 1961 be approved as printed.• ADMINISTRATIVE: OLD BU14NESS 4. ZEC No. II - MARKER DEVELOPMENT Secretary Pederson read, in full, the following memoranda regarding this case. He stated that the Traffic Commission had concurred in Mr. Envall's recommendation: FROM: Everett Mansur, Planning Consultant July 20, 1961 SUBJECT: ZEC No. 11 - Harker Development "Pursuant to your request, I made further study of the proposed service station at the northwest corner of Rosemead Blvd, and Glendon Way. Reference is made to my letter of January 14, 1961, re- garding Case No: 6 at the same location. I am still of the same opinion regarding this application in regard to the statement that the location had been approved by the State. I spent an hour in the offices of the State Division of Highways on July 13, and they could find no record that any application had ever been re- ceived or approved for this site." FROM: George Envall June 14, f961 SUBJECT: ZONING REQUEST - Northwest Corner Rosemead Blvd, and Glendon Way "The Rosemead Planning Commission has requested that the Traffic Commission investigate the feasibility of placing a service station on the northwest corner of the subject intersection. This location was previously reviewed and the request was denied. Subsequent investigation discloses that 4547 vehicles make the turn from Rosemead Boulevard westerly on Glendon Way toeith'er the on -ramp inbound or Glendon Way proper; this amounts to one vehicle per 19 seconds. The proposed plan calls for two driveways on the west side of Rosemead Boulevard northerly of Glendon Way, with an apron area between, and one driveway immediately west of Rosemead Boulevard on the north side of Glendon Way. At present, channeliYation prevents left turning vehicles on Rosemead Boulevard from gaining access to the drive- ways as proposed on Rosemead Boulevard, and an asphalt berm on the centerline of Glendon Way extending westerly of Rosemead Boulevard prevents exit from the proposed driveway. With proper modification of the proposed plans as stated and rearrangement of the present box culvert located at this intersection, two driveways could be placed from Rosemead Boulevard. The pump areas of the station will parallel Rosemead Boulevard. One access drive could be provided adjacent to Rosemead.. Boulevard, on the north side of Glendon Way, and one driveway to be provided at the western end of the parcel; this to permit outgoing vehicles to utilize Glendon Way for access to Rosemead Boulevard, or access to the freeway on -ramp. The present signing by the State Division of Highways could be corrected in this one instance: The sign directly adjacent to the off -ramp for Los Angeles in- bound is properly placed; however, the sign stating "Los Angeles" with the arrow designating straight ahead creates confusion for northbound vehicles, forcing either a right or left turn, whichever the vehicle happens to be in at the time. This left turn north bound with protection pocket should be discouraged, as a conflict for northbound and westbound Rosemead Boulevard traffic interfering with proposed exit, traffic from the service station drive entering Rosemead Boulevard would be during those periods when gaps occur for southbound Rosemead Boulevard traffic. No sight problem will be encountered, since the proposed pai will be lowered in grade not its present em- bank. lent. It is therefore my suggestion that we grant.the proposed change of zoning for the specific use of a service station, with the proviso that the conditions as stated be placed, and also at the earliest opportunity the parcel immediately west to the alley be purchased for service station use." (MO) It was moved by Lieberg, second by McCaffree that ZEC No. II be denied for the same reasons it was denied in ZEC No.6. (RC) Roll call vote as follows: Ayes: Lieberg, McCaffree, Wilt. Noes: Buchanan, Casares, Kunz. Absent:Nane. Warden abstained from voting. (MO) It was moved by Casares, second by Kunz that ZEC No. 11 be approved subject to the conditions attached to ZEC No. 6 and recommendations of the Traffic Commission and staff. (Condition #13 was added by an amendment by Mr. Lieberg and approved by Commissioner Casares and Kunz.) CONDITIONS - ZEC NO. 11 I. That the property be developed substantially in accordance with the plot plan marked Exhibit "A ". 2. That masonry wall be constructed along the north and west boundaries of subject property in line with plan (Exhibit "B" on file in this case.) 3. That all areas used by automobiles be surfaced with asphaltic or macadam type of surfacing. 4. That the signs to be erected shall be indirectly lighted and shall not exceed a total area of 125 square feet. -2- 0 0 5. That flood lights used on subject property shall be shielded and directed away from adjacent residences. 6. That the uses permitted on subject property shall be limited to those for Gasoline Service Stations in Zone C -1 as specified in Section 254.5, Ordinance No. il: When regulations.are in conflict the regulations of other conditions stated herein shall apply. 7. That hours of operation be limited from 6 o'clock a.m. to 10 o'clock p.m. 8. That landscaping shall be provided in accordance with a landscape plan to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission; -such landscaping shall be con- tinuously maintained. 9. That sidewalks shall be provided along the easterly and southerly boundaries. 10. That no advertising signs or objects blocking the view of the freeway access road shall be placed within 20' of the corner cutoff. 1). That accessways be provided to Rosemead Blvd. and Glendon Way as recommended by the City Road Department. 12. That a sign stating that only right turns are per- mitted be conEtructed and maintained bounding the most easterly of the two driveways on to Glendon Way. 13. That there be no overnight parking, and that no more than 6 vehicles, be park.'') on subj-- ,t..p rope rty at any one ti:.. other � a gasoline transport truck or vehicles �r._.. joing service. 14. This exception shall not be effective for any purpose until the owners of the property involved have filed at t:'e office of the Planning Commission their affidavit sta`ing that they are aware of, and accept, all the conditions of'this exception. 15. It is hereby declared to be the intent of this zone excr 'otion, that if any provisions thereof are held and deci -ared to be invalid, the same shall be void and all of tie privileges granted hereunder shall lapse, unless the Planning Commission, upon application and good cause appearing therefore, determines otherwise. 16. It is hereby further declared and made a condition of this zone exception, that if any condition hereunder is violated, or if any other applicable law, statute or ordinance is violated, in the operations hereunder, this zone exam: -ration shall be suspended and the privileges granted here,,,Jer shad, lapse; provided, that the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for a period of 30 days. 17. This zone exception shall become null and void unless use thereof .s commenced within. one year 'from date of approval and -.ontinuously maintained thereafter. (RC) Roll r " vote s as folic-s: Ayes: Casares, Buchanan, Kunz, i:�arden. : LieLarg, McCaffree, Wilt. Absent: None. Advisor Flanery F- esented the Findings of Fact as follows: i. There were no protests to the granting of this exception. 2. Such exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare her to the property of other persons located in the vicinity thereof. -3- 0 5 0 3. Where there are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the ordinance, the spirit of the ordinance will be observed, public safety secured and substantial justice done. NEW BUSINESS PLOT PLAN N0. 62 - REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE 62. JOHN PAGE - 8443 Glendon Way (9:40) Secretary Pederson read a communication from Mr.. John Page requesting that the installation of sidewalks at this location be waived in accordance with the variance pro- cedure set forth in Ordinance No. 62. (MO) It was moved by Casares, second by Buchanan that the request for a variance of Ordinance No. 62 requiring sidewalks for Plot Plan No. 62 be granted. Commissioner Lieberg asked what basis this motion was made. Attorney Boyko read Sec. 9103, Subsection (b) (I1)of Ordinance No. 62 as follows: Because of the peculiar circumstances of the property, the development of the surrounding property, or because of other similar reasons such sidewalk or curbs and gutters can be best constructed through the use of an assessment proceeding." (RC) Roll call vote as follows: Ayes: Buchanan, Casares, Kunz, Wearden. Noes: Lieberg, McCaffree, Wilt. Absent: None. Chairman Wilt declared a recess at 10:04. Meeting recon- vened at 10:18. Chairman Wilt declared that if there were no objections, Item 7 would be considered at thi.s time. There were no objections. 6. Agenda Item 7 - PLOT PLAN N0. 64 - WYBO CONSTRUCTION. 4520 North Ivar Avenue. (10:19). Advisor Flanery presented the factual data regarding this plot plan. He also stated the future extension of Lower Azusa Road would cross the northwest corner of this lot, however, there still would be 12' from the garage to the curb line. (MO) It was moved by Lieberg, second by Casares that Plot Plan No. 64 be approved subject to the following conditions as contained in the P.C. Form 61 -1: 4A. 2" premix over 4" aggregate base Type A, for those areas north of the Freeway and, 5C. In lieu of items (a) and (b) above, guest parking space may be provided by locating the garage a minimum of 25 feet from the nearest edge of driveway, such space to be a minimum of 20 feet wide. (With the modification that 25' be indicated as 24') 6. Each single family dwelling unit (R -1, R -A, or A -1 5,000) must be serviced by separate sewer, gas, and water lines. 7. On parcels of land where drainage is a problem, the driveway must be so constructed as to drain as much runoff from the lot as possible to the street on which the property is located. -4- 8. Where two or more lots share a common driveway, mutual easements and maintenance covenants shall be recorded. A form with recommended wording is , available at City Hall. 9. Plot plans must be submitted as finished copies with no added markings, and must contain all dimensions, plus the signature of the owner and applicant. If the owner will not appear'before the Planning Commission, his signature should be notarized.. 10. All plot plans and other approvals granted by the Rosemead Planning Commission shall be considered revoked one year from approval date unless other- wise specified in the approval or unless the owner or applicant can .show continuous progress towards completion over the twelve (12) month period. A request for extension of time by the applicant in writing will be considered by the Commission at any.time within 18 months of the approval date. The final map to show a net area of 5,000 square feet per lot minimum; also that the area of this plot plan as shown on the County map for the extension of Lower Azusa Road be dedicated for that purpose that the resulting setback modification be accepted as part of this map. (RC) Roll call vote as follows: Ayes: Buchanan, Casares, Kunz, .. Lieberg, McCaffree, Wearden, Wilt. Noes: None. Absent: None 7. Agenda Item 6 - PLOT PLAN N0. 63. - TR 26273. TREADWELL ENGINEERING - REQUEST FOR SETBACK MODIFICATION. Commissioner Buchanan stated that there was no one present to represent this item. I ' Chairman Wilt stated if there were no objections, the Commission would take up Item 9 at this time. There were no objections. 8. Agenda Item 9 - INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 207 - ZONING ORDINANCE. July 20, 1961 Secretary Pederson read the following memo regarding this item: FROM: Secretary Pederson' SUBJECT: INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 207 The Building and Safety Department has requested that the Planning Commission advise it as to the application of Section 207 of the Zoning Ordinance to a development currently underway at 9109 East DeAdalena Street. In unincorporated areas the Building and Safety Dept. would regard the installation of a sink of the.type row installed at this location, and the utility connection and stove vent as installed here as a violation of the first line of Subsection (b) regarding alteration of the character of the premises as a single family residence A problem that the Building & Safety Department has had in the past is that this type of auxilary use can easily turn into a rental unit when the property changes hands or the present owner decides that he needs some additional income. When this occurs, a difficult enforcement problem arises. -5 On the other hand the present owner obviously is trying to maximize the use of a nice residential lot for the purpose of comfortable family living. Section 207 permits such uses as, a boarding house, "guest house "; and servant quarters, etc. which would appear to be less in accordance with the "character of the permises as a single .famll.y residence" t han the proposed 'use. After considering the above mentioned facts, studying Section 207 regarding zone R1 regulations and Section 147.5 defining a residence, and inspecting the property personally,.) feel that the proposed development is not a violation of zone RI regulations and should be permitted. The owner of this property., Mr. Ray Gaynor, has been notified that Commissioners.may wish to personally investigate this property and has stated that they are welcome, but would appreciate a telephone call in advance. AT 0 -0513. Attorney Boyko stated that there was no violation at the present time. (MO) It was moved by Lieberg, second by Casares that in cases referred to in the above memo, and where such a situation arises, the staff advise the owner by letter that this property can be used for no other purposes than for which it is zoned. (RC) Roll call vote as follows: Ayes: Buchanan, Casares, Kunz, Lieberg, McCaffree, Wearden, Wilt. Noes: None. Absent: None. 9. Agenda Item No. 6 - PLOT PLAN NO.. 63. TREADWELL ENGR. (11 :15) Advisor Flanery stated that this was a request for setback modification on 5 lots in TR 26273. He further described the lot numbers and desired setback. (MO) It was moved by Chairman Wilt, second by Kunz, that this item be carried over until the next regular meeting and that Treadwell Engineering be notified by mail. (RC) Roll call vote as follows:. Ayes: Buchanan,.Casares, Kunz, Lieberg, McCaffree, Wearden, Wilt. Noes: None. Absent: none. Attorney Boyko and Advisor Flanery were excused at this time. (11 :25) 10. Agenda Item No. 8 - STREET WIDTHS.. Secretary Pederson read the following memo which was sent to all Commissioners regarding this item. He stated, however, that at this time the only streets that require immediate action are Steele Street, Hart Street and Loma Avenue. ,From: Secretary Pederson July 20, 1961 SUBJECT: Street ltiidth.s - 36' Pavement on 50' Right -of -way The attached chart indicates the estimated cost for. tree removal and miscellaneous reconstruction for all City streets having a 50' right -of -way. The cost for tree removal would be approximately 10 to 20% of the amounts shown if the pavement width remained at 30'. There would be no costs for miscellaneous reconstruction if these street widths remained at i� 30 It is impossible to determine any additional cost for paveouts if the streets were widened to 36 1 , but it is certain that these costs would be somewhat higher. The costs for moving water meters, hydrants and other utility substructures cannot be determined with any degree of certainty at this time. However, we have been informed that there would be a cost of approximately $10.00 per service from Rosemead Blvd. to Rio Hondo Avenue. There are approximately 80 services in this area on Steele Street. (MO) It was moved by Lieberg, second by Kunz, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that Steele Street be paved to a 40' width and that the utility poles and meters be located in the sidewalk area, 5 feet in width. (RC) Roll call vote as follows: Ayes: Lieberg, Buchanan, Casares, Kunz, McCaffree, Wearden, Wilt. Noes: None. Absent: None. (MO) It was moved by Wilt, second by Wearden, that Loma Avenue be widened to 35' or more under the same conditions as Steele Street. (RC) Roll call vote as follows: Ayes: Buchanan, Casares, Kunz, Lieberg, McCaffree, Wearden, Wilt. Noes; None. Absent: None. (MO) It was moved by Lieberg, second by Kunz that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that Hart Street from Valley Blvd. to Steele Street be made a minimum of 36' and that no parking be permitted on the east side of that block. That the balance of Hart Street from Steele Street to the dead end be a 40' width curb to curb.. (RC) Roll call vote as follows: Ayes: Lieberg, Buchanan, Casares, Kunz, McCaffree, Wearden, Wilt. Noes: None. Absent; None.. 11. MATTERS FROM THE COMMISSION AND STAFF. (a) Request for Reports (MO) It was moved by Lieberg, second by Wilt and unanimously carried that when the Planning Commission requests a report or recommendation from any other City body or department such report be sent to the Planning Commission in written form. (b) Anniversary Celebration Commissioner McCaffree announced that the City is going to have a second anniversary celebration on Saturday August 5, 1961, between the hours of 10 :00 a.m, and 5 :00 p.m. (c) Buffer Zone Commissioner Casares suggested a special meeting of the Planning Commission for the consideration of specifications of buffer zones. Chairman Wilt stated Lieberg and Casares are still on this committee and should consult with each other. (MO) It was moved by Lieberg, second by Wilt and unanimously carried that the meeting adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 12:40 a.m. Next regular meeting August 7, 1961 at 7:30 p.m. CHAIRMAN R TAR -7