PC - Minutes - 11-19-620
0
CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of November 19, 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 7:33 o'clock p.m.
1. Pledge of Allegiance will be conducted at the Public Hearing.
2. Present: Commissioners: Casares, Taylor, Kunz, Buchanan,
Crabtree, Wilt.
Absent: Commissioners: McCaffree.
Ex officio: Boyko, Farrell, Flanery, Mansur, Phillips, Wroe.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: NOVEMBER 5, 1962.
Commissioner Buchanan stated that on page 2, paragraph 2, lines
2 and 3 add after the word however "if any improvements are
desired." On Page 3, item A, first paragraph, line 2, add after
Marshall Street 'just west of Rosemead Boulevard."
Chairman Wilt stated that the minutes should show that in the
future Commissioners will take turns as Acting Chairman.
(MO) It was moved by Crabtree, second by Buchanan and unanimously
carried that the minutes of November 5, 1962, be approved as
corrected.
Commissioner McCaffree arrived at 7:42 o'clock p.m.
Chairman Wilt declared the meeting adjourned to the Public
Hearing on the General Plan to be at the Muscatel School, 4201
North Ivar Avenue, at 7:43 o'clock p.m.
4. GENERAL PLAN - FIRST PUBLIC HEARING
Mayor Andersen declared the Public Hearing open at 8:00 o'clock
p.m.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Andersen.
Mayor Andersen explained that before a General Plan can be adopted
by the City there must be at least two Public Hearings held by the
Planning Commission and one by the City Council.
Mayor Andersen introduced Chairman Wilt of the Planning Commission,
and Chairman Wilt introduced the Commissioners. City Administrator
Farrell introduced the City staff.
Chairman Wilt explained what the General Plan is and why it is
needed. He then introduced Everett B. Mansur, Planning Consultant
for the City of Rosemead, who had been hired by the City to prepare
the necessary maps and reports to initiate the General Plan.
Mr. Mansur stated that the General Plan is not a zoning plan and
that the State Law required that a Planning Commission shall adopt
a comprehensive, long term general plan for the physical develop-
ment of the city.
Mr. Mansur explained the following maps which were mounted on the
wall: zoning Map, Land Use Map, Water Supply Map, Future Develop-
ment for large lots, Typical plot plan development, Central
business district, Major City Streets and Highways Map, and General
Plan of land use.
0
P 11 -19 -62
Ll
Mr. Mansur summarized the following reports: Land Use Inventory,
Central Area Survey, Community Design Plan, and General Plan and
Population, Social and Economic Survey.
Mr. Mansur further stated that these reports are in the library,
and copies may be obtained at the City Hall. The maps are also
available for review at the City Hall. The date for the next.
Public Hearing will be set by the Planning Commission., Mr. Mansur
turned the meeting over to Chairman Wilt at this time,.
Chairman Wilt stated there would now be a question and answer
period for those in the audience who wished to speak. Mr. Mansur
would answer the questions.
I. Hal Hoyt, 3150 N. Rosemead Place, stated he would like to know
the definitions of R -1, R -2 and R -3. Zones.
R -1 and R -2 is considered low density residential and R -3
is considered high density.
2. Mrs. A. R. Horeish, 9239 E. Glendon Way, asked where the M,T.A,
proposes to locate their parking area?
It has not been definitely determined as yet, however the north
side is the most logical.
Mrs. Horeish also asked what would the zoning be along Ramona
Boulevard to provide for high residential?
R -3 Zone would indicate high residential.
3. Mr. Alex Heimple, owner 8939 East Glendon Way, asked what the
zoning would be for this location.
This area is now A -1, but the General Plan would indicate R -1
zoning.
4. Mr. Neil Wilson, 8903 E. Ramona Blvd., Would the City have no
more A -1 zone under the General Plan?
The General Plan does not rezone and the new zoning ordinance
is being studied at this time.
5. Mr. Cox, from Porterville asked if there is a liason between.the.
County Regional Planning Commission and the City Planning Qommissionl
Yes, Mr. Flanery is the Planning Advisor from Los Angele5 County
Regional Planning Commission.
6. Mrs. Page, El Monte resident, owner of 4106 North Walnut Grove
Avenue, stated that her property is in two zones and does not
feel that a person should have to spend $300.00 for a zone
exception to utilize this property under the R -3 zone.
7. Mr. D.. A. Brown, 8927 N. Marshall St.. stated that there is a
split zone condition on Rosemead Boulevard near Marshall Street.
R -3 apartments are on the boulevard side and goats and dogs are
being raised in the rear in an A -1 Zone. He also felt that
people do not want such large lots nowadays.
Mr. Mansur stated that the size of lots vary with areas.
S. Harry Tullar,.Bentel Avenue, stated that he felt part of this
General Plan included traffic problems and that the Traffic
Commission should handle some of these at their meetings.
9. Mr. J. P. Uhlarik, 3658 N. Delta, asked if this plan would include
street improvements by the school areas, especially sidewalks.
City Administrator Farrell explained that major city streets are
improved with State gas tax revenues only. Therefore, it takes
some time to improve all the necessary streets.
10. Mrs. J. L. Gore, 3821 N. Ivar Avenue questioned the raising and
keeping of horses in residential areas.
Advisor Flanery explained that under the present zoning 1 horse
per riding member of the family is permissable, however, they are
to be kept at least 35 feet from a residence. hie further advised
that if it appears this is a problem in the City it could be
- 2 -
0
P 11 -19 -62
presented to the Planning Commission for study.
11. Alden R. Hitchcock, 4022 N. Ivar Ave, stated that there is plenty
of vacant property which is zoned for parking. Do we really need
more parking areas?
Mr. Mansur stated the one problem is that the City cannot force
the property owners to use their property for this use.
12. Everett Nance, 3911 E. Glendon Way, questioned the proposed
street between Glendon Way and Marshall Street as he has 3 houses
on his lot and one would be in the way of the proposed street.
13. Mrs. McBride, 8965 Whitmore Street, questioned a petition being
circulated in the area requesting R -3 Zone. She was denied the
right to sign either negative or affirmative.
Mr. Mansur explained the process of a petition requesting rezoning.
14. Mr. W. J. Mazur, 3829 N. Ivar Avenue, stated that he thought
piecemeal rezoning would be of no real help. The City should
be rezoned at one time.
15, Mr. ,V. A. Re, 3227 N. Rosemead Place, also felt the City should
be rezoned at one time.
16. Mrs. I. A. Post, 8940 E. Marshall Street, stated that she would
not like the heavy traffic going by the houses on Marshall Street
that signals on Rosemead Boulevard would create.
17. Mr. J. R. Horning, 9245 E. Marshall Street, stated that the
proposed signals at Marshall and Rosemead would make Marshall a
heavier travelled street. Has the City considered Hart Street
going through to Marshall Street?
18. Loren Rightmeier, 8724 E. Valley Boulevard, asked if any thought
has been given to enlarging the M -1 Zone on Valley Boulevard from
the west city limits easterly?
Mr. Mansur stated that there is M -1 Zoning in the City that is
not being used at the present time.
Chairman Wilt declared the Public Hearing closed at 10:17 o'clock.
p.m. Meeting adjourned at 10:17 o'clock p.m. Next regular meeting
will be December 3, 1962, at 7:30 o'clock p.m.
CHAIRMAN SECRETARY
- 3 -