Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes - 1970/03/10 - Regular" PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH . 10, 1970 INITIATION 1. The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Temple City was called to -order by Chairman Lawson at 7:30 P.M. , March 10, 1970. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Chairman Lawson. 3. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners: Atkins, Beckman, . Dennis, Garvin, Lawson Absent: Commissioners: None Also Present: City Manager Koski, Asst. City Attorney, White, Planning Director.Dragicevich. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular Meeting of February. 24, 1970: There being no additions or corrections to the minutes, Commissioner Atkins moved they be approved as presented. Commissioner Dennis seconded the motion, and a.roll call vote was taken, with Commissioners Atkins, Beckman, Dennis and Lawson voting affirmatively, and Commis- sioner Garvin abstaining. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 5. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 69 -307 Velma D. Riggle, Owner 6759 N. Golden West Avenue Box 1093, Arcadia, Calif. Jim Dandy Fast Foods, Inc., Applicant 10887 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 735 Los Angeles, Calif. Site: 9803 E. Las Tunas Drive, Temple City (Northeast corner Las Tunas Drive and Golden West Avenue). The Planning Director gave additional information and explained the revised Exhibits "A" and "B ". The revised structure is 240.Sq �Ft. larger than the previous one. Service yard, originally to the rear, " would be attached on the north side of the structure, and the over- hang is eliminated from the proposed structure. The signs are con - siderably larger, but conform to the sign ordinance. There were no additional staff. recommendations. " There were no questions from the Commissioners; however, Commissioner Atkins wished it noted in the record that the Commission had before them the minutes containing testimony from the meeting of January 13. The public hearing was then .declared open. Mr. Morris Finley, 8439 Ravendale Road, San Gabriel, apologized for the delay in presenting new plans on this case. He said all the service would be from inside the building, eliminating a pass -thru window. There was no one else to speak for or against the case. Commissioner Garvin asked Mr. Finley if the structure will be developed just as shown in the rendering, and Mr. Finley replied he would be willing to accept that as one of the conditions. of granting. The artist and architect did not work together on the delineation, parti- cularly with reference to the wing walls, and he felt this should be a condition of approval. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 10, 1970 PAGE TWO. •Commissioner Garvin moved to close the public hearing. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Atkins and passed. In Commission discussion, Commissioner Beckman said he did not think this proposal was compatible with the Civic Center area. Because it is a drive - in operation he felt it would be detrimental to surrounding property and the Civic Center. He was also concerned about the traffic it would generate. Commissioner Atkins agreed. He also questioned the location .of this use near the Civic Center with regards to architecture. In another location he felt it wouldn't appear so garrish. He felt it was considerable improve- ment over the original plan submitted. He did not like this proposed use abutting the Civic Center. Commissioner, Dennis agreed to a point. The basic fact is whether they should accept any type of business in Temple City. With the imposition of staff proposals in the original staff report, regardless of the traffic flow or the architecture of the building, he was inclined to favor the application. 1 Commissioner Garvin said that within one block area there are three drive - in business operating, two of which were in existence before applicable drive- in to this type of business. This area already has problems from these three businesses, and adding another of the same type will not alleviate the problems. He-was against the "application because of the proximity to the Civic Center, and to .the property to the north of subject property, which is apartment-type dwelling with . retirement-type residents; the noise, smell and traffic would create problems for adjacent R -zoned property to the north. Chairman Lawson felt this was somewhat of an improvement over what is Ipresently there. With the efforts that have gone forth to produce a better type of building, even though we don't want more drive -ins, he would be in favor of this proposal. Commissioner Beckman moved Conditional Use Permit 69- 307.be.denied inas- much as it is not compatible with surrounding property; and is detrimental to the Civic Center and the property to the north. Commissioner Atkins seconded the motion. .A roll call vote was taken, with Commissioners Atkins, Beckman and Garvin voting to deny, and Commissioners Dennis and Lawson:voting against the motion. sst. City Attorney White read title to :Resolution .70- 373PC, A RESOLUTION THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY DENYING CONDITIONAL SE PERMIT IN CASE NO. 69 -307. Commissioner Atkins moved to waive further reading and adopt. Commissioner Beckman seconded and the motion passed unanimously. NEW BUSINESS 6. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE VARIANCE CASE NO. 70 -3 1 1 Lester P. Norton, Owner - Applicant 1300 E. Las Tunas Drive San Gabriel, Calif. Site:. 4864 thru 4904 Encinita Temple City, Calif. The Planning Director gave the factual report, stating that the appli- cant proposes to allow storage of antique and used cars on the rear portion of a nonconforming M -1 zoned property, containing, at present, six residential units. He explained the plot plan marked Exhibit "A" showing existing and proposed uses, gave the factual data on the sub - ject property, and listed the staff proposals which are on file in the Planning Dept. Commissioner Atkins asked if the residential units were built prior to :1964, and was told they were, being about 16 years old. The sub - division to the south was built right after 1950. 1 • " 1 " 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 10, 1970 PAGE THREE There being no further questions the public hearing was declared open. Mr. John L. Shaw, 5816 Temple City Boulevard, representing the appli- cant, stated the property was zoned R -1 -5000 when the six residences were built, and zoned M -1. in 1964. By zoning it M -1 it was impossible to build another use on-the parcel in the rear of subject :property, either an M -1 use or an R -use, and therefore it was a field where weeds grew. The opportunity to use it as a storage for cars arose, a proper use in an M-1 zone. The owner, thinking it was M-1 zoning, proceeded to put granite on the ground and build a 6 ft. high wooden fence around three sides of . the property, and.a chain link fence with reeds on the back side, completely hiding the automobiles from any surround- ing property. The gates are kept locked at all times with a padlock. To deny him use of . that property for an M- usage, and not allowing him to expand it as an R -use will result in the �property becoming a weed- patch, and places the owner in a dilemma. Mr. Shaw continued that he felt the staff proposals for public works improvements was unreasonable because there would be no construction of $1,000, only the expense for barbed wire to prevent children from climbing the fence. In answer to questions, Mr. Shaw stated the cars are not the property of the owner, but that the owner rents to someone who stores the cars on the property, and that there would be no repair work on the property. The car owner takes the cars to his shop for repairs; there will be no mechanical work whatsoever done on the property. He estimated 25 cars were stored there at the present time. There was no one else to speak in favor of the proposal. Mr. Walter Wise, 9231 Roseglen, was aga fast the barbed wire, was of the opinion this would be a junk yard, and stated this use could be seen by his neighbors from their property. In answer to Commissioner Garvin's questions if Mr. Wise was aware of the M -1 uses that were allowable on that property that could be more obnoxious than the pro- posed one, Mr. Wise said he was not. Mr. Bengt Karlsson,.9233 Roseglenn, stated he owned the property be- tween the subject property and the Wash, and he wants a view-obscuring fence built between these properties, where presently there is only a chain link fence and bamboo. He passed photos to the Commissioners showing the property; which i s 8 to 10 .ft. wide, and 40 to 50 ft. long, and which is used for a play yard for his children and their guests. " It was purchased from the Los Angeles Flood Control District four or five years ago. Mr. Miguel Gallegos, 9236 Roseglen, also felt this would be a junk yard, and was concerned about rodents in the upholstery of these cars, as children get in and break the windows of the cars. The existing: barbed wire was installed when the 15 homes on Roseglen were built, and the residents there had the block wall installed. This wall is not 6 ft. all around, because of slope to the area, so in some places it is only 5 ft. He was also asked by Commissioner Garvin if he was aware of the M -1 uses that could be allowed there, and he said he was not. Commissioner Beckman said that the possibility of children getting into the subject property was not a justifiable reason to approve or deny a proposal. 1 " Mr. Lee Taylor, 9215 .Roseglen, also felt this property would be used as a junk yard, and was against the proposal. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 10, 1970 PAGE FOUR 1111 Mr. Alfred Dattola, 4910 Encinita, was against the proposal unless the use was enclosed so no one could see it from the outside, and there would be no selling of cars or parts. There being no one else to speak against the proposal, Mr. Shaw, in rebuttal, said he could not see into the property without getting on a ladder. The fact that the gate is padlocked at all times indicates no selling activity or mechanical work, only to remove cars for rebuild- ing or bringing in additional cars. Putting: this property to use, rather than letting it become a weed patch, would be advantage to the neighborhood. Commissioner Garvin said that the cars can be . seen through the reed and chainlink fencing. He asked if the applicant would be willing to install a wood fence on the east property line, concrete the storage area, that the cars be in one piece with all loose parts stored in an enclosed building, and the maximum number of vehicles be limited to 25 at any given time, with no 'sales, repairs or dismantling on the subject property. Mr. Shaw said the conditions were agreeable with the exception of the paving of the storage area, and the staff.pro- posal of public works improvements, inasmuch .a.s. these are expensive items, and the rental realized from the subject property would not compensate for these improvements. 1111 Commissioner: s Atkin asked if the entire parcel is rented out, and was assured it was. He then .moved .to close the public hearing, and Com- missioner Beckman. seconded. The motion passed unanimously. In closed discussion, Commissioner Garvin said the property is not being used for what he was led to believe, but is a commercial ven- ture, and the applicant is not willing to comply with certain condi- tions because he would not make any money that way, he was against granting. Applicant is not being denied use of his property or the use being enjoyed by surrounding property owners. He was not in favor of all the public works improvements for a storage use. Commissioner Dennis said there is nothing in the zoning ordinance in M -1 that would preclude use of this for automobile storage yard. He felt the applicant was denied use of his property, because properties to the north could be used as M -1 as this property could if the houses were removed. He was in favor of granting, with certain staff proposals; however, he did not feel the necessity for curbs and gutters as this request is out of proportion to the proposal. commissioner Atkins also was in favor of granting under very strict conditions, including some surfacing so there would be no weed problem, limiting the number of cars, sidewalks and driveway, approaches. Commissioner Beckman was against the public works improvements. He did not feel the property owner was denied the right to use his property as he sees fit, R-1 or M-1. Chairman Lawson was in favor of granting the variance with strict condi- tions as Commissioner Atkins listed, and also that a.view-obscuring fence be built along the rear of the property. City Manager Koski. said Encinita Ave, is proposed for reconstruction IIIfrom the railroad north, which improvement will include curbs, gutters, sidewalks and driveway approaches, and he felt the money the applicant might be asked to put up for any of these improvements could be applied, instead, for paving or for the fencing :which might be required of him. Commissioner Beckman spoke against requiring public works improvements as a condition for granting a variance or conditional use permit. Com- missioner Garvin felt this proposal, in this case, should not have been brought up for consideration if the street is up for bid in the near future. Commissioner Beckman said these improvements could be required where the rest .. of a street or area is already enjoying them, or on .a direct route to a school. 1 1 " 1 " 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 1 0 , 1970 PAGE S I X (c) The Planning Director says the zoning ordinance is ambiguous referring to the location of accessory structures such as guest houses, rumpus or family rooms. The Planning Commission discussed the purpose of setbacks and the regulations in other cities on this subject. It was pointed out that the Building Dept. code states that when a structure has kitchen facilities, it is considered a dwelling unit. Commissioner Beckman stated that, once a structure is plumbed, it is a simple matter to install kitchen facilities, with or without a permit, and it is done frequently. The Planning Director stated that some cities require a covenant be signed at the time the permit is issued for an accessory structure, to the effect that it can- not be used as a dwelling unit. The Commission generally agreed that the 5 ft. sideyard setback was important, but that the 15 ft. rear setback is yard area and could be reduced to 5 ft. for this purpose. The Planning. Director was instructed to prepare a resolution and covenant for presentation to the Commission for adoption at the next meeting. (d) The Planning Director called attention to a letter from Mrs. Janice Morgan to the Commission favoring oil drilling at Glickman near Bogue. It was received and filed. The City Manager asked that a copy . be sent to the City Council for their records. (e) The Planning Director announced that the March, 1970, meeting of the Southern California Planning Congress would be held in Yorba Linda on March .12, and the subject would be "A former Planning. Director Looks at the Job ". Anyone wishing to make reservations should contact the staff. (f) The City Manager announced that a meeting with the City Council and the Planning Commission is tentatively set for March 31, 1970, to study the General. Plan layout, progress to date, and the budget. The date was agreeable to the Commissioners. 8. TIME FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK There was no one. 9. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS " 1 Chairman Lawson referred to two changes in the meeting dates of the Commissions from those shown on the agenda. Commissioner Garvin again called attention to the parking of vehicles on Oak and Las Tunas in the old Market Basket parking lot. The City Manager said there were no provisions in the code made between commercial vehicles stored in a commercial zone in contrast to a passenger vehicle, and the only course of action would be to approach the property owner to restrict the property from any parking use. The Planning Director referred the Commission to the results of a survey done by the Chamber of Commerce Development Council and which was distributed throughout the City. Commissioner Beckman again mentioned that he does not receive the Newsletter, and the City Manager said he would investigate. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Commissioner Atkins moved to adjourn to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission on March 24, 1970. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Garvin and passed unanimous- ly. Time of adjournment was 9 :50 P.M. C Chairman Ottest: 14-4-"st Secretary