HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes - 1966/11/25 - Regular1
1
PLANNING COMMISSION M ` NUT S
REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING
October 25, 1966
1. Chairman Garvin called the meeting to order at 9:00 P.M.
2. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners: Beckman, Caswell,
Millham, Oakley, Garvin
Also Present: Karl L. Koski, Robert Flandrick, George
Dragicevich
3. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE
Commissioner Oakley suggested that a vertical clearance for
access driveways should be provided as suggested by the Commiss-
ion July 19, 1966. The City Attorney proposed to insert a para-
graph on page 60, at the end of subsection two to read: "All
driveways should observe an unobstructed vertical clearance of
13 feet provided that an encroachment of 30" shall be permitted."
The Commission agreed that separate driveways for ingress and
egress of parking areas serving 30 or more vehicles shall be
not less than 12' in width (page 60, second paragraph).
Page 60, third paragraph should read: "Any driveway which is
over 125' in length shall be not less than 15' in width."
Page 78, Principal Use is proposed to read: Not to exceed two
single fame y well F units and one -two family dwelling unit.
Page 89, Accessory uses (b) take out the word "goats ". Same
change should apply to R -1 and R -2 zones.
Page 92, Exterior Li htin . The ending of the paragraph is
corrected to rea :....'visible from any dwelling unit on the
same or adjacent premises."
Section 9362, page 93, sub - paragraph (b) is proposed to read:
"The minimum lot width shall be not less than 50' provided that
no new lot shall be created after the effective date of this
regulation having less than following minimum widths:
1. Interior lots shall have a width of not less than 80' -0 ".
2. Corner lots shall have a width of not less than 100' -0 ".
Page 94, (c) Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit. The lot area per
dwelling unit shall be 1,000 square eet.
Page 97, Open areas (a) subparagraph (1) take out the words
"deck areas of ".
Page 101, Section 9363 should read... "Fencing -will require a 6'
high view obscuring wall or fence wherever R -3 zone abuts an R -1
zone.
It was general agreement that R -4 zoning should be retained and
include apartment houses and some professional uses only.
The following subjectsneed further studying:
1. The access to the off - street parking areas in residential
zones,
2. Principal uses in R -3 zone.
4. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 P.M. to the
Regular Adjourned Meeting of November, 1966 at 7:30 P.M.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Chair /nan
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
CITY OF TEMPLE CITY
October 25, 1966
1. A regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Temple
City was held in the City Hall, 5938 North Kauffman Avenue, Temple
City. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was
led by Chairman Garvin.
3. ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners,: Beckman, Caswell,
Millham, Oakley, Garvin
Absent: Commissioners: None
Also Present: Karl L. Koski, Robert Flandrick, George
Dragicevich
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A motion was made by Commissioner Beckman,
seconded by Commissioner Oakley to approve the minutes of October
11, 1966 correcting again page 5 (9) of September 27, 1966 minutes
that Commissioner Oakley recommended the staff advise anyone
applying under any area that is being studied by the Planning
Commission that the area is under study and it could become non-
conforming. Motion carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners:
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
5. RESOLUTION NO. 66- 225PC:
Beckman, Caswell, Millham, Oakley,
Garvin
None
None
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY DENYING A
VARIANCE (ZONE VARIANCE CASE NO. 66 -193)
AND A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP (NO. 502).
A motion was made by Commissioner Beckman, seconded by Commiss-
ioner Oakley to waive further reading and adopt. Motion carried
by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners:
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
Beckman, Caswell, Millham, Oakley,
Garvin
None
None
6. RESOLUTION NO. 66- 226PC: RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY DENYING A
VARIANCE IN ZONE VARIANCE CASE NO. 66-
197.
City Attorney Flandrick felt this item should be held over until
item 8 on the agenda is decided. This was agreeable with the
Commission.
7. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE VARIANCE CASE NO.. 66 -199
Fortune Homes, Inc., Applicant
1427 S. Atlantic Boulevard
Los Angeles, California
Mr. and Mrs. James Brainard, Owners
6237 Kauffman Avenue
Temple City, California
Chairman Garvin announced that now was the time and place for
the public hearing. Verification of public notice was given by
the Secretary.
Planning Commission Minutes
Page Two October 25, 1966
Planning Director Dragicevich reviewed the factual report
stating the applicant's request is to permit development of three
dwelling units on an R -2 lot with less than required lot area
per dwelling unit; distance between residential and accessory
buildings and enclosed parking spaces. The Planning Director
stated an Ordinance will be in effect November 4, 1966 permitting
only 2 dwelling units on an R -2 lot. Existing is a single family
residence and a 2 -car garage. Proposed is a 2 -story residential
building with two dwelling units, 3 -car garage and an open park-
ing space. Existing driveway is 7' wide and proposed driveway
would be 11'. There would be a 6' distance between proposed
residences and existing garage. At issue are: R -2 zone permits
2 dwelling units per lot; proposed are 3 dwelling units; required
lot area per dwelling unit is 3,600 square feet; proposed is 3,40.,
square feet; required minimum distance between residential and
accessories equals 10 feet; proposed is 6 feet.
City Attorney Flandrick stated that November 4, 1966 the new ord-
inance limiting 2 dwelling units on a R -2 lot will take effect
and would be the same regardless of lot size and as far as this
application is concerned under the existing regulations he could
not meet the requirements for 3 dwellings nor under the new one,
so the variance still stands regardless of which ordinance is in
effect.
Appearing in favor: Mr. James Brainard, 6237 Kauffman Avenue,
Temple City, owner. Mr. Brainard stated three buildings on the
west side of the church have obtained a variance since incorpora-
tion and they are concerned with parking lots surrounding their
home. Mr. Brainard stated their representative from Fortune Homes
was not present at this time and he was not prepared to present
the case.
A motion was made by Commissioner Beckman, seconded by Commiss-
ioner Caswell to continue this item to the next regular meeting
of November 8, 1966 so the applicant may contact his represent-
ative to be in attendance at that meeting. Motion carried unan-
imously.
8. PUBLIC HEARING: RECONSIDERATION OF ZONE VARIANCE CASE 66 -197
Mr. John Hewko, Owner- Applicant
10109 East La Rosa Drive, Temple City
Chairman Garvin announced now was the time and place for the
public hearing. Verification of public notice was given by the
Secretary.
Planning Director Dragicevich stated there have been three alter-
nate plans submitted as shown A, B and C. He stated this is a
3 bedroom home and exhibits "B" and "C" the house will have only
2 bedrooms. Proposed setbacks on "B" are 20' front; 3° side and
5' rear setbacks, driveway 9' wide. Exhibit "C" with 17' front;
3' side and 8' rear, driveway width unchanged. The applicant
prefers exhibit "C" if granted by the Commission. The zoning
ordinance states maximum lot coverage in an R -1 zone is 40% and
this does not exceed maximum coverage. The access buildings
have been removed and the property is clear and ready for develop-
ment. Discussion was held on the portion of the driveway covered
by the roof and this may possibly be against the Building Code,
Appearing in favor: Mr. John Hewko, 10109 La Rosa Drive, Temple
City, owner - applicant. Mr. Hewko stated the roof line could be
changed to provide 9' from the driveway; that Exhibit "C" will
provide a larger back yard area. Mr. Hewko stated that 9' drive-
way would be the maximum as they would have to take off another
room to provide 10'.
Planning Commission Minutes
Page Four
October 25, 1966
Planning Director Dragicevich stated this was denied on the basis
that the applicant does not have 60 foot frontage upon a public
street. The applicant's request is to divide the subject prop-
erty into two parcels. Existing is a single family residence
with a 2 -car garage. Proposed is a lot split with (2) parcels.
Parcel "1" would contain 7,268 square feet and Parcel "2" 8,532
square feet. Frontage would be 46' for Parcel "1" and 54' for
Parcel "2 ". Because of the proposed new parcel line, the existing::
garage is proposed to relocate as shown on the Tentative Parcel
Map. The existing dwelling would have a 3.2' sideyard. The pro-
posed driveway on Parcel "2" is 8.5' wide. Recommendations of
the City Engineer are: If disposal system is located on Parcel
"1" or has inadequate clearance from the proposed new parcel line,
it should be abandoned and the dwelling connected to the sewer;
that a Parcel Map be prepared in accordance with the State Map
Act and submitted to the County Engineer for checking and filing
with the County Recorder. Recommendations of the Fire Department
are to install a fire hydrant on the west side of Reno Avenue
approximately 530 feet north of the center line of Hermosa Drive
at the north property line of proposed Parcel "1 ". Recommendations
of the Director of Public Works are to remove existing driveway
approach which does not lead to a driveway and replace with stand-
ard curb and gutter; remove and replace all broken curb as deter-
mined by the Director of Public Works with standard curb and
gutter; remove the driveway approach on the northerly end of the
property with standard drive approach; install sidewalks along
entire frontage and install street trees as required by the Street
Tree Superintendent.
Appearing in favor: L.W. Townsend, 1300 East Las Tunas Drive,
San Gabriel, Owner - Applicant. Mr. Townsend felt the Planning
Director had covered the facts and asked if the Commission had
further questions. Commissioner Millham was concerned with off-
set of 2,1' on the south side and asked if this was the kitchen
area. Mr. Townsend replied yes. Commissioner Beckman asked if
the new driveway was proposed on the south side. Mr. Townsend
replied yes. Commissioner Beckman stated this would only leave
8' clearance. Mr. Townsend replied yes, the majority will be 10'
6" one portion 82'. This would be a portion of the house that
would be hard to change along the 82 strip. Mr. Townsend replied
yes, it would be hard to change.
City Attorney Flandrick pointed out to Mr. Townsend should this
be approved a zone variance will still have to be approved by
the Planning Commission to take care of the side yard requirement.
Mr. Townsend said he was aware of this.
No one wished to speak in opposition.
After noting that no one else wished to speak for or against this
a motion was made by Commissioner Beckman, seconded by Commiss-
ioner Oakley to close the public hearing. Motion carried by the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners: Beckman, Caswell, Millham, Oakley,
Garvin
Commissioners: None
Commissioners: None
Commissioner Oakley stated he would be against this because of 40'
sub - standard lots , the elderly home on the lot and felt it would
be a detriment to the community. Commissioner Millham felt the
Commission should abide by a 50' lot and was concerned with the
clearance on the south side.
1
1
Planning Commission Minutes
Page Five October 25, 1966
Commissioner Caswell felt he would be in favor with the driveway
on the south side of the property. Commissioner Beckman concurred
and stated lots have been split to 50' and would rather see this
with a 7,200 square foot lot than a flag lot. Chairman Garvin
felt he would be in favor of this with the driveway on the south
side.
A motion was made by Commissioner Caswell, seconded by Commiss-
ioner Beckman to approve the request with the deletion of the
Fire Department recommendations and the driveway to be on the
south side of the property. Motion carried by the following roll
call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Beckman, Caswell, Garvin
NOES: Commissioners: Millham, Oakley
ABSENT: Commissioners: None
10. COMMUNICATIONS - None
11. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS
City Attorney Flandrick read title to Resolution No. 66 -227PC in
reference to the Planning Commission adopting a "no objection"
method instead of a roll call vote:
RESOLUTION NO. 66- 227PC: A REGULATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY ADOPTING A
RULE OF PARLIAkENTARY PROCEDURE.
A motion was made by Commissioner Oakley, seconded by Commissioner
Caswell to waive further reading and adopt. Motion carried unan-
imously.
12. TIME FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK.
a. Mrs. Edward Fickes, k835 North Heleo Avenue, Temple City.
Mrs. Fickes stated she would be appealing her case to the
City Council and would like to obtain an appeal form. City
Attorney Flandrick suggested Mrs. Fickes see the Planning
Director.
13. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Garvin recessed the meeting at 8:40 P.M.
to the Regular Adjourned Meeting in the North Meeting Room for
further study on the revised zoning ordinance.
ATTEST: