PC - Minutes - 11-05-620
CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of November 5, 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 Vice Chairman
Buchanan at 7:40 o'clock p.m.
1. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Vice- Chairman Buchanan.
2. Present: Commissioners: Casares, Taylor, Kunz, Buchanan,
Crabtree, Wilt.
Absent: Commissioners: McCaffree.
Ex officio: Boyko, Farrell, Flanery, Phillips, Wroe.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Commissioner Wilt stated that on page 4, Item 3, should read as
follows: "Chairman Wilt stated that the curb and gutter develop-
ment on Earle Street had a few problems, but looks very nice as
developed by the.L. A. Drug Company. It.seems that setbacks and
landscaping in industrial areas should be covered in an ordinance
to prevent future problems."
Advisor Flanery stated that on page 1, Item 3, paragraph 1,
fourth line should read "In addition to the access to both parcels
by means of the alley there ". Also page 3, Item 2, line 3, after
"loaned" add "leased''.
(MO) It was moved by Kunz, second by Casares, and unanimously carried
that the minutes of October 15, 1962, be approved as corrected.
ADMINISTRATIVE:
OLD BUSINESS
4. PLOT PLAN NO. 82 - BRUCE PRENTICE - 8844,E. MARSHALL STREET
(Rearranged)
Advisor Flanery presented the factual data regarding the
rearrangement of this plot plan which will now provide for a
future cul -de -sac development with the property to the west.
C.A. Farrell explained that a drainage easement would be furnished
to provide adequate drainage.
Advisor Flanery explained that this was a revised plot plan showing
3 parcels instead of the original plan which showed only 2 lots.
The plan should read proposed carports instead of garages as this
is what the owner intends to build.
Mrs. J. Buck, 3714.N. Muscatel, owner of Parcel B, stated that
they bought this lot in good faith andtiere not told about having
to install any improvements to bring it up to code standards.
They would like all of these improvements, but cannot afford
Commissioner
Wilt stated that this is a
much better arrangement.
(MO)
It was moved
by Crabtree, second by Kunz,
that Plot
Plan No. 82
submitted for
rearrangement be approved
subject
to the Planning
Commission's
Standard Requirements.
(RC)
Roll call vote
was as follows: Ayes:
Casares,
Taylor, Kunz,
Wilt, Crabtree,
Buchanan. Noes: None.
Absent:
McCaffree.
5.
PLOT PLAN NO.
78 - MALOOF - 3714, 3710
and 3718
N. MUSCATEL AVE.
(Revised)
Advisor Flanery explained that this was a revised plot plan showing
3 parcels instead of the original plan which showed only 2 lots.
The plan should read proposed carports instead of garages as this
is what the owner intends to build.
Mrs. J. Buck, 3714.N. Muscatel, owner of Parcel B, stated that
they bought this lot in good faith andtiere not told about having
to install any improvements to bring it up to code standards.
They would like all of these improvements, but cannot afford
PC 11 -5 -62 •
1]
same at the present time due to medical obligations. Furthermore,
they would not.have purchased this property if they had known about
these requirements.
Attorney Boyko explained that the Bucks can not be compelled
legally to bring this lot up to standard at this time. However,
any improvements desired in the future, the owner would need to
bring this property up to standard at that time.
Attorney Boyko further stated that all 3 parcels are in violation
and that the Commission has three alternatives for action.
1. Refuse to approve, which would leave this plot plan
where it is, or,
2. Approve and hope that the Bucks will do their improve-
ments, or,
3. Approve and let the property owners work out this
problem the best they can.
Commissioner McCaffree arrived at this time.
(MO) After further discussion it was moved-by Casares, second by
Wilt, that the revised Plot Plan No. 78 be approved, subject to
the P1ann.i.ng ion Is Standard Requirements, to be completed
within one year from this date of approval.
Mr. Maloof stated that Jerry Sandusky handled the sale and
prepared the original plot plan and they were not aware at that
time these problems would be created.
(AMO) It was moved by Crabtree, second by Wilt, that the motion be
amended that Plot Plan No. 78, if not complied with at the end
of the one year approval it would automatically be turned over
to the District Attorney.
(RC) Roll call vote on the amendment was as follows: Ayes: McCaffree,
Wilt, Crabtree. Noes: Casares, Taylor, Kunz, Buchanan. Absent:
None.
(RC) Roll call vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Casares,
Taylor, Kunz, McCaffree, Wilt, Buchanan. Noes: Crabtree.
Absent: None.
This plot plan is to be on the agenda for the meeting of
November 4 1963, which is one year from date of this approval.
NEW BUSINESS
6. PLOT PLAN NO. 112 - SCHULZ BROS. - 3866 N. RIO HONDO AVENUE
Advisor Flanery presented the factual data regarding this plot
plan. This is a corner lot and all three parcels will have
separate driveways.
(MO) it was moved by Crabtree, second by Taylor, that Plot Plan No.
1.12 be approved subject to the Planning Commission's Standard
Requirements.
(RC) Roll call vote was as follows: Ayes: Casares, Taylor, Kunz,
McCaffree, Wilt, Crabtree, Buchanan. Noes: None. Absent: done.
LEGISLATIVE:
OLD BUSINESS
7. REPORT ON BILLBOARDS
C.A. Farrell submitted the report on Billboards to be reviewed
and studied by the Planning Commission.
- 2 -
0
PC 11 -5 -62
(MO) It was moved by McCaffree, second by Kunz, and unanimously carried
that this report be deferred to the meeting of December 3, 1962.
8. REPORT - STORAGE OF BUSSES IN A -1 AND R -3 ZONES AS PART OF CHURCH
ACTIVITIES - BOYKO
Attorney Boyko presented the Commissioners with a written report
regarding this matter. The report stated that the use of buses
in conjunction with church activities is automatically permitted
in A -1 and R -4 zones. However, in an R -3 zone a plan would need
to be submitted to the Planning Commission for approval before
parking facilities may be installed.
Vice- Chairman Buchanan stated if there were no objections this
report would be received and filed. There were no objections.
NEW BUSINESS
9. SET DATE FOR GENERAL PLAN PUBLIC HEARING
Secretary Wroe stated that Muscatel School would be available on
Monday, November 19, 1962, at 8:00 o'clock p.m. for the Public
Hearing on the proposed General Plan. The legal notice will be
prepared for publication by the staff.
Vice- Chairman Buchanan stated if there were no objections it would
be so ordered. There were no objections and it was so ordered.
Discussion was held that the Planning Commission will call the
meeting to order at 7:30 o'clock p.m. in the Council Chambers
and adjourn to Muscatel School for the Public Hearing.
10. COMMUNICATIONS
None.
Il. MATTERS FROM COMMISSION AND STAFF
A. PROPOSED LOFTUS DRIVE
Advisor Flanery stated that the staff has a problem in regard to
requests for lot splits on Glendon Way and on Marshall Street due
to the proposed street. He would like to know what the Commission
wants in regard to the 30 foot allowance for the proposed future
street.
Attorney Boyko suggested that the plot plans be so arranged to
provide for this future street.
C.A. Farrell stated that this type of development should be done
as a whole to provide for proper drainage, paving, etc.
A written report was requested from the City Attorneys office
regarding the setting aside of land for possible future street
purposes.
(MO) It was moved by Casares, second by Kunz, and unanimously carried
that the meeting adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 9:48 o'clock p.m.
Next regular meeting will be Monday, November 19, 1962 at 7:30
o'clock p.m.
CHAIRMAN SECRETARY
- 3 -