HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes - 1960/11/07 - RegularLAN N I NG CO3MMI SS I OrN M I NUTES
CITY OF TEMPLE CITY
NOVEMBER 7, 1960
1. A regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City
of Temple City was held in the City Hall, 9664 East Las
Tunas Drive. The meeting was called to order by Chairman
Pursley at 7:95 P.M.
2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Chairman
Pursley.
. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners: Burr, Harker, Meek
Nunamaker, Pursley;
Absent: Commissioner: None.
Also Present: Woollett, Holden, Shatford.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 5, 1960 and OCTOBER 17, 1960.
Commissioner Meek made a motion that the Minutes of
October 1, 1960 be approved with an addition under item
5- -Zone Variance Case No. 60 -6 - -as follows: Commissioner
Nunamaker stated that the law allows b% per year sales tax
money for use in providing public parking. This is an
important part of the community development and, he
feels, this is as important to community and residents as
help from sales tax money for school district or any other
improvements for Temple City. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Harker and carried unanimously.
Commissioner Harker made a motion that the Minutes of
October 17, 1960 be approved with an amendment under
item 9-- Communications- -last sentence, par.agraph 2, which
should be amended to read "Mr. Woollett commented that
the Commission could endorse this as individuals but
not as a Commission ". The motion was seconded by Commissioner
Benedict and carried unanimously.
5. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Recommendations of
Planning Adviser: Planning Advisor, Ed Holden, counseled
commissioners concerning the development standards presented
to them in a previous report. Discussion ensued during
which commissioners questioned the advisability of proceeding
with the adoption of stop gap measures without first consulting
Mr. Whitnall. City Attorney advised that Commission should
have Whitnall's Temporary Interim Zoning Ordinance before
passing on development standards. After further discussion
commission decided to make changes, if needed, on suggestions
as presented by Mr. Holden for recommendation to the City
Council.
Item 1. Automobile Parking Requirements --in all zones:
12 garages or carports for each dwel n� g unit, bachelor apart-
ment or two guest rooms. In addition thereto, 1 parking
space for each dwelling unit or bachelor apartment situated
on a lot or parcel of land having a frontage of less than
25' on a dedicated street.. All fractions to be raised to the
nearest whole number (Sec. 749.5)
Commissioner Nunamaker made a motion to accept for recommend-
ation to the City Council item 1 as suggested by Mr. Holden,
seconded by Commissioner Harker and carried unanimously.
Item 2. Parking Space Size --- Suggested 9' x 20' minimum.
Commissioner Nunamaker made a motion to recommend item 2
to the City Council, seconded by Commissioner Meek and
carried unanimously:
item 3. Access Width--Suggestion as amended by Commission
for recommendation to City Council: R -i & A -1 only:
11-7-60
9' minimum driveway for 1 or 2 dwelling units;
16' minimum driveway for : dwelling units;
20' minimum driveway for 4 dwelling units.
Commissioner Burr made a motion to recommend item 3 to City
Council, seconded by Commissioner Harker and carried un-
animously.
Item 6. Area Requirement--After a good deal of informal
interchange of thoug t and opinion, the commission amended
item 6 of the development standards to apply only to R -1 and
L -1 with a 5500 square foot requirement for each dwelling
unit over one, to be recommended to the City Council as
follows: 5000 square feet of lot area for 1 dwelling unit on
a lot or parcel of land. 5500 square feet for each additional
dwelling unit on the same lot or parcel of land. 3000 square
feet of lot area for each dwelling unit on a lot or parcel
of land which has less than 2.' frontage on a dedicated street.
Commissioner Meek made a motion to adopt item G as amended,
seconded by Commissioner Harker and carried unanimously.
City Attorney, Shatford,advised that City should have an
Ordinance requiring an affidavit be filed stating that
property will not besplit for selling and that approval of
plot plan is subject to the recording of a statement to the
effect that owner will not split the property. He continued
that restrictions imposed by the City can be removed by the
City in the future. Mr. Shatford said that specifications
for lot splits should be set forth more specifically, and
City Manager asked that commission indicate what additional
information they desired on a plot plan.
6. PROPOSED AERIAL SURVEY AN0 ENGINEERING WORK: M. 1'!. Finley
Company. City Manager, Woollett, explained to the
commissioners that due to an incorrect interpretation of their
letter, it was originally thoughtthat M. W. Finley Co. would
pay the $1750.00 cost for flying survey. However, another
correspondence outlined the costs as follows: flying- -
$1`_)50.00; Ground Control-- $1250.0O; Map with ratio of
1- 100 -- $742.x'3; acetate--$198.00. Only contribution of
Finley Company is that the company will not be making any
money on the deal, and will be giving its own services.
Mr. Woollett continued that an aerial of 1 -100 with a
superimposed cadastre map would show all information plus
zoning. Such maps will be accurate within the scope of
reaps presently in existence, commented Mr. Shatford. Mr.
Woollett explained that this aerial survey work can be part
of the 701 Project if entered into after 701 is initiated.
He continued that sufficient funds are available in the State
for the 701 Program, and that of the City's contribution of
$10,000 up to 50% could be contributed in labor and /or
materials. He continued that by hiring an administrative
assistant who would spend 50% of his time on the Master
Plan for 12 years with 2 of his salary charged to the Master
Plan for 13 years, the City would have to deposit only
$)000.00 for a $36,000.00 program. Chairman Pursley
recommended that the aerial survey be part of City's con -
tribution to 701 and added that this phase of the project
should be bid. Motion to get three more bids before accepting
the Finley Company proposition was made, seconded and
carried unanimously.
7. NUMBER OF CHICKENS THAT CONSTITUTE A NUISANCE: City Manager
William Woollett, read a letter from Regional Planning
Commission concerning an inspection of the premises at 9732
Val Street where approximately 100 chickens are kept for
non- commercial purposes, and therefore, not considered as
a violation of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr, Woollett advised
the Commission that this matter had been placed on the agenda
for the Commission's consideration and recommendation of
the manner in which this kind of problem may be handled in
1
1
11-7-60
the future. Zoning Ordinance does not cope with this
type of problem adequate l y, because it does not l i m i t the
number of fowl permitted. Mr. Hoiden advised that the
Ordinance does not say,very much about chickens in particular.
City Attorney suggested that unless this is a major problem
at the present time, it could be included in a new zoning
ordinance.
Commissioner Harker made a motion that the matter of the
number of chickens that shall be permitted in a residential
zone be filed until such time that the Commission is ready,
to cope with it in a Master Plan, seconded by Commissioner
Meek and carried unanimously.
8. COMMUNICATIONS: Mr. Woollett informed the Commission that
Elton Andrew, State Director of Planning, had indicated to
Mr. Wh i tna 1 l that the time for processing is sometimes as
short as three months instead of the six months previously
required.
Mr. Voollett informed the commissioners that shelves have
been provided in the front office for all communications
other than plot plans, which would be mailed to them as
usual.
Commissioner Meek spoke of the possibility of a display
case in the window of City Hall.
Commissioner Meek made a motion that the meeting be adjourned
at 9 :4) P.M., seconded by Commissioner Harker and carried
unanimously.
ATTEST: