HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes - 1972/10/24 - RegularPLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
October 24, 1972
INITIATION
1. CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Temple
City was called to order by Chairman Garvin at 7:30 P.M., October
24, 1972.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Chairman Garvin.
3. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners - Atkins, Beckman, Collister, Lawson, Garvin
Absent: Commissioners - None
Also present were City Manager Koski, Asst. City Attorney White and
Planning Director Dragicevich.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of October 10, 1972
There being no additions or corrections to the minutes, Commissioner
Collister moved they be approved as written, seconded by Commissioner
Beckman. Motion passed by roll call vote with Commissioners Atkins,
Beckman, Collister and Garvin voting affirmative, and Commissioner
Lawson abstaining.
5. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE CHANGE CASE NO. 72 -378
Vince C. Fazio - Owner /Applicant
94142 E. Las Tunas Drive
Temple City, California
Site: 9861 E. Lower Azusa Road
The Planning Director stated notices had been sent as required by law,
and continued that the applicant requests a change of zone from R -4,
Limited Commercial - Residential, to C -2, General Commercial zone. He
gave background information on the subject property, which had been
granted a variance in May, 1963, for a real estate office, then became
vacant before 1967. He reviewed the factual data on this property, and
4110 the applicant's statements for requesting a zone change. He concluded
with staff proposals on file in the Planning Department.
The second part of Director Dragicevich's report was related to the
environmental impact if the request is granted. He pointed out that
traffic, noise level and safety problems would increase. Further,
granting the request would represent "spot zoning ". On the positive
side, if the property is occupied and properly maintained, it would
add to the physical improvement of the neighborhood. Under the present
zoning, or with variance, the property could be used for a real estate
broker's office or uses currently permitted under the R -4 category.
The public hearing was declared open.
Mr. Vince C. Fazio, 94142 E. Las Tunas Drive, stated he intended to use
the house on subject property for his import business. Location is next
to an apartment house, and across the street (in El Monte) is C-3 (heavy
commercial) zoning. He referred to pictures of his property and pointed
out an easement between his property and the apartments to the west,
where there is an accumulation of trash and he intends to build a wall
to screen this problem which is created by residents of the apartment
house. He also referred to a parking layout he had prepared for his
proposed use of the property. Property has been vacant for two years;
it is not suitable as a residence.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MEETING OF OCTOBER 24, 1972 PAGE TWO
There was no one else to speak in favor of the zone change.
r. J. B. Hoskins, 4822 N. Agnes, Questioned what kind of "import" business
as proposed used furniture, books, clothing, cars. He submitted pictures
of the subject property to qualify his question. Pictures were taken
October 15 and 22, showing a sale of used merchandise being conducted out -
of- doors. The corner has a number of accidents on record, and the proposed
zoning would only increase the traffic hazard at that location. There is
a number of vacant buildings on Las Tunas Drive, within a four -block area,
IIIwhich could be used for retail purposes. The trash situation referred to
just recently started. Under present zoning the property could be used
for a doctor, dentist or lawyer's office.
Mr. John Brown, 9913 E. Lower Azusa Road, stated that the properties along
Lower Azusa Road get serviced by law enforcement agencies and fire fighting
agencies of both Temple City and El Monte, and if the subject property goes
commercial it would be an ideal location for robbery attempts. If the
properties along Lower Azusa Road are going to be rezoned commercial, it
will raise his taxes, too, which were raised when his property was zoned
R -4 from R-1. He felt a spot in the new CRA area could be found for this
business.
Mr. Vince C. Fazio, in rebuttal, stated the merchandise on display in the
pictures Mr. Hoskins presented to the Commission, was an accumulation of
items he no longer had use for and so he held a garage sale on two success-
ive weekends. A charge was made that ;he blocked the approach for trash
men to collect the trash; at the time he bought the property he was not
aware of the easement and considered that portion of the property his and
parked his car there. The property went into escrow in October, 1971;
prior to that the house had been vacant for over a year. He added that
Lower Azusa Road is scheduled to be widened 4 ft. on each side and there
will be more traffic, but not generated by his business. He chose this
location over others in the City because he prefers Lower Azusa Road, with
the heavy traffic. His original intention in buying this property was to
Ilive there, but after he started negotiations, he became aware of the trash
condition next door and the traffic, and decided it was not suitable for
a residence. However, he could not get out of the real - estate deal.
Commissioner Beckman moved to close public hearing, seconded by Commissioner
Lawson and the motion passed.
In closed discussion Commissioner Beckman said he did not object to commer-
cial development on Lower Azusa Road as it will ultimately end up being a
commercial thoroughfare. However, this parcel is too small, and with widen-
�ing of the street, it will be smaller still, for commercial development. If
ackaged together into a larger parcel it might be usable.
Commissioner Lawson concurred, adding that rezoning one piece of property
would be "spot zoning ".
Commissioner Collister agreed that the parcel is too small, it would be
spot zoning, and added that it is not compatible with the General Plan.
Commissioner Atkins stated he did not like spot zoning, but could see no
other answer. It is not suitable as a residence. He was in favor of a
zone change.
Chairman Garvin felt there was some question of reasonable use of the
Iproperty in its present state. To approve the request would definitely be
spot zoning. While traffic may be no problem, the property is not adequate
in size and the applicant is limited in assembling additional property.
Commissioner Beckman moved to accept the environmental impact report as
submitted by the staff, seconded by Commissioner Collister and passed.
•
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MEETING OF OCTOBER 24, 1972 PAGE THREE
Commissioner Beckman moved that Zone Change Case No. 72 °378 be denied
as property is too small to properly develop for commercial use and
granting the request would represent spot zoning in an area where no
other commercial zoning exists. Commissioner Collister seconded, and
a roll call vote was taken. Commissioners Beckman, Collister, Lawson an
and Garvin voted favorably, with Commissioner Atkins voting against
because he felt the property is unique because of its location. Mo-
tion carried,
•
1
Asst. City Attorney read title to Resolution 72 =472PC, A RESOLUTION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY DENYING ZONE
CHANGE IN CASE NO. 72 °378. Commissioner Beckman moved to waive further
reading, seconded by Commissioner Lawson and passed. Commissioner
Beckman moved to adopt Resolution 72- 472PC, seconded by Commissioner
Collister. A roll call vote was taken with Commissioners Beckman,
Collister, Lawson and Garvin voting affirmative, and Commissioner Atkins
voting negative. Motion carried.
6. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE CHANGE CASE NO. 72 °379
Griffin Blake )
1006 S. Baldwin Avenue )
Arcadia, California )
Joseph M. Bland i no )
6257 N. Rosemead Boulevard )
Temple City, California )
Mr, and Mrs. Mark A. Ha 1 1 )
8922 E. Longden Avenue ) Owners
Temple City, California )
Mr. and Mrs. Robert E. Copple )
6251 N. Rosemead Boulevard )
Temple City, California )
Mr, and Mrs. Raymond E. D i l l berg )
8916 E. Longden Avenue )
Temple. City, California )
Dr. and Mrs. C. E. Carmichael- Applicants
8932 E. Live Oak Avenue
Temple City, California
Site: 6247, 6251 and 6257 N. Rosemead Boulevard
8916 and 8922 E. Longden Avenue
Director Dragicevich gave the staff report, stating the applicant re-
quests a change of zone from R °1, Single-family Residential, to R °4,
1111 Limited Commercial-Residential. He gave the factual data on the
properties involved, the zoning history, and applicant's statements
in support of the request. He concluded with staff proposals on
this case, on file in the Planning Department.
The second part of his presentation was concerned with the environ-
mental impact report which stated the effect of the potential uses, if
the zone change is granted, would increase the traffic volume, but no
increase was expected in other areas affecting environment. The posi-
tive environmental effect would be that older structures would be re-
placed by new ones. In conclusion, the staff felt no negative sig-
nificant impact is anticipated in this area.
Commissioner Beckman was concerned about preserving or replacing any
trees and landscaping that might be affected in this request. Chair-
man Garvin was interested in the ultimate goal of the subject property.'
The Planning Director said the environmental impact report ultimately
goes to the City Council with a more detailed report before a building
permit is issued.
The public hearing was declared open.
Dr. C. E. Carmichael, 8932 E. Live Oak Avenue, said the staff report was
comprehensive, but he would be happy to answer questions. His office is
presently located in the CRA area, and he intends to relocate on the
southernmost property involved in this zone change, on Rosemead Boulevard.
Presently he has no plans for the rest of the property, but the higher-
density zoning has more potential and the property owners were interested
in having it rezoned.
1
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MEETING OF OCTOBER '.24, 1972 I PAGE. FOUR
Mr. Herbert We i shan,. 6225 Rosemead Boulevard, said rezoning to either R -4
or C -2 would be a;. definite improvement as the traffic on Rosemead is too
IIazardous for single-family , residences. He has lived in the area for 23 years
nd has seen the properties on ,Rosemead in ..that -block deter iora,te because
V
he noise and traffic and dirt discourage improvements. He felt the en-
tire block to Garibaldi Avenue should be rezoned. It is the only block on
Rosemead Boulevard that remains R -1.
Chairman Garvin said that changing the zoning to higher intensity or
IIIcommercial would .increase the value of the properti-es ` involved, but would
also increase taxes and the owners of these properties might have to pay
the increased .taxes for a. long time before the property would be developed
to its zoned potential. On the east side of Rosemead, across the street,
the .zoning. is R-4 and nothing, is being done to utilize that zoning. Mr.
Weishan said the current construction of a= liquor mart on-the east side
might encourage action. He ,said the property owners he had talked to on
the west side were in favor of changing the zone.
Commissioner Beckman said nothing would be gained unless the properties
on Reno Avenue were also rezoned, as the properties facing. Rosemead are
too shallow to develop properly with R -4 or C zoning. Chairman Garvin
added that a change of zone had been discussed with some of the property
owners in that area and they would rather see it R -1 with the possibility
of consolidating parcels to add width, and go back to Reno in depth. They
• didn't want to pay the increased taxes unless there was something definite.
Commissioner Beckman moved to close public hearing, seconded by Commissioner
Lawson and passed.
Commissioner Lawson started the closed discussion by saying he felt the
proposal made good sense, he would like to see the zone change expanded
to Reno on the south side of Longden Ave., and on Rosemead to Garibaldi;
however, he was in favor of granting this request as presented.
ICommissioner Atkins agreed, but felt only the present request should be
considered at this time. The proposal would make possible more effect-
ive use of the properties involved.
Commissioner Collister would like an opportunity to study the whole block,
but presently he felt the current application should be granted.
Commissioner Beckman agreed. The assembling of five parcels, with access
off Longden and Rosemead was commendable. He was not in favor of tying
any other parcels to these at this time as it would necessitate a delay.
•He hoped this would encourage other people in the neighborhood to assemble
larger parcels to make them .workable and marketable, with access off
another street and take some traffic load off Rosemead.
Chairman Garvin stated he felt there were enough R -4 unused properties
that could be developed, and that the City was accommodating the applic-
ant. This area had been examined in depth and left R -1 for the benefit
of the people living there. Along Longden there will be three zones in
one block area, -. which is not good zoning, or planning in connection with
the General Plan.
Commissioner Collister moved the Environmental Impact. Report, as prepared
by staff, be accepted, seconded by Commissioner Atkins and passed.
ICommissioner Beckman moved that Zone Change Case 72 -379 be granted as
the request is compatible with surrounding area, a start of what should
be done (assembling of properties), and could be developed into a really
workable project. Commissioner Atkins seconded the motion, and a roll
call vote carried with Commissioners Atkins, Beckman, Collister, Lawson
voting for the motion, and Commissioner Garvin against it.
Asst. City Attorney White read title to Resolution 72- 473.PC, •A RESOLUTION
•OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY RECOMMENDING ZONE
CHANGE IN CASE NO. 72 -379. Commissioner Beckman moved to waive further
reading, seconded by Commissioner Atkins and the motion passed.
•
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MEETING OF OCTOBER 24, 1972 PAGE FIVE
Commissioner Beckman moved to adopt Resolution 72- 473PC, seconded by
Commissioner Lawson and the motion carried with Commissioners Atkins,
1111 Beckman, Collister and Lawson voting for, and Chairman Garvin against
the motion.
1
7. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE VARIANCE CASE NO. 72 ®380
Neal Vanderwindt and Manfred Herrmann ° Applicants /Owners
9436 E. Las Tunas Drive
Temple, City, California
Site: ,9436 E. Las Tunas Drive and
5845 N. Oak Avenue
The Planning Director gave the staff report and stated applicants re-
quest they be allowed to retain a painted wall sign in excess of the
permitted square footage of the sign area. He gave the staff report,
applicant's statements, and the staff proposals on file in the Planning
Department. He then gave the Environmental Impact Report which states
the request would have no environmental effect, but it is conceivable
that the City might receive similar requests from other merchants in the
area. At the present time no such requests from other merchants has been
received. The sign was put up after effective date of the sign ordinance,
but violation of the ordinance was not intentional, as the applicants were
not aware of the existence of a sign ordinance.
Illki r. Manfred Herrmann, 9436 E. Las Tunas Drive, said the wall painting is
of two Volkswagens and one Porche, with red, blue, black and purple colors.
He does not call it a sign. He is willing to remove the symbols and paint
in solidly the colors that are now the background. Asst, City Attorney
White said it is considered a sign because the automobiles relate to the
type of services performed on the premises. If the automobiles are not
part of the painting it would be a wall coloring.
Mr. Neal Vanderwindt, 9436 E. Las Tunas Drive, said he considered the wall
Ipainting "graphic art ". The building was in disrepair when he and his
partner took it over. They have cleaned up the outside and consider it
attractive and a great improvement over what was there previously. They
have done some improving of the interior, but it is hard to keep it spot-
less with the type of work done there. He has heard no negative comments
on the wall painting. Many of his customers are young and he feels this
painting attracts them. If the frontage on Las Tunas Drive and on Oak
Avenue were combined perhaps he would have enough footage to be within
the sign ordinance. While there are two business, and two licenses, at
this location, they are under the same ownership, and he gets only one
tax bill, and has only one street address. He pointed out that, if he
emoved the automobiles from the wall painting, he could paint his build-
ing any colors, and the Asst. City Attorney said it does not give him
license to do that as the property could be construed as a public nuisance
if the ultimate paint job was objectionable. Mr. Vanderwindt said that
many people didn't know they had bought the body shop and were operating it,
and the wall painting helped their business which was floundering for awhile.
Chairman Garvin said it was not the sign that that made the difference, but
probably the quality of the work they do.
Commissioner Beckman moved the public hearing be closed, seconded by Com-
missioner Lawson and passed.
Commissioner Collister began the discussion by saying the request does not
Imeet the requirements for granting a variance.
Commissioner Beckman said the sign ordinance was quite comprehensive and
was intended to upgrade Temple City, particularly Las Tunas Drive. While
there are a couple signs larger than allowed, they are located on larger
pieces of property. If the Commission approves this request there would
be no way to deny other similar requests. It does not meet criteria' for
granting a variance.
IIII
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MEETING OF OCTOBER'' 24, 1972 PAGE S I X
Commissioner Lawson: disagreed with previous opinions, saying he thought
the wall painting was an artistic work and an addition to the area. It
S is not injurious to neighboring properties and has no adverse effect on
.property values. By coming for a zone variance is one way the Commission
can control future proposals. In this case he would accept this request
in relations-hip to what could actually be put there.
Commissioner Atkins agreed. The Thrifty - Ralphs sign is greatly over -size
and was granted. This is a preservation of property rights. He felt the
l"
wall painting was aesthetically pleasing. The body shop needs some identi-
fication.
Chairman Garvin was against the proposal which is twice as large as per -
mitted by the .sign ' ordinance which was developed to benefit the whole
community. The Ralphs - Thrifty sign is big but the property is bigger.
Commissioner Beckman wanted it brought out that Ralphs is on a parcel
over two acres large which was taken into consideration. He then moved
the-Envi'ronmental Impact. Report be adopted as submitted by staff, seconded
by Commissioner Collister and .passed.
Commissioner Collister moved that Zone Variance Case No. 72 -380 be denied
because it does not - meet °the sign ordinance criteria in size, and the
conditions of granting a variance per Section 9201 of the. Temple City
Zoning Code are not met. Commissioner Beckman seconded and a roll call
vote was taken, with Commissioners Beckman, Collister and Garvin voting
for,,and Commissioners Atkins and Lawson voting against the motion which
carried.
Asst. City Attorney; White read t i t je to Resolution 42- 474PC, . A RESOLUTION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY DENYING VARIANCE IN
ZONE .VARIANCE CASE NO. 72 -380. Commissioner Lawson moved to waive fur-
ther reading, seconded by Chairman Garvin, and the motion passed. Com-
missioner. Lawson moved to adopt Resolution 42- 474PC, seconded by Chairman
IGarvin, and carried by roll call vote with Commissioners Beckman, Collis -
ter and Garvin :voting ,affirmative, .and Commissioners Atkins and Lawson
against.
Chairman Garvin declared a recess at 9:35 p.m. and called the meeting to
order again at 9 :45 p.m.
8. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Preliminary Draft of Open Space,
.Recreation and Conservation Element
The Planning Director told the Commission that additional elements are re-
quired °by the State to be added to the General Plan. The draft consists of
two elements, a) Open Space and Recreation and b) Conservation. He briefly
explained the contents of the report, and concluded that the draft would be
presented to the Traffic and Parks and Recreation Commissions for their
comments. If there is a difference of opinion among the Commissions on this
element .a meeting with other Commissions will be held.
Commissioner Atkins moved to accept draft of the subject elements and refer
it to the Traffic, Parks and Recreation and Youth Commission. Commissioner
Collister seconded the motion and "i it carried.
B. Environmental Impact Report
The Planning Director called attention to the material in the Commissioners'
packets on the Environmental Impact Report, including a letter from the
City Attorney and the report which must be completed on each case that
comes before the Planning Commission and the City Council. Each building
permit approved by the City must be accompanied by such a report, with a
''negative impact" report required on single - family residences and minor
IIIadditions. The City Manager said it is possible to require a fee and
place the financial burden . for completing the report on the applicant. He
felt the Commission, in reviewing requests for conditional use permits,
zone variances, etc.,, was already aware of the impact on the environment
each request would have, but the state is making it mandatory to consider
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MEETING OF OCTOBER 24, 1972 PAGE SEVEN
this impact in a more formal manner. In a zone change it could now be
required to have the applicant submit a landscaping plan. An applicant who
Ss denied a request because of the environmental impact report, can appeal
o the City Council and then to the Courts.
C. Joi:rit; Meeting with Planning :Commission
and City Council
City Manager stated a joint meeting would be held November 20, 1972, for
Ithe Planning Commission and City Council to discuss various items, includ-
ing the Environmental Impact Report.
9. TIME FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK - There was no one.
10. MATTERS FROM CITY OFFICIALS
A. Director Dragicevich referred to draft of an ordinance for move -
ins, and asked if the Commission wished to proceed with this matter.
It was the concensus of opinion to delay this item until possibly
the second meeting in January, 1973.
B. Director Dragicevich called attention to material in the Commis-
sioners' packets on residential driveways, including circular
drives. Commissioner Beckman moved to set public hearing for
November 28, 1972, the regular Planning Commission meeting. Com-
missioner Collister seconded and the motion passed.
C. Environmental Quality and Code Enforcement Program: The Planning
Director said the report on this matter sent to the Commissioners
gives background on how this subject is being handled at the
present time. He went on to say there are problems in certain
areas, and would appreciate the Commissioners' suggestions in cor-
recting the problem areas. Commissioner Lawson said as the people
move out from Los Angeles into the suburbs, or from one suburb to
another, they are not aware of ordinances in the new location,or
their customs and habits are ingrained. It was suggested, in dis-
cussion, that an emissary for the City go door to door, and meet
the people in that area face to face, or to send a bulletin with
a few facts, addressed personally.
Further suggestions were that the City have something concrete to
offer, such as information where to get home improvement loans,
that street trees be available at cost through the City for those
who would want to plant them. The City Manager said the present
enforcement program has an 85% record for compliance. Chairman
Garvin said there were a lot of things the people in the community
were unaware of, however, the Newsletter is too infrequent, and
there are many citizens who do not take the local paper, or if
they do, they don't read it, so printed information would have to
be distributed in some manner other than those two means.
C. Planning Director referred to a new law which the State legislature
passed requiring cities to have the zoning map correspond with
their General Plan. He considered this premature zoning, especially
in undeveloped areas, and bad planning practice. The Asst. City
Attorney said an extension has been asked for compliance and said
the City wi l l be advised of progress.
D. Chairman Garvin said it would be a good idea to send both Environ-
mental Impact Report and staff report to an .applicant for a condi-
tional use permit or zone variance so he could peruse them prior
to the hearing. This was agreeable to all concerned.
11. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Commissioner Beckman moved to adjourn
to the next regular meeting on November 14 conded by Commissioner
Collister and passed. Time of adjournment ..s 10:!0 p.m.
•
1
1
•
CHA I
ATTEST • R7J
/
S ECR'ETARY