HomeMy WebLinkAbout1957-10-151
1
MINUTES
• �a
HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING CO101ISSIOM
Council Chambers, City Hall
Huntington Beach, California
Tuesday, October 15, 1957
Chairman Bazil called the meeting of the Planning Commission of
the City of Huntington Beach to order at 7:35 o'clock P. M.
Commissioners present: Bazil, Stang, Davis, Schryer, Presson.
Commissioners absent: Bardwell, Liles.
On motion by Schryer and seconded by Presson, the minutes of the
Huntington Beach Planning Commission of Tuesday, October 1st, 1957, as tran—
scribed and mailed by the Secretary, were accepted as mailed.
Chairman Bazil announced the continuation of a hearing for a pro-
posed extension of the Orange County Disposal Station No. 10 located at
S i of SE 4 of NW 4 of NW k of SEC 35, T.S.S., R.11.W approximately the
interior lot adjacent to parcels at SE corner of Golden West and Talbert.
The Secretary was asked to give the latest staff report concerning the
application.
The Secretary pointed out that the two requests by the county
for extension of the existing dump site had been stalemated. July 18, 1957
was given as the date the first application was filed and that almost two
months have elapsed without final action being taken. Therefore it was
requested that the Commission take positive action to make a recommendation
at this meeting.
The Secretary brought up the subject of Bruce Brothers operation
adjacent to the County site because it entered into the controversy of the
county's requested variance. He introduced Murray I. Storm, representative
of the Orange County Road Department who was acting as an agent for the
County in the variance application. The Secretary stated that both he and
Storm had attended the previous meeting of the Orange County Water Polution
Control Board.
Storm was asked to give his version of what transpired during the
Bruce Brothers hearing. It was pointed out that Bruce Brothers were originally
ordered to cease dumping of all forms of industrial wastes in 1948• However
Page #2
Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, October 15. 1957
the order was overlooked for a period of several years until recently when
again an order_was given the -firm to cease dumping all wastes except inert
materials.
Storm explained that it was his understanding that after final
action"was taken on Bruce Brothers permit, they would be allowed to continue
dumping rotary mud in a solid state and all other forms of industrial
waste providing, they were not among those considered detrimental by the
Polution Board. Bruce Brothers would be held responsible to determine
the nature of the material and must submit samples to the board or make
other tests when there is doubt as to the contents,
Commissioner Schryer went on record as explaining that rotary
mud in itself contained no -injurious polutants, because the only additives
were for jelling purposes and fresh water is added containing no salinities
to make a special type,of mud to jell properly. He went on to explain
that his firm had ploughed a good deal of the mud under without consequence
to later cultivation adjacent to their operations in the Peralta Hills.
Weybright, of Hahn, Wise and Barber, asked the Commission,to
omit further discussion of Bruce Brothers on the grounds that it did
not pertain to problem at hand.
Bazil questioned Storm as to whether the Polution Control
Board restricted the depths of all types of dumps.- Storm stated that
he didn't believe it was within the jurisdiction of the Board to control
actual depths.
Storm was asked to explain the exact filling operation. He
said that the dump was open 24 hours a day however there was a custodian
on hand up until 6 o'clock P. M. and that there was essentially no commercial
dumping occuring after this hour. He pointed out that the clean fill
operation is a continou:s one and that the bull dozer fills and tamps through-
out the day so that the layer of waste materials are completely covered
by evening except for -minor -household rubbish dumping.
The Commissioners discussed the problem further and concluded
that it was a desireable operation. A motion was made by Davis and
seconded by Presson to RECOMrlEND APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
Page #3
Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, October 15th, 1957
1. That the City of Huntington Beach be notified at the Planning Comm-
ission Office at the time the County desires to terminate the use of the
described dump site.
2. That at the time of abandonment of the dump site, reasonable efforts
will be made to immediately provide the 24 inches of required ground cover.
3. That this Use Variance will permit only the County of Orange to uti-
lize and maintain this described disposal station premises; the reversion
of the described premises to private individuals whether by sale of fee
simple title or termination of existing lease shall nullify and void this
granted Use. Variance.
The motion was carried.
The hearing was opened for a request of E. M. Finch to revise
two conditions specified in variance No. 3671 previously granted by the
County of Orange. The Secretary explained that the variance was for a
used car lot at the SW corner of Stark Street and Highway 39. 'Some dis-
cussion was held on the matter after the minute order of the County Board
of Supervisors was read.
Weybright told the Commission that the request was reasonable
and that an additional entrance along Stark Street was desirable to redcce
traffic hazards along the Highway. He suggested an additional condition
be attached in addition to the other changes to prevent a car wrecking
business.
Motion by Stang and seconded by Davis to RECOINZSEND THE CHANGES
LISTED BELOW AND TO INCLUDE ONE ADDITIONAL CHANGE:
ORIGINALLY
4. The only vehicular access to the premises shall be by way of one
driveway from State Highway 39.*
CHANGE TO
4. The only vehicular access to the premises shall be by way of two
entrances, one of which is to be located on Highway 39 and the other to
be located on Stark Street. And each entrance shall be a maximum of 36'
in width.
Page #4
Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, October 15th, 1957
ORIGINALLY
5. The applicant shall install a concrete block wall 5 feet in height
along the west and south property lines except for ftt portion of the
wall within 20' of either street right of way line which shall be 4 feet
in height.
CHANGE TO
5. The applicant shall install a concrete block wall 5 feet in height
along the west and south property lines except forthat portion of the
wall within 20' of either street right of way line which shall be 4 feet
in height. The applicant shall be permitted to omit the :south, wall with
the provision that he purchase the southerly adjoining property within
one years time and that the applicant post a bond to guarantee the con-
struction of the wall in the event he fails to purchase said property.
ADDITIONAL CONDITION:
8. The dismantling of automobiles shall not be permitted on the premises.
MOTION WAS CARRIED.
Chairman Bazil opened the hearing for a Conditional Exception -
Vernon R. Seuffert, applicant. To permit a lot located between Pine and
Park and fronting on Utica, further described as Lot 12 Block 1802
Tract No. 12, Huntington Beach, California, excepting therefrom the West
80' thereof and excepting the East 10' thereof (60' x 801), to be a legal
building site. Also requesting permission for said building site to have
a 10' front yard, and requesting permission to place garage in rear to
setback 3' from 20' alley.
The Secretary explained details of the plot plan.
Schryer gave a little explanation of the previous history re-
garding
the property in question.
The original owner had expressed in-
tention
of putting a duplex on the
corner lot, but was so boisterously
opposed,
that he never applied for
the variance. In
the meantime it was
alleged
that the owner divided his
property as shown
on the tax role and
erected
a masonry wall and sold it
to the next party
as a subterfuge of
the original intent. The applicant is now the third party involved.
Page #5
Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, October 15th, 1957
Chairman Bazil expressed his -opinion that this type of activity
could,be stopped by having an ordinance to regulate the division of land
of four parcels or less and that this would eliminate all the controversy
which occurs when a variance is needed.
' The Secretary explained that this very ordinance was included
within the newly proposed sub -division ordinance which was to be intro-
duced to the Commission at the end of this meeting.
There was a discussion of the.past history of the lot and spec-
ulation made as to the intent of original owner.
Weybright expressed an opinion that on the basis of the intent
of making a 2 family residential lot out of a single family district and
plus the fact that the lot is 200 square feet short of the required foot-
age, there was no alternative but to recommend denial.
Bazil said that he personally would be for the proposal except
for the fact that the front lot would be much too small for the minimum
requirements. Standard lots being 50' x 150' the Secretary estimated that
the front lot would be smaller than 4800 square feet. The Commissioners
agreed that it would be undesirable for this to exist. (*NOTE: The
Secretary was mistaken about the size of the front lot. After the meeting
the tax maps were referred to and it was determined that the front lot
was formed of two split lots and that it contained actually 6400 square
feet. This is much more than minimum requirements.)
The Commission noted that it didn't like the idea of a very
small front lot. Also there was an expression that the Commission would
never go along with a 3 foot setback for the garage adjacent to the alley.
It was noted that the lot was surrounded on two sides by a 6' high masonry
wall.
Motion was made by Davis and seconded by Stang to RE=MND DENIAL.
Motion was carried.
The hearing was opened to hear the YARD VARIANCE application
for the Artesia Growers Association io permit variances to rear yard and
building requirements. The property is located approximate NE corner of
Golden West and Ellis Avenue. The Secretary was asked to describe the
Page #6
Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, October 15th, 1957
location of the recreation -building on the premises. It was explained
that the original plot plan did not allow for a large recreation building
and therefore it was a problem now to fit it into the original plan.
Stang told the Commission that he was hesitant about allowing
the premises to become congested. He.said that he checked on the Artesia
Camp location when he was by and felt that it wa-s extremely congested.
Schryer said that he had'noticed that same condition as he passed by.
A discussion was held by the Commissioners and they agreed that
proper circulation was an important element for a crowded labor camp.
Weybright emphasized the fact that it was not supposed to be
a jail and that it would be desirable from the Mexican Nationals point
of view to have adequate room to live in.
A motion was made by Davis and seconded by Schryer to RECOMMEND
DENIAL of the proposed variance. Motion was carried.
Weybright was asked at this time to give a report on the current
projects at hand.
He outlined it as follows:
1. The master land use.plan previously presented has yet to
be properly reviewed and recommendations made by the Planning Commission.
He explained that the zoning ordinances are predicated on the final ad-
option of a master land use plan. And since a precise zoning ordinance
will require a lengthy amount of arbitration and the smoothing over of
the many expected controversies, he asked the Commission to set a definite
date for review and recommendations.
The Commission should arrive at definite conclusions as quickly
as possible in order that their recommendation may be forwarded to the City
Council and allow action taken towards the final steps of precise zoning.
2. The new proposed Sub -Division ordinance as prepared by
the firm of Hahn, Wise and Barber was presented by Weybright to the Comm-
ission for their review and study. Several extra copies were provided
for sub -dividers' comments. It was explained that there was a provision
for sub -dividing four parcels or less and that it was certainly proven
necessary by the case which appeared earlier in the evening. He asked
d
1
Page #7
Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission
Tuesday, October 15th,�1957
the Commissioners for their comments of the Ordinance when it is re-
viewed at a future meeting.
3. The procedure for an alternate parking plan was explained
to the Commission. He suggested that there might be a possibility for
alternatives to the original master parking plan. He finished his report
after some discussion.
Chairman Bazil suggested to the Commission that they plan on
meeting an hour earlier at their next planning commission meeting in order
to informally review the plans for the master land use plan. The idea
of meeting one hour early on the 29th of October for the purpose of mas-
ter land use plan review appeared agreeable to the Commissioners present.
The Secretary was instructed to schedule the early hour on the
agenda for the next meeting.
Bob Bazil
Chairman
CNC1iNf//oqrd"'& E. Trinw
Secretary