Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes - 1968/06/11 - RegularPLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CITY OF TEMPLE CITY June 11, 1968 1 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Temple City was called to order by Chairman Pro Tem Millham at 7:30 P.M. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Chairman Pro Tem Millham. 3. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Commissioners: Garvin, Lawson, Millham ABSENT: Commissioners: Beckman, Oakley ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Koski, Asst. City Attorney Tweedy, Plann- ing Director Dragicevich. Chairman Pro Tem Millham announced that Commissioner Beckman and Chairman Oakley had sent notice to the Planning Dept. that they were unable to attend because of other committments. Commissioner Garvin moved to approve their absence; it was seconded by Commis- sioner Lawson and so moved. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: There being no additions or corrections Commissioner Lawson moved to approve the minutes as written; Commissioner Garvin seconded and it passed unanimously. 5 PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE CHANGE CASE NO. 68 -256 Ellen Bangs - Owner- Applicant 9629 E. Broadway, Temple City and James R. & Leonore H. Lawyer Owner- Applicant 9621 E. Broadway, Temple City Site: Same Chairman Pro Tem advised the applicants that three affirmative or negative votes are necessary to approve or deny the zone change appli- cation, and asked if they wished to postpone the hearing until the next regular meeting when a full Commission would be in attendance. The applicants chose to have the hearing as scheduled. Planning Director Dragicevich gave the factual report and explained the applicants propose a change of zone from R -1, Single Family resi- dential, to R -3, Heavy Multiple Residential. Subject property is now surrounded by R -3 zoned properties and the requested change would "complete a block of R -3 properties with streets on all four sides ". There being no questions from the Commission the hearing was declared open, and Ellen Bangs of 9629 E. Broadway, took the podium. She stated there is a private street around this property that extends to Temple City Boulevard. She was concerned about the redwood fence alll around the property which is owned by adjoining property owners and is dilapidated. One of the houses on the property is very old and they were refused financing on it. Commissioner Garvin asked what her intentions were if the zone change were granted - to repair present structures, enlarge upon them, or demolish them and build something else. Mrs. Bangs said she hadn't decided whether to repair present buildings or sell the property. " 1 " PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 11, 1968 - Page two Mr. James Lawyer, a co- applicant of 9621 E. Broadway, said he had had a number of people inquiring about the possibility of building an apartment house on these two lots. There wasn't much that could be done with one lot, but by combining the two lots a nice apartment building could be erected. He has one old house and one in good condition on his property. He concluded by saying he would like to see the whole thing developed and squared up with the rest of the area as R -3. There was no one else to speak in favor. Mr. A. H. Knowlton, 9657 E. Broadway, the owner of frontage on lot 35, spoke against the change. He bought his property five years ago, feel- ing it was a good place to live. His concern was that there would be increased traffic if an apartment house were built there. The applicants, in requesting the change, have no definite plans. Mr. Joseph Moran, 5524 Temple City Boulevard, was concerned because he he had not received a notice. (It was pointed out by the Planning Director that a notice had been sent to him at the address listed in the assessor's books and had been returned). He stated he had lived at the present address since 1964. He felt the fence was not in as disreputable condi- tion as stated, but that the vines from Mrs. Bangs' property were causing the fence to fall. If a 2 -story apartment house is built on this property he was concerned that it would shut off the light into his home. He said 90% of the people in that area purchased and live there because there were no multiple dwellings or high -rise there. At the time he purchased there he was not aware that a 3 -unit apartment house was going to be built next to his house. Commissioner Garvin asked if Mr. Moran knew that the property he owned was in an R -3 zone. Mr. Moran said he did not. Commissioner Garvin then stated that Mr. Moran was opposing R -3 zoning for someone else although he lived in R -3 zone. Mr. Moran was of the opinion that even though the residences on his private street were in R -3 zone that none of the people would sell to allow multiple residential units to come in. Mr. Howard Padgett, 9635 Broadway, said he lives in R -1 zoning, was not aware that multiple dwellings were going in that area when they moved in, and the apartment there has caused consternation in the use of the private street, and an increase in vehicular traffic. The property owners must maintain this street to City standards, and because of the apartment use of it the street will soon require repairs. His neighbor, Mrs. Frankfurt, was very ill, and asked him to represent her at this hearing as objecting " to the zone change. Her address is 9637 Broadway. Mrs. Grace Vett, 5476 Temple City Blvd., referred to two recent cases that the Commission\had denied, and Commissioner Garvin informed her that one was a zone variance, not a change, and the other was denied because the applicant was asking for a use not allowed in that zone. Mrs. Vett felt there were rules and regulations and these should be complied with. She added this would increase traffic on Broadway, and would devaluate the neighborhood. Mr. Patrick Boyer, 5522 Temple City Boulevard, felt if the zone change were granted an apartment house would be built that would shut off his view. He bought there because it was a private street with single- family residences. Commissioner Garvin asked if Mr. Boyer knew this was R -3 when he bought it, and Mr. Boyer replied he did not. Mr. D. A. Hefner, 5520 Temple City Boulevard, bought his house seven years ago, and knew it was R -3. He spoke against the zone change. He asked when the zoning was established as R -3, and was informed that on April 8, 1964 the City adopted the present zoning; prior to that the area in ques- tion had been zoned R -A -5000 (Residential - Agricultural) under L.A. County " zoning of the City prior to adopting the Ordinance. " 1 1 1 " PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 11, 1968 - page three. Mrs. Bangs was offered a chance for rebuttal, and declined. Mr. Lawyer, in rebuttal, said that since several dissenters to this petition are enjoying R -3 property themselves, he didn't see how they can oppose other property owners in the same locality this right. They have an advantage to sell their property for multiple building purposes and the applicants do not. Commissioner Garvin moved to continue the case as an open public hearing until June 25th when a full Commission will be present. Com- missioner Lawson seconded and it was so moved. 6. PUBLIC HEARING: DETERMINATION OF THE EXISTENCE OF A PUBLIC NUISANCE Mr. Arthur Giffis, Owner 278 Palm Drive, Arcadia Site: 9221 E. Pentland Street, Temple City The Planning Director stated public notice had been posted on the property at least three weeks prior to this hearing as required by the Temple City Municipal Code. Following the City code on proper- ty nuisances, the Planning Commission by their Resolution 68- 296PC, set public hearing on June 11, 1968 to determine the existence of a public nuisance. At that time the alleged violations were listed in that resolution and the same violations were listed on notices posted on the front of the property in question. The methods of abatement were also listed. He then gave a status of the property as follows: Sept. 13, 1965 - notice was sent to the owner to discontinue welding operations on heavy units. These operations were being conducted in the open. April 12, 1966 - Notice was sent to the owner to remove from the property dismantled refrigerators, inoperative machines and pieces of furniture. Storage was conducted in the open and was considered an extreme safety hazard. April 30,1968 - Complaint was filed with the City that the buildings were abandoned, vegetation overgrown and dry, and that these con- ditions may cause fire and safety hazards to the adjacent proper- ties and particularly to children. May 2, 1968 - Owner was requested by the Los Angeles County Fire Dept. to clean up the property and remove all weeds, grass, vines and other flammable material. The Planning Director further stated the owner of the property is Mr. Arthur Giffis of 278 Palm Drive, Arcadia. According to the L.A. County Assessor's office, Mr. Angelo Tocci, 10123 E. Rio Hondo Park- way, El Monte, is still the owner of the property in question. That afternoon,the Director went on, Mr. Tocci came to the City Hall and brought the letter sent to him regarding the nuisance abatement, and said he is not the owner, that 2 -1/2 years ago the property was acquired by Mr. Giffis. Property is zoned M -1, Light Manufacturing. Previous zoning under the County was also M -1. He passed pictures to the Commission taken by the staff on the first inspection of the property. He said the last inspection was made by the staff this afternoon, and that the weeds had been removed, the gate and lock re- paired, entrance into the building is secured, fencing is completed and some unsightly material removed. Efforts have been made by the owner to clean up the property. However, there are several items that still must be accomplished to comply with the Planning Commission regulations: 1) Removal of inoperative machines and equipment stored in the open in the yard; and 2) Completion of installation of drive- way leading into the property. " 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 11, 1968 - page four. There were no questions from the Commission and the hearing was declared open. Mr. Arthur Giffis, 278 Palm Drive, Arcadia, stated he did not want the property but "inherited it ". He stated he was in business in Monrovia and the only time he was . aware anything was wrong was when he got reports about the property. He had let his brother store refrigerators there thinking it was locked, but someone had broken a lock and hasp he had installed to lock the gate, and this was a heavy lock requiring strength to break. His son had fixtures stored in there and someone poured tar over them and broke the chairs stored there. When he was notified by the Fire Dept. last year of the weeds he cleaned them out. This is M -1 property in an R -1 zone, and can't look like a family dwelling. He wants to cooperate with the City of Temple City. He has tried to rent or sell this property, unsuccessfully. The local school district has indicated an interest in the property, and he hopes this materializes. His neigh- bor to the east, Mrs. Nelson, also has M -1, and knows he is trying to sell it. He stated he had been unable to pay the taxes on it, but he will pay them now in an effort to sell this property. Commissioner Garvin asked if he had read the list of methods of abatement, and Mr. Giffis said he had, and that he could abide with all of them. The Planning Director read the nine methods of abatement, and Mr. Giffis said he had complied with all except that he still had some inoperable machinery and equipment there, although the motors, chains and belts are removed. It was suggested by the Planning Director that the pieces of equipment should be stored in the building as required by the Ordinance for a business customarily conducted in this zone. Mr. Giffis said this could be done. Mr. Giffis said he felt putting in a driveway now when he hoped to sell the property and the new use might require a different approach, seemed unwise. The Commission felt this was a point they could consider. Commissioner Garvin suggested that the frontal area be landscaped and maintained to present a good appearance since this property is located in a residential area. The gate locked with a chain and lock could be forced apart sufficiently for a small child to squeeze through and he felt this, could be remedied with another type of lock. Mr. Giffis was asked if he, would object to putting three rows of barbed wire across the top of the wood fence, providing the City approved it, and he said he had no objec- tion. Commissioner Garvin asked if he would object to tearing down the added -on portion of the building rather than patching its roof and paint- ing it, and Mr. Giffis replied he-had already patched the roof, but if he could sell it he was willing to tear it down to do so, and would do so in " four or five months anyway. Commissioner Garvin stated in conclusion that since the middle of May the owner has made a great effort and great strides in cleaning and fixing up this property. There was no one else to speak in behalf of the case. Mrs. Don Wetton, 9224 Pentland, stated she and her neighbors have been fac- ing this property in its bad condition for 2 -1/2 years and while the owner has done well in the last few weeks to fix it up, it did take legal action to force him to do anything. She had contacted Mr. Giffis' brother in Temple City, thinking he was the owner of the property, and said the broth- er is a restaurant owner whose refrigerators and freezers were stored on the property. By contacting the owner she hoped to avoid legal action, but the brother was not cooperative; while the refrigerators and freezers were removed, others were brought in. A few weeks ago a chest -type freezer was placed in the building. She called the sheriff again and they removed the lock. She stated that the owner complies when legal action is taken, but when the furor dies down he no longer keeps up the property. He is aware that weeds continue to grow but the only time he removes them is when he gets a notice from the Fire Dept. Regarding the fence, at the north corner of theproperty the fence consists of corrugated metal which is rusty 1 " PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 11, 1968 - page five. and uneven. The gate is not high and the children continue to get into the property daily. While Mr. Giffis stated, in reviewing the abatement • methods with the Commission, that glass had been replaced in the windows, she stated it was not glass but plywood, and admitted that plywood was safer. 1 1 Commissioner Garvin felt it was the responsibility of parents to keep the children at home. When he viewed the property a couple weeks ago, he noticed children on the roof of the building, and he felt even an 8 ft. fence wouldn't keep some children out. Mr. James Markel, 9242 Pentland, said when they moved there eleven years ago the property had a shop in operation on it, and someone there every- day so it wasn't a hazard, but now it is and he is fearful for the small children. Mr. Tom Atkins, 5428 Cambury, questioned why this property was M -1; with the modern -day character of Temple City, there no longer exists the need for that to be M -1 and should be brought up in a study session for a change. Mrs. W. R. Nelson, 9229 Pentland, stated they had sacrificed for twenty years to wire and prepare their property, which is M -1 zone, for a cabinet shop, and didn't want this changed. To get her money out of it she wants it to remain M -1. Chairman Pro Tem Millham at this point stated the issue was not one of a zone change, but a public nuisance hearing. Mr. J. C. Beatty, 9236 Pentland, stated it shouldn't be necessary to come to the City to have a property owner maintain his property. The mothers in the neighborhood are concerned about the children's safety. He stated that as long as the City tells the citizens what trees to plant, and to keep up their property, an absentee owner should be required to do the same. He felt the City should force the owner to clean up this property. Commissioner Garvin asked Mr. Beatty if he heard the methods of abatement as read, and what further would he require. Mr. Beatty replied he has been living there since 1951 while a shop was in operation on the property in question, and at that time it was kept up. Now it has deteriorated and while the owner will comply and clean it up, he will again let it deteriorate. Mr. Daniel Barron, 9218 Pentland, said since Mrs. Hewitt sold the property the new owners have let it become a mess. It requires legal action to force the present owner to do anything about cleaning it up. He felt • the owner's excuse that he can't get down to view the property is not a good one as Arcadia is close enough to this City for him to take proper care of his property. There being no one else to speak Mr. Giffis was offered an opportunity for rebuttal. 1 • In the 2 -1/2 years he has owned the property Mr. Giffis said not one of the people in that neighborhood tried to contact him about the conditions that existed there, although they seemed able to get other records. The gate had been locked but the hasp was broken. An expensive ironwork machine was stolen and must have been hauled away on a moving van requir- ing the energies of persons other than children. The people on Pentland knew it was M -1, commercial property, which isn't going to look like a piece of residential property. He.stated there are children on this property all the time. He didn't know the glass was broken, and if the neighbors had informed him he would have responded. Commissioner Garvin said he felt the nuisance ordinance was a good thing as prior to its adoption there was nothing the City could do. He would like to see the methods of abatement as listed completed, except for the driveway, since the future use of the property is unknown. In place of PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 11, 1968 - page six. that condition he would like to see the front portion of the parkway, along the full width of the lot, landscaped and maintained. He felt the side fence could be cleaned up and painted. The sheet metal fence top could be evened off. There is no need to tear down what is there but it could be more presentable. He was in favor of adding another condition of abatement - no storage of any kind whatsoever on the premises or in the building. For the owner's benefit he should post, on the front, side and rear, "no trespassing" signs. Then if the children enter the property he has only to call the sheriff's department. The front gate lock could be improved by aligning the gates and locking so they could not be forced apart. Commissioner Lawson, who stated he lived in this area and has a son attending La Rosa school, agreed with all that Commissioner Garvin re- commended, and suggested a reed fencing across the gate, but it was decided it would be better if the property could be viewed from the out side. Chairman Pro Tem Millham agreed with the recommendations, particularly the suggestion of barbed wire across the top of the fence. Mrs. Nelson of 9229 Pentland stated that if Mr. Giffis puts in grass in the area suggested for landscaping she would be willing to see that it is kept trimmed, and felt that the neighbors should_ cooperate in keeping • the front of the property free of papers and trash. Mr. Giffis was asked by the Commission if any of the aforementioned suggested conditions would work a hardship, and he replied that he has some restaurant fixtures stored there and it would be a real hardship to get them out, and he could keep them in the building if it is securely locked. He was in favor of the barbed wire. Commissioner Garvin suggested putting plywood in all windows and doors not visible from the street. It was agreed that he would not store anything in the building of the type of cabinet or chest that would have a self - trapping device. Commissioner Garvin moved that the hearing be continued to the next regular Planning Commission meeting on June 25, at which time a new progress report on this property be prepared by the staff. Commissioner Lawson seconded and it was so moved. 1 1 • Commissioner Garvin stated that anyone present can come back and talk about this case at the next meeting if they have something new to say as this will be a continued public hearing. 7. OLD BUSINESS: None 8. COMMUNICATIONS: West San Gabriel Valley Preliminary Plan Commissioner Garvin moved that this be postponed to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission; Commissioner Lawson seconded and it was approved unanimously. 9. TIME FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK: There was no one. 10. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS Commissioner Garvin called attention to the property on Cloverly in the 5700 block, on the east side of the street, a vacant lot, which has overgrown vegetation and should be investigated. 11. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business Commissioner Lawson moved to adjourn the meeting; Commissioner Garvin seconded and it was so moved. The meeting adjourned at 9:25 to the nex regular meeting on June 25,1968. Chairman