HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes - 1982/10/12 - RegularPLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES.
October 12,1_982
INITIATION
1. The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Temple
City was called to order at 7:30 p..m., October 12, 1982, by Chairman
Pro Tem Breazeal.
Commissioner Froehle led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
. ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Breazeal, Froehle, Stacy
Absent: Chairman Abraham
Also present: City Manager Koski, City Attorney Martin, Planning
Director Shaw and Senior Planner Peterson.
Chairman Abraham's absence was excused for cause.:
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Meeting of September 28, 198.2
There being no additions or corrections to the minutes, they were
approved by roll call vote with Commissioners Breazeal, Froehle and
Stacy voting in favor, Chairman Abraham absent, and Commissioner
Coolman abstaining.
Commissioner Breazeal introduced Mary Coolman, who has been active in
community affairs for a number of years, as the new Planning Commissioner.
The Planning Commissioners greeted her and welcomed her to the Com-
mission.
. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
DETERMINATION OF EXISTENCE OF A PUBLIC NUISANCE
6402 Trelawney Avenue (Case No. 82 -79)
Planning Director Shaw, in giving the staff report, said the conditions
on the property which prompted property nuisance action were the over-
grown and dry conditions of the yard areas and the presence of a
dead pine tree. Staff inspection recently revealed that the yard areas .
are cleared of overgrowth of vegetation, and the dead tree has been
felled and all of it has been removed from the front yard area. He
recommended that the case be terminated. Commissioner Stacy made a
motion to terminate proceedings in Case No. 82 -79 as the objectionable
conditions had been corrected, and to adopt by title only the resolu-
tion terminating the case. Motion was seconded and carried.
City Attorney Martin read title to Resolution 82- 1027PC, A RESOLUTION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TERMINATING PROCEEDINGS IN. PROPERTY NUISANCE
CASE NO. 82 -79.
7.. PUBLIC HEARING: DETERMINATION OF EXISTENCE OF A PUBLIC NUISANCE
4952 El Monte Avenue (Case No. 82 -81)
Mr. Shaw said the conditions on said property which prompted the pro-
ceedings was the overgrown and dry condition of both the north and
east yard areas abutting Grand Avenue and the alley respectively. In-
spection by the staff this date showed no improvement. This property
had been before the Commission previously, but at that time the property
had a different owner, and he had corrected the condition of overgrowth
of vegetation. Now the vegetation had again become a problem.
The Public Hearing was declared open. No one came forward to speak,
and the Hearing was closed. .
Commissioner Froehle said the staff sent letters and noticed the owner
regarding the conditions on the property, the photographs indicate there
is a problem and the problem has not been corrected. He moved to de-
clare the property a nuisance and to adopt by title only the resolution
to that effect, and to recommend to the City. Council the abatement of
the nuisance. Motion was seconded and carried.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 1982 PAGE TWO
• City Attorney Martin read title to Resolution 82- 1028PC, A RESOLUTION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY DECLARING THE
PROPERTY AT 4952 EL MONTE AVENUE A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND RECOMMENDING
TO THE CITY COUNCIL ABATEMENT OF SAME.
At this time Commissioner Breazeal read into the record Resolution No. 82
82- 0000PC Et. Al, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY PLANNING,COMMIS-
SION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, signed by the Mayor, City Manager,
Planning Commission and Planning staff congratulating Planning Director
Shaw and his wife on the birth of their daughter Jennifer Lynn. Mr. Shaw
accepted the Resolution and expressed his thanks to all responsible.
8. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 82 -654
ZONE VARIANCE CASE 82 -655
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 82 -455
Frank Schrader, Administrator for
Santa Anita Convalescent Hospital
Retirement Center Applicant /Owner
5522 Gracewood Avenue
Temple City, California
Commissioner Stacy said he had received a telephone call from a property
owner adjacent to the subject property, stating that she had not received
notification of the hearing. Checking the records it was discovered
that a number of notices had been returned that were addressed with a
Temple City address rather than Arcadia. It was determined that the
hearing should be continued to the next regular meeting of the Planning
Commission on October 26, 1982, and all property owners within 300 ft.
of the subject property were to be renoticed and corrections made on
the mailing list. Commissioner Stacy so moved, seconded by. Commissioner
Coolman and the motion carried.
9. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE VARIANCE CASE NO. 82 -664
Silenus Ong for Third Estate, Inc.
Site: 9510 Olive Street - R -1 Zone
Director Shaw said applicant proposes to construct a new 20' x 21'
two -car garage abutting the midpoint of the east property line. The
required yard setback is 5 ft.. The request is to reduce the required
side setbacks from 5 ft. to 0. As proposed the new two -car garage
would be constructed to abut the east property line of the property and
leave a 10 ft. wide passage to the rear of the property. Planning
staff finds it is possible to construct the new garage and maintain
legal side yard setbacks as well as separation between the two buildings.
He demonstrated on an exhibit how this could be done.
Mr. Shaw continued that the property presently has a one -story house
with a detached accessory storage building. Building Department records
do not show when either of the buildings was originally constructed..
One permit showed the accessory building was a garage in 1955 but there
is no record of any subsequent conversion. However, as the garage was
converted illegally and constitutes a zoning violation, a new garage
is required by Code. He also mentioned that a large tree is situated
behind the proposed garage location.
The Public Hearing was declared open.
Mr. Silenas Ong, President of the corporation that owns the property,
1910 So. Doncrest Street, Monterey Park, CA., said there would be an
11 ft. separation between buildings on the east side of the property,
from the proposed garage to the neighbor's building. He does not want
to remove the large tree if possible. The new garage would be of
Spanish style, with tile roof. If the proposed garage were moved for-
ward the front of the garage and the current building would not be in
line. He then presented to the Chairman several snapshots of properties
in the immediate vicinity of the subject site that seemed to indicate
zero or almost zero setbacks. Commissioner Breazeal said that from
the pictures it was difficult to determine if the accessory . structures
were in the rear third of the lot where they are not required to have
a side setback. Mr. Ong continued that the new garage would add to
the property value of not only the subject property but to the neigh-
borhood.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 1982 PAGE THREE
•
•
Commissioner Stacy asked if Mr. Ong lived here, and was told he did
not, and that the property was a rental. The house was bought in
foreclosure and at that time the structure was in terrible condition
and had to be restored. The accessory structure is being used for
storage presently, Mr. Ong added. Mr, Shaw said that presently there
is no garage on the property. The reason for erecting a garage is
that the accessory structure was converted illegally and the new owner
was informed he needed a two -car garage.
Commissioner Coolman pointed out that the tree in the rear of the pro -..
posed garage is a Chinese Elm, a fast- growing tree, which is not giv-
ing the subject property any shade because of its location. The shade
goes to the neighbor. Was there a reason it could not be removed and
replanted. Mr. Ong said it has been there ten years and has some
economic value as well as aesthetic.
There was no one else to speak in favor of the request. In opposition:
Mr. Arron Grottolo, 9524 Olive Street, was concerned that the applicant
was not a resident, and that the building in the rear would become a
rental sometime in the future. Renters often do not care for the appear-
ance of the property, he said. While the proposed addition may increase
the subject property's values, it would decrease his because it is a
rental. He was against the zero setback request.
Mr. Ken Primising, 9508 Olive Street, said the accessory structure in
the rear of the subject property was originally a chicken coop, and
he described the poor construction of the roof and the flooring. He
was concerned that the illegally converted garage would become a rental.
Mr. Ong, in rebuttal, stated -the house at 9524 Olive Street cannot be
seen from the street so he couldn't see how the addition would affect
that owner. With regards to . the concerns that the property is a rental,
since acquiring ownership of the property his corporation has done a
lot of renovating of the structures and landscaping and the neighbors
expressed appreciation and approval of the improvements.
Commissioner Stacy moved to close public hearing and the motion carried.
Commissioner Stacy said, in reviewing the conditions to be met to grant
a zone variance, that he could see no unusual circumstances peculiar to
the subject property which necessitates the approval of the variance. He
recommended denial.
Commissioner Froehle said in this case the garage can be constructed on
the property and still meet Code requirements. The property owner next
door to the east may want to build in the future, and this construction
as proposed would then pose a problem and be a detriment.
Commissioner Coolman indicated her opposition stating that she was con-
cerned about the light and air space if the building - is constructed as proposed.
Commissioner Breazeal said there are no unusual circumstances as far as
size, shape or topography, and the variance is not necessary to preserve
a property right. The situation requiring a variance is caused by the
property owner.
Commissioner Stacy moved to deny the request on the basis that there
were no unusual circumstances to justify approval, and to adopt by
title only the resolution of denial. Motion was seconded and carried.
City Attorney Martin read title to Resolution No. 82- 1029PC, A RESOLU-
TION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY DENYING A
ZONE VARIANCE IN CASE NO. 82 -664.
10. COMMUNICATIONS - There were none.
"
P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N M I N U T E S
M E E T I N G O F O C T O B E R 1 2 , 1 9 8 2 P A G E F O U R
1 1 . T I M E F O R T H O S E I N T H E A U D I E N C E W H O W I S H T O S P E A K - N o o n e c a m e f o r w a r d .
1 2 . M A T T E R S F R O M C I T Y O F F I C I A L S
( a ) S e t P u b l i c H e a r i n g t o D e t e r m i n e E x i s t e n c e
o f P u b l i c N u i s a n c e f o r O c t o b e r 2 6 , 1 9 8 2 :
6 0 1 2 S u l t a n a ( C a s e N o . 8 2 - 8 2 ) .
6 0 1 9 S u l t a n a ( C a s e N o . 8 2 - 8 3 )
D i r e c t o r S h a w s a i d t h e p u b l i c n u i s a n c e p r o c e e d i n g s w e r e i n s t i t u t e d "
i n C a s e N o . 8 2 - 8 2 b e c a u s e t h e b u i l d i n g s o n t h e p r o p e r t y w e r e u n -
p a i n t e d a n d y a r d a r e a s w e r e u n t e n d e d .
K a t h y W i l s o n , d a u g h t e r o f t h e o w n e r G e o r g e W i l s o n , s a i d t h e f a m i l y
a l l w o r k e d a n d c o u l d o n l y g i v e w e e k e n d s t o t h e r e p a i n t i n g o f t h e
h o u s e . S i n c e f i r s t c o n t a c t e d b y t h e C i t y a b o u t t h e p r o b l e m t h e y
a l l h a v e b e e n p r e p a r i n g t h e h o u s e f o r r e p a i n t i n g a n d s h o u l d h a v e
t h e p r o j e c t c o m p l e t e d b y t h e f i r s t o f n e x t y e a r . T h e C o m m i s s i o n e r s
w e r e i n a g r e e m e n t t h a t , s i n c e t h e p r o p e r t y o w n e r i s p r o c e e d i n g i n
g o o d f a i t h , t h e m a t t e r w i l l b e h e l d i n a b e y a n c e u n t i l t h e f i r s t
m e e t i n g i n J a n u a r y , w i t h s t a f f i n s p e c t i o n s t o b e c o n d u c t e d e v e r y
t w o w e e k s t o o b s e r v e p r o g r e s s . I f t h e r e i s n o p r o g r e s s , o r i t
c e a s e s , t h e m a t t e r c a n b e b r o u g h t b e f o r e t h e C o m m i s s i o n p r i o r t o
J a n u a r y .
D i r e c t o r S h a w s a i d t h a t a t 6 0 1 9 S u l t a n a t h e r e e x i s t e d a s e c o n d d r i v e -
w a y t h a t d o e s n o t l e a d t o a l e g a l p a r k i n g s t r u c t u r e : A e r i a l p h o t o s
s h o w t h e d r i v e w a y w a s i n e x i s t e n c e i n 1 9 5 8 , p r i o r t o C i t y i n c o r p o r a -
t i o n . A t t h a t t i m e i t l e d t o a g a r a g e a n d t h e r e f o r e w a s l e g a l . T h e
C i t y M a n a g e r e x p l a i n e d t h a t t h e r e a r e a c o u p l e o t h e r s u c h s i t u a t i o n s
o n S u l t a n a , a n d t h e C i t y i s p r o c e e d i n g w i t h t h e e l i m i n a t i o n o f t h e s e
e x c e s s a n d a b a n d o n e d d r i v e w a y s a n d c u r b c u t s . T h e c a s e w a s s e t f o r
P u b l i c H e a r i n g f o r O c t o b e r 2 6 , 1 9 8 2 .
( b ) E n v i r o n m e n t a l Q u a l i t y a n d C o d e
E n f o r c e m e n t P r o g r a m R e p o r t - 9 / 1 - 3 0 / 8 2
T h e r e p o r t w a s r e c e i v e d , r e v i e w e d a n d f i l e d .
( c ) E x t e n s i o n o f C - 1 M o r a t o r i u m
D i r e c t o r S h a w , s t a t i n g t h a t t h e C i t y C o u n c i l , o n J u l y 6 , 1 9 8 2 , a d o p t e d
a n u r g e n c y o r d i n a n c e i m p o s i n g a m o r a t o r i u m , o n n e w c o n s t r u c t i o n a n d
b u i l d i n g p e r m i t s w i t h i n t h e C - 1 Z o n e f o r 1 2 0 d a y s . T h a t o r d i n a n c e .
w i l l e x p i r e N o v e m b e r 3 , 1 9 8 2 . T h e r e v i s i o n s t o t h e C - 1 Z o n e , w i l l
n o t b e e s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o t h e N o v e m b e r 3 r d d a t e a n d s t a f f r e c o m m e n d s
t h a t t h e P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n r e q u e s t t h e C i t y C o u n c i l t o e x t e n d t h e
C - 1 M o r a t o r i u m f o r a n o t h e r 1 2 0 - d a y p e r i o d . A s t u d y s e s s i o n w i t h
t h e C i t y C o u n c i l i s s c h e d u l e d f o r N o v e m b e r 1 s t t o c o n s i d e r t h i s i t e m .
C o m m i s s i o n e r S t a c y m o v e d t o r e c o m m e n d t o t h e C i t y C o u n c i l t h e e x t e n s i o n
o f t h e C - 1 M o r a t o r i u m f o r 1 2 0 d a y s . M o t i o n w a s s e c o n d e d a n d c a r r i e d .
( d ) . A c q u i s i t i o n o f p r o p e r t y f o r e x p a n s i o n
o f L . A . C o u n t y S h e r i f f '