Loading...
PC - Minutes - 04-02-62_ 0 • CITY OF ROSEMEAD ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of April 2, 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 :35 o'clock p.m. 1. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Secretary Farrell. 2. Present: Commissioners: Crabtree, Casares, Buchanan, Wilt, McCaffree, Kunz, Maude. Absent: Commissioners:. None. Ex officio: Boyko, Dato, Farrell, Flanery, Mansur, Phillips. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 5, 1962 March 19, 1962 Commissioner Buchanan stated that on page 3, item F, 4th line should read "Commissioner Casares ". (MO) It was moved by Buchanan, second by Casares, and unanimously carried that the minutes of March 5, 1962, be approved as corrected. (MO) It was moved by Casares, second by Buchanan and unanimously carried that the minutes of March 19, 1962, be approved as print -ad. ADMINISTRATION: NEW BUSINESS 4. Agenda Item No, 9. PLOT PLAN NO. 95 - VERNON PARKER - 8858 East Marshall Street - Fortune Homes. Commissioner Maude stated that Vernon Parker, owner, would like to withdraw his application for development at 8858 East Marshall Street as he would like to reconsider the use of this property. (MO) It was moved by Maude, second by Crabtree, that Agenda Item No. 9, Plot Plan No. 95, be allowed to be withdrawn without prejudice to be reconsidered anytime within six (6) months. (RC) Roll call vote was as follows: Ayes: Crabtree, Casares, Buchanan, Wilt, McCaffree, Kunz, Maude. Noes: None. Absent: None. 5. Agenda Item No. 13 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE RECOM- MENDATIONS REGARDING LOT SPLITS, Commissioner Maude read the action and motion made by the Economic Development Committee requesting that the Planning Commission defer the granting of lot splits until a study has been conducted to determine a feasible plan to control these lot splits. He further stated that some of the past approved lot splits are not improving Rosemead and hoped that a study would come up with a feasible way to improve the future lot splits. Attorney Boyko stated as long as a lot split complies with the ordinance they need to be heard. However, tighter standards may be imposed under the present ordinance. A target date for the study to be completed and the adoption of a set of standards, done in good faith, within a 30 day period would be the fairest way to handle this problem. Chairman Wilt stated that plot plans should show adjacent vacant land to provide for proper future development. Chairman Wilt further stated if there were no objections the plot plans on the agenda tonight should be considered in all fairness to the applicants. There were no objections and it was so ordered. 6. Agenda Item No. 5 - PLOT PLAN NO. 80 - SANTINA CORDASCO - 8717 EAST STEELE STREET - FORTUNE HOMES. Advisor Flanery presented the factual data regarding this plot plan. This plan is on C -3 and R -I Zoning, however, the Commission is required to act on the R -1 portion only. He further stated that front access from Valley Boulevard could be made a condition of approval. (MO) After general discussion and the absence of the owner it was moved by Buchanan, second by Kunz that Plot Plan No. 80 be postponed until the May 7, 1962 meeting and that the owner, Santina Cordasco, be so notified of this meeting, (RC) Roll call vote was as follows: Ayes: Crabtree, Cagarez. Buchanan, Wilt, McCaffree, Kunz, Maude. Noes: None, Absent: None. 7. Agenda Item No. 6 - PLOT PLAN NO. 91 - JOHN SANTINO - 4225 RIO HONDO AVENUE - VALLEY CRAFT CONSTRUCTION Advisor Flanery presented -the factual data regarding this plot plan. (MO) it was moved by McCaffree, second by Kunz that Plot Plan No. 91 be rejected at this time. After further discussion Commissioner McCaffree withdrew his motion with agreement of second. Chairman Wilt asked the owner John Santino if he would like to withdraw his application and meet with Darrell Flanery to rearrange this plan and resubmit at the May 7, 1962 meeting. John Santino agreed to withdraw his application without prejudice to be heard at the next meeting. Chairman Wilt stated if there were no objections it would be so ordered. There were no objections and it was so ordered. 8. Agenda Item No. 7 - PLOT PLAN NO. 92 - RALPH, DOROTHY AND FREDERICK CASE - 4104 NORTH LOMA AVENUE Advisor Flanery presented the factual data regarding this plot plan. This property was a previous zone exception for R -3 development in an R -2 zone which was denied. Mr. Harper, developer, representing Mr. Case, owner, stated that he had no desire to split this property, and according to Regional Planning Commission's office the ordinance requires an imaginary lot split line in R -2 additional development. Attorney Boyko referred to Sections 728 and 729A of the Rosemead Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Mansur, Planning Consultant, stated this development would - 2 - Ij 0 not meet the proposed zoning ordinance requirements in regard to the parking, driveway widths, and distance between buildings, and even if it were zoned R -3 it would not conform. Commissioner Buchanan stated that this area could use much improvement, but would like to see it done on a large scale. (MO) After general discussion and polling it was moved by Kunz, second by McCaffree that Plot Plan No, 72 be deferred until the meeting of May 7, 1962, which will allow sufficient time for a study session to be held. (RC) Roll call vote as follows: Ayes: Crabtree, Buchanan, Wilt, McCaffree, Kunz, Maude. Noes: Casares. Absent: None. 9. Agenda Item No. 8 - PLOT PLAN NO. 93 - H. E. AND THERESA RICHARDS - NORTH OF WHITMORE, 287 FT._EAST OF SULLIVAN AVENUE. Chairman Wilt stated that the owner was not present and it is the general feeling of the Commission that the owner should be present. Advisor Flanery stated that the owner would need to be present to verify for future dedication to provide an adequate street. (MO) It wns moved by Crabtree, second by Kunz that Plot Plan No. 93 be postponed until the May 7, 1962 meeting at which time the owner should be present, also a recommendation from Mr. Mansur regarding this matter will be prepared. (RC) Roll call vote was as follows: Ayes: Crabtree, Casares, Buchanan, Wilt, McCaffree, Kunz, Maude. Noes: None. Absent: None. LEGISLATIVE OLD BUSINESS 10. PROPOSED BUFFER ZONE ORDINANCE: RECOMMENDATION Chairman Wilt asked Mr. Mansur if his proposed ordinance is ready for submission and discussion. (MO) It was moved by McCaffree, second by Kunz, that this item be deferred at this time and to be discussed at the study session meeting with Mr. Mansur. (RC) Roll call vote was as follows: Ayes: Crabtree, Casares, Buchanan, Wilt, McCaffree, Kunz, Maude. Noes: None. Absent: None. Mr. Vernon Parker, owner at 8858 East Marshall Street (Plot Plan No. 93) stated he had not been notified that his plot plan was being heard at tonights meeting. There were several property owners present who own land on Marshall Street inquiring as to when the new zoning ordinance would become effective and why was the survey work being done. Secretary Farrell stated the survey work was for the installa- tion of curbs and gutters. NEW BUSINESS H. REPORT - PARKING AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS - INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY - FLANERY AND MANSUR. Advisor Flanery presented copies of his report to the Commission and also read it in full. - 3 - Consultant Mansur presented the Commission with copies of the drafted zoning ordinance and stated that buffer zones were covered on page 64. He suggested the Commissioners study this draft and be prepared for discussion at the study session meeting. Commissioner Maude stated that plot plans should state whether it is new construction or a house move -in and would like to have this matter discussed at the study Session. 12. DISCUSSION: SALE OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY BY METES AND BOUNDS. ATTORNEY BOYKO Commissioner Maude explained this matter to Attorney Boyko stating that he would like to know if there is something that could be done to control the sale of residential and industrial property by metes and bounds procedure. Consultant Mansur stated he would be meeting with the title compani and inquire if there was some way they could cooperate with the City in regard to this problem. 13. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING LOT SPLITS. This matter was discussed at the beginning of the meeting. However, it was requested that it be discussed further at the study session meeting. MATTERS FROM COMMISSION AND STAFF A. CONFORMANCE TO CONDITIONS OF PLOT PLANS Chairman Wilt stated there was still a difficulty with some of the approved plot plan developments conforming to the conditions of approval. Secretary Farrell stated he has been checking plot plans personally since this problem has occurred. Also curb and gutter permits will be issued at the time building permits are issued. B. COMMUNICATION: REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION. Secretary Farrell stated this communication was a cover letter for consideration of a uniform zoning ordinance which would be suitable for the County and incorporated cities. This matter could be discussed at the study session if the Commission so desired. C. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PLANNING CONGRESS. Secretary Farrell announced the next meeting will be Thursday, April 12, 1962, in Ontario, and the discussion to be about air traffic and movement of people at our air terminals. D. CALIFORNIA CONTRACT CITIES Chairman Wilt questioned how many Commissioners were authorized in the budget to attend the Seminar in Palm Springs this May. Secretary Farrell stated he would check the budget and the Council can consider this matter at their next meeting. Also recommended 1962 -63 budget items could be discussed at the study session. - 4 - (MO) It was moved Casares, second by Crabtree and unanimously carried that the meeting adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 10;40 o'clock p.m. Next regular study session meeting will be April 16, 1962. CHAIRMAN S R T - 5 -