Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1IIl'''",A''," <br /> <br />PLEDGE OF <br />ALLEGIANCE <br /> <br />ROLL CALL <br /> <br />APPROVAL <br />OF MINUTES <br />(6-15-65) <br /> <br />HEARING <br />(Woock) <br /> <br />rH/~ <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />16:6578 <br /> <br />M 1 NUT E S <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA <br /> <br />REGULAR MEETING <br /> <br />JULY 6, 1965 <br /> <br />The City Council of the City of Arcadia met in regular session in the <br />Council Chamber of the City Hall at 8:00 P.M., July 6, 1965. <br /> <br />Dr. Phillip S, Ray, Pastor of the First Baptist Church of Arcadia <br /> <br />Mayor Conrad T. Reibold <br /> <br />PRESENT: <br />ABSENT: <br /> <br />Councilmen Considine, Forman, Turner, Reibold <br />Councilman Balser <br /> <br />MOTION by Councilman Turner, seconded by Councilman Forman and <br />carried unanimously that the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June <br />15, 1965 be approved as submitted in writing. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Resolution No. 547 recommending the denial of a <br />requested zone change on property located on the south side of <br />California Street, Fifth Avenue to 145 feet west of Second Avenue <br />from R-2 to R-3. <br /> <br />The Planning Director explained the contents of said resolution which <br />recommended denial of the request; that the approximately 5.8 acres <br />is presently zoned R-2; that the property to the north, across <br />California Street, is zoned R-3; the property to the south is zoned <br />R-2 and the property to the west is zoned R-3. The use of the subject <br />property is both single family and R-2, Section 2 of said resolution <br />sets forth that neither the public necessity, convenience, general <br />welfare or good zoning practice justifies the reclassification and <br />that the Commission therefore recommended denial of the request, The <br />Planning Director advised that the Planning Department was in favor <br />of the rezoning. <br /> <br />Mayor Reibold declared the hearing open and the following persons <br />spoke in favor of granting the request: <br /> <br />H. J. Woock, applicant and attorney for the owners of the subject <br />property, stated in part that all of the owners involved had signed <br />the petition requesting rezoning; that due to the depth of the lots <br />and size of the property it cannot be developed under R-2 to proper <br />advantage inasmuch as there is R-3 zoning across the street on <br />California and urged approval of the request for R-3 zoning. <br /> <br />H. E. Lindbloom, 334 California Street, summarized the existing <br />situation and stated that in his opinion the request embraces a zone <br />correction rather than a zone change; that the area can support <br />greater density with the lots as large as those directly across the <br />street which are developed into R-3 usage. <br /> <br />William Callagy, 1863 Oakwood Drive, owner of 320 California Street, <br />stated that he was concerned when the Planning Commission moved for <br />denial of the request and referred to the need for greater uSe of the <br /> <br />1. <br /> <br />7-6-65 <br /> <br />, <br />