PC - Minutes - 08-20-63CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of August 20; 1963
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held in the
Council Chambers, 8815 East Valley Boulevard. The meeting
was called to order by Chairman Wilt at 7:43 o'clock p.m:
1: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Andersen;
2. Presenti Commissioners: Kunz; Buchanan, McCaffree, Crabtree,
Wilt:
Absent: Commissioners; Casares, Taylor.
Ex officio: Hassenplug, Flanery, Mansur, Phillips, Wroe.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 6, 1963
Chairman Wilt stated that on page 2, fifth person in the second
group list, property should be "southeast" instead of "north ".
(MO) it was moved by Kunz, second by Crabtree and unanimously carried
that the minutes of August 6, 1963, be approved as corrected.
ADMINISTRATIVE:
OLD BUSINESS
4. None
NEW BUSINESS
5. PLOT PLAN NO. 135 - BERNARD GALVIN (Owner & Applicant)
9355 Pitkin Street
Advisor Flanery presented the factual data regarding this plot
plan.
Bernard Galvin, owner, 9355 Pitkin Street, stated that he pre-
ferred to have separate driveways rather than one mutual ease-
ment drive. Also the existing garage on Parcel A will be
removed.
Commissioner Casares arrived at 7.:57 o'clock p.m.
Discussion was held by the Commissioners favoring a community
drive to serve both parcels and it was suggested that the plot
plan be withdrawn and resubmitted with a revised plan.
(MO) It was moved by McCaffree, second by Crabtree that Plot Plan
No. 135 be withdrawn without prejudice to be resubmitted at a
future date.
(RC) Roll call vote was as follows:
Ayes: Casares, Kunz, Buchanan, McCaffree, Crabtree, Wilt.
Noes: None
Absent: Taylor
6. PLOT PLAN NO. 139 - MELVIN CORNERS (Owner & Applicant)
8261 E. Marshall Street
Advisor Flanery presented the factual data regarding this plot
plan. This plan would be in violation as it has not been a
year since the last sale resulted from Plot Plan No. 84.
Mel Corners, owner, 8261 E. Marshall Street, stated that he
was of the opinion it was one year from the date of plot plan
approval. He explained he would request withdrawal without
prejudice at this time..
PC 8/20/63 10
0
(MO) It was moved by McCaffree, second by Kunz, that Plot Plan No.
139, be withdrawn without prejudice until such time the legality
of the last sale from Plot Plan No. 84 is cleared.
(RC) Roll call vote was as follows:
Ayes: Casares, Kunz, Buchanan, McCaffree, Crabtree, Wilt.
Noes: None.
Absent: Taylor.
7. PLOT PLAN NO. 140 - HAROLD MILLER (Owner b Applicant)
9244 East Glendon Way
Advisor Flanery presented the factual data regarding this plot
plan.
Harold Miller, 200 DeAnza,.San Gabriel, owner, stated that he
purchased the rear property in July 1962, and has recorded
ingress and egress easements. The proposed house is to be a
move -in.
(MO) It was moved by Buchanan, second by Crabtree, that Plot Plan
No. 140 be approved subject to the Planning Commission's
Standard Requirements and the following conditions to be
included on five final maps:
1. Establish recordation of mutual easement for 25'
driveway.
2. Obtain signatures of property owners stating there
is no objection to moving the house over this
25' driveway.
3. Provide turn around area on Parcel "B" to meet staff
approval.
4. Proposed move -in to be approved by the Move -in
Committee.
(RC) Roll call vote was as follows:
Ayes: Casares, Kunz, Buchanan, Wilt.
Noes: Crabtree
Absent: Taylor
Commissioner McCaffree abstained from voting..
8. PLOT PLAN NO. 141 - ALERT CONSTRUCTION (Applicant) - VICTOR
SCHMUCH (Owner) - 9353 E. Glendon Way
Advisor Flanery-presented the factual data regarding this plot
plan.
Discussion was held regarding the lot sizes in conjunction with
the driveway length.
Victor Schmuch, 9353 E. Glendon Way, owner, stated they are
planning on removing all old buildings and that a garage will
be built on Parcel A.
(MO) It was moved by Buchanan, second by Kunz, that Plot Plan No.
141 be approved subject to the Planning Commission's Standard
Requirements and that mutual easements be recorded for the
utilities and common driveway.
(RC) Roll call vote was as follows:
Ayes: Casares, Kunz, Buchanan, McCaffree, Crabtree, Wilt.
Noes: None..
Absent: Taylor.
9. PLOT PLAN NO. 142 - SOLAR HOMES (Applicant) - HOWARD PAULSON
(Owner) - 9220 E. Glendon Way
Advisor Flanery presented the factual data regarding this
plot plan.
�m
PC 8/20/63 10
0
Howard Paulson, owner; explained that the existing houses are
about 15 years old and that he is planning on splitting the
front portion so his son can build a home.
(MO) It was moved by Kunz second by,Casares, that Plot Plan No.
142 be approved subject to the Planning Commission's Standard
Requirements and that the five final maps be revised to show
a 25' set back In front of the garage on Parcel A and that
the garage on Parcel B may be rearranged to meet staff approval.
(RC) Roll call vote was as follows:
Ayes: Casares, Kunz; Buchanan; McCaffree, Crabtree; Wilt.
Noes: None.
Absent: Taylor.
Chairman Wilt declared a recess at 9;20 o'clock p;m. Meeting
reconvened at 9:32 o'clock p.m.
LEGISLATIVE:
OLD BUSINESS
10, PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE
Chairman Wilt explained that the Planning Commission has held
their Public Hearing regarding the proposed zoning ordinance
and that Frank DiNoto, representing the P. -3 Study Committee
was present to answer any questions regarding the Committee's
recommendations. Also, Everett Mansur, Planning Consultant,
was present to explain parts of the ordinance.
(MO) It was moved by Casares, second by Kunz, that the second draft
of the Comprehensive Land Use Zoning Ordinance of the City of
Rosemead, as prepared by Everett Mansur, and as considered and
acted upon at joint meetings of the City Council and Planning
Commissions be recommended to the City Council for adoption.
Commissioner Buchanan stated that there are a lot of questions
in the R -3 section of the ordinance and he felt the Commission
should discuss these tonight.
The Commissioners agreed the R -3 section should be taken care
of at this time.
SECTION 9106.03 - Front Yard Setback Minimum -
Frank DiNoto explained that the R -3 Study Committee recommended
a 20' setback instead of the 15' in the ordinance after con-
siderable study of other communities and existing developments.
This would be in the best interest for making a more attractive
unit and not a waste of land.
Secretary Wroe reported the setback requirements in other cities
which range from 25' to 10'.
Harry Higley, 8518 E. Valley Blvd., spoke in regard to the 20'
setback as creating a squeeze problem and would take valuable
property which could be used for courtyard area, etc.
Dale Blue, 8858 E. Marshall St., stated that 15' setback is the
most logical.
Walter Mazur, 3829 N. Ivar Ave., stated that the setback approach
used in the M -1 zone is very realistic. This would mean to
create setback requirements by street or as each area becomes
an R -3 zone.
Chairman Wilt polled the Commissioners in regard to the 15'
front yard setback and the majority were in favor of the 15'
front yard minimum setback.
- 3 -
PC 8/20/63 .
0
(RC) Roll call vote on the previous motion was as follows:
Ayes: Casares, Kunz.
Noes: Buchanan, McCaffree, Crabtree, Wilt.
Absent Taylor.
Commissioner Buchanan suggested the Commission discuss each
item in the R-3 section and a poll to be taken to determine
the Commission's feelings..
SECTION 9106.04 - Side Yard Minimum
Frank Di Noto reported that the Committee studied this item
in detail and are in agreement that the recommended setback
is necessary for adequate air space; light and privacyi
Harry Higley and Dale Blue expressed their views that this was
unreasonable and that the requirement of 5 feet as proposed in
the ordinance would be sufficienti
Benjamin Bontempo, 3947 N& Delta Sty, stated that as the popu-
lation increases land is becoming more valuable and none of it
should be wasted.
Loren Rightmeier and Norman Daley also spoke at this time.
Chairman Wilt stated that a poll of the Commissioners would be
taken to determine whether this section should be changed or
not.. The Commission by a majority favored leaving Section
9106.04 as recommended by the R -3 Study Committee.
9106.05 � Lot Area Minimum -
Discussion and poll indicated that Section 9106.05 should re-
main as proposed.
SECTION 9106.06 - Lot Area Minimum -
Frank Di Noto explained the basis and reasoning of the R -3
Committee's recommendation for 1,600 sq..ft..per dwelling unit.
Harry Higley presented example figures for a development using
the proposed recommendations and of a development using the
proposed zoning ordinance requirements.
Carl Hayland, Building Contractor's Association, 1571 Beverly
Blvd., stated he was not speaking for or against this item,
but would like to point out that members of the association
felt that more reasonable and realistic figures should be con-
sidered.
A poll was conducted with the majority favoring the 1,600 sq.
ft. per dwelling unit requirement.
SECTION 9106 .07 - Distance Between Buildings
A poll was conducted favoring no change in this section.
Harry Higley spoke on this item also.
SECTION 9106.08 - Parking Requirements -
The Commission was in complete agreement to leave this section
as proposed.
SECTION 9106.09 - Driveway Requirements -
Everett Mansur suggested that 2 feet of the 20 foot driveway
could be used for walkway or landscapin g.
- 4 -
PC 8/20/63 •
0
AFter further discussion it was agreed by the Commission to
add "That 2 feet of the required driveway width may be used
for walkways or landscaping ", to Section 9106.09.
SECTION 9106.10 - Landscaping Requirements
It was agreed by the Commission to have the Attorney reword
this section to correspond with the above addition.
SECTION 9106.11 - Usable Open Space Requirements -
Ho change was recommended.
SECTION 9106.12 - Floor Area Requirements -
Discussion was held in regard to the size of a bachelor apart-
ment and the 200 sq. ft, for additional rooms.
A poll was taken and a majority agreed that no change was
necessary.
(MO) It was moved by Crabtree, second by Buchanan, that the Planning
Commission recommends to the City Council the adoption of the
Land Use Zoning Ordinance, second draft with the proposed
changes as indicated by the polls taken at this meeting.
(RC) Poll call vote was as follows:
Ayes: Casares, Kunz, Buchanan, Crabtree, Wilt.
Noes: None.
Absent: Taylor.
Commissioner McCaffree abstained from voting.
H. NEW BUSINESS - None
12. MI -JTERS FROM COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF - None
13. COMMUNICATIONS - None
It was moved by Kunz, second by Crabtree and unanimously
carried that the meeting adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 12 :04
o'clock a.m. Next regular meeting will be Tuesday, September
3, 1963.
CHAIRMAN S CRETARY
- 5-