PC - Minutes - 11-19-630 •
CITY OF ROSEMEAD
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of November 19, 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 8 :01 o'clock p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Casares.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners: Casares, Taylor, Kunz, Buchanan, McCaffree,
Wilt.
Absent: Commissioners: Crabtree.
Ex officio: Cushman, Phillips, Watson, Wroe.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - NOVEMBER 5, 1963
Commissioner Buchanan stated that on page 1, Item 4, motion should
be April 7, 1964.
Chairman Wilt stated on paqe 1, Item 5, paragraph 1, second line,
after "at which' insert "time ".
(MO) It was moved by Buchanan, second by Casares, and unanimously carried
that the minutes of November 5, 1963, be approved as corrected.
ADMINISTRATION:
OLD BUSINESS
4. ZONE CHANGE CASE N0. 4 - HARRY HIGLEY - 8518 EAST VALLEY BOULEVARD
Secretary Wroe explained that this zone change request had its
Public Hearing on September 3, 1963, and Parcel I was approved
at that time and Parcel 11 (Higleys) was taken under submission
for a period of time not to exceed ninety days. There was no
opposition to this zone change at the Public Hearing.
Advisor Cushman presented the factual data as contained in the
minutes of September 3, 1963, and explained the zoning and land
use maps concerning this location.
Commissioner Crabtree arrived at 8 :08 o'clock p.m.
Discussion was held regarding the Southern California Edison Company
easement. Secretary Wroe reported that a permanent 20 foot wide
easement was granted and recorded for this property in 1923, and
that an additional 15 foot easement was granted in January, 1963.
Harry Higley, 8518 E. Valley Boulevard, stated that each of the
properties has the 20 foot easement recorded in their deeds to
permit ingress and egress, especially to the rear property.
(MO) It was moved by Casares, second by Kunz, that Zone Change Case
No. 4 be recommended to the City Council for approval with the
provision that the change from R -1 and M -1 be to R -3 -D, (Design
Zone).
Advisor Cushman referred to Section 9106.19 in the R -3 Zone which
requires the submission of a plot plan for all R -3 development.
Considerable discussion was held regarding the "D" Design Zone,
conditions, etc.
PC 11 -19 -63 0 •
(AMO) It was moved by Buchanan, second by McCaffree, that the motion be
amended to remove the "D" Design Zone from the original motion.
(RC) Roll call on the amendment was as follows:
Ayes. Taylor, Buchanan, McCaffree, Crabtree, Wilt.
Noes: Casares, Kunz.
Absent: None.
(RC) Roll call on the original motion as amended was as follows:
Ayes: Casares, Taylor, Kunz, Buchanan, McCaffree, Crabtree, Wilt.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
The Commission agreed that copies or proof of all recorded deeds
of the easements to the rear properties should be shown to the
City Council at the time of their Public Hearing on Zone Change
Case No. 4.
Chairman Wilt stated if there were no objections Agenda Item No. 7
would be considered at this time. There were no objections and
it was so ordered.
5. (AGENDA ITEM NO. 7) REQUEST FOR ZONE CLARIFICATION - VETERANS OF
FOREIGN WARS LODGE.
Secretary Wroe read this communication in full as follows:
"From: Veterans of Foreign Wars, Inc., Edward Munday Post 3089,
1306 S. San Gabriel Blvd., San Gabriel, California
Subject: Request for Categorical Clarification of Veterans
Organizations Owned Building, with A.B.C. Club License
Provisions.
1. The new planning or zoning regulations do not classify or
designate Veterans organizations in a zoning area, nor do
new regulations show a zoning category for Civic Clubs.
2. In as much as the closest category that Veterans organizations,
can file under is Private Clubs which are zoned as C -3, but
Civic Clubs can file under C -1 zoning, and in as much as a
Veterans organization is normally classified as a Civic Club,
the following is requested:
That Civic Clubs, which should include Veterans organizations,
should be classified within the new regulations and that pre-
vious zoning regulations permitted Civic organizations to be
established in C -1 zones. It is requested that Civic Clubs,
which shall include Veterans organizations, shall be replaced
in the proper section applicable, which permits Civic Clubs
to locate in C -1 zones.
3. It is further requested that the undersigned be informed as
to what action has been taken on this request for I shall
be present at the Rosemead planning meeting on November 5,
1964, at 7:30 p.m."
Advisor Cushman explained that in the new zoning ordinance there
is no provision for a civic club or veteran's club, and normally
these clubs are permitted in the C -1 zone.
Attorney Watson explained the procedure to include this use in the
zoning ordinance.
(MO) After further discussion it was moved by Crabtree, second by
McCaffree that this request be denied.
(RC) Roll call vote was as follows:
Ayes: Casares, Taylor, Kunz, Buchanan, McCaffree, Crabtree, Wilt.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
MM
PC 11 -19 -63 •
0
6. (AGENDA ITEM NO. 5) ZONE CHANGE CASE NO. 2 - PUBLIC HEARING -
GEORGE M. Rt.UB - 4715 NORTH ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD
Advisor Cushman explained that this Zone Change Case was heard on
July 1, 1963, and taken under submission at that time pending a
Traffic Engineer report and a new Public Hearing. The factual
data was presented again at this time.
Chairman Wilt declared the Public Hearing open at 9:20 o'clock p.m.
There was no one in the audience wishing to testify at this Public
Hearing.
Secretary Wroe read a communication in full from the Alhambra
Neuropsychiatric Hospital as follows:
"Pursuant to your notice of Zoning Case No. 2, City of Rosemead,
to be held on Tuesday, November 19 at 7:30 p.m. concerning the
proposed change from R -1 (Single Family Residential) to R -3
(Limited Multiple Residence) (for a rectangular 1.8 acre parcel
on the southwest corner of, and with frontages of 440 feet on
Rosemead Boulevard and 195 feet on Grand Avenue), I, as Administrator
of Alhambra Neuropsychiatric Hospital, whose property adjoins the
above, wish to be on record as follows: This hospital is concerned
that if the property is re -zoned as indicated it may then be found
necessary that the portion of Rosemead which runs across the front
of this property may by the necessity of increased traffic, have to
be widened. If it became necessary to widen this street, the
entire extension would have to take place on the west side of the
street inasmuch as the east side is bordered by the underpass. Such
a widening of perhaps 15 - 20 feet all the way down to the junction
with our property would require a sizeable portion of our property.
Such an extension would come within a few feet of one of our patient
buildings. As you may be aware, this hospital is dedicated to the
care of psychiatric patients for whom peace and quiet is extremely
important. We feel that our contribution to the City of Rosemead
and our potential future contribution would be greatly jeapardized
by such action.
Therefore, I respectfully request that the Zoning Commission not
permit any action which would allow an occurrence that would
jeapardize our service to the community.
Yours very truly,
JAMES W. CONTE
Administrator"
Secretary Wroe read two memos from Traffic Engineer George Envall
as follows:
"Reference is made to inter - office corre= ondence dated October 10,
1963, requesting a written report regarding traffic problems
involved in Zone Change Case No. 2, on the west service road of
Rosemead Boulevard south of Grand Avenue to Rosemead Boulevard.
Investigation discloses that subject west service road of Rosemead
Boulevard extending southerly of Grand Avenue is 24 feet wide, with
curbs on both sides, no lighting.
The Alhambra Psychiatric Hospital commences approximately 400 feet
south of Grand Avenue, extending south to the entrance to Rosemead
Boulevard proper an additional 150 feet.
The west service road of Rosemead Boulevard has single skip center-
line striping with no restricted parking. If the proposed develop-
ment is placed on the west side of this west service road of Rosemead
Boulevard, driveways could be located with sufficient sight distance;
this would be primarily from 200 feet to 350 feet to the north and
south for available sight distance. with the proposed development,
both sides of the west service road should be restricted to parking
between Grand Avenue and its entrance to Rosemead Boulevard proper,
as 24 feet is not sufficient to provide for movement of traffic in
both directions with parking on either side.
- 3 -
0
PC 11 -19 -63
Lighting should also be developed on this portion of Rosemead
Boulevard west service road between limits.
With the foregoing recommendations, it is believed traffic will
be able to move efficiently and safely through this area."
"Reference is made to Zone Change Case No. 2 on the west service
road of Rosemead Boulevard south of Grand Avenue.
Additional control traffic regulations to be imposed as necessary
after ultimate construction of multiple units and increased manu-
facturing development on the north side of Grand Avenue would
necessitate;
(1) Right turn only regulations from this west service road to
Rosemead Boulevard proper;
(2) As vehicular capacity creates additional problems then one
way regulations north bound on the west service road to west
bound Grand Avenue would be necessary to Ivar Avenue with
the present plans for extending Lower Azusa Road westerly.
Ivar Avenue, Muscatel Avenue, Walnut Grove Avenue and possibly
Bartlett Avenue will extend from Grand Avenue to
Mission Drive.
It would appear that worker traffic will not create additional
problems. Again it is reiterated that sight distance to ingress
and egress driveways should be planned at sufficient distance to
eliminate possible conflict. Additional parking restrictions as
needed could be placed depending on demand."
(MO) It was moved by Casares that Zone Change Case No. 2 be denied.
Motion died for lack of a second.
Chairman Wilt declared the Public Hearing closed at 9:38 o'clock p.m.
Considerable discussion was held in regard to the traffic problem
this zone change would create.
(MO) It was moved by Casares, second by Taylor, that the Planning Com-
mission finds the public necessity, convenience, general welfare
or good zoning practice would not justify approval of such a zone
change at this time, therefore Zone Change Case No. 2 be denied.
(RC) Roll call vote was as follows:
Ayes Casares, Taylor, Kunz, Buchanan, Crabtree, Wilt.
Noes: McCaffree.
Absent: None.
Commissioner McCaffree stated he did not feel it was right to
deny the request as the applicant was not present.
It was explained that the applicant has the right to appeal this
action to the City Council within fifteen (15) days of written
notice of this action.
- 4 -
PC 11 -19 -63 . ' •
7. (AGENDA ITEM N0. 6) ZONE CHANGE CASE NO. 3 - PUBLIC HEARING -
R. T. SIMERLY - 8729 EAST MISSION DRIVE
Advisor Cushman stated that this Zone Change Case No. 3, was also
heard on July 1, 1963, and taken under submission at that time.
Also a new Public Hearing to be held.
Chairman Wilt declared the Public Hearing open at 9:42 o'clock p.m.
Advisor Cushman administered the oath to those wishing to testify
at this Public Hearing.
Advisor Cushman presented the factual data at this time.
James Floe, owner of property adjacent to the Simerly property,
presented plans for the development of his property. He further
explained that he did have the Simerly property under option to
purchase, however, due to the time element involved in this Zone
Change Case he has had to release it, therefore he has no control
as to the development of the Simerly property, but would still
like to see it join in his development. He also stated he would
dedicate the necessary 10 feet of right -of -way for the future
widening of Mission Drive.
Mr. R. T. Simerly, 8729 E. Mission Drive, owner, stated he would
like to develop together with Mr. Floe, but at the present time is
not sure it can be done. He further stated he would dedicate the
necessary 10 feet of right -of -way for the widening of Mission Drive.
Chairman Wilt declared the Public Hearing closed at 10 :05 o'clock
p.m.
(MO) It was moved by Crabtree, second by Kunz, that the Planning Commissi-
recommends to the City Council the approval of Zone Change Case No.
from R -1 Zone to R -3 Zone.
(RC) Roll call vote was as follows:
Ayes: Casares, Taylor, Kunz, Buchanan, McCaffree, Crabtree, Wilt.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
NEW BUSINESS
8. REPORT FROM LEGAL STAFF ON BUILDING PERMITS DURING THE PERIOD OF
BUILDING CONSTRUCTION MORATORIUM.
Secretary Wroe read this communication in full as follows:
"To The City of Rosemead RE: Building Permit No. 2108
4120 - 41202 N. Ivar, Roseme
Gentlemen:
We submitted Plans and Specifications to the Regional Office in
Temple City, October 9, 1963, for a building permit.
We were aware that a new ordinance was forthcoming, and would be
effective on October 24, 1963. In discussing the matter at length
with Mr. Cushman, our understanding from that conversation was
that we had ample time to get our plans approved.
On the same day, October 9, 1963, I, the undersigned, consulted
the owners, and was advised to proceed with negotiations for a
construction loan. Thus far we have the building permit, and alcc,
the loan.
A telephone call was received from the regional office, October 31,
1963 in Temple City. From the remarks from that office, it is
questionable whether we can proceed with the construction in
question.
- 5 -
PC 11 -19-63 0
We feel that the owners, Mr. Cushman, and ourselves all acted in
good faith, with the information we were aware of, and within the
spirit of the law.
We also feel that our application be sustained, as it appears to
be reasonable in it's entire form, and with justification.
Thank You,
Owners
Mr, and Mrs. Fred Rice
4118 N. Ivar Avenue
Rosemead, California
Respectfully Yours
LaCosta Builders Inc.
3555 Walnut Grove Ave.
Rosemead, California
By: JOHN B. ARAGON
President"
Advisor Cushman summarized the application and issuance of this
building permit. According to the new zoning ordinance additional
development on R -2 lots must submit a plot plan to the Planning
Commission for approval.
Mr. John B. Aragon, developer, explained the circumstances involved
in this problem.
Attorney Watson explained that there would be no legality in a
building permit if it was issued after the adoption of the ord-
inance. An error was evidently made and said permit would be
a violation and not valid.
(MO) It was moved by Casares, second by Taylor that this communication
be received and filed.
(RC) Roll call vote was as follows:
Ayes: Casares, Taylor, Kunz, Buchanan, McCaffree, Crabtree, Wilt.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
LEGISLATIVE:
OLD BUSINESS
9. None.
NEW BUSINESS
10. None.
COMMUNICATIONS
11. None.
12. MATTERS FROM COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF
A. Chairman Wilt questioned when some of the Standard Requirements
were going to be incorporated in the Building Code.
Secretary Wroe stated this would be done as soon as the staff has
time.
B. Chairman Wilt announced that a meeting with Mansur to review the
Zoning Ordinance was being set -up.
C. A study and discussion of the Grand Avenue area should be made on
the first agenda that is not crowded.
D. Commissioner Taylor questioned when maps would be available for
the Commissioners? It was suggested to wait until the annexations
were completed one way or another.
E. Commissioner Buchanan expressed his views regarding the "D" Design
Zone as being to restrictive to be used on all Zone Change Cases,
which appears to be the case. A further study of this zone should
possibly be made.
- 6 -
PC 11 -19 -63
0
F. Commissioners Crabtree and McCaffree requested clarification on
several sections of the zoning ordinance.
Attorney Watson stated his office will prepare a memorandum regard-
ing various problems after the meeting with Mr. Mansur.
G. Commissioner Crabtree stated he had worked up a new category
division for the Commission's Committee assignments and that
copies would be made. This matter to be on the next agenda.
(MO) it was moved by Casares, second by Kunz and unanimously carried
that the meeting adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 10:55 O'clock
p.m. Next regular meeting to be Tuesday December 3, 1963, at
7:30 o'clock p.m.
SECRETARY
- 7 -