Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I INVOCATION <br /> <br />PLEDGE OF <br />ALLEGIANCE <br /> <br />ROLL CALL <br /> <br />MINUTES <br />APPROVED <br /> <br />HEARING <br />Tract No. <br />39239 <br />APPROVED <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />24:9956 <br /> <br />MINUTES <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA <br /> <br />REGULAR MEETING <br /> <br />FEBRUARY 19, 1980 <br /> <br />The City Council of the City of Arcadia, California met in a <br />regular session on Tuesday, February 19, 1980 at 7:30 p.m. in <br />the Council Chamber of the Arcadia City Hall, <br /> <br />Rev. Gladys Johnson, Victory Chapel <br /> <br />Susan Smith, Highlander Press <br /> <br />PRESENT: <br />ABSENT : <br /> <br />Councilmen Gilb, Parry, Pellegrino, Saelid, Margett' <br />None <br /> <br />On MOTION by Counci lman pa rry, seconded by Counci lman See 1 id and <br />carried unanimously the minutes of January 24, 1980 were APPROVED. <br />On MOTION by Councilman Saelid, seconded by Councilman Parry and <br />carried the minutes of February 5, 1980 were APPROVED, Mayor Margett <br />abstained from voting on these minutes as he was absent February 5. <br /> <br />The City Council on February 5 closed the public hearing portion on <br />the appeal filed by Milton Bade concerning his proposed Tract No. <br />39239, 143 E, Sycamore. The matter is now before Council for further <br />consideration, The Planning Director recalled what transpired at the <br />previous meeting - that the tract had been designed for eight lots - <br />that two of the lots (Nos. 1 and 6) did not conform to the minimum <br />lot requirement due to irregular frontages. The subdivision is con- <br />sistent with the General Plan designation for the area. Council had <br />asked at that time if the developer could examine the possibilities <br />of a seven lot tract. <br /> <br />Councilman Saelid brought up the drainage and soil erosion aspect <br />and the Director of Public Works submitted in part that the City has <br />not as yet rece ived the design-grading plan but that the roadways <br />have a relatively flat grade - that there are no hills associated <br />with it and he could see no problem in developing the lots so they <br />will have norma 1 dra inage. <br /> <br />The developer, Milton Bade, 63 Birchcroft, said he was going to stay <br />with an eight lot subdivision" that it is not feasible for seven lots-- <br />that he has put the driveways to the lots on Oakhaven and Oakglen and <br />has agreed to single story construction. And with reference to the <br />grading he does not believe there is any point in the tract where <br />there will be over a three foot fill area, <br /> <br />The traffic problem was then brought up and the Chief of Police said <br />in part that the Foothills Jr, High School parking has always been very <br />limited and the school parking lot over parked. The width of the <br />streets on which there is so much daytime parking is also a factor. <br />Staff could work on it if Council so desires, <br /> <br />Discussion held on the surplus property owned by the School District <br />and which is up for sale ,.. the Council questioned whether or not this <br />could be used for parking by the school when there is such a need. <br /> <br />Councilman Saelid stated in part that his concerns other than the <br />congestion in the area have already been satisfied .. and that the <br />development will protect the integrity of the homes surrounding the <br /> <br />-1- <br /> <br />2-19-80 <br />