Loading...
PC - Minutes - 01-15-62F 9 CITY OF ROSEMEAD ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of January 15, 1962 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead was held in the Council Chambers, 8815 East Valley Boulevard. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Wilt at 7:38 o'clock p.m. 1. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Crabtree, 2. Present: Commissioners: Crabtree, Casares, Buchanan, Wilt, Maude. Absent: Commissioners: Kunz, McCaffree Ex officio: Dato, Farrell, Flanery, Phillips. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: December 18, 1962. January 2, 1962. Advisor Flanery stated that on page 4, item 8, third line after the word "southerly" add "40 feet of the easterly ". Attorney made the following changes: 1. On page 3, strike out the last line; 2. At the top of page 4, renumber conditions I s:hrcugh `, to read 4 through 8, and add a new paragraph as follows, "The owner of the affected premises was present an" stated that he agrees to and will abide by the above cor,di. ion; ",; 3. On page 4, line 20, change to read as follows: "That there are practical difficulties and unnecessary"; 4. On page 4, the next to last paragraph before "LEC-ISI_ATIVE" should read as follows: "(MO) It was moved by Casares, second by Kunz that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council the approval of a 6 month extension for TR 26631, from December 4, 1961, to June 4, 1962. The June 4 drte is being used so that Mr. Potter and Mrs. Malcof will appear before this Planning Commission on the same date since agreement is contingent on the develop- ment of this subdivision TR 26231." 5. On page 5, the third paragraph should read as folic -ws: "(MO) It was moved by Casares, second by Buchanan that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that a portion of the easement for a future .street not heretofore accepted on the west end of Barrette Street be vacated so as to leave subject to the street easement sufficient land to permit either the creation of a cul -de -sac at the west end of Barrette Street or the westerly extension of Barrette or both, on condition that there first be obtained from the owners of two adjacent lots, namely, 1 and 14, a dedication of a sufficient portion of each lot to complete the cul -de -sac in the manner shown on the clot heretofore prepared for the Planning Commission. Also hat each property owner grant in fee to the City of .o. <msad a strip of land on the west side of their property 25 feet long and 6 inches wide ext t- ':ding away from the center line of Barrette Street, in order to protect 0 9 the City's opportunity to extend vacation proceedings to be borne proportionately by owners of lots 1 and 14 and an agreement to be entered into with the City by owners of Lots 1 and 14 to bear the costs of curbs, gutters and paving." (MO) It was moved by Buchanan, second by carried that the minutes of December 1962 be approved as corrected. ADMINISTRATION: OLD BUSINESS 4. None Casares and unanimously 18, 1961 and January 2, NEW BUSINESS �. PLOT PLAN N0. 84 - MR. AND MRS. M. CORNERS - 8257 East Marshall St. Advisor Flanery presented the factual data regarding this plot plan. Mr. A. L. Bremmer, Temple City Drafting Service, designer of this development explained the common driveway and that the property will be completely cleared of all old buildings, etc. (MO) It was moved by Buchanan, second by Casares that Plot Plan No. 85 be approved subject to the Planning Commission's standard requirements with the additional condition that a Declaration of Mutual Easements be recorded providing for utility, ingress and egress easements to serve any future lot split which might occur off Parcel "D ". (RC) Roll call vote was as follows: Ayes: Crabtree, Casares, Buchanan, Wilt, Maude. Noes: None. Absent: Kunz, McCaffree. 6. PLOT PLAN NO. 85 - ANDERSON AND FLACK - Northeast corner of Temple City Boulevard and Loftus Avenue - Larkwood Construction Corp. Advisor Flanery presented the factual data regarding this Plot Plan. He further pointed out that Temple City Boulevard is a major city street and that dedication of right -of -way should be required. Commissioner Buchanan stated that he felt the house on Parcel "A" is to close to Temple City Boulevard, however, this is a side yard. James Flow, 4353 Rio Hondo Avenue, Larkwood Construction explained the difficulties that would arise from moving the house on Parcel "A". (MO) It was moved by Casares, second by Wilt that Plot Plan No. 85 be approved subject to the Planning Commission's standard require- ments with the following conditions: 1. That the setback on Temple City Boulevard be increased to a 30 foot minimum. 2. That a 10 foot right -of -way be dedicated to the City of Rosemead for the future widening and improving of Temple City Boulevard. 3. That the curb and gutter requirement be waived for Temple City Boulevard. 4. That curbs, gutters and sidewalks be required on Loftus Drive. - 2 - (RC) 7. Roll call vote was as follows: Ayes: Crabtree, Casares, Buchanan, Wilt, Maude. Noes: None. Absent: Kunz, McCaffree. ZONE EXCEPTION CASE NO. 13 - PUBLIC HEARING - Ralph, Dorothy and Frederick Case - 4104 North Loma Avenue - R -2 to R -3 Advisor Flanery presented the following factual data regarding this Zone Exception Case: To construct a six -unit, two- story, apartment building while continuing to maintain two existing.dwelling units on property zoned R -2 (Two - Family Residence). The plot plan marked Exhibit " A " shows the proposed development of the subject property. A six -unit apartment building is proposed for the front portion of the subject property and will replace an existing single- family residence. Two other single family re:.iden- ces will remain intact on the rear portion of the property. Twelve automobile parking spaces, eight of which would be covered, are intended to occupy the area between the proposed apartment building and the existing residences. A 16 -foot wide paved driveway along the south property line will provide access to the proposed parking area. A 15 -foot front yard setback is shown on the plot plan and may be encroached on by a portion of the proposed building. If developed in accordance with the existing R -2 zoning, the area of the subject property would permit a maximum of five residential units. The subject property is a rectangular parcel of land having a frontage on Loma Avenue of 66 feet, a depth therefrom of 120 feet, and comprising a gross area of 13,860 square feet. It is developed within three single- family residences. In general, the area surrounding the subject property is devel- oped with mixed residential uses. The Rosemead Senior High School and a Los Angeles County park are located northerlycf the subject property; the Rosewood Cemetery is easterly, and there are various commercial uses along Valley Boulevard. There appear to be no properties within 500 feet of the subject property that are developed with an R -3 (Limited Multiple Residential) density. Chairman Wilt declared the Public Hearing open at 8:45 o'clock p.m. Advisor Flanery administered the oath to those wishing to testify at this Public Hearing. The proponents testifying were as follows: Robert W. Olson, Home and Income Inc., Pico Rivera, developer, explained this proposed development in full and further stated if more parking is needed they could make this a five unit apartment thus increasing the off - street parking area. Robert Shapiro, 4022 North Loma Avenue, stated he bought this property with the hopes of future R -3 zoning and is very pleased to see new development. Richard Bassett, 1725 Alaska Street, West Covina owner of property on Loma Avenue, has been hoping for R -3 zone to develop his prop- erty also. The following were opponents expressing the parking harships which already exist and an apartment development would only add to the parking problem. Mr. Harry Atchison, 9146 East Bentel Avenue Mr. Alfred McDonald, 9147 East Bentel Avenue Mr. R. V. Dupuis, 9156 East Bentel Avenue Mrs. Anna Dupuis, 9156 East Bentel Avenue - 3 - 0 0 Mrs. Eleanor Wilbur, 9164 East Mission Drive Joan Klycinski, 9150 East Bentel Avenue Mrs. Katherine McDonald 9147 East Bentel Mr. Robert Wilbur, 9164 East Mission Drive Chairman Wilt declared the Public Hearing closed at 9:45 o'clock p.m. Commissioner McCaffree arrived at this time. (MO) After short discussion it was moved by Casares, second by Maude that Zone Exception Case No. 13 be denied as there were no causes shown to present a hardship on the applicant. Commissioner Maude stated that he would like to see a study made of this block in order to obtain a uniform control of the parking spaces. Commission Casares stated that it would be well to consider the entire block for a zone change. Secretary Farrell stated that Mr. Mansur is in the process of a possible recommendation to provide 2 car parking spaces for each unit. (RC) Roll call vote was as follows: Ayes: Crabtree, Casares,.Buchanan, Wilt, Maude, McCaffree. Noes: None. Absent: Kunz. Advisor Flanery presented the findings of fact: 1. There were protests to the granting of this exception. 2. The property can be used for the purposes for which it is zoned and an exception is not necessary for the preserva- tion of any substantial property right of the owner. 3. There are no practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the ordinance. If the exception were granted, the spirit of the ordinance would not be observed, public safety secured nor substantial justice done. He further stated that the applicant has the right to appeal within 15 days after the receipt of the letter of denial. LEGISLATIVE: OLD BUSINESS 8. ZONE CHANGE REQUEST - Study and Recommendation - Ivar Avenue between Mission and Grand Avenue. Advisor Flanery presented a report which contained in part the following: An analytical land use survey of the areas fronting on Ivar Avenue reveals approximately 1925 feet of frontage on the east side and 1825 feet on the west side extending from the C -1 Zone north of Mission to Grand Avenue. Much of this frontage is developed with substantial, well maintained, single- family residences. It would appear highly unlikely that the owners of these properties would find a ready market for their homes at a price which would provide a margin of profit sufficient to enable the home to be destroyed or removed. Approximately 2,000 front feet of the total 3,750 feet are occupied with this type of development. On the other hand, approximately 1,750 feet of frontage is vacant or developed with homes ranging from well over ten years to perhaps 30 or 40 years of age, or with deep, unused rear areas. Such parcels will lend themselves to further development of singles, duplexes or small multiples. - 4 - • • Secretary Farrell read a report from Planning Consultant Mansur recommending the following conditions if a zone change were to take place: 1. Property owners may choose to develop a more deluxe development than would be likely with a ratio of one unit to one thousand square feet of land area. 2. Existing residences may be of such value as to prohibit their removal, or financial arrangements may hamper their removal. 3. Lower Azusa Road, one hundred feet wide, extended westerly, would remove 50,000 square feet (or 50 units). 4. Until Lower Azusa Road is extended and improved, traffic toward the north is somewhat inconvenient, requiring use of Walnut Grove or a left turn onto Mission and another left turn onto Rosemead Boulevard. At the present time, use of Lower Azusa Road to travel east provides the same problem. 5. Proximity of the railroad may discourage some investors and also many renters, especially in view of the greater advertising advantage of other major and secondary highways within the area. 6. Other areas are competing for the renter market within the City. These include Mission Drive, Grand Avenue, Walnut Grove Avenue, Glendon Way and Ramona Boulevard both east and west of Rosemead Boulevard. Some of these areas have renter - advantages not inherent in subject property. Secretary Farrell stated this is an informal petition and there has been no survey made of those who signed this petition. The following property owners stated that they would like R -3 Zoning but had no immediate plans for developing under such zoning: Mr. Joseph Levato, 4706 North Ivar Avenue Mr. Anthony Catanese, 4618 North Ivar Avenue Mr. Vern Henderson, 4658 North Ivar Avenue Mr. G. J. Skinner, 4628 North Ivar Avenue, circulated the informal petition and would like to develop in R -3 zoning at the present time. (MO) It was moved by McCaffree that the Planning Commission request a study and report as soon as possible from Planning Consultant Mansur. Motion died for lack of a second. D 10 (MO) Chairman Wilt stated if there were no objections the Commission would have a study session with Mr. Mansur on Monday,January 22, 1962. There were no objections and it was so ordered. BUFFER ZONE ORDINANCE RECOMMENDATION. Chairman Wilt stated that due to the late hour this item should be on the next agenda. There were no objections and it was so ordered. MATERS FROM COMMISSION AND STAFF Chairman McCaffree read a communication from the Rosemead Chamber of Commerce regarding the installation dinner to be held Saturday, January 20, 1962 at 7:00 in the Rosemead High School Cafateria. It was moved by Casares, second by Buchanan and unanimously - 5 - 0 0 carried that the meeting adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 11:20 o'clock p.m. Next regular meeting will be Monday, February 5, 1962 at 7:30 o'clock p.m. '�!� SECRETARY 0 CORRECTION AND ADDITION TO THE ROSEMEAD PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of January 15, 1962 On page 5, delete the first paragraph. After Item No. 6 add a paragraph stating that Secretary Farrell read the following report from Planning Consultant Mansur: This is one of the areas bei -ng studied for possible change from agricultural to multiple residential zone but no definite conclusion has yet been reached as to what zone change should be made. Any zone.change made on this property should be subject to the following conditions: 1. The street be of a dedicated width of not less than 60 feet for the entire length. 2. There shall be a pavement width of not less than 40 feet with curbs, gutters and sidewalks. 3. Off- street parking space shall be provided of not less than 2 spaces for every dwelling unit. 4. Any change shall not be made until the adoption of a new zoning ordinance or until the present zoning ordinance has been amended to provide adequate front, side and rear yard setbacks; for the 2 story height limit to apply to all buildings, and that the provision for permitted uses other than residences be deleted. 5. The change shall not be made until definite steps are taken for the extension of Lower Azusa Road from Rosemead Boulevard to Mission Drive as this proposed street passes through the property requested to be rezoned. The rezoning of this property and construction of new multi- family buildings could consider- ably increase the cost to the taxpayers of this street extension which has been a part of the Master Plan of streets for many years. 6. That the property owners requesting this change comply with the provisions for change of zone as provided in.Sections 306 to 310 and 636 of the Zoning Ordinance.