Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I INVOCATION <br /> <br /> <br />PLEDGE <br /> <br />ROLL CALL <br /> <br />MINUTES <br />(8-18- 59 and <br />8-20-59) <br /> <br />HEARING <br />(Ryder) <br /> <br />". <br /> <br />1.i:\\)~.p;.1l <br /> <br />~ 01\ <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />04 ":1':);- <br />.."...1':) <br /> <br />M I NUT E S <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA <br /> <br />REGULAR MEETING <br /> <br />SEPTEMBER 1, 1959 <br /> <br />The City Council of the City of Arcadia, california, met in regular session <br />in the Council Chamber of the City Hall at 8:00 o'clock P.M., September <br />I, 1959. <br /> <br />The Invocation was offered by Rev. A. Karl Myers, Pastor of the Village <br />Presbyterian Church. <br /> <br />Mayor Reibold led in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. <br /> <br />PRESENT: <br />ABSENT : <br /> <br />Councilmen Camphouse, Jacobi, Phillips, Reibold <br />.. <br />Councilman Balser <br /> <br />Councilman Jacobi moved that the minutes of the regular meeting of <br />August 18, 1959 and the Special Meeting of August 20, 1959, as submitted <br />in writing, be approved. Councilman Phillips seconded the motion and it <br />was carried unanimously. <br /> <br />Mayor Reibold declared the hearing open on the appeal of David C. and <br />Dorothy M. Ryder from the recommendation of the Planning Commission <br />contained in its Resolution No. 339 recommending denial of a zone variance <br />to permit a second dwelling at 903 North Second Avenue, and inquired if <br />anyone desired to speak in favor of granting the requested variance. <br /> <br />The following addressed the Council: <br /> <br />Mr. David C. Ryder, 903 No. Second Avenue, the applicant and appellant, <br />stated in part that he felt the Planning Commission's recommendation was <br />discriminatory in that it denied him the same privileges enjoyed by others <br />in the area. He cited Sycamore Avenue as an example where lot splits had <br />been approved on lots containing less area than his lot, which is 286.9 x <br />55 feet. He mentioned that of the eight lots on his block concerned in <br />this matter, three are already developed with second dwellings, which <br />meets the required minimum of 25%; that the rear portion of his lot is of <br />no value to him unless it can be improved; that if granted a variance, he <br />contemplated constructing a house thereon of approximately 1000 square <br />feet; that it is doubtful if a street will ever be put through this <br />particular locale since the Santa Anita Wash is to the rear of his property <br />and a freeway is contemplated being constructed on the northeast side of the <br />said wash; that he has access to an alley and that a petition with 32 <br />signatures was filed favoring the requested variance. <br /> <br />A map of the area in question was then displayed and it was noted that <br />Mr. Martin Kordick owns a large piece of land backing up to the Wash <br />and abutting the rear of appellant's property. <br /> <br />Mr. Frank J. Heller, 907 No. 2nd Avenue and Mr. J. Donald Pauley, 825 <br />No. 2nd Avenue stated in part that they felt a second dwelling on the rear <br />of appellant's lot would improve the property and that they were in favor <br />of a variance being granted him. Mention was made that the aforesaid Mr. <br />Kordick had expressed himself as contemplating requesting a variance to <br />construct a multiple dwelling unit on his property and that his fence had <br />been moved ten feet. <br /> <br />No one desired to speak in opposition to the requested variance. <br /> <br />1. <br /> <br />9- 1- 59 <br />